Grant Petersen vs Bicycling Magazine

[weisan]

While researching more about my recently acquired Rivendell Road Standard (http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=195879), I happened upon this old article. There's enough stupid sensationalism and controversy swelling all around us these days, don't need to add more to the fire...but I thought he offered some interesting viewpoints.

http://www.bikesfortherestofus.com/2012/06/grant-petersen-vs-bicycling-magazine.html


Grant Petersen, the founder of Rivendell, has long railed against how racing-centric bicycling is in America. For example, in a 2005 interview with Sheldon Brown at Interbike, Petersen ranted:
I think the worst thing that's happening in bicycles these days and it's been happening for years is using racing and competition bicycles to sell bicycles to people who are not going to do that. I mean, it wouldn't happen in cars. You don't see people driving around in cars that people race on the dragstrip or in NASCAR cars but that's the kind of bike that people get on and ride. It's not a practical bike for everyday living....
Now Petersen, whose wonderful writing made collectibles out of old Bridgestone catalogs and Rivendell Readers, has written a book based on this theme: Just Ride: A Radically Practical Guide to Riding Your Bike.

This is not going to be a review of his book. Instead, I thought I'd set up a debate between Petersen and the most consistent purveyor of the racing-centric view of bicycling I could think of: Bicycling Magazine.

Bicycling has obliged by publishing an article in its July 2012 issue called Beginners' Guide: A Construction Manual. This is an article on "how to become a cyclist." So what I'm going to do here is take a quote or close paraphrase from Bicycling's "Construction Manual" and then a counterpoint from Petersen's Just Ride. I'll leave it to you to decide who makes more sense.

On bike shorts

Bicycling Magazine: Bike shorts wick sweat and make riding comfortable. A section of padding, called a chamois, is sewn into the seat of the garment to help prevent chafing.

Grant Petersen: The benefits of tight shorts with padded crotches matter only to racers and mega-milers. For anybody else, and for recreational rides, even vigorous ones lasting the better part of a day, a good saddle, smooth-seamed shorts, and standing up now and then are all you need.

On jerseys

BM: Made of lightweight, fast-drying materials that stay cool, this shirt includes back pockets to hold snacks, keys, and other essentials.

GP: If you don't race, loose is better. Loose clothing ventilates better and stays off your skin. Untuck your shirt, so it flaps a little and keeps the air moving around your skin.

On shoes

BM: Invest in a clipless system, which increases power and efficiency and smooths out pedal strokes by connecting cleats on your shoes to the pedals.

GP: As long as your pedals aren't dinky, any shoe does the job without flexing because the shoe is supported by the pedal. The benefits of pedaling free far outweigh any real or imagined benefits of being locked in.

On gloves

BM: They prevent blisters and pressure pain from the handlebar and protect your hands in case of a fall.

GP: I can see gloves (or mittens) in cold weather, but they're far from essential in fair weather.

On helmets

BM: That's your only brain up there. Strap this on to help keep it safe.

GP: Are you safer wearing a helmet and overestimating its protection, or going helmetless and riding more carefully?

On buying bikes

BM: Buy the highest quality bike you can afford. For $500-700, expect entry-level components; a frame made of no-frills steel or aluminum; basic wheels. For $1,000 to 1,500, expect mid or entry level parts; a midquality steel or aluminum frame, maybe with carbon fiber mixed in; lighter, stronger wheels. For $1,500 to 3,000, expect upper-level components; a frame made of some high-quality aluminum or steel or midlevel carbon; lighter wheels.

GP: The lighter bike is good for maybe five years before it breaks or you just don't trust it anymore. The heavier one may easily last twenty or thirty years because it can withstand scratches and minor gouges. The more useful steel bike let's you ride tires up to 38 mm so you can ride it over any paved surface with remarkable comfort, because you can lower the pressure in the wide tires. It fits fenders, so it's a year-round, all-weather bike, not a part of the year, good weather one. A weight difference of a few pounds is hard to get worked up over, especially when the "extra" weight makes the bike better.

On saddles

BM: Plan on using a firmer, narrower model common to sportier road bikes that will support your sit bones and muscles. You might initially experience soreness while your rear end acclimates to the seat, but that will subside over a week or two of riding.

