A different kind of racing

Coming from a background of competitive everything, be it martial arts and paintball tournaments to chess and magic the gathering events, I always tried to be the best that I possibly could.  Though my motivation to find greatness through adolescence was different, I always seemed genetically predisposed to strive for progress.  Finding both large and marginal improvements was something that I searched high and low for as it helped me excel in my competitive hobbies.  Unfortunately my most substantial pitfall throughout my journey was that I consistently aimed to win not for personal growth, but to be better than the next person in line.  Though I learned much and usually developed quickly (sometimes not as much), I failed to strive for what is far more important to me today; my own high potential irrespective of what others may or may not achieve.

The merits of racing

Bicycle riding and racing are very unique and interesting arts being that they require their participants to be multi-faceted in numerous ways.  Patience, physical strength and endurance, chess like foresight, nutritional knowledge, biomechanical harmony, mental tenacity and mechanical understanding are just a few key variables that immediately come to mind.  To be a successful and dynamic cyclist, racer or not, is to embody the aforementioned attributes simultaneously.  It is to the degree that we incrementally grow in each dimension that we can to that very degree enhance our over all ability as cyclists.  Racing is an outstanding stone of which we can hone our tools by being thrust into scenarios that demand our immediate receptivity.  Any lack thereof directly translates to a very visceral shortcoming.  Being pushed in different ways and stepping out of comfort zones is something that can benefit even the most recreational cyclist.  Racing sets the stage for a plethora of learning when it comes to the essential building blocks of cycling.  Be it on-the-fly mechanical problem solving or last-ditch effort psychological trickery, the race is a game of back and forth fluctuation; a cat and mouse dance with you sometimes being hunted by a field of hungry chasers.  More often than not the real race of cycling is a mental game of determination within your self.  Persistence and timing are equally key to success as brute strength and speed.  Though engaging in sportive cycling can be advantageous in more ways than not, the competitive nature of the game leads some to obsession, mental burnout and overuse injuries if not managed carefully.

Former leader of the Giro D'italia Alberto Contador holding the Maglia Rosa
 (overall leaders jersey[pink]) by taking only necessary risks, working
cohesively with his team and constantly gauging his current state.



Where are you?

There comes a point where you have to sit back and be honest with yourself about your current  physical conditioning, technical abilities and experience.  If you push so hard that you hurt yourself and others in the process of being overconfident, you may find yourself in a state of serious pain, both mentally and physically.  In the context of cycling there is not a lot that is more vexing than the mental anguish of knowing that you so easily could have avoided adversity by simply letting off the gas a bit and being realistic about the circumstances.  Taking risk is of course essential to growth, but over extending yourself so much that you inflict irreversible damage is something that is entirely avoidable altogether.  I have seen many athletes push themselves so far that the only thing that seemed to stop them was to literally fall flat on their own backs.  Mental clarity and physical resilience has to constantly be in our periphery if we are to safely climb the mountain of growth (pun intended).   

 

No need to allow you and your friends to amount to this..

The race with yourself

In 99.9% of instances there always seems to be someone out there that is in one way or another better than we are.  Be it our ability to descend technical single track or glide up double-digit grade hills, somewhere out there someone is doing it faster.  The important point that I allude to here is that no matter how hard you train, how good you are or how many races you win, there is always margin for improvement within your own sphere of activity.  Regardless of whether you are in the bottom of the barrel when it comes to your rivals or winning virtually everything in sight, your ability to move forward is entirely up to you and massively dictated by whether or not you take your own baby steps within your abilities.  So what if your friend is that much better than you; Is he/she the same age, have the same experience and fitness, ride the same bike or have the same weekly work load as you?   There are so many variables in the equation that it is entirely irrelevant if the next person is any slower or faster than you.  Assuming for a moment that you have outdone the remainder of your counterparts, would it be rational to conjure up a argument that supports a decision to stop seeking improvement?  Why let circumstances such as these in any way dictate your own personal trajectory.  What really matters is where we are, what we are doing, and identifying those areas within which we can grow.  Shy of the professionals who literally eat, breathe and sleep competitive cycling, no two individual's circumstances are alike.  You are here today with your physical abilities and the only way to progress is to identify it as just that.  This is your life we are talking about here and no one else's.  To compare ourselves to the Lance Armstrong's out there is to set such a high standard that we will no doubt feel forever inferior to our seemingly immortal idols. 

