I did the ride with Keith and Terry, another cyclist from St. Joseph, MO. Both are working on R-12 Awards — riding a 200K or longer for 12 consecutive months. I’m not doing that, so I didn’t do the ride “for credit”, just for fun (if you can imagine).

The ride officially started in Olathe at 5:00am, but rather than tacking on an extra 12 miles (into Olathe and back), I elected to meet Keith and Terry in Stilwell, about 10 miles into the route.

I left home at about 4:45, and met up with the other two at about 5:30, and we rolled south on Metcalf Road to Louisburg for the first quick break.

This is just before dawn at Louisburg Lake.

The “Welcome To La Cygne” sign is always a nice milepost along the route, and a nice place to take a short break before the fast downhill and long flat into town.

There’s a nice view from atop the hill. That’s La Cygne Lake to the left beyond the trees, and several mounds on the border between Kansas and Missouri.

(Note: You’ll probably notice a blueish tint to many of my photos. I had the camera’s white balance set for indoor lighting, and forgot to change it back before the ride. I tried to compensate with post-processing, some more successfully than others.)

The water tower in La Cygne, Kansas features a nice town logo. La Cygne is situated along the Marais des Cygnes River (French for “Marsh of the Swans”).

This shot is along County Road 1095 in Linn County, Kansas. This quiet paved road features some good-sized hills, with some corresponding fun downhills, along with some nice scenery. Even in the “brown months” of winter, it’s still a pleasant route to ride.

Also along 1095 is the Linnwood School, once a one-room schoolhouse, and perhaps a church (with a cemetery behind it), now used as a community center, with somewhat dilapidated playground equipment still on the grounds.

Once at Pleasanton we took a nice little rest. Here are the three bikes lined up along the side of the convenience store — Keith’s beautiful Kogswell, my Puch, and Terry’s Specialized Allez (with Terry alongside). We were all traveling pretty light. Terry had a Topeak handlebar bag, but other than that it was just seat bags and pockets.

Back on the road leaving Pleasanton, the day was warming and a nice little tailwind was picking up. All smiles from Keith and Terry. Peace out, ‘Dude.

Terry was nice enough to take my picture as we rolled along through the countryside.

There’s a 3-mile stretch along US-69 highway. It always strikes me as odd that bicycles are allowed on this 75 MPH road, but not on interstate highways in Kansas, which have the same speed limit and similar shoulders. It’s perfectly safe (as long as no fool tries to drive on the shoulder).

And finally, pulling into the garage after 133 miles.

Gear Report

I rode the Puch Cavette II on this trip, my first really long ride on this bike.

Other than wishing for “just one more gear” on some of the hills, the bike performed quite well. No mechanical problems. No major pains, other than shoulder/neck tension, which seems more a matter of acclimation than anything else. Hands good, knees good, feet good, even the saddle wasn’t a problem.

In fact, I still felt really strong at the end.

Part of this was due, in no small part, to the weather, which was quite amazing for early February in Kansas. The temperature dipped to about 32°F in spots in the early morning, and was 63°F by the time we finished up. There was a slight (less than 5 MPH) headwind outbound, and a noticeable-but-not-huge 10-12 MPH tailwind heading back home.

Gear-wise, I had two bits of pre-ride panic. First, I discovered my MagicShine headlight batteries were about done for. With one pack, I could barely get 1 hour on high, and 2 hours on low. The other pack wouldn’t even take a charge.

I figured I needed at least 3 hours of lighting, so I fell back to plan B, and used LED flashlights. My primary light was a Rayovac “Indestructible” flashlight (which I reviewed here: A Decent $15 Bike Light). It promises 100 lumens for up to 15 hours on a pair of AA batteries, which is pretty darned impressive. My second light was an older LED flashlight I had on hand (also running on AA’s). This gave me double redundancy, (triple, if you count the two AA’s in my camera). In practice, the Rayovac (pictured in the last photo above) performed just fine. I have a new bike-specific light on order, but for this ride, I was covered.

The second pre-ride flub was the loss of one of my favorite gloves the morning of the ride. So I used an old MTB glove I had lying around. Turns out that the missing glove was stuck to the inside of my fleece cap, which I discovered at the first stop. So I ended up taking along the glove that was lost, and leaving behind the glove that wasn’t missing. Dumb. Oh well, the MTB glove worked fine, other than cold fingertips for part of the ride.

Clothing-wise, I went with arm-warmers, a wool base layer, a Hind long-sleeve base layer over that, a short-sleeve jersey, and a thin windbreaker vest on top. On the bottom, Cannondale liner shorts and Cannondale pants, with two layers of wool socks and MTB shoes on my feet. I was never cold other than the fingertips. The arm-warmers and vest came off as the day warmed, and I never overheated.

For food, I brought along Clif bars and a gel-pack. I took a few bites of the Clif bar, and squeezed out the gel on the way back, but other than that it was just c-store food and drink:

• Granola bar in Stilwell
• Apple Fritter and V-8 in La Cygne
• Sausage and Egg Biscuit and chocolate milk in Pleasanton
• Pecan pie and Snapple in La Cygne

So, a bit heavy on the junk food, but no stomach problems and no lack of energy.

I ended up with 133 miles at a 15.25 MPH pace.

I rode basically the same route in March 2010 on the LHT (135 Miles and No Headwind) at a 15.0 MPH pace.

So slightly faster on the Puch, and I wasn’t as tired or sore. Do I attribute that to the bike, or to my fitness? Not sure. The difference is pretty slight.

Not much I’d change on the Puch. Better wheels and wider gearing would be nice, but not strictly necessary.

I must say that it tickles me to no end to ride 133 miles — a ride that most cyclists, riding lightweight bikes costing well over $1000, wouldn’t attempt — on a 34-year-old, $15 bike, with steel wheels and $7 tires. The tightwad in me, I guess…

So I thought I’d detail the modifications I’ve made to make it road-worthy.

The changes have been relatively few, since the bike, as purchased, was in remarkably good shape for a 30+ year-old low-to-mid-grade bicycle.

Still, there have been a few things I’ve fixed, or at least changed.

Here’s the bike as it stands now:

One of the first things I did was to remove the original brake levers, and replace them with a used set of Shimano 105 levers (as shown here). I’ve been quite happy with that change. The levers have a better ergonomic feel, and the cable routing is much cleaner.

I ended up keeping the rubber grips on the handlebar drops, and wrapping the rest of the way up with foam tape. Looks strange, I know. but the rubber’s comfortable, and I was able to wrap the rest of the distance thicker because of it.

I also replaced the stock front and rear brake cable hangers. The originals were plain-jane units, and worked fine, except that there was no quick-release mechanism on the brakes themselves. So it was extremely difficult to remove a wheel without letting the air out of the tire.

I found some old-stock Shimano Centerpull Brake Cable Hangers on eBay, and these units integrated a quick-release into the hanger itself. Just rotate a lever, and it provides about 1/4″ of slack. It’s an elegant solution, and works great.

When I got the bike, it still had its original tires, and they were in reasonably good shape. But the 30+ year-old rubber didn’t last long on gravel roads. I suffered a couple flats, and visible cracking on one of the tires before deciding to retire them

I went with the cheapest 27″ tire I could find, a C637 “Super HP” from CST (Cheng Shin Tyre). These only cost me $7 each online, plus shipping. Time will tell on their ruggedness, but they seem to be fine — fast-rolling, and comfortable. The tires are labeled as 27″ x 1-1/4″, but measure closer to 1-1/8″ width (about 28mm).

I also swapped out tubes, opting for a Presta valve instead of Schrader. The tubes appeared to be sufficiently rugged around the stem, so I opted not to use a gasket or hole size adapter. So far so good. I also would have preferred threaded stems, but the tubes I received were long and non-threaded. Again, it hasn’t yet been an issue.

For a tail light, I removed the stock rear reflector, and replaced it with an XLC Ultra LED 1/2 Watt Tail Light.

This appears to be a Planet Bike SuperFlash clone — very similar mechanical characteristics, similar optics. I ran a SuperFlash for several years (before losing it on my southwestern trip), and the XLC is pretty much the same, except way cheaper. Perhaps not as bright, but pretty good.

I mounted it on the rear reflector bracket, using a little trick. I took a short section of PVC pipe, and wrapped it with some old inner tube, then used the tail light mounting bracket on that. Basically, the PVC functions as a seatpost, for mounting purposes. Simple, cheap, and weighs almost nothing.

I also use a reflective safety triangle suspended from the seat bag. This functions as a backup for the tail light, and is very visible during daylight as well.

The seat bag is an old Serfas MTB-2 Medium Seat Bag that I happened to have on hand.

“Carrying stuff” is another area where I’ve had to get a little creative.

