https://www.michaelhanslip.com/index.htmlHot News!enen2026-03-05T20:26:54+11:00 hourly 1 2000-01-01T12:00+00:00 Thu, 5 Mar 2026 20:28:09 +1100Riding2026-03-05T20:26:54+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/dd8ca2e59f57a9721d42d928c298bc12-167.html#unique-entry-id-167https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/dd8ca2e59f57a9721d42d928c298bc12-167.html#unique-entry-id-167One that I have a hard time convincing racers to believe is that the best time to attack in a race is when you are hurting the most. Unless you are an amateur in the middle of a pro peloton, the people around you in a race are of similar ability to you. If you're hurting, they're hurting. A convincing attack at that point can be ultra-demoralising. Make them believe you have more than they do!
 
But, sometimes, all you need is that little edge and you've taken the win. I've never understood trying for a podium when a different strategy could return the win. First or last is my approach. And it has been last a lot of times when my strategy backfired. But sometimes it doesn't. And those days are glorious, even if you only beat your mates.]]>Riding2026-03-02T16:37:58+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/af2a6dfc3bbe74f8dc8495441b548291-166.html#unique-entry-id-166https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/af2a6dfc3bbe74f8dc8495441b548291-166.html#unique-entry-id-166As a coach I like to use cues for my riders to help them remember what they are meant to be doing in particular situations. One is "scraping mud off the sole of your shoe" when climbing seated. That image of mud removal helps people to get a long and powerful stroke. Sometimes these things get ingrained so permanently that the rider need never think of them again. For me, after 40 years of racing and riding, there are many I don't give a second thought to.
 
But there is one that I have to revisit regularly. I have this tendency to let the mountain bike accelerate under me in corners so I end up with my weight too far back. You really can't do much from the back "seat" (like in a car, it's hard to reach the controls). I've used different cues over the years depending on what worked for me on the day. I recently spent a week on my MTB and on day 1 I was doing this again. My cue this time was assisted by a photo of Jackson Goldstone on one of the chairlift poles advertising the Fox Rampage RS. In fact, I see he's the home page photo of the new helmet. In the picture, he has his outside (left) elbow bent and held high. That has never been my style, but for this week I emulated Jackie and realised you absolutely cannot hold the elbow up high and also have the weight back.
 
Perfect.]]>Riding2026-02-15T16:54:23+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fde37f88d99e1210c83732188eec56c6-165.html#unique-entry-id-165https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fde37f88d99e1210c83732188eec56c6-165.html#unique-entry-id-165I've been running MTB tyres without tubes for close to 20 years. I can count on one finger the occasion(s) that tubeless failed me on the fat tyres.
 
Road is different. Pressures are higher. And in Canberra, the number of items lurking on main roads that cause punctures is also way higher than any off-road scenario. The lure is strong. I used to interrupt road rides with nauseating regularity to replace a punctured tube. The combination of my weight and the glass fairies doing their job well meant never a month went past without a flat. Sealant should fill in any small holes - usually without the rider even noticing. That's the theory. Ride along secure in the knowledge that only a massive failure will spoil the flow. The reality is that I've had numerous occasions where all the sealant has leaked out of a small hole without sealing it or the sealant has dried up and even a tiny hole leads to a failure.
I thought I was pretty safe using Pirelli Cinturato 28s - they rank high on the puncture resistance list and also low for rolling resistance. I haven't had a ride spoiled while on Cinturatos. But I recently found a thorn in one and when I pulled the thorn out, no amount of holding my thumb over the hole while keeping it at the bottom of the wheel (where sealant will pool) could get it to seal. Not that much leaked out, but when opened up, there was hardly any free sealant inside.
Since I hit the kangaroo, I've not been keen to ride along the river because of all the 'roos along that stretch. Instead, I've been enjoying riding home on the road. But as mentioned, Canberra roads are a field of glass. (So ironic that a thorn caused the problem.)
I solved my problem in the short term by replacing the tyre with the one spare I had on hand, filling the tyre with the prescribed amount of sealant, and pumping it up. My intention is to clean up the old tyre, patch the hole with a patch and reintroduce it to service in a few months.
 
Pressure is the enemy of sealant sealing. Twenty psi in the MTB tyre is fine. Seventy psi in the road tyre is the limit. Less would be better. I would like to upsize my tyres (again) to downsize my required pressures. Not only for the peace of mind I'd get, but also for the smoother ride.]]>Riding2026-02-04T20:20:29+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d69718258e7640e4678c5209727dc088-164.html#unique-entry-id-164https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d69718258e7640e4678c5209727dc088-164.html#unique-entry-id-164One of the unbreakable rules of fitness is that you must trade fitness for speed. No matter how you look at it, no person can do as much high intensity work as they do low intensity work. And it is the volume of work that determines fitness. In preparation for racing, or a specific race, winding back the volume to add intensity means winding back the fitness to introduce some speed. So you should "mean it" when you do it.
I'm writing this watching a ProTour event and I think one of the reasons they are SO fast recently is that training has changed to be far less about speed and far more about fitness. A large aerobic base can carry a cyclist at a high velocity without any actual speed work. And it can carry a cyclist through the grand tours better. There are a lot of things that go with this, so it is a separate topic, but the take-away message is that the more volume you do, the fitter you get. And to do more volume, without injury, means doing it at lower intensity.
 
Fortunately, you can add some good speed with as few as six sessions in the lead up to whatever you want to be fast for. And racing involves intensity - so you can get your speed "for free" if you don't mind underperforming in the early races.]]>Gear2026-01-31T16:58:05+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ac01abbb5ba917f5dda301d3fce36665-163.html#unique-entry-id-163https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ac01abbb5ba917f5dda301d3fce36665-163.html#unique-entry-id-163I've been using Pro Bike Garage as my maintenance record and scheduling app since the Feedback Sports maintenance app was sold to another vendor who decided to take it US-only. PBG has some great features that I really appreciate. This entry is about a specific feature that I only noticed the other day. Ride count. If you tap into a specific bike you can head one level deeper and find a whole screen of data, most of which are greyed out for me as someone who paid for the app but doesn't subscribe for premium. But ride count is there.
It prompted me to go into Strava and unretire my old bikes, just to see how many rides they went on.
The numbers weren't that big, really. Peak is my old Madone nearing 1000 rides.
But my DH bikes hardly get any use at all. The old V10 recorded 39 rides in Strava - I think there were a handful not in Strava as at least at first I had no computer on the bike. The newer Sender is only up to 29. I couldn't believe it at first, but if I get in 10ish visits to Thredbo each season and spend half of them on my Enduro bike and half on my DH bike that's only 5 rides per season. And I don't take it out much (at all!) when I have to push it up the hill. So four seasons and 29 rides is correct.
Where it all started to go wrong for me was when the thought of dollars per ride cropped up. My advice - don't go there. Sure, the old Madone and my Checkpoint are both sitting around $6/ride. The price of a cup of coffee for each ride to get coffee? With so few outings, the two DH bikes don't add up. They're in the territory of premium bike hire at resort prices. Sure I could have had someone else's hire bike and never worried about maintenance, but also never having a choice about tyres, grips, position - anything really. I'll stick with my own bike.
 
Reminds me that my dad used to like talking about how people could save money by taking taxis instead of buying their own car. And for a lot of people that's probably true. But like hiring a bike, taxis remove a lot of choice and freedom. I notice my dad never opted out of car ownership for a taxi. And I don't plan to opt out of bike ownership for a string of hire bikes.
 
Two of my retired bikes didn't have nearly enough rides on them for expectations: my old commuter Cannondale only had 100 rides and a couple thousand kilometres - I used it for daily commuting for 14 years (around 7000 rides) and my Superfly XC race bike had barely more than 100 rides on it - I probably rode it 100 times just in races. They are clearly missing out on some Strava data. A quick look at old Strava files shows no bicycle associated with each old ride - I don't know when Strava added that feature but clearly not back in 2012 when I first started using the app (and both of these bikes pre-date that).]]>Riding2026-01-27T18:43:30+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/b3c994990acb52bb76b327f2e0b1e6d7-162.html#unique-entry-id-162https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/b3c994990acb52bb76b327f2e0b1e6d7-162.html#unique-entry-id-162I have seen this in early teen riders who get the racing bug. Usually the speed comes a couple of seasons before the skills develop. I won't name names, but several who went on to compete at pro level got their turn of speed around 15 years old, but didn't really learn to control a bike until more like 17 years old. Those were a scary couple of years to be riding beside them. Not quite an unguided missile. Worth mentioning that by 19 all these guys were capable of amazing feats on a bike. Teens learn quickly.
 
Mostly these days I coach older riders. Some have been riding for decades. Others are quite new to the whole cycling thing. But perhaps neither has experienced a bike at speed. It is tough to learn the skills to handle a bike going fast when you aren't fit enough to make that bike go fast. So the speed really has to come first. I've had some success with descending to obtain speed, I've also seen some crashes where the person thought they were faster than they were. The main problem with learning a skill at 50 or more kmh is the margin for error is smaller. Yes the skills you learn descending will set you up for success in a criterium race at 44 kmh, but you have to survive it first.
 
The take-away from this is be patient. If you are early in your riding you might want to descend like Tom Pidcock, but he's been at it for 20 years to develop those mad skills.]]>Riding2026-01-14T21:30:42+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/737892bc8b88fcf7d8926d4fd28acb97-161.html#unique-entry-id-161https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/737892bc8b88fcf7d8926d4fd28acb97-161.html#unique-entry-id-161A quick count reveals that last Spring's two novice classes were my 23rd and 24th programs for the Viking's Club. That's a lot. After several years of running 3 classes per year, and then several more years of running 2 classes per year; this year a decision was made to modify things a bit. I admit apprehension at first - why change what works? Except maybe it wasn't working as well as it should. More coaches. More students. One class.
 
And it is brilliant. Three "head" coaches and three more "assistant" coaches means that individuals can get some one-on-one help while a bunch of up to 30 people can practice proper bunch riding skills. We took them out on the street last week and it turned out there were only 21 persons present - AusCycling limits on road coaching are 7 students per coach. Perfect. Each group had an assistant coach too, so the ratios were actually lower than needed. We took 3 bunches out based on people's experience and did 20 minutes on the road.
 
I love seeing people who came through the course turning up for racing. I think most of the assistant coaches came through the novice program in past years too.
 
CCC - my club actually - had a novice program but for whatever reason does not do one currently. That leaves the Viking program as the only game in Canberra if you are interested in getting experienced instruction and practice for bunch riding/race skills. Starting every September - you're too late for this one (it's well over). But there's always next year!]]>Gear2026-01-04T16:11:21+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/b4d1d946b9fae7d083427adbe782ff6e-160.html#unique-entry-id-160https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/b4d1d946b9fae7d083427adbe782ff6e-160.html#unique-entry-id-160There are many brands of shoes - I am specifically talking cycling shoes in this entry, but it could just as easily apply to running shoes or dress shoes too (there are many, many brands out there). A few of those brands have local dealers, who have some of their offerings. But there are way more choices than there are places to try the shoes on for fit.
I recently used the Trek 30-day trial for a pair of Trek shoes. My local Trek shop didn't have them in stock. They got me the pair I wanted to try. They were too big. Trek does make 1/2 size shoes, but Australia only gets whole sizes. A full size smaller would have been too small. I got my refund (shoes had barely been out of the box so I hope they get sold to someone else as new) and continued looking.
A few brands know they are poorly represented in physical stores, so they have online sizing guides to walk you through the process of selecting the correct size. Northwave, my usual cycling shoe brand, is one of them. I followed their steps and the suggested size puts me right on the line between the one I wear and the same size in "wide". Which is right on my experience with wearing them - about OK for width, could be a tad wider.
Armed with the knowledge that my self-assessment of shoe sizes is OK, I went to the Lake website and ran through their 4-step process for selecting the correct size and model (that latter bit is a realisation that they use different lasts at different levels and the optimal fit might be a specific shoe and size, not just a size). It gave me a size in wide in a specific shoe that is currently not in stock. Since my kangaroo crash in May, I've been looking for new shoes as the ones I had on that night got beaten up by being dragged along the ground.
 
Meanwhile I did the same fitting process with my partner's feet. She has been in some shoes for the past years but lately they've been hurting her feet. Feet change and what was once good is now less good. Lake has a model that seemed appropriate for her feet. I sized. She ordered. They fit well. Given the price and the fact that returns are OK until you place cleats on the shoe, I wanted to make sure she was happy before I put the cleats on. Turns out they were a good choice.
Thanks Lake. Your system works.
 
Sub-story. Why no more Northwave? With a few diversions into other brands, I have been wearing Northwave shoes most of the time since 1997. That's a long time in one brand. They had basically flat soles. A couple of years ago they wanted to make their shoes both stiffer and lighter. To get a stiff flat carbon sole requires a certain thickness. But if you make the sole shaped like a boat hull, you can use less thickness of carbon and still get stiffness from the shape. Except that bit I mentioned above about being on the cusp of the wide shoe - in the boat shaped sole I never got comfortable. They only produce a select few shoes - in one colour that I can see - in the wide model. Whereas Lake seems to make all their shoes in narrow, standard and wide widths. The Lake shoes are $50 more than the Trek shoes were, but $50 less than the Northwave shoes would be.
 
Hopefully they get some in stock soon.]]>Gear2025-12-30T16:13:35+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ddb27366d60066b9486a50554e26f511-159.html#unique-entry-id-159https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ddb27366d60066b9486a50554e26f511-159.html#unique-entry-id-159Most carbon bike wheels now proclaim a lifetime warranty. Trek's carbon wheels are in this category too. Directly from their website I can see "Warrantied for Life" under wheel features, and then it goes on to say "All Bontrager carbon wheels are backed by a lifetime warranty for the original owner".
 
What they don't put in headlines is the fact that only manufacturing defects are included in the lifetime guarantee - it would be fine in my experience if that was only a year as most defects show up pretty quickly once you use the wheel. Not included is outside causes for breakage, you know, like hitting something and cracking the rim. The way most rims fail. That is limited to 2 years. Not a lifetime. Not even the lifetime of a mouse.
 
Recently took a broken Bontrager rim into the dealer and it was denied by Trek - it is 3 years old. They will replace the wheel for about 1/2 price. Which is nice-ish, but certainly doesn't go very far to covering for a very expensive wheel that cracked on an un-noticed rock out on the trail. It certainly wasn't a spectacular impact.
 
Then look at Reserve wheels. The rims from Santa Cruz bicycles, given a distinct name so as to not link too closely to the brand. They have a video of Danny MacAskill jumping down stairs without a tyre in an attempt to break one - he was eventually successful but it took some doing. And apparently those shenanigans are covered by their lifetime warranty. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Reserve is excellent about replacing broken rims, regardless of cause, even in the middle of foreign countries when people are on bike holidays and something went wrong.
 
ENVE limits their concern to 5 years and then has a pro-rated taper (I couldn't find how long it lasts) so that the longer you own it, the less credit you get towards the replacement rim. I hope I never break my ENVE rim because they would be non-trivial to replace with something else (unusual spoke hole dimensions) or expensive to replace with another ENVE rim.
 
Read the fine print...]]>Gear2025-12-26T23:23:07+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e88e5ddc4b19a0a3fc210a7ec9408967-158.html#unique-entry-id-158https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e88e5ddc4b19a0a3fc210a7ec9408967-158.html#unique-entry-id-158Both the enduro bikes at my house are running TruTune full-size inserts. And it is a good thing they are. Set up with a reasonable amount of sag and in our typical riding, we both sometimes see full travel on the O-ring. In the first couple of rides on my Zeb fork, I was leaving behind 25+ mm of travel while running the fork on the soft side.
They do what they claim - slow down the build-up in pressure as the fork compresses. The theory, for those who don't want to go seeking the website and reading all the info, is that the carbon inside the spacer adsorbs air as the pressure increases. Adsorbed air is not part of the gas in the air spring, so effectively it is reducing the amount of air in the spring space as it compresses - pressure increases more slowly than it would otherwise. And on rebound it releases that air just as quickly.
I find it pretty easy to tip into the travel, supportive in the mid-stroke and still willing to use full travel on a big hit. Just the way I like it. RockShox could have made the spring chamber larger, but they didn't, so this is the next best thing.
 
I was slightly concerned that the fork oil would seep into the device and clog up the carbon. Doesn't seem to have happened. You'd think they'd build it to avoid that.]]>Gear2025-12-16T12:40:53+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8510b5c21cefb3304e6545d7bdd21336-157.html#unique-entry-id-157https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8510b5c21cefb3304e6545d7bdd21336-157.html#unique-entry-id-157You can just about guarantee that motorbike, automobile and mountain bike tyres are tubeless without checking. But road bike tubeless is affected by trade-offs that might swing any given rider either way.
Clincher rims, rims made specifically for high-pressure tyres with tubes, are able to "clinch" because of the hook on the rim. Both sidewalls of the rim end in a small inwards facing bump - the hook. The tyre bead grabs onto the hook with the tube pushing outwards on the tyre - a safe and robust system. When you get a flat, the tyre can roll off the rim and cause a crash.
MTB rims have become tubeless because it makes the rim more robust and at the low pressures people should be running their MTB tyres at (<30 psi) they don't try to escape from the rim well. No hook can also give the fat tyre a better shape - Stan's rims use tiny hooks (left over from skinny rim days perhaps?) to avoid interfering with tyre shape.
Road rims, even with wide (for road) tyres on them, have to contend with lots of air pressure compared to MTB. A typical MTB tyre runs mid-20s. A typical tubeless road tyre runs 3 or 4 x that much (depending on tyre, rim and rider weight).
I run 18/24 psi in my MTB tyres (with foam inserts) and 70/75 psi in my one tubeless road bike.
 
Not many sealants will seal at 75 psi. None will seal at 100 psi. All of them seal well at 20 psi. That's the difference and the problem.]]>Riding2025-11-29T23:01:12+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/f4282b55a8473230f685c6bfcbe502c8-156.html#unique-entry-id-156https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/f4282b55a8473230f685c6bfcbe502c8-156.html#unique-entry-id-156I have seen this in early teen riders who get the racing bug. Usually the speed comes a couple of seasons before the skills develop. I won't name names, but several who went on to compete at pro level got their turn of speed around 15 years old, but didn't really learn to control a bike until more like 17 years old. Those were a scary couple of years to be riding beside them. Not quite an unguided missile. Worth mentioning that by 19 all these guys were capable of amazing feats on a bike. Teens learn quickly.
 
Mostly these days I coach older riders. Some have been riding for decades. Others are quite new to the whole cycling thing. But perhaps neither has experienced a bike at speed. It is tough to learn the skills to handle a bike going fast when you aren't fit enough to make that bike go fast. So the speed really has to come first. I've had some success with descending to obtain speed, I've also seen some crashes where the person thought they were faster than they were. The main problem with learning a skill at 50 or more kmh is the margin for error is smaller. Yes the skills you learn descending will set you up for success in a criterium race at 44 kmh, but you have to survive it first.
 
The take-away from this is be patient. If you are early in your riding you might want to descend like Tom Pidcock, but he's been at it for 20 years to develop those mad skills.]]>Riding2025-11-09T11:55:04+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/85504817fbdf804407c1f6f801b040e2-155.html#unique-entry-id-155https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/85504817fbdf804407c1f6f801b040e2-155.html#unique-entry-id-155A quick count reveals that last Spring's two novice classes were my 24th and 25th programs for the Viking's Club. That's a lot. After several years of running 3 classes per year, and then several more years of running 2 classes per year; this year a decision was made to modify things a bit. I admit apprehension at first - why change what works? Except maybe it wasn't working as well as it could. More coaches. More students. One class.
 
And it is brilliant. Three "head" coaches and three more "assistant" coaches means that individuals can get some one-on-one help while a bunch of up to 30 people can practice proper bunch riding skills. We took them out on the street for the final 3 weeks and it turned out there were never more than 21 persons present - AusCycling limits on road coaching are 7 students per coach. Perfect. Each group had an assistant coach too, so the ratios were actually lower than needed. We took 3 bunches out initially, based on people's experience and did 20 minutes on the road. The final two weeks were one big happy bunch. They did great too.
 
I love seeing people who came through the course turning up for racing. I think most of the assistant coaches came through the novice program in past years too.
 
CCC - my club - had a novice program once but for whatever reason does not do one currently. That leaves the Viking program as the only game in Canberra if you are interested in getting experienced instruction and practice for bunch riding/race skills. Starting every September - you're too late for this one (it's over). But there's always next year!]]>Gear2025-11-03T18:54:10+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/84d288d2ccaa3f824ccefa1120d5207a-154.html#unique-entry-id-154https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/84d288d2ccaa3f824ccefa1120d5207a-154.html#unique-entry-id-154There are many brands of shoes - I am specifically talking cycling shoes in this entry, but it could just as easily apply to running shoes or dress shoes too (there are many, many brands out there). A few of those brands have local dealers, who have some of their offerings. But there are way more choices than there are places to try the shoes on for fit.
I recently used the Trek 30-day trial for a pair of Trek shoes. My local Trek shop didn't have them in stock. They got me the pair I wanted to try. They were too big. Trek does make 1/2 size shoes, but Australia only gets whole sizes. A full size smaller would have been too small. I got my refund (shoes had barely been out of the box so I hope they get sold to someone else as new) and continued looking.
A few brands know they are poorly represented in physical stores, so they have online sizing guides to walk you through the process of selecting the correct size. Northwave, my usual cycling shoe brand, is one of them. I followed their steps and the suggested size puts me right on the line between the one I wear and the same size in "wide". Which is right on my experience with wearing them - about OK for width, could be a tad wider.
Armed with the knowledge that my self-assessment of shoe sizes is OK, I went to the Lake website and ran through their 4-step process for selecting the correct size and model (that latter bit is a realisation that they use different lasts at different levels and the optimal fit might be a specific shoe and size, not just a size). It gave me a size in wide in a specific shoe that is currently not in stock. Since my kangaroo crash in May, I've been looking for new shoes as the ones I had on that night got beaten up by being dragged along the ground.
 
Meanwhile I did the same fitting process with my partner's feet. She has been in some shoes for the past years but lately they've been hurting her feet. Feet change and what was once good is now less good. Lake has a model that seemed appropriate for her feet. I sized. She ordered. They fit well. Given the price and the fact that returns are OK until you place cleats on the shoe, I wanted to make sure she was happy before I put the cleats on. Turns out they were a good choice.
Thanks Lake. Your system works.
 
Sub-story. Why no more Northwave? With a few diversions into other brands, I have been wearing Northwave shoes most of the time since 1997. That's a long time in one brand. They had basically flat soles. A couple of years ago they wanted to make their shoes both stiffer and lighter. To get a stiff flat carbon sole requires a certain thickness. But if you make the sole shaped like a boat hull, you can use less thickness of carbon and still get stiffness from the shape. Except that bit I mentioned above about being on the cusp of the wide shoe - in the boat shaped sole I never got comfortable. They only produce a select few shoes - in one colour that I can see - in the wide model. Whereas Lake seems to make all their shoes in narrow, standard and wide widths. The Lake shoes are $50 more than the Trek shoes were, but $50 less than the Northwave shoes would be.
 
Hopefully they get some in stock soon.]]>Gear2025-10-28T21:39:16+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c8b72269f60eacbf9e5175aa2b0698fa-153.html#unique-entry-id-153https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c8b72269f60eacbf9e5175aa2b0698fa-153.html#unique-entry-id-153Most carbon bike wheels now proclaim a lifetime warranty. Trek's carbon wheels are in this category too. Directly from their website I can see "Warrantied for Life" under wheel features, and then it goes on to say "All Bontrager carbon wheels are backed by a lifetime warranty for the original owner".
 
What they don't put in headlines is the fact that only manufacturing defects are included in the lifetime guarantee - it would be fine in my experience if that was only a year as most defects show up pretty quickly once you use the wheel. Not included is outside causes for breakage, you know, like hitting something and cracking the rim. The way most rims fail. That is limited to 2 years. Not a lifetime. Not even the lifetime of a mouse.
 
Recently took a broken Bontrager rim into the dealer and it was denied by Trek - it is 3 years old. They will replace the wheel for about 1/2 price. Which is nice-ish, but certainly doesn't go very far to covering for a very expensive wheel that cracked on an un-noticed rock out on the trail. It certainly wasn't spectacular.
 
Then look at Reserve wheels. The rims from Santa Cruz bicycles, given a distinct name so as to not link too closely to the brand. They have a video of Danny MacAskill jumping down stairs without a tyre in an attempt to break one - he was eventually successful but it took some doing. And apparently those shenanigans are covered by their lifetime warranty. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Reserve is excellent about replacing broken rims, regardless of cause, even in the middle of foreign countries when people are on bike holidays and something went wrong.
 
ENVE limits their concern to 5 years and then has a pro-rated taper (I couldn't find how long it lasts) so that the longer you own it, the less credit you get towards the replacement rim. I hope I never break my ENVE rim because they would be non-trivial to replace with something else or expensive to replace with another ENVE rim.
 
Read the fine print...]]>Gear2025-10-25T16:12:06+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/40986992fbfb071506ae624e56651445-152.html#unique-entry-id-152https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/40986992fbfb071506ae624e56651445-152.html#unique-entry-id-152Both the enduro bikes at my house are running TruTune full-size inserts. And it is a good thing they are. Set up with a reasonable amount of sag and in our typical riding, we both sometimes see full travel on the O-ring. In the first couple of rides on my Zeb fork, I was leaving behind 25+ mm of travel while running the fork on the soft side.
They do what they claim - slow down the ramp in pressure as the fork compresses. The theory, for those who don't want to go seeking the website and reading all the info, is that the carbon inside the spacer adsorbs air as the pressure increases. Adsorbed air is not part of the gas in the air spring, so effectively it is reducing the amount of air in the spring space as it compresses - pressure increases more slowly than it would otherwise. And on rebound it releases that air just as quickly.
I find it pretty easy to tip into the travel, supportive in the mid-stroke and still willing to use full travel on a big hit. Just the way I like it. RockShox could have made the spring chamber larger, but they didn't, so this is the next best thing.
 
I was slightly concerned that the fork oil would seep into the device and clog up the carbon. Doesn't seem to have happened. You'd think they'd build it to avoid that.]]>Gear2025-10-21T18:59:03+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8412b6df7b2058edf7a0e8c1fbe4a587-151.html#unique-entry-id-151https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8412b6df7b2058edf7a0e8c1fbe4a587-151.html#unique-entry-id-151You can just about guarantee that motorbike, automobile and mountain bike tyres are tubeless without checking. But road bike tubeless is affected by trade-offs that might swing any given rider either way.
Clincher rims, rims made specifically for high-pressure tyres with tubes, are able to "clinch" because of the hook on the rim. Both sidewalls of the rim end in a small inwards facing bump - the hook. The tyre bead grabs onto the hook with the tube pushing outwards on the tyre - a safe and robust system. When you get a flat, the tyre can roll off the rim and cause a crash.
MTB rims have become tubeless because it makes the rim more robust and at the low pressures people should be running their MTB tyres at (<30 psi) they don't try to escape from the rim well. No hook can also give the fat tyre a better shape - Stan's rims use tiny hooks (left over from skinny rim days perhaps?) to avoid interfering with tyre shape.
Road rims, even with wide (for road) tyres on them, have to contend with lots of air pressure compared to MTB. A typical MTB tyre runs mid-20s. A typical tubeless road tyre runs 3 or 4 x that much (depending on tyre, rim and rider weight).
I run 18/24 psi in my MTB tyres (with foam inserts) and 70/75 psi in my one tubeless road bike.
 
Not many sealants will seal at 75 psi. None will seal at 100 psi. All of them seal well at 20 psi. That's the difference and the problem.
 ]]>Gear2025-09-16T15:56:05+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a91156b5666f2b4e33cbebc5446dce00-150.html#unique-entry-id-150https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a91156b5666f2b4e33cbebc5446dce00-150.html#unique-entry-id-150A few weeks ago Fox announced their new pro-level downhill helmet. The Rampage Pro RS. It went on sale immediately in Canada, a few weeks after in the US (odd for an American company) and arrived last week in Australia. I immediately thought it looked good (some of the top Fox pros have been wearing one all season long too).
I have been wearing a Rampage Carbon Pro for a while. I began to wonder just how long? Google helped me pinpoint the colour scheme to the 2015 season. Wow - a decade. I thought it was time to replace it, even if it hasn't had a big impact.
On the weekend I picked up my new Rampage RS. Wow it feels so much lighter than the old one, which itself didn't feel too heavy compared to some helmets I've worn.
My only possible disappointment with it is the fact that it is all carbon with a couple of black Fox stickers. There is a coloured version in matte olive - not my thing. I'm thinking of getting some vinyl stickers cut in silver foil to add some contrast to it. But for now, the bare carbon is cool.

I've actually been splitting my time at Thredbo across the Proframe RS and the Rampage Pro. For next summer, unless it is especially hot, I will be using the new Rampage RS there all the time. All of the Fox RS helmets use a newer development of MIPS called Split Integra, where the slippery layer is between two layers of foam. The benefit of that is quietness and more predictable behaviour in a crash (apparently). My old Proframe (the non-RS one) was not noisy that I can recall (not like my road helmet where I clearly hear the creak of the slip layer against the foam). But this new split system allows for a layer of EPP and a layer of EPS for better impact management across different levels of impact.

Might be worth noting that for me in an XL size, the two Rampage models fit almost exactly the same. Differences could be due to the new vs old nature of the helmets.

I'll report back here after the first couple of outings in the new helmet. ]]>Gear2025-09-10T19:49:12+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ecbc16d6aabda1a529bea43679fbfc51-149.html#unique-entry-id-149https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ecbc16d6aabda1a529bea43679fbfc51-149.html#unique-entry-id-149Another great idea from Josh at Silca. To prevent the sealant from sealing the valves on your wheels, lubricate them! Sealant and lubricants do not go together well. Josh recommends a lube with adhering microparticles (molybdenum disulphides, as an example - I think the Silca Synergetic has tungsten-based particles).
I didn’t have any of those, but I do have a quite full bottle of Shimano dry lube with PTFE (teflon) particles. I gathered all the good valve cores I could find in the house (16 of them) and put them in a small cup. I poured in a few millilitres of Shimano dry lube and left them to sit. I got a chance to use one on Monday. The valve stem in my commuting bike had a sealing incident. That was last week and it has been extremely difficult to pump up the tyre since. The pump needs around 100 psi more than the tyre to force the air in. Lots of pumping for not much result.
The lubricated valve core works really well. The locking knob on the tip turns smoothly with some lube on the threads. The plunger portion moves up and down easily lubricated.
I think this is going to pay off.
As I swap in the lubricated cores for the ones in use now, I can drop them in the dry lube to bring them up to speed. Which is good because there are more than 16 tubeless wheels in this household.
The other task Josh suggested was running a lubricated pipe cleaner up through the centre of the valve stems to prevent sealant from sticking to them as well. All of my MTB wheels have CushCore in the rim, necessitating valve stems with a 90 degree bend in the air passage (if it ran straight through like a “regular” valve stem, it would get blocked by the insert). They can’t be run through with a pipe cleaner (or anything else) but maybe a cotton bud with oil on it? I’ll have to see what I can come up with.
I think the cores are the more important part of this equation.]]>Riding2025-09-06T20:34:21+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/58b88f757776a347363b3620a78e3f59-148.html#unique-entry-id-148https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/58b88f757776a347363b3620a78e3f59-148.html#unique-entry-id-148Being comfortable on your saddle while riding is about a lot more than just selecting the correct saddle. The body sitting on that saddle has to have a certain level of stability to achieve "saddle comfort" (Whatever that is!).
Feet, hands, back - instability here can lead to discomfort on the seat.
For the feet it can be the shoe, the cleat placement or the insole.
For the hands it can be bar height or stem length as the most likely culprits.
For the back I find it is either how one sits on the bike or core strength that impact back alignment.
Any and all of these combine to determine how one sits on the saddle and subsequently how comfortable the saddle feels.
Seat height, seat angle and seat setback are also obvious determinants of comfort.
 
Enough padding is nice, but any more than "enough" is too much and can cause pelvic instability and discomfort.
The most comfortable saddle I've ever used was a bare carbon shell that had "just" the right shape for me and it literally disappeared under me - the highest compliment for a saddle. Comfort on a bike is not like comfort in your favourite armchair. If the seat slips from your thoughts for much or most of the ride, then it is doing really well.
 
The bottom line is, if your saddle causes distress when you ride pay attention to the whole bike and not simply the saddle. Best bet is to consult an experienced fitter for assistance.]]>Riding2025-09-02T20:31:09+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/db4ef22e60a70ed1a93adc8c052e9c8c-147.html#unique-entry-id-147https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/db4ef22e60a70ed1a93adc8c052e9c8c-147.html#unique-entry-id-147A few years ago Wahoo purchased the online trainer interface program RGT. Current subscribers to either the Wahoo system or RGT got access to both. RGT didn't have many rides, but the Stelvio Pass in Italy was a good one. Wahoo pulled the pin rather than develop it, and put all their efforts into the System. As compensation to everyone with a subscription, they offered us a free year of Zwift.
In case you don't know, System training is always over a set profile. Most have a video that typically comes from pro racing too. So entirely different to the Zwift free riding experience. With the free riding experience of RGT gone, Zwift was an excellent substitution.
I had used Zwift back when I did a massive smart trainer review article that involved me testing out around 8 different smart trainers. I subscribed to Zwift to test them all in a popular environment. When I had my account resurrected, I still had all the experience and items I left behind a few years prior. (As you ride in Zwift, you get experience points - like many games - and can qualify for upgrades like better bikes, different jerseys, socks and gloves and so on.)
I continued to pay for Wahoo's System, but rode only in Zwift. As I approached the end date of my freebie from Wahoo, I cancelled my Zwift subscription. But I was granted almost 18 months more (can't explain that). The final date was in August. And now it's gone. I will return to System - they've added many new rides and I enjoy the yoga practice offered - but I will miss Zwift.
Zwift has added the climb portal. People wanted an iconic climb, so they mapped and added Alpe d'Huez under the name Alpe du Zwift. It is guarded by a forcefield until you achieve a particular level (maybe 8 - not a high one). Even though it is set on a small island in the Pacific Ocean, it is exactly like l'Alpe d'Huez. But there is a lot of work in reproducing an iconic climb. The climb portal allows Zwift to offer lots of new climbs without that effort. Climbs in the portal and not rendered. The climb itself is an exact replica of the actual climb, but without any scenery at all. The road is coloured to indicate the slope of the road at any given moment. You can see all the other cyclists around you. But the sky is a starry night sky and there is no ground around the climbing road. During the Tour this year, there were four famous French climbs that would be tackled by the peloton this year, inside the climb portal. Riding one gets you a commemorative Tour jersey to wear in virtual life. Doing all 4 unlocks a little devil cap in honour of Didi Senft, the guy dressed like the devil while appearing roadside at the Tour for around 20 years.
My first time on Zwift there were about 3 locations to ride in. One per day was chosen by the program and you could override that choice by writing a bit of autoexec code. Now there are numerous locales to ride in and 3 are active at any one time. I don't think the code thing works any more. Pretty much everything about Zwift has gotten bigger and better in the 10 or so years since I first tried it out. More roads, more locations, running (free too), dinosaurs at the side of the road, more bikes, more challenges, more jerseys - I got a pair of S-Works shoes on my last ride. Most of all I notice the crowds. Thousands of cyclists riding around in the virtual world at any time, instead of tens.
 
I still want to try Zwift with a Kickr Climb device (it alters the height of the front wheel to correspond to the slope of the terrain). And I would like to achieve the Tron style bike (100,000 m of climbing might be the way to unlock that, yet I'm at 15,000 m and have a LONG way to go still).
 
I could run two subscriptions, and if I rode indoors more often than I do it might even make sense. With only 20 or so indoor rides per year, I don't need two options. And with the yoga option from Wahoo, I'm not ready to give up that option.
 
If you haven't tried Zwift and have a trainer, I suggest you try it out. It really is well done.]]>Gear2025-08-17T22:19:14+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/beea5305234176defbf5d6c08cca5a0c-146.html#unique-entry-id-146https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/beea5305234176defbf5d6c08cca5a0c-146.html#unique-entry-id-146In the middle of May, on a Wednesday evening, riding along the bike path adjacent to the river below the dam, I hit a kangaroo. I've had numerous close calls, especially in that stretch of path. There is a horse jumping park up the slope and the river down the slope from the bike path with a small ditch between the horse area and the bike path. It grows great looking grass that the kangaroos like to eat. They only have one exit plan - towards the river. Up is not an option, only down. On that evening the 'roo bolted as I was right there (not before, not after - right at the inopportune time). I dodged behind her. She only took one hop. I plowed into her right hip with my front wheel and strained my shoulders and arms trying to force the bike to remain upright. It was never going to happen because the tyre was buried in her hip.
I fell to the left and got most possible spots on my body on the way down: bruised ankle, knee, hip, elbow and shoulder. Scraped a lot of material off my left shoe. Took the left shoulder out of my rain jacket. Heavily scuffed both brake levers, both lever bodies and tore both brake hoods. Scuffed bar tape. Scratched the Tubus rack on the ground - was easy to buff it smooth with fine sandpaper.
Seat didn't touch the ground. Bars not obviously damaged where the levers clamp on. Frame didn't hit anything.
Before I could stand up, the 'roo was gone.
Replaced levers completely. Ordered new rain jacket. Plan to move the heavily scuffed dial off my shoe to be replaced with another from a same model/year/colour shoe I used to ride in.
 
With the brake levers replaced, re-paired in the system and everything checked, the bike rides 100%.]]>Gear2025-08-06T22:03:31+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/aeb32f25f694c9f17a8ca7112a46a83e-145.html#unique-entry-id-145https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/aeb32f25f694c9f17a8ca7112a46a83e-145.html#unique-entry-id-145For the magazine (Bicycling Australia) I was sent a Silca bike spa kit. Lovely food-based bike care products: chain degreaser (for brand-new chains so you can wax it), bike wash (nice scent, good bubbles), brake and chain cleaner (I've seen similar/same stuff for car wheels, it turns bright red when it has done its job), after-wash bike polishing stuff that leaves a hardened coating on the paint to help protect it and keep it shiny and in-between polish to take the light dust off that you get on a dry ride, also with air-hardening coating. As part of my review I spent about an hour online with Silca owner Josh. Josh and I must be about the same age and have lots of similar memories of cycling in the past. On his YouTube channel and in person he speaks very proudly about the fact that everything that goes into their products is food grade. They hire good agri-chemists to develop their lubes and polishes. While you cannot drink the chain degreaser, you can drink all the components that go into it. So an industrial process with no harmful waist.
And it was using a food process that they developed the chips for their hot waxing system that turn the grease on your brand new chain into a wax. This is done in the food world for various reasons, but it means in the bike world you can dump your brand new chain in the wax and not have to fuss around with degreasing it first. Clever!
Then they released a tyre sealant with a back-up bottle of solvent as a "refresher". When the solvent evaporates through the tyre wall, add some more and get more lifespan. I wasn't convinced. But they made a mark 2 sealant just recently. With no refresher, just a 6 month minimum lifespan in real tyres in any climate. Most people get more. And it seals 8 mm holes with its revised carbon fibre filaments to clog the hole. That was more convincing.
I bought a litre and got a free syringe for measuring it into the tyres. Comes with a hose to go through the valve stem too - but Josh recommends against doing that with narrow opening valve stems.
I put the 120 ml of sealant straight into the tyre and popped the bead on. Inflating the tyre, the valve clogged up. Yes, I guess it does seal holes well and quickly. How am I supposed to be able to inflate my tyres if it does this all the time?
I took the bike for a short ride to distribute the sealant. It was flat the next morning. I then took it for a 40 km off-road ride. That will do a great job of distributing the sealant. It was flat the next day. That's incredibly disappointing for me. One almost totally clogged valve and one leaky tyre. Not a great start to my Silca sealant experience. After a couple of weeks of hardtail commuting off-road, checking the inside of the tyre a couple of times, cleaning the cut hole I made for the valve stem, adding some more Silca sealant, and riding even more again it finally sealed whatever little leak I had there. And it turned out that it wasn't clogging the valve stem, but the valve itself. I changed to a different one and had no subsequent issues.
 
I will definitely go back to Orange Seal for the tyres that still have Orange Seal in them - Josh also recommends not mixing (which is probably true for most sealants). Orange Seal is reliable for me. I've still got ambition for the 900 ml of Silca sealant I have remaining. It will go in my next road tyres to see how they go. My commuting bike needs to be super reliable and I'll give Silca a chance there.
 
But maybe not in the MTB tyres?]]>Gear2025-07-26T22:51:40+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/816423d3dd30a43ef85ab8024156c64e-144.html#unique-entry-id-144https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/816423d3dd30a43ef85ab8024156c64e-144.html#unique-entry-id-144Four years ago I bought a new single speed bike - the Spot Rocker SS - from the company that is accredited with getting Gates into the bike business with their belt drive (for reference, see all the hype for this year's World Cup DH racing with 4 teams gunning for the big prize to be the first to win one with a belt). Spot designed the Rocker to be both SS and gear friendly. There are adjustable length dropouts for the frame to allow belt tension adjustment (much tidier than a creaking eccentric bottom bracket). The drive side dropout bolts to the seat and chain stays separately, making room for the belt to be installed into the rear triangle.
When I ordered the bike the stock wheel option was a Stan's wheel with a relatively skinny rim (25 mm from memory) in either aluminium or carbon rim options. Spot put ENVE wheels on their bigger travel bikes, and I opted to upgrade to an ENVE M630 to get carbon rims and wide rims in the same wheel (as the name implies, 30 mm wide). ENVE doesn't drill their spoke holes, makes all their rims in Utah, hand builds each wheel - all the little details that should make these wheels the envy of the industry. And the price was good.
 
And they've been basically good wheels. The CushCore has the tell-tale marks of firm impacts where the foam is damaged between the rock and the rim sidewall - the best way to break a carbon rim (or ding an alloy one). No marks on the rim at all. My biggest complaint would be that the ENVE stickers are a little delicate and missing in places where rocks have impacted the rim wall on the trail. Biggest complaint aside from my actual complaint - which is that the rear wheel regularly breaks spokes. And always the same mode: non-drive side spoke, where it enters the nipple, when I'm pushing on the pedals to complete a technical move. Each breakage requires removing the tyre and foam insert and the rim tape to access the hidden spoke nipples. I've always had to buy a new nipple as well as the spoke because there is a piece of spoke in the nipple rattling around inside the rim cavity - you can fish them out with a little effort once the rim tape is off, but getting the spoke out of the nipple is usually impossible. I hate taping rims for tubeless. I've tried many methods and different brands of rim tape and still find I'm hit-or-miss with getting a good seal on the rim floor.
With the most recent spoke breakage I decided to rebuild the rear wheel and see if I can avoid the breakage problem permanently. After some looking at what's available, I chose Pillar Wing spokes. The Wing is about the same mass as the Sapim CX-Ray spoke that was in the wheels already, but with a lower cost and a higher strength rating. They have a slightly oversized elbow to reduce movement in the hub flange, and a non-traditional wing shape to the bladed section to improve the aerodynamics (not a consideration at all on a MTB wheel). I'm hoping that a new set of spokes, carefully stress relieved, will not break. But in the rebuilding I noticed that the spokes are not as tight as I'd like them to be (tighter = longer life right up until they start snapping or the rim tacos) and there are only 28 of them (all my other carbon MTB rims have 32 spokes). Either or both of these might contribute to the breakage. I carefully preserved the ENVE spoke tension because I don't want to pull the rim apart.
 
Only miles on the wheel will tell me if I fixed it. Here's hoping.]]>Gear2025-07-20T22:35:00+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8f8a80503035973b5b46061e086612f0-143.html#unique-entry-id-143https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8f8a80503035973b5b46061e086612f0-143.html#unique-entry-id-143Recently I watched most (not all) of a video by some engineer who has a channel on YouTube about how things work. This one attracted my attention - and probably slipped into my feed - because it was about bicycle wheels. I've seen so much rubbish about bike wheels, and this was more rubbish. I was really disappointed that an engineer, who should know better, was out there repeating nonsense theories about how wheels "work" as fact.
A spoked bicycle wheel is more like a pneumatic tyre (including the one mounted on the wheel) than it is like a spoked wagon wheel (the kind with big wooden spokes). Why? Because there is tension - lots of tension if built properly - in the bicycle wheel and the air pressure puts tension in the fabric threads of the pneumatic tyre. The tension allows the wheel to stand on the downward spokes (or threads in the tyre) rather than the popular notion of hanging from the top spokes (which is what this engineer put forth). Pre-tensioned structures do not behave like un-tensioned ones, or often, as intuition suggests.
If you really want to understand the system, go rear Jobst Brandt's book "The Bicycle Wheel" where he explains it all in detail, with measurements.
 
Alternative facts are not a real thing. I can tell you that airplanes fly due to magic and the Earth is flat - I could even believe these things - but that doesn't make either true. People shouldn't put educational content online that is wrong. I'll leave quantum physics to Brian Cox, and explaining spoke tension to Jobst.]]>Gear2025-07-06T14:49:03+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/b12447d41e9a52a523b27251338e3d36-142.html#unique-entry-id-142https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/b12447d41e9a52a523b27251338e3d36-142.html#unique-entry-id-142For a good number of years now the ultimate spoke used in the ultimate wheel builds is the Sapim CX-Ray. The DT Swiss Aerolite is approximately the same spoke, and it seems like DT started making these to offer a DT alternative to the Sapim option. These spokes are expensive - but the price is probably worth it to achieve one of the lightest spokes you can get and also one of the strongest spokes you can buy - the extensive working of the steel wire to achieve the blade shape makes them really strong (and they use the best steel, but I don't actually know how this is any different from the steel in more mundane spokes; perhaps it is all down to the manipulations).
 
Back in 2011 I bought some carbon wheels for my hardtail that were built with Pillar bladed spokes. These spokes actually look a lot like the CX-Ray, but don't seem to have the "pedigree" that the Sapim spokes have (Pillar is Taiwanese, but lots of great bike components come out of Taiwan - compared to DT Swiss which is obviously Swiss and Sapim which is Belgian). Enter Pillar's new Wing spoke. These bladed spokes not only use the same Sandvik steel wire as the other two brands, but they have a new shape that makes them allegedly more aero, slightly more stiff and the breaking load is almost double that for the CX-Ray according to what I found online.
 
My ENVE wheels were built using CX-Ray spokes (28 per wheel) on Industry Nine Hydra hubs. If I was going to pick the weak spot in this trio of parts, I'd have picked the rear axle in the Hydra hub. But, as the bike is my single speed, it seems that not having a low gear nor having a gear right at the inside of the freehub body (where the bending load on the axle would be highest) and despite being heavier than your average cyclist - I've not experienced any axle issues to date. I have, however, broken at least 3 Sapim spokes to date.
 
The broken spokes are always in the same place - the non-drive side "pushing" spoke when I push on the pedal to deal with a technical terrain feature. This unloading of the spoke breaks it off at the start of the threads. I really hate this because it means disassembling the tubeless tyre system, removing the rim tape and coaxing the nipple out of the rim cavity. The section of spoke left in the nipple precludes getting the spoke out of the nipple - hence needing another nipple. The spokes are expensive (around $11 each), the nipples are expensive (ENVE nipples are $5 each), and I hate the down time on the bike. I think all replacement spokes in my wheel are actually Aerolites because no one seems to have the CX-Ray in my needed length in singles (they sell them in packs of 8 or more).
 
I've decided to rebuild the non-drive side of the wheel with Wing spokes. I ordered 14 spokes, 14 new nipples and a nipple tool so I can carefully re-do the off side when the parts arrive. I'll be taking the long road of replacing each spoke one at a time so as not to de-tension the wheel as a whole. Which will leave me with 13 spare spokes and nipples - I'm counting on not ever requiring them. The Wing spokes have a slightly thicker elbow section because this is where spokes break most often. That hasn't been the case for me - all have snapped off where they enter the nipple right at the start of the thread. But a stronger spoke with a thicker elbow - maybe it will deal with loads better overall? Fingers crossed.
 
I will also do an extensive destressing of the spokes after building as this is the most critical element of the wheelbuild for longevity. I have done this each time I replaced a spoke, so either 28 spokes is insufficient for my rear wheel or the CX-Ray is insufficient for my mass or the damage was done in the first few months of use prior to the initial spoke breakage.
 
Incidentally, these wheels came on a new bike. The bike brand told me to deal with ENVE. ENVE told me to deal with their importer in Australia. The importer told me they weren't interested because they didn't sell me the wheels. Great run-around there. Amusingly (not really!) the importer insisted I could purchase single CX-Ray spokes from my preferred bike shop, but the bike shop said the spoke importer's order desk offered them only large packets of the spokes. More run-around.
 
Back to my entry title - if the CX-Ray is no longer the king of spokes, is the new Wing the new King?]]>Gear2025-06-30T20:19:55+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5c02d33b63b23676f9b519bf19dbcb00-141.html#unique-entry-id-141https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5c02d33b63b23676f9b519bf19dbcb00-141.html#unique-entry-id-141I tried to get Llewellyn to build me this bike, but he wasn't interested in working with the electronics side of things and said if I conquered the digital side I should get back to him. So nothing yet. Probably ever!
 
What do I want? A traditional road bike with downtube shifters that are electronic. I was imaging doing it with Di2, in which case the push and the pull of the levers would have to enact different actions. But lately I think AXS is the way to do this, so the levers would have one direction of motion that mimics the click of the shift button on the AXS brake lever (left lever for higher gear, right lever for lower gear, both levers for chainring shift - all programmable from the AXS app). One would probably have to gut an AXS pod shifter for a MTB or the shift mechanism in the road levers to accomplish this easily - short of building the whole thing from the ground up (would have been pretty straightforward in the Di2 space as a Hall-effect sensor or even a magnetic reed switch connected to the shift lever would have sent the signal up the wire to the derailleur). To make this happen would require a nice set of downtube shift levers and a means of turning them into a nice feeling RTC motion (return to centre - every push springs back to the starting place) all while preserving the water-proof nature of AXS shifting. Hence why I haven't done this.
Then I'd need some brake levers that aren't shift levers. To look traditional it would have to be rim brakes, but I like discs and think a traditional metal frame with small round tubes and downtube shifters with hydraulic disc brakes would be nicer to ride. That's actually not too important to my vision as good rim brakes are good and any disc brakes I might come up with that have non-shifting levers for drop bars are also likely to not be the best of disc brakes.
I never had indexed downtube shifting. I went straight from 6 speed friction shifting with downtube shifters to 8 speed STI shifting on the brake levers. At this point I'd happily forego the whole digital shifting experience if I could get some nice 12 speed downtube indexed shifters in Record or Red flavours to go with the rest of the group. That'd be awesome and lovingly anachronistic.
 
Why?
Why not!]]>Gear2025-06-09T15:17:01+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/014b2aca12f82313ad3014e04279fbbe-140.html#unique-entry-id-140https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/014b2aca12f82313ad3014e04279fbbe-140.html#unique-entry-id-140I've loved Campag bike parts since I was a little kid. My uncle who got me into riding bikes (and repairing them!) rode Nuovo Record on his race bike - ah those were the days.
Actually I wouldn't want to go back to friction downtube shifting and 5/6/7 speed freewheels, but I would like to apply all of modern know-how to a lasts-forever and looks nice shiny aluminium mechanical group that shifts over an 8 or 9 speed cassette - but I digress.
Somewhere around 9 or 10 spd, I thought Record specifically and Campagnolo in general had lost their way. But the 11 and 12 speed gear is brilliant. EPS never really did it for me (the same as Di2 didn't) - I guess I didn't like the flimsy wires running around on a bike that doesn't treat flimsy well. Both my road bikes had Record 12 on until my replacement commuting frame couldn't accept the front derailleur - and I went Red AXS (and it's brilliant, of course). My race bike still has Record 12 on it. I often mis-shift because I now have 3 bikes (2 outdoor bikes and 1 indoor bike) with 3 different shifting systems (AXS, Record mechanical and Dual-tap). Every day I ride AXS and when I jump on another road bike I flick the left lever to get an easier gear but instead drop onto the small chainring (if not there already). Only have to do that once per ride to remember where I am.
I am reading that Record is no longer going to be offered by Campag. Super Record wireless. Super Record S wireless. Super Record mechanical. Chorus mechanical. No Record. I've long through the Chorus/Record/Super Record trio were too close together in real terms, even if they were quite far apart in price. Chorus always offered 90% of Super Record for about 1/2 the price.
Maybe Record isn't "super" enough? When SR first hit the shops, it was Ti axles, Ti bolts, a few extra holes drilled - all to save a few grams. I broke my SR rear hub axle in a few weeks because even the steel axle was insufficiently strong in freewheel design (drive side bearing is basically in the middle of the hub and the looong unsupported piece of axle just snapped off). But with more modern SR, there have been some fundamental design differences to distinguish. I had SR cranks for a while and they use a Ti bolt to join the left and right crank - but left-hand threaded to ensure you can't use it on Record cranks. SR bearings are a little bit better than Record ones - a higher level of ceramic (CULT rather than USB in Campagnolo's terms).
I would have thought around 40 years of "Record" as a pinnacle group would ensure it remains in the lineup. I guess it has to be more super. And if you take the long view, I started this passage talking about my uncle's NR group. There have been several Record variations: Nuovo, Super, C- are the 3 I can think of.
I'll probably never have another mechanical road group - the AXS stuff is so good I can't be bothered with the hassles of Bowden cables (of course I have a large legacy collection of cables and tools for cables, even coloured cable "donuts") - so going out with Record will be OK with me. It's incredibly good.

And since I wrote this I've seen SR 13-spd is announced. Does that mean SR-S will remain 12-spd while SR goes to 13? Where will it end? 14? 15? 16?]]>Gear2025-05-30T21:56:57+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/cd5a9ac2f792f3c26887876cf175d45f-139.html#unique-entry-id-139https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/cd5a9ac2f792f3c26887876cf175d45f-139.html#unique-entry-id-139Car brakes always use DOT fluid. Why? Exactly because it is hygroscopic. Water will get into car brake systems during use, in some level, and if water was immiscible with the brake fluid, it would pool at low points in the system (probably the calipers) and start causing corrosion. Because it is absorbed into the brake fluid, the worst that happens is a decline in boiling point with age. It really only takes a small percentage of water in the fluid to really ruin the heat resistance of the system. Racing brakes get bled regularly because the excessive heat they are exposed to (glowing brake discs) mean that new brake fluid is important far more often than in a car used for driving around town at low speed.
I remember buying a particular brake fluid for my race car because the boiling point was considerably higher than standard fluid, but this brand was also inexpensive compared with exotic fluids with, perhaps, a few degrees more heat resistance.
 
On bikes, however, the water absorption issue is less relevant. It almost seems like a liability in DOT fluid brakes. Mineral oil is immiscible with water. If you get water in your bike brake lines it will run down to the lowest point. But there is no steel that I know of in any bike disc brake so no rust will ensue. That water, if it ends up in the caliper, will boil at 100C and the brakes will fail (steam is a very poor brake fluid). Mineral oil is actually a pretty good choice because the boiling point can be about the same as for DOT fluid, it doesn't harm paint (DOT is bad for paint), and it is generally benign on the skin (DOT and skin don't mix).
 
Shimano has used the same pink fluid since day one in their disc brakes. Magura has used the same blue fluid as long as I'm aware (but I don't know if those early Gustav brakes used it and I can't be bothered searching for the answer). Campagnolo brakes are current Magura brakes re-purposed to road use, and the mineral oil is very very similar to the Magura stuff (though, typically Campy, not identical). Hayes and Avid both used DOT fluid from their respective starts. Hayes is now part of the Manitou/Answer/Ringle/Sun brand range, and still uses DOT fluid. Avid is part of SRAM now and the AVID brand name is mostly historical. The most recent 3 new brakes from SRAM run on mineral oil, but everything before that was DOT fluid.
 