So next time we set out on a good ride with a friend lets try to be a little more receptive to the fact that each one of us is unique, and that there is no reason to be hard on ourselves or others for being incapable of maintaining that particular pace for "x" amount of time.  If we can all be inviting in ways such as this the doors open that much more to fun experience with both new and old friends.  Going out on solo rides and pushing yourself is a fantastic way to become stronger in many forms, but with regard to our fellow cyclists, we need to respect one another's unique conditions and try our best to make the most of such circumstances.



When accidents become opportunity

Every once in a while you end up taking a wrong turn that has you in unfamiliar terrain; sometimes both literally and figuratively.  Yesterday was one of those days for me, and it was another beautiful reminder of how easily every "mistake" can be taken as opportunity to experience new beauty.  Commuting with haste to meet with a friend for some bike work had me taking a corner that I though might speed up my ride.  Little did I know that not only would it slow me down tremendously, but moreover that I would discover a completely new and beautiful ditch trail that intersects what I once thought was an impassible section of town.  Beautiful Fields and vineyards were presented to me with an unforgettable sky.  Incredible smells, friendly ducks and dense overgrowth had me feeling like I was in another part of the country altogether.  Its amazing what you can find when you least expect it and are willing to embrace the accidental change of pace and familiarity.  Some of the most rewarding experiences are those unexpected and foreign.  To miss these subtle moments is to miss the subtly that is life!
 

Rule #5 and the Big Ring complex: why shifting into your small gear isn't so bad.

Almost all of us have heard of it:  the ever permeating, all to repeated words composing Rule #5.  "Harden the fuck up!" is such an integral facet of all competitive cycling disciplines (particularly road racing) that it is incredible that more cyclists have not suffered from negligence and or oblivion induced death.  To be unrealistic with our physical and sometimes mental capabilities is seemingly synonymous with the 5th rule of the Velominati's list of etiquette that helps constitute much of modern attitudes.  Pertaining to the "hard man" of today's cycling world it goes without saying that "the bigger the better" is accurate in terms of your chain ring size.  As a male (and sometimes females too) the big ring becomes a direct corollary with the level of your man/womanhood and is often worn as a badge that signifies your capabilities.  The reality of the situation seems to be that very little time is actually spent in these unpractical chain ring sizes that sever as not much more than steep, downhill descenting acceleration facilitators.  When grinding into oblivion to maintain the bad ass status, many hinder more so than benefit their cycling abilities and experiences at the expense of cool points.  Is the big ring really all that bad ass and important after all?

 

 

A mortal getting support from his friends as he
experiences a big ring induced, near death experience.

 

Riding within your abilities

 

If we are all being honest with ourselves we have to come to acknowledge that we have our own unique limits.  No level of our cycling ability should in any way be superimposed over the achievements of professionals and well trained riders that we strive to parallel.  All of us are simply at our own unique, individual levels of fitness and riding abilities as we must work within such parameters in order to ride better, have more fun, mitigate unnecessary injury and improve efficiency.  Acknowledging where you stand physical should ultimately dictate how you make gearing selection, with little to zero regard for the choices of our fellow cycling counterparts.  How do you feel on your bike in that big ring?  Is it conducive to long stints of spinning on sections other than descents?  Do you ever actually spin out the big/little ring combination?  Could a smaller gearing selection generate more practical and usable gearing combinations for less isolated chain ring and cog wear?  All of these questions should be at the forefront of decisions regarding your big and little rings (or single ring for you 1x'ers) as we all ultimately need a bicycle that is practical to ride without hurting ourselves in the process of doing so.
 

These are not our legs.. so lets stop pretending already?

 

Shift already... Its ok... really..

