Touring - Old Touring Frames

Hey There,

Are old '80s touring frames (by Univega, Miyata, etc) durable? I mean, the for-real touring frames with canti brake bosses and extra braze ons, the whole deal. . . They seem really skinny and light compared to today's touring frames. BTW, I'm a light guy (130lbs), but I like to carry tons of stuff. Just wondering if those old lugged frames will hold up. .

Your opinions and experiences would be much appreciated.

Thanks!

-D

Hey There,

Are old '80s touring frames (by Univega, Miyata, etc) durable? I mean, the for-real touring frames with canti brake bosses and extra braze ons, the whole deal. . . They seem really skinny and light compared to today's touring frames. BTW, I'm a light guy (130lbs), but I like to carry tons of stuff. Just wondering if those old lugged frames will hold up. .

Your opinions and experiences would be much appreciated.

Thanks!

-D

I have a Miyata 610 from 1983. It's a good bike but, for me, it was always kinda noodly. It is durable as I've put 10 of thousands of miles on it. And it's still a nice ride.

In the immortal words of Pee Wee Herman, "But. Everyone has a big but Simone. Let's talk about your big but.", old bikes require lots of cash to bring them up to modern standards. Unless you want to ride on 27" wheels (hard to find tires), downtube shifters, friction shifting, freewheels, fixed cup/adjustable cup bottom brackets, and, possibly, substandard brakes, there's a whole lot that needs to be replaced. You can be cheap and maybe get all the stuff replaced (or not) and still end up spending nearly as much for an old bike as for a new one.

Think about it seriously before you invest a lot of time and money in it, especially for a production bike. You can get a brand new Fuji with warranty for around $900. I'm not saying that you should do the old bike thing but think about it before you go down that road.

I have a Miyata 610 from 1983. It's a good bike but, for me, it was always kinda noodly. It is durable as I've put 10 of thousands of miles on it. And it's still a nice ride.

In the immortal words of Pee Wee Herman, "But. Everyone has a big but Simone. Let's talk about your big but.", old bikes require lots of cash to bring them up to modern standards. Unless you want to ride on 27" wheels (hard to find tires), downtube shifters, friction shifting, freewheels, fixed cup/adjustable cup bottom brackets, and, possibly, substandard brakes, there's a whole lot that needs to be replaced. You can be cheap and maybe get all the stuff replaced (or not) and still end up spending nearly as much for an old bike as for a new one.

Think about it seriously before you invest a lot of time and money in it, especially for a production bike. You can get a brand new Fuji with warranty for around $900. I'm not saying that you should do the old bike thing but think about it before you go down that road.

Cool man, yeah, I agree. I just like the way those old frames look. . . I suppose it wouldn't be too bad if I could pick one up for around 100 bucks, spend another 120 on wheels, another 40 on a cassette, 50 on bar-end shifters, 40 on brake levers, 50 on a bottom braket, 150 on powder coating. . . yowza, I'd better do some calculating!

-D

Cool man, yeah, I agree. I just like the way those old frames look. . . I suppose it wouldn't be too bad if I could pick one up for around 100 bucks, spend another 120 on wheels, another 40 on a cassette, 50 on bar-end shifters, 40 on brake levers, 50 on a bottom braket, 150 on powder coating. . . yowza, I'd better do some calculating!

-D

There are lots of pretty modern bikes too. Expensive ones, like Gordon's and Co-motions, are beautiful. Cheaper ones like the Fuji aren't bad looking either. If you want really pretty ones, look at Vanilla. There is true lust!;)

There are lots of pretty modern bikes too. Expensive ones, like Gordon's and Co-motions, are beautiful. Cheaper ones like the Fuji aren't bad looking either. If you want really pretty ones, look at Vanilla. There is true lust!;)

Oh my, those are beautiful! My dream bike is either a Rivendell (any model, really) or a Pegoretti Luigino: http://www.cbike.com/pegoretti_luigino.htm Oh, and then there's Hampsten Cinghiale Pro. . . Anyway, a guy in my area is selling a "Coffee" Novara Randonee, by all accounts a good bike, for cheap. I'll check that out before dumping almost $700 into an old tourer.

