Bike Lust

The past few weeks I've been swooning over some of the bikes I've considered as replacements for my kidnapped, long-lost and lamented bike. What I'm looking for is a super-bike, one that I can use for all of the following: daily commuting, completing century rides and other longer-distance recreational rides in relative comfort, hauling groceries and library books, riding on bumpy and pot-holed streets, and (in my fondest dreams) bike camping.

My research suggests that I should look into getting a touring road bike, rather that a sport road bike (putting aside the fact, for the moment, that my ass has never actually been on a road bike before). And, of course, my frugal nature is convinced that I can find this sterling bike at some bargain basement price.

Here is my epitome of this super-bike, the achingly lovely but astronomically out-of-my-price range, Rivendell Atlantis:

Here is a bike apparently built along the same rugged design lines as the Atlantis, but with a cheaper price point due to the lack of something beyond my ken called "lugs", but still pretty much beyond my price range. Part of the reason I swoon for it, though, is the awesome name, the Surly Long-Haul Trucker:

Fuji makes a pretty touring bike (and you know the degree of pretty is critical to this decision):

There are some touring bikes that seem too heavy-duty, though, like this one from Koga:

The guy at the bike shop this weekend had me look at two entry level sport road bikes, which I suppose I could outfit with racks, though I worry that they may not accept rough usage.

Here's the 2005 Specialized Dolce (a women-specific design):

And here's the 2005 Giant OCR3:

One of the cheapest (around $500) entry-level road bikes is made by Raleigh, to whom I feel some brand loyalty as they manufactured my beloved workhorse. Here's the Raleigh Sport:

Of course, I could chuck it all and go with the Xtracyle, which gets points for sheer utilitarian functionality, which makes me swoon in an entirely different way:

======
Hey y'all, I went crazy a few weeks ago and signed up for the half-marathon training program with the local FIT group. I'm on some kind of streak, because for the past three weeks I've completed every training and group run on my schedule. I even bought some Body Glide that has revolutionized my heretofore miserable running-short experience.

In a few weeks, the training schedule calls for a 7 mile run, which is virgin running territory for me. I try not to look at that entry in the calendar. I might be a wee bit scared.

I am, of course, one of the slowest runners in my training group, about a 12-13 minute mile. But, what can I say, it just feels better to run slow. I have more energy, I enjoy it more, I get less aches and stomach cramping, I can indulge in a gossipy conversation with my running partners. Works for me.

The interesting thing about the FIT program is that it calls for three training runs during the week, none of which seem to last more than 40 minutes, and then a long run each Saturday. Even the marathoners are training like this. I wonder if this is a controversial training plan? I mean, it certainly works great in terms of scheduling, but I wonder if it's an effective training approach. I know my previous running coach didn't particularly like the FIT philosophy, but I also know that my friend Nic finished the marathon last year with this program, and so have others nationwide.

But I'm happy that I'm back into running. I feel better, physically. I still have some shin splint problems, but I've been icing the shin so maybe that will help.

Austin Freescale Half-Marathon 2006, here I come!