 

The correlation between needing bailout gears to help you get up a hill and lacking ability as well as hardness is what in my opinion can be accredited to there being so many road bike re-sales in bike shops, Craig's List and Ebay alike.  Most people (myself included on my strongest days) can simply not turn a 52-50 x anything for any period of time that is worth noting.  Sure, maybe we can sustain a power output that moves us along at a decent clip utilizing such a ratio, but by the time its all said and done the likely hood that we would actually want to do it again would be slim to none.  Even many "compact" rings/cassettes are rather harsh even for many avid, fit cyclists.  How nice it would be to see "entry" level road bikes outfitted with something along the lines of a 30x46 double chain ring set.  Such gearing selection would help less fit or beginner cyclists acclimate to higher cadences and power outputs without doing so at the expense of overuse injuries such as tendonitis and unnecessary onset muscle soreness.  Having fun on a bicycle starts with being honest, getting practical and assessing your current cycling needs for the sake of not just your physical healthy, but mental sanity as well.  So please, take a look at your bike sometime and ask yourself if you are really doing yourself a service by running the setup as you do, or simply holding yourself back and making a fool out of yourself in the process of being stubborn while doing so.

Not a roadie, not a mountain biker, just a cyclist.

Being that I am not looking, it becomes quite alright that I can't seem to find a real place in the cycling world within which to be compartmentalized.  Sure, I spend lots of time riding on dirt as well as logging plenty of road miles throughout the year, but there seems to be a lack of people to ride with considering the fact that I refuse to choose purely one riding style over the other while often incorporate the two in single rides.  Though the gravel/adventure bike scene has been the hottest thing to hit the market as of late and helps to slightly blur the lines between off vs on road cycling, there still seems to be a road/mountain biker dichotomy that splits the cycling world like a razor blade.  Take your pick; Peleton or Dirt Rag magazine, chamois or shorts, SPD cleats/shoes or platform pedals.  There is very much a black and white, one vs the other mentality that plagues the industry and only perpetuates the division between what at the end of the day are often like minded individuals.  Many of us clearly enjoy riding bicycles, being outdoors and enjoying the wonderful virtues of nature while appreciating high quality things in life such as good food, coffee and beer/wine.  So what is it about a simple thing such as big vs small tires that has us forming cliques, stigmas and often deliberate avoidance and or omission of one an other's presence?

Above is Pauline ferrand-prévot (center), the first woman to hold the road,
 mountain and cyclocross world championships all at one time. 

You ride a bike? Me too..

After having worked in a bicycle shop for the last two months (a very down to earth one mind you), I have seen self proclaimed cyclists of virtually every orientation come through and spread their wings.  From the uber hip, fashionable (?), fixed gear riding youngsters to the snobby, everything-retro-is-better proselytizing grouch and the conversely (and sometimes not so much) well financed, ultra high tech loving road and mountain cyclists, I have watched as they come, spoken their language, and gone.  Bits of dialogue I pick up on range from an absolute religious like worship for tech and new gear, to seemingly rare utterances of praise for the joy the act of cycling in and of itself.  Whispers of things that are undoubtedly indicative of a cyclists attempt at identifying with fill-in-the-blank genre become all to solidified after correlating the talk with the walk.  There is a style and swagger behind the various cycling sub-genres that have genius marketing schemes capitalizing on and further compounding the sub-culture mentality within cycling.  Books such as Bicycle Tribes have come to identify, but (inadvertently?) perpetuate the dissemination of cyclist sects within which one can relate to, and then ultimately become assimilated within.  Conforming to social, cycling, eating and drinking habits, the cyclist who identifies her/himself as a one particular walk of rider vs another has not only hindered their ability to congregate within other cyclists, but literally and figuratively confines their cycling style and riding boundaries.  There are certain unspoken rules and style dos and donts within the cycling community that very much compose the core backbone of what it means to be a roadie or a Mountain bike.  It is the dissolution of such dichotomies that interest me as a cyclist, mechanic and writer.