The bike has no water bottle braze-ons, so I used a Minoura water bottle mount (BH-95X) to add a water bottle cage. This works reasonably well. Still not sure how I’ll handle summer rides, though, when more water capacity will be needed…

The bike is also lacking rack mounts on the seat stays. I could get a clamp-on unit, but with the goal of keeping this bike as unencumbered as possible, I’m trying to avoid adding a rack.

What I came up with was an approach I’d used back when I was riding a mountain bike — a fanny pack. The one I had on hand is a JanSport Waist Pack, which has two compartments — a small one in the front where I store wallet, phone, and lip balm, and a larger main compartment which can hold a bit more, such as a camera and snacks:

The fanny pack is light enough, and rides low enough, that I can’t even feel it’s there after a short time.

But I still had a problem.

Often, on rides I like to stop at a grocery store to pick up a few things — it saves a trip by car. But I had nowhere to carry extra stuff.

For a few rides, I slung the plastic grocery bag over my handlebars. Worked for small items, but hardly elegant.

Then I dug up an old drawstring backpack I’d gotten as a promotional giveaway from a local company:

It’s lightweight, and comes with nice reflective striping. And even better, it rolls up into a compact little bundle:

Rolled up, it fits snugly into the bottom of the large fanny pack compartment, with plenty of room left for other gear.

And unrolled, the backpack actually holds quite a lot:

That’s a loaf of bread on top, and various groceries underneath. That load was actually a bit much — about 13 pounds — which is more than I’d care to carry on my back for long. But for the 6 miles home from the store, it was manageable.

I also added a Park Tool PMP-5 Frame Pump, which I purchased used off eBay. Fits perfectly and holds securely against the seat tube. I might eventually move to to the top tube, and add a second water bottle to the seat tube. If I do that, I’ll need to add a strap of some sort to keep it from slipping down, since the Puch frame doesn’t include a pump peg.

And finally, I’ve also replaced the stock saddle with an old WTB Speed V, and the stock platform pedals with some Shimano PD-M520L SPD Pedals I had on hand.

How much have I spent bring the bike (mostly) up to snuff? Not counting the items I already had on hand: $14 for 2 new tires, $8 for 2 new tubes, $12 for new brake hangers, $10 for pump, $4 for handlebar tape, $1 for water bottle mount, $15 for brake levers, $12 for tail light … so about $76. Not too bad.

So what hasn’t changed? Frame, handlebar, brakes, cables, wheels, drive train, shifters, kickstand, front reflector, seatpost.

What would I still like to change?

• I’d like to get a set of better wheels. Aluminum alloy. But should I stick with 27″ or switch to 700c? And should I stick with the freewheel, or switch to freehub/cassette? Are the inexpensive mass-produced wheels (I found some for about $25 each w/o freewheel) worth it, or should I hold out for better quality? (Switching to 700c would necessitate new tires, too … blah.)
• I’d like to improve the shifters, changing from the stem-mounted shifters to bar-end shifters. Even used ones, though, are quite expensive. Still hoping to stumble across a deal somewhere.
• If I really end up riding this more, fenders might be in order.
• Lighter handlebars would be nice.

Note: All product links lead to Amazon, where I am an affiliate, and where I’ll earn a few cents if you purchase something (anything!) through that link. If you have a local bike shop, please support them, but if you don’t have a LBS, or they don’t carry the equipment you need, please consider purchasing via my links, and help support this site.

I’m lucky, because the Dahon was pretty well configured for touring as I received it, with reasonable gearing and a rear rack. I knew my Nashbar panniers would work, but I was unsure how everything else would come together, and how the thing would ride loaded, so I went ahead and did a dry run of the Dahon in touring mode.

Here’s a side view of my setup. My tent is strapped cross-ways across the panniers, and an insulated six-pack-size cooler is strapped in front of that. Both appear to be reasonably secure, and additional stuff can be strapped on top if need be.

The rear view shows the panniers and tent, along with my reflective triangle and a Planet Bike Superflash tail light I installed in place of the rear reflector.

So how did it ride? Well, I didn’t have a super-heavy load, but it rode very well. The weight is mostly low to the ground, so handling is really not affected.

With all the weight on the back, though, I did notice that the front end can get a little squirrely at times. Once, when slowly cranking up a steep little ride, I thought I felt the front wheel come off the ground. But for normal riding, it was no problem.

One aspect that is negatively affected by the touring load is the kickstand. The kickstand seems to be just a bit short, and the bike threatens to topple over if I’m not careful about where I park it. Angling the front wheel away from the lean does help, usually.

Here’s the Dahon on a pathway at a local park. Love those fall colors!

And here is the Dahon on a gravel road. No problem.

And finally, I also got around to swapping out the round grips for ergo grips. These are “XLC Ergonomic Grips“, made specifically for a single twist grip, with the left grip 135mm long, and the right grip 92mm long. They feel pretty good. I’m still thinking about adding bar ends, but haven’t found a deal yet…

I stumbled across a Dahon Vitesse D7HG at a local swap meet, and after a bit of haggling, trading, and some $$$ kicked in, it was mine. It was a bit of an impulse purchase. I’d browsed the Dahon line online, but hadn’t really focused on a particular model, or put much research or thought into the search.

I took this bike for a short spin in the parking lot, and it rode fine, and seemed to be in good shape, and was fitted with most of the accessories I’d want, such as fat tires, fenders, and a rear rack. So I pulled the trigger on it.

I think I got a pretty decent deal on it; less than half the current list price.

Based on Dahon web site, the bike is a 2008 model, but not a whole lot has changed in the three model years since then. The 2011 model no longer has the rear rack, but has a better chainguard and an integrated luggage bracket on the front. So basically, the same bike, it appears.

The bike is in good shape. No telling how many miles are on it, but not a lot, based on tire wear. There is a bit of surface rust on a few of the steel bits, but since the frame is aluminum, and most of the components are as well, that shouldn’t be an issue.

It’s not the easiest thing to fold, but perhaps I’ll get better with practice. It does fold into a reasonably-sized package, and it fits well into the back of our car. I may get a bag for it at some point. Not sure whether to go with a cheap “cover” bag that doesn’t provide much protection, or a more rugger but pricier bag. A true travel case, suitable for use as airline luggage, would cost more than I paid for the bike, so I doubt I’ll ever spring for that, given the limited amount of air travel I do.

The rack is a rather tiny affair, and initially I didn’t think my panniers would fit, since the bungie hooks extended far below the hook slots integrated into the rack. However, I scrounged up a solution of sorts, attaching small “L” brackets to the unused holes on the rear dropouts. This seems to work, though I may need to round off the square bracket ends to avoid wearing a hole in the pannier material.

This image shows the silver “L” brackets I added, with a pannier attached to the opposite side of the rack. This appears to be fairly secure.

I also had to modify the rear reflector. The original reflector was rather wide, and interfered with the pannier top hooks, not allowing me to install the panniers as far back as I liked. So I removed the rectangular Dahon reflector, and installed a round one that I had in my parts box in its place. Eventually I want to replace this with a tail light of some kind, but this will do for now.

With the panniers installed, I went out for my first ride around the neighborhood. Since my neighborhood includes gravel as well as paved roads, this would also be a good test of the little bike’s handling on a loose and rough surface.

Here’s the bike next to some roadside flowers … nice!

The bike nearly disappears in this field of soybeans.

The bike crossing some railroad tracks.

I was quite pleased with the first ride of about 4 miles. This might be the friendliest bike I’ve ever ridden.

With the low step-over height and relaxed, upright posture, you just get on and go with no fuss. The small wheels feels a little tipsy at first, but that feeling soon passed, and it soon felt as stable as any other bike. I had expected a bit of a harsh ride on the rough roads, but it wasn’t bad at all. I’m sure the 1.5″ tires at about 50 PSI had something to do with that, but I was soon not noticing most of the bumps.

The internal gear hub is amazing, shifting smoothly and effortlessly. Except the grip shift will take some acclimation. Seems my instinct was to shift “bassackwards” every single time. I had to consciously think about which direction to rotate the shifter: forward is lower gears (slower), and backwards is higher gears (faster).

The gearing might be a little narrow (34″ to 84″, according to Dahon), but there’s not too much I can do about that, short of changing the chainring and/or rear sprocket. I didn’t really try any big hills, but I was able to spin out fairly easily on the flats. Oh well, it’s not a speed machine.

After I took the picture on the tracks, I realized that the bars were set rather high, and I lowered them a few inches, but it’s still a very upright posture. I’m also thinking that I may want to look at a different handlebar, or at least some bar ends, to give me some alternate hand positions.

All in all, for a short ride, I was very pleased. Not sure if I want to do a century on this thing, but 20-30 miles should definitely be doable.

I still need to load up the bike with a full complement of camping gear, to see how it rides with a load, but I expect that it’ll do fine. I’m planning a trip this winter that should put the bike to the test in city traffic and hills. Between now and then, I hope to put in some fun miles on this little bike!

