Reasons Why Boulder Should Be #1

I know you're wondering...why hasn't Boulder been rated number one friendliest biking city in America? Minneapolis did it...http://www.bicyclingmag.com/news/featured-stories/1-bike-city-minneapolis

REASONS WHY WE SHOULD BE NUMBER ONE!!

1) 300+ days of sun! (Take THAT, Minneapolis!)

2) Lots and lots of: bike racks...Boulder began converting parking spots into bike rack spots a while ago. Boulder also has many bike-friendly businesses. Some restaurants in Boulder have bike-delivery, and many more businesses aren't too strict about letting cyclists bring their rides indoors for a while.

3) Cyclists in legislation. As of two years ago, Boulder finally voted a cyclist into legislation. He's doing his job. As of last year, bicycles are allowed to ride two-abreast in bike lanes, and the law has been bent to allow motor-vehicles to cross the double yellow in order to meet the required three foot distance rating when passing cyclists.

4) Bike lanes and trails to ride. Hellooo...we're in Colorado. Mountains, anyone?

5) Hasn't happened in Boulder yet, but I'm willing to bet that Boulder will follow Denver's views on bike theft and bump up the stakes a little. As of two years ago in Denver, those little Denver yuppies were spending so much money "being green" and buying such expensive bikes (instead of cars) that legislation in Denver was changed. If you steal a bike that costs as much as a car in Denver, you stole a car...at least in the eyes of the law. Class-two felony. Do it Boulder!

Reasons Why Boulder Isn't Number One (Yet):

1) Wasted college kids driving drunk in the middle of the day. Boulder will probably not be rated number one until kids aren't out for cyclist blood anymore.

2) Too much rivalry? The fixters vs. the spandex guys. Boulder will probably not be number one until we can suck it up and just get along.

3) Bike theft. Silly Trustafarian CU kids...I guess Daddy's wallet just can't supply that adrenaline rush.

Hmm. That's about it.

Maybe all we need is a little more culture...is anyone reading this? Come on, fellow cyclists. Unite for the common cause of number one.

Two-Nine or not Two-Nine?

A couple years ago, the lock securing my mountain bike was cut and my bike was stolen from my front porch. This was tragic. I had no mountain bike, and this meant that the following spring was spent researching and preparing to get a new one. In this research, I decided to take a look at the 29er craze. Just to clear up any possible confusion, a 29er is a mountain bike that uses 700c wheels instead of the usual 26" wheels. I heard all sorts of opinions ranging between the poles of: "it's a gimmick, and it'll disappear in a couple of years," to: "29ers are the greatest mountain bike idea ever – they're as good as riding full suspension!"

Given the wide variance of opinion, I decided to go out on a limb and give it a shot, and now that I've experienced the 29er first hand, I think it's safe to say that I'm a convert. I love the big wheels and the fatty tires. While the larger wheel size occasionally felt a little squirrelly in the beginning, especially when making hairpin turns or when cutting along switchbacks, I quickly adjusted and soon fell in love with the sensation that once those big beautiful wheels got rolling, there wasn't anything that was going to stop them! The larger wheel circumference really does allow riders to roll more easily and smoothly over obstacles, and while I won't go as far as to agree that it's like riding full-suspension, I will say that in the world of hardtails, 29ers are tough to beat. The one drawback to the larger wheels is that shorter riders (anyone significantly shorter than 6 feet tall) may feel uncomfortable riding a 29er.

So, as far as this mountain biker is concerned, here's the final verdict: any biker in the vicinity of 6 feet or taller should definitely give a 29er a shot. These bikes are not a gimmicky fad, but a great mountain bike design which really allows hardtail riders to pound the trails harder than ever before.