CyclingTips Digest: Gravel Suspension Forks, Silca's Phallic Computer Mount, A Sub-4 Kilogram Bike & More

 Yea and some road bike manufs to just re-badge their cyclocross bikes, change a gear ratio or two, put the price up 30% and call it gravel...

 Go on pinkbike buy/sell and buy an old carbon 26" XC race bike for $800 and put gravel wheels & drop bars on it. Literally nothing else needs to be done (except probably a full service since its 12 years old) and you have a better gravel bike than most options on the market.

 dad's sending it on a 1990's trek singletrek 930 ridgid. throw some drops on it and its a gravel bike

 Actually you need new shifters/brake levers for the drops

 Wait until the gravel riders discover fat grippy tyres and dropper posts.

 @toad321: and flat bars.

 @toad321:
I’m patiently awaiting the grippy tyre revolution since all the gravel forums are full of the same “Why won’t my gravelking sk’s find grip” every October

 Lol I came here to see the comments on the gravel fork, wasn't disappointed.

 "Hey, I'm looking for something that will make my bike slower, heavier, and less responsive, but also something that won't be quite enough if the road is really bumpy. Basically, I want something that will make my road bike slightly better for around 1% of the riding it will be doing. What do you have?"

 @A-HIGHLY-EDUCATED-PROFESSIONAL: Serious question- if you're on a lightweight, carbon hard tail 26" xc race bike from around 2007, but with 30c tires and drop bars, and you lock out the fork on the tarmac, how much slower is it going to be over a road bike with 30c tires? I have no idea, having never hated myself enough to try gravel riding.

 prediction: gravel bikes will soon become longer and slacker

 @ronin-71: Chammy hanger disagrees.

 @ronin-71: As pistol said, the Evil gravel bike has a 66 degree HTA www.adventure-journal.com/2019/12/evils-chamois-hagar-has-arrived-a-gravel-bike-that-wants-to-rock-n-roll

 There is nothing similar between my first rigid mountain bike which I got in 1998 and Specialized Diverge which I have now. If anything it is a beefed-up road bicycle. Not XC, not cyclo-cross. And gravel bikes do have their niche, their places, which you are not interested in or have not encountered.

 @milkdrop: the diverge is a well maintained packed gravel road bike/shitty pavedroad bike. not an fsr gravel bike. which is more like an old mountain bike with better body postion.

 lots of people covert 90's mtb to gravel bikes. consensus, they make terrible gravel bikes. My diverge has a slacker head angle than my 97 stumpjumper comp. has more tire clearance and has much more efficient geometry, hydraulic disc brakes. the list goes on. Fun to label them as bike industry greed though. you'll likely never get it.

 Finish Line Red is the best """""gravel""""" lube, it doesn't pick up dust and resists water pretty well for a dry lube.

 @conoat if they can make a gravel specific lube that works, then it will be legit AF.

Nothing else dries and wears a chain like the paste that collects when you're riding gravel. It's like cutting compound!

 @excavator666: clearly youve never ridden socal. our trails are that dust, except not packed.

 Totally agree.

 That is incredibly convenient seeing how the gravel bike is basically a 29" mountain bike hard tail from 10+ years ago.

 More similar to the RS Paris Roubaix SL from the 90's, which they should update and bring back for gravel bikes.

 @jmhills: More like 30 years ago. My 1992 Rocky Mountain Fusion would have been a great gravel bike... if I still had it.

 I also assume it's less easy to change the ratchet since one is screwed into the hub this requiring a special tool. I have a few wheels with the old star ratchet design and I love the simplicity and that I can change the speed of engagement in seconds with a new pair of ratchets.

 pretty sure the patent ran out on the old design

 @ols532704: That doesn't mean they have to use a new design. It just means that other people can start using the same design.

 @DC1988: I love my wheels with 350 hubs. In fact I was about to get some new wheels with 350 hubs, I'll be making sure it's the old design!

 DT EXP removal tool is 75 bucks. Wicked cool guys.

 @Bobadeebob: I know that. I think they wanted to change it when their patent ran out so their design would be exclusive.

 But do people buy DT Swiss for the star ratchet mechanism specifically, or simply because of its reputation for reliability? It was certainly the latter in my case - I don't particularly care what's going on inside my hub otherwise.

 What exactly do you mean? Is there something more to the story than a design change gone wrong?

All I see is a company that made a design mistake and is owning it with reasonable explanations and a commitment to change their manufacturing tolerances to handle the newly discovered requirements. The design change seems unnecessary, but it's unreasonable to say that DT should never change the ratchet system at all and at first glance it's a simplification of the system.

None of this seems like a harbinger of doom.

 The fact that other manufacturers can copy the old (and more reliable) design is just going to encourage more people to buy another brand.

 Not too suprised by these failures. Sometimes my old design star ratchets would gave a one ratchet ring stuck in place, while the second was still free to move and provide function. There were no indications there was an issue intil I pulled it apart for service. It was a redundant design, and reliable because of it.

I’d be willing to bet that the current failure rate is square root of the old rate. As the old design would have been (Rate for ratchet 1) x (rate for ratchet 2)= (overall hub failure rate). Now the (rate for ratchet 2) is gone, and since it was significantly less than100%, it’s a huge increase for the single sliding pawl design.

 @Blackhat: I more meant that trust takes ages earn and is quickly lost, and that the current issues convinced me to try other hubs. I don't think they are doomed and I think they'll still be a staple of reliable hubs.

I was reading about the issues a few months ago so I suppose it feels like a late and underwhelming response. But yeah, who knows. I'll still absolutely consider them in the future.