All my SRAM brakes use DOT fluid. I know I should bleed them more often than I do, but even the DH bike (which gets ridden on longer and steeper terrain than any other bike I have) has no issues with boiling brakes after 4 seasons on the original bleed (I shortened the hoses and swapped lever sides out of the box). In general, I bleed the brakes when an issue pops up.
 
Mineral oil and DOT fluid require completely different seals. So never mix them up. Even the bleed equipment has to be quarantined across fluids as the wrong fluid will ruin the seals in the syringes.
 
While most of the bikes at home are now SRAM with DOT fluid, there are still a couple of sets of Shimano brakes around. And I bled one bike with these just the other day (they had a LOT of air in the system and didn't work). I got really good at the gravity bleeding using a Shimano cup on the lever and catch container at the caliper. But this seems too hard after lots of Bleeding Edge bleeds with the SRAM tools. I re-purposed a Reverb seatpost bleeding syringe to go on the caliper end and push fluid up into the cup. I'm much happier with this arrangement as it is quick and easy and because the hydraulic actuator for the Reverb uses mineral oil the syringe is quite happy with Shimano brake oil in it (whereas the vet supply syringe I was using to extract oil from the bottle suffers from a swollen plunger - it doesn't like the oil at all).
Pushing the fluid in from the caliper and out the lever end is in the direction the bubbles want to go. Gravity feeding the fluid does eventually work, but it can involve some fussing around to clear all the air. I used to bleed my car brakes by hand, from master cylinder to caliper, but now I understand most mechanics use a vacuum bleeding machine that does it all quickly and perfectly. There's so much volume in car brake hoses that a little air is rarely the problem - it is burnt fluid and water-absorbed fluid that cars need to get rid of regularly.
 
The one advantage of DOT fluid is any car place can sell you a bottle and it is quite cheap because there are so many cars around. Mineral oil is specific to the brake brand being used and as any proprietary product, can be quite expensive. Having said that, I still have around 600ml of Shimano fluid remaining after so many bleeds over 15 years of disc brakes in the original 1 litre bottle I bought way back when. The 500ml DOT fluid bottles never get emptied by me, because it requires so little volume to bleed a bike and like I wrote above, I don't do it that often. (Note to self, buy a new bottle and then bleed them ALL in one flurry of activity, so they are all fresh.)
 
Ultimately I don't think any real advantage or disadvantage stems from the fluid type used once it is in the brakes. But for safer handling and longer storage life, the mineral oil wins. SRAM must have agreed with their recent switch.]]>Gear2025-05-10T21:59:55+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a7b5311219dba37fd722069b02e6765b-138.html#unique-entry-id-138https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a7b5311219dba37fd722069b02e6765b-138.html#unique-entry-id-138My Slash has a full AXS Flight Attendant group on it. Which includes the rather short-drop 170mm Reverb A1 version dropper (the longest they made in A1 version). In contrast, I have a 200mm drop Reverb C1 (latest version, hydraulic activation) on my Ripley, which is close to the longest drop I could fit in it and the seat is _so_ out of the way when dropped I am not sure more would be of any use in practice. Back to my wireless dropper. The new AXS Reverb drops up to 250mm. That's a whopper of a dropper.
I can definitely bump the seat at times on steeper or rougher trails. I'm very likely to "upgrade" to the new B1 AXS Reverb in around a 200mm drop. Might squeeze the 225mm drop into the bike, might not - have to measure before the posts come into stock and can be ordered. The "plan" at the moment is to head to Whistler in August and the Slash will be going, so a longer dropper would help out on some of the techy trails I'm liable to ride.
Integrating a new wireless post into the bike is simple - remove seat, remove post, insert post, install seat, re-pair all the components, ride.
 
The new Reverb is air-only. No hydraulic circuit. Apparently uses 600psi in the skinny posts (30.9 and 31.8) and a 'meagre' 450psi in the phat 34.9 post I need. I know I don't have a 450psi shock pump to refill that air chamber. I'm sure they'll be a thing once these posts go up for sale.]]>Gear2025-05-02T22:35:58+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/70e9be6c05b81e762c9858d9c3b7a508-137.html#unique-entry-id-137https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/70e9be6c05b81e762c9858d9c3b7a508-137.html#unique-entry-id-137Why you should have a modern MTB.
I've encountered a lot of very casual mountain bikers. They like to ride, but it isn't a priority for them and so they have a bike they bought about 10 years ago. It still works OK. Why not ride it?
Well, there is no compelling reason not to ride it, except that you might just have a lot more fun on a new one. Let me explain.
 
Over the past ten years mountain bike geometry has changed a LOT. Longer. Lower. Slacker. Longer reach. Longer wheelbase. Lower bottom bracket. Slacker head tube angle. The result of these changes is a bike that is much easier to point through corners (they almost steer themselves), with higher stability. They climb a bit better. The descend a bit better. They send riders over the bars less often. They try to wheelie less.
A couple of other things have changed in that period too. Rims got wider. Seat posts got mechanised. Those wider rims provide vastly better tyre support than skinny rims ever could. They allow lower tyre pressure and still the tyre is supported in side loads - meaning you can run lower pressure, get better grip (and lower rolling resistance) and still have better rim protection than you had on the skinny rim (fewer rim dents). The dropper post has now become part of all but the least expensive bikes. In fact, the dropper post drove the adoption of the longer, lower and slacker geometry, because they really do not work as well for actual people with the seat at full height. There's your big compromise, if you move to a modern bike with a dropper post, you need to drop the post in order to ride it at its best.
 
Mountain bikes have also become heavier in the real world. Brakes that work. Wide rims. Fatter tyres. Dropper posts. Wider bars. Longer travel suspension systems. All add weight. And you know what? Unless you are racing up a steep climb, it doesn't matter at all. The weight of the bike has so little impact on climbing prowess as to be almost unimportant. Even XC pros are using wider rims, dropper post and full suspension bikes now (in stark contrast to a few years ago) because the overall package is faster and funner than going old school. It requires adding about 5 kg to a bike to slow a big climb by one minute. One minute is heaps in racing, but insignificant in a social ride.]]>Gear2025-04-25T23:55:49+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/553afac632eecd21cbe9ea1f3ec61840-136.html#unique-entry-id-136https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/553afac632eecd21cbe9ea1f3ec61840-136.html#unique-entry-id-136That seems like a pretty simple question, but it proves to have a very complex answer.
I've been considering the answer for some time now. And I feel no more prepared to answer the question than when I began.
 
By the time the fabric is thin and see-through, they are long past their use-by date. On some of my older bibs the end came when the straps stopped being so stretchy - if they can't stay up then they aren't fit to wear. On others, it was the gripper elastic around the leg opening that perished first. My newest shorts were purchased for commuting to work and now have approximately 125 trips through the washing machine on each one. My race shorts from the same brand have the same pad in them, and worn back to back the less worn race pair either seem a little firmer in the padding, or no difference (I think it depends on the day more than which particular shorts that are being compared). The back-to-back wearing thing is what I do with my cycling shoes to decide when they are worn, as long as the current shoe feels similar to the unused new shoe, they can keep going. It seems easy with shoes and hard with shorts.
I don't believe the end comes strictly from numbers of wash cycles - time in the saddle also contributes. And in the case of my commuting shorts, they've had comparatively few miles. At 30ish km per day and 125 days, that's approaching 4000 km. Where I could find a mileage for top quality shorts, it was around double that. But neither is it just mileage - each washing is also contributing to the demise. If I did 100 km per outing, then I'd have no quandary around saying "worn out". Because 12,000 km is on the far side of everyone's line. If 50 km is typical and 8000 km is worn, then that's 160 washing cycles.
By neither distance nor washing can I definitively state that these shorts are worn out. I don't want to drag them past their end, that doesn't look, feel or perform best. Neither do I want to abandon them before they are ready to be abandoned. That's wasteful and expensive.
Like I wrote at the beginning, I still don't know the answer.]]>Gear2025-04-20T18:42:48+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5461650e602fc5f2821c83e5d8f2925d-135.html#unique-entry-id-135https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5461650e602fc5f2821c83e5d8f2925d-135.html#unique-entry-id-135Remember the adage: all things being equal, the wider tyre has lower rolling resistance. Also remember the corollary: Things are never equal.
 
What are you supposed to make of those two statements?
 
Every time you move up one size of tyre, from a 20 mm to a 23 mm to a 25 mm to a 28 mm to a 30 mm, the amount that tyre has to distort to make contact with the road decreases. If the thickness of the rubber and the carcass of the tyre are identical across all the sizes, then each step sees a reduction in energy losses. Within one model of tyre it would extremely unusual for all those sizes to be offered. And if several were on offer, the larger ones tend to have a thicker layer of rubber on top, or (sometimes and) a heavier carcass. Both of which increase rolling resistance.
And then there is the matter of aerodynamic resistance. If all of those tyres are put on the same wheel, then only one can be optimally aero, and all the others are less slippery.
No matter what, increased size brings increased weight. The wider rim necessary to provide good support and good aero efficiency to the wider tyre also adds weight and complexity.
 
Rolling resistance is always important on a bicycle with so little power to motivate the bike, but aero resistance becomes key from around 20 kmh upwards. By 40 kmh the aero factor is so great you can almost forget about rolling resistance.
 
Wider tyres operate at lower pressures with lower rolling resistance when used on wider rims, but add mass and aero drag (especially when we exceed the optimal tyre size for a given rim). Increasing size reduces one aspect but increases the other aspect. Our optimum then depends on the bike's velocity.
 
All of that is a way of saying that they cannot become too wide or weight/aero will suffer more than rolling resistance can gain for a net loss in speed. I think that limit has to be somewhere around 30mm tyres.
 
There is also the question of what feels "good" too, but I haven't ridden enough good, fat tyres to know what to expect from a 30 mm racing tyre. My 28 mm tubeless training tyres surprise me by feeling quite sharp (neither heavy nor slow). But I know the measured rolling resistance puts them well behind a good racy 25 mm tyre.
 
Perhaps that 30ish mm limit is a temporary one? As technology improves the wider tyres could surpass the narrower ones. Regardless, the practical limit can be observed by looking at motorbikes. The biggest and most powerful litre sport bikes use about a 120 mm front tyre. Those have 150x the power of a bicycle on tap. We never need go there. Even a low powered sport bike has nearly the same front tyre - a 100 or 110 mm section. These tyres are dictated by mass (of the bike & rider combo) more than anything else.

Footnote: looks like the UCI will step in and rule a max size for road bikes. Like the minimum mass they specified around 30 years ago, if they do it will hang around a long time.]]>Gear2025-04-16T23:01:18+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/be9dfbcf7edcc737e9f7433c29be1613-134.html#unique-entry-id-134https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/be9dfbcf7edcc737e9f7433c29be1613-134.html#unique-entry-id-134Why bike industry? Why??
The seatpost that Trek included with my replacement frame - very nice of them too - was the RSL "flexy" carbon post. This ships with 7x10 carbon rail "ears". I discovered that the seat mast that shipped with my original Checkpoint used the same identical ears, but were for 7 mm round rails (ie, metal rails). I quickly put those pieces into play to mount up my Fizik saddle. And a couple of others. None of which I really liked.
Then, as I've noted previously, I tried out some other Bontrager saddles. They use a 7x10 mm oval rail in carbon.
When I decided to try the Ergon saddle, I didn't even consider that the rails might be different. Twenty-five hours of riding and listening to the seatpost head snap over bumps and I had the epiphany while on the bike - the rails are 7x9 mm and therefore too small for the ears. It explains a lot. Tightening does hold the saddle in place, but doesn't feel like it's "tight". And the bottom of the ears touch the actual post - which doesn't seem correct.
I've got the proper ears on order and will report back. Before this epiphany, I was contemplating buying a different post, since I think I like this saddle.
 
As a side note, I can't believe how expensive these ears are. On the Ergon post (also sold for less money with Canyon branding) they are sold with round rail ears and the 7x9 oval ears are the only other option. Trek sells the RSL post with the 7x10 oval ears installed and will sell you either of the other sizes. All of these things sell for about $60. For two bits of aluminium and a bolt (2 bolts in the Ergon post).
I ask, what was wrong with the 2-bolt post heads that all the lightweight posts used for many years? They could accommodate most any rail size - at worst with longer bolts. I don't feel like these eared posts are any better at retaining or supporting the saddle rails, and in some ways could be worse.
 
Fingers crossed, the new ears quiet the bike back to pure silence.]]>Gear2025-04-10T23:23:03+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/4c2afd02e0ce183395578492f64d2b28-133.html#unique-entry-id-133https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/4c2afd02e0ce183395578492f64d2b28-133.html#unique-entry-id-133Most current disc brakes (road and mountain) are more than adequate to enable single digit braking. Why would you want to restrict yourself to one finger?
Because that leaves three others to hang on with. It is also much more precise, and precise braking is safe and controlled braking.
Also because that one finger should be the index finger, the most manoeuvrable and well controlled digit, you end up with even better precision.
 
Even on the road, I do all my shifting and braking with my index finger (and only that finger).
 
It is so key, I will go as far as to say if you can't get sufficient braking force one fingered, you need to do something to your bike rather than try to slow down with two (or more) fingers. Larger rotors, bigger brakes, better pads - or a combination thereof.
 
In the bad old days, lots of disc brake levers were quite long, enabling (encouraging) multiple fingers on the blade. Now they are all single finger with the optimal being your finger pad rests on the little hook at the end.
 
Death Grip is when you don't have a brake "covered". Again in the bad old days, death gripping was essential in rough terrain so you could actually hang on. Three fingers is more than enough to hang on with, so that index finger can cover the brake 100% of the time if you want. (Challenging oneself to ride Death Grip is fun, just reserve it for suitable locations where you won't come to grief.)
 
Go pay attention to your braking next time you're on your bike. Make it so that single finger braking is your default - and your riding will benefit.]]>Riding2025-04-02T23:07:45+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/248435e8f8c6d8ccabc4c2de3622dd3c-132.html#unique-entry-id-132https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/248435e8f8c6d8ccabc4c2de3622dd3c-132.html#unique-entry-id-132As I write this, Milan-San Remo was last weekend and the coverage of the last few kilometres was stellar. Three top cyclists (all world champions) trying to use their particular strengths against the other two to win the longest (and one of the biggest) one-day races of each year. At 280 km, few races approach MSR for distance. Starting (near) Milan, they head quite promptly down to the Ligurian coast and ride along the coast road to San Remo. As is typical for most coastal roads, it isn't flat all the time. Some obstacles crop up that require a road to go up and down to get around them. Some of these lumps are all-time famous in pro cycling. Cipressa and Poggio are two climbs near the end of MSR that can make or break the race for riders.
Mathieu and Tadej were away together. Ganna was bridging on the descent of the Poggio to San Remo. The three came together with around 1 km to go. They didn't have to worry about the group catching them so they could play silly games and try to win. Both Pogi and Ganna dropped back a bit to watch VDP. He timed it perfectly and with a good stiff tailwind, went with 300 m to go. No one could come around him and he won.
 
 
Pogacar was strong, but there was no terrain that gave him a natural advantage. Van der Poel had done the preparation and was the only rider who could stay with Pogacar when he attacked. After almost 300 km, no one had great sprinting legs at the end. Decisive strategy was the deciding factor. On a headwind, going that early would have been suicide. But it's hard to come around in a tail wind.
 
There are tens of different coverage "cuts" on YouTube. If you haven't seen it yet, and you have any interest in road cycling, go watch this master class in race finishing.]]>Gear2025-03-30T15:38:46+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5354e258177d1fce03c56b218f773131-131.html#unique-entry-id-131https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5354e258177d1fce03c56b218f773131-131.html#unique-entry-id-131My Spot bike came with a Bike Yoke Revive dropper post. It has worked without issue for 150 hours of riding now. Every so often, especially when it has hung on the wall for a while unloved, it sags a bit under my weight when sat upon. Like the last ride.
But the lever for purging the air out is attached to the seatpost head and comes with you - every ride. Unlike the Vent Valve on my Reverbs, which require removal of the post from the bike, I pulled over, flicked the lever, slowly lowered the post and - voila - the post was purged of air and back to rock-solid immediately. (Sometimes I have to do it twice.)
 
I like the Reverb. I particularly like the hydraulic actuation of the manual post compared to cable and I really like the wireless actuation of the AXS version - no cables are the best cables. But the Bike Yoke post is excellent. Overhaul is supposed to be simple too, but I haven't felt the need to try it yet.]]>Gear2025-03-15T16:36:53+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/4177ee1de40959e8c7238604348e727a-130.html#unique-entry-id-130https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/4177ee1de40959e8c7238604348e727a-130.html#unique-entry-id-130Pogacar swapped his 172.5mm cranks for 165s and suddenly the shorter length is sold out everywhere. I do not know if these are connected, but they seem to be. Pogacar is unusually gifted at winning bike races and so what he's using MUST be right for me - right?
Not so clear to me, but maybe.
It would only apply if you were of a similar height to Pogacar, and probably only if you had an amazing cardiovascular system like Pogacar. Meaning, probably not.
 
Incidentally, I swapped to 10mm shorter cranks over the past years (it took about two years to change all the bikes). I did this not for any aero- or bio-dynamic gains, but for homogeneity across bicycles. I moved to 170 cranks on the Enduro bike in 2018 (for fewer pedal strikes). The trail bike followed in 2020. My singlespeed has 175s on board, but I always have my eyes open for a sale pair of cranks in 170mm length to bring it into line too. When my long Red cranks broke, I replaced them with lightly-used second-hand Rotor cranks in 170mm. When that frame was warranty replaced, the new bike was built with 170mm Red cranks. The Rotor cranks went on my trainer bike, changing it from 180mm to 170mm. Finally, I put new Record 170mm cranks on the race bike, removing the 180mm Super Record cranks that were on there.
I really like consistent crank lengths across all my bikes.
 
Should you go shorter? You can get lower at the front and not get knees in your chest. You have to remember to diminish your gears by a similar amount as you decrease your crank length - you can't push the same gears with the shorter cranks. It seems particularly useful on a TT bike, where getting an aero position with long cranks can be challenging. Remember that most studies have shown the power benefits of long cranks (a minuscule 1% per 5mm increase). And that this shifts load from "strength" to "cardio". So what is right for Pogacar is not likely right for the rest of us, but people are very adaptable and shorter is probably not worse!]]>Gear2025-03-07T22:57:13+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5474ee3251556bf7899ad0f32cd433ea-129.html#unique-entry-id-129https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5474ee3251556bf7899ad0f32cd433ea-129.html#unique-entry-id-129No matter which disc brake I am using (Shimano, SRAM or Campagnolo) and what sort of bike (road or mountain), there is nothing quite so good for the brake lever 'feel' than a new set of pads. A hydraulic system, in theory, feels the same from the first application of the pads to the rotors as the final one, but the reality is that the lever throw increases with wear on the pads. Brakes feel softer when the pads are thin than when they are new (and thick).
I just replaced front and rear pads on my commuting bike (thin enough that the spring which pushes the pads apart had evidence of contact with the rotor) and the levers went from pretty good to rock solid. If you bleed your brakes with the brake block in between the pistons, you cannot achieve that rock solid feeling with thinner, worn pads. If you do bleed specifically for thin brake pads, you won't be able to put new pads in there when they wear out (without re-bleeding the system).
 
And because I only had one of each, there are organic and sintered pads in the bike at the moment. I intend to replace the sintered with organic and keep the sintered for the MTB. Honestly, the sintered took a few more stops to bed in but otherwise there has been no difference in use.]]>Riding2025-03-01T17:52:49+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5482cf4ff6693ff69bb1f8cbaaeffcb1-128.html#unique-entry-id-128https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5482cf4ff6693ff69bb1f8cbaaeffcb1-128.html#unique-entry-id-128I looked at my maintenance app the other day and noticed I only had about one hour per month on my single speed bike over the past year. That's not much. Given I ride it about 2 hours at a time, that's like every other month for a ride.
No wonder it felt so "hard". The gearing never felt too hard for places like Stromlo (it is definitely too hard for Cotter Pines, with a few steep pitches that I couldn't get up on the SS even on a pretty good day). But it requires riding regularly to adapt to the big pushing as well as the timing of said pushing. I tried riding up a not-very-challenging climb segment twice and couldn't push through the final two pedal strokes either time. Only went 20 km and was tired at the end.
Maybe the single speed bike is the domain of the young rider - and somewhere I've gotten too old? I'm going to keep riding it. It's a fun bike and I like the challenge. Going from Stromlo event centre out towards the bush fire memorial I was spinning away at 160 rpm. It's hardly worth pedalling at that cadence - but fun.
Fun is really the reason for single speeding. Getting rid of derailleurs makes the bike super quiet (no flopping or crashing chain, no cables or shifters, no wondering if you're in the correct gear - just a quiet bike and a challenge to navigate the trail).
 
At one point I was short on a hop over some rough rocks and the rear wheel landed heavily. I heard a nasty noise. The sort of noise that signals something breaking. I got off and checked. Frame OK. Axle OK. Rim OK. What else could it be? Just the hollow frame echoing/amplifying the noise of landing on rough rocks.
 
As my only hardtail bike, I like jumping it but I don't want to come up short as the rear wheel thumps pretty hard if you case it on the landing. Suspension can take the sting out of cases.]]>Gear2025-02-28T00:29:03+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/950cf1d5bc33378bf21868d7715248a0-127.html#unique-entry-id-127https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/950cf1d5bc33378bf21868d7715248a0-127.html#unique-entry-id-127Ever since Fizik "updated" the Arione, I've been trying to find a saddle that works for me as well as the old one. The new one actually isn't too bad, but it has a long break-in period and then it seems to become uncomfortable with only a few thousand km. Coupled with the higher price of the revised model, I'm not sold.
A word on the old one. One of its features was also its flaws. The wingflex feature meant that Fizik had cut some slots in the flare portion of the saddle (where the nose transitions to the wider rear) which permitted that part to flex when you pedalled. It made them supremely comfortable. It also led to their failure as eventually a crack would propagate out of one slot and run across the saddle. When I worked at a bike shop, we had a 30-day return policy on saddles and almost no Arione came back. They suited many people.
And they continue to make the gen 1 version under the name Arione Classic, but they can be hard to find in stock.
I've been running through a lot of saddles on the commuter bike trying to find one that doesn't cause issues. And then I thought of Ergon. I love their grips and the whole purpose of this German company is to address the contact points on the bike and make them ergonomic. On their website the carbon road saddle is around 200 Euro. I found it for sale in Australia for a bit over $200 - seems a good price given the exchange rate. So that went on my Checkpoint recently.
From ride one it was comfortable. The foam seems soft enough to be instantly comfortable, but firm enough to still be comfortable an hour later. The shape is quite flat (what I prefer) with a channel down the middle (I'm indifferent to the channel designs) and a silly little hole at the back of the channel (visual identification?). Given that many saddles require a break-in period, I'm hoping that nothing changes on this one over the next 30 hours of use. Were it to soften up, it would likely be too soft. Given all the carbon in this thing and Ergon's reputation for good stuff, I don't anticipate that. My only prior experience with Ergon saddles is the DH saddle on my Sender. It obviously doesn't get a lot of sitting, but in 4 seasons of use it hasn't changed at all (or bent or otherwise brought attention on itself).
 
New saddle days are usually full of discomfort trying to guess if this seat will be "the" seat.]]>Gear2025-02-11T21:05:16+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d211ecf4240bdb421bdbb75d6911612e-126.html#unique-entry-id-126https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d211ecf4240bdb421bdbb75d6911612e-126.html#unique-entry-id-126I had a DH bike. It was old-school with 26" wheels. It liked steep and rugged terrain but was terrible on anything remotely flat or smooth. Then I got my first Trek Slash. It was a revelation and I found it roughly as capable as the DH bike - the 29" wheels and 160mm of travel on the Slash more than compensating for the extra travel on the DH bike with its much smaller wheels.
I sold that DH bike and had none for a few years.
The new Canyon Sender CFR came out in 2021. I bought one straight away. It was like a playful trail bike with loads of travel. Its limits were well in excess of what the Slash could do. It was also a full size bigger in terms of reach. Which made it better for me just on that point. I sold the first Slash and bought a second one which has a similar reach to the Sender. Both bikes compete on similar grounds; 29" wheels and the Slash now sporting 170mm of travel to the Sender's 200mm.
I have favoured the Sender at Thredbo most of the times I have been up there since I had both bikes.
Just before Christmas I spent a week up there and took the Slash. After riding the Slash on most of the trails and feeling how it impacted my hands in particular, I can safely conclude that the Sender is just plusher than the Slash. My hands were sore after several days back-to-back of riding the Slash. That just doesn't happen with the Sender.
There aren't that many other differences between them. I would expect that Sender to handle really rough terrain better than the Slash, and high speeds better. But I've not raced either bike and I'm old enough now to know slowing down a tad is essential for longevity. I feel fine taking the Slash anywhere I take the Sender, but it just does so with more feedback into my hands.
Oh, except for the obvious exception of climbing. The Sender is neither geared nor possessing of a geometry that lends itself to successfully climbing any sort of hill. The Slash does so fine.
 
A corollary to this is that my friend accidentally booked a DH bike at Thredbo when we rode together. In the past he has booked one of their Enduro bikes. Both Norco brand. Similar sorts of bikes really. But he found the DH bike considerably more plush than the Enduro bike.]]>Gear2025-01-28T21:21:38+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c0cb3b9daafdadd85be6cec7fc3023d0-125.html#unique-entry-id-125https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c0cb3b9daafdadd85be6cec7fc3023d0-125.html#unique-entry-id-125I've spent a lot of time on Maxxis DH soft compound tyres. They grip like Velcro. Like really well on roots and rocks and anywhere that the sticky rubber can get a hold. The mechanical grip obviously depends on the chosen tread type (DHRII, Assegai, Dissector, etc).
I anticipated the Scorpion Race tyres to be better but I didn't expect them to make me feel slow and inadequate. These tyres have SO MUCH GRIP that they never slide. They never do anything at the edge. That can only be because their limits are way out there and I never approached them. Ever.
Wow! After many days at Thredbo on the Enduro Race version (Trek Slash) there are the tiniest amounts of erosion on the inner edge of the knobs. People have said they are grippy at the expense of durability, but that must only apply if the rider is fast enough to slide them.
I definitely wear out the Maxxis tyres slower than many guys - I don't like to lock up the wheels under braking and I don't slide the big bikes around much on the trail. But the Pirelli tyres are wearing slower again than the Maxxis. Amazing.
 
If you are after some tyres that have both mechanical and chemical grip, are well made and have high limits, I suggest you give the Scorpion Race Enduro or DH a trial.]]>Gear2025-01-26T15:38:38+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/f6a1a25674ad0165fd953995c72009d4-124.html#unique-entry-id-124https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/f6a1a25674ad0165fd953995c72009d4-124.html#unique-entry-id-124Rim tape seems a very simple thing. It should be air tight, sticky, durable and flexible to go into the rim and just sit there through multiple tyre changes. I found many OEM rim tapes all wrinkled up at the first tyre swap. Always disappointing.
 
I've tried a lot of different rim tapes in the past 15 years of riding tubeless. Gorilla tape is good, but not great. And it leaves too much residue on the rim - which has to be cleaned off for the next taping. I used Tune branded tape, which worked really well but dated from an era when rims were narrow - the tape was too narrow for 30mm internal channel wheels. I had OK luck with the Effetto Mariposa tape. It claims to have better glue on it, but it didn't stick any better than several other tapes I've used. That Stan's yellow tape that has been around since nearly the beginning of tubeless is about as good as anything and now that I have a long roll of 35mm wide yellow tape, it will be my go-to tape for the foreseeable future.
My Canyon DH bike came with DT Swiss wheels. Every part is DT Swiss. Rims, spokes and hubs, plus nipples and even rim tape are all DT Swiss. The tape has been excellent, surviving several changes of DH tyre with CushCore (including taking the tyres off on day 1 just to fit the CushCore).
 
[side note:] What hasn't been so robust in the DT Swiss wheels is one of the nipples. They appear to be aluminium given how easily it twisted out of shape. I had one loose spoke and put a good Park spoke key on the nipple, resulting in a heavily twisted nipple. What madman specific alloy nipples on a DH wheel? To replace the nipple, the rim tape has to come off. The rim tape lasted longer than the nipple did! When it is time, the tyre has to come off so the wheel can go in the truing stand. New nipple on at least that one spoke. That is my slightly dented rim too - so maybe it won't go back to "perfect"?
 
I've had several pairs of Bontrager wheels - alloy and carbon rim models - and they have all used a moulded rim strip to seal off the spoke hole. Those strips are great. Easy in. Easy out. Air tight. Tough. A bit heavier than tape, but so much easier. They are even tolerably priced should replacement be necessary. They do make tyre changes slightly more difficult by filling up some space in the rim cavity.
 
Velox was the rim tape of choice for tubed road tyres. There ought to be something as universally applicable and durable for tubeless as the Velox canvas rim tape.]]>Gear2025-01-15T19:35:56+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ed5659eb290bcc30987d81f53f152971-123.html#unique-entry-id-123https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ed5659eb290bcc30987d81f53f152971-123.html#unique-entry-id-123Almost every road helmet I have owned has reached an end of life point when the pads perish. Pressure between head and foam, intense salty sweating and being really thin and light mean that the seams on helmet pads typically fail for me after something like 2 years of routine use. Instead of a pad, I end up with a multi-layer mess: inner pad stuck to the helmet, mid-layer foam held loosely in place because the foam is usually semi-rigid and front face fabric flapping in the breeze. They quickly become uncomfortable and unless replaced, call for the end of a helmet.
I try to replace the pads at least once in the life of my helmets. Sometimes that is easy. I've had a couple of helmets that came with spare pads even. I'm currently trying to replace the pads in my Bontrager helmet - a discontinued helmet as it happens - and Trek keeps pushing the due date for them back in time. Maybe they won't ever come? They are also a significant portion of the price of the helmet, about 20%.
The best practice to date has been the Fox Proframe. There are 2 shell sizes and 2 pad sizes. Together they make 4 helmet sizes (S/M/L/XL). My partner's Small comes with the thick pads installed and the thin pads in the box. My XL comes with the thin pads installed and the thick pads in the box. Between us we each have a spare set of pads for the other's helmet. Then replace the helmet a couple of times and we have a good selection of spare pads. These pads are easy to remove, run through a wash cycle, and reinstall without risking damaging helmet or pad.
Another pathway to spare pads was crashing in a race in my then-new Fox Speedframe helmet. I replaced the helmet with another straight away, leaving the soft pads from helmet 1 to be spares for the helmet down the road.
Neither of these is a great option for someone who has a helmet and needs spare pads. I believe the pads need to be readily available, and for a few years after the helmet is withdrawn from the market, at 10% of the helmet price or less.
I would really like to see a helmet that lacks fabric pads. I don't know quite how it would work - the bare foam sitting directly on the forehead of the cyclist seems suboptimal. But something like this would be fantastic. Even the best pads store up salty water and drop them onto lenses or eyes at the worst possible time. No pads should see no source for big drips.]]>Riding2025-01-11T23:39:37+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/16981efa1035c95963418d8cfd48cd30-122.html#unique-entry-id-122https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/16981efa1035c95963418d8cfd48cd30-122.html#unique-entry-id-122The other day I was out at Stromlo by myself - quite literally as it was a warm day between Christmas and NY and there were about 2 cars in the parking lot and I saw zero people on the trails - having a contemplative sort of ride. I was pushing myself, but certainly not at race pace. I rode up the front side and then back down the front side - a lap I have done a thousand times. The descent turned out to be one of those times where everything just felt perfect. I knew I wasn't going to be setting any speed records but everything was simply effortless. Jumps attempted were landed well. Corners flowed, linking together nicely.
It reminded me of the flow states the main character in "Senna" (Netflix show in Brazilian with English subtitles about Ayrton Senna) described when he was driving well. Only in Ayrton's case, he was doing it at maximum possible speed.
It is days like that which make mountain biking worthwhile. All the rides and all the bad moments and bad gear and everything collectively culminate in those few good times.]]>Riding2025-01-09T21:20:16+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/33e89b819556341b0a01abe293ecd0a0-121.html#unique-entry-id-121https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/33e89b819556341b0a01abe293ecd0a0-121.html#unique-entry-id-121This season Thredbo renamed the All-mountain Trail with 3 new names so as to bring it into line with other trail naming conventions up there. The traverse across the top to the top station of Gunbarrel is now Panorama - fitting with the sweeping views for most of the way. It is also now a Black Diamond trail. After spending a day riding it repeatedly, I feel like I know why it has been uprated.
There was quite a lot of rock armour on it before. But also long bits of open dirt. Now it is rock a majority of the way. Past seasons the melting snow would make mud out of the dirt and it took sometimes well into the new year to dry out enough for good riding. But now it is almost all rock, I suspect not only can people ride it as soon as the snow melts, but the upkeep will be way lower. The rocks are boulders so chunky and rough. Every small descent ends in a boulder with no downramp. There is a bit of a drop off on each one. Either you pop off the final rock or drop off it. It could overwhelm a novice rider with so many.
The lap becomes up the main Kosciusko lift, across on Panorama to Gunbarrel lift, and then down to the bottom of Gunbarrel by one of the choices available (Dream Catcher is the new name for a lower portion of the All-mountain and is identical to past seasons). Then up the Gunbarrel and across the traverse to the Flow trail and down to the main lift again. Obviously one could take that traverse from the first time hitting top of Gunbarrel, but that doesn't do the lap justice. With 2 lift rides and lots of traversing sections it takes around an hour to do the figure 8 lap. The roughness of the rock armour will leave an impression in your shoulder muscles too.
But it is fantastic fun and if you clean the little climb on Panorama it means you were paying attention to what's ahead - it is easy to get caught in the wrong gear if you don't see the climb approaching. ]]>Gear2025-01-03T23:16:38+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1862a404127e3c13ca2f63c36c3aa4a1-120.html#unique-entry-id-120https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1862a404127e3c13ca2f63c36c3aa4a1-120.html#unique-entry-id-120Many set-up guides will assist getting the settings in the suspension fork and the shock close to correct for a rider - even if the rider doesn't know what they are doing. I keep reading that most people do not play with the suspension settings at all. That's disappointing because there is so much potential contained in turning a few knobs and adjusting air pressure.
One thing the guides seem to deal with less often is the concept of fore-aft balance. Set the two ends of the bike up in isolation and go ride. If they are quite far from each other in behaviour, the end result is going to be an ill-handling bike. Most suspension runs an o-ring on the inner suspension piece to visually reveal how much travel was used. Probably not on any single run, but certainly through a couple of hours of riding, the front and rear should exploit a very similar proportion of travel - and that proportion should be near full travel.
You don't have to bottom it out every time out. And if you have an Enduro bike, as the best example, riding it on lower speed trails will not push the suspension through its travel if it is set up to deal with higher speed impacts. But if you never bottom out the suspension, then something is not set correctly.
 
Take my recent ride at Thredbo. Even a low-speed day at a ski hill is a high-speed day compared to almost anywhere else. The runs are long, tend to be steep, and give plenty of opportunity to let the bike run wide open. I was running about 1/3 sag in the shock on my DH bike prior to the day. I put a little air in, dropping sag to 30%. I didn't touch the fork. By the end of the day, I had used 95% travel up front and only 80% travel out back. It felt off all day and I think it was the rear not working in harmony with the front (the test will be next time with the rear restored to 33% sag).
If the rear is too high in the travel, it steepens the head angle and pushes weight forward.
Meanwhile my partner's bike used about 98% travel at both ends. Perfect. Those last few percent of travel require hitting something HARD because there is a bottom out bumper inside that has to be squashed out of the way.
 
I suggest you tinker. Change one thing at a time. Keep notes. Try the extremes to see what they do - rebound and compression can cover a small or wide range of actions depending on the brand and model of suspension. I like to bracket - 0 clicks is not enough. All the clicks (just for this example, let's say that is 10 clicks) is too many. Five clicks is close but too little. Eight clicks is close but too many. Six clicks seems good. Seven clicks seems good too. When in doubt, I would default towards less damping. In the example, that would be 6 clicks and not 7. Having decided on 6 clicks, it is time to try something else - if that was rebound now try compression. These things interact. With X pressure and Y clicks of compression, there will be an optimal rebound setting. But change air pressure and/or compression settings and the optimal rebound is likely to be different. Experiment.
 
While I prefer "set and forget" I acknowledge that sometimes the optimal is a few clicks different at different trail locations (different altitude, different dirt, different slopes). And if you sometimes carry a few kg of stuff on your back, where other times you do not, that can alter best suspension settings too.]]>Gear2024-12-08T18:14:39+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/13fe030541375f1551b471f0c4c55180-119.html#unique-entry-id-119https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/13fe030541375f1551b471f0c4c55180-119.html#unique-entry-id-119I neglected to paste this in the previous article (ie, the one below):

Put your helmet on as normal. Grab the rear of the foam and try to roll the helmet forwards off your head. If the straps are adjusted properly and it fits well then it will not roll off the head. If it does roll off, you need to address your helmet's fit - maybe the wrong helmet or the straps are too loose.]]>Gear2024-12-04T23:26:58+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6a9b21a9722772377006e9d0d957eaf2-118.html#unique-entry-id-118https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6a9b21a9722772377006e9d0d957eaf2-118.html#unique-entry-id-118I have seen so many cyclists with ill-fitted helmets lately I am proposing you go test your helmet fit to ensure it is OK. A poorly fitted helmet can do more damage than it prevents - depending on the accident. According to published literature, a loose helmet roughly doubles your risk of head injury and one that can come off during the accident (because it is too big, not strapped on) triples the risk. The stats suggest that a poor fitting helmet is perhaps slightly safer than not wearing a helmet at all - I assume sometimes people fall on the helmet the "right" way despite the poor fit (and are saved) but for me if my choices were a poor fitting helmet or no helmet, I'd go no helmet. A poor fitting helmet can also fall over the eyes without notice, causing an accident.
 
What does properly fitted look like?
The helmet, unstrapped, fits snugly (but not tightly) on the head with little to no gap anywhere between the skull and the foam. When strapped on, the straps are tight enough that only 2 fingers easily slide between the strap and the skin of the wearer. The splitter device where the 2 straps come together should be immediately below the ear - both forward and aft straps equally snug.
Wearing it jauntily tilted back so the entire forehead is visible is inviting brain damage in a crash and makes the helmet easier to roll off your head (in the test or in real life).]]>Gear2024-11-30T22:18:13+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ecae283deb5f86e449736e8c0e07ad51-117.html#unique-entry-id-117https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ecae283deb5f86e449736e8c0e07ad51-117.html#unique-entry-id-117We've come a looooong way from the first two forays into electronic shifting: Mavic Zap and Mektronic systems - they seemed to not work more often than they worked. I'm over a year into riding Red AXS on a daily basis and a Flight Attendant equipped MTB with AXS gearing regularly, and they are essentially faultless.
 
Shimano has their Di2 option (now with fewer wires - I love the description I saw online of wiredless) and Campagnolo the Super Record EPS wireless for the non-SRAM consumer. These are fundamentally the same. An electronic switch tells the computer to shift the gears for you. A servo-motor moves the derailleur. The chain shifts.
 
They aren't faster than cable activated. But they are digital where cables are analogue - my XO1 Eagle equipped bike I ride most weekends also shifts almost perfectly, but it is up to my thumb just how perfectly. Push a little too far and get a 2-gear downshift instead of the desired single gear (upshifts are a single shift per push so you can only have one at a time), or a 3-gear downshift instead of the desired two. The digital shift button is pushed or not pushed. The derailleur then shifts.
 
I've seen women with small hands who struggle with the mechanical front derailleur shift to the big ring because the lever needs to be moved a certain distance to effect a shift and small hands can fail to move it quite far enough. The same hands get a perfect shift with a digital button - every time. Even the rear derailleur shift governed by the thumb (on a MTB) can be a struggle for a small thumb. One tiny tap on the digital button effects a perfect shift. For my large (size 12) hands, I can shift on the road bike with a knuckle. Just tap the button with my index finger knuckle and knock off perfect shifts.
 
Both Shimano and SRAM (have never played with EPS so I can't comment) permit a sequential shifting mode as well. Instead of governing the front and rear derailleurs separately, the up and down shifts are requested from the lever and the computer decides if a front derailleur shift is required. This is great for an inexperienced cyclist who might not know when is the best time to shift the front derailleur. It is also great for people who have a shift-inhibiting issue with one hand as all shifting can be accomplished from one lever with Di2 though AXS requires right and left button presses to achieve up and down shifts (the default is both buttons for a front derailleur change, in sequential mode the both-sides push can be ignored or used to control a Reverb AXS post - or with new E1 Red there are auxiliary buttons on the lever that I believe can put all the shifting on one lever for the first time in SRAM gear).
 
I use what they call compensating mode. Every front derailleur shift is accompanied by an automatic shift the other way at the rear derailleur, if possible. When I go from small to big ring, it shifts into one lower sprocket at the same time, and vice versa. It can't if I am already in the largest (or smallest) sprocket. And AXS won't permit the small to small selection in any circumstance. I wouldn't use compensating mode in a race, but it is handy during commuting.
 
Bowden cable activated shifting can leave you stuck in high gear when the rear derailleur cable or any of its supporting hardware breaks - I've had this happen when the cable housing stop on the frame broke off in a race. Break the front derailleur cable and most front derailleurs will leave you in the small ring. When the shift cable breaks off inside the shift lever, it can be incredibly difficult to extract the stub end left behind with frayed cable ends poking everywhere. Housings wear out with routine use. Ratchet mechanisms that do the shifting wear, get dirty, can jam, can break.
While I am sure digital derailleurs have a lifespan, the main issue is forgetting to charge your battery and being left stuck in a gear (not high or low gear like a broken cable, but whatever gear you were in at the time). (The Shimano batteries are large and last months between charges so unlikely to fail mid-ride if you pay attention to the charged state of the battery at all regularly, and SRAM/Campag batteries are small so a spare one can be purchased and carried around for emergencies).
 
Installation is also super easy as there are no cables to run anywhere unless you chose Di2, in which case there are thin wires to run from the main battery to each derailleur. In an aero bike like my Madone, running the cables was a several hours long job that could (and should) be avoided by using wireless.
 
So who is electronic shifting for? Small hands, big hands, lazy mechanics, aero bikes, bikes without capability to run cables, small thumbs, weak thumbs, hand strength or coordination issues, those seeking perfection in shifting, novices, people not afraid of spending money and people who desire perfect shifting behaviour. I think that covers almost everyone. (which is why there are numerous frames without capacity to take cables...)]]>Gear2024-11-22T19:22:13+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/120fc8566032c07d0228e4e0cd7cc23f-116.html#unique-entry-id-116https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/120fc8566032c07d0228e4e0cd7cc23f-116.html#unique-entry-id-116I recently retired a pair of shoes. This took my newest shoes out of the "pain cave" and onto the road. I had ridden them several times on the trainer and found them to be fine. But as soon as I got them outside, they felt weird.
I double checked the cleat position against all the old shoes I've got with cleats still mounted - and they looked identical. But it felt unstable out of the saddle.
I took the time to slide the cleat approximately 1 mm further rearward on the shoe, and the difference was remarkable. There is no discernible difference when seated, but standing feels correct again.
 
One test I try when I put new shoes into action is to ride one new shoe with one old shoe (both combos) on the trainer against a load to ensure they're correct. And these shoes passed that. I'll have to throw in a standing sprint effort for future checking.
 
The bottom line is that differences between shoes means that even perfect replication of position doesn't mean that the position is perfect! To be perfect requires a bit of testing. ]]>Gear2024-10-27T15:09:20+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/27501a5a925112db682429133f801661-115.html#unique-entry-id-115https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/27501a5a925112db682429133f801661-115.html#unique-entry-id-115My first issue with flat mount brakes was why did we require another standard?
When disc brakes came out they were mostly IS - International Standard (some back then were proprietary and meant you were stuck with whatever brake you were supplied with). IS were bad - left/right movement of the caliper required shims or filing material off - and the brakes didn't actually mount on there, rather the appropriate adaptor did, and then the caliper mounted on that adapter. Back in the IS days, I purchased a brake mount machining kit because it was essential on almost every bike's swingarm I ever worked with (forks were cast and so better - but not perfect). I've updated the kit to work with PM and flat mount brakes (thanks Park for offering the update kit) but haven't had to use it. The range of adjustments and the quality of alignment on carbon frames means using one is extremely rare. I've also machined off part of the adaptor using the tool when the frame alignment was off but there didn't appear to be much of the tab to remove to get where I needed.
 
Next up came PM - post mount. And PM is still how it's done on the mountain bike. PM uses a bolt on the axis of the rotor (IS was perpendicular to this axis) and oval holes in the caliper to permit some side-to-side movement in the caliper body. To move to a larger rotor is easy with an adaptor that spaces the caliper further from the axle and some longer bolts (some adaptors use 4 bolts and move the caliper backwards as well as upwards to be more compact). I like PM. Early disc road bikes were PM because flat mount hadn't come along yet.
 
And then flat mount came for road bikes. For the front brake using flat mount, a literally flat adaptor bolts to the threaded holes on the caliper which in turns bolts to the fork via blind threaded holes - very similar to PM, but different in that it sits right on the fork (also worth noting that flat mount works with 140 or 160 mm rotors only - PM works with 140, 160, 180, 200 and 200 and some variations like Shimano's 203 mm rotors). At the rear, however, the mounting bolts pass up through the chainstay and into the caliper. The bolts have to move with the caliper and so tiny adjustments become markedly harder than for PM adjustments. If the bolt head at all sticks to the chainstay because of paint, dirt, a non-flat surface or any reason then the caliper can be pulled into a slight angle that will cause brake rub. Even with everything set well it is easy to get a little brake rub on a flat mount system but easy to avoid this with a PM system.
 
One tiny issue is that the chainstays of the frame can be thin or thick. The bolts have a short threaded section, so they need to be sized to work with the frame. When I purchased my Campagnolo gruppos, I had to figure out what length bolts to order. I also ordered 2 of each thinking they were sold individually, but I got 4 of each as they are sold in pairs. Campagnolo lists sizes in 5 mm increments and one of the bikes required 49.5 mm bolts according to the brand guidance, which is 0.5 mm from the limits of the 45-50 mm bolts. I ordered them, they worked. I was slightly worried. At only a couple of Euro per bolt, it wouldn't have been the end of the world.
 
Now some stylish, high-end and race-oriented mountain bikes are using flat mount disc brakes. Great if you don't actually like stopping. I say that because my hardtail now has 180 mm rotors on it, my trail bike 200 mm rotors and my DH bike has 220 mm rotors. Bigger rotors are much better for heat management. Lots of hardtails had 140 mm rotors on them but I'm with Enduro magazine in thinking that the big rotor goes on the back wheel so you can speed control on steep slopes safely.]]>Riding2024-10-18T22:58:26+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/573dbefd634560747ecdd4a923a38b47-114.html#unique-entry-id-114https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/573dbefd634560747ecdd4a923a38b47-114.html#unique-entry-id-114You should be doing more zone 1 training. If you take a graph of lactate levels against heart rate, there is a gentle increase at first which moves (sometimes with a sharp inflection point, more often without) to a steeper increase. To generate one of these curves for a rider involves a progressive test that begins easily and progresses in steady steps to failure. Lactate levels should be checked at the end of each step. Different coaching methods use different numbers of zones, but all generally recognise the area before the actual or implied inflection point as zone 1. This is where around 90% of your time on the bike should be spent.
Zone 1 time promotes efficiency at a cellular level. Zone 1 can be completely fat-fuelled. Higher zones cannot. The more time you spend where fat is the primary source of energy, the better your body gets at using fat. The more time you spend in zone 1, the more your body is encouraged to produce mitochondria. As the energy source for the cell, more is better.
Zone 1 is the only training zone that impacts all training zones. You can spend lots of time in higher zones, getting really tired and heading towards overtraining. But that training time only really impacts the region it is "in". If you train a lot at 90% (or 75% - or any above 60% which is approximately where the top of zone 1 sits) then you can improve your response at 90% with no impact anywhere else. However, training in zone 1 moves the entire curve to the right. The inflection point goes up to a higher heart rate. Everything improves by shifting to the right.
 
The classic error in training is to approach the easy days too hard and the hard days too easy. Mostly it produces fatigue. Progress can happen for a while, but a plateau that you can't get off will be reached. Ease up on the easy. Attack the hard.
 
When you are reflecting on whether your training goal of 90+% at zone 1, you need to include all your time on the bike. So, racing too. Which is difficult or impossible if you race often (and aren't a pro who spends hours in between races in zone 1).
 
Since I have started making almost all my commutes in zone 1, I have taken around 10% off my commute time at the same, or perhaps even lower, heart rate. Efficiency gains!]]>Riding2024-10-09T21:28:08+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e1c576efe560a9bf9219077ec24807b6-113.html#unique-entry-id-113https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e1c576efe560a9bf9219077ec24807b6-113.html#unique-entry-id-113If you want the TL:DR right now, it is that 1 mm too high can be terrible, but 1 mm too low is seldom even noticeable.
 
The details...
Sometimes I swear that YouTube and Facebook can hear me think. I've been having some seat-comfort issues with my Checkpoint commuting bike since I got the new frame - more than 12 months ago. It has never been quite right in that period. Meanwhile I changed the crank length on my Madone road bike necessitating a change in seat height. I hadn't changed the seat height since I assembled that bike several years ago, so I wasn't sure how to do it or exactly how much to change it by. This is perhaps where the default feed results came from?
After riding my Madone on Sunday with the saddle at very much as much the same height as the Checkpoint as I could muster, and deciding it felt a very tiny amount too high I got to thinking if that was the source of discomfort on the Checkpoint. And into my YouTube feed came a bike fitters video about how saddle height impacts on saddle comfort. Now I didn't have the symptoms of a too-high saddle he spoke of, but I still wanted to try lowering it to see if that helped things.
I had to do a few minor things to the Checkpoint and included lowering the seat in that list. I think I went down around 4 mm. I have a red mark on the post to indicate if the post was slipping (it did slip twice when new - solved with carbon grip paste and slightly more torque on the pinch bolt). I hid the red mark. So now I can't tell if I slide down, but that is about 4mm change.
On that basis of one ride to work the next morning, I think it did help. I'm still not convinced that the saddle on there is a perfect match for me, but it definitely is not a bad one.
Next thing I have to do is revisit the Madone and drop that saddle by the same amount (and also get out some car wax to shine up the portion of the post that has been hidden inside the frame for several years but is now showing).
 
And then ride. Ride a bunch to see if the problem has been solved.
Typically I suggest someone try a saddle for 20 hours before deciding if they like it or not. Unfortunately, I seem to need longer. Many saddles have been close. Few have been good.
Thus I expect it will take 10 or more hours to evaluate the small drop in seat height as 1-not necessary, 2-just right, 3-too much or 4-not enough.
 
When the saddle goes too high, the hips cannot sit squarely on the top of the saddle and reach down to both pedals through a full revolution of the cranks. Everyone favours one side, so the non-favoured side should be reaching too far and rocking a bit on the seat resulting in pain (and possibly saddle sores) on that side. This YouTube video fitter has a saddle pressure mapping device for clients and can see if a rider is evenly sat upon the saddle. He displayed a before and after map for one client where they were heavily right-favoured before and very even after. In this case not from just dropping the saddle a bit, but a whole suite of changes including the lower seat.
 
If you find yourself always getting sores on one side, or your hips are rocking slightly, or you are always trying to ride on the saddle nose - these are all signs of a too-high seat.
 
Conversely, there are no signs of a too-low seat unless you look at near-maximal power outputs where the lack of full leg extension will cost a few Watts.
 
So err on the side of slightly too low.]]>Gear2024-10-06T16:06:14+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/713bf5f1c2a19154f6072bf7a240255e-112.html#unique-entry-id-112https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/713bf5f1c2a19154f6072bf7a240255e-112.html#unique-entry-id-112It seemed (when I worked in a shop) that the average bike shop customer rode their bike until the shifting was problematic, and then took it to their bike shop for adjustment. Often that adjustment involved a new chain and cassette (sometimes chainrings too). Which is expensive.
On the flip side are the multi-chain users. These people seem to run 3 chains at a time, swapping the one on the bike frequently with one of the other two. This way one can be on the bike, one ready to go and one getting ready to go at all time.
My own approach is closer to the first than the second. I've never had great luck with multiple chains over a single cassette. As the cassette's edges wear, even if the chain-pitch isn't wearing, performance degrades. Sloppier, slower shifts. Noisy driveline.
53/16 is a favourite gear for racing. On the race bike I spend a ton of time in the 16T sprocket. So much so that it might take 40-50% of the use. Even if it doesn't end up too worn to mesh with a brand new chain, the shifting "ports" end up worn enough that shifting suffers and it gets noisy. I had one cassette that after 28000 km, it would still take a fresh chain for pitch, but it refused to actually shift it well (sometimes at all).
 
Thus, my approach is to use one and only one chain, but replace it before wear gets carried away and ruins the chainrings too. And then replace the cassette at the same time. I try to take care of the whole drivetrain at the maintenance/lubrication stage rather than through the rotation of chains. Ultimately it might be a bit more expensive, but everything works as expected through its life. Taken care of they last thousands of kilometres and I don't see the point in putting up with one noisy gear, one gear that doesn't quite work right or the issues of a partially worn cassette when I can have close to perfection all the time.

And in this era of excellent lubricants that double (or quadruple) chain life, the chances of wearing out the shifting ramps on the cassette before the pitch goes "bad" seems that much higher than in the past. On my commuter bike with Record I was over 12000 km with everything still shifting nicely when I sold the Record gear. That seems just fine with me.]]>Gear2024-09-26T22:42:10+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/27c71211c0481a17cf7f8efa8ec03afb-111.html#unique-entry-id-111https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/27c71211c0481a17cf7f8efa8ec03afb-111.html#unique-entry-id-111I recently put up a story about chain lubricating that was inspired by a disagreement in a Facebook cycling group about best approach to chain lubrication.
Well it happened again, this time about bike size.
The Gen 2 Trek Checkpoint was (as it has been superseded now by the gen 3) a very long bike. This length prompted many to choose a size down. A question came up from a Checkpoint shopper asking for advice about sizing. Someone replied that all else being equal, you should choose the smallest frame you can fit on.
I've heard that advice so many times; lighter frame, stiffer frame, more aero... the benefits list is long.
And I completely disagree with it. I suggested that as a fitter of 20+ years experience, when in doubt, size up. Choose the largest frame you can fit on for the most comfortable experience.
Small is OK for some professional riders. They are all young, fit and have access to a support team that can assist if the small frame leads to discomfort. I suggest for anyone with typical Western lived experience, small is not going to be your best friend. It requires a certain level of flexibility, core strength, mobility and balance to achieve a happy location on a small bike. As part of my bike fitting, I've tested a lot of cyclists for flexibility and core strength. It would be fair to say that most do not present with high flexibility and high strength.
Regardless of these, for older cyclists larger is going to help out with achieving comfort. Few at 40 still retain the flexibility and strength they had at 20.
 