GP: Sitting well behind the pedals keeps you from scooting forward on the saddle and putting more weight on your hands, and lets you apply power sooner when you're pedaling uphills sitting down.

[oldpotatoe]

"but I thought he offered some interesting viewpoints."

"I think the worst thing that's happening in bicycles these days and it's been happening for years is using racing and competition bicycles to sell bicycles to people who are not going to do that. I mean, it wouldn't happen in cars."

Really? You do know who grant is, yes?

[weisan]

"but I thought he offered some interesting viewpoints."

Really? You do know who grant is, yes?

Yes I do...

Old pal, I say "interesting"....which can go either way...depending on who you talk to. :D

[oldpotatoe]

Yes I do...

Old pal, I say "interesting"....which can go either way...depending on who you talk to. :D

Sorry, not trying to be argumentative but the events of yesterday, just upset, more than a little scared, tired. Just glad there are some checks and balances, even if he might want to change that.

[Peter P.]

Both camps are looking at cycling for different purposes.

Bicycling Magazine is looking at cycling from a recreational perspective. That's "bicycle gear-centric". After all, one of the primary goals of the magazine is to sell advertising to companies that make stuff.

Grant Petersen is looking at making cycling a lifestyle. He wants you to just jump on the bike with what you have, and go, whether for fun or transportation. If you have to kit up for every foray to the post office or store, you lose the convenience and freedom he's trying to promote.

If in America, we wanted to by like Amsterdam, we'd ride more like Grant Petersen advocates. But most Americans view cycling as a pastime and its practical uses are almost tertiary so that "ride as you are" mentality just doesn't work.

Grant will continue to tilt at windmills. I hope he wins.

[saab2000]

It doesn't have to be one or the other. And frankly, these things can coexist not only in the world but under one roof.

Just like having a Porsche 911 and pickup truck in the same garage.

[stephenmarklay]

I think they are both right.

I like to get kitted up and pretend I am fast, do group rides with the team punish myself in a Gran Fondo now and again and think about how to be a little faster.

On the other hand I have a Schwinn commuter with flat MTB pedals and 35mm tires, leather saddle, bars level with the seat and I love to ride it with my tennis shoes, a t-shirt and shorts. Heck I even road it 50 miles once an my butt was fine :)

[weisan]

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/rivendell/bigpicture.html

The Big Picture By Grant Petersen
A bike should fit you. Most riders today are riding bikes that by our standards, are too small. They make you lean over too far, which puts too much weight on your hands, and too much strain on your arms, neck, and back.

A bike should be appropriate for how and where you ride it, and your fitness. If you're a mid-50s rider of moderate fitness, but ride fewer than 3000 miles per year, and you want to ride longish and steepish hills, the standard road gearing you'll find on virtually any stock road bike, is too high. You don't need a top gear more than 100 inches. You'll appreciate a low gear of 23-inches or less. Your big ring should be less than 50t, you middle ring should be 36t or 34t, and your small ring should be 24t or 26t. The biggest cog on your cassette should be at least 27t, and preferably 32t.

If you weigh more than 150 lbs and/or are not racing (meaning, even if you weigh 122 lbs and don't race), the smallest tire you should ride is 27mm wide. You may be able to ride comfortably and safely and problem-free on skinnier tires, but there's no benefit to the skinniness, and the drawback is more strain on your wheels, your frame, and your body; and less traction, and you're more likely to get a pinch flat. Air is so light and so cheap and so beneficial that you shouldn't minimize the amount in your tires. I'm not saying you should maximize it (because at some point you need more rubber for that, and that adds weight and affects frame and brake clearance). But you shouldn't minimize it, either.

For non-competitive riding, it's hard to justify tires smaller than 28mm.

Actually, it's hard to justify tires smaller than 32mm. Unless your justification amounts to, "I just bought some, I ride them, I say I like 'em, and that's final." Logic always loses arguments with emotion!



All of our frames are lugged steel. Steel, because it's the best material for frames, in terms of toughness, longevity, proportions, repairability, and safety; lugged, because it's better to create a joint with a low-stress sleeve of beautiful steel, than to merely melt steel together, or even joint it with brass fillets.

