Touring - Which mountain bike components on touring bike?

Hello,

If you were building a touring bike (and you're 220lbs+ like I am), which components on your bike would you prefer were for mountian bikes, and which for road bikes? I have a rear XT derailleur I will be using, a cassette from Harris, and 105 shifter/levers. [Frame is an OCR touring 2003]. If you were building from scratch, of the remaining components, of which would you get ultegra/105 and which might you get lx/xt/xtr? Should I buy a road crank, or is a mountaiin bike crank be better for a touring bike? For brakes, I was thinking about getting 105 brakes, and maybe add a rear disc brake later. For hubs, I was thinking about getting a dynamo hub for the front, and a 105 rear (good/bad?).

This bike is just something to work on, never done this before. If anyone has any links to articles on various aspects of assembly it would really be appreciated. (I will probably end up taking the bike to a shop to check alignment on the derailleurs and other areas of the bike)

Thanks a lot

I'm putting together my new touring bike right now. A few thoughts:

- I went with MTB hubs (Shimano XT) -- those are the ones with the 135mm spacing you need on a touring frame. I'm not sure you can find 105 hubs in 135mm.
- I used a Sugino crank. It's really purdy and dirt cheap compared to most road components. Otherwise I would recommend a MTB crankset because it gives you real-world touring gears. My "other bike" is a 53/39 ultegra 10spd double which I really enjoy but I didn't think twice about going to a 46/36/24 for the tourer.
- I opted for Cantilever brakes, but you'll enjoy the disc brakes too. I like the classic look of the canti's and I've never had trouble with stopping power.

My wife has the 2004 OCR touring bike. She likes it fine although it was hard to find a rack that fit well (she's a really small frame) and the rack/bags do come very close to interfering with the disc brakes. YMMV because of frame size differences, etc.

The bike frame has to be disk compatable, if you ever want to put a rear disk brake on it. The reason to have a disk on a touring bike is for long steep down hills that would put to much heat on the rim.(to hot to touch, hot)

Where you will be touring will determine whether you need a road[30/42/53 or there about] or MTB triple crank[24/34/46Tooth or something close]. MTB front derailer with MTB crank and Road with road.

Are you 220lb big and lean, 220 round and squishy, or something in between?

26 inch MTB wheels are a bit stronger than 700c wheels for the same basic design, spoke count, and build quality, but tire selections and widths are different and your bike frame requires one or the other.

If you want to put fenders on it, you might have problems with the road brakes.

If you're full loaded touring, mountain bike cranks will let you get lower gears. I had road cranks on my first tour bike, and switched to mtb cranks for my second one. Check for compatibility with the 105 levers - don't know if they pull the right amount of cable.

At your weight, you will want really strong wheels, with a high spoke count. I rode with a guy who was 210, he was carrying a big load, and he broke a few spokes.

Thanks a lot everyone

Capsicum: How do I determine a road or mtb crank? I haven't been touring for a while but will be touring around NY next month (not with this bike). I do medium weight touring at my own pace. I'd assume that I am doing it at a more recreational level than most of the posters on here.

I'm something in between big and lean and round and squishy.

The frame takes 700c wheels.

I also need to buy a fork for this frame, so if anyone has any specific recommendations (I dont have the frame yet, so I don't have any details on it being threaded, or not, etc).

If the mountain bike triple crank is going to give me a lower gear, I think I'll probably opt for that. I need something for the inclines.

Thanks again everyone

>How do I determine a road or mtb crank? I haven't been touring for a while but will be touring around NY next month (not with this bike). I do medium weight touring at my own pace. I'd assume that I am doing it at a more recreational level than most of the posters on here.

Most of use are just cassual too. The first few days are usually the hardest so most long term guys just don't stop cause it's too difficult to start again.

I'd like to know all the answers on the MT vs. road cranks also. A lot of serious voices say NOT to use the MT cranks, but a lot of people do because they are available and easy to get small enough drive rings on. I;m not too sure what is better about road tripples. Last time I looked it wasn't the weight.

>The frame takes 700c wheels.

MT wheels tend to be stronger given the size but they also tend ot have 32 spokes rather than 36.

>I also need to buy a fork for this frame, so if anyone has any specific recommendations (I dont have the frame yet, so I don't have any details on it being threaded, or not, etc).

The main issue is 1" vs. 1.125" stem I don't prefer threaded, but as long as you have the right headset who cares.

>If the mountain bike triple crank is going to give me a lower gear, I think I'll probably opt for that. I need something for the inclines.

You get the right road crank you are fine.

You can get down to a 26 tooth granny gear on a 105 triple crank, down to a 22 tooth granny gear on a mtb crank. If you plan on carrying camping gear and there are any hills over 5% grade where you might ever go, I would get a mountain crank. I rarely wish for a higher gear but frequently for a lower one. If you are only going flat and/or only carrying a very light load (<20lbs) then road crank would be OK. IMO of course.

Fork considerations:
mid-fork rack mounting braze ons if you're going to use front panniers
correct brake mounts for whatever brake you decide on
rake and trail for good handling - i don't know how you're going to figure this one out, but it's the most important!
clearance for fenders and fatter tires (plan on 28 mm tire minimum, 35 would be better)

Capsicum, why do you ask about this guy's build, what difference does that make in components?