The bike is a Puch Cavette II. There’s not a lot of information about this bike on the web, but I found a bit here and there, mostly about other Puch models.

First, some background on Puch:

A short lived marque, made by Austro-Daimler Puch, and which had success particularly in the USA in the 1970s and early 80s. There were two lines simultaneously marketed; Austro-Daimler and Puch. A-D was a “fancier” line with medium price to high end offerings, while Puch was aimed at a broader range including models at lower price points. [classicrendezvous.com]

And there is further info from Martin Cohen, which provides a rich history of Steyr-Daimler-Puch and how the Austro-Daimler and Puch lines were marketed in America, and the ultimate demise of the brand(s).

Actually, Puch is still (apparently) alive, selling bikes to Austria and Germany via puch-bikes.com.

Here’s some info from a 1977 brochure scan I found on the web:

At Puch’s factory in Graz, Austria, production is done according to the European workstation concept, where a team of craftsmen works together to build one bike at a time. The most critical operations are all done by hand. And the finished product, the Graz frame, is unsurpassed for quality, durability and, most important, performance.

Two types of tubing are used for Puck’s Graz Frames: double butted Reynolds 531, a remarkably stiff yet light manganese-molybdenum alloy, and Special Puch 482, a lightweight high-tensile nickel-carbon steel.

Since a frame is only as strong as its joints (local points of stress), joints on the Graz Frame are engineered to withstand hundreds of pounds of pressure with no energy-consuming end-play. Tubing ends are mitered to fit perfectly and resist the torque that is built up by pedaling. And each joint is locked into a carefully-tooled hand-fitted lug.

On all Graz Frames, lugged joints are solidly fixed with a low-temperature soldering process called “brazing,” which preserves the temper of the tubing, hence its strength and rigidity. Most of the brazing on Puch bicycles is done by hand. much of it using an especially low-melt silver solder.

For casual or cross-country touring, the Graz Frame of Special Puch 482 tubing combines stable tracking with an extremely comfortable ride. It is designed by the same engineers and built in the same factory as the Puch all-531 frame, and is finished with equal attention to detail.

The Cavette is a rugged bicycle, built to ride smoothly over any sort of road conditions. Equipped with alloy racing handlebars and consistently reliable Weinmann center pull brakes.

The Cavette appears to have been priced as either the lowest or next-to-lowest model of Puch’s road bikes. Higher-end bikes included the Cavalier, Brigadier, Marco Polo, and Royal Force (only the latter in 531 tubing). The Paladin was an “upright touring bike” and the Toledo was a 3-speed upright bike. Puch also had a folding bike called the BreakAway, a city bike with 20″ wheels called the Vitessa, and a children’s cruiser bike called the Rapier.

Here are the components on the bike:

• Special Puch 482 Tubing
• Rigida Steel Rims, 27″ x 1-1/4″
• Semperit 27: x 1-1/8″ x 1-1/4″ tires
• Normandy Alloy Hubs
• Maillard Front Quick-Release
• Silstar Cast Aluminum Cranks (170mm)
• Sakae Chainring (52/42) with Chainguard
• Sun Tour Perfect 5-Speed Freewheel (Model PT-5000) (14-17-20-24-28)
• SC Bottom Bracket 1.37x24T British, 68mm width
• Sakae steel handlebar
• Sakae Stem SR-80AH, alloy, 80mm extension, 150mm length, 22.00 diameter (French sizing)
• Steel seatpost, 25.4mm diameter
• Steel saddle clamp
• Wittkop Saddle
• Sun Tour SevenGT Rear Derailleur (Model # RD-2000)
• Sun Tour Spirt Front Derailleur (Model # FD-1000)
• Sun Tour Stem-Mount Shifters (Model # LD-1100 w/covers)
• Weinmann Centerpull 610 brakes, front and rear
• Weinmann Brake Levers
• Cateye Reflectors
• ESGE/Pletcher Kickstand
• Platform pedals form West Germany

So, a mixture of European and Asian components. Not top-of-the-line stuff, but decent quality. Date codes on the components are a mixture of “77″ and “78″, so I’m guessing that mine was sold in 1978 or 1979.

Weight is about 31.5 lbs.

So this is a low-end 10-speed road bike. Not fancy, but pretty solid. Much better quality than the old “Coast King” 10-speed that I purchased in 1980 (and sold at a garage sale a few years ago).

Surprisingly, once I got it cleaned up, I only found two problems with it — a flat front tire, and a dented rear rim (what was why one of the rear brake shoes had been lowered off the rim). The tires were pretty good for 30-year-old rubber, and everything else was pretty functional.

I replaced the tube in the front tire, and pounded out the dented rim as best I could, and took it for a test ride.

The bike rides really nice. Shifting is not particularly smooth, and it won’t reach the highest gear in the rear (I suspect a bent derailleur hanger), but it’s a pleasure to ride. Very smooth and stable, even on gravel.

Surprisingly, the bike is very nearly my size. By my estimation, it’s a 23″ (about 58cm), whereas my Long Haul Trucker is a 52cm. Standover height is just barely enough, and I feel a bit “stretched out” on the bike, but the more I ride it the more comfortable I seem to get.

I don’t really care for the handlebar style or the brake levers, but I can live with them for now. Even the saddle (a solid chunk of rubber) is reasonably comfortable.

The bike is rideable as-is, but I’m planning to look for a few items to improve things:

• Replace the handlebar tape
• Replace the cables with new — they all work, but the rear brake cable housing is bent at the lever, so may not last long
• Replace the brake levers with “aero” levers, so that the cables route beneath the handlebar tape
• Replace the 27″ steel wheels with 700c alloy wheels for lighter weight, better braking, and more tire choices (I think the existing brakes will handle the slightly smaller rims).
• Swap out to a shorter stem
• Find a different handlebar — I think I want one with flatter ramps and a shallower drop
• I’d like to change the stem-mounted shifters to bar-end shifters
• Maybe I can find some better brakes — side-pulls?
• Need to find a way to mount a water bottle — the frame has no braze-ons

A swap meet is coming up, so I’ll see what I can find. It’s hard to justify putting much money into this bike, but maybe I’ll luck into some more good deals.

One aggravating factor is the stem — it is “French Sizing”, which means that it’s 22.00mm in diameter (rather than the more common 22.20mm), and the handlebar clamp is 25mm rather than the standard 25.4mm. So that may be a limiting factor. If I can’t find a shorter stem, or a 25mm handlebar, then I might be stuck.

Yes, I’m aware that I can perhaps modify a 22.2mm stem to fit, as suggested by Sheldon Brown:

In cases where the stem really won’t fit into the steerer, a few minutes’ work on the stem with sandpaper will usually do the trick. Wrap the sandpaper around the stem, grip it with your hand, and turn the stem round and round until it fits. You only need to remove 0.1 mm, which is 1/250″, not much at all!

… but that’s a fallback position. Likewise, I’m aware that if I change out the rear hub from a freewheel to a freehub, I may need to cold set the rear hub to accommodate slightly wider spacing (the exisitng spacing appears to be 126mm).

Here are some pictures, most in pre-cleanup state:

This is a side view of the Puch Cavette II after I got it home and before I started cleaning it up.

“Puch Special 482 Tubing” label.

Head badge (just a label, actually) and lugwork details.

Front brake detail. The tires look barely used.

Handlebar and brake lever details.

Sun Tour stem-mounted friction shifters.

The saddle may appear to be leather, but it’s not. I believe this was referred to as a “comfort saddle”.

Sun Tour SevenGT Rear Derailleur, a mid-to-low end offering of the time, but apparently well-regarded.

This also shows the rear axle bolts, with Puch covers. Kind of a neat touch, but I find it curious that the front axle use a quick-release and the rear is bolted on.

This picture also shows the rear dropout, which is stamped, not forged — another sign that this is not a higher-end frame. The derailleur dropout is a bolt-on affair.

Here’s a look at one of the Rigida steel rims (“Made in France”).

This is a close-up of the bump in the rear rim. I used a hammer to gently beat the rim as flat as I could. It turned out OK. I can still feel the bump when braking, but it’s not terrible.

This photo shows my Long Haul Trucker superimposed on the Puch, with the bottom brackets lined up. The Surly is a 52cm frame with 26″ wheels. The Puch is a 23″ frame (about 58cm) with 27″ wheels.

I find it interesting how closely the two bikes match, despite being built ~30 years apart. The seat tube and down tube angles are spot on. And the seat height matches, even though the Puch was only fit by feel.

This image also shows that the Puch handlebars are definitely lower and the center of the bar is farther away than on the LHT.

Here’s a “glamour shot” of the Puch against a solid colored background.

This shot was selected because the building is of the same vintage as the bike — 1960s-70s. This is the (former) United States Post Office in Spring Hill, Kansas.

I post-processed the image to make it appear older, but I think it fits…

And finally, the Puch on a country road at sunset — in its element.

