So, here it is....

..... the route. I've done a bit of research and stuff on t'internet and found a few places that suggest routes. WikiTravel has a good one that takes about 9 days. This is a bit too quick for me, as it averages about 300 miles a day. Eventually I've settled on the route below that is based on an itinerary from a company called Riding Route 66. It takes about 14 days, and includes side trips to The Grand Canyon and Las Vegas, where I might spend a couple of days, meaning this part of the trip could actually take me 16 days. So here it is in more detail:

Day 1: Pick up bike in Chicago, fairly short ride to Springfield IL.
Day 2: Springfield, IL to St Louis, MI
Day 3: St Louis, MI to Springfield, Missouri
Day 4: Then on to Tulsa, Oklahoma (202 miles), cutting the corner of Kansas for about 20 miles
Day 5: Tulsa, OK to Clinton, OK (217miles)
Day 6: Is this the way to Amarillo? I sure hope so, as that's tonight's stop
Day 7: Amarillo TX to Las Vegas New Mexico, passing through the half way point on this route
Day 8: Las Vegas, NM to Grants, NM/AZ, about 239 miles
Day 9: Grants to Holbrook, AZ
Day 10: Then a side trip up to the Grand Canyon
Day 11: Back on track, and stop for the night in Needles
Day 12: A short ride for the 2nd side trip up to Las Vegas, Nevada
Day 13 (& maybe 14): Stay in Vegas and clean up on the poker tables
Day 15: Back onto Route 66 to Bartsow, CA
Day 16: Arrive at the end of Route 66 at Santa Monica Pier
Day 17 - 21: meander up to San Fransisco and give the bike back :-(

 Of course, this is the first cut. I might find something interesting on the way and spend longer in one place, and then make up time elsewhere. I'm not planning to book any accomodation more that a day or 2 in advance, so there will not be a strict schedule that I have to keep to.

Getting exciting now!! Can I go this year instead?

How long is long enough?

The longer the better, seems to be the consensus, but this is a bike trip I'm talking about, so there's bound to be a limit - only question is, what is that limit?

I've decided that time will be the limiting parameter for this trip (well, after the money side of things, of course) as it will ultimately determine the route, the bike (mine or rented?), and whether I come back to a wife who's missed me, or one who's started divorce proceedings citing abandonment.

So how long is long enough? Chicken and egg sort of question - it depends what I want to do really. What I want to do, depends on how long I've got.

Well clearly a week isn't; although technically it would be possible to cover the 2000 odd miles of Route 66 in a week, it would be pushing it, with no time to take it all in.

OK, so longer than a week then. What about a year? Nah - too long. People go round the world in a lot less than that. And that's on foot.

So, I'm narrowing it down - somewhere between a week and a year. 6 months still feels too long, and 2 weeks too short. Between 3 weeks and 5 months then.

I decide to be pragmatic and start with a bargaining position of 3 months. That would be plenty of time to do everything I could want to do, before getting bored, so this is the time period I started planning to.

More of that later.......