>How do I determine a road or mtb crank? I haven't been touring for a while but will be touring around NY next month (not with this bike). I do medium weight touring at my own pace. I'd assume that I am doing it at a more recreational level than most of the posters on here.

Most of use are just cassual too. The first few days are usually the hardest so most long term guys just don't stop cause it's too difficult to start again.

I'd like to know all the answers on the MT vs. road cranks also. A lot of serious voices say NOT to use the MT cranks, but a lot of people do because they are available and easy to get small enough drive rings on. I;m not too sure what is better about road tripples. Last time I looked it wasn't the weight.



The only downside to a mountain crank is the length. I'd prefer 170mm but those are harder to find in a mountain crank...not impossible but just harder. The benefits are you get a super low gear. Most of them come with a 22 tooth inner ring but you can get a 20 and an 18 tooth cog (if you could find one) would fit. Matched with a 34 tooth rear gear that will give you a 17 inch gear, a 16" gear or a stump puller at 14" :eek:

The high gear will be limited however. A 44/11 combination gives you a 108" (which is respectable). A 46/11 combination (easily obtainable) 112" gear. For comparison, 15 years ago, a 108" gear was what elite pro riders used. For loaded touring, the 112" gear is a little high but, since we do most of our riding without a load, it's a nice gear for everyday.

The other benefit of the mountain crank is that it shifts a little better than a large chainring very wide range road crank. The ratios are just a little closer and tighter.

I like MTB hubs for touring, and their 135mm dropout width is more suitable, along with 9-speed cassette hubs. The range of MTB cassettes is better suited, that or using a custom setup like the Cyclotouriste that Sheldon Brown builds and sells through Harris Cyclery. For the heavy tourer, 26 in MTB wheels are best unless the bike frame is very large. Road bars. Road shifters. Road or touring cranksets and bottom brackets.
Road fenders. I prefer MTB derailleurs an have different reasons to like both top normal and low normal RDs.

Thanks Stuart. Why do you think the Rivendell guys and Beckman say only use the road. The odd thing in Beckman's case is that his prefered high ring is 44 so getting a big gear is not his concern. I think I prefer even lower gears than you do Stuart, I don't try to grind down hills and could do without the larger ring almost entirely, except as you say when the paniers come off.

Capsicum, why do you ask about this guy's build, what difference does that make in components?
Strength for gearing mostly, and will he be loosing much weight.

Now all about the crank:
Road crancks tend to be a little bit slimmer/more ergonomic, than MTB cranks, MTB cranks are slightly more robust for the jumping and whatnot.(Full body weight is landing on the cranks in a jump, just the same as if the bike was still and you jumped on to it.) You won't break either touring.


Standard [widely compatible and availible] triple cranks have one of four bolt circle diameter(B.C.D.) combinations, and these are:
110mm/74mm five arm(touring, older MTB, and tandems);
130mm/74mm five arm (full sized road triple);
104mm/64mm 4 arm (new MTB);
94mm/58mm five bolt ("compact").

The larger B.C.D. number is for the outer and middle chain ring the small is for the granny ring.

130mm BCD is also the standard road double and has a minimum of 38T(39/42 52/53 are standard sizes) and the sky is the high limit(58T+).

110mm BCD has a lower limit of 33(Rare. 34/36/38 are common) and the high side is generally 44-48T(50T can be had but not quite as common) or in the 60T-70T area(for tandems). 110mm is also used for the "compact" double.

104mm BCD 4 arm can go as low as 32T(common size) and I'm not sure of the upper limits of what's availible, somthing like 46T or 48T. (Little help here.)

94mm BCD is a "compact" five arm and can take a 29T ring, but I don't know much about compacts other than that.


For the granny rings

74mm BCD five arm can take a 24T(Availible, but many are 26T or 30T stock). I tried a 24T on my MTB and found I like 26 better.

64mm BCD 4 arm can go as low as 22T for sure. (I've heard of 20T but not sure)

58mm BCD "compact granny" five arm can go down to 20T


NOTE: You can not go to both extemes with any crank. ie. no 24T/44T/58T combos the derailer can't take it and even if it could, shifting would be a clunky chunky nightmare. For good shifting, depending on the exact derailer model, I wouldn't go more than a 22T total spread (like 24T/34T/46T or 30/40/52T), 24T spreads should be tested and adjusted very well.
Also smaller chain wheels tend to wear out chains and sprockets at both ends slighty faster, because they put more tension on the chain and encourage the use of the cogs with less teeth.(More force spread between fewer teeth) It's not going to cut drive train life in half by any means, but the life will be a bit shorter. That's aboout the only down side to having gearing that's too low, as touring down hills tend to be an energy saving coast-o-rama anyway.

:eek: :D

Thanks for all the information everyone, I've got a lot to think about. For the reasons above I'm going to go with a mtn crank. I read the article over on Peter White about determining a crank length. I used a measuring tape and from the floor, to what I think is the top of my femur measures around 38" (965mm), 18.5% of this would give me 178.5mm. I will most likely be getting a Shimano crankset - if, for example, I get an XT crank, I have the option of 175mm or 180mm, the LX only goes to 175mm I guess. Keeping my precious knees in mind, which generally results in more comfort - a somewhat shorter, or longer crank?

