Great Debates of Cycling: Settled!

If you ever partake in online cycling discourse, you know that there’s no greater annoyance than when one of the Great Debates of Cycling comes up. It’s like when someone brings up politics at a family gathering around a racist uncle. Suddenly what was pleasant conversation becomes a series of vitriolic tirades making the same tired points and propagating the same misinformation. So in the interest of keeping these subjects from ever coming up again, I’d like to put four of them to rest forever:

Tubulars Vs. Clinchers

Perhaps the ultimate yawn-inducer in roadie forums, this debate has been raging since the advent of the high-end clincher. Typical retorts include:

--Tubulars can be ridden longer flat—that’s how Abraham Olano won the 1995 Worlds. (Yes, there was once a cyclist named Abraham Olano. Google “Indurain” and “Mini-Me” and you should be able to find him.)

--Clinchers are easier to repair

--Tubulars don’t get pinch flats

--Clinchers have lower rolling resistance, as proved by Jobst Brandt. (In the test, uber-curmudgeon Brandt scowled at a clincher and a tubular mounted on rotating wheels; the clincher melted before the tubular, proving the former had lower rolling resistance.)

--Pros Ride Tubulars

And so on.

End of Argument:

Clinchers. Why? Because the only reason pros ride tubulars is the power and influence wielded by the International Pro Bicycle Mechanics Cabal. Think about it. These days, bikes are so simple that even the most inept, dope-riddled domestique can do most necessary repairs with a couple of allen wrenches. Gone are the days of prepping frames, building wheels, and drilling bikes into the sub-20lb realm. So the only thing these mechanics have left to justify their existence is gluing wine cellar-aged tubulars on pre-built wheelsets over the course of four days. And think about that one guy who works for the one French Michelin-sponsored team riding clinchers, and how he feels when he’s surrounded and laughed at by all the other mechanics while he sits in a chair mounting clinchers with a couple of tire irons and taking occasional bites of a Croque Monsieur. Who wants to be that guy?

26” vs. 29” Mountain Bike Wheels

This one’s been raging for the last few years now. 26” wheels handle better. 29” wheels roll over obstacles better. Yadda and so forth.

End of Argument:

While I like to make most points with a little bit of finesse and diplomacy, I have to be frank here. If you’re still asking this question, you’re an idiot. Why? Because this, like all other bicycle-related questions, has been settled once and for all by the Great Trek Bicycle Making Company. The answer? Both!* D’uh.

*Note: The titatium vs. aluminum debate was also settled awhile back by Merlin in the same manner. With this grossly opulent bike, they made the dream of having this exchange a reality:

Question: “So what’s your road bike made out of, carbon or ti?”

Answer: “Yes!”

Campagnolo Vs. Shimano

This is a truly venerable debate, and is a metaphor for the Janus-like spirit of cycling in so many ways. Campagnolo, steeped in Italian tradition and flair, versus Shimano, engineered with Japanese precision and efficiency. To me, however, the real question is what to marvel at more: the fact that this question hasn’t been settled yet, or the fact that people care so much in the first place? Various arguments include:

--Shimano has won eight out of nine of the last Tours de France. (And the only reason they lost one was because it was won by a chemically addled Amish guy with a chip on his shoulder and a testosterone patch on his reproductive musette.)

--Campy wears in, Shimano wears out

--Shimano invented integrated (and indexed) shifting, the waterproof wristwatch, and the first artificial heart

--Campy has Italian Soul and Shimano is an evil OEM behemoth that supplies weapons to our nation's enemies

--Shimano offers mountain bike components, Campy once offered heavy things that bolted onto mountain bikes and didn’t work

And so on.

End of Argument:

Shimano. Why? Compatibility. Not with its mountain bike range, or with other manufacturers’ components. No, I mean compatibility with its fishing equipment range. Yes, all Shimano road and mountain bike component groups are fully compatible with their line of high-end fishing components. And while that may not mean anything to you, it means the world to the many competitors and fans of the cycling/fishing/sulking triathlons that are so popular in the fjords of Norway.

On the other hand, Campagnolo’s road groups can only be made to work with their line of alloy car wheels by employing unsightly kludges and unorthodox cable routings.

Helmets Vs. Not Helmets

This one has been responsible for more threads than the Garment District. Proponents say that only an idiot wouldn’t wear a helmet, and even point to specific instances in which helmets literally saved their lives. Opponents argue that the efficacy of strapping a foam hat to your head is negligible, and that the push towards compulsive helmet-wearing in the cycling community has been largely orchestrated by helmet manufacturers more concerned with their profits than with melon-protection.

