A different type of touring

[toekneep]

I have just read an article in a copy of Cycling World called 'Teapot Touring'. The idea is to purposefully not go very far but to spend more time looking at the area you are in. This got me thinking, along with comments from Mrs. TKP on the fact that we might have covered a reasonable amount of ground, for us, on our last tour but we didn't stop and explore very much.

I've got this idea to base a tour in a limited area with fixed boundaries, the Yorkshire Dales for example. The idea would be to forget progress across the map but to weave about and really get to know the area. Mileage would be cut down to say 30 to 40 miles a day max so there would be lots of time for  pubs, cafes, castles, churches etc. (Note the order of that list    )

Has anybody done this type of touring? I'm just wondering how small an area would provide for eight days of touring and leave us feeling that we had really explored it.

[Polar Bear]

It's what we tend to do all of the time.   Pitch camp, spend a few days in the area, move on.   I've done the big mileage days touring and find it boring as hell.   

It's not about the miles, it's about the smiles   

[alan]

We stayed on in the York area for a few days after leaving the Knavesmire on the Monday morning at the conclusion of the CTC Rally.
Most of our exploring was by car but I did a couple of rides & we both realised that the area had great potential for a base-camp type of cycling break lasting a few days.
I reckon Bellingham & its environs hold the same promise.

This of course is the principle behind the CTC's annual Birthday Rides event.

[Wowbagger]

We did that in Dorset last weekend. Last day was only 27 miles but included a lovely tea room, a visit to Lulworth Cove, a walk to Durdle Door and back to Lulworth Cove, lunch in a pub with good beer and sandwiches and a trip back to the B & B in plenty of time for a shower and the bus into Wareham for a superb dinner at the Black Bear pub.

The other two days were both about 40 miles, but the extra 13 would have replaced an hour's walking and half and hour on the beach.

[Polar Bear]

I reckon Bellingham & its environs hold the same promise.

Indeed it does.

[Si]

Is this not what is known as "fixed centre touring"?

It's the sort of thing that I do when I'm away working somewhere and thus can't move on - I use the bike to get around and explore the local area.

Compared to "moving on" touring it doesn't give me the same level of achievement (for me) - there is no goal destination at the end.  However, as you've said, it does allow you to better experience the area that you are in, and there is less pressure to be at certain places by certain times or do large mileages when you fancy an easy day. Plus the getting there and back is much easier too (esp if lugging a tandem around).

I 'spose it's a question of what's most important about cycling-touring to you?  Covering a distance by bike, or experiencing the places that you are in as well as you are able?  Of course, there's no reason why the two should be mutually exclusive - you can spend a couple of days moving on to get somewhere, then spend the next few days fixed centre, then ride home.

[toekneep]

We were talking about it a bit more last night and we both agree that we prefer to move on most days to a new camp site just for the variety. However, by staying within the confines of a relatively small area it would take away the pressure of reaching a particular location by the end of the day. We have often stopped at lunchtime or early afternoon and commented on what a nice place it would be to stay but have felt compelled to move on because of the schedule we have planned. This time the idea is to take away that pressure and if we camp twenty miles from the previous evening so be it.

The more I think about it and the more appealing it becomes.

[MSeries]

Bodger makes a good point. "I 'spose it's a question of what's most important about cycling-touring to you?  Covering a distance by bike, or experiencing the places that you are in as well as you are able?" For me it's about cycling, about the journey. One way journeys are always better.

[toekneep]

Bodger makes a good point. "I 'spose it's a question of what's most important about cycling-touring to you?  Covering a distance by bike, or experiencing the places that you are in as well as you are able?" For me it's about cycling, about the journey. One way journeys are always better.

I think this is a bit of a compromise between Mrs. TKP and myself. I prefer the idea of a one way journey or a loop but I'm quite happy to give this a go next year. Perhaps it is misnamed. Maybe it should be called "cycle exploring" to more accurately represent the idea.

[Really Ancien]

This is a cycling website, so there's a tendency to put the cycling first. If this was a historical website or a botany website, then we could discuss the bicycle as something which is faster than walking, but has a more intimate contact with the environment than motoring. The problem most groups or couples have is that their interests are not entirely congruent, so the day is full of micro compromises unless a main goal is agreed.
For people whose lives consist of constant decisions it is often preferable to have one big target and take your brain out. That's one of the attractions of Audax for Heather and myself, we don't even have to make allowances for each other.
There are however destinations which can satisfy both our interests, Normandy, North West Scotland and the Southern Lake District are good, with lots of interest, Heather can stop to look at the flowers and I can photograph them. I will often scout the terrain looking for something unusual for Heather to identify.
The ultimate single centre touring option is the Semaine Federale.