The TL:DR summary is: there's a pretty good reason that there is a "usual" size for a bike based on a person's leg measurement. Have a good reason if you want to stray from that.]]>Gear2024-09-20T22:53:47+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2c9b6a7cbd5eb01609c5de03b836e9aa-110.html#unique-entry-id-110https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2c9b6a7cbd5eb01609c5de03b836e9aa-110.html#unique-entry-id-110I never really liked Pirelli automotive tyres when I worked in the tyre business (years ago). They usually took a lot of weight to balance out and they didn't look well finished on the inside. Contrast with Michelin tyres, they looked as good on the inside as the outside and they hardly required any balancing weights at all. Regardless of how good the rubber might have been, from a tyre installer's POV, the Pirelli tyres weren't as good as some competitors.
Enter Pirelli bicycle tyres. Early on, none of them were even made by Pirelli. Road tyres by Hutchinson in France. MTB tyres by Vittoria in Thailand. But both those companies make good tyres. So, Pirelli rubber (arguably as good as it gets from F1, WRC, MotoGP and more experience) is likely to be great.
I've written about them before on these pages. The topic of today's writing is the new(ish) Scorpion Enduro Race M. I have one on each end of my Slash. Prior to that I had the Scorpion Enduro M/R pair (not Race).
There is NO comparison between the Race and non-race versions of the Enduro tyres. None. The Enduro Race has massive blocks for traction, made of soft rubber. I was really happy with the traction offered by the first version - they gripped well in the wet with their rubber compound clinging well, and in the dry. I have only a couple of rides on the Enduro Race so far, but they are so amazingly grippy and stuck to the ground that I bought a pair of Scorpion DH Race Ms for the Sender.
They're a bit like magic. I can't do much to make them slide. They simply grip. Yes they are a little draggy on the climbs, but they are also good in techy climbs where traction is important. On the way down I don't feel like my progress is impeded by the high rolling resistance of them - rather I can stay off the brakes more and carry better speed in places.
If their durability is OK (they're softer so I expect them to wear faster) then I've got a new tyre to use going ahead.
 
I'll also need to report back on the DH version - once Thredbo opens for the season and I get a few runs on them.]]>Gear2024-09-08T18:21:21+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8c6f8e9ca76e5993c29412a326031ee6-109.html#unique-entry-id-109https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8c6f8e9ca76e5993c29412a326031ee6-109.html#unique-entry-id-109In a Facebook group on cycling, I recently got into an argument about the best way to lubricate a chain.
 
I stated a simple enough message. That frequent lubrication is the pathway to a quickly worn-out chain; probably faster than any other option. I've seen it first hand and I can support it with a mechanism. When I worked in a bike shop we had numerous customers who only took away the message that they needed to lubricate their chain. So they did. Some after every ride.
Particularly back when I worked in a bike shop, there were more bad options than good ones for lubricant. Any "oil" is a prime candidate for rapid wear. The problem isn't the lubricating properties of the oil itself. After all, motor oil keeps a very complicated internal combustion engine running for hundreds of thousands of kilometres. The problem is that it is sticky; a characteristic that helps it do its job inside the confines of an engine. But one that confounds its role on a bike chain. We ride around in the outdoors where there is all manner of fine dust and grit that sticks to the sticky oil. Look at just about any bike chain that has some use, it has some dirt stuck to the outside.
The problem arises when more oil is applied. It washes that dirt from the outside (where it does no harm) to the inside - the moving surfaces of the chain (where it can do a great deal of harm).
Grinding paste (such as for making a glass lens, or polishing a nice stone, or a concrete floor) is essentially some fluid (like the oil) and some grit (like that stuff stuck to a chain).
Once inside the chain, every time the chain bends around a chainring or cassette, it is being abraded by the paste.
I've seen a chain go from new to beyond worn in as little as 600 km due to frequent lubrication.
You'd get markedly better life just from a good wipe of that dirt prior to re-lubing.
This is where the bike industry tried to outsmart the dirt (not that the dirt is actually smart - just ubiquitous) with self cleaning lubricants. Early ones didn't work so well. The cleaning part of the mix attacked the lubricating part so it required frequent reapplication, sometimes in the middle of a ride. Eventually the chemists came up with some formulae that worked. I used Rock N Roll Gold for at least a decade with great results. Good lifespan for the drivetrain, low effort on my part, good shifting and didn't run out in the middle of a ride. It wasn't so much self cleaning as easy cleaning.
When I was a kid there were some cyclists I knew who dipped their chain in melted paraffin wax. Because the wax dried hard, and it was waxy, nothing stuck to the chain. And it didn't run or splatter in use. Unfortunately, it wasn't a great lubricant and it couldn't mobilise inside the chain. Once the wax on the articulating surfaces inside the chain was worn away, it was time to redip the chain. Most lubricants are runny enough to continually replenish the moving surfaces with fresh stuff in use. [Interesting little aside here, if you take a chain link and place it on top of a drop of liquid and bend the chain side to side, the motions of the pieces will suck up the liquid and push it out the top - chains in use do this all the time.]
Waxing is back. But now it is not simply paraffin wax, but some clever chemists have added numerous extra goodies to the waxy stuff so that it provides good lubrication for your chain. Silca even makes a specific bike chain station with hanging arm so you can simply immersion-wax a chain.
While chemists were playing with waxes, several came up with an emulsified option (if you've ever used oil & vinegar dressing you'll have noticed that oil and water don't mix - the best science can offer us is a liquid where the oil is held in the water in extremely tiny droplets: an emulsion). These emulsified waxes can be dripped onto the chain, the water penetrates (some more than others - more on that in a minute), delivering the waxy lubricant inside the chain where it can do some good. Eventually the water evaporates and the only thing left behind is the desired wax.
As I wrote above, I used Rock N Roll for about a decade. I got a sample bottle of Squirt at a bike race in my goody bag. I tried it on a few MTB rides and found it was good. I went through a couple of bottles of Squirt before I learned that Smoove was similar, but better. They provide good shifting and easy application along with low dirt. But not the best lifespan for chains because whatever solvent they use to get the wax into suspension isn't drawn into the chain as easily as one might like.
Zero Friction Cycling tests chains to destruction. They have established a protocol of clean then dirty use that tests either chains or lubricants for effectiveness. Both Squirt and Smoove do better in the testing after a period - where the lubricant finally makes its way inside. I'm not sure how much it helped, but whenever I applied one after learning about this, I used a heat gun to warm up the chain and help mobilise the lube inside.
Two lubricants that perform better than the Squirt/Smoove twins are also a bit of twinsies themselves: Silca Super Secret drip wax and Effetto Mariposa flowerpower drip wax. Both test well at Zero Friction and behave similarly in my garage testing. Because the solvent is water for both of them, it runs into the chain "just like water".
I had the pleasure of talking to Josh Poertner from Silca for about an hour online when I was reviewing some Silca products. Josh puts out loads of YouTube videos about Silca products and about best practices he and his team have found. Josh tells me that SSS wax is about 70% wax and 30% water. Thus, on one application, I add a drop of SSS to each roller on the chain and pedal backwards a little to draw the suspension inside the chain. Then I leave it for a day. The water evaporates leaving behind 70% wax fill and 30% voids. A second application will fill those voids with emulsion and evaporate once again. Only this time the chain is 91% full of wax. A third application (a bit of overkill without a  lot of pay-off in my testing) leaves the chain about 98% full of wax. Which is about the same as immersion waxing with the Silca hot wax which is the same formula as the drop wax in a different format.
 
The wax in these four lubricants is not sticky. It doesn't promote grit sticking to the chain. But some sticks anyway.
I can't be bothered doing a full re-wax every time the chain requires a top-up. Instead I wipe the chain as much as I can such that it appears clean (I know some grit is lurking in places I can't wipe) and then drip on some more wax. A single top-up will almost double the interval between cleanings. I know it is speeding up the wear rate on my chain slightly, but in a return on investment (of time or money) I think it's OK.
The beauty of the waxy chain is that it can be completely removed with some boiling water. This was Josh's idea and it is brilliantly simple. Chain on big ring. Bike in work stand. Full kettle of boiling water. Move chain backwards, pour hot water on chainring. Two minutes later you have an incredibly clean chain with some water in it. I suspect drying it out first would fully load the chain with the 70% wax load, whereas dripping water onto an already wet chain won't displace all the water with waxy water [editorial note - I noticed Zero Friction Cycling expressly demands drying out the chain after the cleaning step, so I will have to revise my approach in future]. But it is much easier that way and I don't have so many days to relubricate a bike I use every day to ride to work.
If I do the boiling water thing on Saturday morning, the second lubrication on Sunday morning, I can ride a silent bike to work on Monday morning.
It is even simpler with any other bike in the quiver - they don't get ridden so often so the cleaning and lubricating can take place over a week or more.
 
The proof, they say, is in the pudding. My Campagnolo 12-spd chain that never got lubricated when dirty according to the above (but not the boiling water clean as I didn't know about that then) had 13000 km on it when I retired it. I wouldn't have done so were I not replacing the frame. It wasn't worn out yet, just very worn. The Campag 12-spd chain on my race bike only has 3500 km on it to date, but it measures "new" because it rarely gets ridden in wet conditions and that's when a lot of wear occurs. Now that I have Red 12-spd on my commuter, I'm at 6000 km and can't accurately measure any wear on the chain (it might be half the thickness of the scribe marks on my metal 12" ruler). I have heard of Red chains worn out in 4000-5000 km. At this rate I should get at least 12000. Wear is not linear in chains, once you go through the surface hardening it speeds up quickly.
On my various mountain bikes, the chains (all SRAM, mostly 12-spd - the DH bike is 7-spd but that is actually an 11-spd chain) last crazy amounts of time. And if we look at Zero Friction chain wear statistics, the Eagle chain is about the longest lasting chain ever tested. Couple a long-lasting chain with careful lubrication and they last almost forever.
Which brings me back to where I started. Some guy got angry with me for suggesting that frequent lubrication leads to premature wear. It doesn't have to. But it routinely does.
My old boss at the bike shop used to counsel lazy customers to not lube their chain at all. Better dry than worn out he used to offer. He had a deal with one customer who rode the most of anyone we knew - 600-1000 km per week most weeks. That's pro sorts of distances. He offered her free service for the life of her bike if she promised to never do anything to her bike. And after that deal was accepted, she went from a chain per week to a few per year.
Thus I stand by my statement. Lubricate a dirty chain at the peril of your pocketbook.]]>Gear2024-08-24T00:31:05+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/3f45e6dd772580beaff0132b27d4dcf1-108.html#unique-entry-id-108https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/3f45e6dd772580beaff0132b27d4dcf1-108.html#unique-entry-id-108How long does a cycling shoe last? Obviously the answer is "it depends". But what does it depend on?
 
For road shoes it's subtle. With plastic soles, the sole declines in stiffness with use and age. This is demonstrable by comparing a brand-new pair with a well-used pair. Carbon soles will not do this - they should be as stiff at ride 1000 as at ride 1. If you walk in them much, however, they can get very scratched up. Most new carbon soles are incredibly shiny and well finished. That doesn't impact actual riding, however.
On my moderately wide feet, I tend to stretch out the (usually narrow) front part of the shoe with use to the point they feel loose. I try to have a new pair on hand at all times - just in case - and when I can discern a difference between the in-use pair and the new pair, it is time to retire the older shoes.
On more traditional shoes with velcro straps, the cling of the velcro was usually gone before the shoe was. With buckles and now dials, that doesn't apply.
I recently got 2 years out of a mid-range Northwave shoe that I never really liked that much before I called it a day and demoted my race shoes to commuting duty and promoted my in-the-box shoes to race duty. And yes that means I have no back-up shoes at the moment. Northwave has radically changed their shoes and the supply of new-old-stock obsolete models has dried up. I might have to try the new model or swap brands... Back to the retired shoes - that was 2 years of 30 km per day commuting duty, rain or shine, until I could really tell that the well loved shoes I had for racing were much more comfortable than the 2 year old ones with the faux carbon sole - the only carbon in it is the small circle where the cleat attaches that appears to be glued into a cavity in the plastic sole. That was a much shorter run than the full carbon soled shoes seem to last - almost everything was better about the high-end shoe compared to the mid-range shoe. They both had 2 dials to adjust the fit - these dials are identical on any Northwave that uses a dial. But the plastic sole, the fabric upper - even the reflective materials used (are shinier on the high end shoes than on these ones I recently retired).
 
For cleated MTB shoes, the end for me is usually when the tread is gone. Manufacturers tend to put so little rubber on the sole that what is there takes a high load and a beating every time you put them on. I've also seen a fair few pull the cleat out of the sole - that's a definitive end of lifespan issue. Like road shoes, it can be the shoe stretching too much, or the velcro losing its grip - but usually the shoe dies prior to anything like wearing out. MTB is hard on shoes!
 
For flat pedal shoes the end is usually, but not always, when the sole is so torn up by the pedal spikes that the insole is visible. These are generally lace-up shoes and new laces are easy. The shoe itself is usually the toughest of all cycling shoes too. Those grippy rubber soles erode on the pedal pins rather quickly. And that depends a bit on how rough the ride is - riding smooth singletrack doesn't push feet around on the pins like storming down rugged trails in a bike park off the chairlift does!
 
I guess the bottom line in shoe life is that changes are subtle and slow. Without the references to wear (poor fit, being able to see through the bottom of the shoe, etc) it would be easy to drag use out. Many riders do run their shoes longer than their feet might like.]]>Riding2024-08-16T20:19:00+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5ec05adcb9e4fd60e939d58166e37538-107.html#unique-entry-id-107https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5ec05adcb9e4fd60e939d58166e37538-107.html#unique-entry-id-107Lots of animals freeze when exposed to a headlight. I've had close encounters with deer and other large mammals on the road when my car headlights scared them into not moving.
But the Canberra rabbits are totally unpredictable. They might freeze. They might bolt. And if they run, it might be away from you or perhaps towards you. The other night on the bike path along the river I was riding along in the dark. Two rabbits ran straight at me and turned as I met them so as to hit my front wheel.
Bunny number one bounced off the spokes and kept running. I assume he is OK (I say he because these were both big rabbits - but maybe not?). My front wheel is a Campagnolo wheel with G3 spoke pattern. That means that the spokes run in parallel triplets from hub to rim with large gaps between the 3. The second rabbit followed the first but didn't bounce off of spokes. Instead the mudguard was pushed into the tyre and it crumpled up against the fork crown. And I ended up with rabbit fur everywhere on the bike. But zero blood. So the spokes didn't cut into the poor creature; merely abraded off clumps of fur which ended up stuck to my wheel, my fork, my downtube, my seat tube, my bottle cage, my shoes, my pannier and rack and even my rear mudguard. Like everywhere!
 
I had to stop. The front tyre didn't roll very well in this state. I was able to stretch the guard back out and while it was quite twisted, the wheel was free to spin. So I rode home. I removed the mudguard and using a pair of spanners, bent the metal pieces back into shape so that reinstalling the guard found it sitting almost in the correct location again. Yes it had a twist in it, and marks from where it acutely folded. Also, the tip that protrudes from the fork had a burn mark on it from the top touching the moving tyre tread under it - I don't know how that occurred.
 
I fear the second bunny ran off into the brush and died. Rabbits are quite fragile. This one had a heck of a fright. Someone I know with a pet rabbit lost the lovely bunny when a dog barked at it too aggressively, it died of fright. Maybe the river rabbits are made of sterner stuff than this pampered pet, but I haven't seen any bunnies with a big bald patch running around on the path in the ensuing days.
 
I will replace the mudguards with new ones now. The rear already had a lot of marks on it from mounting it quite differently on the first Checkpoint. And now that the front is disfigured, it is time for a fresh pair. These Bontrager mudguards have been the best ones I've ever had for durability. On my Cannondale I used to lose pieces of the mudguard regularly. The first to go was the small piece that sticks forwards of the fork crown. It would vibrate so badly that it shook itself free in about 6 months. I had numerous warranty replacements and eventually gave up. Sometimes the rear would also split in two where the brake bridge support piece hangs it up - I think that is a position that usually alters the arc of the unit (the slotted hole that connects it to the brake bridge is never long enough to get it where it needs to be). No issues with the Bonty mudguards after 4+ years of use. I even had some Esge fenders that rolled up around the bottom stay attachment point when a stick ran up the back of the front tyre and pulled the guard into the tyre.
 
I don't like the aesthetics of the "no cut stays" because there are 2 plastic blocks on each fender stay. They look awkward and unaero. But they sure are easy to adjust and like the name, you don't have to cut anything to make them fit.]]>Gear2024-07-19T22:33:19+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/26769cb9f2a02c33eef6b21fb6b7105a-106.html#unique-entry-id-106https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/26769cb9f2a02c33eef6b21fb6b7105a-106.html#unique-entry-id-106I am often asked how one finds the best saddle to put on a bike. I wish there was an easy answer. Many brands offer a variant on the "ass-ometer" that measures the distance between the sit bones in order to select the appropriate width amongst a single saddle available in multiple widths. But that still doesn't tell you which model to pick in the first place. Both Specialized and Trek offer a few saddles to pick from, in various quality levels and in multiple widths. The sitting gauge will tell you which width, but not if the saddle itself is suited. There is often little guidance about how the different levels might affect comfort either. The carbon rails are MUCH stiffer than the titanium rails, with the steel rails in the middle. Carbon shells are very tunable, so not necessarily stiffer than a nylon shell - but different shell materials in the same model of saddle definitely impact comfort. And softer is not better for everyone.
There is one rule that has enough research behind it to use as an actual rule: saddle flatness is related to rider flexibility. A flexible rider is capable of moving around on the bike and therefore requires a flat saddle to move on. An inflexible rider benefits from being locked in place. A saddle-shaped saddle helps keep the pelvis at the bottom of the "bowl" and works best with an inflexible rider.
How flexible? For Fizik it is a very low bar. If you can't reach much past your knees, you are a Bull - an inflexible creature - and you should have the saddle-shaped option. If you can reach past your ankles, then you are a Snake - a flexible creature - and you should have the flat-topped option. In between you are semi-flexible and should have a slightly curved saddle - the Chameleon option. For a while they even produced three seats called Bull, Chameleon and Snake. These were variations on the three saddles they've had for 20+ years: Aliante for Bulls, Antares for Chameleons and Arione for Snakes.
Another complication is that different levels of saddles have different types of foam, different rail materials and therefore sit quite differently across the models. The top-line carbon rails are very stiff. The next level titanium rails are very flexible. Steel rails are in the middle. Nylon shells have some give to them. Carbon shells generally have very little give.
This takes me to the second rule of comfort: the longer you plan to ride in one outing and the more often you plan to ride, the less plushness you want on the seat. This also goes a little bit with the position of the torso. If you ride sitting up, you need a wider/softer seat. If you look like one of those "Tour de France guys" then you must have a narrower/firmer seat.
 
Examples:
Fabric offers all their saddles in different rail materials, different flatness profiles for the same plan shape and different foams across the different profiles. I test rode a steel-railed Fabric saddle and thought it was OK. I purchased a titanium-railed one and never quite gelled with it.
Fizik R5 and R3 level saddles have nylon shells. The R1 and 00 levels have carbon shells (which I believe are different between the two as well). The 00 is extremely light, and extremely stiff. It doesn't ride like an R3 (on titanium rails) or an R5 (on steel rails), which are themselves subtly different due to the rail flex.
Specialized also has each saddle at different price points by virtue of the materials used in the seat and rails. I've liked one level of Specialized saddle but not liked an otherwise-identical variant. The whole of the saddle matters.
 
And now many companies have a 3D printed variant. The plan and profile shapes are the same, but the foam and cover are gone in favour of a plastic lattice. Specialized offers 3 models in 3D printing, two of which can be had with carbon rails or titanium rails. Fizik offers perhaps 4 models in 3D printing, again with carbon or titanium rails. And also with or without a groove up the middle for the Antares at least.
 
Around 20 years ago I was selling lots of the Fizik Arione to people and most liked it. It seemed to only disagree with people who sat too upright or were too inflexible. I used Arione from about the time they were released until quite recently. The problem is that there is a new model which is not nearly as accommodating as the old model. It lacks the flexible sides that Fizik called wingflex. This was actually some slots cut in the shell where the pedalling leg brushes the saddle (allowing movement in the "wings"). Wingflex was also the death of all my Arione saddles - eventually one of the slots would crack into the shell and then all support was gone. The new saddle should last better, but it lacks the comfort for me of the older model so it doesn't really matter how long it lasts!
 
The prompt for writing this was my journey on trying to find a replacement seat. I bought a saddle from Trek with the 30-day comfort guarantee. It didn't pass the comfort test and went back to the shop. It was close, but not close enough.
I'm currently trying out an out-of-production Trek seat. If I like it, I cannot get another one. Which makes liking it a risk! But I'm getting quite desperate to find something comfortable. If this one passes muster, it really just postpones the inevitable of finding a wholly new saddle I can put on several bikes. There are certainly a LOT of options out there.]]>Gear2024-07-06T16:12:01+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a48cdfe80af104c7a29ab79ce6e224ce-105.html#unique-entry-id-105https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a48cdfe80af104c7a29ab79ce6e224ce-105.html#unique-entry-id-105Back in October 2022, I wrote about saddles and wanting to try a 3D printed saddle.
And then in November I wrote how I'd found one on sale and purchased it for my commuter bike.
In April 2023 I reported in after 30 hours of use that it wasn't doing it for me.
 
Then I put the Arione back on the commuter and the 3D saddle on my Ibis Ripley (because the Fabric saddle I thought I liked on that one was hurting my butt).
 
Now, more than a year later I can report on the 3D printed saddle on the Ibis.
In short, it is fine.
The complaints I had about it as a road bike saddle where it had only a few millimetres of fore-aft adjustment for a supported pelvis do not apply on the dirt. I'm always standing and sitting and shifting my weight and hitting bumps. With all that going on, the cushion it provides and the support it offers both seem adequate. I have little doubt if I went and ground out 4+ hours on smoother trails that it would fail. But that's not how I ride the Ripley. It is 1-3 hour blasts around in a forest and for those, it is fine.
 
I still want to try another 3D printed saddle on the road. Fizik Antares is not the best model for me in the conventional construction style, so there is no reason to think it would be the best model for me in the 3D printed style. Fizik recently announced the Aliante in an Adaptive (Fizik's word for 3D printed construction) model. That leaves my Arione as the only road saddle from the trio of long-term models not to be produced in Adaptive. Also, I realise that the model I have is "Versus" which means it has a big groove down the middle. There is an Antares Adaptive that is not Versus - lacking the big channel. That might well be better too. I've always found a hole or a groove squashes too much under my weight. What is fine for a 70 kg average cyclist is not necessarily fine for a tall/heavy guy like me. Finally, there is the newer short nose style Argo in Adaptive build to try.
Plus all the Specialized 3D printed saddles.
Not to mention the less well known brands and the fact that Selle Italia now 3D prints saddles too.
 
Hopefully there will be a part 4 at some point.]]>Gear2024-07-03T22:30:07+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/48ba010c7611f136dc7e2571ee232a0d-104.html#unique-entry-id-104https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/48ba010c7611f136dc7e2571ee232a0d-104.html#unique-entry-id-104The second generation Trek Checkpoint SL is ready for many things. And bike packing is definitely one of those things. I'm not personally interested in the bike packing experience - if I were going camping from my bike I think I'd get a BOB trailer and put everything in it. But there is no harm done in the frame having numerous options.
Three mounts down each side of the fork, plus one at the crown and one at each dropout, two on the top tube for a bag, three under the top tube for a larger bag (or a tool mount - though the Bontrager tool fits in the bracket under the door that resides behind the main water bottle mount), water bottle mounts on the down tube (3 on top, 1 underneath) and the seat tube (only the 1) and then various rack and mudguard mount points - 28 in total.
When the bike is delivered each of these is filled with a black plastic plug. The plugs keep the threads clean and the hole closed, but with time they start to pop out of the holes in places. And the black plastic disc on each one is not the best look to my eyes.
So I succumbed to temptation and purchased a bunch of oil slick anodised titanium water bottle bolts. I discovered that a few of the threads were dirty - they had glue or other detritus from production in the threads so they had to be cleaned up before the bolt when in. Other than that the only other anomaly was that the fork bolts don't go in to flush, they stick out proud. I thought it might just be me, but I read that this happens to other owners so I guess it is just how they are. The suggestion is to run a presta valve nut underneath so it tightens down completely and doesn't leave a gap under the bolt head. I might try this.
I didn't replace all the locations with Ti bolts - where the water bottle cage was already mounted I left it (one of the bolts is quite long due to the shape of the storage compartment door). Where the fenders and rack were mounted, I also left the stainless bolts in place. I don't think these small Ti bolts are up to much more than a water bottle. Wow the bolts look much nicer in the frame than did the black plugs. The oil slick ano looks green at extreme angles of light, and more purple at more direct angles. The change is the nicest part - you never know what colours you'll get. I also left the two water bottle mount plugs under the down tube as they aren't really visible under there and just get covered in crud while riding.
 
I found a motorcycle shop here in Australia that does oil slick ano Ti bolts for motorbike fairings and the like - correct thread pitch and length for a water bottle cage. But at $12 each, 28 of them carries a big price tag (yes, I didn't actually require 28 since I didn't use a couple of them). I ended up with some specifically for water bottle cage mounting bolts from the US. They only ship within the US so you can go to Amazon if you want them here in Australia, for example. But the shipping is pricey. And the exchange mechanism built into Amazon seems aggressively pricey too. I ended up having the maker ship them to my sister and she reshipped them to Australia. Total cost was below $150 for 3 dozen bolts. I have enough left over to mount water bottles with bling bolts for years.]]>Gear2024-06-22T21:41:01+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ec47e66206582ac1fa92e8f08c1725c7-103.html#unique-entry-id-103https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ec47e66206582ac1fa92e8f08c1725c7-103.html#unique-entry-id-103Where the Zero and other Speedplay pedals of old required regular lubrication of the spring for movement within the cleat and for the spring against the pedal, the new Speedplay suggests you may wish to lubricate (with a dry lube) but it isn't required. I ran them dry. Because the top of the pedal is now encircled in a steel ring, there has been zero wear to date. I think the old cleat was a soft plastic and the spring would eat into it if it was run totally dry. The new cleat is steel so there can be no wear - steel on steel is already pretty low friction. And the movement is rotation through a small number of degrees.
So that's a big improvement in my book.
I installed a new set of cleats on my newest shoes. They clip in just the same. They clip out about the same (I haven't done back-to-back testing to compare). Riding feel is identical. The new cleats work perfectly fine with new and old pedals alike, just as the old cleats work fine with both pedals too.
In February my right pedal developed a little bit of side-to-side play in the bearings. Unlike old Zero pedals, the new ones are not user serviceable, nor user lubricated. So there is nothing to come loose or adjust. This was a problem. Pushys to their credit replaced them promptly.
It turns out there is a laser-etched serial number on each pedal. It is SO tiny I had to photograph it in good light and zoom in on the photo to read the digits. I provided a video showing the play in the bad pedal and the serial number and they sent me a whole new set of pedals. I hope if anything goes awry with these that it is the left pedal this time so I can mate the old left with the new right and continue with a fully working pair.
I don't know if this is anomalous, or if they are fragile. Wahoo was supposed to increase the bearing size for durability, so I hope it is the former.
I would have to go back to an old pair if I couldn't continue using the new Wahoo variant. None of the other pedal options work for me. I have tried the Time, the Look and the Shimano and not only do I dislike the plastic cleat (but could live with that) but they generally sit way too far forward on the shoe for me. Wahoo no longer sells the plate, but I have 3 sets of the old Speedplay rearward cleat adaptors. They allow around 15mm more rearward placement (and 8mm more forward placement) of a Speedplay cleat on a 3-bolt shoe. I push the cleat back around 10mm further than the Northwave shoes permit on their own. (I could go custom shoes with custom hole placement for any pedal system but I would dislike going down that road.)
 
Check back in another year to see if my trial with the Wahoo pedals continues to be OK. ]]>Riding2024-06-15T22:03:02+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fa01dd24124d6434712486d43a7faf15-99.html#unique-entry-id-99https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fa01dd24124d6434712486d43a7faf15-99.html#unique-entry-id-99
The Checkpoint SL is a “cheap” carbon frame made out of more, lower-grade carbon whereas the Madone SLR is an “expensive” carbon frame built out of top-of-the-line high-grade carbon. That they weigh roughly the same amount is due to the different intentions of the two bikes. The gravel bike has a massive fork to endure the rough roads while providing clearance for nearly MTB sized tyres. The racing bike has a massive fork to make it as aero as possible. So the two frames ride quite differently. And that isn’t what I want to write about.
When you touch the shift button on the SRAM AXS system, the derailleur instantly slams a gear change in the indicated direction. It is silent and barely requires the flick of a finger to achieve. Shifting mechanical Record requires a deliberate and forceful movement of the appropriate finger (unlike electronic shifting, there has to be unique movements for up and down shifts). The gear changes with a loud and satisfying thunk. While some people have complained about the delay in the wireless shifting to transmit and engage the command, there is to my perceptions a larger delay in the cable moving the mechanism and getting the change. With AXS the shift happens as I touch the button. With Record it happens slightly after.
There is never any question of achieving the shift in Record. It is proving very robust to adjustments and the audible indication that the shift has occurred leaves zero doubt. AXS can shift so imperceptibly that I sometimes look at the gear position indicator on my Garmin to see if it actually shifted (it always has).
I read in several places that the Campag hydraulic discs were the best of the big three on the road. When I first went to Red I thought they were “just as good”. After a year and riding the Record again the other day (I admit to not having ridden the Madone as much as I would like in the past few months - it is either commuting duty or MTB time) I noticed there is a subtlety to the Record that the Red lacks. They are perhaps only 1/2 a point out of 10 better, but they are that bit easier to modulate. The rotor/pad combo is a little quieter too. SRAM brakes all seem to make a certain noise that the Campag (and really I should call them Magura because they are really just the Magura MTB brakes for the road - right down to using the same pads) do not make.
I found the Record levers a nice change from the Rival/Force levers they replaced. The Red electronic levers are enough different to the mechanical SRAM levers I used before that they are an all-new thing. They are at least as nice to use as the Record ones. The hood area where you park your hands riding along is great on both, perhaps a bit flatter and big hand friendly on the Red. The lever itself perhaps a tiny bit better shaped on the Record side.
Gearing is actually pretty close. The Record more traditional with 39/53 rings and 11-29 12-spd cassette. The Red uses the SRAM 13 tooth gap with a 37/50 ring pairing and a 10-28 12-spd cassette. Low gear on the Madone is not quite 2% taller than on the Checkpoint. High gear on the Checkpoint is not quite 4% taller than on the Madone - but that 10T sprocket is inefficient. Since Red was released in 12-spd form around 3 years ago, the pro teams have requested even larger rings than I have (the largest at release) not because they felt they needed larger gears overall, but to avoid using the 10T. A massive pair like 43/56 means not having to use the 11 or the 10 most of the time, and the 11 is there when needed.
I ride almost everywhere on the Checkpoint in the big ring. AXS will permit all 12 gear choices in the big ring (it forbids the small:small combo in the small ring) and a 50:28 is plenty low enough for most of my riding. Then I have the 37 to fall back on if I need lower.
Actually, because the Madone is the race bike, if I’m “on” it, I will do most of my ride in the big ring as well. I’ve done numerous Uriarra loops (if you ride in Canberra you must have done the loop before) in the big ring. I will often drop to the inner ring for the climb up from Uriarra Crossing if I’m going anti-clockwise because it is so steep - it is faster for sure - but I can easily push up that climb in the big ring.

Time on both groups solidifies how good they both are. But the digital goodness of Red can’t overwhelm the mechanical goodness of Record.

[Note: I put this under riding and not gear because even though the conversation is about the gear, it is really about rider perceptions and use.]]]>Gear2024-06-08T22:50:08+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1e9cc94349c7deffd71e8f68260f8885-98.html#unique-entry-id-98https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1e9cc94349c7deffd71e8f68260f8885-98.html#unique-entry-id-98This brand based in California makes cycling accessories, (limited) clothing and shoes. Mostly they make shiny objects that look nice.
When I was putting my Checkpoint together I thought some special bar tape would finish the bike well. I chose Oil Slick from Supacaz. This stuff is pretty expensive for bar tape. And while aluminium plugs with matching oil slick anodising are particularly nice, plastic plugs are very effective, lighter and cheaper.
The texture is not bad but tends towards feeling a little slick sometimes. Notably, rain and sweat don't seem to impact the slipperiness - it just hovers around the "perfectly acceptable" level most of the time, sometimes feeling a little too slippery.
The colour is amazing. It really catches sunlight and refracts it into truly oil slick looking colours. The default colour blends well with the Dark Aquatic paint on my Trek, and the refractive colours go really well with the oil slick anodised bolts I put in the accessory mounts on the frame (to plug up the sometimes-fall-out plastic plugs Trek supplies in the 28 holes around the frame).
Grip and texture are pretty good, but not exceptional then. Appearance is stellar. "Cushion" is seemingly quite low. I feel like my fancy carbon bars meant to flex downwards under bumps but not upwards under pulls from the rider's hands are the only thing providing comfort in this set-up. I had the bars on the old Checkpoint with some soft red bar tape (and the soft foam stick-on layers under the bar tape that the bars came with - but they didn't survive the bar tape removal and so aren't on the bike now) and it was more cushioned feeling.
It is proving quite durable. For a bike that gets ridden every day to work and stored in a bike cage where neighbouring bikes often bump into mine on their way in or out (the paint has a few marks from these events) there are zero blemishes on the tape after 11 months.
 
The tape is perfectly named. It is bling. Perhaps even excessive bling. I like it. But I did run Deda chrome-look bar tape for several years on my road race bike (lots of negative comments about that tape). They were a tiny bit stingy on the amount of bar tape provided - another 10 cm would have made wrapping so much easier. And as one of the more expensive bar tapes I can name, I'd have thought they'd be slightly generous with length.
 
I'm not sure I can get past the RRP, but I found it on sale and at that price (25% discount) I can definitely endorse Bling Tape.]]>Gear2024-06-01T00:06:30+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/32f3f95320136211a136ae44ec23cef2-97.html#unique-entry-id-97https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/32f3f95320136211a136ae44ec23cef2-97.html#unique-entry-id-97My single speed has the same fork on it as my trail bike, the Fox 34SC with 120mm travel. The 2 bikes are not otherwise identical, which explains why I run differend pressures in the same fork on two different frames. But it doesn't seem to explain why the difference is SO large. Around 75psi in the Spot's fork versus 90psi in the Ripley's fork. And, it felt like the Spot fork was never getting full travel.
I had my first post-service ride on the Spot. It was a typical Stromlo one-hour lap. No events of note. A few bumps and a few jumps. The o-ring revealed more than 110mm of travel on that ride, where typically I'd barely achieve 100mm on that bike. All I can attribute that to is the new oil in the fork lowers. What came out was crystal clear - as if it had been in there for a couple of months, not 100+ hours of riding over 3 years.
All I can conclude is that fresh oil (with assembly lube mixed in) is more slippery than what I took out?
 
Regardless, the fork now feels more supple and gets more travel. I didn't notice more traction, which might occur if it was tracking the ground better now.
 
I've read many stories of forks of all brands arriving at their first service damaged because they were shipped too dry (or completely dry in one case). That's fine if you can claim warranty on your distressed fork. In my case it is well out of date for a warranty. Luckily, no such claim was required. But it is worth the bother to open up your new fork while it is in warranty, just in case.]]>Gear2024-05-25T18:39:43+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6a1e33ecdd944cf0126a62606f9201cb-96.html#unique-entry-id-96https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6a1e33ecdd944cf0126a62606f9201cb-96.html#unique-entry-id-96How long is too long to go without updating a bike part?
Traditionally most updates come with an extra sprocket. I really strongly believe that 12 sprockets is too many. On the MTB side it does permit decent gaps and 1x drivetrains, which is good. But it came at the expense of wheel dish and axle length; both of which make the rear end of the bike more vulnerable to damage. As much as I'm happy to lose the front derailleur from the mountain bike (frame designs quickly occupied the space where the front derailleur once lived meaning returning to a 2x or 3x system would be impossible) I dislike the compromises made at the rear end to achieve it. Perhaps the gearbox bike will remedy this?
On the road side it is possible to go 1x, but it does limit the absolute range of gears on the bike and that is a handicap for racing. Back in the days I started cycling people used freewheels with 6 or 7 sprockets. On flat races many would run a straight block (a corncob was my favourite term for this) such as a 13-19. And on a hilly race might go to something like a 14-24. Freewheels didn't have 12T high gears nor more than 7 sprockets (I think I read about 8-spd freewheels but don't know if I ever actually saw one). My front derailleurs work very well across my various road bikes. And they greatly expand the range of gearing on the bike at one time. To the point that it isn't necessary to swap cassettes between races.
As well as 12-spd works and lasts, if the same technology was put into an 8-spd drivetrain it could last MUCH longer.
But I digress...
The first indexed Dura Ace was 7-spd. STI came out in 1991 for Dura Ace with a move to 8-spd. Some parts were carry-over. Others were obviously new. In 1992 the Ultegra STI was released, replacing the 7-spd version of that. That carried on unchanged until 9-spd was released. When 10-spd Dura Ace came out it involved a new freehub body design and this decision proved unpopular. A revised 10-spd Dura Ace replaced it and returned to the older HG freehub body. Then came 11-spd. And so on. Most updates involved an additional sprocket at the back and refinement of things like brakes and derailleurs.
As an aside, Shimano's habit of releasing Dura Ace a year prior to Ultegra means that the Ultegra is always a more mature product. Those extra 12 months allow them to work some bugs out of the design before Ultegra is locked in. Those first Dura Ace STI levers looked unfinished compared to the Ultegra units, as an example.
SRAM and Campagnolo were much the same. Campag 11-spd groups were updated when disc brakes were released (new cranks, levers and brake-related parts only) and shortly thereafter all-new 12-spd products came out. SRAM updated Force last year with new components, but not an all-new group, and it remained 12-spd. New Red was leaked in January, seen on pro bikes increasingly as the season went on, and stopped being a hidden thing during the Giro - just ahead of official launch on May 15. Like Force update, it seems to be a revision rather than another sprocket.
Now I've had the now old Red for almost a year. It is brilliant. I like the hood shape (a common complaint apparently). I like the aesthetics. The new Red chain has holes in the sideplates (a few grams weight reduction), bigger holes in the bigger jockey wheels (less weight, lower drag) and revised ergonomics on the levers. Not much else looks changed aside from minor things like less metal in the rear derailleur (another few grams lost). As I'm writing this ahead of the release I don't know all the details. But it looks like a pretty minor update to me.
I assume the tooling to make the pieces is either essential to change every so often - things wear out - or easy to change. So after 5 years maybe it was time? But I think SRAM could have continued on unchanged.
Campagnolo released a new wireless EPS Super Record last year. It moved to the new freehub body introduced for 13-spd Ekar. But it did not move to 13-spd itself. Like Red it now uses a 10T high gear on every cassette. To fit the 10T on required using the new freehub. Thankfully they designed it so it was backwards compatible with the old 11T high gear cassettes. Many changes were made to go with the wireless move (from wired) but choices like changing the shifting button locations from traditional Campag Ergo to more like Dura Ace didn't have to be made and weren't universally well received.
 
I think the answer is probably "it depends on what your competition has done" and only the new and very expensive Campagnolo EPS is really new, but Dura Ace Di2 12-spd is newer than the RED AXS by a short period of time. Unless Red is hiding some new functionality, and it is really just a rolling update of the 12-spd stuff, it didn't seem necessary. Given how much riders like "new & shiny" I will accept that new for the sake of new is going to happen.]]>Gear2024-05-19T21:08:12+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/3c082743958f8471f188e904b8fbe457-95.html#unique-entry-id-95https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/3c082743958f8471f188e904b8fbe457-95.html#unique-entry-id-95When your shifting is mechanical and actuated by Bowden cables, no matter how good it is it can only take the rider's movement of a lever at the bars and turns that into a movement of the chain at the drivetrain. One click equals one shift. And downshifting usually permits multiple clicks for multiple shifts although upshifting is usually one at a time.
Once you make the derailleur digital the relationship between the lever on the bars and the behaviour at the drivetrain can be modified in many ways. The first one I was familiar with was the multi-shift in AXS because that is applicable regardless of having a front derailleur or not. I tried briefly the multi-mode and returned to one click for one gear because the multi-mode is time dependent and if you leave your finger on the button for a fraction too long, you get an extra unwanted shift. Plus I like the one to one ratio of clicks to shifts.
The second one is sequential shift. Which only makes sense if you have a front derailleur. In this mode, shifting is accomplished as if you only had a 1x system - shifting at the rear derailleur only. But the computer decides when to shift the front derailleur. This is neither random nor computed. It is set by SRAM for each cassette type. On my 10-28T if you begin in highest gear (50/10) and ride along shifting into ever lower gears, when it reaches the 50T/24T ratio (the second largest/lowest sprocket) it changes pattern. Instead of going to 50T/28T (big:big) it drops the chain onto the smaller chainring (37T) and double upshifts at the rear (19T). In three more shifts, the lowest gear is reached (37T/28T). On the way back it doesn't reverse course but instead plots a slightly different pathway. Remaining in the small chainring (37T) until the eighth ratio is reached (14T), and only on the next shift does it move up to the big ring (50T) and double downshifts at the rear (16T). There are five more higher gears remaining until the highest gear ratio (where we started) is reached.
I think if it changed to and from the big ring with the 24T and 19T sprockets used then I'd be happy with it (if the small ring returned to the big ring at 19T on the upshifts and from the big ring at the 24T. I try to remain on the big chainring as much as possible. If there is a big ring option that's the same as the small ring option, then I choose the big ring option. Every time.
The final option I tried is what SRAM calls compensating mode. It compensates for the front derailleur shift by also shifting the rear derailleur. SRAM gives the rider the choice of 1 or 2 sprockets compensation. I chose 1 sprocket and I think it's great. Shift up onto the big ring and the rear derailleur also shifts one down onto the next biggest sprocket. Shift down onto the small ring and the rear derailleur also shifts one up to the next smaller sprocket. It means that the change is not so big. Rarely the big change is welcome, but that only works if you take the bike too far up/down the next gradient change. Shift early and it is too hard or too easy for a minute. Compensating by one sprocket diminishes the size of the change to the better.
 
I'm not 100% sure I'd use this racing as I do worry about losing the chain in a race (happened so many times with mechanical shifting - I'm paranoid). Since it is my commuting bike, racing is not an issue.
 

Shimano got to digital shifting first and they have a similar, but even larger, suite of features to delve into in Di2. As I haven't much ride time at all on a Di2 bike, I won't bother to comment as it would be wrong. I seem to recall that Campagnolo EPS also offers some digital features. I mean, why wouldn't you?

]]>Gear2024-05-08T23:33:47+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5dca9f29c1802a0815440cdba40f6a3e-94.html#unique-entry-id-94https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5dca9f29c1802a0815440cdba40f6a3e-94.html#unique-entry-id-94A few months ago I got a Silca "spa" package in the post for a review of their bike care fluids. In case you haven't paid attention, Silca was the Italian producer of the best long-lasting floor pump in cycling history - everything was replaceable and so the same basic pump platform could last forever. They went out of business. An American guy, formerly of Zipp, bought the remnants and set up a new Silca in Indiana where Zipp is headquartered and he lives.
 
I got to chat with Josh, Silca owner, via an online connection as part of my review. That was fun because we have a similar long history in cycling. And we both get pretty enthusiastic about anything bike.
 
Silca has a YouTube channel that mostly demonstrates best practice with their various products. I've picked up two habits that work extremely well from Josh, via YouTube and I plan to discuss one today.
Wax is very popular for bike chains. I remember when I was a teen my riding friends and I discussed the idea of immersion waxing our chains with plain parafin wax. I think it lasts about 100 km or so before you need to re-do it. Modern chemistry has stretched that interval out around 4x, but the basics remain. I have never been a proponent of immersion waxing. I don't like removing the chain from the bike for routine maintenance.
My spa kit from Silca included a bottle of Super Secret drip wax. This stuff is exactly the same as the solid wax they sell for immersion, but emulsified in water at around 70% wax: 30% water. Immersion types can use this to top-up the chain in between immersions to extend their mileage. Or, like me, one can use the drip wax on its own. The Silca team found that the water evaporates and leaves the wax behind directly related to the emulsion ratio. The water will fill the chain's inner voids and on evaporation, 70% of those voids remains filled with wax. A second application can fill those smaller voids again at the 70% level (= 91% filled after 2 goes). And a third will fill 70% of the remaining 9% (= 97% filled after 3 goes). As far as I can tell, the third go is pretty much optional as it doesn't seem to effect the behaviour of the chain.
The Silca team investigated the best way to get drip wax into a chain. Into, not onto! The wax on the outside is simply messy. Wax (or any lubricant) needs to be inside the chain where the action is happening. Big ring and second largest sprocket is the recommendation. Why? Because the cross-chaining position articulates the chain as it leaves the chainring into the span above the chainstay (assume pedalling backwards for lubrication and not pedalling for motion) and again the opposite way as it lines up with the cassette sprocket. Drip immediately prior to the cassette sprocket take-up of that chain link and you get maximal penetration.
Josh demonstrated how placing a clean chain on top of a single drop of chain lube and articulating the chain side to side would pump the lube up through the chain and out the top. Same thing happens during the lubrication dripping. Each motion of the chain pulls the lube inside where it can actually lubricate.
I drip left handed while I pedal backwards with the right hand, placing one smallish drop of well-shaken wax onto the roller of the chain just prior to touching the cassette teeth. Once I've gone around the entire chain once, I back pedal for numerous revolutions to run the chain around a dozen or so times.
Top chains are hydrophobically coated, so the emulsion wants to run off the chain. The proximity of the cassette teeth apparently help with this too. Once the water evaporates, the remaining wax is attracted to the hydrophobic coating.
At the second application, another tip from Josh is to quickly pedal forwards and shift across the cassette. This leaves a thin wax layer on each sprocket which will make the bike a little quieter during the first 100 or so km of riding.
 
None of this is actually what I wanted to write about. It does lead up to it, however. At the end of an interval, how should we be cleaning our waxy chains off? I used to use a full bike wash with MucOff bike shampoo and get the chain all sudsy before scrubbing with a brush. There is a much better way! A kettle of boiling water. The boiling water is plenty hot enough to melt the wax off the chain and leave you with a fresh, clean but wet chain. On a MTB you can start with a really dirty looking chain and end up with one looking really fresh just by slowly pedalling backwards and pouring the boiling water over the chainring at the front where the chain is on it. No scrubbing. No waiting. Just clean.
And then the wax can be dripped straight onto the wet chain for application number 1. They hydrophobic chain holds the wax better than the water so the damp chain is not a problem.
 
All these years of using various waxy chain treatments and it never occurred to me to use boiling water to clean them. So easy. So effective.]]>Gear2024-05-05T18:26:13+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/88e72b8c823e5a010751d6e20e56a365-93.html#unique-entry-id-93https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/88e72b8c823e5a010751d6e20e56a365-93.html#unique-entry-id-93Just before Covid changed 2020 so dramatically, as in about 2 weeks prior, I got my Ibis Ripley. As I wanted this to be my "Stromlo" bike and also my replacement XC race bike (the proper race bike was going up for sale) I specified the 120 mm Fox 34 SC fork rather than the more usually installed Fox 34 with 130/140 mm travel.
Meanwhile I had reached the end of the road with my hardtail's fork. A Fox 32 with a straight steerer, Fox hasn't supported these forks in years. The bushings were quite worn, the stanchions had bushing marks on them - it was past its best. Virtually nothing decent was available with the necessary straight steerer tube. And the Ibis convinced me that I needed updated geometry - a much longer reach being way more suitable for this tall and long-armed rider. I bought a Spot Rocker which came with the same Fox 34 SC 120 mm fork as the Ibis. The Spot was almost exactly 12 months behind the Ibis into my life, coming in March 2021. Yet the fork was the same on each bike (Fox usually changes stickers each year or so and they have the same stickers).
As mentioned in a prior entry, I swapped from Feedback Sports app to ProBikeGarage app to keep track of my maintenance. PBG told me instantly that my Fox 34s were past-due for seal replacements.
I picked up the two seal kits with one for the Ibis shock and used a recent weekend to attend to the two. My first problem was that the bolts holding the sliders onto the stanchions are highly recessed in the SC forks. And with the step casting (what SC stands for) the bolts are off-centre in the bottom of the leg even though they are dead centre to the stanchion's circle. I really needed a 10 mm thin-wall deep socket to get on the nut. Luckily, my 12-point shallow socket was just thin enough to sit on the nut.
The Ibis fork had lots of oil inside it, but it was moderately dirty looking. Not the golden syrup colour of new oil, but more like burnt butter. Still quite clear, but also rather dark. It was past time to replace these seals and given that PBG was telling me I'd almost hit 150 hours of riding, it really WAS by all accounts. The Spot fork was quite different. This exemplifies why some Fox forks work really well and others don't - the builds are not identical despite mass production. There was hardly any volume of liquid in this one in either fork leg, but it looked absolutely brand new.
Using a trick taught to me by a former sponsored-by-Fox racer (thanks Brent!); with the trick being to use a little Fox Float Fluid in each leg to increase the slipperiness of the splash oil and make the fork that bit smoother for longer. I don't use Fox Fluid. It is a viscous but fully soluble in fork oil liquid that is used primarily inside the shock bodies. Maxima has a great reputation for fork oil as a probable supplier of Fox fluids (which are reportedly made by a local-to-Fox company, which would be Maxima) and the definite supplier of Rock Shox's Maxima Plush used in current forks - so I use Maxima 10 wt and Maxima Assembly Lube (both more readily available and about 1/2 the price from MX shops than from bike shops).
To refill the splash lube I squirt about 1-2 ml of the red Assembly Lube into the syringe through the plunger side, insert the plunger, and then slurp up the correct amount of 10 wt (10 and 15 ml total for the 34 SC's two legs) and squirt it down the hose and through the bolt hole in the slider. Then push the sliders so the threads protrude, and tighten the nuts to 5.7 Nm and done!
One wrinkle in this whole process was I haven't used the seal press I bought for my 34 forks before. This one is from Unior. It was available locally, but it isn't as nice as the Real World Cycling presses I have in sizes 32 and 36 mm. They fit snugly in the bushing forcing the seal to go in straight. There is a long nose on the Unior tool, but it doesn't fit very snugly in the bushing and it requires operator diligence to get the seal in squarely. Also, the outer lip on the RWC tools give a strong indication (if not a positive stop) that the seal is pushed in the correct amount. I note that the new Unior seal presses proclaim a new design that bottoms out positively on the fork to prevent overdriving the seals.
The first seal I did with the Unior ended up too far in, by 2-3 mm, because there is no indication and I pushed too far. Knowing that, the other 3 went in the correct distance. I had to squeeze the foam ring in between the seal and the bushing because the gap wasn't quite the width of the ring. Hopefully everything will function fine for the next 100ish hours.]]>Riding2024-04-30T10:16:00+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/26e1f5a03d71939eac6384de04066c0b-92.html#unique-entry-id-92https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/26e1f5a03d71939eac6384de04066c0b-92.html#unique-entry-id-92Probably ten years ago I purchased a Feedback Sports Pro workstand. In exploring the paperwork that came with it I discovered they have an app for tracking bike maintenance. It links to your Strava account and pulls in distances. I've been using that since to keep track of my maintenance. But my Strava updating hasn't worked properly since day 1. Lots of emails to the coders who built the app and some diagnostic work with them and ... nothing. Still updates every so often but not properly.
Then I heard about ProBikeGarage app online somewhere. I was thinking perhaps I should swap when I got an email from Feedback Sports that they had sold their app to another American bike business (an online bike shop?) and there was a link to download the current version of the newly renamed app. Following that link I got the message that the app is not available in Australia.
For less than $10 I thought I should try out the alternative. And now I have been using it for a couple of weeks. It pulls your bikes out of your Strava account, so if it isn't there is isn't in the maintenance list. But once in the app, you can add components and even make complex components built out of other components (picture a wheel made of hub, spokes and rim). One sub-component, like the hub, can have one maintenance schedule (for its bearings) while another, like the rim, can have a different schedule (for rim tape, spoke tension, etc).
Use can be tracked in time or distance or calendar time. Replace fork seals after 100 hours of riding. Re-lubricate a chain after 300 km of riding. Refresh sealant in a tyre after 3 months (whether ridden or not). All of these intervals are possible in the ProBikeGarage.
It allows special circumstances too. Such as when on the trainer the rear wheel doesn't accumulate use. And parts can be swapped easily. Two sets of wheels? No worries. To get proper stats for some wheels I carried over from older bikes to current bikes I had to go into Strava and unretire the old bike. Then it uploaded into PBG. Then I added the wheels and it calculated distance and hours used. Finally I moved the item at the appropriate date to the current bike and it brought its prior use with it. Very nice. (And I re-retired the bike in Strava after to get it out of the way.)
As a maintenance deadline approaches, the bike goes "orange" to warn you. Once crossing the deadline, the bike goes "red". Every day on the anniversary of the part's installation (each item has an installation time on it so PBG can distinguish if you swapped before or after a particular ride) it sends a warning notification through the phone.
 
I had been estimating time of use from distance and estimated speed. I was off. My Ibis wasn't just approaching the 100 hours for suspension seals, but was well past at around 145 hours. So I got a warning every day. My Spot wasn't most of the way to 100 hours, but right at it. So I got a warning every day for that one too. Now that I've replaced the fork seals on both bikes (the fluid in the Spot's fork was crystal clear but there wasn't much of it while there was plenty of fluid in the Ibis's fork but it was a bit dirty - so both needed doing) and checked some suspension sag across different bikes, PBG is happy and stopped sending me notifications every day.
 
I've had extensive correspondence with the developers. They were very curious about my experiences with a competitor's product and seem genuinely interested in customer feedback to guide future development. I need access to multiple Strava accounts to keep track of use on different owner's bikes since I'm the family mechanic. They haven't implemented a good solution - yet. They do plan to have some way to connect with 2 or more accounts. It wasn't clear to me if this was a technical hurdle (how do we do it?) or a time hurdle (when we've done all this other stuff, we'll do that!).
 
If you need to keep track of your bikes for maintenance, and you use Strava, I recommend this one.]]>Gear2024-04-29T20:38:20+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/17212c7a1e9e7f6b96130df524906024-91.html#unique-entry-id-91https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/17212c7a1e9e7f6b96130df524906024-91.html#unique-entry-id-91I use my Ibis Ripley like an XC bike, but technically it is a trail bike. What's the difference? I'll suggest the difference can be as simple as "intent" but in this case the Exie is the Ibis XC bike and the Ripley is usually delivered with a 130 mm fork (more often a 140 mm fork in Australia according to the importer) making it a trail bike. My build uses a 120 mm Fox 34 SC, which is more XC than trail. But then I ran 200 mm rotors so I could swap in the chunky tyres from the Enduro bike for occasions such as Stromlo enduro races where the Ripley would be faster, but held back by the tyres.
Well, no more. I had almost 150 hours of good use out of the Scorpion XC tyres I put on the bike from new (the front was original, the rear was much newer and still had some life left). Now replaced with the Trail version of the tyre - complete with bigger size (2.4" rather than 2.2") and bigger knobs - much bigger. After 20 km of riding, this is very much a first impressions report.
I used my usual 18/24 psi F/R settings that work on the DH tyres on the Sender, the Enduro tyres on the Slash and the XC tyres on the Spot - but they felt pretty hard on this bike. I was bouncing off of some stuff during the ride. The pressure might need to decrease a little. Inside the tyres is the same CushCore XC insert I had in the old tyres. CushCore says to run them until they lose their radial tension. And these still fit tightly into the rim well under their own elastic pull. So should be good. I did peel off most of the sealant that had built up on them before reinstallation.
First impression is that they are MUCH grippier than the XC tyre. Not surprisingly with the much bigger knobs. I got them into sliding on the loose dirt on the backside of Stromlo and they recovered nicely; I was never sure with the XC tyres if they'd bring it back so tried to avoid sliding the front tyre at all.
While they are heavier (more knob, more volume - of course they are heavier) they didn't feel it.
 