I’m hoping to use the Puch as a “go fast”-ish bike, as a contrast to the utility nature of my Long Haul Trucker — bigger wheels, thinner tires, no racks, fewer bags. Something where I can be unencumbered and push it a little harder.

I still need to come up with a bag and pump, and a way to carry water, before I can take the bike too far from home.

Should be a fun project!

I’d used Boeshield T9 on the previous two chains, and while I had no major issues with either the factory stock chain, or the SRAM PC-991 I replaced it with, and got decent life out of both (4098 miles on the factory chain and 4589 miles on the PC-991), I was a bit dissatisfied with the frequency of lube reapplication required. I’d generally get about 150 miles before I could start hearing the chain, or it started squeaking.

So I decided to make a switch.

I’d used Liquid Wrench Chain Lube on my Burley Django recumbent, on the recommendation of someone on a ‘bent forum, and had been happy with the performance, except that it wasn’t as clean as I’d like.

In the meantime, while I’d been using the Boeshield T9 on the LHT, it turns out that Liquid Wrench reformulated the lube to address the cleanliness issue. ‘New Organic Molybdenum Compound for high lubricity, anti-wear properties, without the black staining of original “MOLY”‘, according to the company.

The old lube came in a can with a black cap, and the new lube is in a can with a yellow cap. It’s also available in a bottle, but more commonly found in the spray can. I bought mine in the spray can version at a local auto parts store for about $4 — cheap compared to bicycle-specific lubes.

According to Liquid Wrench:

Industrial chain lube sprays like this one use an evaporating solvent in a base of petroleum oils and molybdenum disulphide. The high-viscosity petroleum oils do some of the rustproofing and general lubrication, while the molybdenum disulphide acts as a friction modifier, reducing wear. MD has exceptional lubrication qualities under conditions of high temperature, high loads (metal-to-metal contact pressure), and corrosive environments. It not only prevents rust, but metal-to-metal galling and can be used as an anti-seize compound. The combination of petroleum oils and MD offers superior rust and corrosion protection when compared to lighter oils or silicone products.

It is specifically recommended for bicycle chains (among a host of other applications).

“New, anti-sling formula, Liquid Wrench Chain Lube, works best on high performance bicycle and garage door opener chains for long term corrosion protection.”

I figured “what the heck”. The worst if could do is cause my chain to age prematurely. My new chain was an SRAM PC-951, their low-end 8-speed chain, which I got for $18.

Now, after 4620 miles, I have just replaced that chain, so here are my conclusions about the lube:

The chain appeared to run pretty clean. Perhaps not quite as clean as with Boeshield, but certainly cleaner than with the old Liquid Wrench Chain Lube formulation, and cleaner than with other oil-based lubes I’ve tried. It still got a bit of the black gunk after awhile (Boeshield did that, too), but not bad.

The chain was cleaned twice (using a Park Tools chain scrubber), both times after a mud-fest ride.

The longevity of the lube on the chain is slightly better than the Boeshield. I ended up lubing the chain about once every 180 miles, on average. Some of that was due to the snow/rain/mud rides; during dry periods, my lube frequency was usually 200+ miles (maximum = 288 miles).

To use the lube, I repurposed an old empty Boeshield bottle, punching a hole in the side, and using the straw applicator to fill it with Liquid Wrench Chain Lube, then taping the hole closed. Crude, but works.

To apply the lube, I apply it to a link at a time, using about one drop per three links, then rotating the crank a few times. The mess is minimal.

In all, I’ve been happy with the Liquid Wrench Chain Lube. It’s less expensive than the Boeshield and appears to work just as well. I’m planning to use it on my next chain (another SRAM PC-951) as well.

Bike & Gear:

• Surly Long Haul Trucker
• Helmet: Bell Ukon FS
• Tires: Serfas Vermin
• Front Rack: Blackburn MTF-1
• Rear Rack: Planet Bike Eco Rack
• Front Panniers: Taigo Mountain Front Panniers
• Rear Panniers: Nashbar ATB Panniers
• Top tube bag: Schwinn Top Tube Bag
• Pump: Topeak Road Morph
• Tail Light: Planet Bike Superflash
• Under-Seat Bag: Nashbar
• 2 spare 26″ tubes
• Tube patch kit
• Bicycle toolkit (multitool, etc.)
• Bike cable lock
• Brooks Saddle Cover
• Head light (cheap “be seen” flashing light, plus a Coleman 3AAA LED Headlamp)

Camping Gear:

• Tent: Eureka Pinnacle Pass 2XTA
• Sleeping pad: Cabella’s XPG Ultralight Sleeping Pad, Regular
• Sleeping bag: Northeast Outfitters Trailhead Mummy
• Pillow: Dellca Inflatable Pillow
• Timex Travel Alarm Clock

Clothing & Personal:

• 2 nylon cargo shorts (Old Navy)
• 3 cycling shorts
• 3 cycling jerseys
• 1 long-sleeve shirts
• 2 pairs socks
• 1 pair riding gloves
• Riding sandals (Lake SPD)
• Off-bike sandals
• Rain jacket (Specialized Deflect Jacket)
• Nashbar Helmet Cover
• MSR Packtowl UltraLite, large
• Sunglasses, w/extra lens and Take A Look Mirror
• Small notebook w/pen
• Travel wallet w/credit card, ID, insurance card, cash
• Toiletries (toothbrush, toothpaste, razor, shampoo, etc.)
• Misc energy bars
• Cell phone
• Camera
• MP3 player and speaker
• Several dry bags (Walmart Ultimate Dry Sacks)

This is basically the same kit as some of my previous tours, except a new pillow, extra outer shorts, and panniers instead of one large duffel bag.

The gear was organized with the sleeping bag in one rear pannier, the sleeping pad & pillow in the other, the tent on the rear rack, clothing in one front pannier, and electronics/sandals/toiletries in the other, and some miscellaneous items spread around in various panniers. Despite persistent rain, everything stayed pretty dry.

Total: About 66 pounds for loaded bike plus gear, not including water bottles. Probably about 34-35 pounds for the bike itself…

I’m pretty happy with the list, except that I’d like a smaller/lighter tent and smaller/lighter sleeping bag. Plus, for true self-supported, I’d need to come up with a cooking kit (stove, pots, utensils, etc.) and perhaps warmer clothing options.

See also: Flint Hills Bike Tour On Tap, Shakedown

I bought a new set of front panniers from a company called Taiga. The bags are an incredible deal at only $19.95 (Canadian dollars), and even with shipping from Canada, it’s an unbeatable value. The panniers appear to be really well-made. The mounting system, using a strap cinch and velcro, is a little fidgety to get attached (and un-attached), but on the bike, the bags are rock solid.

I ended up going with the Blackburn MTF-1 for the front rack. I considered using a low-rider rack, but went with the MTF-1 because I thought the platform might come in handy. Also, it appears to be a good match for the front fork of my Long Haul Trucker.

For the ride, I tagged along with Noah Dunker and Keith Gates, who were headed down to Hillsdale Lake for an overnight bake-camping trip (similar to the one I accompanied them on last year. I wasn’t planning to camp out, since I’ll get plenty of that on my trip, but it’s be a good trial run equipment test.

The plan was to meet them in Olathe, then ride paved roads to Hillsdale, hang out for a bit, then ride on home.

Here our bikes at the meetup in Olathe: cDude’s Kogswell on the left, Noah’s Trek in the middle, and my Long Haul Trucker on the right. Loaded up and ready to roll!

Here are a couple views of my gear. On the front is the Blackburn MTF-1 rack and the Taiga panniers, with a Sunlite C-Sport Bicycle Handlebar Roll Bag and Schwinn Top Tube Bag. In the rear is the Planet Bike Eco Rack and Nashbar ATB panniers, plus a Nashbar seat bag.

I swapped out the Nashbar CO2 Inflator/Pump, which I’ve been using most of the year, in favor of a Topeak Road Morph pump. The inflator works fine, but the pump is next to useless. With just the inflator, I’d have had to haul a bunch of CO2 cartidges, and still would have been screwed if I happened to get a rash of flats. With the regular pump, at least I can never run out of air. It takes quite a few pumps to air up the big tires, but it’s do-able.

We rolled out of Olathe and through Spring Hill on pavement, but elected to take a gravel road south to Hillsdale. Actually, we started out on gravel, but jumped over to a sort of a trail that runs alongside the railroad tracks for a ways. I think it’s an access road for maintenance vehicles, but it has a great surface for about a half mile, then gradually the railroad ballast (think big, rough, loose chunks of flint) replaced the gravel. It was pretty rough by the time we hit the first railroad crossing just east of Columbia Road.

I’m running 1.95″ MTB tires, so it wasn’t too bad for me, but it was tougher on the other guys, rolling with more road-style skinny tires. But we all made it thru unscathed.