You may personally prefer welded frames, or fillet-brazed frames, and that's fine. We prefer them lugged, and so that's all we make.

Modern bikes have too many gears. By "too many," I mean for non-racing uses. It's a stretch to say you need more than this: (1) a really high high, (2) a normal high, (3) a high medium, (4) a medium, (5) a low medium, (6) a high low, (7) a medium low, (8) a low low, and (9) a super low low. But it's foolish to moan about "more than we need," and we know that from years of experience. So now our attitude toward the number of cogs on the rear hub is: Seven is heaven, eight is great, nine is finPile of lugse, ten is kind of getting ridiculous, but it won't kill you.



The worst thing about modern frames isn't the materials or joining methods, but their design. The designers don't know how long to make the forks, where to put the holes in the fork crowns, or where to put the seat stay bridges. The fork blades are too short, the brake holes in the crown are too high, and the rear brake bridges are too low. As a result, these frames don't accept practical tires. They accept racing tires, and racing tires are not practical for non-racing use. Yes, you can ride a racing bike on a Sunday ride, or a non-competitive group ride or a century or charity ride, but those bikes are less comfortable, more likely to get a flat, and in many cases are one broken rear spoke away from being unrideable. Plus, you can't put fenders on them for wet weather riding, and if you can't do that and you live in someplace other than Arizona or Southern California, it's nuts. You wouldn't buy a car without a top, but a bike you can't put fenders on is the same thing.

Materials and methods.

The only bikes we love, and therefore the only ones we make and sell, are lugged steel. Steel is the best material for frames because it's strong, tough, safe, repairable, and less likely to need repair. It endures hardships such as accidents and nicks and gouges that kill lesser frames, and although it's not unbreakable, it's less likely to break, and is more easily repaired, than is a frame of any other material.

Steel frames tend to have slender tubes, which are not only aesthetically pleasing in the same way that a fly rod or a 1910 airplane is, but also are more practical when it comes to fitting tires between them. Because steel is more rigid by volume than are other materials, the tubes don't have to be as fat. And skinny tubes look better and fit tires better.

The best way to join steel tubes is with lugs. Any other way is a compromise, a concession to price, expediency, or skill. It makes sense to add material to the outside of stressed frame joints, and that's what a lug does. A weld concentrates the stress. A fillet (as in a fillet-brazed frame) acts luglike, and is preferable to a tig-weld, but we prefer lugs for their interesting and beautiful looks. There is beauty of a sort in a tig-weld or a fillet, but there's just not a lot to look at. Yes, a bike is a tool, but tools can be beautiful and functional, and the best ones are both.

Forks should have crowns. Fork blades should have a low radius that continues, without increasing or straightening in the least, all the way to the dropout. That's how we like them, anyway.

[fourflys]

I think they are both right.

I like to get kitted up and pretend I am fast, do group rides with the team punish myself in a Gran Fondo now and again and think about how to be a little faster.

On the other hand I have a Schwinn commuter with flat MTB pedals and 35mm tires, leather saddle, bars level with the seat and I love to ride it with my tennis shoes, a t-shirt and shorts. Heck I even road it 50 miles once an my butt was fine :)

yep... I like Grant and his thoughts (just not his current bikes mostly), and I like to have my "go fast" bike with my bibs and jersey... plus, I like gadgets and stuff! :D

the one glaring thing I disagree with Grant on is the helmet thing... as a prior EMT and current Corpsman, I will always wear a helmet, especially after I cracked one all the way through while riding "smart"...

[fourflys]

http://www.sheldonbrown.com/harris/rivendell/bigpicture.html

The Big Picture By Grant Petersen
A bike should fit you. Most riders today are riding bikes that by our standards, are too small. They make you lean over too far, which puts too much weight on your hands, and too much strain on your arms, neck, and back.



for me, I do agree with this... I'm a big believer of "a fistful of seatpost" when it comes to frame size at this point... if having 5" of saddle to bar drop works for you, great... for me, I like a more level approach... :D

[El Chaba]

Like a stopped clock, Grant is right twice a day.......but mostly he is the leader of a weird religious cult....