A cyclist stands by her commuter; a mountain bike equipped with racks for toting, drop bars 
for speed and big, plush tires for comfort. (Image courtesy of http://bikecommutechallenge.com/)

 

Walking the walk

It doesn't take much to spread the good vibes of cyclist inclusion.  Go out on that all day ride with the "roadies" and get your ass kicked a bit while showing them how much fun you are able to have on your not so pure bred road bike.  You could always invite your "fixie only" riding friend to join you on a slightly more adventurous ride to broaden the horizons.  What about taking that "gravel grinder" bike of yours out on some rougher trails and splicing in some love for the die hard mountain bikers?  We all need people to come in and shake things up a bit, blending good styles and aspects of cycling from all genres.  If riding a single speed road bike while wearing tall socks with SPD (mountain cycling) shoes, a messenger bag, lycra shorts and a skateboarding helmet is your thing; please, by all means.  As half of the struggle here is a style war, the further we remove ourselves from various cliques the more we can allow ourselves to be where we want, riding how we really want to with a hopefully increasing number of like minded individuals.

Steel bicycle frames: the pros, the cons, and why I continue to ride them

In the bicycle world, the steel vs fill-in-the-blank frame material conversation is so seemingly prevalent that one can easily wonder whether or not a visit to the local bike shop will end in a vehement, single sided argument with both sides walking away equally bitter.  It's an all too often classic fight of the ages; the iconoclast, vintage thumping retro-grouch vs the space age, "latest and greatest everything is better" proselytizing contrarian.  Though the above mentioned observation may seem somewhat black and white, it unfortunately proves to be the case in most instances.  Seldom do I experience truly open ended conversations encompassing unbiased views pertaining to "old vs new" that encourage a rational middle ground.  For this very reason I desire to open up a can of worms that seems to stand as the mother-of-all conversational focal points within the bicycling community while doing so with the most carefully considered and all encompassing approach possible.

All is compromise

When selecting tubing material for your bicycle there is without question a large handful of variables that must be considered: the more important being frame weight, handling characteristics, load capacity, terrain application, longevity and ease of repair.  What it really boils down to is what you plan on doing with your bike: road racing, loaded touring, trail riding, track racing, urban commuting, cyclocross, ect.  The desired application should dictate initial considerations followed by aspects of lesser concern.  The next focal point for anyone without bottomless pockets of cash would logically be the cost-benefit-ratio.  An acquisition that incorporates palatable levels of reliability, cost effectiveness and performance is what I feel most cyclists look for and will serve as an adequate template for what follows.  Steel, aluminum, titanium and carbon fiber compose the landscape of modern frame building material and vary highly in cost, weight, ultimate tensile strength, fatigue life, ease of working (welding, bending, heat treatment, ect) and handling characteristics.  Diving into metallurgic properties can in and of itself warrant for a lengthy write up that I hope to avoid within this post while conversely touching on some of the basic aspects that give steel the characteristics that have contributed to a somewhat cult like obsession for many.  Hearing catchy phrases thrown around such as "steel is real" and "hand built steel is the best" as often as I do has only further solidified the fact that though steel is an outstanding material choice for many, a tremendous amount of it's momentum in re-emerging as a high end bicycle frame material is partially based on marketing capitalization and myth surrounding racing legends as well as custom frame builders.  The reality is that steel bicycle frames can be made as either outstanding tools that endure decades of abuse, or as poorly fabricated, incorrectly purposed junkers that suffer from terrible handling characteristics and low fatigue/tensile life expectancy.

Though slightly dated, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology publication
"Bicycle Science" has let the numbers do the talking with this informative
comparrison chart.  Not alot has changed with steel, aluminum, titanium and
carbon composits over the years.

