Pics of actual rando bikes please

[Saguaro]

I’ve only completed two 200k brevets so I can only speak from limited experience. I rode this 1982 Nishiki Cresta on the Saguaro Lake 200k.

My second brevet was also the Saguaro Lake 200k, but this time on my Tommasini.

I completed the course faster on the Tommasini than on the Nishiki so my take away was lighter is better, but you need a comfortable saddle and frame geometry to get the most out of the experience.

[unterhausen]

Lighter is definitely better. The traditional randonneuse is lightweight. They just had provisions for a front rack, fenders and lighting.

There is a mistaken impression that a heavy old touring bike is a good choice for randonneuring.

I did my first super randonneur series on a racing bike from 1980. It worked okay. Much better than an old touring bike. Of course, anything will work.

[dsjackson]

I'll offer this one up as a build that supports SV's take on a slightly rowdier rando build.

The roads of trad Randonneuring and "Endurance Gravel" have intertwined as of late, with many who were previously strict randos deciding that, in the USA, death by cars and gas station controls are just not that great. So while many argue to just leave randonneuring alone, others have tried to broaden the format from within its constraints to include rougher, less traveled terrain.

I don't know where I stand right now within the tensions of randonneuring, but this bike was designed for long ass self-supported rides off the pavement. It can do the classic randonneuring thing too, but I see why some believe that the SV take with 48mm tires dilutes what was once a great underground consensus on "rando bike design." I still got my 700 x 35 rando bike, and it's fun too, but I'll share this one on this thread.

Best,
Daniel in Northern VT

[dsjackson]

Originally Posted by donevwil

My AR Cycles rando in hauler mode, 26" Rat Trap Pass tires vs the usual (and road preferred) 650b x 42s. Unfortunately I have no pics of the latter.

Attachment 1698028300

This bike is DOPE.

[merckx]

Daniel in Vermont, awesome machine.

[spoonrobot]

Originally Posted by dsjackson

I'll offer this one up as a build that supports SV's take on a slightly rowdier rando build.

The roads of trad Randonneuring and "Endurance Gravel" have intertwined as of late, with many who were previously strict randos deciding that, in the USA, death by cars and gas station controls are just not that great. So while many argue to just leave randonneuring alone, others have tried to broaden the format from within its constraints to include rougher, less traveled terrain.

I don't know where I stand right now within the tensions of randonneuring, but this bike was designed for long ass self-supported rides off the pavement. It can do the classic randonneuring thing too, but I see why some believe that the SV take with 48mm tires dilutes what was once a great underground consensus on "rando bike design." I still got my 700 x 35 rando bike, and it's fun too, but I'll share this one on this thread.

Best,
Daniel in Northern VT

That's a great looking build and a great post.

[bicycletricycle]

I like your firefly, would you mind sharing the front end geometry of that bike? head angle, rake, trail if you know it.

Thanks

Originally Posted by dsjackson

I'll offer this one up as a build that supports SV's take on a slightly rowdier rando build.

The roads of trad Randonneuring and "Endurance Gravel" have intertwined as of late, with many who were previously strict randos deciding that, in the USA, death by cars and gas station controls are just not that great. So while many argue to just leave randonneuring alone, others have tried to broaden the format from within its constraints to include rougher, less traveled terrain.

I don't know where I stand right now within the tensions of randonneuring, but this bike was designed for long ass self-supported rides off the pavement. It can do the classic randonneuring thing too, but I see why some believe that the SV take with 48mm tires dilutes what was once a great underground consensus on "rando bike design." I still got my 700 x 35 rando bike, and it's fun too, but I'll share this one on this thread.

Best,
Daniel in Northern VT

[dsjackson]

Originally Posted by bicycletricycle

I like your firefly, would you mind sharing the front end geometry of that bike? head angle, rake, trail if you know it.

Thanks

Thanks for the inquiry. The front end geo has been honed over the last few years of experimentation. I love it for its purpose - long dirt rides with singletrack and unmaintained roads. Dialed on the ups and the downs.

72 HTA
65mm rake
Mid 40s trail with 650b x 55mm

The fatter more supple tires of recent years add their own stability that I find is hedged well by a slightly lower trail number, steeper HTA and smaller wheel diameter.