At Hillsdale we took a quick break at the c-store, with intentions to ride the next half-dozen miles directly to the campsite. But then I asked the fateful question: “You boys up for some more adventure?”

I explained what I had in mind: basically, a 6-mile detour to hit up the minimum-maintenance section of Woodland Road. They agreed. But they had no idea what they were getting into.

Pushing against a strong and gusty south wind, and being exposed on open roads for much of the distance, the 6 miles to the start of the MMR was slow going.

When we reached 287th and Woodland, where the MMR began, I pointed up to the “Minimum Maintenance – Travel At Your Own Risk” sign. Nervous jokes and laughter, but I led on.

The first half mile is pretty tame — slightly overgrown, but very rideable. But this soon gives way to a long downhill, which I’ve described as “a rocky, rutted, overgrown memory of a road”, which I think fits pretty well.

The grass gets taller, the trees start to close in, the doubletrack starts to get deeper, until it’s really just two ruts with tall grass growing in the middle. Soon we reached the first puddles. We’d had rain earlier in the weak, and while the gravel and most of the MMR was bone dry, there were a few tacky spots and outright bogs. I rolled through or around these, picking up a bit of mud on the tread, but no big deal.

But Keith and Noah’s fendered road bikes clogged up quickly. After navigating a rocky downhill, I stopped and looked back to find them picking mud out of their fenders. Their wheels had completely clogged up and stopped turning.

Soon enough they were back in business and making their way down the rocky decline. The road passes across solid bedrock here, with some rough loose stuff on top. It’s not a smooth ride, and they approached it cautiously, but made it through without incident.

The road turns west at 295th, and the surface actually gets worse — much rockier, more rutted out, and more likely to hold moisture.

This picture is from last year, and it doesn’t really do it justice, but it should give you some idea of the level of “road” this is.

Again, with my bigger tires, I could ride most of this stuff, but the skinny-tired boys had to walk quite a bit of it, with several more episodes of mud-clearing. But they kept going without complaint. Kudos!

By the time we reached the next cross street — the accurately-named “Victory Road”! — the gravel road, which under most circumstances would have seemed sketchy at best, felt luxuriously smooth and easy.

We needed more water by this point (and the day was heating up), so we headed on over to Lake Miola, where we found this potable water for drinking, bike-cleaning, and dousing. Perfect.

From there, we went by back roads north and west to Hillsdale. Just a few miles from the state park, the boys thought they were in the clear, but I had one more MMR to throw at them — 271st, between Lone Star Road and Lookout Road.

This section is comparatively easy — it’s more dirt than rock, and it doesn’t get too much traffic so the ruts are not as deep (though the weeds are taller). Here’s Keith and Noah navigating the last little bit of rough riding.

From there, it was just a mile or so to the entrance to Hillsdale Lake State Park. We parted ways at this point, with Keith and Noah headed off to the campsite, and me headed home.

Here’s the Trucker at Hillsdale Lake, with the marina in the background, where I stocked up on drink and snacks before rolling out.

I ended up with about 56 miles. I’m not quite sure of the distance or speed because my cyclocomputer wasn’t working.

But everything else worked flawlessly. I had no equipment issues, with either the bike or the gear, and if it can handle that rocky ride, it should be able to handle my upcoming tour with no problems.

And I got to introduce two roadies to the joys of rough riding, the rewards of venturing off the pavement.

You did great, guys! Hope I haven’t scared you away from further off-road adventures. I have plenty of other routes to torture you with …

I selected them for the relatively smooth center tread — which roll pretty well on both pavement and smooth gravel roads — and the knobby sides, which provide a little extra grip in corners and on loose surfaces.

I’ve been happy with the tires, and they served me well for about 2000 miles, with good performance and very few flats. But after that point, they flatted rather too often for my taste, and I resolved to see if I could find something perhaps with a Kevlar belt to protect against thorns (the cause of most of my flats).

My search led me to Serfas. It’s not one of the better-known names in tires, but I’d used a Serfas Barista on the back of my recumbent a couple years ago, and had been happy with the flat resistance, durability, and performance.

Turns out, Serfas has a tire very similar to the Double Fighters, called the “Vermin”.

The Vermin has basically the same tread pattern as the Double Fighter — semi-slick in the middle, knobs on the sides — but adds what the call a “Flat Protection System”, which “creates an armor-like shield between two distinct rubber casings for unrivaled puncture resistance.”

Sounds good.

The Vermin has front-specific and rear-specific versions (unlike the Double Fighters). The only difference seems to be extra ridges on the rear version, which makes it slightly heavier than the front, but both are still lighter than the Continentals (590/615 grams vs. 790 grams). They also cost a bit less than the Conti’s, which never hurts.

I’ve ordered and received the new tires, but haven’t mounted them up yet. I’m looking to get a few more miles out of the Continentals. Hopefully they’ll last long enough for me to save the Vermins for the Dirty Kanza.

Here are some photos, first of the Continental Double Fighter II and then the Serfas Vermin front and rear:

This is my rear tire (Continental Double Fighter II) after nearly 3000 miles. Not much left, and that crack looks troublesome…

The front tire (not pictured) has decent tread left, so for now, I’ve swapped the front tire to the rear wheel, and the rear to the front (adding a boot — an extra layer of old inner tube and duct tape — to the crack). I’ll see how long that lasts.

And here are the Serfas Vermin rear and front tires — side view.

Here are the Serfas Vermin front and rear tires — tread view.

That describes this week for me pretty well. Monday through Thursday were 12 to 14 hour days, and I was definitely feeling it by late Thursday: tired eyes, tired hands, kind of grumpy and short-tempered.

So on Friday, a long bike ride was the order of the day.

Online forecasts called for a high of 34 with cloudy skies. A local TV station called for a high of 42 with sunshine all day. They both called for light winds.

I headed out about 9am into lovely sunshine and a 31°F temperature. It was really pretty nice as I rolled south with the gentle breeze at my back. Turning west after about 20 miles, I felt the wind for the first time, but it wasn’t bad. Still nice and sunny.

By the time I’d turned north, the sun was gone, the wind seemed to pick up a bit, and I suddenly felt cold and damp.

I stopped for lunch after about 50 miles, feeling fairly good and strong, but the last leg of the ride would turn out to be a tough one for me. A headwind for the first few miles, then a crosswind (that felt a lot like a headwind) for the next 20. Just a few miles of tailwind.

I made it home for a total of 76 miles, at a 13.25 MPH pace. Better than last week’s 12.75 mile pace over 68 miles, but I didn’t feel nearly as strong at the end. In fact, I was pretty well wore out.

But more than just the fatigue, two things were really starting to bother me:

1. My neck and shoulders get really sore and tense on long rides. I had this problem last year as well, and the LBS suggested that I was riding for too long with my arms straight, that I needed to keep my arms bent, and let my back support my upper body more. I’ve tried to do this, and it does seem to help, but not enough.

   I’m thinking it’s one of three things:

   • Fitness: My back and abdominals are not strong enough to support me for long rides.
   • Technique: I’m not clear on how I should be riding. Hands on the bars? Hands on the hoods? Hands in the drops? I try to mix it up and use all hand positions, but my “default” position, the one I’m most comfortable in, is in the drops. Unfortunately, in that position my tendency to lock my arms is most pronounced.
   • Mechanical: Should I look at other handlebar designs? I’m just using the stock bar that came with the bike. Would a narrower or wider bar help? A “dirt drop” / “randoneuring” style bar with some flare or sweep? Is the bar too close or too far? Too much drop or too little? Lots of questions, but I’m not sure how to answer any of them, short of buying some different bars and giving them a shot.

   I’m not sure what my next step is. I’m considering getting a high-end professional bike fit. That might solve it, might not. I seem to be well-fit on the bike other than the shoulder issues…

2. My last two long rides, I’ve suffered from numbness in my right foot. It was worse this ride, and took an hour or so to get back to normal after I was done. Actually, I wasn’t sure if it was numbness or just cold toes, but now I’m sure it’s numbness. Left foot is fine, right is numb.

   I’m wearing Lake sandals (the same ones I’ve worn for years), a wool liner sock, a Serius Stormsock, then a heavier outer sock, then a Trek toe cover. I thought perhaps it was the toe covers I wear, they kind of add a lump underneath the ball of the foot. But why would it only bother me on one side? I don’t blame the sandals. I don’t blame the SPD pedals or cleats. This problem has only really shown up on my last two long rides.

   I’m a bit flummoxed by this. Maybe there’s a subtle cleat positioning difference between the left and right sides. But the cleats haven’t been moved since the middle of last year.

   Weird.

   I think for now I’m going to check the cleat positioning, and perhaps switch over to different shoes for my next long ride.

I need to figure these issues out, because either one is a serious roadblock to finishing longer rides. The shoulder issue is the more serious, I think, since it’s been a problem since almost the very beginning of my riding with this bike.