Cheers,

-D

There are some good deals in older bikes out there. I picked up an early 90's Miyata touring bike that was made for Backroads touring company. The bike says "Backroads Chimayo" so nobody thought it was anygood. Full LX drive train and barend shifters in excellent condition, rear rack and seat pack. I paid $100 for the bike. I've swapped the stem, recabled the bike, put on new brake pads, a Brooks and fenders, and that's it. I'll need a new wheelset soon, but I've probably only put $300 into the bike total including the purchase price. Like I said, there are good deals out there, but getting a bike that had a great drivetrain, 135mm spacing, and was an older tourer was pure luck. If you've got time, you can look around, but as a data point I need to get a new bike for my wife and I think we're going to go with a Volpe or something similar. Most used touring bikes seem to run at least $300 and would require upgrades. By then we'd be better off just getting a new bike with the specs we want, etc.

The amount of work an old bike in functioning condition needs is exaggerated a lot. Downtube friction shifters are fine if you don't mind reaching a bit or are easily replaceable with friction bar-end shifters. Both of those are more reliable than modern indexed shifters and can feasibly be repaired in the field, unlike integrated brake/shifter levers. Old brakes can be brought up to modern standards with minor adjustment and replacing the pads for a few dollars. 27" wheels work fine, and if you're in the US the tires may actually be much easier to find than 700c. Places like Wal-Mart and Dick's generally don't carry 700c, but will have tons of 27"s.

The amount of work an old bike in functioning condition needs is exaggerated a lot. Downtube friction shifters are fine if you don't mind reaching a bit or are easily replaceable with friction bar-end shifters. Both of those are more reliable than modern indexed shifters and can feasibly be repaired in the field, unlike integrated brake/shifter levers. Old brakes can be brought up to modern standards with minor adjustment and replacing the pads for a few dollars. 27" wheels work fine, and if you're in the US the tires may actually be much easier to find than 700c. Places like Wal-Mart and Dick's generally don't carry 700c, but will have tons of 27"s.

I agree that you can use the old parts but modern technology really is better. Considering that I've only ever had one shifter in literally dozens of bikes fail, I don't think that shifter reliability is a problem. STI is certainly as durable and reliable as indexed shifters are and index shifters are just as reliable as the old friction ones.

The reason I was suggesting new brakes was because the old brakes on a Miyata 610 were awful! They were stubby little cantis that would stop anything. If the brakes have been upgraded, then they are probably fine but the old ones were only good enough for recycling.

I doubt very highly that Wally World carries 27" tires. I'm sure they carry lots of 26" but 27" tires are not that easy to find. It can be done but 700C is a far better choice. Any town that has a bike shop will probably have 700C. The same can't be said for 27". I can't say that I've really look since I switched to 700C long ago but it has come up occasionally and I have had difficultly obtaining them.

Oh my, those are beautiful! My dream bike is either a Rivendell (any model, really) or a Pegoretti Luigino: http://www.cbike.com/pegoretti_luigino.htm Oh, and then there's Hampsten Cinghiale Pro. . . Anyway, a guy in my area is selling a "Coffee" Novara Randonee, by all accounts a good bike, for cheap. I'll check that out before dumping almost $700 into an old tourer.

Cheers,

-D
You guy are making me swoon dropping all those names!!!:D

Here's a photo of my 86 Schwinn Passage. Built with Columbus Tenax steel. I need to upgrade the brakes, but other than that she's in great shape.

http://thecuda.com/tn_P9260143.JPG

many more photos in the link in my Signature. I'm hoping to have time to put together a proper page on my website about it soon. Rides GREAT! :D Oh, and the Brooks B17, I'm a believer.

Base price for the bike: $150. Additional Spent upgrades: $100 ish. (Fenders, rack, tires, shifters, saddle)

Better full bike shot, pre Brooks:

http://thecuda.com/tn_P6171622.JPG

I doubt very highly that Wally World carries 27" tires.

Last couple of times I visited either there or tarzhay, I found 590x37 (26 x 1 3/8) and 27" but no 700C

For real availability get on the 406 bus.

I bought an 83 Centurion Pro Tour that was sitting in a garage for $50. It was very clean and the guy told me that he had bought it new in 83. I had wheels, rear der., bar end shifters and most of the other items to convert it. The brakes worked fine when I put on 700c wheels to replace the 27" wheels. The bike was a 15 spd and I changed it to 24 spd. I have about $150 in it now and consider it money well spent. Had I not had the spare parts it would have cost more than it was worth in my opinion. I will use it for touring some and just riding the roads sometimes. My main touring bike is a Cannondale T2000 and the ride of each bike is unique.