[redir]

Of course he makes good points but he also sounds like an egotistical jerk doing it. I imagine most guys, and probably a few of the girls too, would love to have a Porsche 911 for every day driving. Heck I would!

[unterhausen]

that's a really old GP article, isn't it? I remember being annoyed by it years ago. The part about racing bikes definitely foreshadowed some significant trends in the industry. However, the rest of the argument is still annoying.

[pinkshogun]

It hard to combine a practical, beautiful, and well made bike these days and Grant does it very well

[fourflys]

Of course he makes good points but he also sounds like an egotistical jerk doing it. I imagine most guys, and probably a few of the girls too, would love to have a Porsche 911 for every day driving. Heck I would!

plenty of people daily drive a 2005 Mini Cooper S... I had one and loved driving it, just not a daily for me... so I agree with your post for sure!

*I will say I LOVE daily driving my Tacoma though... Hmm, wonder what that says about me... ;)

[Ken Robb]

plenty of people daily drive a 2005 Mini Cooper S... I had one and loved driving it, just not a daily for me... so I agree with your post for sure!

*I will say I LOVE daily driving my Tacoma though... Hmm, wonder what that says about me... ;)

Nothing good! :D

[goonster]

Since '05 the roadie scene, and what you see covered in Buycycling, has expanded significantly to include cross, "gravelgrinder", bikepacking, bigger tires, etc.

There is far less road/MTB purism and taxonomy, and that is an important part of what Grant was/is advocating.

[peanutgallery]

I think that Frank Day and Grant Peterson should have a cage match refereed by Paul Curley or someone like that

Imagine them breaking power cranks, helmet mirrors and steel frames over each others heads, I would actually consider attending a bike show if this was the marquee spectacle

[tv_vt]

I steer clear of people who use the word 'should' in every sentence.

[bikingshearer]

I think that Frank Day and Grant Peterson should have a cage match refereed by Paul Curley or someone like that

Imagine them breaking power cranks, helmet mirrors and steel frames over each others heads, I would actually consider attending a bike show if this was the marquee spectacle

Having met and spoken with both of them more than once, I suspect they would both think this was a bad stupid idea. I have trouble believing that either would have anything against the other.

Oh, and Frank is far, far more arrogant than Grant Petersen would ever be on his highest horse and his worst day. Grant basically wants you to actually think about what you ride and why - if that leads you to disagree with him, that's okay. Frank thinks anyone who does not agree with him is at least stupid and quite possibly morally defective.

[Ken Robb]

Having met and spoken with both of them more than once, I suspect they would both think this was a bad stupid idea. I have trouble believing that either would have anything against the other.

Oh, and Frank is far, far more arrogant than Grant Petersen would ever be on his highest horse and his worst day. Grant basically wants you to actually think about what you ride and why - if that leads you to disagree with him, that's okay. Frank thinks anyone who does not agree with him is at least stupid and quite possibly morally defective.

I don't know Frank but I have met/chatted with Grant several times and I agree with bikeshearer. Grant just thinks non-racers on race bikes give up too many benefits of bikes that would be more practical and comfortable for most non-racers. He has said that race bikes for racers probably make sense.

[bikinchris]

I read Grant's book.
Most of us here have more than one bike and have done more than one kind of riding. Apparently Grant doesn't understand that. he says he does, but it is apparent from reading his book, that no he doesn't. That's just as sad as the young racers who never rode for any reason other than racing, then quit.

At one point I had 7 bicycles with a clearly different purpose for each and no real overlap:
CDale Track racer
Austro Daimler Fixed gear road training (with brakes)
Klein Hard tail mountain bike
Serotta CSI Full loaded touring bike
Ti Serotta road racer
CDale tandem
Trek Hybrid grocery getter with flat pedals and grocery bag panniers

All kinds of cycling can co-exist without taking away from the other kind and I find that great. If any of you haven't tried different kinds of riding, please do.

[Plum Hill]

Best chapter of Grant's book was about getting a new rider interested in cycling.
I have a friend that's done everything counter to that chapter; those new riders are no longer riding.