 

 Economic material, economic results

Having worked as a professional metal fabricator for the last 4 years I have been afforded the luxury of having first hand experience with working steel of all sorts. From stainless and chromoly alloys to hardened tool and hot/cold rolled mild steel, I have spent countless hours bending, machining, plasma cuing, welding, rolling, hydraulically forming, grinding, polishing, sanding and tumbling steel in most ways imaginable. I have watched very low quality steel take tremendous abuse over and over again without failing, and conversely watched things like chromoly fail from what would seem like normal use under conditions that in theory would not exceed it's fatigue or ultimate tensile threshold. The reality of the matter is that not all steels are extruded, bent/rolled, forged/cast or welded and heat treated equally. It is my opinion that these facets account for more of the wild card variables that give rise to frame failure out on the road than say the bicycle simply being "cheap".  Having owned everything from hand built fixed gear and mountain bike frames to mass produced counterparts of both modern and vintage makes, the overall take away from years of riding both ends of the spectrum is that products of comparable quality can be found in both small-batch made bespoke bicycles as well as japanese/taiwanese mass produced frame sets.  Though this is a generally accurate rule of thumb, it is by no means always the case.  It's not so much that your fill-in-the-blank custom frame builder of choice has a mythical, Midas-like touch that renders their work impervious to failure as it is that small batched, hand worked, quality controlled production tends to be more conducive to consistency than say mega factories with super large batches of mass produced frames. 

Kusaka San of the now defunct Vivalo Bicycles tacks an
aligned bicycle frame.  I owned and heavily rode a bicycle
 built by this man that was nothing short of spectacular.

 

 Why I choose steel

I often times liken the act of purchasing/riding a steel bicycle to that of owning a Toyota as opposed to a Porsche. Though the Porsche (being super thin walled, light weight aluminum and carbon fiber frames) will get you from point A to B (usually), the likelihood of being able to do so consistently, for long periods of time without experiencing issues along the way is not so high. The Toyota (being steel bicycle frames) is by most standards an inexpensive vehicle to own that will typically last for ages without showing many signs of problem. Being that parts are so readily available, in more cases than not it is substantially easier and more affordable to service when time comes. Though the Toyota will generally be slightly heavier, slower, and less sporty in appearance, it's utilitarian purpose as a quality vehicle that excels at many things, while failing to be perfect at any one, pays dividends for the not so purely race oriented consumer. The ultimate differentiating factor between the Porsche (similar makes as well) and Toyota is that the Porsche is a sport machine being sold to typically non-sporting consumers, whereas the Toyota was built more so with comfort, ease of transport and reliability in mind. Just as the automotive industry benefits massively from counter intuitive marketing schemes does the ever lucrative bicycle industry seek to do the same by selling the fastest, lightest and most technologically advanced product to a consumer who does not only lack a need for a such a specialized synthesis, but would more than likely otherwise lack the inclination to make such a purchase all together. Typically the speed of these race machines come at the cost of harsher geometry, super stiff riding characteristics (the previous not pertaining to suspended mountain bike frames), super high tolerance component requirements, seriously compromised fatigue life and greater likelihood of catastrophic failure during a crash.  Some of these mega bicycle manufacturing think tanks have not only insulted our intelligence as consumers by attempting to sell us fragile products with short life expectancy, but often time locked us into product marriage with new and obscure component standards that leave us going back to the same few, if not singular, component manufacturer(s) for their usually expensive replacement parts. The beauty with the steel bicycle (think Toyota again) is that for the most part, product support, interchangeability and universal standardization has opened up the doors to inexpensive repair, DIY modification and easier home mechanic serviceability.

My old steel workhorse (mass produced 1989 Diamondback Apex) that has 

endured innumerable loaded commutes, city bus rides,

truck bed transporting, off road rides, pot hole hits, bicycle rack smacks, ect..  

Though the steel tubing is slightly thicker than I would normally prefer,

the handling characteristics are outstanding with the bicycle loaded down.

Racing requires race machines

Those of you who have read even a few of my blog posts will have come to the realization that I stand firm in my decision that we as "serious" cyclists have to level with ourselves in acknowledging the fact that most of us simply are not, and never will be racers.  It's something that contrary to heavy marketing exposure, we as consumers must come to terms with if we are to establish rational purchasing habits.