I have a 1983 Trek 520 that I bought new. It has been a great bike through all the years, but there a things going seriously wrong. The parts are hard if not impossible to find and end up being quite expensive. I wonder about the integrity of the frame, but honestly think its just as strong as it was new. But the components - wow. I love the bike, but to bring it up to a modern standard is cost prohibitive.

So, I just bought a new Trek 520. Today. Yay!

Good luck with your quest.

Last year when My Schwalbe burst, I had no trouble finding 27 tires, and 700s were not in the big boxes. Of course a folding tire would have been better. The problem witht he 27s is that they tend to be 60 pound inflation tires so not a whole lot of fun even if you had the proper rim.

Possibly an old tourer is one of those things you need to ask around about on a free basis. Put out feelers, smile a lot say you will carry it on and so forth. I get a lot of very expensive cabinet grade wood for "free" I can't afford to pay for it, it costs me money to process it and the worst cost is storage. It really has to be free or I am better off not taking it, even through a good sized cherry can have thousands of dollars of wood in it. Same thing here, it's a continuity service, but maybe it's not economical to do it unless the feed stock is free.

I have a 1983 Trek 520 that I bought new. It has been a great bike through all the years, but there a things going seriously wrong. The parts are hard if not impossible to find and end up being quite expensive. I wonder about the integrity of the frame, but honestly think its just as strong as it was new. But the components - wow. I love the bike, but to bring it up to a modern standard is cost prohibitive.

So, I just bought a new Trek 520. Today. Yay!

Good luck with your quest.

I did the same thing in 2003. After owning a Miyata 610 for 20 years, I decided that it was time to get a new touring bike so I got the Cannondale T800 I have now. The logic, and joke, I used on my wife was that if I didn't buy a touring bike at least once every 20 years they were going to stop making them. But the more I think about it, the more I realize that there is a kernel of truth in there. Roadies and moutain bikers buy every stupid fad that comes along and so the companies make more of them. We tourist hang on to the same bike for 10, 20, 30 or more years. Hell, we even go looking for 20+ year old bikes and are happy to do so. But have you walked into a shop to try and buy a touring bike? They are a rare as hen's teeth!

And they shouldn't be! People are buying all kinds of cyclocross bikes and using them for commuting. Why? A touring bike will do everything a cyclocross bike will do and it will carry all your stuff! That alone should make them superior commuting bikes but, because we old skinflints have held onto our bikes far past the point where we should have purchased a new one, touring bike are losing out to other bikes!

The end of the production touring bicycle...I mean classic long wheel base with every possible braze-on on it and capable of riding around the world...is nigh! If you don't believe it, name me 5 classic touring bikes and 2 shops in your area that carry any one of the 5. I can't and there are 120 bike shops within 50 miles of me!

So, people, if you want to keep doing this, get out there and put a crowbar in your wallet and get a new bike! Heck, I'd even settle for you joining the cult of Surly;)

I rode my 1985 Miyata 1000 for eighteen years before retiring it. I did a lot of upgrades over the years, but was still using the original fork, seat post, handlebars, and brakes. It was getting increasingly difficult to find replacement parts, and there were certain upgrades that I wanted to do but couldn't.

I take it for a spin a few times a year, and it still rides like a dream. If something were to happen to my custom touring bike, I would dust off the Miyata in a heartbeat and hit the road!

that Pegoretti Luigino is a gorgeous bike; but I'm old fuddy duddy (what the hecks that?), anyway not sure if I like the stem but it's unique; but the bike is expensive.

Older touring bikes like the Trek 720 and 620 were superb touring bikes as were the Miyatas which was Japans highest level brand and Bridgestones just to name a few. These can be found on E-Bay relatively cheap and still be in good shape.

I have a Trek 660 with over 145,000 miles on it and it still works just fine.

Some of the new component technology I don't agree is better then the old-note I said some. I don't much care for index shifting, I like the hassle free friction jobs; friction has very little that can go wrong with those whereas the newer STI and Ergo stuff has the complication of the shift mechs in the brake lever and everything has to be dialed in before it can shift real good. The newer stuff uses thinner chains and those chains last anywhere between 2,000 and 5,000 miles, my older wider chains will last 8 to 12,000 miles. The brakes from single pivot to dual do not improve the bikes ability to stop faster just has a smoother action which can get people to trouble by applying the brakes too quick. You have to add ugly spacers to extend the stems height instead of just buying a longer stem. And new production bikes just don't have the artistry the older production bikes had, and it's difficult to buy a bike that was made in America. BUT THAT'S JUST MY LAME'O' OPINION!!!