First verdict: great fun. I'll happily trade off a little speed (though I don't know if I did) for more fun, especially when I'm not racing.]]>Gear2024-04-04T00:36:55+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ab37eda9a0a08c5f41d036e8b7ea47a3-90.html#unique-entry-id-90https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ab37eda9a0a08c5f41d036e8b7ea47a3-90.html#unique-entry-id-90My first experience with a seat post specifically designed to make the ride more comfortable was the Specialized Roubaix carbon post back circa 2004. That one made a remarkable transformation of my oversized aluminium Cannondale CX frame from its original aluminium post. Even before that I had used posts like the Syncros one, which was primarily aimed at being light in weight, but as a consequence of being made so thin-walled it also flexed quite a bit. Unlike modern flexy posts, it flexed evenly in all directions.
Fast forward to my first Trek Checkpoint. Like most Trek road bikes it used a seat mast rather than a seat post. These very large diameter units slide over the frame and must be close to inflexible for it. But the Checkpoint had Isospeed decoupling where the seat tube is not rigidly joined to the top tube/seat stay junction (instead an axle at that joint permits the seat tube to flex like a leaf spring). I found this bike to be perfectly comfortable. There is a lump in the pavement in my neighbourhood that is a good indicator of how a frame transmits harshness through the seat. On that Cannondale, even with the Specialized post, it was sharp enough that I tried never to hit it. On the Checkpoint, it was a dull noise and not much of a feeling at all.
And now everyone wants a dropper post on their gravel bike for the same reason everyone needs a dropped post on their MTB - it just works better. So my new Checkpoint uses a seat post again - and has routing room for a dropper post actuation cable. The post I put in it is the Bontrager RSL - a very high-end post designed to be flexy fore and aft but rigid side to side. I haven't ridden the Checkpoint without this post, but it does float over my harsh neighbourhood lump approximately as well as the old Checkpoint did.
I've been contemplating this as I ride it for the past week. There is no indication that this post flexes at all. However much it absorbs, it does so in conjunction with the Isospeed and it is not materially different than the older frame.

As a corollary of this, my Madone race bike has its own version of Isospeed - the seat post floats inside the seat tube in a carbon leaf spring mechanism that permits adjustment of the spring rate in that spring. You can have more or less movement for a given force to reflect your body weight or preferences. It came in the middle of the adjustment range and I haven't adjusted it once - it was fine on day one and remains fine. Interestingly to me, it feels a lot like the first Checkpoint (and therefore the second Checkpoint) despite the deep aero sections of the frame. It suggest that Trek know what they are doing with the Isospeed thing. I wonder what the new Checkpoint would be like without the flexy post? I don't have any other 27.2 posts, nor do I want to fuss around with the swapping of posts, so I won't find out any time soon.

The most extreme looking flexy post is the one that Canyon puts in their gravel bikes. It is a two part leaf spring that is held together on one end by being in the frame and at the top by how it bolts to the post head. An idea whose time is here. If you haven't tried a designed-flex carbon frame you should. They're brilliant in their ability to absorb bumps and still feel firm underfoot when you pedal. ]]>Gear2024-03-24T19:47:30+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/72e911eada9e4d819d2d30adbb4f5b17-89.html#unique-entry-id-89https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/72e911eada9e4d819d2d30adbb4f5b17-89.html#unique-entry-id-89I purchased a set of OneUp Thick grips roughly the week they were released in Australia. I put them on the Ripley and they felt a bit odd. I decided that I must have gotten Left and Right mixed up, so I swapped them around. Then I found in a photo online that they are marked for handedness! I totally missed that in real life. On checking, they were the wrong way around on my bike. So I swapped them back. Third time's a charm, and with a bit of rotational tweaking, they felt right this time.

I've now ridden them four months properly oriented so it is time to comment on them here.

Size is great. Grippiness is also great. The various shapes seem appropriate to holding on too. There is a pad of thicker rubber under the palm, and this is where it falls down for me. It is just too firm and it hurts my hands. I just can't come to terms with them regardless of how I rotate them or which gloves I wear.
Previously I had Deity Supracush grips on there for a couple of years. They might have been slightly too soft for ultimate control, but they sure were comfortable. What I'm looking for now is something with the comfort of the Deity and the control of the OneUp.

I managed to tag a tree with the end of one grip a few weeks ago - I sometimes forget that I have 82 cm bars on the Ripley and this can be sub-optimal in tight forests. It shows that they are quite tough as there is a mark, but it could have destroyed the grip. I did a small involuntary separation of bike and rider, but remained on my feet. Mostly it made me laugh.

So I'd highly recommend the OneUp grip for big-handed riders looking for a grippy grip, but not if you are after higher than average comfort from your grip. ]]>Gear2024-02-20T16:20:50+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/da7042329a6478f21a9f3ff1710332bd-88.html#unique-entry-id-88https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/da7042329a6478f21a9f3ff1710332bd-88.html#unique-entry-id-88When SRAM introduced the universal derailleur hanger, I don't know if they knew where it was going, but it seemed a great idea. If you've ever broken a derailleur hanger you will know that there were about 1000 different models and it has to be the exact one. The whole idea of the UDH was that one derailleur hanger fitting on a standardised attachment on the frame meant any new bikes built to this standard could use any new UDH. A good start.
The bonus now is that those frames can remove their UDH and replace it with a Transmission rear derailleur. I've seen three or four videos of reviewers standing on the derailleur to demonstrate who solidly it is attached to the frame. The derailleur is anchored into the through-axle system so it is robust and secure.
Because there is no hanger, there is no B-tension screw. The derailleur has been redesigned to be set in a particular position during setup and then it remains there statically. There is a red sprocket on the cassette that reminds the mechanic which gear to set up the derailleur in. The derailleur is so tough that a collision with typical rocks or trees might not damage it at all, but if it does it won't be ripping the derailleur from the frame. And some sub-components of the derailleur are sold individually for rebuilding after a collision.
Also because of the way the derailleur is setup and because there is only one cassette it works with, there are no inner or outer limit screws either. Suntour invented the slant-parallelogram rear derailleur about 50 years ago. This is perhaps not as revolutionary as that, or perhaps it is. A big step forwards.
The new Transmission cassette and flat-top chain will only shift in the shifting windows. Hyperglide introduced us to the idea of shifting windows back in about 1990. The Transmission uses taller than normal teeth for all but the shifting teeth, so there can be no shifting except where designed. That can be perceived as a delay in the shift - waiting for it to come around. Several users I know don't complain about it and it seems fine to me.
Eagle was the name applied to everything new when SRAM went 12-speed. "Eagle Technology" SRAM called it. Given there is no real cross-over compatibility with Eagle and Transmission, they really ought to have called it another bird name (Condor for better soaring? Falcon for higher speed?). Naming oddities aside, Transmission seems a good step forward for AXS MTB drivetrains. ]]>Gear2024-02-17T16:09:38+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/94e7845140eccdd3aad5ef7e244f1ae9-87.html#unique-entry-id-87https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/94e7845140eccdd3aad5ef7e244f1ae9-87.html#unique-entry-id-87The biggest visible change with the move to "Transmission" drivetrains from SRAM is the shifting mechanism. It used to be a butterfly shaped rocker switch. One way for one direction of shift and the other way for the other direction (probably - the AXS app allows one to reassign all button functions). The shifter for transmission can only be called a pod - it is a small rounded-off unit with two buttons. It no longer connects to the bars via the excellent MatchMaker system (via the brake lever clamp) but now has its own figure-8 shaped clamp (one around the bars, the other around the round projection on the rear of the pod). It tightens via a single bolt in the middle of the "8".
I would say it is fair to call the pod controversial. People who were perfectly happy with the old AXS shifter have had to adjust to the new pod. The buttons have been known to fall off on rough terrain. It is highly adjustable, but not really in the direction I wanted to adjust it. The bolt in the middle is labelled "max 3Nm" but I tried that with a torque wrench and it was far from tight. In an era where everything bike is going lower profile (think the new SRAM brakes and their master cylinders sitting almost on the bars), these pods are very high profile.
Function-wise they seem fine. The buttons are easy to press. If you get it in the correct position, it takes only a light tap to effect a change.
Aesthetically, they don't pair well with the Reverb button on the other side - why isn't it a new pod too, off the same figure-8 clamp?

All things considered, I wouldn't rate the pod higher than a 7/10. And honestly, I don't think it really deserves that much. ]]>Riding2024-02-10T23:21:48+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e32a45dcc7123366dc442c48a2f427a2-86.html#unique-entry-id-86https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e32a45dcc7123366dc442c48a2f427a2-86.html#unique-entry-id-86When I bought my first DH bike almost 15 years ago, I put clipless pedals on it. I couldn't imagine riding a DH bike as it is meant to be ridden (as much as that is possible without the talent and skills of a World Cup rider) on flats. Back then, I couldn't really imagine riding any bike on flats!
Fast forward through years of riding flats for everything from XC (but not racing) to trail and Enduro racing and never having had clips on my current DH bike - my recent day visit to Thredbo involved throwing the Crank Brothers Mallet DH Race pedals on the Sender and pulling the old Shimano DH cleated shoes out of the closet. It was an interesting day out. I had zero issues with clipping in (I'd hope not after all those years of being clipped) and having my feet locked to the pedal was fine (I didn't find it more reassuring in rough terrain as I assumed I would - perhaps never blowing a foot off my aggressive flats has something to do with that?). The Shimano shoes permit the cleat to go back quite far. But probably not quite far enough to mimic the location my foot sits on my flats. Obviously I didn't have to change my approach to jumps and drops, but I found that I was doing it differently until really late in the day when I'd made some adjustments.
The Mallet pedals are great. I can understand why so many DH racers use them. Easy in. Easy out. Good retention.
The Shimano shoes are very comfortable and provide decent foot protection too. So no problems there.
But I won't be keeping the clippy pedals on my Sender for the next visit. I want my flats back. Feet loose on pedals is the only way I can judge the amount of downward pressure I've applied through my feet: enough pressure means my feet stay locked on the pedals (and not-quite-enough pressure means my feet get skatey on the pedals).
Across numerous Enduro races and 1 DH race, I've never felt like flats were making me slower. Perhaps If I put in many days on the clippy pedals I could get a feeling of confidence and control superior to flats, but I do doubt it.

I'm sticking with my flats for the big bikes (Enduro and DH). I'll keep the clips on the hardtail, and swap them in and out on the trail bike as the ride demands. ]]>Gear2024-01-25T23:20:16+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/f97368614758f0b256d32eb7529e3633-85.html#unique-entry-id-85https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/f97368614758f0b256d32eb7529e3633-85.html#unique-entry-id-85Close to 20 years ago now I bought my first 29r. A titanium hardtail with XT bits providing the gears and stopping. That was my race bike until I got a full-suspension bike for that role and the hardtail was modified to be a singlespeed. Then about 3 years ago I bought a new singlespeed and the titanium bike went in storage. It came back out just before Christmas to become my son's new bike. But he needed some gears.
Box is a company that was known for making high-end BMX gear. They decided to get into MTB and eventually released four levels of related drivetrain components that are all 1x9 (Prime 9 = 1 x 9). The top one is quite expensive and called Box One. The cheapest one is not very nice looking and is called Box Four. The Box Two pieces aren't quite as flashy as the Box One, but much lighter and nicer than the Box Three level stuff. Seems like Box Two hits the sweet spot. Especially when it is on sale when you need it!

One small box contained the derailleur, the shift lever, the chain, the cassette (11-46 range), some cable housing and a shift cable. Instructions were provided online either written or YouTube. It all went together really easily. It did require a lot more B-tension than I expected to keep the upper jockey wheel from hitting the low gear teeth on the cassette. And when I was finished it was not shifting nicely into the second-lowest gear when coming from a higher gear (but it was fine from the lowest gear). No adjusting could quite get rid of that.

I checked the derailleur hanger and it was not perfectly lined up with where it should have been. Once that was fixed, then the shifting was perfect.

In use, the Box Two items work really well. I did find that the amount of pressure required on the shift lever reflected the gear the bike was in - some strange relationship between cable tension and lever effort that suggests Box hasn't nailed every last aspect of their design philosophy quite yet.

It was also my first exposure to anything in the CUES line from Shimano. I put new cranks on the bike because the new owner didn't need my old 180 mm cranks but by remaining in the Shimano brand I didn't have to change bottom brackets. The CUES crank preloads like a SRAM DUB crank, except there is no locking mechanism for the preload collar.

Only having 9 steps for most of the SRAM Eagle gear range means the steps are wider. In use, that seems OK. Especially for a fun bike. XC racing might benefit from more options, and any decent downhill slope (whether XC or Enduro or anything) would benefit from the 10T high sprocket the Box cassette lacks. But for a fun bike, it's great and you pretty much know what gear you need to be in at any time. Given that the entire box-set (pun intended) cost about the same as an XT cassette, it can't be just as refined and light as Shimano's second tier offering.

I like this brand. I'll be curious to see how it fares with use. I'm betting OK. ]]>Riding2024-01-23T21:16:43+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/710336e42d781339cfc8e58ecc0e14c7-84.html#unique-entry-id-84https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/710336e42d781339cfc8e58ecc0e14c7-84.html#unique-entry-id-84What a difference a couple of weeks can make!
I spent a week at Thredbo ending just a few days prior to Christmas Day. There were zero braking bumps and very little trail damage of any sort. It was very pleasant really.
And then I returned on January 7. Braking bumps were everywhere, even in places where no one needs to be braking. Big holes on the trails in weird spots. There is this really fast descent off the Gunbarrel chair that was very rough before the holiday season and was completely, hand-hammeringly rough by the first week of January. Luckily it ends on a fire trail which is a great place to shake the hands out before heading into the next bit of singletrack. And this was on my DH bike, which is markedly more gentle on the hands than my Enduro bike (I really noticed it by riding them on consecutive days).

Braking bumps form on dirt due to the way a tyre under braking has a resonant frequency; the tyre is excited by a bump and hammers back into the ground immediately (creating a low spot) which leads to the next high spot, and so on. I noticed when everyone was on 26" DH bikes that riding a 29" Enduro bike on those trails that the big wheels would not "fit" in the braking bumps, so it was quite smooth. Now that almost everyone's front wheel is 29", all the tyres fit all the bumps. The solution is to either pick a line to the side of the braking bump line, or to hit the bumps fast enough to skip over the tops of the sequence. Neither is an option on some lines, but most of them permit one or the other.

Unfortunately, braking bumps are self-reinforcing. You see them, you ride into them, they are so rough you grab a handful of brake, and you then contribute to making them bigger and longer. Or you try to ride beside them with a handful of brake and you contribute to them getting wider. The only solution is no brakes. Which is admittedly very difficult in certain places.

The other thing I noticed in January was the many large holes high up in the berms. I think these are caused by the sheer volume of tyres running under high force up there, breaking the hard dirt surface layer and leaving behind a softer hole that can erode more quickly. Some of them are pretty bad but I was able to either go just above them or, thanks to the DH bike, right through them. ]]>Riding2024-01-19T22:44:59+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6de45b98ee14af5f1de6499c490adf8f-83.html#unique-entry-id-83https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6de45b98ee14af5f1de6499c490adf8f-83.html#unique-entry-id-83Wait.

What?

How?

I can remember reading at the time when World Cup DH racers were all changing to clipping in that they sit more central in the bike and therefore distribute the load more evenly across the front and rear suspension. Compare that to the same person riding flats who will drop their heels more, pushing their weight further back and loading the rear suspension more and the front less.
I had visible evidence of this after my recent trip to Thredbo on the Sender DH bike with Mallet pedals attached. At the end of the day the fork o-ring was right up at the full travel mark while the shock o-ring was nowhere near the full travel mark. Usually I see the reverse and leave that extra air pressure in the fork for "contingency" issues.
This was despite making a concerted mental shift on every run to attempt to ride just as if I had flat pedals under my feet. Over the day I never achieved that "same" feeling.

A bicycle is more than the sum of its parts. Choices have impacts in the least expected way sometimes.]]>Gear2023-12-24T10:08:48+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6add6110b315fe98295bc10c8cdd026e-82.html#unique-entry-id-82https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6add6110b315fe98295bc10c8cdd026e-82.html#unique-entry-id-82The progression in an air shock is a predictable process. Halve the air volume, double the pressure. The choice the manufacturer makes is what is the overall progression. Longer travel demands somewhat greater progression, as do higher speeds and bigger jumps. So a pro rider doing a pro enduro race needs more progression to make the fork behave as desired than does an amateur who rides slower.
One way to adjust this is through volume spacers inside the air chamber. Some shocks and most forks have these as regular options and may even include some in the package if you buy it aftermarket (whether your new bike includes any depends on the deal the bike brand does with the suspension brand). Back 15 years ago when these bits of plastic weren't offered by suspension brands, a mechanic could achieve the same thing with a lump of grease inside the air chamber somewhere out of the way.
The Fox brand ones for forks clip on to the underside of the air cap and each other. The RockShox brand ones for forks are threaded onto the air cap and each other. Same end result, slightly different method. For rear suspension, they are usually bands that run inside the air can around the hydraulic innards and therefore very specific to the model of shock in question.

But what if zero spacers is still too much progression? And with some of the forks on the market today that is a real issue for many riders. My Zeb wasn't giving me full travel when set at a reasonable sag, and felt way too soft if I lowered initial pressure enough to achieve near-full travel.
Enter the magic of TruTune negative spacers. They look like one massive spacer of either Fox or RockShox variety (I purchased both so I can compare them directly). The end of the spacer is a filter allowing air to enter (but not oil?). Inside is something special. As the pressure increases, the amount of air that is soaked up by the carbon inside also increases. This happens instantly and therefore lowers the progression of the fork. They produce a smaller and a larger version for people who want a little less or a lot less progression.
With a normal amount of sag on my Zeb I was also seeing full travel on the o-ring. Success.
My partner is a small woman and her new Fox 38 with a TruTune inside it also returned full travel when pushed hard but started with a good sag point around 20%. Most success.
While 100 pounds plus shipping is expensive, it is a minor expense compared to even a few thousand dollar new bike. ]]>Gear2023-12-24T09:56:19+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/833b9a660b46ed18e91ac5f18fc519ac-81.html#unique-entry-id-81https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/833b9a660b46ed18e91ac5f18fc519ac-81.html#unique-entry-id-81Back about 2010 I decided to try flat pedals on my DH bike. I bought a pair of 5.10 Impact shoes as worn by Sam Hill as they seemed the most DH oriented shoe in the range. I wore them for a couple of years before I picked up some Freeriders and then a whole range of other brands. But because the Impact shoe was still the best for the DH bike, I kept my original Impact for riding the DH bike.
Then a couple of years ago I bought a new DH bike, the Canyon Sender CFR. Which gave me plenty of opportunities to wear the Impact shoes again. The shoes started to show their age and in addition to heavily worn soles (the pins had carved out lots of holes), the sole was beginning to peel off from the shoe.

Black Friday sale I picked up a pair of prior year (how many years prior I'm not sure) Impact shoes for $100. Superficially they look like the same shoe I was replacing, but in detail comparison they had nothing in common, except for looking like plain black orthopaedic shoes - the Impact has never been about style.

The sole is different - sewn to the shoe in places instead of simply glued on. The older 5.10 shoe had a cat incorporated in the tread pattern of dots which was a weak point (the thin outline of the cat tore off quite quickly) and was absent from the newer shoe. The tongue is different. The padding is different. The lacing is different.

What remains the same is the feeling of protection for the feet and the secure connection to the pedals. After a 5-day visit to Thredbo using the lifts every day and the Impact shoes every day I can say they are still good.

I can't see the Impact in the current Adidas 5.10 catalogue, which suggests they've discontinued them. So there won't be a replacement for these shoes when the time comes. That seems typical of the way Adidas has treated 5.10 since purchasing them, and a bit sad. For now, the chunky black shoes will remain my go-to pick for lift-served riding. ]]>Gear2023-11-26T01:55:16+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fefbc2c26c2b5206d9f5335553647eff-80.html#unique-entry-id-80https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fefbc2c26c2b5206d9f5335553647eff-80.html#unique-entry-id-80The usual approach for me to fit a customer's bike is to start with the frame that they have, and do what I can to make it fit better. When I purchased a Checkpoint to be my new commuting bike, I selected a stem that would yield my usual saddle to bar reach based on previous (and current) bikes I was riding. And it worked fine.
Then the frame was replaced with the new model Checkpoint. Which has 2 cm more top tube reach than the old model had. I should have swapped to a stem that was 2 cm shorter to achieve the same fit. However, the nearly new stem I had on the Checkpoint was one I found very attractive and both light and stiff. In the meantime, the stem was updated which meant new graphics that I don't like as much. And the price has gone up considerably in a couple of years. Plus they were out of stock everywhere in that size.
I tried the bike with the "too long" stem. I added the maximum permissible (according to the manufacturer's build guide) spacers under the stem to diminish the impact of a longer stem (the stem seems closer when it is higher and as it goes up, it comes slightly back towards the rider thanks to the steering angle).
 
I ended up with the saddle to bar distance and saddle to pedal distance the same on my racing bike and my commuting bike. The pedal to bar distance was a little longer on the commuter, but this can be "adjusted" by hand position on the bars and elbow bend in the rider's arms. I now think having extra room is mostly good. I definitely adapted over a couple of weeks to the new position. And going to another bike doesn't feel weird. These are good. I have a bit extra weight on my hands. That is potentially bad. If I rode this bike for hours at a stretch regularly, it might not work. I rarely ride it more than 3 hours in a single day, and for that much time it is fine.
 
Sometimes a bit of a lateral approach will achieve the desired result.]]>Gear2023-11-16T21:28:10+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/555c6194462536a8ef2c6f6821fca772-79.html#unique-entry-id-79https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/555c6194462536a8ef2c6f6821fca772-79.html#unique-entry-id-79After having a couple of Fox 36 forks on past bikes, and really liking the Boxxer forks on my DH bike, I selected a Slash with Flight Attendant; meaning Zeb forks.
My experience with the Boxxer has been ideal from day one. Set the pressure to that recommended for my weight and one or two minor tweaks to make it feel "right". And then nothing since. It was so "right" I didn't bother to install a ShockWhiz for feedback.
The Zeb began in much the same vein. I put in the recommended air pressure and ended up removing a few psi. It was great. Big hits would use up almost the entire travel, riding along it seemed to sit not-too-far into the travel and the Flight Attendant lockout was a very solid lockout. On my final day of a week riding in Tasmania, something changed. The lockout was soft - the fork visibly moved a lot under pedalling and there didn't seem to be the same amount of rebound damping as I'd had up until that point. I thought the Charger cartridge had blown.
The fork went to RockShox and their dyno said it was 100% as intended.
My shop just happened to have a new customer's Slash being built at the same time, so they set both forks up for the mechanic and he rode them both back-to-back and couldn't discern a difference.
I got the bike back and did all my riding over winter on shorter travel bikes. The Slash mostly sat. And with Spring on us and Thredbo opening in sight, I pulled the Slash out and started riding it again. I had to set up the pressures from scratch because of all the experimenting by RockShox and the shop. I put a ShockWhiz on the fork this time. With the same pressure I used in Tassie a few months ago, I found it very stiff and impossible to get more than about 1/2 travel. The ShockWhiz concurred:
Too much air pressure.
Too much compression damping.
Too many tokens (there were none!).
 
Dropping the air down incrementally until it was about 1/3 less, I was still not getting full travel and while the fork felt soft, it was also not settling into travel with sufficient sag.
The Flight Attendant's function of locking out the shock when pedalling isn't fit for purpose with the ShockWhiz measuring damping and spring rates, so I have had the fork in manual "open" mode the whole time. Thus, I can't comment on the firmness or lack thereof for "locked" mode.
 
A suspension fork is a pretty simple device, really. I cannot imagine what could have changed that effected such a significant change in the fork's behaviour.
It is going back to the shop for a strip-down. Shop owner has put a Zeb on his own bike recently and went through the fork lubricating seals and checking torque on bolts to get the best possible performance out of his fork - he's going to check everything internally is good with my Zeb.
Fingers crossed he finds something to "fix" because I'm almost out of ideas.
 
There is a British company that makes negative tokens for forks. Effectively reducing the compression ratio in the air chamber, perhaps it will permit me to run more baseline pressure and still achieve full travel? Check out Trutune.co.uk if you're curious. Obviously, I haven't tried one yet so I can't comment on how much difference it makes. The science seems sound, if a little bit like magic.
 
I want my "new" Zeb back.]]>Gear2023-10-20T22:42:14+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/558cb5bc1c0b8470807d1377698123f2-78.html#unique-entry-id-78https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/558cb5bc1c0b8470807d1377698123f2-78.html#unique-entry-id-78MTB suspension is very sophisticated these days. If you read my last entry on air pressure in suspension, you'll know I ventured into the setting of the knobs without fully exploring the topic. That is here...

Even on my Slash with Flight Attendant, I still need to set all the electronic knobs properly and get the air pressure right. Flight Attendant really only flicks the platform switch to one of three positions (open, pedal or locked) as I ride based on slope, bumps and pedalling input. On more regular suspensions, it is all manual and the setting up is still the critical thing to an enjoyable ride.

Take the Fox Float X shock or the Grip2 fork. They have 4 adjustments which few other models or brands offer: high and low speed for both rebound and compression. In contrast, entry level forks might have zero adjustments although they usually have a rebound adjuster because that has to be adjusted for air pressure to behave anywhere near properly.
Assuming you read and followed the previous entry to get your air pressure correct, what's next?

First, let's look at what this high speed and low speed stuff is all about. It refers to the shaft speed of the suspension rather than the forward velocity of the bike. When jumping a bike, the face of the jump loads the rear suspension a lot. A big jump face will just about bottom out the shock. As the wheel leaves the lip there is suddenly zero resistance to the shock fully extending. It will do so with full speed - this is high speed rebound. The low speed happens when you go through a big bowl-shaped depression in the trail. As the bike travels down into the bowl, speed of the bike increases. On the other side it goes up the side of the bowl, slowly compressing the shock (this is LSC's territory) and as you roll out of the bowl at the top back onto flat terrain the load comes off smoothly assuming a gradual transition from up to flat - this is low speed rebound. Low speed compression also happens from pedalling but mostly it is the gradual increase in load from gentle terrain changes. High speed compression is running into a rock at high speed. The front wheel instantly wants to move up the height of the rock. There is so much oil flow attempting to go through the low-speed circuit that it is overwhelmed and the bypass IS the high-speed circuit.
Many HSCs are governed by a shim stack. These are merely thin steel washers that are pushed out of the way by the oil flow through the tiny holes they cover. This is why, as I mentioned in the last entry, you require some HSC to get any LSC. If the washers aren't forced down onto the holes by the HSC adjuster, then the oil can just flow through the holes with little to no damping going on. Once the HSC is set the oil will be forced to go through the LSC circuit. I should have mentioned that this circuit is typically governed by a needle in a hole. The needle has a taper (much like a sewing needle) and the adjuster moves the needle up or down, pushing more or less in the hole. More needle in the hole means less flow (more LSC). Less needle in the hole means more flow (less LSC).

In regular riding conditions you'd like the suspension to ride quite high in the travel range. At or just below sag. This leaves more reserve for bumps and preserves the bike's steering geometry which gets really messed up as the suspension compresses. This calls for a decent amount of LSC (but not so much that the bike feels wooden, slow or sluggish to answer bumps in the trail). LSC might be quite different front to rear because rear suspension has a leverage ratio between wheel travel and shock travel usually around 3:1. Forks area always 1:1.

HSC is the last thing you play with. Once air pressure, rebound and LSC are set, HSC can step into control the movement of the suspension when it hits stuff. Too much HSC will feel rough and make hands sore. Too little HSC relies on the air spring to ramp up and can make the suspension not respond to repeated impacts as well as it might.

Finally, once this is all set, go out and ride the bike and pay attention to what is happening. Keeping notes helps. If it feels right most of the time, but bottoms out when you go faster or rougher - the solution is probably a travel token. If it springs too much off jump lips, that is rebound. If it sits too low in the travel, that is LSC or air pressure. Every problem typically has two remedies. But one preferred remedy. Because everything affects everything else in some way, the best solution for your suspension depends on the impact either adjustment will make to the other things.

Which is where ShockWhiz is quite helpful. Because it looks at compression and rebound, for different kinds of events in isolation, it can recommend a single fix for any problem having considered everything else that might be impacted by its recommendations. A rider is doing well if they can look at one thing per run.

When you do make changes, only change one thing at a time and not more than 1 or 2 clicks on the dial. If you change two things and one is an improvement while the other is worse, the end product might be "feels the same". You'll forego the improvement. Keep notes. Bracketing can also help quickly narrow in on what works. If there are ten clicks, first try 3 clicks and then 7 clicks. One should feel better than the other, try either side of the one that is preferred - eg, you prefer 7 clicks so next steps are to try 6 and 8. If you prefer 6, try 5 and 7 (again). One of these three should be your pick. Another great option is to take the manufacturer's suggestion - they usually offer starting points based on air pressures (which are based on body weight). I find them very close.
RockShox has a setting page on their website if you want to play with that. If you have a Trek, they also have a settings page on their website which goes to tyre pressures as well as suspension settings.

You need to experiment a bit, and pay attention to settings in general, in order to get the most out of our suspension and by association, your bike. ]]>Gear2023-10-05T21:45:53+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/259b46857a0ee827d996a645c1befaa4-77.html#unique-entry-id-77https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/259b46857a0ee827d996a645c1befaa4-77.html#unique-entry-id-77Part 1 was all about tyre pressures. This bit is very much MTB specific because it is about shock pressures. Very few road bikes have shocks!

I remember having to regularly pump up my shock back in the early days of suspension. They leaked. Regularly. You would start out at 250 psi (as an example) and two weeks later it would be down to 200 psi - soft enough to make a difference. I am quite certain I haven't pumped up the shock on my DH bike since I set it on the first ride! That is 2 years (or maybe it is 3 years - yikes).
One of the issues with checking your shock pressure is that the combination of a very tiny air chamber and a very high pressure means that almost every method of checking results in it no longer being at that pressure any more. A shock pump has a short hose that fills with the pressure from the shock when it is connected - it is long enough and has sufficient volume to take at least 10 psi out of most shocks. You can check this by attaching and removing the shock several times.Each time the pressure will decrease by almost exactly the same amount.
This is different from letting air out when removing the shock. Most shock pumps have that problem covered. My favourite shock pump is a Topeak one I've had for years. The hose threads onto the shock valve, sealing air tight. And only then do you thread in the next "stage" that pushes in the valve to release air into the pump. On removal, the process is reversed. Pump the shock to the desired pressure, move the second stage back so the valve is closed and then release the pump from the shock. The noise of releasing air you hear is only air coming out of the pump. Not air coming out of the shock.
Of course, if you worry about this and reattach the pump, it will fill the hose up with air again thereby diminishing the pressure in the shock by that small amount.
Most of my shock pumps (I must have a dozen from all the ones included with bikes over the years - most of them unused in their original packaging) have a different attachment than the one I described above. Instead they do this whole thing in one step by threading onto the shock a long way - first contact is with the seal making it air tight and keep threading until the pin pushes in the valve and releases the air.

What is the correct air pressure in a shock anyway?

Sag is a good starting point. But it is not the end point. With riding gear on (which includes some water in your backpack if that is how you ride, plus riding shoes and helmet and glasses and tools and whatever else you normally ride with) sit on the bike while someone holds the bike upright. Bounce a little and settle on the seat as you would pedal - which means dropper post in the uppermost position. Assistant should slide the o-ring marker on the shock shaft up to the shock seal and then you very carefully dismount the bike without moving the suspension in the process of getting off - sometimes easier said than done. Check the o-ring. On RockShox you'll usually find a set of sag markers. On Fox and other forks you'll have to break out a ruler and some math. Ideal sag is a bit dependent on the type of suspension and the amount of travel - look to your owner's manual for recommendations here. It is around 30% for a DH bike but less - maybe 20% - for some XC bikes.
For the fork, it is very similar but slightly different. Again with full riding gear on, mount the bike while someone holds it upright for you. Get into standing riding position. Bounce a few times and then hold the position. Move the o-ring marker to the dust seal on the slider. Gently dismount. Again, many RockShox forks have sag markers on the stanchion. Other brands do not. With a fork you require less sag than with a shock - 20% is a good starting point for most forks.
Note that you cannot assume the o-ring will end up fully on the other end of the shock shaft or fork stanchion at full travel. Often there are top out bumpers that prevent what appears to be full travel. My old Slash had a travel reducer inside of what was a longer-throw shock, so it never looked like I achieved full travel even when I did. Same with forks. Whether 100 mm travel or 200 mm travel, there can be several millimetres more space. Check it out by measuring the distance from fork seal to fork crown along the exposed stanchion and compare with fork rated travel. They seldom coincide.

Now go and ride it. There is a rule of thumb that you should achieve full travel at both ends on every ride. This is demonstrably false. If you have a DH bike set up to go fast on rough terrain and then ride it slowly down some smooth trail, it is not going to come close to using full travel. On the flip side, if you set up a short travel bike to use full travel on a smooth trail at low speeds you will dangerously bottom out if you go faster or rougher with the same settings.
I use a ShockWhiz because it gives some guidance to what I might do on my own anyway. I don't rely on it fully but it speeds up the process. Across every fork I've ever put the ShockWhiz on, it has told me to soften it up. I must ride really lightly on the front end because I seldom see full fork travel on any bike and even on my 100 mm travel Fox 32 that I performed surgery on to reduce the ramp-up rate in the air spring (I cut the shaft that holds the air seal piston inside the air spring making it ride lower in the chamber and finish lower in the chamber - the opposite of putting in a travel token - much less increase in air pressure as travel is used up) the ShockWhiz told me the rate was too high. It often wants me to install tokens in the shock - I guess if I'm light on the fork I must be heavy on the shock. I mostly ride flat pedals and that pushes my weight rearwards when I drop my heels for pedal traction.
The best way to dial in the shock/fork pressures is to ride a short loop on a technical and turn-laden trail. Adjust the pressure in one unit by 10 psi and ride it. Repeat. Keep notes. When it feels best, it probably is if you chose the trail correctly. Adjust the pressure in the other unit until it feels right. Now go ride for real. Watch for times the bike feels funny, bottoms out, etc.
If I use my Ibis as an example, it has 120 mm of travel at both ends. I get full travel on the rear end (or within 2 mm of shock travel = more than 110 mm of wheel travel) almost every ride. I get full travel on the fork on any ride I do some jumps or drops, or ride rough tracks fast. It corners well. Whatever air pressure I am using is perfect for me. I don't adjust it to suit the place I'm riding. Or the weather. On my Sender I seldom see more than 180 mm travel up front. But that last 20 mm is there and gets used sometimes. Plus it feels great so I don't mess with it. The ShockWhiz wants me to take another token out of the fork, but they are all removed already. I could try - and have been thinking about it - a TruTune negative token (if you haven't heard of these things then go look it up, amazing chemistry/physics to make a negative volume token - the stuff of science fiction) but it is very good already.
Pay attention to the balance between front and rear. Sometimes if you set them up independently and don't bother to pay attention to the balance, it is possible to end up with an imbalance. A few psi extra in one will usually sort that out. Generally if you want better traction at one end, add air to the other end. That pushes some traction away from the firmer end towards the now relatively softer end. That is without the rider changing anything from their behaviour.

Keep detailed notes. Record your final air pressures. Because when you get a service, they'll probably let all the air out and not restore the same pressure it was at. Or maybe your shock will leak. Or you'll lend your bike to someone who needs to change it. Whatever the reason, being able to restore it to how you like it is important.
I haven't tried it yet, but my new digital pressure gauge has no hose. In fact the volume inside the system is so incredibly small that it doesn't seem to change any air pressures at all on checking. This is great. Given it will register up to 350 psi means it can be used to check shock pressures too. And check them without decreasing them. If I do it this way it means the crappy gauges on cheap shock pumps are irrelevant. I can pump up close to correct and then set with the gauge and know it is same as last time.

Beyond the scope of this article, but just a reminder, once you set air pressures you need to twirl the dials to set the rebound and compression settings to match the air pressure, bike, rider combination. Everyone should run rebound in almost the same setting - for a given air pressure. Not too fast and not too slow. If you have HSC and LSC, most compression circuits require a bit of HSC to get the LSC to work properly. LSC is a small orifice with fairly high resistance to oil flow, but at low speeds the flow is low enough that it can flow through. Unless the HSC is zero and then it can bypass the LSC circuit and just go through the HSC circuit. So a couple of clicks of HSC is a good starting point for everyone. LSC like rebound will scale with air pressure but there is more room for personal preference in LSC than in rebound. HSC can make up for not enough tokens, but too much HSC makes for sore hands (more tokens is a better solution).

Set your air pressure, test your air pressure, record your air pressure and periodically check your air pressure for a happy bike. ]]>Gear2023-09-30T16:19:16+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/cb751f70e301a7fd10604f8cb6de8847-76.html#unique-entry-id-76https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/cb751f70e301a7fd10604f8cb6de8847-76.html#unique-entry-id-76Pneumatic tyres were a critical development in the expansion of bike use in the late 19th century. Solid tyres just aren't very nice. Once Dunlop's air-filled tyres were put on bicycles, everyone was better off. Better traction, lower rolling resistance, better handling.

And all these years later, tyres filled with air are still mission-critical on all bikes.

Mountain bike tyres rely on conforming to the surface (where lower pressure is better) and forcing sharp edges into the ground (where higher pressures are better) to enable navigation of unpaved terrain. From MTB commercial origins in the 80s until the late 2000s, we were forced to use a rubber tube to contain that air. The tubes can be heavy - thinner is better from a riding standpoint. But thin tubes are easy to cut. Tubed MTB tyres were always prone to pinch flats necessitating more air than optimal for ultimate traction and handling.
And thanks to Keith Bontrager, we got skinny rims for most of those tubed years too. Keith re-rolled some road rims to 26" diameters, achieving something that the rim companies weren't doing: strong and light double-walled rims. The problem was that road rims were very skinny (around 13 mm inside width) and gave a light globe shape to a 2"+ knobby tyre. That, too, necessitated more air pressure.
Almost all mountain bikes above the very cheapest are now tubeless. To the point that high-end MTB no longer come with tubes inside and leave the tubeless step to the consumer or shop. Now they come with some sealant and valve stems and no tubes.
With tubes and large tyres on relatively skinny 26" rims, I had to run as much as 40 psi to prevent pinch flats. There is a lot of traction loss with that much air pressure in the tyre. In the case of some rim/tyre combinations, I had the tyre rotate on the rim under braking with (not much) lower air pressures - which ultimately rips the valve stem off the tube if it progresses far enough.
My current quiver of mountain bikes all run 30 mm inside width rims. That width supports the sidewall of the wide tyre much better than one half that width can. I run CushCore foam inserts in all of the wheels too. CushCore acts like a fork volume spacer by decreasing the space for air in the tyre (by roughly half). When a bump is hit, the pressure in the tyre increases more quickly due to the lower volume present. Less "travel" is used in the tyre for any given bump than would be the case without the foam. When a big enough impact occurs to bottom out the tyre on the rim the foam intervenes and cushions the impact. Impacts have to be much larger to cause rim damage. On 29" wide wheels with foam inserts I (@100 kg) can get away with around 20 psi - around half of what I used to use with tubes.

On the road side it is only very recently that mainstream tyres and wheels have gone tubeless. And it is by no means (yet, at least) a universal changeover the way it has been in mountain. High pressures and a desire for lightness push more strongly towards tubes. The biggest lever moving us to tubeless tyres has been the realisation that wider tyres are all of: faster, more comfortable, better handling and can be similarly aerodynamic if the wheel is designed for the bigger rubber.
My first new bike in Canberra came with 20 mm wide tyres on it. That wasn't a universal size, but it was very common. Not long after that, 23 mm tyres set in as the main size for a racing oriented bike. For a period of months, until I purchased a floor pump with a gauge, I inadvertently ran upwards of 160 psi in those skinny tyres. I had a frame pump that advertised "up to 150psi" and most of these claims are over-statements of the easy reality, so I pumped up the tyres as firmly as I could with that pump. I assumed it was around 130 or 140 psi. The gauge revealed that it was more like 180 to 200 psi! Good pump. Too much air.
My current race bike doesn't sport tubeless-friendly rims. I run latex tubes and light 25 mm tyres - which is actually considerably lighter than the tubeless alternative. Some 60 grams for a tube plus 200 grams for a tyre and nothing else; adds up to 260 g. I can run these at 100 psi for a solid but comfortable feel.
My commuting bike has tubeless-ready rims. I have used both tubes and sealant over the time I've had the wheels. I could run similar 260 gram tyre and tube options as on the race bike. In tubeless, the similar racy tyre is around 300 grams and the valve stem only weighs a few more grams plus 50 ml of sealant adds up to 330 grams or so. Currently I am running a less racy option (meant to be quite puncture resistant and long wearing) that is only 350 grams. So far they are great.
Sealant does its magic when pushed through a small hole to congeal and seal the hole. Often prior to the rider knowing it ever happened. With 25 psi, there isn't much force behind the sealant and it works effectively. With 125 psi, sealant often sprays under pressure (it has happened to me twice before). Sometimes everywhere (bike, rider, pavement, etc). Currently on 28 mm tyres I only require 75 psi tubeless and it feels fine.

The implied issue here is that as tyre pressures get lower and lower, a single psi difference becomes a higher and higher percentage of the total pressure, and therefore more important. An expensive pump might have an accurate gauge installed, but mechanical gauges are subject to being bumped out of accuracy even if they were good to begin with. An associated problem is scale. Road bike tyres require around 100 psi. The gauge typically goes to 150 psi or higher. That leaves very little resolution for distinguishing between 16 and 18 psi for a MTB tyre (those 2 pressures ride completely differently, by the way). You can get a MTB specific pump with a 50 psi gauge, which improves things a lot (but then you'll require a second pump for the road bike if you have one of those too).
I've just purchased my second digital tyre gauge. The first one recently stopped working after almost 15 years. I can only hope the new one lasts as long. This coincides with the gauge on my main floor pump deciding to become crazy in its readings. Instead of being around 3 psi out at 20 psi (consistently, so I could compensate) it is now something like +15 psi at indicated 20. With no markings below 10, the range I need to in when be filling up MTB tyres is useless to me. It seemed better to buy the gauge than to get a new pump - the pumping part works perfectly still.
The pump explains the difficulties in my household with off-road riding of late. An extra 15 psi in a tyre, when it is only meant to have around 20 psi inside in the first place, means it doesn't ride like you'd expect. Bouncing off of things was common, where normally it would roll over the top. I tried a portable mechanical gauge in the interim, but it really only reads to the nearest 5 psi and even with that I found out using the digital gauge that it was reading low; my road bike tyres had around 5 psi too much inside.

Your tyres are your connection to the terrain, be that the smooth boards of an indoor velodrome, the bare rockslabs in Squamish or anything in between. It really is the first adjustment after bike fit to get correct on your own bike(s) before adjusting anything else. Not the suspension sag or anything else related to suspension should be seen as more important. Without having the tyres right first, the suspension cannot work as it is meant to. On a road bike, go too low and it won't go around corners confidently and safely. Get it too high and you'll be prone to extra punctures, you might bounce off of road bumps and you might damage a rim if you go too high. It also rides poorly with too much air on any surface.
Accurate and consistent air pressure in the tyres is the start of a good experience with any bike. ]]>Riding2023-09-23T22:51:45+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2fee609a93f7fa4ad5ef6202a055dfb8-75.html#unique-entry-id-75https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2fee609a93f7fa4ad5ef6202a055dfb8-75.html#unique-entry-id-75The traditional way to start training for the season was long slow distance. Ride a lot, slowly. More recently, this has been replaced with stuff that seemed more scientific. More structured. Turns out the old idea was a good idea.
 
Most readers will be familiar with the concept of aerobic fitness and possibly anaerobic fitness. Literally meaning "in the presence of oxygen" and "in the absence of oxygen", it can apply to bacteria too (anaerobic bacteria die in the presence of oxygen, having adapted to non-oxygen environments). Aerobic in fitness terms is working at levels low enough that the requirements of the muscles are met by the blood (and hence oxygen) supply from the cardiovascular system. Anaerobic happens at higher levels of performance when oxygen is limited.
 
Incidentally, this is why drugs like EPO are so effective for endurance athletes - EPO stimulates more red blood cell production which provides more oxygen carrying capacity which lifts the maximum aerobic activity point. This is important - in the presence or absence of illegal performance enhancing drugs - because anaerobic activities can only run over a short time period before their resources are exhausted. Without making this a lesson in physiology, suffice to say efforts between 10 seconds and 5 minutes are mixed products of both. Pure anaerobic is limited by the energy supplies in the cells themselves to around 10 seconds. Over 5 minutes and it is going to be an aerobic effort.
The reality is that there are no hard lines, but this is a convenient manner to think about things.
 
This rule - no hard lines - also applies to heart rate zones. Some people have 4 zones, others 6. I've seen more, and fewer. No magical transformation occurs at a given heart rate. Which is why too many zones is not helpful. I'd be quite comfortable with 3 zones: low, medium and high. Low is the level a person can go for hours without feeling stressed. Medium is the level at which the accumulation of lactic acid in the blood starts to make things stressful. And high is that really top-end stuff that you can't do for more than a few minutes at a stretch.
Low could also be called recovery. Medium could be called aerobic. High is hard work - I don't have a nice name for that. In power terms, high is anything from around the MAP and up (Maximal Aerobic Power is the power one can produce for a 5-minute stetch).
 
Back to metabolic efficiency. The coaches I read are all concerned about metabolic fitness these days. This is a measure of efficiency in the cells. It isn't solely down to the number of mitochondria, but roughly equivalent to. More metabolic fitness returns many good things to the endurance athlete and also the human being. A high level shifts the lactate curve to the right on the graph. That means for any given effort (in Watts on the power meter or bpm on the heart rate monitor) the lactate level will be lower. The apparent effort will be lower. The "head room" in that person's system is greater. More capability for the machinery of the body to propel one faster longer.
Higher metabolic fitness is also associated with a healthier, longer life.
 
One of the easiest ways to increase metabolic fitness is through the long slow distance of old. There are some cool ways to tweak it a little here and there, but you want the results, you have to put in the time.
 
In the running sphere this is good news for runners who get injured from trying to run fast too often. In any sport it is good news for those who dislike the hard work of a mostly HIIT program. Injury potential is low all around. Less soreness too. In a time-limited lifestyle there can be issues with getting in enough but that is a separate issue.]]>Riding2023-09-08T22:44:56+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/235af942aee42f1fb1680eb480fb254a-74.html#unique-entry-id-74https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/235af942aee42f1fb1680eb480fb254a-74.html#unique-entry-id-74For anyone racing their bike 50 years ago, about the only means available for measuring recovery would have been a finger to the neck feeling a pulse while looking at the second hand on a watch counting time – all before getting out of bed. A low(ish) HR suggested things were going OK. A high(ish) HR suggested that perhaps an easy day was in order. Not definitive. Frequently stuffed up by getting out of bed before remembering to measure HR. For the dedicated only.
Then Polar introduced a portable heart rate monitor. Suddenly it was possible to monitor on and off bike heart rates without paying attention. They were very expensive at first, and not terribly robust. But they opened up sports science a lot. By the time I came into cycling, the Polar patent was about to expire and the range of Polar watches was extensive. Prices were way better than they had been years earlier.
Incidentally, when the patent did expire and the market was flooded with copycat technology, all of the models that I saw were basically rubbish. Polar still had the upper hand. The end of Polar as market leader and trend setter roughly equates to the time they first moved production out of Finland.
There was a very high-end Polar that did a morning heart rate test. It required as much dedication and memory as the above-mentioned finger test – it had to be done before you got out of bed (and my athletes forgot as much as they remembered). Slip on the chest strap, get the watch into the correct mode, start recording, lie still for 1 minute, stand and repeat the 1 min. Repeat for 30 days and only then the watch could tell you how tired it thought you were. It worked, but the human weak link made it less successful than I’d hoped.
With a power meter one can calculate TSS – the training stress score. This metric allows characterisation of all rides to a standardised scale. How does an afternoon of sprint training at the velodrome (TSS=80) compare to a leisurely longer ride (TSS=80)? Answer in this example is that they are identical in physiological impact. With TSS the training plan can be measured and recovery allowed for – but only in a predicted sort of way, not in an actual way. By this I mean that, on average, this athlete will be fine with this load so we can keep going. But what if they’re not?
Now most wrist devices can measure heart rate variability as part of their regular routine. A built-in optical heart rate monitor not only measures HR with great accuracy, but it can pick up on the interval between the two peaks in a normal heart rhythm. This interval changes depending on the demands of the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. Routine monitoring of this gap allows it to be characterised as HRV – heart rate variability. The value is suppressed in tired (unrecovered) persons. It is also low if one is overly rested and lethargic.
Unlike the prior analyses, HRV doesn’t require one to do anything – just wear the watch and check in with the results now and again. And it is accurate right now because it is based on real measurements of fatigue. Done a hard week and handling the load; HRV will remain steady. Done a recovery week and got sick but symptoms haven’t appeared yet; HRV will be depressed.
With HRV you should be able to measure how long is long enough for your personal sleep needs. It’s a cool insight into how the body works, and it is an accurate reflection of how you’re tracking.

Some further notes on HRV
HRV can be measured continuously by a wrist device. That's not sensible because every activity will impact on it in a way that doesn't help interpretation of the value. It should be taken just prior to waking every day. I think - not 100% sure here - that you can set some Garmin's to measure only during sleep. That's better than all the time. The really useful measurement is just at the end of sleep.
I have been comparing the figure that different people get and it is highly variable. In a paper on HRV I saw a range listed from high 20s to over 100. In my own exploration of individual's values, I've seen mid-40s and low-100s. The point of this is that all that really matters is the consistency of your own score. At least to some extent. If you make a lifestyle change and the value increases, that is a positive change in your life.
HRV is really a miniature version of the variation in HR seen across different activities. For example at rest a pro cyclist might have HR of 40. In the middle of the bunch it might increase to 100. And climbing a 17% gradient in a break-away might push it up to 200. So too does HRV respond to the demands of the body. Inhalation and exhalation change the delays in the system. Digestion. Healing. Immune system working hard with an infection. All of these boost or suppress one side of the sympathetic : parasympathetic balance. ]]>Gear2023-09-02T00:47:27+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/4a2c1ba5ae586ce518545fbbff0079a6-73.html#unique-entry-id-73https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/4a2c1ba5ae586ce518545fbbff0079a6-73.html#unique-entry-id-73If you read this blog regularly, then you’ll know I got a new Slash late last year. I took it to Tassie to ride the Blue Derby trails in March. I had the fork off the bike for a while so SRAM could look into its behaviour (oddly, it all checked out OK, despite it clearly being quite different at the end of the week in Tas than I was at the beginning. Maybe it wasn’t right to start?). Now that the bike is back together and summer is coming and the suspension is more or less fully broken in, it is time to worry about getting it set up “just right”.
Previously, I set it up by getting the sag close to correct and then adjusting the dials until it felt right. But I know I can do better than that with a little iterative adjusting.
Last weekend I installed the ShockWhiz on the fork. Getting all the air out of a RS fork is a difficult challenge for me. I am obviously missing the “how to” understanding as both my Zeb and Boxxer have thwarted me in the past in getting them empty. I finally got the Zeb empty when it wasn’t stuck down (the negative spring is the part I am functionally challenged to empty), measured all the parameters necessary, and then went for a ride with 78 psi in the air spring chamber.
After a 2-hour ride at Stromlo, the app suggested I was a little on the firm side with the air pressure. I reduced that to 72 psi this weekend, reset the app and did another 2-hour ride. Nothing changed except the app now says I need to reduce air pressure more (it has gone from amber to red). I don’t know how that is possible. Yet I can confirm I used a lot less travel than the first week, despite dropping 10% of the air out of the fork.
My plan for next ride is to zero the air pressure and pump back up to 70 psi before pedalling away. Can’t imagine it will make a big difference, but it seems worth trying to make sure the negative and positive air chambers are both at 70.
Once I get the fork dialled in, I will be going after the shock.
I never did this with the Canyon Sender for two, practical, reasons. I set the sag and rode it – it felt divine immediately. When I got the ShockWhiz out of the box to put it on the Canyon, I couldn’t find a location where the ShockWhiz would sit on or near the shock (it sits in a small tunnel) and I couldn’t get the air out of the fork to start calibrating. So I put the ShockWhiz back in its box and went back to riding the Sender.
Even with a ShockWhiz, you can set your suspension up badly. There are numerous set-up goals. You need to pick the one that is right for your bike and your riding (do you want planted or poppy, as an example). And the anomaly of my most recent ride aside, it is a valuable tool to baseline your settings and make known adjustments with measured outcomes. It is also good for diagnosing suspension problems. If your rebound circuit fails, that will show up when it calls for more rebound (but you find it is at zero clicks from full already).
For the first time that I can remember, I had to change the battery in the Whiz. The first ride on the Slash reported a low battery. It wouldn’t wake up a week later. Thankfully SRAM/Quarq designed it to be replaceable while mounted on a bike. It is a bit expensive for what it is and does. It won’t work with many forks (Manitou, DT, Formula, Ohlins and so on with dual positive air chambers or progressive air chamber designs). And paradoxically, I find it easier to use on Fox suspension than RockShox units. But all that aside, it is a useful tool. Something that monitored the front and rear simultaneously would be even better because it’s possible to have them working with, or against, each other. The bike shop has a telemetry unit they want to try out on my Slash in the coming weeks. I can’t wait to see it in action.
]]>Riding2023-08-17T21:28:17+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2d0c351999fe031c33e8ae9e960e1c6f-72.html#unique-entry-id-72https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2d0c351999fe031c33e8ae9e960e1c6f-72.html#unique-entry-id-72The Red Axe gear on my commuting bike still tempts me into riding too hard. I want to cruise to work in a reasonable manner. Actually I want to try out about 6 months of hours-per-day Zone 2 training on the same bike - which means not going to work (so that isn't going to happen) - but in lieu of all that fantasy, I want to ride to work at a brisk but not breakneck pace.

Red doesn't seem to permit. This morning I averaged 135 - about 20 bpm higher than usual - just because the sun was out and I felt like pedalling.

I can't put my finger on what part of the Red group goads me into pushing harder. I find if I watch my HR on the Garmin screen, then I am OK. If my screen is set to something else, then I blow through my ceiling.

Incidentally, I got about 800 km on the first charge for the rear derailleur. I charged the front too, but it didn't require it quite yet. While 800 km isn't going to cut it for Paris-Brest-Paris in one go on one battery, probably, it is more than enough for my needs.

Red is attractive. The shifting is flawless. Now that the bike has some use, it is also silent. It took a few rides to get some of the noises to settle down. And the rear brake was rubbing but it has finally been centred and remained for more than one ride (ten days in fact).

It rained a bit in the past week. My bike is now quite dirty. I plan to wash it on the weekend if it is sunny out. It is mostly adhered plant matter from the pathway surface that got splashed up onto the frame and dried out in place. Easy wash.

I've hooked up the Garmin to the shifter so it can display both the gearing I have selected and the battery status of each of the four batteries in the system. On Monday night when the rear derailleur crossed the low battery threshold, the battery indicator on the Garmin went red, and there was a beep. Hard to miss both signals.

I got back on my AXS MTB after a brief hiatus last weekend, too. It's odd, but I really like the ease of adjusting the saddle height with the wireless dropper post. It isn't hard to do on the other bikes, but it is SO easy on this one. I just love the soft lever action.