  Hypothetically speaking, if I were to set out on a mission to seek contention in professional racing I would certainly look toward lighter, stiffer and more aerodynamic bicycle materials such as aluminum and titanium. When longevity and previously mentioned considerations cease to be critical, the text above understandably looses most traction. Winning races has not, and never will be about mounting your bike and hoping that it will perform daily, over and over again with minimal issue. The main consideration in racing is that the bicycle can complete it's task well enough that the race(s?) has/have been completed without any mechanical failures. When sponsors such as component manufacturers and frame constructors facilitate racer's sporting endeavors, all necessity for long term durability and strength become sacrificed at the expense of speed in every dimension that it entails. For applications such as these, choosing steel begins to seem like less and less like a logical decision as carbon fiber immediately comes to mind. Though carbon fiber often fails catastrophically during races, it is typically negated as a concern due to the consistent replacement of frame sets, wheels and all carbon cockpit components donated by sponsors. The disposable factor is more or less irrelevant for these high echelon cycling teams and riders who are the beneficiaries of a never ending flow of replacement bits.  For those of us who are not so generously taken care of, seeing our dollar go a long way is simply a must in a world where it is becoming incrasingly depreciated and harder to come by.  It is for these very reasons that I see steel as a frame material has making the most sense for my riding habits and mentality.  Though it might not be for everyone, it is certainly one that almost everyone can afford  to own and replace if damaged or stolen.

I am now a "Happy Bikes" family member

I am now officially part of Stevie's Happy Bikes crew in Corralles, New Mexico and will be helping out with mechanic/sales work a few days out of the week when it starts to warm up here.  I never seriously considered working for a bike shop until recently when I became more acquainted with Stevie and his way of work.  The shop that he runs outside of Albuquerque is my cup of  tea being that second hand bikes and consignments are emphasized far more than pushing new bike sale quotas and super high end componentry.  The yard is littered with vintage road, mountain and cruiser bikes spanning many decades evoking the sense of orphan children looking for TLC and good homes.  Though they do sell new bicycles and components, the central focal point is on practical bicycles that will regularly be ridden as opposed to 4-5 $ digit race machines.  The fit seems great for me and will certainly be a positive environment for me to spread my wings, giving attention to the blue collar side of the spectrum and helping promote cycling for all, not just the affluent. 

A short video showing the life at Happy Bikes

How many bikes are enough?

With the ability to choose from road: commuter, adventure, gravel, touring, cyclocross, cross country, enduro and downhill bicycles, the options seem myriad and leave the doors open to one of the more obvious questions facing cyclists; how many bikes are enough?  To begin answering this question would be to first really break down the various styles of bikes offered today.  From featherweight, aerodynamic road bikes to 5"+ travel suspended mountain bikes, we must figure out what we are trying to achieve, how often we are trying to achieve it and determine what constitutes a reasonable amount of money to spend in the process.  A logical follow up question would be to ask how many bicycles can fill multiple roles at one time without sacrificing to much in one realm or another.  The balance of compromise seems to be all to prevalent in the world of cycling; particularly pertaining to the rider seeking "jack of all trades" style bikes.

Speed and light weight vs comfort and durability

Two of the biggest aspects obsessed over in cycling are light weight products coupled with ultimate speed.  The desire to go faster for longer periods of time is a goal that most cyclists strive to achieve at one point or another and often overshadows the cost/benefit ratio of such an equation.  To get something for nothing is simply never the case as light weight frames and componentry will always come at an inversely proportional cost of strength and durability.  A thoroughbred road race machine for example will exhibit characteristics that lend itself to lightning fast hill climbs and wind tunnel test worthy times on the tarmac but will lack when the going gets rough and terrain becomes somewhat bumpy and uneven.  Someone once said that "to overspecialize is to breed in weakness" and could easily have been speaking particularly about the bicycle when making this assertion.  It is to the degree that one aspect becomes more and more the focal point of purpose that other aspects become further from grasp.  If your goal is to have the fastest road bicycle possible you will find that it is best to operate such a machine within the particular parameters it was designed around.  Pushing to far into the opposite end of the operational spectrum will deliver a sometimes painful and expensive message.  