I will be ordering a 13-34 9spd rear from Harris. Front will be 44-32-22 (LX,XT or XTR). Rear derailleur XT (long cage-which I already have-is it ok?), front will get the same as crank. Assuming all that, what chain should I get - any recommendations?

The whole fork thing is bothering me, I can't seem to do any planning until I have measured the frame. Doesn't Giant always use the same stem size (1" or 1.125"?). What is the headset? If I can find out the stem size, without knowing if the frame is threaded or not, can I order any 1" or 1.125" fork. After I get the fork, then I can get an idea about the wheels (will use an XT rear hub, SON front, marathon tires as wide as possible for the fork and frame, I don't think 35 will be a problem).

I don't know which rims to get, I know to get 36 spokes. Any suggestions? If both Peter White and Harris have the rim I want, I'd like to ask Harris to build the rear wheel and Peter White to build the front. So I'm looking for a good, common rim that will easily take 32-35c tires.

Brakes will be Shimano 105, there is a used pair at the LBS. The frame is disc brake compatible, and I would like to have the extra stopping power maybe in the future (see how it goes). How difficult is it to have both brake systems on the same bike (overkill and chunky?) I won't be doing the disc brake thing now, just curious.

That's about it. Thanks a lot for explaing the whole gear thing to me everyone! I understand it much more having read this.

Building up a bike from a frame isn't an easy, or cheap way to go. You might wish to just spend a $1000 or so and buy a nice touring bike (Trek, Jamis, Novara, Fuji and for a bit more, Cannondale)

Your current project will cost you a lot more than that....and the bike not really work all that well.

Trust me.... buy a Trek 520 and be happy.

Building up a bike from a frame isn't an easy, or cheap way to go. You might wish to just spend a $1000 or so and buy a nice touring bike (Trek, Jamis, Novara, Fuji and for a bit more, Cannondale)

Your current project will cost you a lot more than that....and the bike not really work all that well.

Trust me.... buy a Trek 520 and be happy.
I built up a Trek 520 lookalike from a NOS 80s touring frame and lightly used parts... for $325. The only substantive difference in my opinion is that mine has a threaded headset, and my hubs aren't as good for touring (they're 105).

Thanks guys. Could you tell me why the bike won't work that well Tacomee? I do know that the bike will be more than the bikes you listed (I looked at all of them online, and I use a borrowed Cannondale T800-what I'll be riding in NY- but none are in stock at any LBS). I have a bike for immediate use. Comparing components, I do believe this bike should also be better than the $1000 bikes and of course a closer customization. I'm not saying I disagree with you (as I don't know enough to, and you didn't say why), but I would like to know why this bike won't work that well in your opinion.

The Cannondale doesn't go as low as this bike will go to, I'm looking forward to that. And the dynohub, and... Ask me after the bike is built if I'm happy :)

Thanks again

Here goes:rolleyes: :D
I use Deore LX (7spd) on my tour bike. I have 175mm cranks. I don't worry about top gear because I coast down long hills. IIRC it is something like a 98" or a 102". Bottom gear is a low 18". I am currently running brifters, but will probably go back to bar ends. Loaded touring is not about going fast. I use Canti's because that is what came on the bike. Low rider mounts on the fork are a plus and I use a full front rack. I use a steel frame, personal preference. The longer crank will supposedly spin a bit slower but is supposed to be better on the knees for a given leg length. I have ridden 165, 170, 175 and 180's I feel most comfortable on 175's. I usually spin in the 85 rpm range, but can top 110 for short bursts. I have had a tour bike with a drum brake on the rear in addtion to the canti's. I used it as a drag brake on long down hills. If I were to build a new tour bike I would consider the discs, but only for their massive stopping ability. I am still not convinced that their complexity is not going to cause problems out in the middle of nowhere, as well as rack mounting issues. I use full fenders and 35 width tires. I probably could get 38's on my bike but haven't seen the need for them. I have toured on tires as narrow as 30, but don't reccomend it. To me touring is all about comfort and enjoying the trip.

Enjoy the ride!

Aaron:)

Thanks a lot Aaron...can I ask how long your foot to top-of-femur length is? (if you have it handy of course) :) haha

I'll probably go with the 175 as you said.

I agree with a lot of what Aaron said.

"Road crancks tend to be a little bit slimmer/more ergonomic, than MTB cranks, MTB cranks are slightly more robust for the jumping and whatnot.(Full body weight is landing on the cranks in a jump, just the same as if the bike was still and you jumped on to it.) You won't break either touring."

That sounds right, and it may all be the aesthetics, but I did look at the crank weights and the mountain cranks with the really bionic arms are hollow and weigh often less than the road, or the same neighbourhood. The often have sharp edges that won't slip the wind as well. Beckman categorically says "we never use mountain compact-drive cranks". I have heard similar things from other touring builders. Oh well it could just be aesthetics.

guruguhan Go for your own build. You can get everything you want. Wwhile price is a thing people can all agree on, they agree something is more or less expensive where they might not agree qualitatively. Yet this often ends up in a person who bought half a dozen affordable bikes and never got all the right parts once.