AXS is addictive. Don't succumb if you don't want to get hooked. ]]>Gear2023-08-03T22:32:05+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2c5bea62035b755d6a05f0ca262c7437-71.html#unique-entry-id-71https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2c5bea62035b755d6a05f0ca262c7437-71.html#unique-entry-id-71I have been using Speedplay pedals for a VERY long time. The first I tried were the Magnum MTB pedals almost 30 years ago. They updated them with a revised design and a better cleat and called it the Frog - I bought those straight away and used them until I got tired of lots of cleat maintenance. Soon after that I bought some X pedals for the road bike. They were great with one caveat. The X-shaped retention spring in the cleat ran over the pedal axle. Thousands of kilometres and numerous rotations of the pedals resulted in a shallow groove in the pedal axle. Speedplay's response was that they had never seen an axle break on the line, but I wasn't convinced. Perhaps neither was Speedplay because it wasn't too long before the Zero pedal was released. Like the Frog was a vast improvement on the Magnum, the Zero was an update and improvement on the X pedal. I sold my two sets of X pedals and bought some Zero pedals. I'm still using them.
Literally. I still have those original pedals in use. I think I bought four pairs of navy blue Zeroes in one go, and they are still going well today. Regular greasing and cleaning does wonders for pedals, I guess. I added three pairs of the Zero Track Special along the way too. I actually preferred the stiffer release of the Track version so they found their way onto my track bike, my road racing bike and my time trial bike.
I put my left foot down when I stop. So I clip/unclip much more with my left than my right. This can be seen in the wear on the plastic pedal body of the Zeroes. I started using a pair of the Track Specials with my red Checkpoint three years ago - they were both red. But after three + years of commuting not to mention all the use before that, the pedal bodies were looking rather worn (the letters moulded into the bodies to identify left and right were gone).

Meanwhile, a few years ago, Wahoo of smart trainer fame bought the Speedplay company. They completely changed the pedal line. Gone were all the legacy options: no more MTB pedals (they did a replacement for the Frog and a flat pedal), no more X pedals, and the Zero had an easier in-and-out little brother called the Light Action - all gone. The Zero was totally reworked with new plastic (no more colours - boo), new metal (better bearings fit in the revised design, and the pedal body was fully ringed in steel) and new cleats. But they retained full compatibility with the Zeroes of old. Old cleats fit new pedals and new cleats fit old pedals. How clever. And in deference to the discontinued Light Action, they made a new cleat with easier release. (In my opinion this is a much better option because once you get accustomed to clipless pedals in a Light Action pedal you would have to change pedals to get better retention - under the new system you only need to change your cleat.) The old cleats were anodised aluminium; very slippery to walk on. The new cleats have a built in rubbery cover; apparently (I haven't tried them yet) much better to walk on. I have coffee shop cleat covers for the old cleats. Don't require them for the new cleats.

When I was sourcing all the parts for my new commuter bike I found some Wahoo pedals on sale. I bought one set. Now that I have been using them for a couple of weeks, I thought I would reflect on them. The new Zero seems as stiff as the Track Special, rather than the regular Zero of old. This is a great thing, I thought the regular pedals were too light in their action. Other than that, the transition has been invisible. They click into the old cleats fine. They release fine.

Soon I'll have some experience with the new cleats because I have decided to retire my commuting shoes, deprecate my racing shoes to commuter duty, and roll out my new-old-stock been-sitting-in-the-cupboard-for-over-a-year new Northwave Extreme shoes to racing duty with a pair of the new Speedplay cleats on the soles.

Wahoo also bought some in-development power measuring pedals company and solved their technical issues and released a Speedplay power pedal. I'd love to try those. In fact, the bike magazine and I tried to get me a set to review. The agent wasn't interested in having their pedal reviewed and neither was Wahoo in the US. So these remain on my list...]]>Gear2023-07-29T18:04:18+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/41c4383b6d97423e5c4dbcacf0565159-70.html#unique-entry-id-70https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/41c4383b6d97423e5c4dbcacf0565159-70.html#unique-entry-id-70Back in the days when everyone rode steel frames, they made noise quite often because everything required frequent maintenance. Bottom brackets had loose bearings in them. Headsets had loose bearings in them. Pedals had loose bearings in them. Freewheels had loose bearings in them. One ride in the rain was sufficient for most bikes to contaminate at least one of these and cause noise.
I remember Saturday morning bike fixing when I was at university. There was always something that either drew attention from noise, or because it felt loose, tight or rough. High end gear was better, but it still needed a lot of TLC.
If you were a regular cyclist, you got in the habit of continuous maintenance just to keep your bike running well. I never knew a regular cyclist in those days who wasn't their own mechanic, so I don't know how someone went getting their shop to do it all for them - saving things up might well have ruined something or left the bike stranded.
But I digress. One thing you could count on with a skinny-tube steel frame is that it wasn't overly annoying to have a creak in it. Those thick, skinny tubes didn't amplify noises.

Fast forward to today. Everything is sealed. Sometimes beyond even replacing/adding grease to it. Headset and bottom bracket bearings are sealed collections of bearings that simply drop in in the case of headsets and press in with bottom brackets (even the threaded bottom bracket units have the bearings pressed into them - the current Shimano bottom brackets can have the bearings pulled and new ones pressed in for less $$ than a whole new assembly as an example). And everything is installed in a super-oversized thin-walled carbon frame. These bike frames isolate the sound from its source (where did that noise originate?) and amplify it to the point it cannot be ignored.
On the plus side, even when making noise there is seldom damage being done. These cartridge units can wiggle and make noise in the frame but be perfectly fine doing this for thousands of kilometres. Noise control is not about perfect adjustment - in fact there is seldom any adjustment possible. Instead it is about getting just the right compound in just the right place so that the motions continue silently.

Take my recently departed Checkpoint. It was an absolutely brilliant commuting bike. Comfortable. Speedy. Light. Top of the line gear in the form of mechanical shifting Campagnolo Record 12 speed. But it was noisy. For almost every ride over the three years I rode it. I made lesser and greater efforts to exorcise the noise. New bottom bracket bearings. Different cranks. Lubricate the adjustable dropouts. Check the torque on everything. Grease the headset. Grease the chainring/spider interface. Lube the through axles. And more. I went over absolutely everything at least 2x in 3 years. Then the shop had it for a total of 2 weeks where they did one thing I couldn't do (replace the bearing seats for the bottom bracket) and re-did everything I did do (lube everything and check the torque settings). And still it creaked. We could only conclude that perhaps there was a flaw in the carbon construction, somewhere invisible, that made a noise. Trek agreed and offered me a replacement frame.

Thanks Trek!

Even my racing bike, a Trek Madone, makes some crazy noises from time to time. I think that is just the way it is. This large volume, thin wall, carbon structure is light and fast and noisy. It has an almost identically Campagnolo Record mechanical 12 speed build as the Checkpoint had. Nothing is ever loose. And it almost never gets ridden in the wet. But it can make a noise sometimes.

As a bike shop mechanic there were many times that customers brought in weird ghost noises. Once it was one particular spoke crossing in the rear wheel - once lubricated with one drop of oil, the bike was silent. But it took hours to get to the spoke crossings.

Mountain bikes are even more prone to it with their suspension systems moving all over the place. I have two noises in my Ibis. One seems to come from the shock itself. Is it internally dry? Probably time to replace the seals on it just in case. The other comes from pedalling, but does not seem to be related to the mechanical components. Maybe a derailleur hanger? That was an early noise on the replacement Checkpoint on its first rides after it got damp - there is an aluminium derailleur hanger than interfaces on bare carbon. A touch of heavy grease made it quiet. Time to investigate the same pieces on the Ibis for noise.

On my single speed MTB, the dropouts move to provide chain tension. The eccentric bottom bracket alternative is a constant source of noises, and they tend to rotate and wreck carefully adjusted tensions. The sliding dropouts are a nice alternative. They also must move slightly in use. Every time I remove them, clean them, lubricate them and reinstall them at torque spec, they are quiet until they get wet/dusty again or about 3 rides, whichever comes first! I don't want to exceed specified torque for fear of breaking anything. So I have to put up with some noise in between services. This brings me back to where I started this entry - I could be doing this servicing after every second ride to prevent the noise from ever occurring. Lazy? Perhaps. But I also always have a backlog of much needed bike work to do so I don't want to do this non-vital work as well. Need time to ride!

The Canyon Sender DH bike also has a little "tick" noise in the drivetrain. I strongly suspect it is dropout related. The dropouts are many pieces permitting wheelbase adjustment. I think when moist/dirty, the pieces make noise. Given how little actual pedalling happens on the DH bike, I've been happy to ignore it. But not forever. I will get around to covering the pieces in grease to see if it quiets the noise.

My favourite no-longer pro rider, Phil Gaimon, even did a video on creaks. His TL:DR was that it is never the bottom bracket. And with current equipment this is 99.99% true. It really always sounds like, but never is, the bottom bracket. So do not start there. Unless you have a press-fit bottom bracket that isn't press fit properly. They can make noises. I put a thread-together bottom bracket in my first Slash not long before I sold it - instead of just pressing in, the two halves thread together in the middle ensuring they are parallel with each other and provide a good support to the axle, as well as ensuring they're tight in the frame. I didn't think the noise was the bottom bracket then either, but the replacement unit did make the bike quiet. At least until I sold it.
Suspect everything, except the bottom bracket. Even if you get through everything and the only thing left is the bottom bracket it is still not likely that. They basically don't seem to make noises any more. Hoorah.

Postscript: Today I got rid of a creak noise in my Ripley trail bike by snugging up the drive side bottom bracket cup. It was finger tight and that's why it creaked. So it can be the bottom bracket.

Good luck and good hunting.
]]>Riding2023-07-22T00:29:24+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8eac1fd1d18b097ab3db7f0453a36932-69.html#unique-entry-id-69https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8eac1fd1d18b097ab3db7f0453a36932-69.html#unique-entry-id-69This entry comes out of a conversation I had at work recently. We were discussing how you can get so much contradictory advice from different YouTube presenters on any skill you care to investigate. That can be anything, but in this case we were discussing jumping a mountain bike.
Some presenters offer partial advice, which might seem in conflict with other partial advice - when the reality is they might both be offering advice with limited utility. To put it another way, they can both be right and seemingly in conflict. My favourite example of conflicting advice comes from the very professional and "they should know better" people at GMBN (Global Mountain Bike Network). There are several videos where the advice offered is to "make sure you get back sufficiently" and then in the demonstration they remain nicely centred on their bike throughout. I've not been able to figure out if they feel like they are moving back relative to their usual position, or if they believe they move back when they don't (and you shouldn't!). As former pro cyclists and obviously more-than-competent riders they know better than to get so far back that they unweight their front wheel and lose steering control, yet there are numerous videos where they offer this advice. I just don't get it.
Back to jumping. One guy (I think he is The Loam Ranger) offers "stand up to the jump" which is advice that is really good, if you can follow it. What does that mean? First it means don't let the jump push you around and make you into a passenger. Always be the driver, never be the passenger. Second it also means literally, stand up when you jump. Pushing down through your feet is the single most essential part of jumping and it naturally leads one to be standing up straight in mid jump. How do you "stand up to the jump"? By standing up when you jump. The hard part of this advice is how do you follow it if you can't follow it? He gives some examples of standing up and not standing up, but not a lot of advice for fixing problems preventing you from standing up straight.
Lee McCormack (leelikesbikes - author and YouTube guy as well as in-person teacher to many pros) is so invested in his rowing methodology that he developed and sells a device called the RipRow that not only teaches you to hip hinge properly, but strengthens the move through adjustable resistance while doing it. (It is a set of handlebars on a vertical bar hinged to a base plate that you stand on and connected by a hydraulic strut that resists your push and pull motions - if that makes no sense then look it up for video.) For me, all the years of working with PMBI and doing jumps trails finally worked much better (no one would accuse me of being an amazing jumper, but at least now I can do most of the ones I ride on at trail speed without fear) when I tried Lee's rowing motion. It allowed me to coordinate everything I was doing with better timing for the lip of the jump, regardless of jump size or slope. So thanks Lee. But that rowing analogy doesn't work for everyone.
Some people talk about bunnyhopping off the face of the jump, and certainly that is what some people do - particularly to get extra height - but accentuating a bunnyhop involves moving hips backwards to get more pop and I'd heavily discourage anyone from trying this out on a jump face until first they are really good at jumping and bunnyhopping separately. It is a recipe for making it onto Friday Fails (a Pinkbike recurring video of people crashing).

The short of it is, be very wary of whose advice you pick on YouTube because there are no credentials to be a presenter there. All you need is a camera and an opinion. At least with an in-real-life teacher you can form an opinion of their teaching skills as you work with them. The good ones will make your riding easier, flowier and more confident very quickly. ]]>Gear2023-07-18T19:15:20+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1ab87028ccfb953008db592181dae5ba-68.html#unique-entry-id-68https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1ab87028ccfb953008db592181dae5ba-68.html#unique-entry-id-68My first shift/brake levers (I cannot bring myself to call them brifters like "they" do on the Internet) were 8-spd Shimano. Then I changed to 10-spd SRAM. Both of these were obviously mechanical for rim brakes as that was the only option back then. Three years ago I changed once more, to 12-spd Campagnolo. Again with mechanical shifting but now with hydraulic braking. This was the third shifting pattern to learn, but as I always had the same shifting pattern on road and commuter bike it was easy to swap.
Now I've gone to Red AXS with its wireless shifting and hydraulic braking. After a couple of weeks of riding on it, it is time for an early review. Incidentally, this is the first time I haven't updated both race and commuter bikes at the same time. The race bike still has 12-speed mechanical Record on it. And it will forever as the frame cannot take a DUB axle and I've never seen a 12-speed Red GXP crank.
I really liked the feel and function of the Record hoods. The hydraulic master cylinder sticks up a long way above the brake lever pivot. This is a good spot to grab onto for the hands. The hoods feel quite slim, but not too slim. The hood rubber wore well, despite the big slot in the inside for the upshift lever to poke through.
The Red levers feel completely different. Without a shifting mechanism, there are no holes or gaps in the lever body so the rubber hood feels very solid. It also feels quite wide. I like it with my large hands, but I wonder if small riders don't feel like it is too much? The rubber is quite grippy and soft. The knobs and hooks on the rubber hood don't seem to lock onto the lever body quite as solidly as the Record design, but it hasn't proved a problem. The master cylinder is set lower in the lever body because there is no shift mechanism in the way, so they don't stick up quite as much as the Campagnolo ones, but enough that there is something to hang onto.
I was a tiny bit worried because so many reviews suggested that the Campag disc brakes were the best of the big three. However, I find the SRAM brakes almost identical to the Campagnolo ones in use. One finger braking is more than enough for most stops. The lever doesn't move much (it shouldn't, I'm competent at bleeding brakes after all these years) and there is good feel of how much slowing you're going to get. On the hood or on the drops, the brakes are good.
I set the levers up to flow straight out from the bar tops. One straight line in total. And the mix of these Bontrager bars and SRAM levers means the hoods are a touch higher than they would be with Campagnolo levers set up flat. Which moves the lever out from the drop a bit more. Not so much that I can't reach with my long fingers, and I can always wind the lever in a bit with the reach adjust, but usually I end up with them a little closer than I might like because of how low they are positioned on the curve of the drop.

The original 11-spd wireless Red shifting was simply e-tap (with the mechanical being called double tap, this was a cute play with words). Now 12-spd is AXS, but still e-tap. E-tap is, I believe, the shifting pattern. In the AXS world you can change the shifting pattern and even make it semi-automatic (you select up or down shift and the computer decides when to change the front and rear derailleurs), but the two lever system is preserved from 11-spd times. Default is the right lever moves the chain right at the cassette to a higher gear. The left lever moves the chain left on the cassette to a lower gear. And both levers in sync activate the front derailleur to move to the opposite chainring. With only 2 rings, it is super simple to just swap the rings. No need to tell it which way to go. I love it. Brilliant.
On installation I noticed two ports in the right lever body to add wired "blips", the remote buttons that sprinters, climbers or TT riders might want elsewhere on the bars. These are for historical reasons, mostly, because there are now wireless blips too. If you have a TT bike with only blips, you can run a wireless blip box to receive the signals and tell the derailleurs what to do. The blips can be programmed for function in the app too - whatever you want.
I'm shifting way more than I need to just because I enjoy playing with the system. I still occasionally try to flick a gear change with my thumb in the Campagnolo style - there is no button there to receive my command, but I guess I'll do this still because I have to shift that way on the racing bike.

So far, so very good. ]]>Gear2023-07-13T22:40:20+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/61c52a7fdd391b5b21faee17b96e9af8-67.html#unique-entry-id-67https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/61c52a7fdd391b5b21faee17b96e9af8-67.html#unique-entry-id-67When I made the switch to Campagnolo components, I purchased as many tools along with them as I knew I would need. That didn't begin to cover what I'd actually require over time. As lovely as Campag components are, perhaps their tools are nicer again. Many a shop mechanic loves to own a set of the traditional tools from Italy. I almost took a job once simply because I would get my hands on a multi-thousand dollar set of Campagnolo frame preparation tools (headset and bottom bracket facing tools, to name only two in the set).
The Campag chain is meant to be joined by their unique method. Like Shimano, there is a specific joining pin with a pilot that breaks off after use. Unlike Shimano, the ends of the pin need to be peened to assure a secure connection. So I got the Campagnolo chain breaker. It is a beauty. Not only does it have chain breaking and rejoining functions, but an anvil against which the pin can be peened and a retaining device to ensure the chain doesn't slip upwards and damage either the chain or the tool mid-use.
My chain whip is very old and I have repaired the chain on it numerous times. Plus it dates from 8-spd days, so it is a properly wide chain (perhaps 5-spd?). It really doesn't fit on 11 or 12 speed sprockets properly. The Campagnolo chainwhip came with a nice section of Campagnolo chain on it (not the cheap chain on my older one) and it is just pleasant to use.
Every hydraulic brake system is a bit different (size and type of opening, fluid requirements, etc) so I got the Campag bleed kit. Which is a re-badged Magura bleed kit as the calipers are so close to production Magura brakes that they share pads. It works really well.
The Hirth joint that connects the two half axles on the cranks uses a big Allen headed bolt. I didn't buy - or even check if they offer - the appropriate large allen key to drive the bolt, but I did purchase a socket driven Allen tool so I could put it on my torque wrench. It is unfortunate that the Super Record cranks use a left-hand threaded titanium bolt where the Record cranks use a right-hand threaded steel bolt. My, and most, torque wrench doesn't guarantee accuracy when used on left-hand threaded fasteners.
I have adjusted the rear hub several times in 3 years of riding the wheels. The axle is a large aluminium tube, onto which threads various pieces. To get the drive-side locknut off requires either two 18 mm cone spanners (I only have one of this size) or an 11 mm Allen key to fit the hex inside the axle shaft (I do not have nor have I ever seen - except in a Campagnolo catalogue - an 11 mm hex key). However, it doesn't need to be very tight so an 8 mm plus a 3 mm pair of Allen keys will fit pretty well inside, and if coupled with an 18 mm cone spanner on the opposite side it can be tightened sufficiently by using my smallest shifting spanner on the locknut. I had to do this to replace the freehub body (Campag to SRAM XDR) and all the videos are of people doing it with Zonda wheels. I can see from the info supplied with the freehub that both the Shamal Ultra and Zonda use the same freehub body - but the Zonda rim-brake wheels use a 6 mm Allen key in the axle making life so much easier. Of course it is left-hand threaded, which is unexpected but makes sense to keep it from loosening in use.
Way back when, the original Campagnolo cassette lockring tool also did double duty as a bottom bracket tool - the cartridge BBs had the same toothed socket profile around the axle. Two for one was nice while it lasted. It could hardly look different to the Shimano one, but it is enough different to necessitate a separate tool. SRAM just used Shimano's profile, even with the XDR cassettes.
I found that they make a caliper alignment tool that fits in the brakes in place of the pads with a slot for the rotor to get optimal alignment when building the bike. I probably would have purchased that if I knew about it first. I do have a Birzman alignment tool that fits a thin stainless plate between the pad and the rotor on both sides making it hard to get the alignment wrong. But the Campagnolo part is just nice.

Now that I've swapped to SRAM on and off the road, I don't see many specific tools that I either don't already have or aren't included with the parts. An example of the former is the bleed kit. I have a SRAM professional bleed kit with both threaded and push-fit ends so I can bleed road or MTB brakes with bleeding edge calipers as well as the older threaded port calipers. My original Eagle XO1 bikes didn't come with the B-tension gauge tool. My Eagle AXS XX1 bike did come with the - different - B-tension gauge tool. My new Red AXS derailleur came with the - road specific - B-tension gauge tool. And the front derailleur came with the alignment tool installed, ready to go on the bike perfectly. Shimano used to have dealer-only front derailleur alignment gauges that were harder to use than the eyeball method most mechanics were used to. But this SRAM tool sits on the teeth of the big ring over enough teeth to practically ensure perfect alignment by even a semi-competent mechanic. The derailleur cage has alignment marks on it too, so should it ever come loose or get bumped it will be easy to see it is out of position.
Thankfully, I didn't encounter any tools I required but didn't have in assembling my Checkpoint because I wanted to get it ride-ready as soon as possible. I have three chain breaker tools and only one fits the flat top chain large diameter rollers in its guide, but one was sufficient to shorten the chain for installation.
The T47 DUB bottom bracket - of course - doesn't use the same installation tool as the BSE DUB bottom bracket tool. Therefore it was serendipity that the bike shop installed it for me before I took the Red ensemble away.
The brakes appeared to be fully bled on delivery. That won't work for me because the hose has to run through the frame to near the axle before emerging, and the tunnels they run in are so narrow the olive has to be cut off the hose to slide it through. Luckily I know how that all works from lots of SRAM brakes around the house.
SRAM doesn't really make tools aside from the mentioned ones (bleed kit, b-tension gauge). So there are fewer opportunities for a weird one to pop up in assembly - if it is a routine tool then I have it and if it is a very specific purpose tool then they probably make it and I'd know I need it.
The rollers on SRAM 12-spd chains are larger in diameter than any other chain, even though they retain the 1/2" pitch of other bike chains. That means that you shouldn't try a Red chain on another brand's rings or cassette, nor should you try another brand's chain on Red sprockets. It is a good thing that they are a decent chain given the lack of options. My chain wear checking tool (a Shimano one - almost all the tools for this on the market are useless, although more 3-points-of-contact checkers are around than before) probably won't do the trick. I rarely use it anyway because a 12" ruler is best. ]]>Riding2023-07-07T18:28:51+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/03e73e0cacb32a3c1e7d15ccc990059f-66.html#unique-entry-id-66https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/03e73e0cacb32a3c1e7d15ccc990059f-66.html#unique-entry-id-66TL:DR - faster is always better, except when it isn't

When you spot a cyclist who is struggling along in too big a gear, pedalling at an ultra-slow cadence, what do you think? I always think how much easier it would be if they would shift to a smaller gear and pedal faster. For most people, that impression probably only applies at numerically low cadences, such as 40 or 50 rpm. As a coach, I still feel that way sometimes at 90 rpm.
If there is one lesson I try to impart onto every cyclist I coach, it is an ability to pedal quickly. If you are a track cyclist, the only way to go faster is to pedal faster (only one gear on a track bike). Your top speed is usually governed by how fast you can pedal rather than pure power limitations. So, to be more competitive, you need more leg speed - more top end cadence.
Most of us aren't track racers. Yet it still applies that an ability to pedal smoothly to a higher cadence limit gives a rider more flexibility in their riding. Everyone can stop pedalling and just coast when it gets too hard to pedal faster. Usually you can shift up to a larger gear and continue to pedal. But for a short time the best option is to just pedal faster.

It is true that cadence opposes efficiency. It takes extra oxygen to move legs faster - more than the increase in power would demand. Thus the efficiency is decreased. Yet most good cyclists will instinctively up the cadence when they up the pace.
The Lance Armstrong years are way behind us now. One thing he changed about competitive cycling was use of cadence. (Oversimplified but essentially true) A low rate puts the demands on the muscles of the legs. They get tired. A high rate, however much more inefficient it might be physiologically, moves at least a portion of the demand to the cardiovascular system. By spreading demands across systems the rider can go faster for longer. If the CV is up to the challenge. And Lance was on the best drugs available, ensuring his CV was up to the challenge.

My cadence strategy for any race is to start out as fast as possible and slow down as you get tired through the event. Use aerobic fitness for as much and as long as possible. Rely on leg strength at the end when necessary. The problem with trying to do the reverse is that tired legs don't respond to the cardiovascular but can continue without it - the order must go that way.

I've seen many clients for years of training. They have all improved their default cadence upwards, expanded their range of possible pedalling speed and therefore gotten faster for longer. By pushing the boundaries of what is possible on any given day to achieve just a couple more rpm. There are numerous muscles in the legs that coordinate to pedal. This requires neurological training. A new bike rider cannot pedal comfortably and with souplesse at a high rate nor for that long because their nerves aren't trained for the motion. That takes hours to develop. And years to perfect.
Pro cyclists mostly make it look easy because their office is their bike and they spend every day at their "desk".

No matter if you are pedalling an e-enduro bike, a light XC hardtail, a touring bike laden with panniers or a sleek time trial bike; they all go better if you are smooth and relaxed in pedalling and better again if you have a wide range of cadence to select from. ]]>Gear2023-07-02T20:49:09+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/afd719f0f9374c8871c6669fba9b3f5d-65.html#unique-entry-id-65https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/afd719f0f9374c8871c6669fba9b3f5d-65.html#unique-entry-id-65Is a gravel bike a road bike that takes fat tyres, or a mountain bike with drop handlebars?
With the Trek Checkpoint, Trek's design decisions place the frame somewhere in the middle of these two alternatives and have had multiple impacts on my commuter bike.
A bit over 3 years ago, Campagnolo released the Record 12 speed group. I had ridden the 11 speed disc brake option at Campagnolo Press Camp the year before, and I was sold. As I have put it many times, I didn't know I wanted disc brakes on a road bike until I tried them. They were that good. I purchased 2 groups from Campagnolo and then found frames to hang them on. For commuting duties, I picked a Checkpoint. I would have had fewer issues if I picked an Emonda, a Domane or even a Boone, but none of these frames will take a rack. I learned a long time ago that panniers beat a backpack without question.
There is a Trek kit to fit Campagnolo cranks in the BB90 bottom brackets most Trek frames had up until recently. This involves gluing some pieces into the BB bearing seat area to fully support the bearings that are pre-installed on Campag cranks. Then it is just bolt them in place and go. But that wasn't so simple with the Checkpoint. The chainstays bulge right behind the bottom bracket shell to make room for a fatter rear tyre. And the very straight arms of the Campagnolo Record crank wanted to pass through the left stay. Suddenly I had cranks I couldn't use.
After a lot of looking and frustration, I ended up with a set of Red 10 spd cranks with a 130 BCD spider for 39/53 rings. Before they even arrived I learned that they wouldn't fit on the bike either. That 39T inner ring would contact the right chainstay, and the 53T big ring was too tall for the front derailleur to clear at the top of the mounting slot. Those cranks went back and a set of 110 BCD compact Red cranks were purchased. Onto these went Praxis 34/50 chainrings. These fit fine.
Except the glued in Campagnolo adapter pieces were slightly in the way. And by slightly, I mean that when the cranks were installed, the inner face of the arms just around the bottom bracket shell lightly touched the rings on both sides. Ideally, they wouldn't be there. But the glue used was very strong and I was afraid of trying to remove them and damaging my still unridden frame.
Everything (except one thing - I'm coming back to this in a minute) was fine for 26 months. When the Red cranks broke at the pedal eye. Not a catastrophic failure; the pedal remained in the crank. But it wouldn't have taken many more kilometres to break it completely. With a 24 month warranty, SRAM said they would give me a discount on new Red cranks - only they didn't have any in stock.
To keep riding to work I installed a set of older Rival cranks I had on hand. With a 130 spider, my only option was to run the small chainring on the outside and remember not to touch the front derailleur for fear of losing the chain into the space where a small ring was meant to be. This went on for far too long. 39/11 is not a large top gear!
Eventually I found some near-new Rotor cranks that were old enough they had a 24 mm axle (new ones have 30 mm axles) and therefore fit in the frame (BB90 cannot accept 30 mm axles without running incredibly tiny and fragile bearings). These happened to have the same Praxis 34/50 rings on them as I had been running on the Red cranks. So they just bolted in and away I went with front gears again.

Back to my exception. The frame had a little temperature sensitive creak in it from day 1. I spent hours hunting the creak. Check bolts, lube things, pad things, remove things - nothing made the creak go away except really cold weather. Across the three different cranks the noise went on unaffected. It could not have been anything to do with the cranks or their bearings (the Red and Rival cranks used different bearings than the Rotor cranks - and I swapped bearings a couple of times just in case). I ran a different set of wheels. I removed the mudguards and rack, just to check. Swapped pedals. Got the torque wrench on the bar and stem.
The bike shop offered to replace the bearing seats for me. Trek customers used to have to toss their frames if they had a bearing seat issue in the bottom bracket before they developed a solution. There is a cutting tool to remove the existing seat surface, some new carbon bearing seats, some high-strength glue and a jig to ensure the new seats go in square to the frame. And as I left the shop after all this, it creaked.
The bike shop owner got the bike for a week and unbolted absolutely everything. He lubed and used a torque wrench and checked everything from pedals to water bottle cages to seat rails. He reinstalled my mudguards and rack in a slightly different way. And as I left the shop after all of this, it creaked.

Trek, to their credit, heard all of this (but they didn't get to hear my creak!) and agreed to replace the frame with a current equivalent (or credit me a frame's worth on a full new bike if I chose that option). As luck would have it, the colour they had in my size was one I loved. As the old Checkpoint used a seat mast and the new one a seat post, and because I had upgraded my aluminium mast to a carbon one, they replaced it with a carbon seat post. New Checkpoints use T47 bottom brackets (now you can use a 30 mm axle) and Trek put a new T47 bottom bracket for 24 mm axles in the box.
What we didn't know until I tried to assemble the new bike in my head (this will go here, this will go there, do this first, do this second ... etc) was that there is no cable stop for the front derailleur cable. Look at just about any bike, including my older Checkpoint, and you'll find that the cable housing stops on a fitting on the frame at the bottom of the downtube, and the bare inner wire runs around the bottom bracket and up to the arm on the front derailleur to pull it down for a shift to the big ring. Not on the the new Checkpoint. Trek's bike lineup of Checkpoints has one inexpensive mechanical Shimano drivetrain model, and Shimano's newest mechanical derailleurs have their own housing stop built into the front derailleur - and all the rest of the models are either one-by drivetrains (no front derailleur at all) or electronic shifting. Trek had no solution for my Campagnolo front derailleur.
I checked for solutions online. I can imagine a solution that is a cross between a chain drop device that attaches to the front derailleur bolt (it prevents the chain from moving inside of the inner ring when properly positioned) and a cable housing stop for cantilever brakes that hangs from the seat post binder bolt. No one makes such a thing that I could find. I guess the total market for these things is about 10 people.

If I wanted to go one-by, I would need a narrow-wide chainring and a K-Edge single ring road chain guide up front with a wide-ratio cassette at the back to give me close to my usual top and bottom gear choices. Unfortunately, I had ridden the bike as a one-by for some months and didn't like it much. And I have recently purchased a new close-ratio cassette to go on the new frame. Super Record cassettes are not cheap. It would bug me to purchase another in such short order.
The second option that came to mind was the recently announced Super Record wireless shifting. Then everything would either stay or be replaced with another Campagnolo part. Unfortunately, these pieces are not currently available. There is no solid time frame for when, either.
Option three was to go with the now obsolete wired Super Record option. It bugged me to buy more tools and a charger that will only ever be used on one bike, but it was a decided option. It not only has the benefits of option 2, but the shift levers are almost identical between mechanical and wired electronic, and it was all in stock.
The final option I considered was SRAM Red AXS. Super Record is so expensive, I thought a full Red gruppo might be about the same price as a partial Super Record one. Turns out it is a bit more, but not all that much more. The advantage of AXS is that I already have 3 bicycles at home in the AXS app (used to update firmware, control options in setup and view battery charge levels) and two that use the universal batteries (so loads of chargers and batteries to move around as needed).
Yes, I could have put a 105 mechanical or even electronic gruppo on for less than any of these other options (well probably more pricey than the one-by option), but I haven't liked anything Shimano since about 9 speed. I could have gone "gravel" and opted for Campagnolo Ekar, but I didn't know if the cranks would fit and my wheel (yes, Campagnolo brand) is not Ekar friendly - so new wheels necessary.
I chose Red. I still have Force on my old Madone, and the single shift lever per brake lever works a little differently for AXS than for mechanical, but I think I'll adjust quickly. I've ordered the SRAM-friendly freehub body for my Campagnolo wheels too (even got it on sale); odd that I can change to Shimano or SRAM but not to new Campagnolo with this wheel.

Every decision Trek made might have simplified their life, but it surely complicated my bike-building journey.

You can expect some Red reviews soon. ]]>Riding2023-06-25T22:04:15+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a07e0c02847026365b21172e13b5b98c-64.html#unique-entry-id-64https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a07e0c02847026365b21172e13b5b98c-64.html#unique-entry-id-64I worked in a bike shop for a number of years. I never understood the number of customers who brought their bike into the shop to have a puncture repaired.
Now this is actually a very vital activity for bike shops all over the world. Fixing flats keeps the doors open in some cases. But it isn't very difficult and it is extremely annoying to have to prematurely end a ride just because a tube was punctured.
That doesn't even begin to cover the issues on the mountain bike side of things. There was a guy at Whistler, far enough from the top that he didn't want to walk back up to download, but so far from the bottom that he would take ages to walk down as well. He offered me at least 20 bucks for a tube for his bike. Loads of people ride bike parks without any spares or tools. I get it. But you will get a flat (or less likely a mechanical) and you'll lose that run, and probably some others (due to the time element) just getting to the bottom to repair it. It is particularly precarious at Whistler if you're up the top of the Garbanzo zone (or Top of the World) because it is 30 minutes at race pace for world-class riders to get down to the village from the summit. That's several hours walking with a dead bike.
I no longer carry a tube off road (but always carry at least one on road). Since all of my mountain bikes have foam inserts, there is nowhere to put the insert and I probably can't easily get the tyre open on the trailside anyway. Instead, I always carry my tyre plug tool. I use Dynaplug, but there are numerous effective brands on the market. If the damage is small, the plug fills the hole instantly sealing it airtight. The tyre can usually be used for the remainder of its service life with the plug in there. Tiny, thorn-sized, holes will seal with the sealant. Moderate holes can be plugged with the tool. For any big holes, I am relying on the ability to ride slowly on the foam insert to get off the trails.
But a small hole can let a lot of air out of the tyre prior to my sealing it. So I also always carry a pump. I used to need the pump a lot to refill a burped tyre, but since Cush Core I haven't burped a tyre once. My pump hardly ever sees use these days. I like it that way.
The third thing I usually carry is a multi-tool. A few common Allen keys, screwdrivers, chain tool and so on. Being super compact, they are far less easy to use than individual workshop tools, but the number of times that one has allowed me to fix the problem is high.
One of my coached riders also carries these tools (because I told her to?) even though she doesn't know how to use them. On one race she broke her chain mid-lap and someone stopped to assist her. He was able to get her going again with her own tools because he knew how to use them, but didn't carry them himself.
Most of the time I will deny carrying anything because I don't really want people to rely on others out on the trails. I was in front of the Brumby distillery on my way to Thredbo when I got a puncture off something sharp on the shoulder of the road. Some guy with a car covered in bicycles stopped to lend me his floor pump. How nice! I was just starting with my mini-pump so the floor pump got me filled with air quickly. He jumped back in his car and drove on. Then my tube exploded out of the unseen large hole in the tyre that caused the original puncture. I ate my snack and used the wrapper as a tyre boot with my one remaining tube. This time I pumped it with the mini-pump. And I turned around and rode back to Jindabyne as any more punctures would see me stranded. In Jindabyne I bought another tyre and grabbed two more tubes from my collection, threw the bike on the car and drove out to where the puncture happened. From there I rode out to Dead Horse Gap and back. In the end I got my full intended ride completed.
The tool that most people seem to want for on the road or trailside is the pump. Not so long ago I had a puncture about halfway home from work. I changed the tube and started pumping it back up when the head broke off the pump and let all the air out of the tyre before I could react to stop it. It was an old pump and the joint between the metal pump body and the quite robust plastic pump head was a pretty delicate looking piece of plastic that must have gone brittle with age. The air pressure as I neared full was sufficient to blow the pump body off the head. I had to get an Uber to get home that day.
On my commuting bike I have gone through several pumps. After the pump broke, I returned to the "frame fit" pump. Only no pump fits a modern carbon frame as there are no sharp corners where the tubes meet to lock the pump into. I had a super-short Zéfal frame pump (size 1 - the smallest) in my spares collection. It happened to fit perfectly between the seat stay:seat tube junction and the through axle lever. Back in the day, lots of people carried a pump between the QR skewer and that same tube junction so they could have 2 bottle cages. That was great until I had a puncture and I must not have returned it to position quite right. I got to work and home a couple of times before one night, in the dark, I heard a noise. I didn't realise that noise was the pump jumping ship until I got home and saw the pump was missing. I looked where it had fallen off the next morning, but some lucky rider had already taken it I guess. Now I am using a mini-floor pump. It doesn't really sit on a frame well. So it lives in my pannier, with a mini tool and some tubes. I've also got one of those tool bottles on the bike with two tubes and some tyre levers inside. If I was really forgetful and didn't take my pannier or a separate pump, I'd still have a supply of tubes and then maybe I could borrow a pump (I know, it's hypocritical of me to not lend my pump but plan to borrow someone else's).
My new Slash has in-the-down-tube storage like so many carbon mountain bikes these days. The opening is not large enough to get a pump of any description that I own inside. There is room in the frame bag to put a pump, but without bending it (pumps don't bend!) it won't actually go in the hole. Tubes do bend - and CO2 cartridges are short: those are what Trek expect me to put in the frame bag. Imminently as I write this I am expecting my warranty replacement Checkpoint frame. The new one has storage in the frame. I believe all the Trek bikes use the same door on the portal. Meaning no pump will go inside of this bike either. Which is kind of sad because it would be so cool to have a pump and a tube always hidden inside the frame.

Take a simple mechanics bike course. Learn how to change a tube, brake pads, adjust rear derailleur, join a chain, tighten a seatpost - simple things that can interfere mid-ride. Then carry the tools to fix those simple things. I'd rather carry them unneeded for years than be without them even once when they're required. ]]>Gear2023-06-20T19:31:35+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1eef240aef3983131a0cde8ea63a06ed-63.html#unique-entry-id-63https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1eef240aef3983131a0cde8ea63a06ed-63.html#unique-entry-id-63Those pesky presta valve cores. How many times have they caused a problem on the trail?

My most vivid memory of a problem was once I was riding on the backside of the Stromlo. A group of young men were out there with zero tools amongst the group. One guy had burped a tyre and needed some air to keep pedalling. Reluctantly (this should be a blog entry in its own right) I leant him my pump. Those who know, will know - but the rest of you will not. I use a Lezyne pump. It is great for pumping but because it threads onto the valve it also tends to unthread the valve cores once pumping is finished. Especially if the full pressure is still in the rubber hose part of the pump. My solution to this is to really snug up the cores when I install them. So, guy pumps up his tyre until it feels full and when he unscrews the pump hose it brings the valve core with it. All the air departs his tyre. I explain what has happened. He reinstalls the valve core and refills the tyre. And again the hose removes the valve core. At this point I departed with my pump and he started walking back to his car.
Check those valve core people. Even with the pressure release button on the hose (a direct reaction by Lezyne to this problem) it tends to unthread loose valve cores.

The other problem with tubeless and presta valve cores is that they love to clog up with sealant. A pump usually pushes the air with enough force that it will go in, but the release of air is much more gentle and can be completely blocked by a blob of dried sealant in the valve shaft. I also find the exit hole into the rim cavity gets blocked. These can be pushed out with a tiny Allen key pushed up the core-free shaft of the tubeless valve. Individual cores can usually be cleaned of the offending sealant but they can also be purchased for very little money - one way or the other, hard to pump tubeless tyres can be fixed easily.

Some tubeless valves are T-shaped, where others are Y-shaped. Some rims do better with one than the other. If the hole is snug around the valve stem, then the Y-shaped ones often don't seal well - in these cases the T-shaped ones are better. With larger holes, the T-shape can leak, where the Y-shaped ones will snug down into the hole and create a good seal. Bontrager valves are T-shaped but have an o-ring on the underside of the T. They're specifically designed to work with Bontrager plastic rim strips (which have a smooth flat surface at the valve hole) and are probably the best option for Bontrager wheels with the rim strips. They might not work so well with other rims.
In other words, it pays to match the valves and the rims.
Insert-friendly valves are ones that have the air exit port in a location that cannot be blocked by the foam of the insert. Cush Core valves have a large base with a large hole on the side of the base - free of interference by the foam insert. Early Cush Core inserts (before they had their own branded model) were Bontrager-looking inserts with a hand cut slot in the T-piece to allow air to escape if the foam rests on the top of the T.

Santa Cruz has spun off their carbon rims to its own sub-brand: Reserve. They now have a high-flow tubeless valve that is kinda like presta, but flows several times more air because the entire valve stem is the valve - not some miniature piece that threads into the stem. I've heard of, but never seen, people using Schraeder valves in tubeless too - they're more robust than presta.

Whatever valves you might use on your tubeless rims, when a new tyre goes on, or even a top-up of sealant, that is a great time to pay a little attention to the valve. ]]>Gear2023-06-16T23:11:38+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/27f26fade2ff8a1c7b2422da50c5b8e3-62.html#unique-entry-id-62https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/27f26fade2ff8a1c7b2422da50c5b8e3-62.html#unique-entry-id-62In the six months that I've had the new Slash, I have ridden it a fair amount. After I broke my collarbone, I chose to ride it on my return because it was the plushest bike I had that would go uphills (the Sender might be plusher, but it does not go up hills). I thought that would insulate my shoulder better.
The first proper use of the bike was in Derby, Tasmania last month. It worked perfectly well as an enduro and a trail bike for 5 of the 6 days. Through some of the wettest riding I have ever done. On day 6, the servo motor and indicator lights were doing their thing, but the fork was not locking out. At all. Not even a hint of change when locked from when open. It also had zero rebound - with the knob not making any difference.
Recently it went on the test rig at SRAM DSD in Melbourne, and tested 100% fine.
The fork is coming back to me and if it doesn't work, I have to document it and get the bike shop to experience the fault.
Hopefully the Flight Attendant was on holiday that final day and will work flawlessly when I get it back.

How odd. ]]>Riding2023-06-13T13:51:31+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5d8655d98953abb73473ca48a0265026-61.html#unique-entry-id-61https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5d8655d98953abb73473ca48a0265026-61.html#unique-entry-id-61I was reading an article about CushCore the other day and it suggested that a number of pro enduro riders actually use the XC version of the insert over the more aggressive Pro version because they primarily use it to prevent burping.
Interesting idea. I have 2 bikes with the XC inserts and 2 with the Pro inserts. Since going CushCore I have not burped a tyre once. I used to do it quite regularly back in the days of skinny rims not necessarily designed to be tubeless, with moderately fat tyres and the lowest air pressure I could get away with (mid-20s). Land a drop a little bit sideways - burp. Slide into a corner and the tyre suddenly finds traction - burp. There were numerous initiating factors, but always the result was losing 10+ psi and having to stop and pump it up. Sometimes much of the sealant came out with the rush of air too.

Taking a step backwards, there are three roles an insert can play.
Many, but not all, sit between the tyre beads and prevent them moving inwards. Thus no burping.
All of them occupy some volume of air in the tyre and act like a fork air chamber spacer (eg, a RockShox token) to reduce the volume of air in the tyre and "ramp up" the pressure rise more quickly on hitting a bump. This is the pathway that led to the development of both CushCore and the original tyre insert, the Schwalbe/Syntace ProCore. I've read an interview with the Syntace guy who wanted to better couple the movement of the tyres with the movement of the suspension. That it also helped the other two traits I'm discussing here is just a bonus. Regardless of the sophistication of the suspension mechanisms on a bike, the tyre is a large and uncontrolled suspension element (as in Formula 1 cars). In the Syntace experiments, they found that the tyre moved completely before the fork moved at all - but ProCore coupled the two together more closely. Which was better for control and therefore traction.
The third is the primary reason many people go to inserts, and that is for rim protection when you hit something really hard. ProCore is essentially running a road tyre inside your MTB tyre. The MTB tyre is tubeless, but the road tyre uses a tube at around 80 psi. That much pressure pushing inwards on the upper rim floor became much more pressure in a bottom-out situation. Enough pressure to crack a carbon rim not designed to have such loads on the normally unloaded upper floor surface. Hence the recommendation not to use ProCore with carbon rims. Any insert that sits down in the rim well can transfer too much load to that upper rim floor and crack a carbon rim - even if the foam ones don't do it very often. My DH bike runs DT Swiss aluminium rims, so no issue there. And my enduro bike runs Zipp 3Zero Moto rims, so no upper floor to worry about (they are built like cheap metal rims without a hollow structure in the middle - part of the reason they are so different to other rims).

On my 26" wheeled DH bike I use to run DH tyres and pretty high air pressure and still put big dents in the rim every season. The Sender has had CushCore Pro in the 29" DH tyres since day 1, and there are zero marks on the rims from impacts, despite running very low pressure. The benefit of the low air pressure is amazing grip (the tyre can conform to everything so it hangs on much better) and lower rolling resistance (on rough terrain, high air pressure uses energy that lower air pressure does not - by lifting the bike up and over more obstacles that would not happen if the tyre deformed over the object instead).

I titled this article "tyre pressure" because I actually wanted to talk about the effects of tyre pressures on MTB riding. But I had to discuss the impact (pun intended) of inserts first.
On my old 26" wheeled DH bike, the Santa Cruz V10.4, I tried running some non-DH tyres for a while. I had to run about 36 psi in the rear tyre to even hope to make it down a single run without a pinch flat. Even at that high pressure, I would get a flat every third day. This was with tubes. Once I dinged up the rims a lot, I replaced them with Stan's Flow rims and ran tubeless. I still had to run around 34 psi in the rear to protect the rim, which got dents in it regularly. Mid-30s tyres do not grip optimally.

I remember a group skills class I was running about 10 years ago. One student liked to run the max sidewall pressure on his tyres. That was 65 psi. He literally had zero grip. His plan of action was to aim the front tyre at ridges and rocks that the tyre could bounce off. I like to get students to experiment with tyre pressure so they can feel what different pressures do for them. Then - pre inserts - I was running mid or high 20s psi in my XC bike tyres. He was incredulous that this could work. (How would he have felt about my 16 psi front tyre pressure with insert?) In the end he relented, did some experimenting, and settled on 45 psi. If he's out there, and reads this, I'd hope he'd do the experiment again and get down into the 20s where traction starts to get really good.

So, as I wrote in the prior paragraph, I can go down as low as 16 psi in the front tyre (I've even run this on the DH bike but usually use a touch more there - 19-20 psi). Lower and it moves around laterally too much for good "feel". On the rear I can get away with about 21 psi without bottoming out the tyre and feeling it regularly. But in higher speed corners, this low pressure squirms too much. It feels imprecise and also disconcerting (like something is broken or loose). I run 25 psi out back to avoid that feeling.

While running less pressure on rough terrain lowers rolling resistance, it does not turn a Maxxis Assegai into a Maxxis Ikon. Reinforced, chunky and heavy tyres still roll with greater effort than delicate, small knob and light tyres. XC racers run at the edge of puncturing (and frequently do) to maximise performance. I feel like I could do anything with a DH double-wall tyre and not damage it, but fast racers are proof that this isn't true. Regardless of the tyre's construction, minimising its rolling resistance requires minimising its pressure.
Incidentally, this applies to road tyres too. Hence the recent move towards wide rims and even wider tyres on race bikes from club level to World Tour level. ]]>Gear2023-06-06T18:13:18+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/93e1215da9e059a61f0bed5a4f7e8aab-60.html#unique-entry-id-60https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/93e1215da9e059a61f0bed5a4f7e8aab-60.html#unique-entry-id-60I have been riding the original Trek Checkpoint SL to work for around 3 years. There has been this weird, temperature sensitive creak in the bike for that entire period.
I replaced the bottom bracket bearings several times. When even the Trek oversized bearings didn't fix things, I turned to the dealer. After checking on a few things, they replaced the bearing seats in the frame. Trek uses direct pressfit bearings in the BB shell of the Checkpoint and most road frames of the past decade or so (which meant no 30 mm axles). If a rider neglected their bearings too long, the seat would be damaged and that was the end of that frame. Until they developed a fix. A cutting device carefully removes the carbon that the bearings sit on, and then new seats are glued in. A jig holds everything in alignment while the glue dries. Voila - good as new.
In my case the creaking was instantly back. Phil Gaimon (ex-pro cyclist and now YouTube cycling guy) did a video on creaks where he said it is never the bottom bracket. I suspected it wasn't the bottom bracket. It wasn't.
On another occasion the bike shop owner spent way too long going over the bike and not only lubricated every interface on the bike (from brake levers-bar and bar-stem to dropouts-rear triangle and chainrings-spider) but checked the torque of every fastener. And it instantly creaked again.
That suggested to me what I'd long suspected (since I'd done the same thing as him twice over before) - that the noise might be inherent in the frame. Perhaps a joint was improperly glued together?
A claim went to Trek, and to their credit, they provided a new 2023 Checkpoint SL frame for me, with a new high-end seatpost and appropriate bottom bracket (because I'd upgraded my Checkpoint to the high-end carbon seatmast that Checkpoints no longer use, and many Trek bikes now use threaded T47 BBs). Thanks Trek.
The 61 cm frame they had for me turned out to be the best colour that Checkpoints have come in since their release. The main colour is dark aquatic, a sort of deep sea teal colour with a metallic flake. The second colour, used for the TREK writing and the contrast marks on the frame, is bare carbon. Superb.
My frame is in the bike shop and the bottom bracket has been installed, ready for me to pick it up and transfer all the Record pieces over. The old bike was two-tone red. I purchased the matching two-tone red Ortlieb bags, red bottle cages, red Speedplay pedals, red bar tape and even a red not-a-bottle to carry my spares in. The bar tape has to be replaced - I found some cool metallic oil slick effect tape from Supakaz that has lots of green tones in it. But the bottle cages, pedals and bags are going on as is. Supakaz also makes matching oil slick cages - I don't plan to buy those, but who knows...
I have a new chain and cassette to go on. The brake hoses have to be disconnected to go through the frame, so a full bleed will be required. New Campagnolo cable housing and Campagnolo-compatible cables (since the proper Campag ones are too short for the big frame) will go in at the same time. And finally, new Pirelli Cinturato 28 mm tubeless tyres with Orange Seal sealant will go on the Campag wheels. I have some spare brake pads that I bought with the chain and cassette, just in case their more worn that I expected.
I am swapping saddles with my trail bike too. I think that saddle is good with an aggressive forward leaning position (which you don't use all the time on the mountain bike) and might be great on the commuting bike (a Fabric Scoop Race Flat). I don't expect that the Fizik 3D printed saddle will be great on the trail bike, but it can't hurt to try it.
With a complete cleaning it should be just like a new bike.

I am not sure when to build it. A rebuild probably takes longer than the initial build, because disassembly and not everything is brand new. And I'd like to continue to ride to work every day. Look for a first-ride entry soon.

Post-writing note: I have discovered that new Checkpoints do not have a housing stop for the front derailleur. They rely on one of three things occurring in the build: many are 1x drivetrains lacking a front derailleur; many have AXS shifting with no cable at all; and one (the SL5) uses a Shimano front derailleur that has its own housing stop built in. I could go 1x, but I like the small chainring when I'm tired. I could use a Shimano derailleur, but I went to great lengths to avoid mixing Shimano and Campag on the one bike. Hopefully there is some kind of solution that works with my Record front derailleur. ]]>Gear2023-05-28T18:04:58+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5bdcc69a7ac871c0e4dfdfc73f92d094-59.html#unique-entry-id-59https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/5bdcc69a7ac871c0e4dfdfc73f92d094-59.html#unique-entry-id-59I can still remember back in 2006 when Stromlo got what would become the 2009 World Championships XC course. For 2006-8, portions of that course were used for competition at Stromlo as they dialled in the details for the big show. In 2006 it might well have been National Championships that ran on these trails. In 2008 there was a World Cup round held on virtually the same course as Worlds would be the next year.
If you have ridden a mountain bike at Stromlo, you've probably ridden up the front-side climb to the summit. Beginning from the parking lot you hit Cockatoo Switchbacks. At the top of this trail you turn left onto a firetrail and head back into the singletrack at Blue Gums. This is where the competition course begins. There is a trail on the uphill (right) side of Blue Gums called Cardiac Arrest (the earlier Nationals course used a climb called Heartbreaker - so this one is a bit of a pun, a bit of a continuation of the naming convention, and a LOT more difficult). Near the top of Cardiac, one has to ride over a small boulder. I can't remember how many people I knew who took a tooth of two off their big chainring (back then, everyone had front derailleurs and multiple chainrings) on that rock. The rock is still there, sporting the scars from all these hits. The only way to protect the teeth was to have the chain on that chainring - hard to use the big one when you're climbing a technical trail.

It was about that same year that I got my first single speed bike (a Gary Fisher Rig). It had a single mid-sized chainring (32T) and sprocket (18T). Being single speed, the chain is always on that chainring. Which meant if I happened to drop the chainring on a rock during a ride, the chainring teeth were protected and usually no bad happened. Fast forward to single speed #3 for me (Spot Rocker SS). This one has very little in common with that Gary Fisher from nearly 20 years ago. Where the Fisher was aluminium, the Spot is carbon fibre. The Fisher had a chain, the Spot a belt (Spot brand was instrumental in the development of the Gates belt drive system). They did share some traits too. Both had Fox forks. Both were 29ers.
I've long wanted to go to a belt drive on my single speed. Belts are quiet (but not silent I've learned), and light and they last a much longer time than a steel chain does. What I didn't think about was rocks. Even taking two teeth off a 40T chainring leaves you with a working bike. Touching the chain against the rock leaves a mark on the chain, a mark that might impact shifting on a geared bike but nothing that will impede a single speed. That same touch against the rock with a belt drive could well leave you stranded at the trail side. The belts are carbon fibre, which is why they have so many restrictive handling rules (don't bend them, don't fold them, don't roll them up tight, don't turn them inside out and so on); if you break the carbon fibres then the belt will fall apart quickly. Just an innocent tap of the belt against a rock (between the chainring (beltring?) and the rock) can slice the belt in half. I touched something once, don't even remember what, and lifted up a tiny piece of the protective rubber covering and one fibre sticks out. I was initially worried, but it is holding up fine after a year or more.

My intention was to equip the bike with something to protect the belt from touching down ever again. But what?
My first thought was a bashring. These are larger in diameter than the chainring and chain combo and several millmetres thick to ward off any impacts. Except that they are all designed to replace the outer chainring when the middle chainring is the in-use chainring. And the beltring on the Spot is in the outer position on the spider AND the belt is really wide compared to a chain. No easy mounting solution for a bashring.
Another tricky part is that the belt has to go on quite large sprockets at the hub, so the chainring also has to be quite large to get the desired gearing (which for a 29er bike is usually around a 50" gear). This makes it more likely to hit a rock and also harder to protect.
I found a Shimano Saint DH bashguard device that might fit. There weren't any in Australia, but Shimano kindly brought one in for me. That took ages. The Saint device only protects 1/4 of the circle. Which is OK.
Divide the circle into four pieces and two of those pieces are protected by the crank arms themselves. And most people ride one foot forwards preferentially most of the time. That means protecting only 1/4 might be enough.
Again, the thickness and outboard position of the belt were problems. The Saint device is meant to attach to the outer position of a Saint crank with the chainring in the inner position.
I succeeded in installing it in the correct position with some chainring spacers and much longer bolts. Long enough that there would be a huge leverage on the protection device if it hit a rock.
Then I found a bottom bracket mounted ISCG device. By removing the 5 mm spacer which usually sits between the drive side cup and the frame, this space can be devoted to an ISCG mounting bracket. Which in turn can hold any ISCG mounted chain device. I found a tiny chain protector of the correct size to sit outside the belt. I have similar bash guards on my DH and enduro bikes. The belt is sandwiched between the inside positioned fixed protection mounted to the bottom bracket and the 1/4 circle outside protection mounted to the crank spider.
Being mounted on a hardtail means that the bottom bracket doesn't change height quite so much as a full suspension bike and therefore the belt doesn't touch down quite so often on things. It also means I'm probably travelling a little slower on rough terrain where the probability of a strike increases.
Inside and outside protection is probably overkill, but the belts are quite expensive and I'd hate to cut it on a trail simply for misjudging a rock's position. I have some good piece of mind that my belt will last a while.