End of Argument:

Helmets. Yes, maybe they are largely worthless. In fact, statistics prove that they do little to nothing to prevent against injuries such as broken ribs, fractured collarbones, stubbed toes, saddle sores, paper cuts and road abrasions below the neck. However, anecdotal evidence does suggest that they may be helpful when it comes to actual blows to the head. There’s also the additional benefit of transferring superpowers to the wearer, since strapping one on apparently gives you the ability to tell everyone else what they should do. In any case, whether you wear one or not, it’s a pretty dumb thing to argue about.

Five Grounds for Immediate Equipment Reappropriation

Unlike drugs, motor vehicles, and firearms (well, in some states) anybody anywhere can walk into any bike shop and buy whatever they want—provided they’ve got the money. And while I’m all for shops making a profit, I just don’t think that’s right. Yes, I’ll come right out and say it—not everybody deserves to have whatever they want. I think there should be a strict set of criteria that a customer should meet before he or she is allowed to buy something. (Which is why no investors ever seem interested in my business plan for "Fascist Cycles.")

I also don’t think that this equipment regulation should stop at the retail level. I think it should also be enforced out in the world, well after the bikes and components have left the store. I envision a network of officers and informants who would report violations of these rules, upon which bicycles would be confiscated. Here are just a few circumstances in which you should be forced to forfeit your bike or components:

You Don't Glue Your Own Tubulars

The mind-numbingly boring tubular-versus-clincher debate continues to rage, as it undoubtedly will for all eternity. And as far as which one you prefer, I couldn’t care less. What I cannot stand, however, are riders who use tubulars but cannot glue them by themselves. Instead, they have a shop do it. (This may not be common everywhere, but it sure is here in NYC, where everyone seems to have more money than time.) And while I suppose I’d rather ride behind a guy whose tires were glued by a shop than by some idiot who stuck them on with some Elmer’s glue and a popsicle stick, I still think that if you don’t install your own tires you should have your wheels taken from you. Tubular gluing is an old, ritualistic cycling practice, and riding the tires without putting them on yourself is like sending someone else to your local house of worship to do your praying for you.

You Don't Tape Your Own Bars

Yes, it’s true, a lot of riders can’t and don’t tape their own bars. This is like being 40 and swinging by your parents’ house on the way to work to have them knot your tie for you. If you’ve owned a drop-bar bike for more than six months, either learn how to wrap ‘em or fork that sucker over.

You're Wealthy and You Don't Transport Your Bike Properly

I’m not a communist and I’m not Amish. Some people have money and they want nice cars. Fine. And sometimes you need to transport your bike someplace, like a race or a far-off group ride. Okay. But what I cannot stand is when I see a brand-new Mercedes or BMW pull up at the start, and the driver proceeds to wrestle his $7,000 Colnago out from the back seat. I mean come on! You’ve got the money, get a goddamn rack! The only explanation I can possibly come up with for this behavior is that there’s a spouse at home who does not want the statusmobile marred by unsightly load bars and fairings. Well, you know what? If you’ve reached a point in your life where you’re successful enough to afford all this stuff, yet you can’t put your foot down and give cycling the pride-of-place in your life that it deserves, then hand over that shiny piece of Euro-plastic. Or at least get one of those stupid removable trunk racks. Is a leather seat riddled with chainring holes somehow preferable to a Thule?

And don’t tell me you keep the bike in the car to save gas. If you cared you’d have bought a Civic.

You Don't Meet the "Dollar-a-Mile" Qualification

We’ve all seen the “too much bike” phenomenon in action. You know, the guy who buys the absurdly expensive team replica bike and rides it around the park a few times a summer in sneakers. Sorry, this is not acceptable. I think a very fair and accommodating rule is that you must meet the “Dollar-a-Mile” qualification in order to keep possession of your bike. Example: let’s say you paid $5,000 for your bike. You should then be able to prove that you ride at least 5,000 miles a year—which isn’t all that much given the fact that $5,000 buys a pretty serious bike. 5,000 miles a year is less than 100 miles a week. I think that gives plenty of latitude. And you can buy as many other bikes as you want, without additional mileage requirements. The only requirement is that you must ride annually at least the number of miles appropriate for your most expensive bicycle. Simple! And if you don’t? Repo time.

You Are a Serial Upgrader

Everybody wants nice stuff. Fine. But if you are not a professional bike racer and you own components made by companies such as AX Lightness, Lightweight, or Schmolke, or if you train on carbon wheels, or if your credit card starts vibrating when you hear words like “integrated,” “proprietary,” or “stiff yet compliant,” you have a problem. If this is you, your bicycle should be taken from you for no less than six months. At the end of that time you will then be permitted to buy a bicycle at a retail price of no more than $1,000, which you must then ride for no less than one full year without changing any components whatsoever. At the end of that year we’ll see where you are, and we’ll take it from there.