First stop, I suppose, is to check in with the LBS and see what they suggest.

It wasn’t a big day for photos, what with the dreary weather and my discomfort, but I did come up with one nice shot from early in the ride, before the sun gave out:

This is a shot of a nice fence-lined country lane in Miami County, Kansas.

I got out yesterday for a very short ride, just 4 miles. The snow was just too fresh, and the gravel roads hadn’t been plowed at all. It was slow going, with 2-3 inches of fresh fluff atop hard-packed ice/snow, it was extremely slippery. I never went down, the the back wheel was fishtailing constantly.

On the positive site, I was rather comfortable, even at 11°F with a 12 MPH wind. Toes were fine, fingers were cold, but manageable, and everything else — head, torso, arms, legs — were just fine, if not a little too warm in places.

But today I got out for another short ride (this time 8 miles!) and the roads were decent, but the comfort level wasn’t nearly the same, especially with the hands.

I’m trying a three-layer system, actually two of them:

• On my left hand, an UnderArmour ColdGear liner glove, a fluffy fleece glove 40 gram Thinsulate Berber Fleece), and a neoprene windblocker glove/mitten (a fingerless glove with a flip-down cover that turns it into a mitten).
• On my right hand, an UnderArmour ColdGear liner glove, a neoprene windblocker glove, and a fluffy fleece glove on top.

Three miles into the ride, and my fingertips are freezing. I stopped, and added a polypro glove liner over the ColdGear liner. That helped, but it was still cold. The mitten was marginally better than the glove, but not by enough to really matter.

Why such a big difference between the two days? The temperature wasn’t much difference (maybe 3-4 degrees colder), and the wind was about the same.

I think I need a larger outer wind-blocking glove to replace the tight neoprene glove, to hopefully provide a little more space for insulation.

So I guess that’s my next step.

Unless I say to heck with it and wait for a warming trend. Bah.

The LHT is not exactly a mountain bike, but it performed admirably on the trails at Dornwood Park and MacLennan Park in Topeka. These trails are more fast-and-flowy than technical, but there were still plenty of rocks and roots to challenge my limited mountain biking skills.

The main thing was that I didn’t fall. This was my first return to singletrack since my crash last December, and I definitely played it safe, keeping the speed in check and walking the bike whenever it got too sketchy. I still ended up riding a number of sections that were pretty scary, but I made it through unscathed.

I had the LHT set up with knobby mountain bike tires (which is the same thing I’ve been using on recent gravel road rides), and they gave me really secure traction on downhills, uphills, and corners.

The LHT’s drop bars actually worked quite well. I found them comfortable, and they provided great control under all conditions.

Shifting was something of a problem, though. The bar-end shifters were just too difficult to reach on short notice. On terrain with lots of ups and downs, a good deal of shifting is required, and the bar-ends are pretty obviously not the right choice for this type of riding.

The brakes, which I’ve been somewhat unhappy with on road rides, actually worked just fine on singletrack. They’re a little wearying for long descents, but I found them adequate.

All in all, the Long Haul Trucker was a pleasant surprise — it worked better than I expected, and as well as I could have hoped. It’s obviously no match for a real mountain bike — the lack of suspension is especially missed — but it did work.

I wouldn’t want to use this bike on a purely singletrack tour, but it could certainly handle a tour that includes short sections of singletrack or rough roads.

The LHT at Dornwood Park in Topeka, KS, within the crumbling ruins of an old dairy barn.

This was the first time I’d ridden dual mountain bike tires on the Long Haul Trucker (previous rides had used an old worn-down Specialized MTB tire on the front, and the stock WTB Slickasaurus on the back).

With the new tread and more aggressive knobs, the ride was rather buzzy on hardpack and asphalt — I could both feel and hear the tires on a smooth surface — but felt great on normal gravel roads. At one point I even took the bike a bit off-road, venturing down a state park access road that was muddy in places, and soft in others, and the tires worked very well there (as you’d expect).

They also worked well for out-of-the-saddle climbing on gravel — a situation where the Slickasaurus would tend to spin out, but where the MTB tires dug in and just kept climbing.

Some pictures from the ride, a 40-mile, mostly-gravel route down to Hillsdale Lake, on a pleasant February day with temperatures into the mid-60′s:

In all that time, I never once took a good look at the helmet I’d been wearing the day of the wreck. It appeared intact, and felt solid.

But yesterday, as I was preparing for a ride, I noticed something wasn’t right.

The helmet was misshapen on the right side. On closer inspection, I found that the helmet was cracked. And embedded within the crack was a small stick, a half-inch-long chunk of wood about the diameter of a #2 pencil.

Thinking back on the accident, I don’t even remember wanging my head, and there were no abrasions, no bruising, and no pain.

Yet I’d hit my head hard enough to lodge this twig into the helmet — and keep it stuck in there through sometime like 27 hours of riding since then.

So for all who prefer to ride without a helmet, take a look at this. If I hadn’t been wearing a helmet during this relatively minor and low-speed accident, that stick could have been lodged in my head. And instead of a cracked helmet, I could have had a cracked skull.

A broken head is a lot more hassle to deal with than a broken helmet.

The helmet: A fairly low-end Bell Aquila. Nothing fancy, but it certainly worked.

I still can’t believe it took me so long to notice the crack. Jeez, that was dumb…

• Though I’d read some poor reviews of the WTB Slickasaurus tires, they haven’t been a problem so far. No flats, and they seem to roll reasonably fast with no handling problems. I’ve ridden them on both pavement and gravel (though I had to let some air out of the tires on gravel to soften the ride a bit).

• The WTB SST saddle has likewise been trouble-free. Reasonably comfortable, no saddle sores, no numb bits. Granted, my longest ride is still only 30 miles, but so far so good.

• I’m not terribly happy with the Tektro Oryx cantilever brakes. Yes, they work, but I really have to squeeze the levers hard to get much braking power. I was going down a steep, curvy, and muddy gravel road the other day, and had to ride the brakes all the way down, and if I’d had to really stop — and not just slow down — I’m not sure if I could have. I was squeezing the brakes really firmly as it was, and it was rather wearying. Not sure what the answer here is — get used to it?

• No mechanical issues at all, other than some normal stretching in the rear derailleur cable, which I’ve been able to fix with the barrel adjusters.

• The drop handlebars have taken some getting used to. Coming from a flat bar, they just felt weird at first. That feeling has faded as I’ve become acclimated to them, and they’re starting to feel more natural.

• I may want to add some extra padding to a few key points on the handlebars, though. Even with padded gloves (plus another layer of fleece gloves over the top) I’ve felt the need for some extra cush. Mostly this occurs in two locations — when my hands are in the drops, with my weight near the shifters, and on the hoods, when my weight is on my palms right at the curve of the bars. The problem has improved a bit over time, so this may just be another incidence of acclimation…

• The bar-end shifters have also taken some getting used to, but I think I’m going to be happy with them. They shift cleanly smoothly, and are easy to access. I like the friction shift on the front derailleur, which lets me tweak out chain rub at the extremes of the cassette.

• Frame sizing seems good. I rode with a guy who’s very knowledgeable about these things, and he said the bike fit me well, that I appeared comfortable, with good form, and good power. That’s encouraging.

• I swapped the frame bag for a rack trunk. Since I had the rear rack installed anyway, the trunk was only 5 oz. heavier than the frame bag, and it can hold a lot more, plus allows me to get rid of the fanny pack I was using for my phone and camera. I mounted my safety triangle reflector on the rear of the trunk, which worked out great — it’s in an optimal position, and doesn’t interfere too much with opening and closing the bag. The bag is an older REI Basic Rack Trunk that I picked up last year off eBay.

• I still want to add fenders. I hate getting snow melt and gravel road mud splattered all over the frame and my legs. Still not sure which fenders I want yet. 60mm width or 45mm? Planet Bike or SKS? Silver or black?

• Speed — I don’t feel particularly fast on this bike. It rolls well on the flats, but I don’t think it climbs particularly well. How much of that is the bike, and how much of that is my still recovering fitness from having ridden very little for a month? Still too early to really say for sure…

I’m looking forward to riding more, and giving another report, perhaps at 500 miles or so.

• Rear Rack: The rear rack is a Planet Bike Eco Rack, a basic but functional rack that came with my EZ-Sport. There are fancier and more rugged racks, but this should do for now. In fact, I’m not even sure I’ll be keeping it on the bike. For local rides, it’s not really needed, and it just adds weight (about 1.25 pounds).

• Pedals: I swiped the Shimano PD-M520 pedals off the mountain bike (and prior to that they’d been on the recumbents). At some point I’ll probably have to break down and get a new pair, but these still seem to work perfectly, so why change?