There are numerous places where you could ride a belt-drive bike without any protection. Sparrow Hill is one such place. With a little bit of experimenting and a build-your-own-adventure result, I can ride my belt bike anywhere and not fear for the life of the belt. ]]>Gear2023-05-25T22:44:51+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a12659f00ff8a340860f40143a4a74fd-58.html#unique-entry-id-58https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a12659f00ff8a340860f40143a4a74fd-58.html#unique-entry-id-58As mountain bikes get longer, lower and slacker, the wheelbase is growing beyond the bounds of what fits on roof racks or in travel bags. My brand new Yakima bike carriers are really very good in many ways, but their ability to carry my two long-travel bikes is not one of those ways. But that is a story for another time.
After booking a trip to Tasmania to ride at Blue Derby and St Helens, I realised my new Slash would not fit in either of the two Evoc bags I had stored in the cupboard. The oldest was from my first trip to Whistler more than 10 years ago when the travel bikes were 26" wheeled machines (I already had XC 29ers, but the long travel bikes were still small wheels). As soon as I went 29" wheels, I couldn't use the old bag (2018 trip). Evoc enlarged the pocket space to fit a 29er wheel in there (if only just). Otherwise they were identical.
There is now an XL Evoc bag and a Pro Evoc bag. They will both take a couple of centimetres extra wheelbase in the bag, but my Sender has a 133 cm wheelbase that is too long for any Evoc bag and the Slash is about 15 mm shorter than the Sender - also a no fit solution.
Enter Albek. Their new Atlas bag lists 135 cm as possible. Eureka. A solution. And an Aussie solution at that. Albek is a (primarily) moto-x company out of Newcastle. After deciding that even with some inconvenient disassembly, the new Slash wasn't going in the old bag, I ordered a new bag. Lots of the places that might stock one were out of stock, but I found one (at full RRP, no discounts for me!) from the MX Store in Qld (bought a few items from them before: fork oil, goggles and lenses). It arrived promptly, but had two production issues. The external pocket I would normally store a few small tools in hadn't been sewn up properly. And there is a foam piece that supports the rear end of the swingarm, and it hadn't been glued together properly.
After informing the MX Store, I got a call from the mountain bike guy at Albek. Nice one guys! He said he would send me a spare foam piece from his shop supplies - one that he knows was glued correctly. And he said he would find someone to sew up my pocket. I'm actually happier with mending this one than replacing it - less shipping, lower impact on the planet.

I used the bag for the trip to Tassie and back and it was fine - bike was protected and packing is simple. So that part is great. Still haven't heard back from Albek about fixing my bag. I'm sure they'll get back to me again.

First comment is that this is really Evoc bag mark 2. It is not a 100% direct copy of the Evoc bag. It is more like a direct copy with improvements in spots that needed them. Starting with two straps to wrap up the collapsed bag in storage mode and keep it all tidy and together. Two struts go at each and of the bag to stiffen the ends - they are like sail battens in the Evoc bag and round tubes in the Albek. Four PVC pipes go into the wheel pockets to protect the brake rotors - no difference there between the two. Two big skate wheels at one end and a handle at the other for pulling through the airport. The Albek bag has slightly bigger wheels set slightly further apart for greater stability. The handle is not moulded rubber, but velcro nylon and foam. Possibly more comfortable and easily replaceable should it get damaged. Two key changes in the Albek bag. The circumferential foam rubber that runs along the spine of the bag gets squashed in the Evoc bag when it is folded up for storage. It is removable in the Atlas bag and quite easy to insert/remove. There is also a fibre rod that runs around the periphery of the bags opening zipper. This keeps the bag standing upright when open. Evoc bags tend to droop when open, making inserting the bike that little bit more challenging. To carry a road bike in the Evoc bag they recommend using the fork bag because the fork retention system in the bag only works with fat suspension fork blades. In the Albek, the fork goes in a bag that then is secured into the main bag. Hence it works with road bikes by default. They even threw in the plastic dropout protectors that new bikes ship with in case a Quick Release bike has to go in the case (prevents the pointy dropout ends penetrating the bag material).

The Atlas is a little longer, a little more versatile and a little more expensive than the Evoc equivalent. Having had two team coloured Evoc bags I find the black Atlas a bit boring, but the brightly coloured Evocs do tend to get dirty on conveyor belts in airports so there is that. If I am going to go back to Whistler next year, it will be with both the Slash and the Sender and I'll have to buy a second Atlas to carry both of them. I'd definitely do it after using it for this one trip - it really is an improved Evoc. ]]>Gear2023-05-21T19:58:32+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/615073b9a257a575539cf3fdf06ad2ed-57.html#unique-entry-id-57https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/615073b9a257a575539cf3fdf06ad2ed-57.html#unique-entry-id-57I had two Thule bike carriers permanently installed on my car. My partner had three permanently installed on her car. For a trip to Thredbo I moved one of mine to her roof bars so we could take two bikes each. There were three different bike carrier types represented here and she had a new car that we wanted a different solution for.
I sold all five Thule mounts in about an hour online. I probably could have received even more money for them at the rate they flew out of the house. I put that money towards the Yakima. I found a place online in NSW that had four in stock (it was pandemic times and no one had much in stock). They even gave me a good deal on buying four.
The beauty of the Highroad is that it goes on or off the car in about 30 seconds (probably faster). I leave the roof bars on my car because they're involved to get on or off (and the plastic that they sit on to protect the interface between rack and roof is well and truly dead after so many years). We got Seasucker roof bars for my partner's car. They go on in 5 minutes and come off in 30 seconds. I can put one, up to four, bike carriers on either car in about one minute. Super convenient. And it means the carriers don't get used (or use fuel) except when required.
I hung four hooks on the garage wall and the racks hang from those when not in use. Out of the way, but readily available.
I once used a couple of them on the roof of a friend's car and it only took a little longer to mount them there because some adjustment of the strap length was required to get a good fit on his roof bars.

The only thing wrong with the Highroad is that it doesn't work with mudguards. It clamps the front and back of the front wheel snugly to hold the bike upright and secure. A small strap goes over the rear rim to hold the back wheel in place. The rear clamp tries to squash the mudguard onto the tyre - not ideal. When I have to carry my commuter bike I just take the front wheel off and slide it in the hatch of my car, but I'd rather be able to put it on top.

As I alluded to in my Albek Atlas bike bag review, the Highroad does not cope with modern long wheelbase gravity bikes (at least in size XL). The 131 cm and 133 cm wheelbases are not so long that I can't put them on the carrier, but are too long for the rear wheel holder to sit under the rear hub. Instead I use the fat bike strap (really long) to reach up the rim to pull down on the wheel well in front of the rear hub. Slightly sub-optimal, but it works. I've taken the Sender to Thredbo multiple, multiple times since I got both the Sender and the Highroad with never a problem.

Like all carriers that hold the front wheel, there is no scope for moving bikes in relation to each other. On a small car with narrow roof bars the wide flat bars of a mountain bike can (and do) interfere with each other. To get four bikes up there requires turning the bars on at least one bike 90 degrees by loosening the stem bolts - a minor change that makes them so easy to get in place. Luckily it is only one as the DH bikes with their direct mount stems can't do the 90 degree rotation. One also has to pay attention to pedal placement as they pedals can rub each other. The bikes do end up close together.

I prefer the wheel holding system to one that clamps the frame. A post-mud-ride leaves the bikes filthy and I can put a filthy bike on a Highroad without fear of damaging either the frame finish or the clamping mechanism.

Yakima, you got it so close with these. You just needed to make them a few cm longer for modern bikes. ]]>Gear2023-05-18T20:21:39+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/439a69b036897237be0a79a6710cc079-56.html#unique-entry-id-56https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/439a69b036897237be0a79a6710cc079-56.html#unique-entry-id-56It has been around 2 years since Pirelli released the Scorpion line of MTB tyres. Initially I tried the XC tyres and loved them for grip, feeling of rolling along easily and durability. They also held air extremely well.
Pirelli expanded the line to include trail and enduro tyres too. Back in October my new Slash arrived and I put new Scorpion Enduro tyres on it. An "M" up front and an "R" in the rear. I wrote not too long ago that I was going to discontinue my habit of running less tread in the back. My recent trip to Tasmania only reinforced that intention. But for the moment, I have a rear-specific rear tyre on the Slash.

It was wet in Derby. Like riding in the bathtub wet. Our first day out it didn't rain much, but it had rained VERY heavily overnight and there was flowing water everywhere. The second day it rained all day. All day. Days three and four were actually much more sunny, but still oh-so-wet. As I haven't been anywhere in the past 2 years to ride (thanks Pandemic) this is my first experience with the Scorpions in the wet. The rubber sticks well on wet things. That's "chemical grip". Obviously I don't know how well another brand might have gone (Maxxis, Schwalbe, Continental, Kenda and WTB all having been used at some point in the last 10 years), but the chemical grip was tops. The tread itself provides the "mechanical grip". That is, the knob edges dig into soil and other soft substrates to grab on. The front tyre was excellent. The rear one, not so much. The Slash is a long bike - only 2 cm less wheelbase than my DH bike. If I put my weight forwards to keep the front tyre weighted and gripping, then the back tyre is a bit free to do what it wants. Sam Hill is possibly the best ever at ignoring what the back tyre is doing. I'm not Sam Hill. Having the back slide around too much concerns me.

I thought it was amusing. When we drove up to our accommodation in Derby, the owner was just departing having done some prep-work for our arrival (firewood and smoke alarm batteries he said). He had dirt all over his face. He said he'd been for a ride just prior and thankfully it was raining. I don't think the locals like riding in the dry. Late summer in Squamish can be slippery with all the dust loose on top of things. Your tyre might grip the dust, but the dust doesn't grip anything. Those big rock slabs (like on In N Out Burger) go from reassuringly grippy to sketchy and a bit unpredictable. Derby rocks (there are big slabs here too) get covered in mud dragged by the bikes and that makes them slick. Unless it is raining (or dry enough to have zero mud - I'm sure it happens, sometimes). I knew then that I was in for a four day mud-fest. I was.

To be fair, my partner was on an Assegai and DHR2 combo and had zero issues with sliding (except in the really slick mud). So I'm not suggesting that the Pirelli tyres do things that others cannot, but I am suggesting they are excellent at what they do. Pirelli makes the spec tyre for Formula One, for World Rally Car, and for some top motorbike competitions both on and off road. They know rubber. I think they got these pretty "right". Even if they are only as good as other tyres, they are a similar price, hold air better (in my experience with numerous examples of each brand run tubeless) and show lower rates of wear (and are also nearly immune to tearing off knobs).

And yet, having read they recently finalised their new enduro and DH tyre tread (same tread, different carcass) after 2 years of testing I see a bike from the Pirelli-Canyon DH team using a non-Pirelli tyre. What's that about?

Next time you need some tires, consider the Scorpion. You might be pleasantly surprised. ]]>Riding2023-05-16T20:51:59+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1a9d8700c582e5e4ab9dc92eef49347b-55.html#unique-entry-id-55https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1a9d8700c582e5e4ab9dc92eef49347b-55.html#unique-entry-id-55Blue Derby has ten years of history and three (or more?) Enduro World events behind it. St Helens is only 50 km away on the east coast of Tasmania and has put in a big effort to create a trail network in the past few years. I couldn't go all the way to Derby and not spend a couple of days at St Helens.
What a contrast to Derby! It was sunny, dry and rocky rather than sodden and grey. The views from the trails almost always include the ocean - love it. If I had to characterise the whole network in Canberra terms, it is like a gigantic Bruce Ridge. Nothing really steep, everything a little meandering, and the character of the soil and trail depends exactly where on the hill you are.
St Helens might be the only place I've been that puts gap jumps on the side of green trails, and blind TTFs with consequences on blue trails - in BC these things would be marked or push the trail to black. You're 100% fine if you stick to the main trail line. But as soon as you start partaking of the optional extras to the side, you can easily get caught out on a first go. Right at the bottom is a jump over a big tree stump that favours a line into the trees - and those trees are very scarred making me think many have taken the preferred line. One blue trail had numerous rollover features, but suddenly they throw in one that has a tree stump in the run off or make it a gap jump rather than a rollover. These are all fine if you know - but blue trails aren't meant to have things that require that knowledge.
Worse than Derby is the tendency for trails to go up and down. Even the jumps trails have some big ups in them. Every descent trail becomes a jump track - we chose to ride the black trail Icarus because the description said it was a technical trail. It started out with some nice technical challenges and then it was jumps. The trail that most people seem to ride is Send Helens and it is the main jumps trail of the network - I didn't bother to try it. On the advice of one of the professional trail maintenance guys, my first descent was Old Salty Dog. It runs down a ridge, which is actually super fun and the views are great, but then it goes into the wet valley below the ridgeline and does a couple of big climbs to finish off. It's just a weird choice for me to put some big climbs at the end.

While St Helens is a proper town (restaurants, grocery stores and services galore) compared to Derby, it isn't (yet?) a big MTB destination so the shuttles only operate if you can get 4 people together for the bus to run, or you show up during a weekend or holiday. None of the above applied to me, so I was pedalling up every time. The elevation gain is similar to Stromlo, but with all the climbing and then descending and then climbing some more, it ends up being double the metres gained and 3 times the duration. Which is fine if an XC ride is what you want.
Like at Buller, the trails are connected loops. You can grow your own adventure this way by continuously connecting to the next loop until you've had enough and then come back on the other side of the loops. Again, I think they built this network on the assumption everyone would shuttle up and not ride up. The proper climbing trail, Garn Up, takes the better part of an hour to access due to the combination of distance and climbing before it. And it is by no means direct.
At the end of a week of riding my legs only felt up to one summit ascent. The second day we stopped at the top of Icarus (under the cellphone tower, which you can see poking through the trees from the trailhead - and interestingly only a few metres shy of the actual summit in elevation terms despite there being loads of pedalling in between the two).

There was nothing at St Helens that called for an Enduro bike, and everything that proclaimed bring a small bike. We got caught by a guy on a ten+ year old MTB (very short, very steep geometry - very fast up) and never saw him again. We plodded up the climbs carrying travel we didn't need to go down.

These trails are really fun. But get "climbing" and "descending" out of your head before you arrive. It's an intermix of both all the time. Stop to take in the views. Some are really special. Appreciate the great trailhead facilities (picnic tables, parking, toilets and showers, coffee shop that wasn't open when we were there) and amazing signage - you never lack for knowledge of where you are, where you're going or where you'll end up.
They also built a trail called Town Link. It runs from the centre of town to the trailhead. It runs along the ocean and through the forest. Once you leave the beach and head into the trees it is a gentle climb all the way to the trailhead. What becomes very clear is that this is a really fun, but quite gentle, descent. The only one of the day without any climbs tossed in. And if you pedal, you can go very fast down the Town Link. Luckily we weren't taking it when it was busy as it is the only bidirectional trail in the network. And it is quite narrow in places. You couldn't go fast at midday on a weekend I suspect. We met a nice local who rides his e-bike out to the trailhead and back every day for some exercise. He wasn't in a rush and I'd hate to come around a blind corner when he's coming the other way.

Oh, and the seafood in this fishing port was amazing. Highly recommend St Helens for a visit/ride. ]]>Riding2023-05-14T21:36:30+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a8ec218653219e918e704ab8fcd478d2-54.html#unique-entry-id-54https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a8ec218653219e918e704ab8fcd478d2-54.html#unique-entry-id-54They've done an amazing job of building a mountain biking attraction in the literal middle of nowhere at Derby. There is a great network of trails draped across the hills surrounding the village. But I really found there is a gap in the network - most of the trails are very XC oriented, and then there are the Enduro tracks that are very gravity oriented and I didn't find anything in between. Take "Trouty" as an example. This trail is on the edge of the network and is visible from the highway - they've painted a gigantic trout on the fish-shaped cliff above the trail and is clearly seen by everyone driving into Derby from the East. It is a pretty amazing and fun trail. But to get to it you have to ride Krushka's, which is up and down, up and down, and even the real descending part of Krushka's would be best done on a trail or XC bike. But then you get to the chunky rock section of Trouty and you need an Enduro bike to ride it properly.
Roxanne is the trail that made the highlights show of the most recent Enduro World Cup event at Blue Derby as the pros tried to figure out the boulder field in pouring rain (note they did it WAY better than I managed in similar wet conditions!). To get to Roxanne requires a climb from the shuttle drop-off point similar to the climb of Mt Stromlo from the parking lot. And that's assuming you get a shuttle in the first place.

We arrived at the trailhead intending to climb up under our own steam, only to find that it was closed for maintenance for the day. Unfortunately, Derby is all about the shuttle and only has one climbing trail from the parking lot (Axehead) - climbing seems a problematic side-effect of being on a hill. The four+ shuttle companies suggests I am in the minority on wanting to go up pedalling. Conveniently, the shuttle pick up is about 10 metres from the trail closed sign and the Up Down and Around van pulled up just then. A ten-ride pass was purchased and we spent the whole of our four days using their shuttles. But the shuttle is more the beginning than the end. Snig Track becomes a necessity with multiple trails sprouting off the top of that climb.

On advice, I took my Enduro bike. On reflection, I should have taken my trail bike. Yes I would have been "under biked" for a couple of sections of Roxanne and Trouty, but I would have been appropriately biked for everything else.

There is a small body of water - the one with the floating sauna in it - that has a gentle green bike path around it. There is also a run little blue trail over there called Watchya Upta. The climb was a mud-fest and not only impossible to ride up but also almost impossible to walk up. So slick. Once past the mud, the rest of the track was good. If it were dry, it would probably be a real blast.
Long sections of track revealed that they were based on plastic lattice tiles. I suggest a few of those on the climb of Watchya Upta would go far to making it weatherproof.

On the Saturday we caught a shuttle up to "First 13" which is the first 13 kilometres of the track that runs from above Derby down to St Helens on the east coast. The first 13 is primarily descending. The trail head is a lovely place, even first thing in the morning when it was still pretty cold in May. Loads of room for the drop-off shuttles, toilets, maps, grass - just a really attractive place to begin. The trail was good fun too. It seemed to take about 10 minutes, but was actually close to an hour. And like almost all the trails we rode, handled being completely wet very well (it was lovely and sunny on the Saturday, but it had rained a lot and there were puddles everywhere. Mud was minimal (but sketchy when it did occur).
Then the shuttle grabbed us and hauled us to lunch. Why do shuttles always have a lunch stop? I just want to ride.
After the pub lunch (most of the guys had at least one beer - not great for the riding to follow), we hauled off again to the top of Atlas. Atlas runs about 8 km into the Derby network at the top (on Dambusters). As I rode all of Dambusters (very XC) the day before, I knew exactly where we'd join in and what my options were for the rest. Atlas, despite being shuttled to the top of a big hill, doesn't have a lot of descending. It is generally down, but not a descent.

All of the trails seem to have a common theme. The descents have climbing and the climbing trails have descending. And as I'll write about later, the St Helens trails where I went next have this same trait. This is a decision of the trail designer to change the direction of flow mid-trail. The Mt Fromme trails in North Vancouver either go up, or go down.

So, I really enjoyed going to Derby. The place we stayed was awesome, just above the trailhead and a couple of blocks from our morning coffee source. The trails are really well built. The vast majority of the tracks ride well wet. The rock sections ride better wet - no dust, dirt of mud on the rock if it is washing them clean with the rain. And it is super-grippy in the wet. But I don't think I get the trail ethos here. Glad I saw almost all the trails and have seen the beautiful place that Derby is, but I won't be rushing back. It is also fairly difficult to get to - nearly 12 hours from door to door (taxi to CBR, fly to MEL and then LST, get hire car, load hire car, drive to Scottsdale for groceries (you can't get ANYTHING in Derby) and then onto Derby). ]]>Gear2023-04-30T17:24:23+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a0f340c714b5b9462b5f3ba9d13923cb-53.html#unique-entry-id-53https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a0f340c714b5b9462b5f3ba9d13923cb-53.html#unique-entry-id-53As a taller, heavier rider - one who doesn't take the smoothest line - I am well used to putting dings in my MTB rims. As a result, all my XC/trail bikes for the past while have had carbon rims. You can't ding it (though you can smash it/break it).
I've had two DH bikes. The V10 for several years and for the past 3 years, a Sender CFR from Canyon. The current bike has DT Swiss DH wheels on it consisting of 240 hubs, the wider of the two DH rim options and some DT spokes. (There is even a QR code on them for "more information" about the wheel, but it leads to an "unknown" type error. Leading me to suspect there are some special Canyon-only wheels that are somehow special.)
Normally, on the basis of both the experiences with the V10 and even the XC bikes, I would put at least one ding in a rim in a season of lift-serviced riding. To go three years without a mark is unprecedented for me. While the alloy used in rims has improved over the years, not so much that the rims by themselves get all the credit. The majority of the credit goes to the CushCore Pro foam inserts in the rims from day 1.
Yes I used proper (Maxxis in this case) DH tyres. But for the most part I did that on the V10 too. And given that the V10 had tubes inside for most of the seasons of action, I had to keep enough air pressure in them to prevent pinch flatting - something I did quite a lot when using tyres with too-soft a sidewall.
CushCore has allowed an amazing transformation of my expectations on the MTB. My hardtail and short-travel bikes have the smaller, lighter version of CushCore (an intermediate choice was just released this month so it doesn't come into play for me) while my Enduro and DH bikes have the Pro version. It means I can run as low as 16 psi in the front for excellent traction and low rolling resistance on irregular terrain while still getting adequate support in corners. I haven't been able to go quite so low in the rear without feeling a bit loose - I suspect I sit a lot of weight at the back of the bike much of the time. Still, I can routinely run 24 psi in the rear without feeling like the back end is moving too much.
The evidence that the foam is doing its job is the number of permanent marks in it where some edge has trapped the foam against the rim edge. Many of them on the Enduro bike (the first bike of mine to get CushCore and also the one that gets the most riding on rugged terrain) at the rear wheel - almost zero up front. I swapped them around when I replaced the tyres so the rear gets what is effectively a new insert and the front won't tax the insert the same way.

But the inserts are about more than protecting the rim and more than running low pressures safely. The inserts occupy roughly half the air volume of the tyres, causing them to ramp up in pressure more quickly than they would otherwise - much like a volume spacer in a fork or shock. The whole "insert" thing stems originally from attempts to more closely couple the movement of the tyre (soft, undamped, precedes any suspension movement) with movement of the suspension (well damped, trails the tyre compression - leading to an out-of-control phase at the edge of performance). Syntace and Schwalbe released ProCore (a road tyre inside your MTB tyre in essence) to force the suspension to activate earlier in the overall travel range with the unexpected benefit of tyre retention and rim protection.
Inserts like the Huck Norris occupy so little of the tyre volume that they are a good choice for those who do not want to alter the characteristics of their tyres.

I've written about CushCore before. I'm such a big fan. They've improved my tyre grip. Stopped the frequent burping of my tubeless setup. Prevented rim dings. Better coupled the tyre and the suspension (which I believe can be felt in certain situations). And I've even become quite good at changing tyres with a foam insert inside. The extra mass can be felt, but it's a small price to pay for the rest, and I think the mass can help with the grounded feeling of the bike too.

Inserts are the way to go. ]]>Gear2023-04-24T21:53:53+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1d05b2c0b786cfedd336d3a160ce8248-52.html#unique-entry-id-52https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1d05b2c0b786cfedd336d3a160ce8248-52.html#unique-entry-id-52My Fizik printed saddle has taken a lot longer to reach 30 hours than I would have predicted due to breaking my collarbone - I took 13 weeks off the bike commuting thing. But now that I am approaching that milestone I am really thinking that I don't like it.
One of the benefits of 3D printing is that the padding can be soft in one spot and firm immediately adjacent to that spot. There is a very firm spot where ones sit bones are meant to rest. And most of the rest is quite soft. But the saddle is too wide, even in its narrowest option, to suit my sit bones. Normally one can sit further forwards on the saddle and be fine. But when I move forwards, I slide into the soft space that doesn't support well. When I sit on the firm and supportive place, the sides of the saddle rub on my inner thighs and irritate them.

I think the tech is great. The basics of the saddle seem fine. The specifics for me - not quite right.

I'm not quite sure where to next for me in the saddle game. I have tried a number that I don't like recently, and none that I do like. ]]>Gear2023-04-16T19:01:19+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d2697564d3e75e10a7e329878145fdff-51.html#unique-entry-id-51https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d2697564d3e75e10a7e329878145fdff-51.html#unique-entry-id-51Starting back in the 90s, I really only travelled with a road bike. I had a Tri-All-3 hard case. It was very protective of the bike, but the box itself often got damaged by airline handling. Because it used a quick-release font axle device to hold the bike securely centred in the box, it would only work with a standard 100mm QR front fork. And even a mountain bike with such a wheel could be a problem due to the wheelbase being too long for the box. It was also relatively difficult to pack the bike into, a bit like an advanced Tetris level; you were never quite sure where to put the next couple of pieces.

For my first trip to Whistler in 2011, I purchased an Evoc soft bike bag that easily swallowed my Extra-Large size Santa Cruz V10 DH bike. Unfortunately, mountain bikes kept evolving and 29" wheels were too large for the wheel pockets on that original Evoc bag. I purchased a second generation bag that had 29" friendly wheel pockets. And mountain bikes kept evolving.
The longest wheelbase that Evoc suggests will fit in the bag is 125 cm. The length of my recently-sold Trek Slash. It only just fit. Now I have a new Slash with a 131 cm wheelbase. There is no way I can see to get this bike in that bag. Looks like I am buying a third bike bag for my upcoming week in Tassie.
Evoc now makes an XL bag with extra-large wheel pockets (think fat bikes) but they only increased the wheelbase capacity of the bag by 1 cm to 126. That is no use to me at all. Enter Australian bag maker Albek. Their Atlas sports a 136 cm capacity. There are bikes longer than that, but my two long wheelbase bikes are shorter than this by a little bit (the Canyon Sender CFR is 133 cm).

I was thinking, initially, of taking the trail bike to Derby. Loads of their trails are XC oriented and the Ripley is perfect for that. But if you've paid attention you know that there have been 3 Enduro world rounds in Derby and they have some really gnarly trails to ride. I'm also going to St Helens and it sounds like they have less gnarly terrain than Derby, but still some good rough stuff to play on, and some jumps tracks. It really has to be the Slash that I take. It will be a little bit extra work on the ascents, but a lot more fun and security on the descents.
And so I need an Atlas bag.

You can count on a review after my trip…]]>Gear2023-04-12T18:26:48+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/90051e87cc667acb2b3acf37188c5fb8-50.html#unique-entry-id-50https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/90051e87cc667acb2b3acf37188c5fb8-50.html#unique-entry-id-50Now that I am back riding it is time to catch up on some of my new technology. Today I'm writing about the Flight Attendant system on my Slash. In case you don't know and don't want to look it up, Flight Attendant is Rock Shox's AXS integrated intelligent suspension adjustment system. It is the SRAM equivalent to Fox's Live Valve system, but aimed at gravity riders rather than XC riders.
At release there were about 7 bikes available with Flight Attendant. The Slash being Trek's entry to the game. Using the same batteries as an AXS rear derailleur or a Reverb AXS post, and the same motor, the damping in the shock and fork can be adjusted between open, medium and locked almost instantly.
Not only is it adjustable to rider preference across a spectrum of locked-preferred to open-preferred, but the left lever can also over-ride the system (to a pre-selected option of locked or open). I particularly like the split settings where the fork is open and the shock is in medium - this is selected quite often in the more open end end of the adjustment spectrum (where I have settled for the moment).

What's it like on the trail?
Almost invisible. Though a bit noisy. You can easily hear the adjustments happening. And the mode is reflected in the lights on top of the fork crown (they can be turned off in the settings). Mostly while you are pedalling, the suspension is locked. The instant you stop pedalling it swaps to open. If you are pedalling on bumpy trails, it will firm up rather than lock up.
Basically it is a transparent almost-always-right system that makes the plush descending bike pedal up bob-free. It is fast enough that if you get air, it is always full soft for the landing.
It doesn't transform the Slash into an XC bike, but it does make it pedal like my old Slash with the locks on fork and shock, but I can't forget to turn them off at the top because the smart system does it for me.

TL;DR: Flight Attendant is a smart system that almost always adjusts the three-way adjustments on the fork and shock across the fully open, platform and fully closed settings to the one you would pick just now if you could easily pick these settings while you ride along.

Flight Attendant doesn't make the Slash lighter, but it does make it completely bob-free. ]]>Riding2023-04-09T21:01:31+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/3c33653ff4e369f66a6cf3babe9404c9-49.html#unique-entry-id-49https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/3c33653ff4e369f66a6cf3babe9404c9-49.html#unique-entry-id-49After almost 12 weeks - 11 weeks and 3 days - I got back on my bike outside for the first time. It was a nice day and I just had to go for a roll around on the road.
I grabbed my new monochrome commuting clothing - in future it will be mostly reserved for the ride to work. I grabbed my Madone which only had very low pressure remaining in the tubes since the last time I took it off the wall (latex tubes are dead flat after maybe four weeks).
My HR strap was showing low battery. I replaced the battery with a new one. And then the strap didn't work at all. D'oh!!! The one I purchased to use with the smart trainer (the whole smart trainer system uses Bluetooth and not ANT+, so I needed a Bluetooth HR strap) works fine so I used that one.
Despite starting the process of putting cleats on my new road shoes months ago, I still haven't completed that task. Thus I needed my shoes from the "pain cave". I could have worn my commuting shoes, but I chose not to.
Finally I grabbed my flashing taillight that is bright enough for all-day use. It hasn't seen any use since prior to my fracture, and it was flat. This is what happens when you don't ride for a while.
 
While in some ways this seemed like a momentous occasion, really it was just a pedal around the neighbourhood. Regardless, it was really enjoyable. I love riding. Indoor riding might be good for the legs but it is the outdoor riding that is good for the soul.
I checked out the completed-since-last-time-I-was-over-there bike path joining the Stromlo criterium circuit with Opperman Avenue - Uriarra Road intersection. It is impressively smooth and very wide. The far end also joins up with what is left of Uriarra Road between what is now Swallowtail Road and what is still Uriarra Road. A piece of bitumen still in good condition. It would be nice to see a bike-sized hole in the fence at Swallowtail Road permitting bikes to duck onto the road and ride straight through to the race circuit without using another roadway.
Eventually I rode up to the Stromlo Observatory. That was slow. I think indoor riding can provide great base fitness and is probably peak for high intensity work, but it just never seems to work for ascending ability.
 
In the end, legs felt good, bike worked great and I did a lot of smiling.
 
Next ride will be on the MTB and then back to commuting once more.]]>Riding2023-04-05T21:43:41+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ac746b4a3ec120ffb7b34ffff2054f61-48.html#unique-entry-id-48https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ac746b4a3ec120ffb7b34ffff2054f61-48.html#unique-entry-id-48My journey into virtual cycling really began with a group trainer test I did the summer of 16/17. I spent a lot of that summer in the heat of the backyard riding virtual trainers for many hours so I could write with conviction about their differences and traits. Most (all but 1 or 2) worked with Zwift, so I used that for a portion of my testing.
Zwift was something I'd heard of, but never seen in person back then.
I've written about all this very recently so I won't go over it any more again.
 
After 2 months on Zwift, I cancelled my subscription and went back to Wahoo. I like the System training exercises, but I really do notice that going hard inside leaves me with a sore lower back. This has been the case for 25 years - possibly forever - so I can't blame getting old or anything else for this. It is simply that sitting and griding out power while not moving is different than doing it on the open road with the bike free to move underneath me. On Zwift I was doing a lot of Zone 2 stuff, with occasional efforts above that.
 
After a number of rides across a variety of locations (almost all of those available, including the latest Scotland roads in anticipation of this year's world champs) I have a very good feeling for Zwift. So it was very telling to jump back to RGT only a day later. They have many things in common. There are equipment choices and customising ones avatar to reflect how you look or how you want to look. There is drafting behind other riders. The scenery is pretty nice in both. Hills and their gradients seem to feel the same.
Zwift definitely wins for crowd size. I dropped into several paced rides (as opposed to organised group rides, which I never tried) with more than 50 other human riders. My last ride on RGT, up the Stelvio, had 2 other human riders present anywhere on the course (and about 100 bots each riding at a set Watts per kilogram).
Zwift wins for graphic efficiency. RGT is running on my AppleTv device. I had to set it at the lowest possible graphical quality. And it still will not run smoothly through corners or when other riders (computer and real riders) are in my view. And running it on the AppleTv was a response to trying to run it on my portable computer, where it didn't work at all sometimes. Zwift just works (on the AppleTV or the computer).
RGT wins for realism. As you approach a corner on a descent, the software applies virtual brakes and slows you down to a speed at which you could actually make it around the corner. In Zwift you rail round corners at 88 kmh like it is a rollercoaster ride.
RGT added audio comms between riders. I read that it hasn't been so successful, especially for female riders who can get harassed by male riders.
RGT added steering just recently. Zwift added it a while ago. I haven't tried it in either, but I have a screen in the phone companion app dedicated to steering in RGT. I think one of the wheel riser/steering input devices I've seen is the way to go with either as it ups the realism. Nearly 20 years ago I was using a CatEye accessory for PlayStation that used just such a device to add steering input. This wasn't cycling specific - one could play any game (auto racing was best) where acceleration was provided by pedalling input, braking was a button on the handlebars and steering was done with by steering the bike. It was brutal for most car races as you wanted to accelerate out of corners quickly so you spun up the pedals hard - everyone got tired quickly. Anyway, nothing is new under the sun.
RGT has about as many locations as Zwift, but within a Zwift location there are numerous route options and RGT seems to have only one per location. 
RGT and Zwift both have racing and group rides - I haven't tried them anywhere. Both have set workouts as well (which I haven't used because if I want a set workout I have the full System resources to work with), and I know I set up custom Zwift workouts for a client once - don't think you can do that in RGT.
 
On paper, then, they seem pretty comparable. But the bottom line for me is that I could go back to Zwift regularly. As their own ads say "fun is fast and fast is fun". Zwift is both fast and fun. RGT just lacks something that makes it fun. If it didn't come as part of my System subscription I would never pay for it on its own.]]>Riding2023-04-01T14:45:21+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/7c2bda165993ea06b91e87534fc8dc1b-47.html#unique-entry-id-47https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/7c2bda165993ea06b91e87534fc8dc1b-47.html#unique-entry-id-47I've told the beginning of this story before. When I reviewed a group of smart trainers for Bicycling Australia (2017 I think) I spent a summer of hot days in my back yard riding half a dozen different smart trainers so that I could write about their differences. To put them on an equal footing for part of my test, I subscribed to Zwift and rode them all in that virtual riding environment. After the test was published, I got an email from someone at Sufferfest asking if I'd like to try out their virtual cycling space. They offered me six months free if I was willing to provide some feedback.
 
I spent six months suffering through the difficult training exercises of Sufferfest. I liked it a lot. I provided a lot of feedback about where I saw opportunities for different training options. I can't be sure how much of it is due to me, but they have implemented all of my recommendations. Sufferfest was purchased by Wahoo and is now called Wahoo System. Wahoo has freshened up the lead in and lead out sequence of the videos and removed all of the references to "suffering" and the mythical nation of Sufferlandria, except where they are contained inside the workout and not so easily removed. Most of the videos ended with "IWKMATSICKYT", or something very similar which was the first letter of the Sufferfest saying I will kick my ass today so I can kick yours tomorrow (I'm 100% sure that isn't quite right, but the sentiment is correct).
All gone in the new corporate Wahoo style guide.
The System, as it is now known, has some excellent components. There is a bunch of yoga, mostly 15 minute practices that target one body area. Hard to not do yoga when it is only 15 minutes. Strength training is another component. And within the cycling things, they already had the best fitness testing I've seen. They call it 4DP (which I'm sure stands for something that I can't be bothered to look up right now). It consists of a 10 second maximal sprint effort, a 5 minute steady state effort, a 20 minute time trial effort and finally a brutal 60 second "whatever's left" effort. It looks at how they interact and not only does this help the program set your target power for various future efforts, but it also characterises each rider to a type (sprinter, rouleur, climber, etc). That helps one either train their strengths or weaknesses. Then they added a slightly less brutal fitness test, the ramp test. This one is unique in the System's repertoire because it uses how you went in the first part to set your target power for the second part. I wish they would do this more often, since clearly it can be done. You do this ramp test until failure, and it uses your failure point to determine your target power for the effort to come. On the basis of those two steps it can calculate FTP and VO2. Brilliant.
Sufferfest lacked recovery rides. What's suffering about a gentle recovery ride anyway? Except it is an important part of a program. They have numerous easier rides now.
 
Then Wahoo purchased another app called RGT. This one has virtual spaces like Zwift, but lacked the numerous route options. You can ride the set route in the set direction or go somewhere else. RGT has some quite fancy graphics, and allows a user to select any of the dozen or so locations at any time (in Zwift, you used to get one rotating location and now it is 3). RGT is not nearly as "gamified" as Zwift. No power-ups. No equipment to earn with levels (no levels either). But they share sprint segments and racing as well as organised social rides. RGT recently added live audio communications, where most people in Zwift seem to use group chat (private chat does exist, I've never used it).
Zwift can offer the l'Alpe d'Huez climb from the Tour de France (called Alp du Zwift) where RGT can offer the Stelvio pass from the Giro d'Italia.
 
In January I was doing about 99% of my riding outside. There was the odd wet day where I'd hit RGT for a look at one of the riding zones. But I broke my collarbone and had to get on the trainer every day, or stop riding. Serendipitously, Zwift offered me a free re-trial to lure me back to the platform. "A lot has changed since you left", they said. "Come and try the new stuff..." So I signed up again. As they promised, all my old equipment and experience points were still there where I'd left them.
Riding for a month or two testing smart trainers I achieved the beginning of Level 7. I was tempted to stick at it for a bit longer because I was drawn by the Alp du Zwift, but you require Level 12 to gain access (hence wanting to try a bit longer). With a useless left arm I started Zwifting again, and riding 40-60 minutes per day the XP rack up pretty quickly. I finally achieved Level 12 and the very next day I tried the climb. It was also only a few days later that my subscription was due for another month, so I cancelled it. Two months of riding Zwift every day was fun, but I've got an annual subscription to The System/RGT and I think it's time to add some structure to my training. Plus I've only got 2ish more weeks until I'm allowed outside.
I think the Stelvio climb is harder than d'Huez. I'm not sure how much of that is platform and how much of that is climb. They're both pretty big hills.
So my hope is, that once I get out on the road again for real, my legs will be doing OK. They haven't had any real time off. We will see. Cycle commuting again very soon. Can't wait! (Wednesday 12 April looks like the first commuting day, which is almost 13 weeks after the fall, but with Easter being a four-day weekend, that's the date.)]]>Gear2023-03-26T16:01:14+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a768ca72201b5da0c663e06a946c3b66-45.html#unique-entry-id-45https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a768ca72201b5da0c663e06a946c3b66-45.html#unique-entry-id-45While my newest bike was originally scheduled to arrive last month, and it actually arrived several months early, it was only a week or so ago that I sold off the bike it was replacing. There was not any particular "use" reason for selling the "team build" Trek Slash. Yes I have had it for a few years, but it was working great and remained tons of fun.
Rather, when I purchased it the frame reach was a full size bigger than any other bike I was riding at the time. This last generation Slash in size XL had a roughly 48 cm reach. This coming from four older bikes with roughly 45 cm reaches was a revelation. There was so much more room to move when standing up. Wow! A guy I was riding with at Whistler every year commented I'd finally bought a bike that fit.
But the industry kept going. I bought an Ibis with a 50 cm reach, then a new hardtail with a 50 cm reach and a DH bike with a 51 cm reach. Suddenly, every time I rode the Slash, it felt too short. Many brands run 20 or 25 mm extra reach per size. That makes the 50ish cm bikes a full size bigger than the 48ish cm bike.
The new Slash came out with a 51 cm reach. That's why I ordered one, to make all my bikes feel an OK size.
 
The old XL Slash has a reach roughly the same as a current generation Slash in size Large.
This was driven home when a potential buyer came to try the Slash. Only around 180 cm tall, the reach looked entirely correct for him. That's nearly 15 cm shorter height than me.
He did encounter a problem in that the seat tube was too long for his leg length. I honestly thought he had a chance of it working out. My legs are short for my height. My height is in my torso. In the end, he purchased a new, shorter, dropper post and was on his way with a bigger travel bike. In the abstract, I wasn't sure if he would best fit the Large Trek or the Medium/Large size (they only offer this in-between size in some models). Looks like he's more L than M/L.
 
This reach increase with each generation seems good for everyone at the tall end of things. More choices and better fit are to be encouraged. But what about the shorter riders? Where a Small bike once sported a 40ish cm reach, it will now be at least 42.5 cm and possibly as much as 45 cm. That's a size or two too big for some. A couple of companies have added XS to the mix to cater to the height-challenged riders, but many have abandoned the shorter customers. Even a big company like Specialized doesn't appear to offer the Enduro in size S1. For me, the small end is important because I know a lot of average height women who like to ride - this size of bike. Hey manufacturers, let's make sure they've got something to pick from!]]>Riding2023-03-20T12:25:34+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1dc465c26503e89370769b577831a7ce-46.html#unique-entry-id-46https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1dc465c26503e89370769b577831a7ce-46.html#unique-entry-id-46I haven't been active lately contributing new entries to my blog. That's because back in January, I fell off my bike on the way to a ride. I broke my collarbone and have been off the bike since. Not riding means I'm not thinking about things the same as I usually do, and I've avoided writing new posts.
I was on a wide grassy area when I crashed, not far from Mt Stromlo. I landed hard enough to knock 2 hours of memory out of my head too, so I have zero recollection of the accident (or the ambulance ride). Interestingly, I didn't hit my head on the ground. My Fox Speedframe Pro not only has dual density foam to deal with both low and high energy impacts, but a delicate exterior finish that reveals most contact with any rough surface. No dents, no scratches - nothing in the finish or lining to show it touched the grass. All my clothing and bike were both grassy and dusty, but not the helmet. Must have been quite an interesting impact.
I've missed out on a couple of planned days at Thredbo. I've missed out on a couple of planned races. I've missed out on a lot of on and off road activities involving bikes. I've also had to stop stretching and weight sessions because I couldn't do much of anything with my left arm.
On the positive side, I renewed my Zwift membership and rode most days on a smart trainer. My goal since they added the climb five years ago was to get to Level 12 and attempt the climb up l'Alpe d'Huez (called Alp du Zwift in Zwift). I finally achieved that and had a pleasant and low key 70 minute ascent. As I write this, my 2 months of membership on Zwift are over. I'm going back to Sufferfest (sorry, now called Wahoo System) now that I'm able to undertake structured workouts again. The free reign of just riding in Zwift and the change of virtual scenery was what I needed but I'm ready to get a bit intense with my indoor riding.
It could have been worse. A mate broke his humerus and missed almost a year of riding. And still isn't fully back. I'm at 10 weeks recovery and have full range of motion in my shoulder, but still cannot do overhead lifts and push-up type movements with more than a few kilograms. That gets better every day.
In case it helps anyone, I dug into the medical literature about clavicle fractures and found a number of quality meta-analyses on surgery versus non-surgical recovery. When any bone is surgically repaired, the muscles have to be removed from the bone to make access for the plate and screws. The "union" rate is somewhat higher for clavicles post-surgery, but full recovery is longer and there are numerous possible complications from the surgery. I had a robust discussion with an orthopaedic surgeon at The Fracture Clinic at Canberra Hospital and we came to a mutual agreement that there was no need for surgery in my case.
I'm still happy with that decision.
Yes I have a pretty big "bump" where the broken end of the collarbone sticks up. In the surgeon's words, I could have traded that bump for a surgical lump. Some breaks result in a length change in the bone as it heals. Shorter can be the result if the two pieces overlap and then heal in that position. Any change requires the muscles, ligaments and tendons of the shoulder to adjust to the new dimensions.
 
Everything points to 12 weeks post-fracture as the reasonable time to get back on the bike. I am going to wait two more weeks and then see how it feels. My indoor riding went from left arm in a sling, to left arm resting on the bars, to a little weight on left arm, to left arm doing pretty much half the support for my upper body in the drops. All in a couple of weeks. But then I tried to compress the suspension on a mountain bike and it really hurt all the soft tissues in my left shoulder. Definitely not ready at that point. That was 2 weeks ago. I tried to do a push-up this week and knew from the feeling that: A-one downward half was enough and B-I wasn't going to make it back up.
I'm doing daily exercises for both strength and mobility I got from my physiotherapist. They're helping, but it's a long journey back to normal.
 
Last year Camille Balanche broke her collarbone at one round of the UCI World Cup, and about 3 weeks later she was back at the final round to defend her lead in the overall. She was successful. I cannot imagine how she did it based on this experience. Yes she is younger and had great medical care, but it must have hurt so much. Bravo to Camille for wanting it so much that she was prepared to go through the pain. On the other hand, maybe this is not a good precedent? Do we need our sporting elite to be so aggressive in coming back to racing? Were it me, I think I'd follow Camille's path and at least try, so there's that.
 

I've been racing a bike since I was 14 years old. I've had quite a number of unintended dismounts from the bike in that time (otherwise known as crashes). This is the first time I've broken a bone. I'm too old for this! I hope I can avoid ever doing it again.

]]>Riding2023-02-26T15:52:57+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/bd1bfce250a9e4baf1b7a6a376aa0ca9-44.html#unique-entry-id-44https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/bd1bfce250a9e4baf1b7a6a376aa0ca9-44.html#unique-entry-id-44Some days you have to accept that riding is just not going to happen.

I haven't had an entry in the blog for a while because i've been out of action. After work on Thursday the 12th of January, I never quite made it to an after-work social ride. Instead, while riding down the grassy verge beside Eucumbene Drive, I crashed.
Hard.
Hard enough that I lost around 2 hours of the day - yet my helmet never touched the ground. I must have gone down instantly onto my left shoulder, breaking my collarbone and shaking my head hard enough to cause serious mental confusion.
The trauma team at Canberra Hospital were concerned enough to do a full upper body scan and keep me around for 24 hours. The surgical team talked about putting a plate in my collarbone, but 6 weeks later I am mostly healed and there was no surgery.

I wish I knew why I crashed. But I will never know. The period between rolling out of my driveway and being in the hospital is completely gone from my recollection. No waiting for the ambulance. No ambulance ride. No firies carrying me to the ambulance. Nothing.

Then there were 2 weeks scheduled off the bike when I went to visit my sister. I brought a nasty case of Covid-19 back with me - timing suggests it was most likely on the 15 hour plane ride I caught that. As I type this I am recovered, but that took a whole week and I'm still feeling quite delicate. Seems every person's Covid experience is unique. Mine was bad and a week long.

There is a SuperFlow on this weekend. I've attended pretty much every Superflow at Stromlo that has been offered. Not this one!
I am hoping to get back on a bike really soon - even for a gentle pedal. ]]>Gear2023-01-17T12:20:27+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/aba2a157c83e4283aba428dc1d4e72f9-43.html#unique-entry-id-43https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/aba2a157c83e4283aba428dc1d4e72f9-43.html#unique-entry-id-43As long as I have been riding a mountain bike, I have been attracted to a fast-rolling rear tyre. I am quite sensitive to the perception of rolling resistance in a bicycle, and lowering it always seems better for me.
Low rolling resistance rear tyres (LRR for the rest of this entry) can be semi-slicks. These tyres have almost zero tread in the middle (the slick part), where the majority of pedalling takes place (ie, with the bike upright). But they have some cornering knobs on the sides that only come into play when the bike is tipped over for a bend. They can be quite large (check out the Minion SS from Maxxis), but even if they are small (I’m looking at you, Thunder Burt from Schwalbe) the lack of inner knobs can make them dig in quite well.
[Incidentally, when they first came out I bought a Thunder Burt once to try. I got about 4 km into my first ride when one of those tiny cornering knobs ripped off the tyre leaving a hole behind which my sealant wouldn’t seal. Schwalbe said “no warranty” and I couldn’t reliably patch it. That’s about $20 per kilometre!]
The ones I have the most recent experience with are the Pirelli Scorpion “R” tyres (in both XC and Enduro guise). They are not really semi-slicks because the knobs in the middle, while optimised to lower rolling resistance, do provide some bite for both pedalling and braking traction. Maybe a meta-slick? I installed a Dissector on my DH bike this summer because I couldn’t find one of the aggressive tyres I have used in the past. The Dissector isn't really either of these because the middle tread knobs are quite large, but few in number. It is not a clearly defined category; it's a gradient.
When the going is fast, such as descending a steep hill, I usually want for more rear tyre. I think Sam Hill might be fine with the slightly loose feel of even a brand new LRR tyre – but I am not. There is this one particular left turn at Thredbo that can be taken quite fast. On my Slash, with the Scorpion Enduro R rear tyre, I have to dab the brake to get around without sliding. On my DH bike, with the Dissector, I do not have to. Both the tyres and the bikes are enough different to not attribute it all to the tyres, but I believe with two "front" tyres on either bike (Scorpion Enduro M on the Slash and Assegai on the DH bike) I could go even faster.
When you are playing off the chairlift and especially if you aren’t racing, does anyone really care about rolling resistance? I think I will not in future.
On my trail bike I recently replaced the Scorpion XC R tyre with a Scorpion XC H tyre. Lots of small knobs designed to grip on harder surfaces. I haven’t ridden it yet, but I expect it will hang on better than the R tyre it replaced in all situations. Probably I should have simply matched the front “M” version of the tyre and been done with it!
Great Kiwi rally driver Possum Bourne used to tell amateur rally drivers to spend their money on tyres rather than some go-fast part for their motor. No extra power is getting to the ground if your tyres are rubbish. I think this will be my approach for MTB tyres in the future – not the spending thing because a LRR tyre costs the same as a grippier one – meatier rear tyres just make the bike feel that bit more secure. When you want to get down the hill safely and quickly, the meatiest tyre is always the right choice if you aren’t earning your living on the bike.]]>Riding2023-01-05T23:50:43+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/39382a3996f000c338efb7edf6305653-42.html#unique-entry-id-42https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/39382a3996f000c338efb7edf6305653-42.html#unique-entry-id-42I think there may have once been some wiggle room in this space, but the physiology does not lie and there is no ambiguity whatsoever on the subject. When training for aerobic performance (such as pretty much anything bike related, possibly aside from pure track sprinting) consistency in training is so important. The other day I saw a graph of cellular mitochondrial numbers (I’d attribute this if I could find it again…). The drop off in numbers after one week of inactivity took three weeks to repair. One week off the bike means a four week setback to progress in training.
Four weeks!
Imagine you’re preparing for your big event. Doesn’t matter if that event is the Olympics or the next club race – big for you is all that matters. There is a finite amount of time to address your fitness prior to the start line. Being forced to take a week off is equal to a one month hold on your progress. That’s huge when most people are at least a little bit behind on the run in. And let’s be honest, you could almost always be better. It might not matter materially if you are one month better (maybe you need to be six months better to make a big difference), but we could all imagine a state of being better. Though Julian Alaphillipe at his best – I’d be hard pressed to imagine being better than that!
Aim for consistency in your training to be your best.]]>Gear2022-12-30T18:06:52+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/74a308442b6574dcaf3fbd85f91aa246-41.html#unique-entry-id-41https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/74a308442b6574dcaf3fbd85f91aa246-41.html#unique-entry-id-41Despite the drawbacks, air suspension is what the majority of mountain bikes use. Air is light. Air can be freely adjusted with a shock pump. These two benefits alone are responsible for why air is King.
The alternative is a coil spring. Coils are very smooth, but also heavy and to change spring rate you must change the coil.
There is another difference that is neither positive nor negative in its own right, but generally means that the bike frame has to be designed around it - that is the linear nature of a coil spring versus the progressive nature of an air spring. A 100 lb/in spring requires 100 lb of weight on it to compress it one inch. A second 100 pounds of weight will compress it a second inch. This continues until all the coils are bottomed out on each other and the spring is maximally compressed. An air spring works very differently. Compress an air spring through half of its travel and you have approximately increased the spring rate by 100% (approximately because the air chamber does not reduce to zero volume at bottom out). Compress it by another half and this happens again. Every millimetre of movement in the coil spring requires the same input as every other millimetre of movement but every millimetre of movement in the air spring is unique in the amount of input required to achieve that movement.
Downhill bikes that typically use a coil spring require the rear suspension to build in a progressive linkage for the rear end to prevent bottom out on big hits. Cross country bikes that typically use an air spring may even have a falling rate in the rear linkage to prevent the spring from ramping up too much. Some coil sprung shocks have fancy hydraulic anti-bottom-out features as well.
The design in air springs has been towards make them feel more linear; more coil-like. Increased air volume can go some way towards that. But the amount of progression any rider requires to get both a good (comfortable) feeling at their sag point (ie, just riding along) and also to not bottom out too easily varies widely between a beginner and a professional (who might well be using the same shock).
Enter the air volume spacer.
If the air chamber is quite large producing a compression ratio in the chamber of around 4:1, then beginners will be well served. They will see most of their travel used under their moderate demands on the equipment. Put that same system under a competitive professional, and the suspension will bottom out often and hard enough to cause damage. They require more ramp-up at the end. The volume spacer that goes in a RockShox fork is a plastic disc that threads onto the underside of the air chamber cap. Simply remove all the air, unthread the cap, add or subtract a token (as RockShox calls them - the Fox system is nearly identical except they snap together rather than thread together) and reassemble/reinflate. By removing some volume from the air chamber (the plastic takes up some volume in the part of the chamber that is still open at full compression - clearly it can't occupy any of the volume used by the air piston in its travel) and beginning with the same air pressure as before, the end pressure increases. Typically the difference is only from around 1/2 travel to the end.
At sag (just riding along) the fork or shock behave the same regardless of volume spacers. But in a decent hit, the air pressure increases faster after half travel and increases the resistance of the suspension to bottoming out.
 
I had an old Fox 32 XC fork that was designed to be like a modern fork with several spacers in it. The compression ratio was in excess of 5:1. I never achieved full travel. Over two trials (the first to try an intermediate reduction) I shortened the air piston rod (which connects the sliders movement outside the fork to the air piston movement inside the air chamber) enough to take the compression ratio down to 4.3:1. At this lower compression ratio I could occasionally bottom out the fork without that happening too often (or requiring so much air pressure that it didn't sag adequately).
Now my hardtail has a Fox 34 fork with 120 mm of travel. It came with 2 spacers installed and two more in the packaging. At the other end of the travel scale, my new Slash has a Zeb fork with 170 mm of travel. It had one spacer installed and two more in the packaging. To get full travel in both of these forks, I had to run slightly more than normal sag and zero spacers. I seem to be light on the fork across all bikes. Not that I'm super fast - I acknowledge I'm only moderately quick. But I'm a big guy and weigh a lot and I do like to ride steeper trails (where more weight ends up on the front wheel). Yet I don't require any spacers.
 
I've written mostly about forks, and also about suspension linkages (rear end only except for the unusual few bikes out there) - but fork and shock can be freely interchanged in this theory. They both have air chambers and they both can use spacers inside them to take up some volume and lend more bottoming out resistance to the unit. The main difference is that a fork has a 1:1 relationship between wheel travel and air chamber piston travel. They are directly connected to each other. But the shock is on a linkage that compresses the shock 1/2 to 1/3 as much as the wheel moves. A 200 mm travel DH fork has 200 mm of movement between the sliders and the stanchions. A 200 mm travel rear end on a DH bike probably uses a 75 mm travel shock (almost 3:1). While this puts more stress on the shock, it is otherwise the same.
 