 I agree, my SID ultimate fork weighs 1498g on the scale with the axle and it has 120mm of travel and it locks out solid. I would way rather rock that on a gravel expedition and unlock it if things go crazy. Ultimately though I will just keep riding my rigid fork as it weighs nothing.

 A gravel suspension fork that uses leaf springs seems like it would require less maintenance and be much lighter

 @blackthorne: www.laufcycling.com/product/lauf-grit-sl

 @p0rtal00: my sarcasm didn’t come across too well on the internets :-)

 Smaller diameter doesn't automatically mean lighter when you also consider wall thickness. Consider as well that Fox already has all the tooling to manufacture 32mm seals, bushings, etc, leading to a less expensive product, and that every bike shop in the country is likely to stock 32mm Fox wiper seals and other parts.

 That's alot more comfortable than a carbon rigid fork. No reason to ever go back to elastomers.

 I have a cheap 60mm coil fork on a hybrid. There's not much to say about it except that it sucks. I can't imagine elastomers being any better, except for maybe weight.

 @boozed: sorry but 60mm is the joke

 @madmon: Why would gravel bikes need more than that? Most gravel bikes are fully rigid, so 60mm is plenty and most gravel riders wouldn't want a fork that significantly raises the front end and messes with the geometry.

 @madmon: These aren't downhill bikes

 @DoubleCrownAddict: why would a gravel bike need one?

 Yes they do, if you appreciate different forms of cycling it's a good site to check out.

 @justanothermatt: Ah yes? Must be well hidden 'cos I've seen nothing except curved bars topics.

 I rode a gravel bike for 2 years before getting a MTB, and yeah it really is a joke, absolute misery to ride, but maybe thats the appeal, I'll probably get mine serviced and sell it this week

 So is decent geometry, but it makes the ride a lot more comfortable, motivating riders to ride more often and for longer every ride. Nothing wrong with that, right?

 @Mac1987: what? no. A rigid gravel bike is fine, and there is no bigger pile of b.s. than discussing gravel geo. Once you are putting 2" tires and 650b wheels on the bike you are just building a bad xc bike. What is an inch of travel doing for you on a gravel bike, nothing other than comfort.

But hey, im not the guy trying to sell you on gravel bikes and accessories.

 @RonSauce: not a fan of gravel bikes myself, but I know people that ride long distances on their gravel bike towards an easy XC MTB track. A little bit of suspension travel can help immensely on the rougher parts of XC tracks.
Why not ride a XC bike then, you might ask? Because riding 40 miles to a track on roads is a lot faster and easier on a gravel bike.
And what's the problem? You don't have to buy these bikes (I know I won't...).

 @RonSauce: "nothing other than comfort" And the problem is? Comfort also equates to less fatigue. There have definitely been 60+ mile gravel rides I've done where my arms are absolutely cooked more than my legs because of rough gravel surface. A little give in the front end would have made that more comfortable, which probably would have let me complete the rides faster, and with less fatigue. And if you're racing… that counts, and is probably much more than a marginal gain.

Let's just take a moment to LOL at your statement while you review allll the things in MTB and road that are absolutely centered around comfort: all sorts of vibration-absorbing stems, handlebars and seatposts, frames that have built in compliance and flex, material choices like carbon and ti that helps absorb some vibrations for a "better" (i.e., more comfortable) ride, grips with various shapes and materials to aid in hand comfort and vibration, saddles are entirely about comfort… the list goes on and on.

Maybe you should ride your bike with grips and a saddle from a $100 walmart bike, then we can talk about how comfort is superficial.

And that leaves us with the rest of your dismissive gravel bike attitudes, which also seem myopic and misguided. Gravel riding is a cross between XC riding and road riding… no one denies that, so I'm not sure why it's a pile of b.s. Gravel rides are often much much longer than your average XC ride, the speeds are way higher, the gearing is different, the pedaling position and aerodynamics are different, etc etc.

 I'll just point out that "gravel" can vary wildly across the country. If your bio is up to date and you live in chicago, then I know the exact kind of gravel you are used to riding. I used to live there. It's crushed limestone that you can ride on 28s, it's pretty enjoyable. In the west, gravel is way looser, way rougher, way shittier to ride IMO. I have done some rides that would absolutely have benefited from a little squish in the front. I have felt underbiked on low pressure 40s, it can be so chunky.

 Washboard...

 @jmvcolorado: 60 km on gravel, I would use an XC bike. Better tool for the job.

 Owner of a Fox AX40 here. Bike also has a dropper on it. It's stupid fun on light duty singletrack in this area. It's less to make gravel more comfortable, and more for the gravel riders that are pushing well past a gravel bike's intended duties.

 @riklassen: no it’s slower and sucks to ride on the road after amd before the gravel psrt. But you do you…

 @parkisatool: speed is subjective on who is riding and how hard they are capable of going and sustaining. Plus riding an XC/MTB on the road is actually quite doable and can be fast and comfortable. Hell, I ride my mtb to the trail head quite often on road (about 10 km). I often pass fully kitted roadies/gravel riders and I am not a super fast rider, I also get passed by fully kitted roadies/gravel riders. point is speed is super dependent on a whole host of factors. I would choose a MTB over a gravel bike everyday of the week and twice on Sundays, if I am looking for a veritable terrain machine. Just way more versatile and effective.

 @Austin014: if the gravel is getting too chunky and loose an XC bike starts looking way better. Before everyone decided we need 160mm and 64*hta and 2.6" tires xc bikes were awesome on gravel.

Locally I won't even take out my gravel bike, my XC bike is better in every way on every surface that isn't a straight up road.