Gauge your riding style well and try
 not to be like this person...

When it comes to bridging the gap between bicycle genres you indeed make trade offs.  A more sturdy aluminium or steel frame will cost you extra weight and thus be slower but will begin to pay dividends when it comes to longevity and overall comfort.  The aggressive geometry of a race steed will  pay a toll on you physiologically as a hunched over, aerodynamic position taxes the body if held for long periods of time on a regular basis.  Conversely, too relaxed of geometry will not lend itself well to consistent lengths of power output and will in turn also be sluggish in the corners. Figuring out what importance one facet or the other plays in your cycling experience will be completely personal and should be ultimately determined by your intentions.  An important question to ask at this point is whether or not you are really a full-tilt professional looking for marginal weight savings and aerodynamics geared toward every particular genre of riding or someone who wants to get the most out of their bicycle purchases.

Dynamic and enduring

These two words above best epitomize a well spent dollar for non-millionaire individuals lacking bottomless pockets of cash.  To acquire something that does a few, or possibly many jobs well and is simultaneously enduring constitutes true efficacy.  If you are the type of cyclist that likes to go beyond a purely road or mountain oriented ride in a more recreational inclined fashion, the words in the header above will in time present themselves to be just as necessary as desirable.  By bridging the gap between some of the never ending bicycle genres you can do some serious downsizing to your current and/or hypothetical bicycle stable while conversely upgrading your wallet in the process.  The question once again arises; what do you want to do with your bicycle(s)?  Perhaps you like road riding but also enjoy good stints of back road gravel trekking.  Or maybe you are into fast paced boulder ridden trail riding and at the same time enjoy less gnarly fire road rides.  Do the previously mentioned riders really need two not so different yet equally expensive bikes to fill the void of two similarly related objectives?

The late Jobst Brandt (highly revered bicycle critic, 
mechanical engineer, author and avid cyclist) making easy
work of some dirt trails on his "road" bike.

Fewer bikes, less profitibility

 For the sake of length (i tend to carry on) subtle bicycle differences will be ignored in this particular post to try and stay on topic.  The main concern attempting to be expressed is an overabundance of bicycle consumption geared toward a market of  riders that lack the time or necessity to justify such niche orientated, overlapping bicycle purchases.  Cutting through the industry fluff in today's world is just as important as understanding the subtle intricacies that compose bicycle similarities and differences.  There is certainly more in common with a cross country and enduro bicycle than fill in the blank manufactures will lead you to believe, and for a very good reason at that.   The bicycle marketing think tanks that be will lead you to believe that you need one particular bicycle, for every possible riding scenario.  It is simply not lucrative for the mega bicycle conglomerates that dominate the market to sit back and watch as masses of riders downsize their purchasing habits with less frequency.  In order to prop up the bicycle industry such manufactures feed on current trends that exhibit even the slightest bit of traction.  If a slightly new wheel size for example (think 29'er in the mid 00's and 650b circa 2012)  proves itself in the world racing circuit battle ground, you better believe that every effort will be made to lead you into believing that your previous setup is now obsolete.  The objective of never ending bicycle sales coupled with race oriented, weight and speed obsessed cyclists will continue to pave the way for more and more styles of bicycles to fill more and more supposedly niche riding.  It is up to us a cyclists to cast a voice using our most valuable tool being our dollar.  Our purchasing power tells such companies and industry annalists that we are indeed intelligent and discerning cyclists.  If we continue to feed into the previously mentioned propaganda we will certainly perpetuate the train of planned obsolescence that has already gained such momentum.  Perhaps the next time you watch Alberto Contador (6 time grand tour winning road cyclist) climb the Pyrenees, or Julien Absalon (6 time world cup winning mountain biker) descend rock gardens in Windham, ask yourself if its really the $9,000, brand new super light bicycle in between their legs that enables them to do what it is they do with such grace, or perhaps more so their fitness, skill and accurate bicycle fitment.