|
|
 |
The tyke trackers who beat Team Tamalpais (2010)
Original article by Tim Dawson (pictured left a year or so before
his breakthrough invention)
|
My role the invention of mountain biking has been overlooked for too
long. I now intend to set the record straight once and for all.
At some point in the mid-1970s my friends Alex Pearce, Patrick McBride
and I started to experiment with bicycles that were specially adapted
for use on mountain trails. We lived in a Yorkshire town, overlooked by
a famously wild moor. Rather like Marin county's relationship to San Francisco,
it served the role of outdoor playground of the Leeds/Bradford conurbation.
We were familiar at the time, of course, with the Rough Stuff Fellowship
of cyclists who enjoy riding off-road tracks. They might have some claim
to having invented mountain biking - but it was us who were the pioneers
of the mountain bike.
Our motive was simple. We wanted to ride down the vertiginous slopes
of the moor. From the hill tops, we would pick up speed on the sheep tracks,
scooting through the gullies, and, when our nerves allowed us, jump over
the massive gritsone boulders that punctuated the heathery slopes.
To do this required a number of technical leaps. We quickly realised
that bike wasteage was high. Enthusiastic descents frequently resulted
in bent wheels, and fairly often we managed to snap frames in two. Our
prized 'road' bikes could not be risked on the moors, so we sought out
expendable alternatives.
We also needed to get up to the top of the trails - without the benefit
of the pick up trucks that our Californian counterparts relied upon in
the early days. It was here that we were at the cutting edge. The nature
of our riding meant that we only ever really had to pedal up hills - the
descents took care of themselves. It was Alex Pearce who realised that
small childrens' bicycles had very small front chainrings - some with
as few as 20 teeth. These we cannibalised to create the first bikes to
feature 'granny gears'. The granny gear was, in fact, their only gear,
but it was sufficient to get us up even the most precipitous slopes.
Children's bicycles also provided diminutive frames, with brought with
them two advantages. Their compact triangles were generally stiff and
were better suited to a rider moving their body about the bike to stay
upright as they careered downhill. Sadly they were also badly made - which
increased the frequency of frame failures.
We called the bikes that we created 'tracker bikes' and would take them
out several evenings each week in search of high octane thrills.
Although pretty much all the mountain bikes that have been commercially
produced since that time have included our innovation - the granny gear,
to get up the hills - the names Pearce, McBride and Dawson now go uncelebrated
in the annals of cycling history.
Twenty years after my adolescent spanner sessions I spent a summer in
Mill Valley, Marin County - pretty much the epicentre of the area that
claims the mountain bike as its own. There it was impossible not to dwell
on this question. Why did the Californians spark a cycling revolution
while our efforts were consigned to the tangled mess of rusting frames
at the back of the coal shed?
Well first let me qualify my story. We were very young - 12 or 13 I
would guess. We had neither the tools nor the workshops to do very much
'adapting', nor the money to buy components. We were pretty short on technical
skills too. Neither were we much interested in attracting a scene around
what we were doing and, our enthusiasm endured little beyond a single
summer.
That we inspired no one then should come as little surprise. More interesting
to consider is why California has for long been the most productive well-spring
of lifestyle trends. BMX, stakeboards, surfing, Apple Computers and much,
much more has been beamed to the world from the sunny west coast.
Hauling my adult body up and down Mount Tamalpais, I began to glimpse
just why the Golden State provides quite such a favourable enviornment
for novelty to thrive. Sunshine, money and media play a part, as do a
young, mobile population that is relatively free from tradition. It struck
me that my friends and I could have fitted our bikes with duel suspension
and crafted frames from carbon fibre and donned full body armour and still
gone largely unnoticed in Yorkshire. For bolting a derailleur to a klunker,
Gary Fisher has a reasonable claim to be the most important cycle-design
innovator since James Starley.
The lesson if there is one is this. The audience for an idea is often
every bit as important to its success as the invention itself. Not for
the first time in my life, I was simply in the wrong place at the wrong
time.
TD Oct 10
Two rather more plausible accounts of cycling history...
|
Bookmark this on Delicious
Follow the site!
Join our list we will let you known when new reviews
are added to the site. We will never share your email address with
third parties.
tim@timdawsn.demon.co.uk
You can also follow us on Facebook
|
Visit our sister site
for dispassionate, expert advice on general cycling
issues
|
How this site is organised
As reviews are added, they are featured on the
front page. All titles are listed in the master index and cross-referenced
in the other indicies.
The subject line contains the title, author and
date of each book's publication. As a general rule, we list the
date of the actual edition that we read, unless there is an obvious
reason to use the original date (say where we read a reprint).
The first line of the main text contains the name
of the publisher, the ISBN
number, where it exists, an indication of the book's
size and the number of printed pages that it contains. Finally,
where it is clear, I list the published price of the work in the
currency that is most prominently displayed.
We summarise the book in a single sentence or two
in the next line. The rest of the review is then intended as a self-contained
piece.
|
|