"The whole fork thing is bothering me, I can't seem to do any planning until I have measured the frame. Doesn't Giant always use the same stem size (1" or 1.125"?). What is the headset? If I can find out the stem size, without knowing if the frame is threaded or not, can I order any 1" or 1.125" fork. After I get the fork, then I can get an idea about the wheels (will use an XT rear hub, SON front, marathon tires as wide as possible for the fork and frame, I don't think 35 will be a problem)."

Moutain bike are basically all the larger size. Touring bikes are sometimes one or the other. They really don't need to be anything bigger than 1" unless you are planning a lot of really bad abuse, but for road it is fine to have 1". 700c forks should fit fairly well any frame as long as the head tube angle is a standard angle of 73 degree, or 72. If it's a 1.125, and that should be in the bike's spec sheet, then you can probably fit either the Surly forlks for the LHT or something else, or the Nashbar forks. In touring forks it can be harder to find a 1" fork replacement, or at least I haven't found one I like for my bike.

The headset is the bearing in the "stearing bearing" this assembly determines whether you need a threaded type fork or not, not the frame. Of course a threaded fork also determines the headset type you need. In a threaded fork you screw the headset to the fork, and adjust preload without the stem or handlebars needing to be there. With the threadless, it is the act of clamping the stem to the outside of the fork tube that sets the bearing tention (along with a loading screw on top of the stem). You can't attatch or tension the fork to the bearing without the stem in place. I like threadless, less tools to attach it and maintain it. Stronger. It's all real simple to do when you have the stuff in front of you.

Boy you're dropping a lot of $$ for the XT Shimano mountain crank/BB combo. Do a bit of research into alternatives I think you'll save yourself a lot of money and have a more attractive + better quality touring crank.

In touring forks it can be harder to find a 1" fork replacement, or at least I haven't found one I like for my bike.
The QBP catalog has both threaded and threadless 1" steel forks with canti braze-ons, as well as 1" disc forks (with no canti braze-ons :(). You can find 'em at bikeman.com

Boy you're dropping a lot of $$ for the XT Shimano mountain crank/BB combo. Do a bit of research into alternatives I think you'll save yourself a lot of money and have a more attractive + better quality touring crank.
Yeah, I agree. I'm perfectly happy with a square-taper BB, and I prefer the 48/38/28 rings of a touring triple to the lower mountain bike gearing. Nashbar sells a 48/38/28 crankset for about $70 that takes ISIS BB. Anyone used it?

The headset is the bearing in the "stearing bearing" this assembly determines whether you need a threaded type fork or not, not the frame. Of course a threaded fork also determines the headset type you need. In a threaded fork you screw the headset to the fork, and adjust preload without the stem or handlebars needing to be there. With the threadless, it is the act of clamping the stem to the outside of the fork tube that sets the bearing tention (along with a loading screw on top of the stem). You can't attatch or tension the fork to the bearing without the stem in place. I like threadless, less tools to attach it and maintain it. Stronger. It's all real simple to do when you have the stuff in front of you.
Thanks Peterpan. I believe the OCR Touring frame takes a 1" fork [http://www.giant-bicycles.com/cn/030.000.000/030.000.000.asp?year=2003&model=9865 I'm still confused about the headset. Do I just decide if I want threaded or threadless and then buy a threaded or threadless fork (1", 700c and compatible with the brakes I'll be using) and get a headset to match?

Thanks Peterpan. I believe the OCR Touring is 1.125 now. I'm still confused about the headset, is the steering bearing located inside the frame where the fork inserts? I think I know what you mean by threadless. Do I just decide if I want threaded or threadless and then buy a threaded or threadless fork (1.125", 700c and compatible with the brakes I'll be using) and get a headset to match?
Modern touring frames are pretty much always 1-1/8". There's no good reason besides asthetics to use a threaded fork/headset these days. Threadless headsets are easier to adjust, and there's a greater variety of threadless forks and stems available today (at least in the western world).

Modern touring frames are pretty much always 1-1/8". There's no good reason besides asthetics to use a threaded fork/headset these days. Threadless headsets are easier to adjust, and there's a greater variety of threadless forks and stems available today (at least in the western world).

Sorry Moxfyre, looks like I edited while you were typing. It's a 1", not 1-1/8".

Sorry Moxfyre, looks like I edited while you were typing. It's a 1", not 1-1/8".
Ah, well that's okay too.

Not so many 1" forks meant for touring available today (Nashbar has a nice steel fork with disc AND canti braze-ons, but it's 1-1/8" only :() but they're not super hard to find either. 1" threadless headsets are easy to come by, as are 1" stems (or you can use a simple shim to put a 1-1/8" stem on a 1" fork).

