I’ve always been a pretty goal-oriented person, but one thing I’ve realized as I’ve gotten older is that achieving a big goal isn’t always as rewarding as we think it will be. I often find more reward in the grind/challenge of pursuing a big goal vs. actually hitting the goal (which is often a very temporary high). And if you are setting appropriately tough goals, you should be failing at times. Find joy and happiness (I know, feelings….) in the pursuit of your goals and you’ll likely feel pretty rewarded whether you always hit them or not. The goal is often needed to motivate the work, but the work is often the bigger reward.
All that said, if your point is that many people need to be more driven and push to achieve hard things, I couldn’t agree more. I think a lot of people just struggle with knowing what they really want, which makes it tough to pursue anything with much drive.
Agree with all you said, but neither you nor I (nor many on this forum) are “most people”.
Where I was generally going is that “most people” today are often disappointed, frustrated, or unhappy with their lives because they aren’t getting what they want or something that fulfills them, and that PART of that is because they focus too much on their feelings and too little on what they should be doing to organically/truly generate such feelings.
Put a different way, they want to feel proud of doing something hard, but instead of actually doing something hard they “dumb down” the idea of hard to some pale imitation of it, then claim they did hard so they can feel proud, because what they think they’re supposed to care about is the feeling… and they end up feeling empty.
Modern bikes are pretty in the same way that a backhoe is pretty. They modular, angular tools that get the job done well. They are no longer pretty in the same way a 1975 DeRosa is pretty. In fact, modern bikes are just kind of ugly.
But, I no longer own a proper bicycle and pedal away on a Concept2 bike erg. And the BikeErg is ugly. So, consider the source.
I’ve gotta say I’m pretty meh on this one. I like looking at old bikes, but compared to modern bikes they kind of look like insects with antenna and other protuberances all over them.
In this pic…exposed cables, cable housings, toe clips, shifters, brake levers, brakes, curvy fork. Also, the low saddle looks funny now that I’m use to sloping top tubes.
Since my first 20 years of racing were on level top tube, curved fork bikes (as late as say 2005, most carbon forks were still curved), the fork looks graceful to me. I’d rather have shiny cable clips than brake disks. I like the look for downtube shifters just because that’s what I grew up on. The downtube clutter is perhaps a wash when compared to the size of post-STI levers.
If I bought a bike again, I’d be ok with using a lugged steel bike as my daily driver, but no way would I race on one. But, the actual difference isn’t as great as we might think.
Yeah, different strokes for different folks. I do like to look at old bikes and modern lugs just for nostalgia, but I prefer the modern look. I do think new mass produced carbon bikes pretty much all look the same now though. I just like that look.
Big fan of old lugged frames with modern drivetrains hidden cabling etc best of both worlds.
Started down the rabbit hole of modifying an old steel frame for disc brakes stuff like that. Ended I could build my own frame from scratch for less but I don’t need yet another hobby so now I don’t have either.
Funny in MTB I find a steel or Ti singlespeed hardtail the peak of aesthetics (though I also ride an ugly Epic 8), but on road I much prefer the look of a modern aero bike with integrated everything.
I appreciate the craftsmanship of the old lugged frames (as well as the modern boutique ti and steel stuff), but I’d never use that stuff for anything but hanging on a wall as art. Modern plastic bikes are super boring to me from a style perspective, but they are the best tool for the job and I like the modern tech.
I kind of look at cars the same way. A 67 corvette is a rolling piece of art, but not that enjoyable to drive (and certainly wouldn’t be my choice at the track).
My dream bike as a kid was a chrome Schwinn paramount (back when Schwinn actually made some nice bikes). If they were cheap, I’d hang one on the wall in my man cave. But they aren’t cheap.
Dropbar MTB at Leadville (LT 100 MTB) are only faster for about 4 men, annually.
You won’t benefit from more data.
SRAM chains are (literally, actually, measurably) 20-100x more durable than Shimano chains, in real-world riding with haphazard maintenance. (at least in this garage)
Separating fuel from electrolytes is unnecessary and suboptimal for >70% of the people who do it. (it’s occasionally useful, but should not be the default)
Interested to get your thoughts on dental health when just consuming liquid carbs on the bike.
My usual mix is a bottle of ~250g of table sugar and a bottle of plain water I use to swish out the mouth. is this necessary? Should I just use carbs in both bottles and not worry about it?
I’ve been looking into this quite a bit recently, as I had radiotherapy for tonsil cancer a couple of years ago, which puts me at an enhanced risk of osteoradionecrosis if I ever have to have an extraction. So I suddenly care a lot more about my teeth than I used to - which is a good thing.
Conclusion seems to be that as well as being nearly the optimum fuel, as well as the cheapest/easiest, sugar water with a plain water rinse is as good as you’re going to get. And frequency is more detrimental than sweetness, so go as sugary as you feel you can without it turning into a gel that sticks to your teeth, and sip less often.
Even 20x more durable sounds laughably far off, even if there is really a significant difference at the mid to top end where most people in this forum are playing.
Think about it: if a Shimano chain lasts someone 6 months of usage (oiled / waxed / whatever mileage), you really think a SRAM chain is going to somehow last a decade under the same usage? Let alone 50!! years, which is your high end estimate.
The big races in the Midwest are tedious and unexciting for spectators and I imagine competitors alike. Straight for 5 miles, 90 degrees left, straight for 8 miles, 90 degrees right, wade through peanut butter mud….
No real climbs, no technical sections and brutally hot and humid.
My commute to work this morning (22km, 33kph, technical, hilly gravel, 411w NP - on power) is more exciting than anything I’ve seen at unbound or the Nebraska world championship.
Gravel shouldn’t just be a gritty, dusty, muddy suffer fest. It should be technically challenging, thrilling and beautiful.
Why can’t they hold it in places like this? Credit to Pär Lindholm for the photo (in Norway)
I‘m not sure it‘s possible, I‘m slow haha.
- on power) is more exciting than anything I’ve seen at unbound or the Nebraska world championship.