• Cyclocomputer: The E3 F11c Cycle Computer w/Cadence is something I picked up on super-special at Nashbar. It seems pretty decent, though it’s bigger and less elegant than the Cateye Strada I have on the Django. Getting it installed on the bike however, took an embarrassingly long time. I had no trouble setting up the cadence sensor, but the hangup was the speed sensor. Being able to fit fat tires, the distance between the chainstay and the spokes on the rear wheel is quite large, and I had a tough time finding a way to shim the speed sensor out far enough to reach the spoke magnet. Eventually, I cannibalized part of an old handlebar mirror mount, and figured out a way to mount the sensor on the end of that. It’s not particularly elegant, but it works, and seems solid. I’m still not entirely happy with the wire routing, but the computer is at least working reliably now.

• Frame Bag: The Frame Pack bag is another Nashbar special, but I’m rather happy with the way this worked out. In a nice little bit of serendipity, my Blackburn Mountain Air pump from the mountain bike fit perfectly in the long side of the frame bag, with ample room for a tube, multi-tool, and various other small items.

  However, the frame bag does have two significant problems. One, it covers up one of the bottle cage mounts, and two, it’s in the way if I ever try to load the bike onto a car rack. I don’t plan on doing that for awhile, so it’s no big deal, but eventually this will become an issue. At that time, I can either just take the bag on and off each time I put it on the rack, or just switch back to a seat bag. The bottle mount may ultimately be the bigger issue, as the third bottle may be needed for long remote rides.

• Bottle Cages: These are just a couple cages I had lying around. Nothing special.

The only other additions I’m planning to make at some point are a pair of fenders and possibly a front rack. Still looking at options for those items.

Here’s a picture from today’s ride, a short jaunt to Gardner Lake and back. This picture was taken at one of the picnic shelters.

I’m still getting a feel for the bike, and haven’t really put any serious miles on it yet, but so far so good. I’ll report more as I figure things out.

I got this on January 3rd, and have had it out for two rides so far, a 9-mile gravel grind on its maiden voyage, and a 17-mile paved ride today. On the ride today, I intended to get a good picture, but the sun disappeared as soon as I hit the road, and this was the best I could come up with. If it wasn’t for the guardrail, the bike would almost disappear into the brown grass and leafless trees.

I’ve been thinking about this bike for quite a while, at least since late summer. Here were my selection parameters:

• A bike I could ride on both paved roads and gravel roads
• A bike I could ride on weekly club rides
• A bike I could ride on longer events of 100+ miles
• A bike I could ride with on cross-state tours
• A bike I could ride on self-supported tours
• I didn’t want to spend more than about $1000 (hopefully less)

The mountain bike I’ve been riding hard for the last six months handled all of that, to greater or lesser extents, but it really wasn’t the right tool for the job, and for some of the tasks, such as the cross-state tours and long single-day events, it was particularly ill-suited.

Looking at different types of bikes, I could dismiss some immediately. Recumbents were out because they didn’t handle gravel roads well. Pure road bikes were out because they didn’t handle gravel or loaded touring.

I seriously considered a cyclocross bike. It would be light and fast, well-suited for club rides. It could handle gravel with ease. It could handle light touring. I could get a basic model for just under $1K. I could even use ir for racing, if I wanted. But it wasn’t really the right bike for extended tours or loaded tours.

One bike that piqued my interest was the Salsa Fargo. It could handle the loaded touring, it could handle gravel and even some pretty rough singletrack, it would be great for long single-day events. It had disc brakes.

However, it wasn’t available (as a complete bike) until February. It used 29″ wheels (which meant having to stock another size of wheels, tires, and tubes). It was a brand new design (i.e. not heavily field-tested). It was $2000.

So I ended up with the Surly Long Haul Trucker, a touring bike that could take skinny tires for reasonably fast local rides and supported touring, or could take fat tires for gravel and dirt roads. It could handle a heavy load for self-supported touring. It has been field-tested for at least a half-dozen years, with nearly unanimous positive reviews. It used 26″ wheels (in my frame size). It listed for $1100.

On the downside, it used cantilever brakes — OK, but not as solid as disc or V-brakes. It was heavy — about 26-27 pounds stock. And while it could take fat tires and handle gravel and perhaps even some easy singletrack, it is primarily a road bike.

On the balance, the positives far outweighed the negatives, and the decision was made.

At that point, the main issue was frame sizing. Not having ridden a road bike since I was a teenager (and that just a department store 10-speed), I had no clue what size I needed. People of similar height rode everything from 50cm to 56cm frames, and every brand of bike seemed to measure their frames differently, so that a 54cm from one company wasn’t the same as a 54cm from another company. And even worse, I no longer knew what felt right.

In the end, I was fortunate to find two Long Haul Truckers in stock locally — a 50cm in Kansas City, and a 54cm in Lawrence, and both shops were kind enough to let me test-ride them and ask a few questions. Both sizes felt foreign to one degree or another. But I got the impression that the 50cm was too small, and the 54cm too big, so that gave me the answer right there: 52cm frame.

I placed the order with my most local of shops, Bike America in Olathe, on my birthday, just before the end of the year. Thanks to Kevin and, especially, Mark, for getting me a great deal.

Not having any particular preferences on specific components, I went with the Long Haul Trucker “complete”. My understanding is that most of Surly’s component choices are pretty decent, and should serve me well until I learn more about my road bike likes and dislikes.

That’s enough for now. I’ll discuss the particulars of the bike, and what I’ve added so far, in the next post…

I stayed close to home, heading up the road a couple miles to Lone Elm Park, where I hit the gravel and grass trails for a few loops. With the temperature just under freezing, the roads were clear but wet, and the gravel trails were mostly clear, though the wooden bridges were snow-covered, and there were a few water puddles on the trail. The grass trails, however, were pretty well snowed in, and it was slow riding breaking trail through the fresh snow and 3-inch tall grass.

In all, I did 2.5 loops — two complete loops including both gravel and grass, each about 1.4 miles long, and one gravel-only loop of about 0.7 miles.

That and riding roads there-and-back got me about 8.5 miles. That was enough.

Clothing-wise, I’m still trying to work it out. Today, the problem was my feet. With a base layer cotton sock, a Seirus stormsock, and wool sock, in my Shimano MTB shoes, I ended up with cold toes. I’m thinking the stormsock (a windproof, water resistant layer) should have gone on the outer layer, providing more airspace within. The other problem is that my shoes are really too tight with all the sock layers, further limiting the insulating airspace.

Other than that, the Amfib tights were great on the legs, wool + polypro + rain jacket was actually too warm on the torso, and liner glove + fleece glove was great on the hands.

The other problem was glasses — I was using a fleece neck gaitor, which works fine keeping the neck and face comfy, but warm air rises and fogs the glasses. Never did really work that out, other than the lower the gaiter below my mouth.

Finally, my camera crapped out on me, or I’d have some nice photos. That thing is eating batteries like candy. Time for a new one, I suppose.

I bought a pair of Chiba on eBay. Haven’t ridden with them yet, so I can’t comment on their ride qualities, but they have one feature that just kicks butt.

Between the first and second fingers, and between the third and fourth fingers, there’s a little fabric loop. This bit of material doesn’t seem to get in the way, and doesn’t restrict finger movement at all, but it makes it very easy to take the gloves off.

Most short-fingered cycling gloves are kind of a pain to take off. You either have to turn the glove inside out, or individually scootch each finger through the glove.

No more! Just pull in the little loops, and the glove comes right off! Quick and easy.

OK, you still have to scootch the thumb, but at least the fingers are easy!

Yah, I am easily impressed…

First, I wanted to check out the new rain jacket I bought (a Specialized Deflect Jacket). This seemed to work fine, though with warm temperatures and heavy humidity, I think I was nearly as wet inside the jacket as I was outside. The jacket didn’t feel terribly breathable, but I’m not sure this was a valid test case. It did seem to do a fine job of keeping rain out, however.

Second, in anticipation of riding the century on wet roads, I’d purchased a set of fenders. The Planet Bike Freddy Fenders aren’t full fenders, but are of the clip-on variety. They don’t fit terribly well on the mountain bike — the rear fender’s clip, in particular, interferes with my front derailleur cable — but I eventually got them installed. And despite a bit of interference on the front fender during tight turns, they worked great.

Third, I rigged a helmet mount for my Planet Bike Superflash. This blinky light comes with a seatpost mount and a built-in clip mount, but no obvious way to mount it to a handlebar. Normally, I run this on my seatpost, but I was concerned that its visibility would be blocked by the read fender and expanded seat bag. Plus, higher is better, I think. So I came up with a simple solution, using just a tie-wrap and a hunk of old inner tube. Basically, the tie-wrap connects the inner tube (which acts as a fat rubber band) to the helmet’s internal webbing, and the light’s clip is inserted into the inner tube. I’m not sure how well I explained that, but it seems to work very well, allowing me to position the Superflash securely onto the helmet, yet still allowing for some adjustability.