As for other components:
I would pick mountain components over road for a touring bike (except for cranks, I personally prefer a 52/40/30 road triple). LX/XT derailers are excellent and durable, and LX/XT hubs are *much better sealed* than 105/Ultegra hubs. I wouldn't choose road hubs for a touring bike. Also, you should probably use canti or V-brakes rather than 105 caliper brakes, since modern caliper brakes usually don't work with tires larger than 25 mm or so!!! Lastly, go for 36 spoke wheels, not 32. They're supposed to be something like 20% stronger, all else being equal, so for a touring bike for a big guy it's a no-brainer.

Thanks again

Fork question: When looking at the specs for forks, which will tell me the max tire width possible (just browsing on Nashbar)?

Hi, guruguhan, I also have a 2003 Giant OCR touring bike, would you like to purchase the fork that came with this bike. I have the stock one still new in the box, I did not use this fork because I purchased a different fork for it instead. This fork is for a 1 inch headset, so if you want it please reply back. Using a disc brake in the back would be a big mistake, it is too powerful for that, a disc in front would be the better route to take. And a disc brake using road levers will only work if the levers were design for disc or cantilever. And if you are using road shifters you will need a road front derraileur for it to work. rmwun54

Thanks again

Fork question: When looking at the specs for forks, which will tell me the max tire width possible (just browsing on Nashbar)?
Good question! Basically, road racing forks will be designed for tires of 25mm or less. You can safely assume that a *touring* fork willl take AT LEAST a 32mm tire, and probably significantly bigger.

Also, the front tire bears only about half as much weight as the back tire on most bikes, so you can often get away with a slightly narrower tire up front. I use 25mm/23mm on my road bike, 28mm/25mm on my fixie, and 32mm/28mm on my touring bike. Matching tires just ain't my thing :)

Using a disc brake in the back would be a big mistake, it is too powerful for that, a disc in front would be the better route to take. And a disc brake using road levers will only work if the levers were design for disc or cantilever.
Actually the front brake is ALWAYS more powerful than the rear brake. The conventional wisdom is wrong, read this: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/brakturn.html#frontorrear

Most people who only use one disc brake put it up front because it's MORE powerful up front, and more braking power is what you'll need in wet or icy conditions, or on a long descent.

Actually the front brake is ALWAYS more powerful than the rear brake. The conventional wisdom is wrong.

Right that's true, but a good disc brake in the rear would create an imbalance in modulation when braking with both brakes if the front was a rim brake; causing the rear to brake sooner. So yeah the front disc is more powerful and so thus is why I said that it is better to have them up front, a disc.

Hi, guruguhan, I also have a 2003 Giant OCR touring bike, would you like to purchase the fork that came with this bike. I have the stock one still new in the box, I did not use this fork because I purchased a different fork for it instead. This fork is for a 1 inch headset, so if you want it please reply back. Using a disc brake in the back would be a big mistake, it is too powerful for that, a disc in front would be the better route to take. And a disc brake using road levers will only work if the levers were design for disc or cantilever. And if you are using road shifters you will need a road front derraileur for it to work. rmwun54

I am interested, how can I contact you? Thank you

Thanks Stuart. Why do you think the Rivendell guys and Beckman say only use the road. The odd thing in Beckman's case is that his prefered high ring is 44 so getting a big gear is not his concern. I think I prefer even lower gears than you do Stuart, I don't try to grind down hills and could do without the larger ring almost entirely, except as you say when the paniers come off.

I'm not sure. I think they might be using a 110mm BCD rather than the 130mm BCD for their road stuff. 110mm BCD has a few advantages like being able to run larger rings without having a lot of material in the chainring but still having a good low gear. I've found that you can convert a 130mm BCD crank with a 74mm inner to a 24 tooth small chainring but I had some issues with the chain getting caught in between the 24 and the 38. There's a big void there of the chain to get sucked into. You don't have that with the 110mm rings. The 110mm BCD cranks also used to have the widest selection of rings but not a lot of people are using them anymore...or weren't until the advent of the 'compact' crank...so ring selection is limited now.

For a lower high gear, try a 42 outer with a 32 or 34 inner. It's pretty low...in the mid 90"gear... and it shifts like a dream. I like the sound of wind rushing past my ears and the way that the road looks like one huuuuuuuuuge scab when you are flying over it at 50mph. Makes me feel...alive ;)

Lots of bits and pieces here.

Question: Are you just looking at a frame or are you waiting for the package to arrive, whaaaat's ttthhheee deal?

SRAM chain, a model with cross peened rivets, not step peened. (Which ever model is meant for your choosen 6/7/8, or 9 cog cluster and matching chain rings, PC-68 or PC-991XS[cross step] for long life, PC48 or PC-951 on the cheap, the mid. models aren't much of a real upgrade IMO)
Don't worry about the light weight hollow rivet chains, those are for racers.
Nickle plating is nice, but not nessasary. (It's hard so it helps slow wear, stops rust[Oil does too!] and looks shiny -like crome[If it's clean].


:p Now, it's time to undermine everyone here.:p

Your best off to stick with whatever style head set came on the frame, if it has one installed. Threaded or threadless 1" headsets often require slighty different head tube inside diameters and final machining, same goes for the 1-1/8". The fork tube is still 1" or 1-1/8" outside diameter but thats the only real thing the types have in common, and you can thread a theadless fork for use with a theaded headset but you cannot unthread a fork.