My preference for these types of bikes leans towards the nimble road spectrum. I feel that the slacker HTAs and higher trail numbers of recent gravel trends just make for a sloppy bike that rarely goes where I need it to go. I find the 71 HTA, 50 rake, 700 x 40 bikes especially challenging on those decreasing radius, high speed, loose kitty litter gravel corners. But I’ll gladly take a 66.5 HTA on my trail bike!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bicycletricycle]

looks like you are running a longer top tube shorter stem combo? what stem length is that? can you ride no handed with some load on the bars?

Originally Posted by dsjackson

Thanks for the inquiry. The front end geo has been honed over the last few years of experimentation. I love it for its purpose - long dirt rides with singletrack and unmaintained roads. Dialed on the ups and the downs.

72 HTA
65mm rake
Mid 40s trail with 650b x 55mm

The fatter more supple tires of recent years add their own stability that I find is hedged well by a slightly lower trail number, steeper HTA and smaller wheel diameter.

My preference for these types of bikes leans towards the nimble road spectrum. I feel that the slacker HTAs and higher trail numbers of recent gravel trends just make for a sloppy bike that rarely goes where I need it to go. I find the 71 HTA, 50 rake, 700 x 40 bikes especially challenging on those decreasing radius, high speed, loose kitty litter gravel corners. But I’ll gladly take a 66.5 HTA on my trail bike!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dsjackson]

Originally Posted by bicycletricycle

looks like you are running a longer top tube shorter stem combo? what stem length is that? can you ride no handed with some load on the bars?

90mm stem.

Yes, I can ride no handed and snack away the miles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dsjackson]

Originally Posted by dsjackson

90mm stem.

Yes, I can ride no handed and snack away the miles.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also probably worth noting that my experience has been that increasing stem length generally makes front ends steer heavier, as though the bike has more trail. I usually use a 90-100mm stem on roadish bikes. 35-50 on trail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by unterhausen

Lighter is definitely better. The traditional randonneuse is lightweight. They just had provisions for a front rack, fenders and lighting.

There is a mistaken impression that a heavy old touring bike is a good choice for randonneuring.

I did my first super randonneur series on a racing bike from 1980. It worked okay. Much better than an old touring bike. Of course, anything will work.

How much does this depend on the distance? From an outsider's perspective, it seems like the needs would be completely different for something 200km (a day ride) vs 400km (unless you're insanely fast, you'll be riding some with the sun down) vs 1200km (you're going to need to stop to sleep along the way).

It seems like a one-style "randonneuring" bike is maybe missing how much variation there is.

[dsjackson]

Originally Posted by prototoast

How much does this depend on the distance? From an outsider's perspective, it seems like the needs would be completely different for something 200km (a day ride) vs 400km (unless you're insanely fast, you'll be riding some with the sun down) vs 1200km (you're going to need to stop to sleep along the way).

It seems like a one-style "randonneuring" bike is maybe missing how much variation there is.

A good Rando machine works for all distances with little to no modification. Sure, a fast 200 can be done on a TDF race bike, but if you’re using the trad Rando series to get to PBP, then you might want the same bike proven across the range before you make the trip to Paris.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cp43]

Originally Posted by prototoast

How much does this depend on the distance? From an outsider's perspective, it seems like the needs would be completely different for something 200km (a day ride) vs 400km (unless you're insanely fast, you'll be riding some with the sun down) vs 1200km (you're going to need to stop to sleep along the way).

It seems like a one-style "randonneuring" bike is maybe missing how much variation there is.

What you carry on the bike isn't actually that different for a 400km vs a 1200km event.

The 1200k will usually have sleeping areas provided by the organizers for riders, and a bag drop service. Your on the bike load is still just riding clothes, food, lighting, etc. All your overnight stuff is in the drop bag(s).

Chris

[ripvanrando]

My first brevet was in the late 80's and I never saw a proper randonneuse until decades later. This is what I ridden on not too many brevets but a good number

Masi GC
Dawes touring bike
Vitus Carbonne 9
Klein touring bike
Kestral esi
Pocket Rocket
Trek cyclecross bike
Felt AR1
Stumpjumper
Cervelo S3
Pinarello AK61
Zinn custom rando
M5 CHR recumbent

Only one of the bikes failed to complete a brevet, it got a torn PCL. The Felt AR1 was able to ride 1220 Km without sleep, pretty much nonstop. I doubt the bike has anything to do with success on brevets to be honest. I am sorry, I have no pictures of my bikes.