The ride itself was just a quick 23-mile loop. The rain, as I left, was light but steady. Later on, it stopped entirely (and the sun even came out of the clouds for a few moments), before resuming just before I returned home. A few minutes thereafter, the rain started pouring down.

The title of this post, and the photo (which is not mine, as I neglected to bring my camera), refers to what I saw when I crossed a low spot on a lightly-traveled road — crawdads walking across the paved road. As I stopped and rolled near them, they’d rear up onto their tails, raising their claws toward me in a defensive posture. The little buggers are so ugly they’re kind of cute, and the claw-waving “salute” behavior is really funny, especially when they lose their balance and topple over on their backs.

I’ve been on a bit of an eBay kick lately (a dangerous thing!), and most of the items alluded to in the title relate directly to that:

• The “something old” is a pair of Lake MX220 mountain bike shoes I bought off of eBay. They’re in fine shape for used shoes, and as a bonus, they came with SPD cleats (albeit Ritchey, rather than Shimano, brand). I paid $22 plus shipping, which seems like a good deal given that they ran about $120 new. These are a size 43, which Lake says correspond to 9 to 9.5 in US sizing. I normally wear a 9.5 in shoes, sometimes a 10. These seem to fit me plenty tight. Too tight? That’s what I was trying to find out.

• The “some things new” are two other eBay scores: a new saddle and a new long-sleeve jersey.

  The Saddle is a WTB Pure V, which WTB classifies as a “performance” saddle. The one I’ve been using for several months is a WTB Speed V, which falls into the “recreational” category. I’ve been rather satisfied with the Speed V, but it’s developed two small tears — one on the bottom of the saddle, and the other on the tail end. The one on the rear, which it’s not serious yet, will eventually become worse and worse. So my $25 (plus shipping) purchase of a new saddle was preemptive. That, and I wanted to see what the differences between the Speed and the Pure were…

  The jersey is a Louis Garneau Roadster 3, which retails for $80, and which I got for $11.50 (plus shipping) — a steal! It’s a brand new jersey, and it seems to fit me fine. Here’s the manufacturer’s description: “This ripstop finish fabric has amazing moisture transfer properties and provides breathability with a soft brushed back for comfort and warmth. 9″/23 cm zip for good ventilation, elastics at wrists and hem.” This is my first “real” long-sleeve cycling jersey.

• The “something broken” is my cyclocomputer, a Cateye Cordless 7. It’s been on the fritz for the last few rides, and today it worked sporatically for a mile or so, then stopped working entirely.

• The “something blue” is the Louis Garneau Roadster 3 jersey, of course.

OK, so how did everything perform on this little test flight?

It was a cool morning, in the upper 50′s, and the jersey did OK. It definitely didn’t do much to block the wind, but on this morning that was fine; with lower temps and/or more wind, that might be a problem. The jersey did fit well, and it seemed to with moisture very well.

The shoes were fine as well. They were kind of tough to get on, but I don’t know, maybe that’s normal for cycling shoes. They were easy to walk in, but they did feel a bit small — I could feel the little toes pinched slightly. On the bike, this wasn’t a problem, and once clipped in, I really didn’t notice them at all. They just kind of disappeared, which is a good thing, and I felt like I had a very solid connection to the pedals. Clipping in was a little difficult, as was clipping out. This is with Shimano PD-M520 pedals. This may have had to do with the pedals being old and the cleats being new, or with the pedals and cleats being different brands. Who knows, but I’ll need to keep an eye on this.

The Pure V saddle felt noticeably firmer than the Speed V, but it wasn’t uncomfortable, at least at that short distance. I’ll definitely need to give this some more time, and some longer rides, before I can render a verdict on it.

So everything was basically fine, but I won’t know for sure on the shoes or saddle until I’ve put in the miles and the hours to give them a thorough testing. Time will tell!

As for the cyclocomputer, I don’t think it’s actually broken; I suspect it just needs new batteries…

Still, I couldn’t quite persuade myself to drop $100+ on a bike-specific lighting system.

Browsing the selection at my local Wal-Mart (yah, big spender), I came across some Coleman flashlights and headlamps. I don’t expect that these are bleeding-edge state-of-the-art lights, but they looked pretty solid, and weren’t too pricey.

I bought a Coleman 3AAA LED Headlamp for about $25, thinking that it could replace the anemic Energizer headlamp I had been using.

The Coleman light uses three AAA batteries (it comes with Alkaline cells, but I bought some rechargeables as well) contained within a cylindrical plastic case about the size and shape of an old 35mm film cannister, with LEDs on one side, the battery compartment on the other, and a rotating mode selector switch on one end. The case snaps onto a plastic holder with elastic headband.

The lamp uses three LEDs, a white CREE Xlamp XR-E LED for the main light, and two 5mm red LEDs for “enhanced night vision”. I’m not sure if the red LEDs are worth much, but the white LED is very bright. The packaging lists it as 105 lumens, with a throw of 58 meters. The Coleman web site lists the brightness as 55 lumens. Not sure why the discrepancy, or which one is correct, but regardless, it’s darn bright, at least compared to my old lights.

The size and shape of the light worked out well with my helmet (a Bell Aquila). I was able to mount the lamp just under the visor, with the lamp’s headband stretched around the back of the helmet. This, by itself, was fairly secure, but I added a rubber band (made out of an old inner tube) to make the connection between the lamp and visor even more secure. Time will tell, but it looks pretty solid.

The weight of the lamp is noticeable, but not too objectionable. If it gets to be too much, I can unclip the lamp from it’s holder, leaving only the holder and headband in place.

One minor complaint: The rotatable mode switch is kind of hard to operate with the light tucked up under the helmet visor. Given that I shouldn’t have to be making many on-the-fly adjustments, it should be fine.

So how’s it work?

I haven’t ridden with it yet, but in some quick tests, I’m rather impressed. Walking outside on a dark night, the beam carries a good distance, and the beam is fairly tight.

The following photos were taken in a semi-dark garage, at a distance of about 10 feet:

The left photo shows the Energizer headlamp on the left and the Coleman headlamp on the right. No contest.

The right photo shows the Cateye HL-EL300 on the left and the Coleman headlamp on the right. Closer, but the Coleman’s beam is clearly brighter and more focused.

I haven’t taken photos to prove it, but at longer distances the differences are even more stark.

Now to give the new light a go in real-world conditions…

Coming from a recumbent, and with a history of Repetitive Strain Injury, hand comfort was a major concern with an upright bike. Going into this little experiment, I didn’t really know how my hands would respond. There was a distinct possibility that putting weight on my hands would cause my RSI symptoms to re-emerge, and I’d be unable to ride the bike at all, or would have to limit my rides to short distances.

Thankfully, that hasn’t proven to be the case. I’ve been able to ride pretty much as long as I’ve wanted, and the hands haven’t been a big issue.

However, they haven’t been perfect, either. I definitely experienced some numbness and discomfort, but changing hand positions frequently, as well as stretching, helped a lot.

However, at some point I added some Dimension long bar ends to give myself extra hand positions. This has worked out fairly well. At one point I mounted the bar ends “backwards” — pointing back towards me, and angling away from me. This was kind of nice, as it let me sit really upright, with very little pressure on my hands. However, this made the bike really wide, and looked pretty goofy.

I eventually switched the bar ends back to a more normal position, though I have them rotated somewhat further forward than is typical, nearly parallel to the ground. This allows me a sort of “drop” position, where I can lean farther forward, which is more aerodynamic, and it also feels like I can generate more power in this position. I typically use it on flats and when climbing long hills.

So, at this point, I’m fairly happy with my handlebar setup. The bar ends give me quite a few hand positions, and the leaning-forward position feels more efficient.

Still, I’m considering making some changes.

One, I’m considering using “ergo” grips. I have some on order from PricePoint (the Sette Ergo 2 Grips). I’m thinking that spreading the pressure points across more surface area would be better than the round grips I’m currently using. Plus, these are far cheaper than the name-brand “Ergon” grips, and I’m a sucker for a deal. However, I don’t know how well these will work with the bar ends, or if they’ll even work at all. I’m a bit dubious, but time will tell…

Two, I’m thinking about some alternate handlebars. The Origin8 “Space Bar” looks promising. I think the more swept-back bar would make for more natural hand positions, and as I understand it, the bar should work with my existing controls. Don’t know how it’d play with the bar-ends, though.

The Origin8 “Gary Bar” is another possibility. This actually is a drop bar, but with the drops “spread out” rather than completely vertical. Looks kinds weird, but has garnered decent reviews. I think I’d have to change my shifting components, though, which I’m loathe to do.

Another intriguing design is the Titec H-Bar. This funky-looking bar offers both sweep and bar-end-like extensions on the front, proving lots of hand positions. It’s a little more expensive than the other two options, and I’m not sure how my controls would mount.

For now, I’m probably going to stick with what I have, but I find the alternate bars rather compelling, so may have to give them a try someday, just to find out what they’re all about…