At the same gain ratio(total leverage) a shorter crank will strain the knees less. Because the knee does not flex as much, go to the gym load up the squat bar and do a couple 4"-6" squats then, with the same weight, try doing a deep squat so your knees are at at least a 90 degree bend. What causes more strain? A longer crank will work a broader range of muscles however and requires slightly less turns per mile(5mm= about 3% distance).


A short crank will require slightly lower gearing than a longer crank to get the same gain ratio, a full 10mm of crank(165-175mm = 6%), is equal to:
two teeth in the 33T chainring range(32-34T), or 3 teeth on the big ring(50-53T) and about 1.5 teeth on a 22T ring. :D


Brakes of the same design will have the same power without regard their front or rear, wheel placment. During braking weight will transfer to the front wheel increasing its total traction and reducing rear wheel traction. This is especialy true when using the front brake.(to the point of 100% weight transfer, resulting in the rear tire just leaving the ground. That is if your front tire has the traction to transfer 100% with your combined center of gravity position, relative to the front contact patch.:rolleyes:)

For a drag brake a rear disk or drum would be prefered for handling reasons, this has nothing to do with max braking force, it is for shedding some energy continuously, to help keep speed in check while keeping the rims cool for real braking.

Bicycles and most motos do not have connected proportional front and rear brakes, in other words they are totally seperate parts. They don't because the traction of the two wheels varies from 100%/0% to 0%/100% depending on road surface conditions, manuvering, and load balance. So even if your rear brake was more efficient than the front it wouldn't be a big thing because you modulate them seperately anyway.

The drag brakes I've used are wonderful and I would have one in a heartbeat if it didn't make removing the rear wheel nearly impossible. I'd talk about parachute breaking, but we normally reserve that discussion for the late winter when things really slow down around here.

guruguhan, stay away from the 9 speed rear cluster. All the fun started when they went to that and it isn't worth it. all you really get back for your pottentially infinite trouble is the 11 cog you don't need in the first place. Except for Stuart and his 50 MPH runs. So nice to live in the mountains!

buy a Trek 520 and be happy.

+1

The drag brakes I've used are wonderful and I would have one in a heartbeat if it didn't make removing the rear wheel nearly impossible. I'd talk about parachute breaking, but we normally reserve that discussion for the late winter when things really slow down around here.

guruguhan, stay away from the 9 speed rear cluster. All the fun started when they went to that and it isn't worth it. all you really get back for your pottentially infinite trouble is the 11 cog you don't need in the first place. Except for Stuart and his 50 MPH runs. So nice to live in the mountains!

11T cogs have been availible since the 7 speed, or so I thought.(for special setups anyway)
Yes 9 speed = thinner sprockets and thinner chain with the higher stresses and reduced where life. 7 and 8 speed use the same spacing and cogs as each other

Throw rocks if you will, but I'd switch to a BioPace or OvalTeck triple in a New York Second. :o

Hi all,

Capsicum - yup, I'm waiting for the frame to arrive (hope I'll have it in a week or so). And there is no hurry in building it, this might not be used until next summer (like I said, I'm using a Cannodale in the meantime). I'm just going to pick up parts as I can afford them and as I see good deals online.

Thanks for the in-depth explanation on cranks. For the cassette, I'm just ball parking it, if I can grab a 12-32 for $50 or so, I'll go for it. I didn't realize that 9spd cassettes had a thinner sprocket and chain. Becuase I'm a bigger guy I'll already be stressing a bike more than the average guy, so I'll keep it in mind (an 8spd).

Peter: is the potentially infinite trouble you refer to (with 9spd), what capsicum elaborated on? (stress/wear) or are there other common problems associated with them?

My e-mail address is wunrichard1@earthlink.net rmwun54

Thanks for the in-depth explanation on cranks. For the cassette, I'm just ball parking it, if I can grab a 12-32 for $50 or so, I'll go for it. I didn't realize that 9spd cassettes had a thinner sprocket and chain. Becuase I'm a bigger guy I'll already be stressing a bike more than the average guy, so I'll keep it in mind (an 8spd).


I've been using a 9 speed on my touring bike since I bought it in 2003. I haven't noticed any excess wear. I also have a mountain bike with an 8 and a mountain bike with a 9 and haven't notice real difference in either one. If you go with an 8 and you want to use brifters expect to have difficulty finding shifters, unless you can find older stuff. Soras STI are 8 speed but everything else is 9.

My point was not that you can only get 11 on 9 speed, but that is basically the kind of additional sproket you will get. There are many choices, but from my 13-34 perspective I don't see a lot of useful growth. I'd like the 14-34, that's right up my alley, but not the standard spec whic gets you the 11 and the 12. That' no trade for the weakness of the 9 speed.

guruguhan,

Hello-- I'm the guy who told you give up and go buy a new Trek. Nothing personal, but building up a frame is a way bigger deal than most people real realize. It takes some skill, some bike knowledge, and is never easy. It's fun however. Good luck with your project.

2 things to keep in mind.