Damon.

[urban_biker]

For people whose lives consist of constant decisions it is often preferable to have one big target and take your brain out. That's one of the attractions of Audax

One of my favourite quotes of the day!

[LEE]

For people whose lives consist of constant decisions it is often preferable to have one big target and take your brain out. That's one of the attractions of Audax

One of my favourite quotes of the day!

Yes.  Audax cycling is my "Brain Out" cycling but I also love "Brain In" cycling such as the YACF Camping weekend (low mileage and high beerage)

Recently, during the BCM600, someone stupidly replaced my brain causing me to quit immediately.

[teethgrinder]

For people whose lives consist of constant decisions it is often preferable to have one big target and take your brain out. That's one of the attractions of Audax

One of my favourite quotes of the day!

Yes.  Audax cycling is my "Brain Out" cycling but I also love "Brain In" cycling such as the YACF Camping weekend (low mileage and high beerage)

Recently, during the BCM600, someone stupidly replaced my brain causing me to quit immediately.

I think the opposite. If I'm going to do an Audax style tour, then it will take a fair bit of planning and contingency plans. Everything done to a tight schedule with sleeping patterns, navigation, route planning to take into account.
On the other hand, I spent last week in Turkey. I arrived with no map. Just an apartment booked and my bike. I had a rough idea of what was there, but I just looked in the guide book and 1:800,0000 map in the apartment, which gave me an idea of places to aim for.
I cycled 550 miles; less in 9 days than I have done in a weekend. I just picked a road and see where it took me on some days. Often dead ends or dirt roads. I thought it more mindless than planning a big mileage tour and I doubt that the memories will last as long. But it was fun in a different way. I reckon I experienced Turkey more than I would than if I'd have done an Audax style tour. I saw things I wouldn't have seen, but it was localised. I had a more in depth view of an area, not a brief insight to the country as a whole. Even then, there was a lot that I didn't see.

[LEE]

TG, I think we are 180 degrees out of synch with each other, that's fine, each to their own and all that.

The point I was making in my case was that, if my brain was "in", I probably wouldn't Audax (on a couple of levels).

Level 1 - My only objective in Audax is to get to the end, never more so than on a 400 or 600.  All I have to do is watch the road slip under my front wheel and keep one eye on the route sheet.  During the night stages, when all I can see is a small patch of illuminated tarmac, I really must switch off the brain.  I find Audax requires less of my brain to be switched on than most cycling.  It's very Zen and I am invariably thinking about things other than cycling.  It's all so easy.

Level 2 - It can get so cold and so boring on the longer Audax rides that I invariably think "What the hell am I doing in Wales, at night, in the rain and staring at wet tarmac hour after hour?".  The enjoyment of those sort of rides is much like banging your head against a brick wall, it's great when you stop doing it.  I need to be "Brain Out" because it's too crazy a hobby to do "Brain In" (You don't have to be mad to work here ..etc)


Touring and pootling is full of enjoyable decisions, which lane should I take?, should I have another pint here or further down the road?

I see Audax as a straight line with no decisions, it's automatic pilot.  I see touring and pootling as an endless choice of junctions and decisions.

I think short-haul touring sounds great, getting to really know an area rather than passing through.  On my Audax rides and LEJoG ride I found myself passing through interesting looking places in a few minutes, just to reach somewhere less interesting.  How nice it would be to stay in that pub or cafe all day (or all week).

[Really Ancien]

There is a difference between using a bicycle as an instrument and as a tool. Structured rides cast the bike as an instrument, we are at one with the machine in acheiving a prescribed goal, much of the culture on this forum celebrates this. Hence the concentration on function and indeed beauty.
When the focus is away from the centrality of the instrument, the bike fades into the background as simply a tool. When we explore an area by bus, we should not be looking at the bus. I suppose I get a heightened perspective on this duality, as the primary instrument I am using on many of my rides is a camera. The bike and my ability to propel it are combined to perform a task other than timed movement for its own sake. Oddly this requires me to train by way of minutely timed tasks, such as TTs and Audaxes, but this is because I need to cast myself as part of the bike- rider system. In short I see myself as a bit of a tool, but you could probably guess that.

Damon.

[Regulator]

On the continent I tend to stick in one place for a few days and explore.  Belgium is very good for this, in part given the number of breweries...