Prior to suspension companies making all these volume spacers available and designed into so many higher end products, the go-to solution was a blob of grease placed in an out of the way corner of the air chamber. So it has always been possible to increase the compression ratio. And my physical modification of the old Fox fork demonstrates the decrease was possible too - if rather more involved.
 
There are also several unconventional solutions on the market. Formula suspension uses closed cell foam volume spacers. As the pressure in the chamber increases, the volume of the foam spacer decreases. This limits the ramp-up at the end to less than you'd otherwise see. Good for controlling the mid-range without overwhelming the final range of travel. There are also designed-in and aftermarket solutions with negative air chambers. If the air chamber acts upon a piston with air pressure behind it, like the close cell foam, once the chamber pressure exceeds the opposing air pressure, it will move the piston and lessen the compression ratio. Several European producers of forks use this sort of system in their own forks and the MRP Ramp Control cartridge replaces your stock air cap and spacer stack with an on-the-trail adjustable volume spacer.
 
The take away message from this is that regardless of how your air suspension behaves it can be modified quite simply to behave differently. If you can't imagine undertaking this challenge yourself, there are shops and people who specialise in helping with just such problems.]]>Gear2022-12-29T12:18:39+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/409dd98f524f6487677fe91d22018365-40.html#unique-entry-id-40https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/409dd98f524f6487677fe91d22018365-40.html#unique-entry-id-40If you read all these stories, then you know I recently got my long-awaited new Slash. I put a Shock-Whiz on the fork before taking her to Thredbo last week. Riding every day in the bike park is a good workout for any part, especially suspension. The Shock-Whiz began telling me I was running too much air pressure and too much compression damping - especially the non-adjustable high-speed compression setting. By the end of the week, without doing anything to the fork (except ride it) the Shock-Whiz was telling me that these things were right in the centre of the range.
The difference was the wearing in of the seals with use.
I would assume not only the fork bushings and dust seals, but also all the o-ring seals in the damping cartridge all loosened up slightly, making the fork's action smoother.
This suggests that setting up a fork shouldn't be "finalised" until it has had at least 20 hours of use. I don't know if the Zeb will continue to loosen up with further use, or if it has plateaued now.
The other thing I take away from this experiment is that I am close to what the Shock-Whiz tells me without its input. I've been adjusting suspension on vehicles (cars, motorbikes and bicycles) for a long time. I learned something it seems. The Shock-Whiz did get me to add one click of LSC before it was happy.

For anyone interested in the Shock-Whiz as a tool, I can recommend it. Even if just for observations of the suspensions activity during a ride. It notes all manner of good and bad shock behaviours during a ride (packing down in the travel, deep compression events, air time is logged, pogo behaviour, etc) which assist with dialing in the correct settings. The answers it provides are NOT definitive because there are so many end goals in the set-up matrix (soft to firm suspension feel and active to planted behaviour): perfection in one set-up window can be terrible in another one.
Lots of people borrow or hire a Shock-Whiz to do set-up on one bike, but I really think the value is longer term. It teaches riders the relationship between a click on a dial and the behaviour on the trails in subtle ways that are hard to feel.
I learned that the break-in process lasts longer than I had assumed. ]]>Gear2022-12-22T21:15:51+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8e1a927dda94c467473943ed463402be-39.html#unique-entry-id-39https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/8e1a927dda94c467473943ed463402be-39.html#unique-entry-id-39I have been using the Scorpion XC tyre for a couple of years and really like its grip and durability. When it came time to put new tyres on the Zipp wheels for the new Slash, I chose the Scorpion Enduro. The Mixed condition (M) on the front and the Rear specific (R) on the back.
These are the same choices I made for the XC tyres and seemed suited to riding wherever and whenever riding presents itself.
After a week of riding at Thredbo I can definitely say "wow". Particularly the front one, it just hangs on like Velcro. The rear wasn't quite as amazing, but it has much less tread as a trade-off to provide low rolling resistance. Low rolling resistance is good on the XC bikes. And it might be good slogging up a big mountain for an Enduro stage on the Enduro bike. But it is NOT good in a bike park when you're trying to go quickly. The rear end sliding is fine if you're Sam Hill (he seems to revel in that), but it is distracting for me sometimes.
I think two of the "M" tyres might be optimal for all around use, but the soft (S) variation is probably perfect for Thredbo where the ground is often quite soft (dust or dirt).

Pirelli and Continental getting serious about MTB tyres is one of the best developments of recent times in the mountain bike space. I frequently rave about the Scorpion tyres in their various options and I am looking forward to someone having the Continental Kryptotal in stock so I can try those. ]]>Gear2022-12-15T19:48:43+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/7b9c88cfe8fc2be8debfea49b21f9a94-38.html#unique-entry-id-38https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/7b9c88cfe8fc2be8debfea49b21f9a94-38.html#unique-entry-id-38Does anyone actually agree on how a bar is meant to be set in the stem?
Riser bars have both upsweep and backsweep (as well as rise). Shapes differ, but generally the fat central portion is dead straight to play nicely with the stem clamp. Not far beyond the stem the "rise" part happens. At the end of that riser piece, the remainder of the bar is narrower and tilted both upwards and towards the rider.
But the clamp section is round. It can be rotated through 360 degrees inside the stem clamp. Only a few of those degrees make any sense, but they can make quite a difference to how the bars feel.
I observe that my chosen position is not the same as most chosen positions. I like to put the rising section such that it rises vertically and leaving the backsweep to provide the backsweep. Most people seem to install their bars rotated more backwards than this, with some of the upsweep contributing to backsweep (and some backsweep diminishing the upsweep offered).
My new Slash is up and running with the one-piece bar and stem combo that Slashes have this season. There is no bar rolling going on there and I'm super-keen to see where it sits and how it feels.
 
On one bike I ran a flat bar with loads of backsweep. I rotated it such that there was some upsweep and less backsweep. While that is how I believe it should be installed, the logo ended up pointed at the front wheel rather than dead ahead. Strongly suggesting I am wrong.
 
Within reason, there is no wrong. Only what suits. I strongly suspect most riders don't even think about rotating their bars in the stem and just take what their mechanic gave them when the bike was assembled.
 
I'll report back after some riding on the Slash...]]>Gear2022-12-06T21:35:03+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a08b3b8c58a8b902b9e23afa652e3236-37.html#unique-entry-id-37https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a08b3b8c58a8b902b9e23afa652e3236-37.html#unique-entry-id-37How wide should your handlebars be?
I don't think there is a definitive answer to this.
 
I've seen it suggested that one’s ideal hand spacing for push-ups is also ones ideal bar width. For me then, my actual bar width is pretty close to perfect.
 
I moved to Vancouver when narrow bars were all the rage. I remember seeing guys riding flash (for the time) MTBs around on the road with ultra-narrow bars and thinking they had to ride offroad to justify those narrow controls. This was a time when a 58cm wide bar was normal, and the bars I am talking about where sub-50. This was all predicated from the tree spacing on the trails being built in those days - minimal tree cutting meant narrow was necessary.
There is a trail in Whistler on the edge of the village down to one of the primary schools. That trail is called "cut yer bars" and back when it was built in about 1991, it challenged people with 58cm bars to navigate the narrow-set trees. You can clearly see where an entire row of trees has been cut out to widen the way for more modern bars, but not so far as to get away from the spirit of the track. The first time I rode it I had 75cm bars and they just fit. The last time I rode it was with 82cm bars and that's considerably more challenging.
 
Between the 58cm bars I used when I started on a MTB and the 82cm bars I use now was a whole series of small progressions: 64, 68, 70, 72, 75 and 78 before 82cm. Each step felt better. No step felt like I'd gone too far. And before anyone tells me I'm "over barred" let me tell you I have a 2.1m wingspan. As I wrote above, I have tried push-ups at different hand widths and 82cm is perfectly fine (I can do just as many at a narrower width, but max reps at 82cm and 74cm are the same). I haven't specifically tried wider, but I think I'm at (or very close to) my perfect max.
 
I like the longer lever that the wider bars provide.
 
I've also seen many shorter people stuck with bars too wide for them. Many will be through ignorance and the fact that many bike companies specify one bar across the size range - not suitable to anyone riding a small but possibly not wide enough for those on the extra-large. I had a student recently who was clearly struggling with her bar width. She took it back to her bike shop and they shortened the bars to a much better length.
If there is a take-away message here it is that experimenting with bar width is important to find the optimum.]]>Gear2022-12-03T16:01:43+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e6b6d32afea3b25e86bcc896222c51f8-36.html#unique-entry-id-36https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e6b6d32afea3b25e86bcc896222c51f8-36.html#unique-entry-id-36Time flies when you are stuck in a pandemic. Or something.
It seems like just a few months since I got my Ripley, but it was early 2020 before the pandemic struck. That's more than 2 years. Actually going to be three soon!
The Ripley is the first bike I've had with a Dave Weagle suspension - in this case DW link. It does what the brochure says: it doesn't bob with pedalling but it responds to terrain inputs. It does lack the plush feeling that other suspension designs have, but it doesn't seem to detract from performance.
I took the Ripley up to Thredbo once. While the Flow trail in particular doesn't have gnarly terrain and doesn't seemingly require loads of travel to navigate, at speed on the 120mm travel Ripley I felt like I might get vibrated to pieces. Jumping on the Slash instead was much more comfortable. Even tame trails at speed reward more travel with a plusher ride.
But on XC trails it rips.
It jumps well.
It climbs well.
It is pretty light.
I can (just) get a bottle under the shock into the cage down there.
 
For me, it replaced a full XC race bike and I don't believe it is slower anywhere but it is faster in many places. Head angle is several degrees slacker than the XC bike. Seat angle is several degrees steeper than the XC bike. The 200mm dropper post gets the seat well out of the way - giving me more leg travel than I'd get with a lesser dropper post.
I am running a 60mm stem. With the reach on this bike it is perfect when standing but a bit short when seated. I think a 90mm stem would be better when used as an XC race bike. I even have the stem, but it has a 31.8mm bore for the bars while the bars on this bike are 35mm diameter. (If it were the other way I could shim it...)
Rowney Sports indicated that most of their builds use a 140mm travel fork. The default by design on the Ripley is a 130mm fork. I read in the release info on the then-new Ripley that they'd raised the bottom bracket so that people running a 120mm fork wouldn't hit their pedals and that decided it for me to run the 120mm option. With two bigger bikes at my disposal it didn't make sense to try to upfork the Ripley and stretch its use envelope towards bigger terrain. It did make sense to downfork it and push it more XC-wards.
I should probably make a separate entry for the fork as I find the same model on two of my bikes now, but suffice to say I like both the fork and how it performs on the Ripley.
 
I did a full protective vinyl wrap on the Slash, but I wanted a less labour-intensive option for the Ripley. I purchased a roll of wide and thick protective tape and cut three pieces for top, down and seat tubes. That has worked well as those are the parts of the frame that get the most abuse. The outside of the chainstays would benefit from more protection, but otherwise I'm content.
The tape I used is from Effetto Mariposa. It is too thick. It might provide extra protection being 1.2mm thick, but standard 3M automotive film does a great job on thousands of bike frames. That thick it is difficult to bend on compound curves and even hard to cut cleanly.
 
The Ripley is an enthusiastic bike; it encourages going faster and faster and has the traction and handling to back that up. With some medium weight wheels and fast rolling tyres (1500g Bontrager carbon wheels from my Slash and Pirelli Scorpion XC M & R tyres) it feels like the bike I was after: a playful but race-worthy bike.]]>Gear2022-11-27T19:47:32+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ff165a778a3b1ad66b203913897d9d5a-35.html#unique-entry-id-35https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ff165a778a3b1ad66b203913897d9d5a-35.html#unique-entry-id-35Sometimes it seems as if there is only one school of thought in MTB tyre design...
While you might think I am going to talk about tread patterns, I'm not. Sure many tyres "look like a Minion", but that isn't what's on my mind today.
 
Maxxis is probably the tyre of choice in Australia (at least here on the East Coast - perhaps everywhere). They do produce a tyre for every purpose, which helps them to be popular. My main grumble about Maxxis tyres is that most (if not all) of the modern tyres (read that as anything that comes in a 29" size) have a dual compound knob on the tyre. To get chemical grip, they use a soft rubber that is capable of high grip on hard surfaces; but to get mechanical grip they form most of the knob out of a harder rubber that resists deformation under load. On day 1 this is great, but as soon as the soft rubber is worn away from the underlying support rubber, the tyre is done. Sure you can keep riding it, but it has poor chemical grip at this point (if it has any at all, that hard rubber can be pretty slick on some types of surfaces) and probably it didn't wear evenly, resulting in less than stellar mechanical grip too.
About three years ago, Pirelli entered the MTB tyre scene with a new range produced by a partner (Vittoria I believe - in Thailand) using Pirelli rubber compounds. One of the distinguishing traits of these new (XC only initially) tyres was the single compound through each knob. In a tyre like the XC-R (rear specific), the cornering knobs start out looking a bit worn, so they don't really change much through their lifespan. And they do provide very good chemical and mechanical grip.
Pirelli hired Fabian Barel, ex-World Champ at DH and renowned engineer for fast bikes on dirt, to help develop a DH tyre for Pirelli. After a couple of years of running prototypes under some fast racers, Pirelli has announced their new DH and second-generation Enduro tyres. And - queue unhappy noises from me - to get the characteristics the fast racers wanted they had to resort to dual compound knobs. Soft over hard, like Maxxis. The Enduro tyres on my Slash are single compound and have a tread pattern quite different to these new (now made in Italy by Pirelli too) MTB tyres.
 
I've run several sets of tyres on my Slash in the time I've had it. It came with Bontrager SE4s, front and back. At some point Trek added the SE5 to their lineup, and I've been running an SE5/SE4 combo for the last year or so. With little fanfare, Trek has introduced a revised SE tyre line, including the new SE6 (if an SE4 is like a Minion DHF, and an SE5 is like a Minion DHR2, then the SE6 is like an Assegai). One feature of the new line is soft over hard rubber to make the tyres more suited to race use in the EWS by their fastest Enduro team riders. This replaces single compound knobs (the SE tyres were softer on the outside and harder in the centre, but any individual knob was a single compound).
 
This probably cuts a tyres useable life in half.
If they were half the price then it would just be the inconvenience of purchasing them, mounting them and getting them sealed.
But dual compound knobs are harder, not easier, so if anything, the price of the tyres has gone up.
 
Now there is less incentive to reach for a Pirelli or Bontrager tyre next time I need new rubber on the rims.]]>Gear2022-11-21T15:29:25+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/94e73155cdc37df779088bbdeee339e4-34.html#unique-entry-id-34https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/94e73155cdc37df779088bbdeee339e4-34.html#unique-entry-id-34When I'm riding inside I use a Kickr. I thought I'd briefly run through why.
My first stationary training device was a set of Belgian rollers. Three plastic drums in a steel frame were great for developing balance and spin, but not so good for strength because there is no real resistance in traditional rollers. The alternative was a wind trainer. They are very loud. Very.
After the wind trainer came the mag trainer. This was a foreshadowing of the smart trainer (as most smart trainers use electro-magnetic resistance not too dissimilar to mag trainer resistance) but definitely not smart. They weren't even as good as wind trainers, but far quieter. And quiet wins in many households. I never liked any mag trainer I tried because the flywheel was too light and there was no momentum.
And then came the smart trainer. I don't know if the Kickr was first, but it was among the early options. And it has continued to progress to keep abreast of industry developments. The latest version is #6, which offers only tiny changes from version #5 - though one is really good when you require it. When you stop pedalling it can be impossible to get back on top of the gear as the trainer tries to force you to put out the rated power, which at a low cadence is a very large load. Now it takes a few seconds to ramp up to the set load when restarting. If you never stop in mid-ride then you'd never notice.
Kickr is unique in the Headwind (a Bluetooth paired fan that speeds up based on power, velocity, heart rate or a simple manual setting). And in the Climb (a companion to the Kickr that moves the front of the bike up and down in response to slope in the virtual world. I have a Headwind and would love to have a Climb.
My Gen 1 Kickr (technically I'm minding it for a mate who wore it out with tens of thousands of kilometres and replaced it with a Tacx Neo; and I purchased the spare part to make it work again and am now keeping it safe for him by using it once a week) is not Climb compatible. The rear "axle" doesn't freely rotate in the housing to permit free rotation of the bike through simulated hill slopes.
I did a group test of smart trainers including Tacx, Elite, Wahoo, JetBlack and more. We bought the Gen 3 Kickr from the test pool for my partner's use.
The Kickr has good folding legs (stable when open, small when closed). It has a good handle. It is quiet. It is fast to respond to power changes from any controlling app. That power is consistent and stable. The Saris Hammer was also good, but just more awkward to use. The JetBlack was cool in that it generated its own power from use - no plug-in required. I don't know if the current model shares this with that older model, but this new one has become the Zwift Hub - Zwift's first foray into hardware. I guess if Wahoo can buy in two apps to go with their hardware then the app makers can buy in hardware to go with their software.
The market has progressed enough that Wahoo and Tacx both do a "bike". A hybrid between their trainer and a studio bike, they easily reconfigure in order to fit most riders. The Wahoo bike has the Climb's tilt function built in. The Tacx bike has something like the Headwind built in - with 2 fans on the bars.
Tacx also makes a mega-treadmill that is large enough to accommodate a full road bike. That one would be my choice based on the real-ness of riding on a moving belt over fully stationary trainers. But the size (big) and price (over 8000 Euros) are very unfriendly. And apparently not in Australia at all.
I have a good bike on my Kickr. Which is why I would not choose the smart bike. But would choose the Magnum treadmill. My seat. My bars. My position. And only my position.
Smart trainers open up the prospect of indoor, remote racing. Indoor, remote bunch riding. And simulated riding just about anywhere in the world. Zwift has multiple real and imaginary roads contained inside the app. RGT has "magic roads" that let you upload a GPS file and re-ride the road in a simulated environment (RGT doesn't attempt to mimic the scenery of your road, just the slope).
Virtual riding is only going to get better from here.]]>Gear2022-11-12T22:32:15+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/265d5a9af48edb7faa9f66cb150bea59-33.html#unique-entry-id-33https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/265d5a9af48edb7faa9f66cb150bea59-33.html#unique-entry-id-33After 12 months of waiting, my Slash has finally arrived – early! My first observation is that paint is more complex than I expected. It is not only hue-changing paint but there are two paints. The top is dark and mostly purple.  The bottom is bright and mostly blue. Somehow they’ve been able to paint it with a “grain” so that the writing behaves exactly opposite the background in how it reacts to light. What makes one bright, makes the other dark. Very cool. I’m also sad that most of the blue paint gets covered by the chainstay protector and the downtube protector. Yes that protection is essential. But it hides the cool blueness to a great extent.
Second impression is that the new Slash is much more of a beast than the previous version (which I now have for sale). Longer, lower and slacker. The Zeb fork is much beefier than the 36. Both ends are primed for one size larger disc rotors (200/180 rather than 180/160). I ran 200/200 rotors on the old Slash and will run 200/200 on the new Slash. It ships in low position where the old Slash shipped in high position (which I never rode once).
The gearing is lower. That makes sense after my time on the other Slash as top gear is too big for most trails, but I occasionally wanted a lower gear on long climbs up a mountain. Both a smaller chainring and a larger big sprocket on the cassette means the low gear is quite a bit lower. Ten per cent lower in fact.
And finally: It still looks like a Slash. The Trek family lines are there.]]>Riding2022-11-10T21:08:49+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6322302ea78c03db53b34e66efe86580-32.html#unique-entry-id-32https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/6322302ea78c03db53b34e66efe86580-32.html#unique-entry-id-32That's plainly not true, in fact I rarely ride park. But it is the title of a recurring theme in Matt Dennison's repertoire. If Matt and the title mean nothing to you, you're missing out. Go to YouTube and check out the gems from IFHT (their new channel is called Mahalo My Dudes). So I don't only ride park, but I really enjoy riding park. Which is a segue into what I am writing about today.
From 2011 to 2019 I went to BC to ride every year. Then Covid hit. Didn't go in 2020. Didn't go in 2021. Could possibly have gone in 2022, but travel was hard and expensive this year. Plus timing wasn't good with work stuff, and the whole newer Creekside zone at Whistler was closed all summer due to lift works on that side of the hill. Sounds like there's going to be more closures next summer as they put in yet another lift (which is sub-optimal, but not avoidance worthy).
 
To make up for the long absence, it was proposed that maybe we should visit all the good places we have been and the few places we haven't been in prior visits. Minimum stay under this scenario is 62 days (allowing for a couple of days on each bike park's trails and transit between parks).
 
The trails at SilverStar are superb for trail bikes. The trails at Sun Peaks and Kicking Horse are best for DH bikes. Whistler delivers trails for both types really well. I've been with only a trail bike and with only a DH bike. Both leave you wanting for the other. The best visits have had both types of bike - choice is prime.
Whistler in particular benefits from having a trail bike because there are way more good trails out of the bike park than inside it. As good as the park is; Howler, Dark Crystal and Lord of the Squirrels are only three of the many amazing trails on offer if you can pedal up.
 
The proposed itinerary looks something like this:
SilverStar > Big White > Sun Peaks > Retallack Lodge > Fernie > Panorama > Kicking Horse > Revelstoke > Whistler > North Shore.
 
I haven't been to Mt Washington on the island. It seemed to be open a bit this year so there is hope. And the Nanaimo area trails were tons of fun (Cumberland and Tzouhalem are the two I think we hit up last time). So maybe?
 
In less than a month, Thredbo opens for summer. I've got my season pass. I made it up for ten days each of the last two seasons. I'm hoping this rain doesn't ruin what could be a really fun summer of MTB. My stoke is high knowing that the Gunbarrel lift will have double the capacity of last year (two bikes per chair now after taking the racks from the Kosciuszko chair). Which means the main chair gets new bike carriers too (more capacity? When I spoke to lift services they weren't sure yet). Merrits Gondola remains two bikes per car. But at the summit of the gondola will be a new chair for bikes continuing straight up in the same direction (apparently with 2 bike capacity as well). Three new trails off that lift means that Sidewinder now runs the full length of that hill, plus there are a blue flow and a blue technical trail up there as well.
As long as the upper traverse trail is open (closed for too much of last season) then much of the hill is accessible from the main lift. That trail runs past the top of Gunbarrel, taking in everything it offers, and then past the top of the gondola too. The only trails that it won't touch are the three new ones. They'll be holiday/weekend only tracks I guess. Kosciuszko runs 7 days but Gunbarrel/Merrits and the new Cruiser lifts are holiday/weekend only.
The first time I went to Thredbo was summer 1997. There was only the one trail - the Cannonball DH track. The day we were there the main lift was closed for servicing so we had to take an old and slow lift (which I think must be gone because I remember it being immediately next to the Kosciuszko) that stopped short of the summit. We had to do "dirt school" where they showed us how to "safely" carry our bikes in our laps on the chair (there was never anything safe about it). The bike guy showed us some of the Cannonball DH trail, but it was closed except for race days. Which meant we had a boring run down the firetrail back to the lift. After a couple of those we called it a day.
When Thredbo started taking MTB seriously, they added the Flow trail to open the hill to modest skill level riders. The All Mountain is even better because it can be quite challenging if you go fast and take the optional side lines it offers, or it can be merely a bit more difficult than the Flow.
The grommets seem to love the Merrits lift and Sidewinder. It's short, so fitness isn't an issue (the main lift is pretty long). And Sidewinder is fun for all (from beginner to pro there is something to enjoy on the trail).
I digress in my enthusiasm for the coming summer season.
 
The only other ski resort in Australia where one could ride park was Mt Buller in Victoria. Unfortunately it had a very short season. Day one was Boxing Day and the final day was January 31 for the regular season, and then for a dozen years they had the Buller Bike Festival closer to Easter that opened the lifts for another week. Worksafe ruled that carrying your bike in your lap was not, in fact, safe (see my comments on Thredbo's former similar situation above) cancelling the 2020 Buller Bike Festival for good. There is now a shuttle service that runs weekends and holidays from December to April, plus full time the same periods as the lifts used to run (Boxing Day to February and Easter).
With long, long summers in Australia, and short, short winters I don't understand why Perisher (with over 30 lifts), or Falls Creek (with a dozen lifts) or any other ski area in Australia hasn't gone down the MTB pathway yet.
In BC, riding park is possibly a way of life. In Australia, not so much.]]>Gear2022-11-06T22:07:05+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/76d4b84ede7831bc5c0332f5848af13a-31.html#unique-entry-id-31https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/76d4b84ede7831bc5c0332f5848af13a-31.html#unique-entry-id-31Following on from the recent post about saddles, I found a Fizik Antares Versus Evo R3 Adaptive (3D printed top, metal rails) on sale. Since mid-last week I've had it on my commuter as a trial.
My first impression was that it was comfortable but after a few rides I'm less certain. I plan to give it 25 hours of ride time (19 commuting days) before I make any definitive decision.

It is obvious that the nose is soft and the back area is firm. Whether these are soft or firm enough remains to be seen.
For what it's worth, it looks nice.
Compared to the Arione that was on there before, the Antares is essentially missing the rear 4cm. From the nose to the tail it is the same as an Arione, except the Arione has a convex rear shape and the Antares is blunt to slightly concave. I never use that portion to functionally they should be the same. ]]>Gear2022-11-01T21:13:31+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e0eb95bdb9982b62d781e2f2bb3f9c3d-30.html#unique-entry-id-30https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e0eb95bdb9982b62d781e2f2bb3f9c3d-30.html#unique-entry-id-30I recently wrote about road gearing. In the aftermath of Ganna's amazing Hour Record recently, track gearing has been a topic of conversation amongst my cycling friends. So I decided to write about that today.
English speaking cyclists tend to reckon in "gear inches". Which is an arcane measure of how big the front wheel of a Penny Farthing would be if you were riding one! Because they were direct drive, the biggest wheel that could fit between your legs was the size you used (assuming you could afford to commission a brand-new custom bike back 150 years ago). A 700C road bike wheel is roughly 27" in diameter. Of course this depends on the tyre size (a 42mm gravel tyre is MUCH bigger than a 20mm track tyre on the same rim). But this reckoning is strangely tyre independent.
I ran a "fixie" commuting bike for a while. Fixed-wheel bikes demand that you pedal as long as and as fast as you are moving. So a particularly small gear requires lots of leg speed, particularly down a longer hill. Conversely a bigger gear demands leg strength on the way up any hill. For a few weeks my gear selection on the commuter was a ridiculously small 39/17 gear combo: 61". I then tried 52/13, which is a crazy big gear: 108". It was a couple of weeks before I was able to muscle up the hill to my home, but I was happy to finally make it up there.
On a Friday afternoon about 3 km from home I decided I had had enough of commuting on a fixed-wheel bike and resolved to swap back to gears over the weekend (before going to work on Monday). The decision was taken away from me when the light turned green. As I stood to power away from the intersection, the threads on the hub holding that 13T sprocket in place sheared off for good to end my fixie fixation. I scootered home and replaced the drivetrain on the bike with gears.
There are no hills on a velodrome, but acceleration is critically important to racing success. So, a gear in the high 80s would be a typical warm-up gear. Then, a gear in the low 90s would be good for actual racing. At an event like Nationals these tend to go up a little because everyone is riding faster and is fitter, plus the good wheels come out for these occasions; allowing bigger gears. The big change in world level track racing in this century is going to bigger gears and going much faster. I remember when the team pursuit first went under 4:00 for 4000m, but now the individual pursuit has also gone under 4:00. In the 90s, Graeme Obree could often catch national teams in demo events where he raced them solo: his ability to do a sub-4:20 time put him on par with a decent team pursuit team.
For the Hour Record, Ganna used 65/14. That's about 125 inches. Much bigger than anything I've ever used, even in fun. I remember trying out different gearing for club track racing and one night I threw 108" on the bike and managed to get a gap over the field in the final scratch race of the night and no one could catch me thanks to my big gear. On the pursuit side I turned nearly identical times on everything from mid-90s inches up to 110" because the limiting factor was neither strength nor fitness; but power. A Watt is a Watt and it takes more Watts to go faster no matter how fast or slow you turn your legs over.
But if you watch the 5 minute highlight video (or the entire hour replay) for Ganna's record ride, he starts out very slowly. He's young and strong and fit but that gear is still a huge effort to get going. Ganna's speed works out to 15.75 m/s average. Or 945 m/min. Or roughly 450 wheel rpm (obviously tyre size dependent but that won't change too much regardless of what rear tyre he ran-maybe 5%). With his gearing selection that is a very comfortable 105 rpm for his legs. In contrast, on a 90" gear (50/15) that's more like 136 rpm. I can do my FTP output for an hour at 105 rpm. I can do it at 136 rpm for maybe 1 minute before something in my legs tightens up and I have to slow down.
So 125" is a huge gear, no doubt. But it is right in the sweet spot for a good track rider to pedal for 60 minutes. Which suggests if you plan to ride 57 km in 60 minutes you need an amazing combination of fitness and strength permitting use of such a monster gear choice.]]>Gear2022-10-28T22:31:04+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2e62777b9f025268bddb7f955a7bf940-29.html#unique-entry-id-29https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2e62777b9f025268bddb7f955a7bf940-29.html#unique-entry-id-29Finding the right saddle for your bike is much like finding anything where fit is involved in a mass-produced good. Which is to say maybe the first one you try is close enough that you never look beyond it, or perhaps you try all you can get your hands on and still find yourself wanting something different.
Most saddles follow a tried and tested construction process. A nylon shell is covered in foam which is further covered in leather or leather-like substance. Rails can be made from many substances, most of which have little influence on the comfort level of the saddle.
The first saddle I tried that wasn’t of this variety was way back in my teen years when I got a traditional saddle – stretched leather over a metal frame. These days that pretty much means a Brooks saddle, but there were other choices back then and mine was from France rather than England. It was quite comfortable, but it left all shorts with black dye in them and it got bent when my bike tipped over and couldn’t easily be straightened. End of experiment 1.
Much more recently, Brooks released a modernised version of this same saddle in rubber and canvas instead of leather. I applied to be a tester and was granted a C17 to review. I liked it quite a lot, but it moved around too much to be a permanent addition to my bike. I’d love to try the racier version with carbon rails – both for the lighter weight and narrower dimensions as for the stiffer chassis that might all contribute to less movement. Just in the past weeks this has found its way onto my indoor bike. With no corners and no bumps the movement is a non-issue.
Fizik is an Italian saddle brand that had 3 main road saddles to suit the more flexible, the less flexible and the inflexible rider. The Arione, the more flexible option, was my go-to saddle for many years. The one drawback was that the shell had “cuts” in it to allow the shell to flex out of the way of pedalling legs for greater comfort, but the cuts eventually ran through the middle of the shell rendering it unrideable. Fizik has a gen 2 version of the Arione now, which I have 3 examples of for my 3 road bikes. It is much more durable than the original (no cuts), but also much less comfortable for me.
On the trainer, the Arione was replaced with the C17 to good effect.
The state of the art in saddles is now a 3D printed unit. The printer creates a spider-web like network of small plastic struts all joined at thousands of nodes to create the three dimensional shape of the seat. There is no padding and no cover, just the lattice of plastic struts. Specialized was first to the market with one of these, and now they have two models and two variants. Fizik came out with something similar more recently. Again they have two models and at least two variants. I was interested to read that both saddles are produced by the same American company that has unique 3D printing technology and the ability to create numerous saddle tops in a short period of time.
I really want to try one of the printed saddles. They just look like they’d be comfortable and the reports on them suggest most people like them. Unlike foam, which is the same stiffness everywhere – the 3D printed lattice can be different in stiffness anywhere across the structure to suit local conditions for a seat.
One drawback is price. There is no such thing as a cheap printed saddle. Though they have gotten markedly less expensive than they were a year ago.
MTB saddles are less demanding than road saddles because you sit for so brief a time on a mountain bike and the ground jostles you around on the seat too – effectively resetting things all the time. I bought a new trail bike two years ago and needed a saddle for it. The bike shop recommended something (Fabric brand) and leant me a demo model. I thought it was pretty good, so I bought two (one for that bike and a variation on it for a bike that required a new seat). With time I’ve realised I do not like the Fabric saddles. The flat one on the trail bike might be better on a road bike with more drop to the bars (rotating my pelvis further forwards and changing my relationship with the seat) while the more saddle shaped saddle on the long-travel bike just doesn’t work.
There are just so many “nearly” saddles. They are nearly what I want… I find it quite difficult to find the “yes” saddle. It can take 20 hours on a broken in saddle to decide if it is right, and it can take longer than that to break one in. Which means a typical demo situation is of little use except to toss out the obvious losers early. I almost hope that I get a 3D printed saddle and dislike it because it would be unthinkably expensive to put one on every bike…]]>Riding2022-10-22T21:10:31+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a34e256c22ef3fb74a7859002ecda17b-28.html#unique-entry-id-28https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a34e256c22ef3fb74a7859002ecda17b-28.html#unique-entry-id-28Just a week after Ganna set the Hour Record, he was back on the track on his expensive Pinarello for the track Worlds. Not only did he win but he beat the world record, previously set at altitude, in the process.
I remember when the team pursuit record went under 4 minutes, and now it's the individual pursuiters' turn to go so fast.

When you're fast: you're fast!!!!

Andiamo Ganna.]]>Riding2022-10-13T22:46:16+11:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ca480a19c803dc72ff8ad966a02d4e5f-27.html#unique-entry-id-27https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ca480a19c803dc72ff8ad966a02d4e5f-27.html#unique-entry-id-27Near the end of the 19th century, the first man established the “hour record” at around 35 km in 60 minutes (the women’s hours record came MUCH later and isn’t the topic of conversation for today). Now, the hour record is a cool cycling thing based on how far you can ride on a velodrome in one hour – that’s it: ride for 60 minutes and see how far you went.
When, in 1972, Merckx set the record at 49 km, it was out of reach for a long while. Ten years later, Moser was able to take that up to 50 km by using newly developed disc wheels and a lo-pro frame to gain an aero-advantage over the Merckx set-up. In 1992 it got bumped up again. First by Obree and then by (then) recent Barcelona Olympic Individual Pursuit gold medallist Boardman at 52 km.
Obree, Indurain, Rominger, Rominger and Boardman kept pushing the distance upwards in five steps to well over 56 km (56.3). Then the UCI stepped in and threw out 25 years of progress by telling everyone that Merckx was once again the record holder. From that day forwards, all record attempts had to be done on a 1970’s style bike. There were a few attempts, a couple of successes, getting the record up to 51 km. But the main problem was it didn’t appeal to anyone. At least the 90’s flurry of activity was based around the then-current Individual Pursuit regulations and any decent time trial rider would feel at home on a pursuit bike.
Then the UCI leadership changed and they opened up the hour to current pursuit bike rules again. The last decade has seen another whirlwind of records upping the distance from both strong GC riders and time trial specialists. They collectively pushed the record up to nearly 55 km (still not equal to Boardman’s 1996 record of 56).
In September an unlikely holder emerged at the end of one hour with a 55 km distance: an engineer from a pro road team, who is apparently a pretty handy cyclist himself, put all of the marginal gains he knew about into his personal attempt with fantastic success. That was just the prelude to the main event. On the same team was double world champion Ganna. Early on the morning of October 9th (8th where he was) Ganna took his fancy Individual Pursuit equipment and crushed all the records with a 56.7 km record.
That is far enough that it might be some time before anyone can better it.]]>Riding2022-09-30T23:04:08+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/103b2b27ea05d36493bab15a812a8074-26.html#unique-entry-id-26https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/103b2b27ea05d36493bab15a812a8074-26.html#unique-entry-id-26On the track you have the Individual Pursuit and the Time Trial (the kilo). On the road there is the Individual Time Trial. In mountain biking it is the Enduro and DH disciplines. What these all have in common is not knowing how fast your opposition is travelling, regardless of whether they went before you or behind you.
A common mantra for the road and track side of things is repeatedly quizzing oneself if it is possible to pedal any harder right now. It is quite easy to slide off the pace just one increment. Over a typical 40 km ITT that can easily drop 30 seconds off your time. It is a rare event that 30 seconds is unimportant to your final placing. At nationals one year, I tied with another guy for second place – they went back to the timing system to sort out who might have been second because they hate ties, but that is close (it was me!).
One of the ultimate tests of this whole approach is the hour record. For nearly 150 years, the hour record has been a pinnacle event for the road or track cyclist looking to prove their ability. Around a velodrome for 60 minutes, distance over that period is your result. When there was a flurry of records in the 90s (after only one new record in 20 years) amongst four riders: Boardman, Obree, Rominger and Indurain (twice each except for Indurain), they were active roadies who seemed to only have ridden some practice 20-minute sessions in the lead up.
The current record holder isn’t even a “cyclist”. He is a support team member for the INEOS pro road team. In contrast to the usual, he apparently rode at least 40 full hour sessions on his record bike in order to get used to the length of the ride, the position of the ride and to achieve his speed desires. It worked well because he added a decent distance to the record.
Having had one crack at the Master’s Hour myself, I can say that perhaps I would have benefitted from having ridden a few. Although it was unpleasant and maybe after a few trials I wouldn’t have continued to have interest in the record? I was sick on the day and had to pull out after around 35 minutes of riding well off my chosen pace.
Things are even more complex on the dirt. With much of the velocity provided by gravity, speed is a function of not-braking. Thus, one must identify sections of the track where it would be OK to get off the brakes completely. The resultant speed of doing this can be quite scary. Paradoxically, the mountain bike works best off the brakes so it might be the best way through some sections to be off the brakes and going fast. Speed is your friend too, going over certain kinds of bumps – then the tyres only bounce across the top of the peaks (lacking time to fall into the holes in between them).
Every obstacle on the course presents a question about speed. I’ve ridden a long straight and relatively smooth piece of firetrail letting the bike rip – over 70 kmh was the result. That is fine. But bumps, jumps, drops and corners all require a level of control. The top racers are so close that it comes down to how well executed the plan is, and sometimes to even finer details like who selected the faster line through a section. On a five-minute course, sometimes the separation between first and second is fractions of a second.
Whenever racing against the clock, it takes a special mindset to maximise the results (whether that is first or twenty-first) because it is so easy to go slower. The best way to develop that mindset is to use it – practice! Fun races. Club races. Enter as many as you can to work on your personal going fast.
 ]]>Gear2022-09-24T15:19:34+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/cb9b691f50b69abf29e038792ca87b1f-25.html#unique-entry-id-25https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/cb9b691f50b69abf29e038792ca87b1f-25.html#unique-entry-id-25If you begin looking at road bike gearing in the 1960s, everyone had a 144 mm spider that would accept a 42T small ring. Not surprisingly, that happened to be the standard at the time. By the late 1980s the spider has shrunken to 130 mm (135 mm for Campagnolo), with a small chainring standard of 39T (the 130 mm will accept a 38, just as the 144 mm will accept a 41 - but neither was common).
Both of these small ring sizes were usually accompanied by a 53T big ring.
By the mid-1990s, the triple chainring option (which was usually 74 mm for the granny and 110 mm for the two outer rings) was losing favour to the better shifting "compact" crank option of two rings on a 110 mm spider. Standard rings for the compact are 34T for the inner ring and 50T for the outer ring. I remember when this 16T jump taxed the ability of front derailleurs, but they have improved considerably since then.
 
Over the same period of time, the set of sprockets on the hub have added more choices and a bigger range. In the early 1980s most bikes had 5 sprockets on the freewheel. By the early 1990s the sprockets were now a cassette (the freewheel mechanism became part of the hub) with 7 gear choices. My 1992 road bike had the brand-new 8-spd gearing from Shimano.
Serious riders would pick their 5 options from a larger range to suit the course they were riding. A 12-16 had five one-tooth jumps for flat courses. A 12-24 had huge jumps between gears, but provided a more hill-friendly option. With 8 choices, there was far less need to swap cassettes between rides. A 12-24 with 8 sprockets has comfortably small jumps so it is suitable for both flat and hilly rides.
The low gear on that 8-spd road bike was 2:1 (42/21), a relatively high gear choice. I attended a road race in Buderim Queensland in approximately 2000. I was still on 8-spd and I brought my 12-23 cassette with me just in case the course was hilly. It was actually pretty flat except for one climb which was incredibly steep. I could barely make it up there in a 42/23! Someone from Canberra leant me their lower geared 8-spd cassette and I removed my 16T and added in the largest sprocket from their cassette just in case the state of wear was different between my chain and their cassette. I didn't want the chain to skip and I didn't have time for testing. I got terrible shifts across the gap where the 16 was meant to be and then into and out of low gear, but I managed to get over the climb multiple times in a many lap race.
This trend continued until now, all high-end road bikes have 12 sprockets on the hub. My current race bike still has a 39/53 up front, but now it has a 11-29 range at the rear. My commuting bike runs a compact up front (34/50) with the same 11-29 at the rear.
I read somewhere that most pros choose to ride most races solely in the big ring, using the wide range of modern cassettes to avoid the use of the front derailleur as much as possible. I note that the lowest gear in my big ring (53/29) is considerably lower than the lowest possible gear on my old 8-spd bike (42/21). In fact, almost 10% shorter gearing. That is why I can ride a lot of places around Canberra only in the big ring if my fitness is OK and I am going swiftly.
The lowest gear on my commuting bike is a whopping 71% lower than my old 8-spd road bike. But! The top gear is also 3% larger.
 
The trend has been towards smaller chainrings and more range in the sprockets (smaller = higher high gears and larger = lower low gears). Where 8-spd sprockets started at 12T (and freewheels could go down to 13T, but usually started at 14T), now all 12-spd cassettes start at 11T, except SRAM (which uses a different style of freehub) which uses a 10T high gear.
The only drawbacks to smaller sprockets are higher wear due to the fewer teeth to share the chain load and chordal action, which happens noticeably with bike chain on sprockets 14T and smaller - this phenomenon is of low importance on a bike but not of no importance (it causes vibrations and fluttering in the drivetrain).
 
In the days of 8-spd cassettes I was routinely able to get over 20,000 km out of one chain and cassette. Now with 12-spd cassettes, despite much better metallurgy and surface treatment, I believe my commuting bike won't make 6,000 km on a chain and cassette. Despite the 12-spd one being markedly more expensive too.
Modern stuff is super-effective and easy to ride along with being incredibly reliable, but it just can't last the way older stuff did. I have often opined that an 8-spd system made using 12-spd material science might last the life of the bike. I don't know if many would be willing to go back to 8 sprocket cassettes - I don't think I would do it.]]>Gear2022-09-22T15:29:50+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2966cdafe9a43ae387afcfc44a459b8a-24.html#unique-entry-id-24https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2966cdafe9a43ae387afcfc44a459b8a-24.html#unique-entry-id-24Having had a couple of failures with the tubeless tyres on my commuting bike (holes that leaked all the sealant out instead of sealing up), and being unable to purchase the tyres I've decided to try next, I was forced to pick something from my "inventory" of spares.
On the rear of the bike I put a GP4000Sii because I've found the Conti race tyres to be quite puncture protected. Less puncture critical, I put a P Zero Velo on the front. And that is how the commuter bike has been for a few months of commuting.

Last night it was merely damp out and I suffered two punctures on the way home. The first was an unpleasant discovery when I got my bike from the bike parking at work - must have picked up some glass on the (dry) way into work. The second was about 400 metres from home. I got off and walked rather than deal with it on the side of the road.

This morning I took the bike down off the wall to have a look at the tyres. The rear tube had 2 holes in it on opposite sides of the wheel. No wonder it went down rather quickly. The rubber isn't worn through to the fabric, but there are some very thin patches and some historical holes where the fabric is visible. That's about what I expected given the two punctures in one day.
The front was interesting and unexpected. There were about 1000 small cuts in the Velo tread and perhaps 20 pieces of super-sharp glass in the tread face. I haven't had a lot of experience with these tyres but I am much more impressed now than before. Given Pirelli's history in the tyre business I can't say I'm surprised, but it is a very pleasant surprise. Some of the glass pieces were deeply imbedded in the rubber but were stopped by whatever puncture layer is in that tyre.

Which bodes well for my chosen tubeless tyre: the Pirelli Cinturato Velo. As soon as they come back into stock I will be putting a pair on my Checkpoint.

In the meantime, I have replaced both tyres on my bike with some Conti GP4 Seasons. They are a tried and true commuting option being both grippy and very puncture resistant. I borrowed them from my partner's commuting bike (she isn't using the bike - in fact it's for sale if anyone wants a small commuting bike?) and put some brand new tyres on that bike so it is still rideable.

Given the third summer of La Niña, I expect more rainy commutes to come. The GPs will do well to fill in the gap until I can go tubeless.

But, next time the race bike requires new rubber I will seriously consider the P Zero option after seeing the damage withstood by my front tyre in months of commuting. ]]>Riding2022-09-18T20:13:12+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/700c2daf8bbbd31468a5c1483b6390b1-23.html#unique-entry-id-23https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/700c2daf8bbbd31468a5c1483b6390b1-23.html#unique-entry-id-23Cycling in general, but MTB riding in particular, benefits from instability training. Bikes are only as stable as the rider can make them, so unstable exercises contribute to better riding outcomes. If you doubt this for a second check out a video of either Nino Schurter or his teammate Kate Courtney to see how much unstable work they do, and how good they are at doing it.
Machine weights are super stable and essentially isolate a single muscle in the exercise. Free weights are far less stable and the stability muscles that control across a joint (knee, hip, etc) have to be included in the process. I use kettlebells for most of my weight work. The one-sided and swinging motions are less stable again than traditional free weights. The final level is actively unstable exercises, such as one-legged squats or any drill on an instability platform (I use BOSU, there are others).
Machine weights are like standing up while touching the wall – eventually muscles will get tired but they are very static while you stand there. Free weights are like standing in the centre of the room – not that much different to machine weights. One-legged drills are challenging even without weight. Try to stand on one foot for as long as you can, it gets tiring quite quickly. Then take that one-legged standing drill onto a BOSU. It takes practice just to do it at all.
But are unstable training sessions right for you? Only if you are proficient at stable training already is the short answer. I remember when I did my Level 2 coaching course. We spent a day with an amazing strength coach from the national track program. He recognised four levels of weight room proficiencies in his cyclists. Level 1 were people who needed close supervision in the gym to address imbalances in the body and technique in lifting. Level 2 were people who were ready to do proper basic exercises (imbalances addressed, technique sound). Level 3 were ready to challenge some aspect of their strength, balance and flexibility in the weight room. Level 4 were the peak athletes who were ready for the most bike-specific drills and explosive moves because they’d mastered their body and were more than ready for this stuff (almost no one made it to L4 ever).
I take a slightly different tack in my weight sessions with coachees. I like to see them doing unstable drills with only body weight from early on to help address balance in motion. Doing some weights and some unstable drills achieves progress on two fronts. Hopefully it isn’t too long before the two come together. Also, since I’m not trying to develop world champion track cyclists there isn’t a lot of weight involved at any point. We do reps rather than kilograms.
How can you incorporate this into your own training? Get off the machines and into the free weights. Get off two legs and onto one. Don’t use a barbell all the time and start using one-sided drills that challenge stability across the body (one dumbbell or kettlebell instead). Finally, consider replacing two-leg drills with one-leg drills.
 ]]>Gear2022-09-12T08:23:52+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/13826aa120d219f7429046b10e32f51b-22.html#unique-entry-id-22https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/13826aa120d219f7429046b10e32f51b-22.html#unique-entry-id-22I have done a few installations of Shimano’s Di2 digital shifting system, but I recently had my first experience with the SRAM version: AXS (pronounced access according to SRAM). AXS being wireless is its distinction from even the newest 12-spd version of Di2, which I’ve seen referred to as wired-less (the derailleurs are wired to a common battery while the shifters have their own power supply and communicate wirelessly with the derailleurs). AXS has one battery per unit – in the shifters it is a CR2032 button battery and in the derailleurs and seat post it is a small LiIon clip-on battery that gives a decent amount of run time (typically around a month I’m told) for frequent riders.
Being totally wireless means there are no connections whatsoever to run through or around the frame. Bolt on the derailleur(s) and set them up with the SRAM set-up tools. Attach the control mechanisms and align them for rider preference. Then pair the controller and the controlled unit (derailleur or seatpost) by clicking a button on each one. Super simple and worked first try with each pairing.
SRAM has an AXS app. I have it on my phone already because I use a Quarq power meter and it gets new firmware updates from the app. But using it for AXS was new to me. One “builds” a bike in the app and all the associated wireless devices show up there. I can see the derailleur, both controllers but not the seatpost on this particular bike. I know it can see the seatpost since I updated the firmware to the latest version on initial connection. One is meant to be able to swap shifting functions to any logic one desires – even if it makes no sense – but I couldn’t move rear derailleur functions to the seatpost commander.
Flight Attendant, the digital lockout controls over RockShox suspension also appears in the AXS app (and they use the same batteries for their power supply), permitting the Flight Attendant specific left controller to be programmed for which paddle does which function (and presumably to make a mess of things if one desires by including right paddle functions too).
By far my favourite aspect of the AXS process is fine tuning the shifting. Hold the button on the shift lever down while tapping the shift lever in the direction of required change and the derailleur moves one tiny amount in that direction. Di2 has a similar function but I always have to look up what the process is to invoke adjustment mode. With AXS there’s nothing to remember.
The owner of this bike has small hands. She sometimes is challenged to do the shift she wants towards the end of a race. AXS means no physical effort is required to effect the shift – she will be able to shift any time as desired.
Shifting seems faultless. The motor has a bit of grunt so it just moves the chain regardless of the terrain or pedalling going on at the time.
In the Reverb seatpost, it is virtually instantaneous between touching the paddle and the saddle being freed from its current position. These AXS Reverbs benefit from no hose connection either, so they can easily be removed from the frame for maintenance, flights or whatever. And when the post gets a bit squishy from air on the oil side of the floating piston, just flip the post over and insert the bleeding tool to free the air. New hydraulic Reverbs do the same, but it is hidden under the saddle clamp as the bottom side is occupied with a hydraulic fitting.
AXS is available across XX1, XO1 and GX. In GX it costs roughly the same as analogue XX1 – which is expensive but for anyone who has shifting issues with mechanical systems then the digital option is a good way to go. My own AXS-equipped MTB is now about 2 months away (if delivery date can be believed) so there will be more on AXS in a future post.]]>Gear2022-08-20T21:58:44+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e779de9999a474f614e77e88ff697a99-21.html#unique-entry-id-21https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e779de9999a474f614e77e88ff697a99-21.html#unique-entry-id-21A long-term review
 
I've had a Proframe for several years now. It is my go-to helmet for Enduro racing and riding anything steep, except for lift serviced riding on anything but the hottest days (where I choose my Rampage Pro Carbon for its higher level of protection).
The Proframe is breezy. Everything from the open mouth port to the interior channelling in the foam contributes to a better flow of air than in the Rampage (which has filter-like foam in the mouth port and smaller internal channels for air flow).
It is light. All those holes "add up" to less mass.
It is comfortable. I have a Fox-shaped head (all my MTB helmets are now Fox) but the padding in the Proframe is good at moisture management and keeping the MIPS liner off the actual head. The weakest point is the brow pad which is very thin and takes a lot of pressure and movement from donning and doffing the helmet. The brow pads disintegrate before anything else (I have used several so far in the life of my one Proframe).
Protection seems good. Thankfully, I haven't crashed my Proframe but people I know have. One fall directly to the chin bar did break that into pieces, but it also absorbed nearly all the fall's energy leaving the faller with no facial injuries and only a couple of tiny marks. It doesn't look as solid as the Rampage chin bar for example, but it took a big impact and saved the owner.
With either a drink pack or a bottle you can drink with the helmet on - the open mouth port lets water directly into the mouth.
I try to replace my helmets roughly every 5 years because the interior generally only remains a pleasant place for my head for about that long. And so it is time for a new Proframe this coming summer. I read a story about a Pro version of the Proframe (will Fox really call it a Proframe Pro like the Rampage Carbon Pro?) but maybe I don't need more complexity and weight (and expense) when I have the Rampage too. Regardless, it will be one or the other as I'm very happy with the helmet.
 
I just hope Fox does some good colours and has stock when I decide to buy one.]]>Riding2022-08-18T21:23:48+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/bb2f9473e45ba39c6b9359b60df21a98-20.html#unique-entry-id-20https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/bb2f9473e45ba39c6b9359b60df21a98-20.html#unique-entry-id-20I see the question a lot online. "How do I get better at X?"
 
The short answer is by doing X.
Steep hills are a problem, train on some steep hills (though some gym work might help with that too). Sustained efforts are a problem, ride with some sustained efforts. Most people who aren't coached ride aimlessly and therefore too slowly. They get good at riding long distances slowly (not exactly called for in any race situation).
 
If you want to gain speed, do intervals.
If you want to climb faster, do hill repeats.
If you want to be able to push a bigger gear, do big gear intervals.
If you get tired too quickly, ride more hours.
 
Most training from a coach is focussed on one thing at a time. It will either be very hard, or very easy.
Most self-guided riding is middle paced. It is not hard enough to promote adaptation, or it is too hard to promote recovery.
 
If we look at some pro riders and the little info that there is about their training we can see some examples of this.
Mona Mitterwallner of Austria LOVES to ride long distances in the Alps. She was fit enough last year in her first year out of juniors to win the XCM World Championships. She gets better the further the race goes because of her big volume training. But this year she moved up to Elite racing and she has been slow off the starts. Part of that is experience as she's never had to deal with such fierce starts before (the U23 category might be quite competitive but it doesn't have the depth or competitiveness of the Open category). Quite a bit of it is the fact that riding at high altitudes for hours at a time doesn't build a powerful start.
Rebecca McConnell won the first three rounds of the UCI World Cup this season (2022), which is unprecedented for her and unusual in World Cup racing too (to win 3 in a row). Bec said in interview that her new coach and she had to negotiate how many intervals she added to her program because she'd never done them before and didn't like doing them. (But obviously they worked in a way that whatever she did before did not...)
 
Some of the people I coach do nothing but intervals thanks to their time challenged schedule. Intervals are your friend when you want speed on a bike.]]>Riding2022-08-11T18:19:52+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/19f846a9e2b317b52e15bfcebfce5118-19.html#unique-entry-id-19https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/19f846a9e2b317b52e15bfcebfce5118-19.html#unique-entry-id-19Still, it is regular riding of a decent length and I've proven I'm pretty good at using commute time as training.
However, I've felt pretty slow on the bike - especially the mountain bike - when I'm not commuting.
Given the slightly muddy conditions of late, most of my MTB time has been on the single speed. I got a single speed years ago in part because there are no derailleur gears or expensive drivetrain bits to wear out. I am on my third single speed now because they do run forever with little maintenance and they're a lot of fun.
Last weekend I had two decent rides on that bike. Both felt like I was struggling for speed.
Enter Strava. I got several PBs on both rides. Mostly climbing ones (where fitness matters most). Including one that was set in a race about 8 years ago. While Strava is GPS reliant and therefore not accurate enough for proper race timing, to-the-second results are fine and I don't care about a second here or there anyway. On a 3 minute section, being one second out matters in a race but not in a "how fast did I go?" query.

The coaching lesson from this is one I've seen many times before. How you feel and how you go are two distinct and separate things. The feel slow, but are fast situation is infinitely preferable to the feel fast, am slow situation at the other end of the spectrum. For me personally, the feel fast, am fast situation leads to tactical errors.
If only there was some good racing to really test my fitness on...
]]>Gear2022-08-06T16:24:15+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e3f7adb322d63a1599558576491cbc51-18.html#unique-entry-id-18https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e3f7adb322d63a1599558576491cbc51-18.html#unique-entry-id-18And the 177.5 mm cranks on my commuting bike cracked over a year ago. SRAM couldn't easily replace them (they were just out of warranty cover so they offered to give me a great price on replacements) because they're all about the DUB axles now and DUB doesn't fit BB90.
At this point I thought "what about 170 mm cranks?"
Why 170?
Because that is the length I have migrated to on the MTB (well, 2 of 4) for ground clearance. The remaining two MTB are the DH bike > 165 mm and the Single Speed > 175 mm. I'd like to change the SS to 170 mm as well, but basically can't be bothered.
Enter a set of loaner cranks with all the critical dimensions OK for my BB90 Trek. A 24 mm axle, a compact spider, the 170 mm length and enough offset to clear the chainstay. That they happen to be lightly used Rotor cranks is a bonus because they look good with the bike and the Record parts on the rest of the bike.