1. there are a lot of parts on bike. Things like headsets, bottom brackets, stem, handle bars, cable stops, seat post...ect. None of this stuff is cheap. Most bike people, like me, have lots used parts stocked away for future projects. If you end up paying retail or even EBAY prices for every little part, you'll pay twice what you would for a new prebuilt bike.

2. Not all bike parts work together. You have to be careful about what you plan to run together.

Here's a link for you.

http://www.lickbike.com/

This a a great internet bike parts retailer. They are a little pricey, but they really know what they are doing and the service is great. They also have a nice bike builders worksheet you can use to add up the cost of a project bike. It's gthe place to start.

Thanks everyone


guruguhan,

Hello-- I'm the guy who told you give up and go buy a new Trek. Nothing personal, but building up a frame is a way bigger deal than most people real realize. It takes some skill, some bike knowledge, and is never easy. It's fun however. Good luck with your project.

2 things to keep in mind.

1. there are a lot of parts on bike. Things like headsets, bottom brackets, stem, handle bars, cable stops, seat post...ect. None of this stuff is cheap. Most bike people, like me, have lots used parts stocked away for future projects. If you end up paying retail or even EBAY prices for every little part, you'll pay twice what you would for a new prebuilt bike.

2. Not all bike parts work together. You have to be careful about what you plan to run together.

Here's a link for you.

http://www.lickbike.com/

This a a great internet bike parts retailer. They are a little pricey, but they really know what they are doing and the service is great. They also have a nice bike builders worksheet you can use to add up the cost of a project bike. It's gthe place to start.
tacomee, thanks for the advice, but you've really said nothing. Your two points (that bikes have a lot of parts), is something I think anyone who's seen a bike would know, and definitly someone who's been reading on here for a day would know (I'm saying that if this is what you refer to as knowledge, it is no help compared to the other information shared in this thread). If you believe I've overlooked one of these parts (as someone did regarding the headset), do you not believe it to be more beneficial to mention it and explain it? Your first point also eludes to the cost of these numerous, mystifying parts. I'm the one who will, and has been paying for them. If I wasn't in a position to buy the bike, I wouldn't be wasting everyone's time here, and wouldn't post threads to that effect.

Your second point, that not all bike parts work together, also makes me feel that your questionable knowledge (compared to those sharing meaningful information on this thread - albeit greater than mine) results in such a meaningless contribution. If you have been reading this thread (and even assumed I knew absolutely nothing about bikes), that was learned by capsicum's first post, and the third post in this thread. You're a little late.

So, just in case there is any confusion - I can afford the bike (thank you for your concern) and thank you for telling me bikes have handlebars, stems, headsets...it might surprise you, but learning what to buy was a pre-requisite to choosing which to buy.

My intention isn't to insult anyone here, I understand I am new to these forums. I sincerely appreciate those who are willing to share their knowledge and answer my questions. After two years of membership here, I hope I will be able to return the favor to other newcomers with responses greater than "there are a lot of parts on bike".

Have a good weekend

guruguhan,

First of all, bike shops are full of employees who spend years learning about bikes and still don't know everything. This is not stuff you just pick up on the internet in a few days. And 50% of everything you read on this forum isn't true (just like the rest of the internet)

I'd look for a live, local person to help you with this project. Your local bike club is a good place to start. I can't even start to tell you every pitfall over the net.

Here's a part list for you (I personally know all this stuff will work together)

###Drivetrain.

8-speed shimano bar con shifters (105)
Tiagra front derailer
Deore LX rear derailer (high normal)
Sugino triple crankset (XD-600)
Shimano bottom bracket (118mm square taper spindle JIS)
Sram 850 cassette (11-32 or 11-34)
Sram chain (8 speed)
Dura Ace cables and housing

###Wheels--

Hubs-- depending on the spacing of the rear drop outs-- Shimano 105 (130mm) Deore LX (135mm) 36 hole.

Rims-- Mavic A719 would be the best, fallowed by Sun Rynolites.

Any good bike shop can build you a great wheelset with these rims and hubs.

###Brakes-- Tektro cantilevers (Oryx) Tektro brake levers (R-200)

###Other stuff.

Nitto noodle bars (26mm)
Richie scuzzie logic headset
Kalloy stem
Kalloy seatpost
Brooks saddle (or Terry)
Bar tape (nashbar is pretty good...and cheap)
Vittoria Randonnuer touring tires, (32mm)

###racks and panniers. Go straight JANND, front and rear racks, 2 sets of panniers (F&R) and handle bar bag. These are good quality, middle price products that are made to work together.

Well, there's a start for you. You can price all the stuff at Lick bike and see how much it costs (I'd guess $1200.)

Good luck, PM if you have more questions. I'm always happy to help.

