"Hybrid" bicycles have long suffered the derision of the fancy-bike set, with the reasoning that they "can't do all things equally well." If by "all things" one includes fast road club rides and ledge-bombing off-road descents, this is a fair complaint.
A simple equation for determining the appropriateness of a bicycle for a given terrain would be something like "tire width" x "gearing" / "rider fitness and skill". "Mountain bikes" tend to have much wider tires, around 50-60mm, and much lower gearing than "road bikes". The remaining differences, one can argue, are trivial, or related more to either tire width or gearing than to the terrain itself. For example, "road" brakes accommodate only "road tires" with little clearance for mud, fenders, or fatter tires. Rider fitness and skill are important to consider as well, however, because particularly fit or skilled riders can accomplish much more with a given bike than the bicycle itself might suggest.
Hybrid bicycles have always tried to run the middle ground, with broad gearing and mid-width tires, which has been a reasonable set-up for indeed most of the riding public riding most roads and trails together with most other people. The sneering from the bicycle community originates mainly in component snobbery and expectations about particular types of bikes in particular terrains. The problem really comes from the component manufacturers' side, which has steadfastly refused to produce quality parts not required for specific types of competition. Thus, a paucity of appropriate tires, and clumsy or aggressive mountain bike drivetrain parts have been part and parcel of the hybrid specification.
Some hybrids are arguably more successful at bridging the gap, such as the short-lived and rare Specialized Rock Combo and Bridgestone XO-1. Both of these bikes pursued the successful route of using 559mm rims, taking advantage of this size's comparatively wide variety of tires. The Specialized, using MTB drivetrain parts, achieved lower gearing, while the XO-1, using lighter road parts compromised with the acceptable low of 34/28. Both also abandoned the limiting flat bar in favor of more "road" bike style bars with multiple hand positions. Tire availability is really the most important factor in spec-ing bikes like this. Drivetrains and gearing are changed easily enough, but with canti-bosses fixed on the frame, changing rim diameter to match tire availability is another matter. Perhaps the most salient example of this problem was the doomed GT Tachyon and its proprietary 700D tire size. Without any replacement tires available, those bikes are sitting pretty useless now.
But things have changed in the past ten years. The popularity of "29-er" mountain bikes has meant a burst of variety on the wide-end of of the 622mm rim diameter tire selection. Tubular tires are gaining popularity even for smaller wheeled mountain bikes (more a curiosity than anything relating to the theme of this post) and component manufacturers are starting to realize the potential for wide range gearing systems, like SRAM Apex. Perhaps most importantly, disc brakes, despite some of their drawbacks, have divorced the rim diameter from the braking equation. This is actually huge news, as it allows one to select tires based less on rim diameter than appropriateness for the intended use. For example, a rider with a hardtail mountain bike can build up an extra set of wheels using 622mm rims to utilize the wide variety of 700x23c tires available in this size. Bottom bracket height still needs to be considered, but as I mentioned before, this is trivial in comparison to tire selection.
OK, so what about cyclocross bikes? These bikes have long been seen by the bike crowd as acceptable hybrids. For mountain bikers, they look an awful lot like a road bike, while roadies see them as a form factor they're comfortable with, just with fat knobby tires. The thing is, of course, that cyclocross is a discipline, with very specific (and arguably arbitrary) rules concerning componentry that cyclocross bike manufacturers have to respect. Despite the fact that the vast majority of cyclocross bikes sold (and, according to reports from Eurobike, [and, one could gather, from this widely circulated cartoon from last year] a lot will be sold this year) will never see cyclocross competition, the buyers of these bikes will have to endure these restrictions as they use their shiny new steeds for commuting or be-fendered winter road riding.
To start with we must address the discipline. Cyclocross racing has about as much to do with trail riding as criterium races have to do with road riding. The arbitrary limitation of tire width to 35mm and the ban on disc brakes has limited the utility of these bikes for consumers wishing to use these bikes for more real-world type conditions. With the new season upon us, of course, the tires have been further limited to 33mm, while the ban on disc brakes has been lifted.
The tire issue is problematic. For those of us with monster-cross builds, or similar 700c hybrids, the issue of quality tire availability in the 35mm-50mm gap has been of serious concern. I'm currently running wire-bead WTB Interwolf 38s, but would love a set of foldables. With the UCI ban on 35s, however, and manufacturers catering primarily to the racing crowd for quality parts I hardly see this becoming a reality in the coming years.
The liberal stance on disc brakes is more promising. As I mentioned before, one of the great benefits of this type of brake is removing the brake from the rim diameter equation. With long-reach caliper brakes, the center bolt of frames intended for 700c wheels have accommodated the suddenly-popular-again 650b wheel size. While at first I was skeptical about the need for this in-between rim size, I can see a greater utility in the tire size when frames are equipped with disc-brake mounts. For example, a cyclocross bike designed for 33mm tires and disc brakes could probably accommodate a much wider 650b tire, even a knobby. This can only be considered a good thing, even if it kind of leaves out all of us with full bike stables and nary a disc brake to be seen.
No comments:
Post a Comment