To make the swap I had to change the off-side bearing. SRAM GXP uses a 22 mm inner dimension while Shimano (and equivalents) use a 24 mm axle the entire length from left to right. In the end I put the original Trek bearings back in (the bike came with Shimano parts) on both sides. They have a thin nylon sleeve that covers the outside of the bearing and runs inside the bore to sit between the axle and bearing race. I have zero idea how durable this will prove, but maybe it will be quieter than a metal on metal system?

A side note: this bike has had a very noisy BB area from day one. The drive-side bearing doesn't seem to fit tightly enough in the bearing seat and the off-side bearing fits too tightly. So anything that makes it quieter is welcome!

The Rotor cranks might also be good in that they are not a fixed width system like Shimano cranks. Perhaps a bit of inwards pressure on the bearings will keep them quieter? Yes it might come at expense of a couple of Watts of power and early bearing failure, but I'll take it after 2 years of listening to noise from down there.

First up after installation was front shifting. It was perfect. The Rotor cranks located the two chainrings in the same place as the Red cranks before them.
Second was the test ride. I didn't have much light left, so I headed up Stromlo access road for one "effort" that would test out the system. Big ring all the way (which is so possible with compact cranks). No noise. The cranks did feel a bit short. I think I was running smaller than usual gearing to compensate.

Only time will tell if the shorter cranks become OK in a road environment. I'm also concerned about jumping back on either Madone with their 180 mm cranks. Will they feel too long?
Another side note: I haven't changed my seat height. The expected thing would be to lift the seat up by 1 cm to compensate for the 1 cm shorter crank and still achieve maximum leg extension. But that changes the top of the stroke by 2 cm. I've not been convinced for a multiple-crank-length riding cyclist that different seat heights are optimal. Many tell me I'm crazy. I always ran my track seat at the same height as my road seat. The centre of the circle of pedalling remains the same that way (concentric circles). I may also experiment with seat height as I go.

So expect me to report back in a few weeks with how radically shorter cranks are going for me. Dependent on going back to the office too, as working from home provides few demands on my commuting bike.
]]>Riding2022-07-10T20:06:00+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/22fe4f6069ffd193862bb6bdba32f08d-17.html#unique-entry-id-17https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/22fe4f6069ffd193862bb6bdba32f08d-17.html#unique-entry-id-17While there may be other ways to characterise training approaches, from what I've seen as a coach and rider there are two main groups going on in this space. Consistent training is the description I give to those people who are out almost every day doing something on their bike. Intermittent training is what I'll call those people who, regularly or irregularly, get out and hammer themselves silly whenever they get out (which is irregular by definition).
 
Let me make an analogy. Consistent training is like a long period of gentle rain. It doesn't wash away the dirt. It doesn't damage the flowers. It isn't instantly wetting if you go out in it. But the ground gets wet. Very wet. Deeply wet. This rain soaks down to deep roots. This rain keeps the ground wet for ages after it stops.
Intermittent training is like a big storm. A lot of rain falls in a short period of time. It washes dirt off farmers' fields, it washes dirt out of my front yard; the runoff is high and the effects are obvious and immediate. These big storms knocks leaves out of trees, flowers off of stalks and so on. If you go outside, you get soaked quickly. And, with loads of rain in a short period of time, it does a poor job of actually wetting the soil. It can be dry and dusty only hours later if the sun comes out.
 
Training effects are like the wet soil. We want a deep and lasting effect. To get the best result requires gentle and continuous training. The hammer-fest once a week leaves muscles sore and a feeling of accomplishment, but not much in the way of long-term benefits.
Be like the rain; be gentle and regular rather than episodic and overly vigorous.]]>Gear2022-06-28T20:23:44+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d9c97ceaad6407968c69a62a1fcebd02-16.html#unique-entry-id-16https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d9c97ceaad6407968c69a62a1fcebd02-16.html#unique-entry-id-16What makes a good flat pedal?
There are hundreds of flat pedals out there. Some brands offer many more than one option. How to pick? What to look for? What to avoid?
The more aggressive the bike and the riding that will be taking place, the more aggressive the pedal should also be. Harmony works. That means a DH bike requires a more aggressive pedal than the bike you want to ride on the neighbourhood singletrack with your kids.
Metal pedals are more difficult to damage than nylon ones, but cost more, weigh more and are still susceptible to ruin from a single rock. When mountain biking, most people don't get a chance to wear out their pedals. More likely, they are beaten into submission by continuous impact with rocks, roots and the ground.
 
I hit a pedal into the face of a jump when a prior incident meant I was one-footed. I didn't consider just how much the suspension compresses under the load of a jump face. I was ejected from the bike and the pedal was twisted into a new shape.
 
So nylon pedals can be a good choice. Loads of colours; and the colour runs through the entire pedal (so scratches don't show). A big impact will tear/fracture the nylon, but that same impact might just have bent the metal pedal out of shape anyway.
 
I don't like grub screw pins. Their traction isn't the best, regardless of length. They are easily damaged on the upper surface, and that makes them more difficult to remove. I'd also argue they aren't aesthetically pleasing, but that is a minor complaint.
Most bottom loading pins are a better option. The pointy end can break off or bend yet it still can be removed via the head under the pedal.
Some top loading pins are also OK. I have two pairs of old E*13 LG1+ pedals. They use top loading pins that are threaded in from the opposite side of the pedal - the Allen key runs fully through the pedal body to engage the pin. This permits a big shoulder supporting the pins against the pedal body while also making the remnants easy to remove because the threaded part is never damaged.
 
Pedal shape can be concave, convex or flat. And this can be further modified by the pins heights across the pedal. Long pins are more vulnerable than short pins so I'm not a fan of too-long pins. Making a flat pedal concave by long pins at the front and rear edges isn't as robust as properly concave pedal bodies.
Concave pedals make your foot feel attached to the pedal. Convex pedals force your shoe to wrap around the pedal body. Flat pedals fall in between.
 
Pedal size should vary with shoe size somewhat. Crank Brothers has it right with two sizes of flats to suit most adult feet. Some pedals are extra large or extra small - don't stray too far from the average without a reason.
 
Pedals can run on bearings, bushings or a combo of both. Bushings work pretty well, until they wear a little and then the pedal has loads of play in it. Bearings maintain their form longer than a bushing in terms of wear, but the bearing itself can wear faster than a bushing (depending on bushing type, and protection from contamination).
Bearings tend to be bigger in diameter than bushings. Many pedals have a large bearing up close to the crank arm that creates a bump on the inner edge of the pedal. This bump usually interferes with shoe placement. Beware the bump, but don't avoid completely (many great pedals have the bump).
 
Axles are usually steel, unless you pay a lot and get titanium. Ti can be accompanied by a magnesium pedal body. The combo is very light and very expensive - also quite fragile. Mg doesn't hold up as well as Al. Ti is 2/3 the weight of steel in the same dimensions, but not as strong. Ti axles usually have a weight limit.
 
The thinner the pedal body, the better it feels under foot. How thin they can be depends on the shape (convex/concave) and the bearing style (bushings tend to be smaller than ball bearings).
 
The Spank Oozy and Straitline AMP are very similar to each other and close to my ideal pedal. Thin with a good chamfered leading edge to not get hung up on rocks, slightly concave, enough meaty pins to make traction great while not succumbing to every rock and decent bushings without a massive lump on the inside. Straitline has given up (no more MTB products from them) while Spank has slightly redesigned the Oozy (haven't tried the new one) - but you get the idea.]]>Gear2022-06-23T21:35:10+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c431f32f7eb3a6f919fd25d819947dd3-15.html#unique-entry-id-15https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c431f32f7eb3a6f919fd25d819947dd3-15.html#unique-entry-id-15On the eve of the release of the newest Madone for the '22 Tour, I thought I'd put up a short review of what is my best bike ever - Madone SLR Disc.
Having been through many generations of design, the recent few have been full-on aero race bikes. This sacrifices some weight for being slick in the air. To maximise this, they use truncated air foils. Not only does this make them UCI legal, but road bike practical. The flat back of the downtube is convenient for a bottle cage, for example.
Disc brakes are something I never thought I wanted on a road bike. Sure, I've used them for years on the MTB, but rim brakes work fine on the road. And then I rode them!
So.
Much.
Better.
As an added bonus, carbon rims don't need to be brake friendly. This makes the rim's life easier, lighter and more aero.
Mine is the first Madone with IsoSpeed. A means of pivoting the seatpost on the frame so it can move slightly in response to bumps - it takes the sting out of potholes. On the Madone it is adjustable. I have never tinkered with mine because I like how it came and thought it aligned well with the response of the non-adjustable one on the Checkpoint. So no reason to mess with it.
After 30 years of carbon frames, Trek has enough experience to make the Madone really stiff while hitting all their other targets. Never does the chain rub on the front derailleur. NEVER! The bike feels super solid.
So: the bike is aero, the brakes are good, the ride is good and it is sufficiently stiff for a big guy like me. These traits all come together most often when I hit a decent hill at speed and realise I am pushing it up the slope at crazy speeds. This much power should flex the frame. It should not go quite this fast. And such a deep-tubed frame should have a rougher ride.
Couple that with my Project One pick of metallic Emerald paint and the superb Record drivetrain and I've got a fantastic bicycle. One I love to ride. My best one ever.
 ]]>Riding2022-06-16T21:08:28+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/572009161c9bd91a03e7ee522bb03b1e-14.html#unique-entry-id-14https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/572009161c9bd91a03e7ee522bb03b1e-14.html#unique-entry-id-14Go back more than fifty years and road bike geometry was a bit different from what it has been in the period since. Bikes got taller with increasing sizes, but they barely got any longer – instead this seemed to be left up to the longer stem. Even with stems up to 14 (or more) centimetres long, big guys often look pretty squashed in older race images. I guess it proves you can adapt to many things.
Currently one would be shopping smartly if one looked for a new bike based on top tube length (or reach). The gap between sizes for most companies is consistent for both the frame’s height and length. That is, each size is 2 cm taller for each size up (in traditional sizing at least) and each size is a consistent X mm longer (with X being model dependent around 15 mm) for each size up.
One thing that didn’t change in the old days was crank length. Occasionally I see a non-170 mm crank on an old gear website, but that seemed to be the size that most things came in. My first good bike was a 60 cm frame with 170 mm cranks. My second bike was a 61 cm frame with 170 mm cranks.
And then one day someone decided that crank length mattered. But only for those in the middle of the size distribution. Check out the size range offered by most manufacturers. It amounts to three sizes: 170, 172.5 and 175 mm only. Move up to the current 12-spd Shimano Dura Ace and you can go both shorter and longer – but not by much (160 or 165 mm and 177.5 mm are your choices). On the Campagnolo side of things, only the basic three lengths are available regardless of price (Super Record is super expensive but has three choices). This wasn’t always the case. I have had numerous 180 mm Dura Ace cranks over the years (from 8-spd, 9-spd and 10-spd models) and I currently have two Campagnolo 11-spd cranks in 180 mm (one Record and one Super Record).
If you require short cranks, there are numerous choices for children that function fine for height challenged adults. If long is what you want, then you are in trouble. As much because off-the-shelf frame won’t work with cranks much longer than 180 mm as because of the difficulty in getting anything longer than 180. Lennard Zinn has you covered if you are really tall and want a suitable bike because he can make both for you – cranks up to 230 mm long (I think) and commensurately higher bottom brackets to avoid driving those cranks into the ground when pedalling.
I cannot understand how anyone can think “My company needs to make cranks in different lengths because legs come in different lengths” but we aren’t going to make crank lengths representative of leg lengths. Where adult leg lengths cover about a 25% range, the cranks cover around a 2.5% range. There is no explanation that makes that sensible for me. Except that the range is SO small and 3 sizes is so few that it is possible to stock 3 SKUs and fit them on any bike. The bike industry runs afraid from discussions of biomorphology and optimal crank length.
Reality suggests that a 50 cm frame should have 165 mm cranks – possibly a bit shorter. And that 62 cm frame should have 190 mm cranks (possibly a bit longer). What we get instead is each frame size up receives a slacker seat tube angle. This moves the riders pelvis backwards in relation to the pedals so that the riders legs sit behind the pedals similarly for each bike size without the desired extra crank length. Basically, it is a cheat. All sizes of riders should be on the same seat angle, but have ever-higher bottom brackets to go with ever-longer cranks as the size increments up.
When I got my Trek Checkpoint, I had a full Record group to hang on it. Only the cranks didn’t fit. The frame was designed around Shimano cranks only. The offset in Shimano cranks is all at the axle. In SRAM cranks, the offset is in the middle of the crank in a gentle curve. For Campagnolo, the offset is near the pedal after the crank runs straight out of the axle. The bulge in the offside chainstay hit the Record crank. I was able to use the Record cranks on my old Madone (the one that lives in the trainer) and bought some new-old-stock SRAM Red GXP cranks for the Checkpoint in the longest size SRAM makes – 177.5 mm. It is only a single size, a tiny difference, but I never liked the 177.5 cranks. They always felt a bit wrong.
Then they broke. I was simply going to replace them, except a year later and SRAM hasn’t been able to come up with a solution. They were going to send me some Quarq cranks in 177.5 mm length with the old GXP axle and old 3-bolt interface for the spider. But they didn’t have a matching spider. So my bike shop found a spider. When the cranks finally arrived, they were 8-bolt interface. The spider won’t fit. They sent the cranks back but got stuck with the spider. A part they don’t need and might never sell. SRAM is all about the DUB axle these days and that 29 mm axle won’t fit in a Trek BB90.
What about other options? Rotor once made 180 mm cranks, but it appears not to have done so for many years. At least one generation. I didn’t go with Shimano in the first place because there is a general sentiment that Shimano and Campagnolo do not mix. Now with the 12-spd new generation of Shimano parts, there is no 180 mm crank in the parts list. SRAM still makes 177.5 mm, but I know I don’t really like that length and non-DUB axles are harder to find. Campagnolo abandoned anything longer than 175 mm when they went to 4-bolt spiders about 2015. Miche, an Italian brand that makes a lot of bike parts, only makes the 3 lengths from 170 to 175 in their racing models (and shorter for kids).
Lightning, in Los Angeles California, makes some very fancy carbon cranks with a bolt on spider and a 30 mm axle stub on each arm. Like Campagnolo cranks, each half-axle stub bolts together inside the bottom bracket. They have a Trek BB90 solution that involves very tiny bearings. I have read many stories of premature bearing failure and constant creaking from these very expensive cranks. At least they produce cranks from 150 mm up to 190 mm, which is a vastly superior range to most brands.
In the past 5 years all my mountain bike cranks have gotten shorter for better ground clearance as bottom brackets have gotten lower for handling. I had a trail bike until 2017 that ran 180 mm cranks. They were great for pedalling up open fire roads and the like, but I got so many pedal strikes on singletrack. The Slash I got in 2018 came with 175 mm cranks, but the shop arranged for me to get 170 mm cranks. A change made by 2019 for all Slash models. Then I replaced the short travel bike in 2020 with 170 mm cranks; partly so they’d be the same as the Slash, partly to ensure better ground clearance. My personal corollary on crank length is my new hardtail, which came with 175 mm cranks. I get more pedal strikes than I would like and think that I should replace the cranks with some 170 mm variants. As is typical of DH bikes, my new DH bike came with 165 mm cranks for even more ground clearance. This is the same as my old DH bike, but because I haven’t ridden that since about 2015, it is long out of my head.
My latest thinking, then, about the Checkpoint cranks is to run with 170 mm. Maybe that is the compromise that has to happen because there just aren’t sufficient choices in 180 mm cranks. I’d be happier if I could swap all three road bikes over but maybe it won’t matter? I’m considering something inexpensive (like Shimano 105) in case I don’t like the 170 mm length on the road bike.]]>Gear2022-06-12T11:15:45+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/060f8e83cf9662fd454b98672ea4fb6b-13.html#unique-entry-id-13https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/060f8e83cf9662fd454b98672ea4fb6b-13.html#unique-entry-id-13If it is really cold (or really warm) then clothing selection is quite simple. When it is not so clear-cut in temperature, or the morning and evening commutes are very different, then the clothing choice becomes difficult.
 
I've been failing at this a lot recently. You'd think after years of choosing clothing I could get it right...
 
The initial shock of leaving the building into the chill wintery air should never be accommodated because as soon as the rider warms up, they'll be greatly overdressed if they worry about being warm in those initial ten minutes. And still, you don't want to get too cold. Sometimes a starting layer pays off - something that can be unzipped or even removed early in the ride.
 
Chill comes from the ambient air temperature, is affected by the humidity, and then there is the wind. Even on a perfectly still day, if you ride along at 30 kmh you are in a 30 kmh wind. On days like the other day, when I was riding along at 20-something kmh into a 30-something kmh headwind, then we've got some serious chill-factor to deal with.
Thus, in winter, you almost always want to be wind-proof. The waterproof breathable fabrics are all wind-proof. But they also lead to overheating pretty quickly by the amount of warm air they retain inside. (I haven't tried Gore ShakeDry fabric, but even with its excellent breathability it still retains warm air inside and therefore could lend itself to overheating.)
Wind-proof can be a single layer. This week I have been wearing a light shell jacket over the top. It keeps the wind out, but by itself would be insufficient for adequate warmth.
Accompanying the wind-proof layer needs to be an insulating layer. In cool temps that might be a long-sleeve summer jersey. In colder temps that would be a long-sleeved winter jersey. In coldest temps that would be a winter jacket.
I have two winter jackets that are also wind-proof. They're great, but if you get warm there is nowhere to go. You can't shed the whole jacket so you're stuck with the wind-proof and insulating layers together. I stopped part-way to work this morning to lose my wind-proof layer and continue with only the insulating one. Can't do that if they're one and the same.
On coldest days you might want the winter jersey under the winter jacket, but it seldom gets that cold in Canberra for me.
 
Extremities can get chilled pretty fast so something for the hands and feet are important. I bought some "Lobster" gloves from Pearl Izumi many years ago. I was never able to wear them in Canberra on even the coldest mornings because it has to be below -10 for me to feel comfortable in them (I got one chance to wear them in Canada on a Christmas visit at -20, where they were perfect). Lately I wear some Campagnolo brand gloves with a high-tech fabric that is water resistant and wind-proof plus insulating. And yes, they are often too hot. I used to commute in some Castelli winter gloves that were very thin - they had the wind-proof part going on but virtually nothing in terms of insulation. And that was perfect many days. No glove lasts forever and they have worn out.
 
On my feet, my favourite is a set of Lycra overshoes with wind-proof material at the toes. No insulation. Simply keep the wind out. That's enough for all but the coldest rides. I have some fleecy shoe covers that are also good for most rides. Because they let wind through, they aren't so good for longer cold rides - eventually the toes get cold.
One thing that never works is thick wool socks. Cycling shoes are pretty low volume. There is no space inside for a thick sock. If you do go that route, then it cuts off circulation and your feet get cold. Guaranteed.
I also tried some GoreTex shoes. They were great for keeping the rain out (as long as you didn't let it run down your ankle, because then the shoe filled up like a plastic bag and the water couldn't go anywhere). But I didn't like the actual shoe. So they got zero use for a few years and then I gave them away.
 
Ears can also get cold. Mostly in the commuting department I am fine. The ride is always less than 40 minutes and my ears don't get cold on most 40-minute rides. If it is frosty out, I have a thin beanie I can wear under my helmet which keeps my ears warm. It almost always has to come off after 20 minutes. I've been using the same beanie for 25+ years. It doesn't get a lot of use so it has lasted forever. I had a wind-proof ear loop (a band that goes around the head, covering the ears in the process) but it cut off a lot of hearing and ears are important on the road. It kept my ears comfortable but affected my perception of the world around me.
 
Once it starts to rain, then you need a different approach. The air can't be below zero, else it would be snowing. Rain means relative warmth.
Now you want water-proof. That means a membrane fabric like GoreTex, eVent or the like. Usually the water-proof layer is close to enough by itself due to the humidity (high when it is raining) and higher temps. I've often commuted wearing water-proof pants and jacket over a long-sleeved jersey (the inside of the rain jacket sleeves can be very cold when wet) and been fine.
I bought some Fox Ranger H2O pants (fully water-proof and seam sealed). I actually bought them with British Columbia in mind - there are days when I've ridden in shorts and gotten pretty wet and then cold. But with the pandemic, I haven't been to BC in 3 years and so I've used these pants for the odd wet commute. Where they've worked well. (Not sure I could ride with actual knee pads under these quite snug and non-stretchy pants anyway.)
 
I occasionally consider that I have too many choices. Having cycle commuted the entire time I have lived in Canberra, I have collected several winter jackets, winter jerseys, rain coats, undershirts and tights/pants. Some days I dress too warmly. Other days I never quite feel warm enough. Yet I've seen colleagues ride in the same jacket and tights from mid-Autumn until mid-Spring and endure.
Given how much their jacket stinks by Spring, I definitely prefer to be able to launder my stuff regularly and not have to try to dry it out for the next commute. Caught in the rain last week (when it wasn't supposed to rain at all) I tossed everything I was wearing in the wash on getting home and wore something else to work the next day.
Adapting clothing to temperature takes practice and an eye to how long and how hard the ride will be. If you're too warm, back off on the pedals to generate less heat. Or, if chilly, pedal harder to generate more heat. I cruise to work at about 300W. But the human body is about 25% efficient. So I'm generating about 900W of heat. That's enough to warm a bedroom. No wonder I get hot!]]>Gear2022-06-11T16:45:04+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a0f321bd43d301b5a7d253b71b70e6b0-12.html#unique-entry-id-12https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/a0f321bd43d301b5a7d253b71b70e6b0-12.html#unique-entry-id-12A couple of weeks ago I entered a fun enduro at Mt Stromlo. I planned to use my Enduro bike but had to swap to the Trail bike because the new rear tyre on the Slash wouldn't stay full of air for more than an hour or so. This is a quick tale of a leaky tyre and a race run on the wrong bike.
 
I think the tyre on the Slash rear wheel was the first tyre I had installed on that rim (about 2 years ago). I swapped wheels on this bike and - thanks to the pandemic and the purchase of a proper DH bike - the new ones haven't had as much use as I might have anticipated. When I changed the tyre I assumed the quick deflation was due to damage to the rim tape. So, I re-taped it. With no impact whatsoever.
When I eventually got around to sticking the wheel in a bucket of water, I discovered air leaking from everywhere in the entire sidewall. It was like they forgot to line the tyre with the tubeless-ready lining. It wasn't much air from any point, and there was zero sealant leaking with it, but hundreds of micro-bubble streams means a flat tyre in no time.
After several emails back and forth with the shop that sold me the tyre, they got agreement with the importer to replace it for me (as soon as I provide video evidence that I destroyed the leaky tyre).
 
Between the realisation that I had a still-leaking tyre before the race and the discovery of the bubbling sidewalls, I had the actual race. When I put my Trail bike together, I made a deliberate decision to make the wheels swappable for just such occasions. With the front wheel of the Slash in the fork, I took my 120mm bike to the Enduro. It was probably the faster bike on one stage, but definitely the slower bike on two stages (and I'm not sure about the fourth stage). It was really fun to try to ride as fast as possible with a little bit less bike than I desired. Perhaps the weakest link was the fairly worn semi-slick on the back. The rougher sections of the DH track were fine, if slightly slow, on the small bike.
My biggest memory of the event was going off course! I came up to an obstacle and turned left when I should have gone straight ahead over the obstacle. Left sent me to a shoulder-high vertical ledge that I rode off of fine. The safety person monitoring that road crossing came running - I guess she thought I'd gone splat. I pushed back up the hill and tried again. I don't know why I turned left... but I did. The second go was much better, and way faster with no deviations.
Overall it was a fun day and I was slower than anticipated.
In a week or so, I'll have a new tyre on the Slash and look forward to riding it while it holds air...]]>Riding2022-06-03T23:01:20+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/0fc6f964a3315777abd8dd99ae3c36fe-11.html#unique-entry-id-11https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/0fc6f964a3315777abd8dd99ae3c36fe-11.html#unique-entry-id-11One day, on my way back from a fun day on the lifts at Thredbo, I stopped in the middle of Cooma to use the toilet and saw a decent-sized map pointing out some tracks not far up the road at the southern edge of Cooma. Deciding I had to come back to try them out, it was only a few weekends before the opportunity presented itself. Really, it takes about 40 minutes to get to Sparrow Hill and I have gone through periods of riding there every weekend. It takes about an hour to get to Cooma, so why shouldn't these trails be considered?
There is a small parking lot at the base of the trails and not much else by way of facilities. The dirt road looks like it runs all the way up, making shuttles an option for the gravitationally challenged. There are a couple of climbing trails too, for the non-shuttling types.
I plotted out a three-lap adventure using Trailforks but we've never used the Garmin for following a course offroad before and it wasn't behaving as expected (if you stop at a trail junction it is supposed to identify the options facing you - and that is without any programming). Sometimes we would ride up a trail only to be told to turn around and go back. After a while this gets old and you just keep riding... I think in the end we did two laps plus a little extra bit rather than the three full laps planned.
The hill is really a good one for trails. It has both decent elevation gain and a variety of slopes from mild to steeper. That means the trails can range from quite easy to quite difficult. The soil is typical dry and dusty Australian dirt. On the climbing side of things the main climb track is a pretty normal XC climbing track without any hard or technical challenges, but some long and flowy lines that are fun to ride. The descending trails are generally on the easier end of the spectrum, feature a lot of jumps, were a lot of fun and didn't need a lot of travel to make them work (I was on my hardtail). I did see some guys shuttling on DH bikes, but they appeared to be riding the same descent as me so either they were seriously over-biked or bent on going super fast. I enjoyed my couple of hours there enough to want to go back and try again.
If this cold and wet winter weather yields to milder and drier days, I'd go back right away. Next time I think I will take the trail bike as much for the gearing choices as for the rear suspension.]]>Gear2022-05-25T16:07:15+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/64af103bb805ae936feb869045ff3edf-10.html#unique-entry-id-10https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/64af103bb805ae936feb869045ff3edf-10.html#unique-entry-id-10Who thought matte finish cycling shoes were a good idea?

I have used Northwave shoes for many years. A couple of years ago they rolled out a new sole plate that wraps further up the sides of the shoe; in both the all-carbon top-of-the-line shoes and the partially-carbon mid-line shoes. The idea is greater stiffness from the no-longer-flat sole plate.
I wanted some new commuting shoes. Usually I deprecate the old race shoes to the commuting duty at the same time as I introduce a brand new shoe to racing duty and retire the old commuting shoe. In this case, there was zero wrong with the racing shoes (not a lot of that going on lately!) but I wanted a new commuter shoe.
The Revolution 2 in silver is a reflective finish grey shoe with virtually zero graphics on it - it is simply a slightly reflective material with this matte finish. The texture of the matte holds dirt like crazy. So every time I ride in the rain, I need to scrub the shoe to try to clean it, and it doesn't work so it gets slightly more grubby with each wet ride. The reflectivity is disappointing as well. My current race shoes are reflective camo print. Only portions of the pattern are reflective, but they are intensely reflective. Almost painfully so if you look at your feet in the dark when a car headlamp catches part of the shoe pointed at your eyes. The Revolution however, is dimly reflective. Maybe it's the matte finish? Not likely - it just isn't as shiny as other Northwave shoes have been.
The partial-carbon sole is really a misnomer. Actually I'd call it a lie. The sole is nylon like a cheap shoe, with a flat-ish disc of carbon where the cleat attaches. Even with the 3D shape, it is not stiff like the full carbon sole on my older Northwave shoes. And it has this odd squishy feeling like it has a thick and soft insole in it that compresses with each pedal stroke, except it has my custom orthotics inside and they are solid. The squish feeling comes from the shoe, somehow.
Being nylon, they get more flexible with age. I don't know that I've noticed it over the approximately two years I have been commuting in them, but I always notice how much less stiff they are than the shoes I race in when I wear them back-to-back.
 
I have a high instep. That gives me a large foot volume and makes shoes like Sidi a no-go option for my feet (even the Mega series shoes don't quite fit). In Shimano I get the best fit from the wide fit option shoes. But going back to the 90s, Northwave has fit me well. The Revolution is a little low in volume for my foot and I'm at the limit of comfort.
 
The final unwelcome aspect of these shoes was the fact that all the bolts (like BOA, but Northwaves on SLW adjusters) that hold the dial adjusters onto the shoe were loose out of the box. They didn't seem to be any Allen key size I own. Not 1.0mm. Not 1.5mm. Finally I was able to jam a very tiny Torx driver in there and tighten them sufficiently that they haven't come loose again. I contacted Northwave Australia and they couldn't tell me what size they were - only that replacement dials came with the tool.
 
The new version, the Revolution 3, differs only in that it has the new version of the SLW on the shoe. The same matte grey reflective shoe is available. I won't be buying these. In fact, even though they are not worn out yet, I want to chuck these away and start using my race shoes to commute (I found a new-old-stock pair of the same shoes in a different colourway so I have a new pair to race in when I choose to introduce them to the shoe line-up in my closet).
 
For a $300 shoe (3/5 the price of the pro model), I don't think a plastic sole with a disc of carbon in the middle and faux reflectivity is good enough. Stiffness index is 12 where the pro is 14, but it feels more like a 7; literally about half as stiff.
 
If, however, you are lighter than me, have a lower volume foot than me and generally place fewer demands on your cycling shoes than me; this could be a great shoe for you. The dual dials give precise tightening during use and I prefer the SLW to BOA that I have used on other shoes. The build quality on the shoe is excellent. They appear as though they will last well beyond 2 years of daily use. They don't hold a lot of water on wet days, though they can be slow to dry out after.]]>Gear2022-05-21T00:07:28+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1e4f6c446f7374189b53c0ca9d2fdc42-9.html#unique-entry-id-9https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1e4f6c446f7374189b53c0ca9d2fdc42-9.html#unique-entry-id-9Modern goggles all have some kind of quick install mechanism. Dragon uses a frame glued to the lens with pins that simply press fit into holes in the frame. Swapping lenses is so quick and easy. The 100% version locks the lens over the nose into a groove in the frame and then pulls the lens tight into the frame with "buckles" at the ends of the lens. Oakley has a similar latching mechanism too. The Smith Squad isn't quite a swiftly changeable as all that, but it is pretty close. The cutouts in the lens are few and large, and the ends of the lenses have hooks that drop into slots in the frame. It occasionally feels like the hooks might break off, but so far, so good in that regard.
The squad is unique in being a MTB specific goggle. Everything else is either a modified (or actual) MX goggle or a modified snow goggle. Thus where the MX goggles have foam over the vents to keep out the roost and dust, the Squad has open venting that allows much more airflow and therefore much less chance of fogging up. Really, to fog up a Squad lens requires stopping completely and standing around. The lack of foam is rarely irritating - small bugs can fly in for example, but is more often a good thing.
Smith's fancy coloured lenses are called ChromaPop. The lenses in these new-school goggles and glasses filter out the frequencies of light that cross-over between any two colour receptors in the human eye. By eliminating them, there is no confusion as to which sensors got stimulated. They can make colours look unnatural, but they do add depth perception and texture comprehension from this elimination of select frequencies of light. Within the ChromaPop label, there are numerous lighter and darker choices. I have two: a medium-dark rose tinted lens and a dark green tinted lens that cover most light conditions short of stormy or dark (which is when the clear lens included with the goggles works best).
They are good for picking out trail details.
They are easy on the eyes.

The rest of the goggle is good too. The foam rests lightly on the face. The strap is sticky enough to not move on the helmet. The lack of foam in the vents plays well with my contact lens wearing habits 99% of the time.
They are a touch small for my XL helmet-wearing self. That should be taken care of by the newer Squad XL option (which admittedly does me no good at all…).
ChromaPop options range from 12% transmission down to 65% transmission; plus clear which has 89% transmission. That covers most contingencies.

Really, goggles are about 2 things: do they fit and can you see?
These are comfortable and fit well in helmets with their slightly smaller sizing; taking care of point 1.
The moulded lenses (they aren't flat when removed from the frame) are usually higher optical quality than the flat ones and the ChromaPop colouring does highlight trail features well; taking care of point 2.

Highly rated in other words.]]>Gear2022-05-18T23:58:28+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/0041bf63831a53b75852b2c73110ff60-8.html#unique-entry-id-8https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/0041bf63831a53b75852b2c73110ff60-8.html#unique-entry-id-8And as with so many things, E*13 discontinued them almost immediately.
The weak point of the pedals was the pins. They were extremely grippy, but they sheared off at the base if you looked at them wrong. In a place like Whistler one of my daily maintenance duties was to replace all the missing pins ready for tomorrow. This was only possible because I purchased a large quantity of pins before they vanished forever.
I still like the pedals, but I was running out of pins. I stole the pins from one pair to service the other pair. The pins hold the plastic plate onto the metal piece, so any thread-in-from-the-bottom standard pins wouldn't cut it on these pedals - although the thread turned out to be one that many pedals use for the pins. Then I found the DMR pins.
The Vault pedal looks like a good pedal, but one of its best traits is how many options DMR provides. It comes with thread in from the bottom bolts as pins. And it has completely different options as well. One is a longer length of the OE bolts. The Mg pedals have shouldered bolts for better support of the delicate magnesium pedal body.
Finally there are the MotoX pins. These are some serious pins. They thread in from the top and have a shoulder - perfect for the E*13 pedals I own. The pin part is a tapered cone with a hole in it, providing a lot of biting edge into the shoe. They seem to be hard on the shoe sole, but not as hard as the E*13 pins were. I wouldn't want to run either of these up my shins!
One set of these for my DH pedals freed up enough pins to get the second set back in action for my trail bike. I have only lost one in almost two years of using the pedals on the DH bike and I think that one rattled loose (because I found several other were only finger tight when I noticed one had vanished).

If you have some flat pedals with M4 threaded pin holes, definitely give these some consideration if you need new pins. They insert from the top with an included spanner so they will work with most pedals if the thread is correct. ]]>Riding2022-05-14T09:31:58+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2df5dcbafea2eb56becb8926c4af0941-7.html#unique-entry-id-7https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/2df5dcbafea2eb56becb8926c4af0941-7.html#unique-entry-id-7Then I ran into a video on YouTube from Lee McCormack (of LeeLikesBikes fame, purveyor of Cycling Kung Fu, teacher of many skill-deficient professional MTB racers, and co-author of MTB skills books with Brian Lopes). Lee talked about rowing up the face of the jump, and for me that was the epiphany. I suspect it didn't change very much of what I was already doing, but the rowing action demands that you remain centred on the bike (you cannot do it out of position). And voila, I could consistently clear smaller jumps. My main issue with bigger jumps is risk. Falling hurts a lot. And can take months to recover from. I don't want that time off the bike, or the rehab, so I'm cautious.

As a person's jumping experience grows, they can "know" the appropriate speed window for a new jump they haven't done before. But that is hard-won experience. There has to be a first jumper, but if that's the jump builder, they should know exactly what they had in mind... Everyone else can learn a jump by following someone who has done it previously.
I was all set to get towed into some jumps at Thredbo this summer by a young guy I'd been riding with a bit - but then he got a jump wrong and smashed his humerus to pieces. I knew I could do those Thredbo jumps so I tried two of them, and was able to do them easily on several occasions. Phew! Woohoo!! I left two more untested for next season (I was cautious!).

I realise how visual I am with jumps from my recent experience with a small one on Trebuchet at Stromlo. Just before the over/under intersection of the DH tracks and Trebuchet, there is a small rock lip on the right. It was surrounded by weeds that grew up in Spring nearly obscuring the rock. I couldn't easily hit it. As soon as Iconic Trails cleared the weeds away, it was trival to take off. Small change, big impact on my head.

I have taught a fair number of people to use better jumping technique in their riding, but what was working for others wasn't producing the consistency I was looking for in myself. Lee's rowing thing did the trick. Incidentally, he also teaches rowing and anti-rowing for pump track progression, but I can't get the un-row down. My own method works pretty well so I just go with that.

You might want to check out Lee on YouTube, or hit me up for a lesson if your own jumping isn't up to scratch. ]]>Gear2022-05-10T14:33:41+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d1fa78b68030126a6c07a2b65c060bee-6.html#unique-entry-id-6https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/d1fa78b68030126a6c07a2b65c060bee-6.html#unique-entry-id-6While mine is several generations old - exactly how many is less straightforward than you might think since Garmin can't count each generation with a new number - my observations apply to all the Fenix series watches. The watch is slate grey and it came with a black band. The metal ring (which acts as, or protects, the GPS antenna) is the part anodised slate grey. It scratches moderately easily. I first purchased a genuine Garmin green silicone band for a bit of colour, but the band broke very quickly. I then bought three off-brand silicone bands (green, blue and yellow) and despite their low price, they have outlasted the Garmin band by years.
I find the watch vibrates a lot during mountain biking. Enough that by the third day of lift-served descending, my wrist could have a hole in it where the watch rubs on the skin. Doing the band up a notch tighter does help, but it also can make it feel too tight. In fact, it vibrates enough that on several occasions the main button has been pushed causing the watch to stop recording. Reverting the watch to watch mode protects the recording function because the button would have to get pushed twice to achieve stop.
Someone I know recently purchased an X-sized Garmin. It is only 4mm wider, but it looks so much larger than the regular one. He told me that his new watch moves around on his wrist less than his old, regular-sized watch. That was enough of an endorsement to make me consider buying an X.

I always use the Fenix in dual mode - where it uses both GPS and Glonass satellites. On road this isn't so important. Off road this is much better for accuracy. It gives a small hit on the battery life but I seldom get close to running the watch down in use.
While I read lots of stories online about the Fenix series not holding power meters well, I have used mine with at least 2 different power meters without encountering any dropouts in connectivity.
I once had an issue where the watch froze. I sent it back to the dealer and they got in touch with Garmin (or sent the watch back to them, I'm not clear on this part). All it needed was for me to upload all the files in the watch to Garmin Connect and then delete the lot from the watch. It was just a memory issue. It hasn't recurred in the years since. Weird.

With the recent release of the Fenix 7, there was also an Epix 2. The Epix only comes in the middle size like I have now. The difference for the Epix is the OLED screen. It is considerably brighter and more colourful than the Fenix passive screen, it offers more pixel density - it just looks better. Unfortunately there is no Epix X (or I'd probably have one already).

In many ways the Fenix line function like an Edge bar-top computer for the wrist. That is good, because the Edge line are well done.
Even better, the Fenix is not in the "sporting" line of Garmin products, but in the "outdoor" line. No lives depend on the sporting, so the firmware is usually released before it is 100% right. The outdoor line is considered essential survival gear, so the firmware rarely goes wrong (either early in the lifecycle or at any subsequent point).
Both the beeping and the buzzing could be more attention grabbing during a ride - it is easy to miss them on the bike most of the time.

I reviewed a much less expensive Garmin when mine was very new. That model would identify sporting activities as they started and record them just in case you wanted to record that sport. The Fenix doesn't do that. I got to work and it suggested I had just been on a bike ride, would I like to save that activity? Pretty clever.

It is almost impossible to read the screen with the watch hand on the bars. If you really want to read it, it could go around the bars and point up towards rider's face. But that gets the heart rate module off the wrist where it can function. Yes, I usually use the HR chest strap for greater precision in HR, but putting the watch on the bars is a slow task and prevents any use of the HR module.

After 6 years of using the Fenix and 7 years of using my Edge bar-top GPS, both could probably use a refresh/update as the battery doesn't have the original run time any more. I am seriously considering foregoing a new wearable GPS and going with only a bar-mounted one. A lot of expense goes into squashing everything into a watch-sized device. The Fenix 7 I prefer is about 3x the price of the Edge 530 I also prefer.

There are some options that the Fenix gives that an Edge lacks. I run DH ski mode for lift-served cycling which gives me run-by-run data and a count of how many runs were done (and then in Strava I swap it back to cycling and it reinterprets the data in that light). I also use the Fenix for walking and the like - I could skip all that for a new Edge, but I might miss it. While the old Edge and old Fenix continue to function pretty well, I can keep thinking about my future needs.
Incidentally, I have had opportunity to use quite a few other GPS brands, from a Suunto watch to Wahoo, Bryton and Xplova bar-top units. Each has appealing aspects, from being less expensive to more customisable. I don't think I'll go away from Garmin any time soon. ]]>Gear2022-05-08T17:54:27+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fbcb706bcfcee4bd1c0dd5eb896b198e-5.html#unique-entry-id-5https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/fbcb706bcfcee4bd1c0dd5eb896b198e-5.html#unique-entry-id-5I bought some for my partner. Good colours, good fabrics - nice clothing.

Fast forward to the 20's and DHaRCO has added clothing for men and kids to the line. In fact, every trip to Thredbo is like a visit to the DHaRCO fashion parade. It seems like every second rider is wearing their kit.
I have several pieces of the clothing now, but it is the pants I'm writing about today.

The fabric is quite heavy. It stretches making it very comfortable to wear, but this fabric makes the pants quite warm. I've been wearing them for my Wednesday morning skills classes because it has been chilly in the mornings the past couple of weeks. Warm is great when apparent temperature is about 3 degrees, but when it is perfect summer weather these pants are far too warm.
The cut of them is also a bit "skinny". I've been racing a bike since I was a kid. I have larger leg muscles. I also have a small waist. To get pants that fit my legs (even the knee pad space) required sending back my first pair and going with a 38" waist (at least 2 sizes too big for my actual waist). There is a velcro and elastic sizer on each side of the waist band to pull them in snug, but it would be so much better if they were more "cyclist" shaped.
The pockets are good. One just below the waist band at the back is small and quite well protected (unless you do a full flat-back crash landing). The left one is on the thigh with a diagonal zip opening and where I keep my lift pass when at the bike park. The right pocket is a vertical zip and a good place for a phone if you carry one when riding.

After a couple of seasons of any colour you want as long as it's black, the pants now come in a rainbow assortment of shades from leopard spots to plain white (please don't use white in the mud). I'm hoping they can make a lighter weight version and maybe even a different fit as they increase the range of their offerings.

Despite their not being quite perfect for me, I have worn them a lot this year at Thredbo in particular - epecially the blue pair as I really like the colour. I love at the end of the day being able to peel off the pants and having clean legs inside - no dusty gap between sock and kneepad. And even the pads remain clean.

If you've never tried riding in pants, consider giving it a try. If I had pants on at Buller that day a few years ago, the rock that split my shin skin open probably would have left only a small bruise. Pants are now the de facto uniform for UCI DH racing. It was only a few years ago that everyone had shorts on, but now it is pants, pants, pants. ]]>Gear2022-05-06T21:38:03+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e6e45b37a2a6b782504cfc22cc759f4f-4.html#unique-entry-id-4https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/e6e45b37a2a6b782504cfc22cc759f4f-4.html#unique-entry-id-4As one might expect with a product owned by a major player in bike parts (SRAM in this case) the Quarq feels like a quality product right down to the battery case being easily accessible and robust (neither of which were true for the Stages). I purchased the cranks and the power meter/spider as separate units and assembled them myself. While SRAM cranks have a robust 3-bolt attachment mechanism (and you can put a Power2Max spider on those arms) the Quarq version relies on an 8-bolt interface to really hold the two pieces together.
The battery lasts a long time. I replaced one last month and that is the first battery in my service records for the bike (making it likely but not definite that this was the first battery). The meter doesn't require much user input - zero is reset autmatically and it is self-calibrating as well; basically get on and pedal.
The absolute numbers are nearly identical to those from the Stages, but I do get a left:right report that the Stages one-sided meter cannot provide. I am slightly right heavy if you're interested; usually 48:52.

Using power is great if you want to keep track of TSS (training stress score) because weekly TSS is the actual figure that should be slowly incremented throughout the training cycle rather than hours or miles or any other proxy for what we really want to measure - fatigue. And TSS is a direct measure of the effort leading to fatigue. At least on the bike.

When I have failed in a race, bonking before the end, I can look at the effort levels that went into hitting that threshold and work on increasing them.

Because cadence is an essential component of power, the Quarq reports cadence to the head unit without any sensor or external magnet for reference. Pretty clever.

Power readings are very stable, independent of bumps or anything that might spike the power momentarily in other meters I have used.

I have an upper chain guide on my bike after having the chain fall off and cost me first place in a race on the older XC bike (it had a narrow-wide chainring that did a pretty good job of keeping the chain on, but a chain guide is insurance against that happening). Quarq makes the spider thicker than normal and the bottom bracket area of my bike is a very busy place with the solid Quarq spider hiding the ISCG tabs and the upper guide behind it. The crank axle bends just enough to close the sub-millimetre gap between the back of the meter and the bolt head holding on the upper guide. There is some light scratching on the Quarq as a result - but it doesn't look anything but cosmetic. Despite years of progress in chain guides (they used to require luck, a drill, a hammer and lots of washers and options to install one on a DH bike - now most bikes fit them quite simply) they still cause issues with other equipment a lot of the time.

I did propose a power-based experiment for an article to Mountain Biking Australia before they closed their doors, but it never got editorial approval and importer backing to get me all the bits I needed to get it running. That's a bit sad because part of my reason for purchase was knowing I could use it for research. Still, I'm always learning about my own legs and what separates a hard race from a very hard race, or an easy ride from a moderate ride. All good things to learn. One of the final articles I wrote for MBA, in fact, was the review of the bike with the power meter on it.

I'd have Zero hesitation (pun intended) putting a DZero on another bike. They're great power meters. ]]>Gear2022-05-05T22:37:02+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ca3718f59f9ed2b9ef23129754718237-3.html#unique-entry-id-3https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/ca3718f59f9ed2b9ef23129754718237-3.html#unique-entry-id-3
The shock linkage looks superficially the same as on the previous generation, but the shock now links to the downtube rather than the top tube - bringing the weight lower in the frame.

Frame dimensions went longer, lower and slacker. I chose the Sender as one of perhaps 3 DH bikes that had a 50+cm reach. The other two were the Commencal Supreme and the YT Tues.

The bike was offered in two specs - the more expensive version used Rock Shox suspension and the XO1 DH group. As I was really after an air sprung bike, and the Super Deluxe shock and Boxxer forks were exactly that, this was my bike.

Neither colour scheme inspired me. Either a red and white option I didn't care for, or boring black. I knew I'd do something to it from new - and adding the blue and white hibiscus pattern was the choice I made (thanks to Peter at Bunnyhop bike wraps for making a custom kit to suit my Sender).

I modified only a couple of components from the OEM spec. I added my used E*13 LG1+ DH pedals (with really grippy DMR pins), I swapped the front DHRII for an Assegai putting CushCore inside both tyres while I was at it (and Stan's sealant) and I added 220mm rotors to both wheels. I decided to run the rear wheel in the longer wheelbase position to better balance the long front centre and don't plan to try the shorter position anytime soon.

It wasn't 100% perfect out of the box. Canyon sent it to me without the stem bolts and the Australian office didn't seem willing to source the four bolts for me. The chain guide rubbed on the chain stay - unforgivable if you ask me. But these things were easily remedied.

Canyon designed the Sender to have an adjustable reach. The headset bearings fit in cups that fit into the frame. As shipped, it comes with cups that have the bearing seat centred in the cup. It also ships with an offset cup that moves the bearings either +8 or -8 mm from the standard position. What they don't tell you is that you may not use the shorter position with Boxxer forks. I would be so angry if I needed the shorter reach and purchased the bike only to find out I couldn't do that unless I had Fox forks.

It was a few years since I sold my 26" wheel DH bike. I didn't know what I'd think of the very long, big wheeled Sender. I shouldn't have been worried as it felt right from the first ride. In fact, the Sender feels the most right of any bike I've ever ridden. I can't put my finger on it - it isn't the longest reach bike nor the most extreme in any dimension. It simply goes where you want and does everything effortlessly while inducing a big grin and generating easy speed.

I pedalled it down the hill from my house to Mt Stromlo. Then I hit the little jumps line on Evolution. As expected, I could run the full trail without touching the brakes (which gave me the confidence to do the same thing on the trail bike). It jumps with confidence-inspiring stability and predictability. Going back up the hill to get the Sender home was less fun, but I didn't have to walk at any point so it was OK.

I feel like there is so much more speed and capability in the bike than I'm an extracting. But even at my pace it is big fun. I really love the Sender.

With the length, it won't fit in my Evoc bike bag. I'll have to buy a new one before I go on a plane with the bike. The Albek bag looks like a good copy of the Evoc, with some marked changes to accommodate modern long frames. Looks like it might be 2+ years old before I get a chance to go anywhere further than Thredbo with it.
I've had around 20 days at Thredbo over the last 2 seasons and around 16 days have been with the Sender. It is so much more comfortable on the chatter at Thredbo that I might not take the trail bike back there again. I can (only) just get up the little climb on the Upper All Mountain trail with the DH bike - it would actually be easy if the gearing was lower. XO1 DH has only 7 gearing choices and they are all pretty high options (it is meant for DH racing after all).
Thredbo bike carrying is decidedly NOT set up for bikes as long as this one. On the Gunbarrel chair, where you hang your bike on a hook on the outside of the chair and then sit down and self-retrieve at the top, someone (sometimes the lifty does it for me) has to walk the bike to the end of the concrete pad so it doesn't get caught (and damaged). On the Merritt's Gondola, it hangs so low that the rear wheel doesn't sit in between the sway control arms. Were it to sway, the arms would damage rear wheel spokes. We watched it get pushed by the gondola guidance system entering the middle and top stations, which isn't much of a deal if the bike is in the rear position, but one could imagine a problem occurring if it was in the front position. On the Kosciusko Chair, there are two bike carriers on the rear of each seat. These are easy to use, but once my bike was dumped from the carrier as it entered the summit station. After a long talk with the Lift Services Manager I learned that they can't move the bikes upwards very much at all before they start to interfere with operating clearances for that Doplmeyer Chair; that only a handful of bikes per season fall out; that they lost a lot of 29ers the first season 29ers started showing up (they had to change the tilt of the bike rack on each chair to remedy that) and that Gunbarrel will be getting a higher capacity option next summer. Tilting the bike to the outside of the chair gets the rear wheel away from the concrete pad at the summit station and is my new mode of operating for the ride up. I hope it never falls out of any lift ever again. ]]>Riding2022-05-03T13:10:09+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c6ef06a8dd61b3e915f071499ccc9df9-2.html#unique-entry-id-2https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/c6ef06a8dd61b3e915f071499ccc9df9-2.html#unique-entry-id-2Unlike Zwift, Sufferfest had pre-programmed drills developed by an experienced coach, set to pro racing cinema as a back drop. There was a whole mythology built around Sufferfest - riders from Sufferlandria and Couchlandria, laser-eyed goats that picked off slow riders at the back of the bunch, and so on. It was quite funny and promoted suffering for one's "art". Having Zwifted for a while, I paid for a subscription to Sufferfest (which is now 2+ years ago).
Progress was slow. One new video was cause for celebration. I found the videos to be of high production values - and getting higher. When they added the ramp test for a quick fitness test (to go with the longer and harder full test they have had for some years) it used very clever programming that used results from earlier in the drill to program power levels later on (a first for Sufferfest).
In reply to that free period of use, I sent Sufferfest many pages of feedback. Some general, like they should have some recovery rides on offer (it isn't all about suffering) and some specific, like I suggested a specific drill based on the work of Dr Tabata and thought they should have something similar on offer. All my suggestions are now incorporated in their product - glad to see they listened!
Then Wahoo purchased the company. Wahoo makes my smart trainer - the KICKR (they love capital letters and dislike vowels). And a pandemic hit. Loads of people must have signed up to Sufferfest, encouraging development. Scores of new videos and new video styles appeared. There are now 300 exercises for riders. The name became SYSTM. With new investment and new subscribers came loads more videos. Some were delivered without a video so it would be available for riding and eventually the video backdrop would follow (just an expediency to get them out there in the wild).
SYSTM immediately downplayed the whole suffering thing.
At the end of each Sufferfest video was the Sufferlandrian flag and motto (IWBMATTKYT - I think - stands for I Will Beat My Ass Today To Kick Yours Tomorrow) appeared with the copyright notice. These were changed to SYSTM ones. No references to Sufferlandria or suffering were made in new videos. I know the whole suffering thing dissuaded a friend from subscribing because he thinks of cycling as an enjoyable activity. I find it a bit bland.

Can't argue with a good product however.

And as of the end of April, RGT was added to the Wahoo family and made available to subscribers as part of Wahoo X. RGT is much like Zwift, without all the human traffic (When I tried Zwift it had one active world at any given time - though you could force change the world in play - and hundreds of humans riding in that world regardless of time of day) because it hasn't got the popularity of Zwift. RGT uses real places. As far as I can tell, they are accurately modelled in the digital realm too. Instead of screaming down a hill at 90 kmh and railing corners like a game, RGT tries to make it more realistic but I still zoomed around corners at 55 kmh that probably couldn't be ridden at that speed by anyone. It is trying. It does apply brakes. RGT also offers fixed power output "bots" anyone can use to pace themselves with. With only (approx) 10 riding locations and the locations typically short (10-20 km) Wahoo is going to have to build more worlds to keep my interest. For now it is an unexpected bonus.

My Wahoo X subscription expires in the Spring. I am definitely going to consider my options before I renew my account. It is good. It isn't perfect.
]]>Gear2022-05-01T20:56:58+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/48fe56d7d02cbc9c58b8add2f5bae253-1.html#unique-entry-id-1https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/48fe56d7d02cbc9c58b8add2f5bae253-1.html#unique-entry-id-1Ten years ago, I was riding bikes with a 45cm reach (size XL). There were few exceptions that were markedly longer, and they were seen as freaks.
My five year old Trek Slash was a full size larger, with a 48cm reach (again, size XL). Comments were offered that it finally looked like I had a bike that fit me.
But now it seems too small. All three of my newer MTB are another size larger again than the Slash. It is fine if I ride it a few times in a row but as soon as I jump on it from any of the other bikes, it feels too short.
In 2021, I ordered the new model Slash. It is another full size larger again than the one I'm riding today. If the bike industry wasn't currently a disaster of supply and demand, I'd have had my new Slash since December. Instead my delivery date is early February.

So tall guys are finally getting bikes that fit.

But on the shorter end of things, bikes are also growing and I think they're growing away from the shorter riders who were well served with the old-school bikes. An average woman who was well fitted on a size Small with a 40cm reach will now find most bikes that size with a 42 or even a 43cm reach. That's a full size larger - effectively a Medium - and too long for those short of arm and torso.
Really what should have happened is the Small remained suitably small with larger sizes added on top. The problem with that is making 6 or 7 sizes of bikes instead of 4. No profits in that. When something like 5% of a typical bike is sold in size XL, spreading those few sales across multiple sizes is never going to work. ]]>Writing2022-04-30T22:58:04+10:00https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1b33667e023eb4ae8e68b7d64b0fc1f6-0.html#unique-entry-id-0https://www.michaelhanslip.com/blog/files/1b33667e023eb4ae8e68b7d64b0fc1f6-0.html#unique-entry-id-0I never intended for the blog pages of my previous website to vanish. When I moved to a new web hosting service I built this new look site but I didn't want to have to migrate a blog to a new computer. My intent was for it to be a short down time but life seldom works as expected.
I had troubles migrating my web design software to the new computer. Contact with the vendor didn't help - they couldn't find a record of my purchase. Then suddenly this month I found a self-service search function on their website and found my license number. Voila, now it is up and running on the new (not so new now!) computer.

My vision is to put up writing about cycling equipment under the category "gear" and writing about riding under the category "riding". I anticipate the these two categories will be exhaustive, but time will tell. ]]>