Thanks for your suggestion tacomee, if you are interested in knowing what I will be getting (some of which I have bought in the last two days) here you go:

Giant OCR touring frame
Mavic A719 rims (36 spoke), XTR hubs (was going to get XT, changed my mind), single butted spokes (will change to different spokes - probably DT Alpine III as cyccommute suggested in another thread if/when these break)
Marathon plus tires (35c)
no cassette or crankset yet, will probably be xt, but if you read this thread you can see what I'm deciding between
I'm undecided on the fork, might get the nashbar cyclocross carbon, but want more opinions on carbon
cane creek s2 headset
nashbar oversized handlebar
nashbar stem
nashbar seatpost
brookes saddle (b17)
xt rear derailleur
same front derailleur as crank (whatever it turns out to be)
sram chain
105 shifters/levers
xtr v-brakes (and agents)
for racks I'll decide after most of the bike is built so I can check for clearance

After that much of the bike is built, I'll start to buy the lighting, will be a SON dynamo wheel made by Peter white and probably Schmidt E6 headlights.

I hope that makes you sleep better. Looking at the components you're suggesting, I'm not surprised you suggest I get a Trek 520 or the like. The lighting system I'd like alone costs more than half of a Trek 520.

Again, thanks for the advice, but I think you are missing something, the Cannondale I use is better than what you specd (not that it is bad). Take it easy, I'll look for help elsewhere.

XTR hubs (was going to get XT, changed my mind)

Heh...
I'd rather spend my "XTR" dollars on a low-normal rear d.
XT hubs are more than strong enuf, albeit a few ounces heavier.

I already have an XT rear derailleur from another bike, I won't be getting a new rear derailleur.

FOr those dollars you could consider a lot of other hubs. Shimano hubs don't necesarilly get better for touring as you spend more than XT dollars, if they are lighter I would be suspicious.

I'm really interested in the Nashbar carbon fork. Not so much as a good idea, but as a interesting one. I would warm you, though, that even if it has overall integrity, the rack eyelets are aluminum (?), and there aren't mid fork eyelets as far as I can tell for racks, and clamp on mountings are a bad idea with this fork. I can fabricate absolutely anything required to get racks on such a fork, since I have machining capabilities, chromo fab capabilities, and a boatshop full of carbon tow and epoxy. I don't think mounting a rack is a big deal but it might require some fabrication. One non-custom option for mounting a rack would be something that mounts on the axle and the canti boss. Those are readily available. There are those who despise that mounting, but they don't seem to be in the adventure cycling org since they endorse the Old Man racks.

One thing I could use input on. I believe the rear disc mount, as on the Nashbar, is the one that pulls the wheel out of the fork... Or is it the front mount. My load path musings say rear, but who knows.

It's not a big deal building your own bike as long as the frame accepts the BB and the headset, and a local shop can probably help you there. Often it all goes easily with a stock frame. The rest is really just the stuff you need to know to take care of your bike on tour anyway. Sure lots of people don't know how to set their bike up, but if you don't know all the details, but are interested in learning, then get stuck into a project like this and you will figure it out. Believe me you can do it. People are learning how to build frames online and countless other things as long as you don't have any unreasonable limits on time and budget it's easy.

I've been using a 9 speed on my touring bike since I bought it in 2003. I haven't noticed any excess wear. I also have a mountain bike with an 8 and a mountain bike with a 9 and haven't notice real difference in either one. If you go with an 8 and you want to use brifters expect to have difficulty finding shifters, unless you can find older stuff. Soras STI are 8 speed but everything else is 9.
You probably won't notice the difference in wear unless you keep track of all your miles for each of the parts and all that scientific control stuff. It may be something like a 2000 vs 2500 mile life though, which is a 20% reduction but you may not notice it. Of course in the end that's only one extra set of parts in 10,000 miles, not a huge deal to the end user, to the big maker's it's an extra 20,000 parts sold per year though, so yea they like it. It's probably less than a 20% difference though, just an example.
I know the life expectancy of the new 9 and 10 speed stuff is about half of the old 5 speed rigs. (Quality 5 speed that is, like suntour, lots of variation between brands and models back then.)
I wouldn't go back to 5 cog even with the long life, I like at least 7 cogs and the fancy hyperglide shift ramps that are on 7-10 speed cassettes and freewheels.
8 speed use the same cog thickness and spacing as the 7, but the wheel/hub needs a touch more dish because the cassette is one cog wider, or a slighty longer axle and a few mm of axle spacers.

Guruguhan,
I wouldn't go with XTR hubs they really are meant for racing not touring and the cost is way high just to make them seem that much better (A solid marketing technique many companies use.) Parallax hubs make good for touring high spoke count hubs(Shimano tandem parts are called parallax) and are ecconomical, careful of the model though some use odd sized axles. I've had 36 spoke parallax hubs on my MTB for years with good results.

I've heard Mavic has had some quality issues in general, in resent years, total rim failure kind of stuff. I like Sun-Ringle personally, they make a tough rim and they tend to be slightly wider bead to bead, which reduces side to side tire flex for sharper less wallowy handling. The rim must be narrower than the tire however.

V brakes are good but I've never had a problem with cantilevers or their stopping power and they don't need travel agents for use with standard levers, really they are the same thing, the cable just pulls on them differently.(V brakes do have a bit more power and a little different feel, but you only need enough power to endo or overcome traction. Mostly V-brakes have easier cable installation.)
Brake pad compound can make a big differance both in wet and dry use.

I haven't used the 719s, but they have a golden reputation. The last of the good rims, they have for instance double eyelets which are the only "right" way to do eyelets, and rarely found on rims these days.