Some newer touring bikes like the Trek welded 520 (grandson of the lugged 520 from the 80's) is a good deal for the money. Mercain, Woodrup, Atlantis (Rivendell's next level down from the famed Rivendell) and others like Moon and Vanilla are excellent examples of new bikes that still carry on the old world craftsmanship sorely lacking from regular LBS production bikes.

This country has be traversed thousands of times over the years by old lugged steel touring frames.
I have a 1981 Miyata 1000 Touring that I wouldn't hesitate to tour with if it weren't for the fact that the frame is too big for me. I think it is a 62 cm and I require a 59 cm. I've tested it with a BOB trailer and front and rear panniers, it go's fine. I'd like to sell the frame and fork with the Ultegra head set and original front and rear racks. I live in Burlingame,CA.

Old touring bikes are wonderful bikes and are very capable of taking you wherever you need to go. That said, the newer technology IS better. A lot of the frames are better. When my Miyata 210 was damaged in an accident this summer (tweaked headtube), I ordered a Surly LHT frame and built that up. Well, the Surly is a better touring bike, period. The components have a little bit to do with it, but not much - in the initial build, I used a lot of parts from the old bike. The only downside is that the LHT is a better touring bike ;) - it doesn't have as much "zip" to it. But that's okay, because the LHT is supposed to be a tourer and my principle commuter, not a speed machine with crit-level handling.

As far as durability goes, I broke the fork on that Miyata and had to replace it not long before I lost the bike for good. I don't know how I did it (I weigh 125 lbs), and I've never heard of this happening to anyone else on a Miyata touring bike, but it did happen. Otherwise, there was never any problem with the bike.

It's funny that some people insist that the newer technology in the component area is better the the older stuff for touring...and yet a lot custom touring frame makers like Rivendell and Robert Beckman Designs use friction shifting and barend shifters. Why is that? Oh that's right, simple to operate and simple to fix which is what tourers need when their no where near an LBS to run to for help.

Unless you want to ride on 27" wheels (hard to find tires).

I'm a bit confused. I have a late 60's racer and a 70's touring bike, both take 27" tires. Almost every LBS has a verison of 27 1 1/4, one carries 27 x1. There are still quite a few companies that make 27's. I have never had an issue finding this size. Addtionally, yeah, if you go to a place like Walmart, the max psi is probably 60 or you can get a pair of Performance OEM 27's that go to 125psi for $20 that ride quite nicely.

That's true, but it's not the full story. I've never had an STI shifter fail on me yet -after many tens of thousands of miles. Sure, they are more complex and would be very difficult to fix (nigh on impossible by many accounts) but I can't say I lay awake at night worrying about my shifters. What I do get -convenience, easier shifting and a better control grip way -offsets any mechanical issues that might occur. A similar logic would be to go back to a 3-5 speed cluster at the back, I mean, after all, there are less parts, it's more rugged and reliable and people used to tour on 3-5 speeds with no problem?

I do take your point that STIs breaking outside the area of an LBS could be a problem though -however, realistically, one has to ask how often you find yourself touring in that kind of environment? Admittedly I'd go with barcons with a friction mode if I decided to tour across outer Mongolia or something, but well, I don't go to outer Mongolia touring (though I'd love to!). So why do Rivendell and Beckman use barend shifters? Well I'd guess they cater to more hardcore clients, the shifters still do the job (and are probably cheaper to spec on the bike while offering that "ruggedness") plus the perceived hardcore touring that may be done.

So, to me, newer componentry offers way better performance and convenience, but with the caveat that reliability is going to be less (how much less is a big question for debate) and hence you take that into account for your touring destination. There is no question for me for my current touring destinations STIs are the way to go -but, as I previously stated, I wouldn't choose them for shifters to take them to the middle of nowhere where no LBSs are available.



It's funny that some people insist that the newer technology in the component area is better the the older stuff for touring...and yet a lot custom touring frame makers like Rivendell and Robert Beckman Designs use friction shifting and barend shifters. Why is that? Oh that's right, simple to operate and simple to fix which is what tourers need when their no where near an LBS to run to for help.

It has nothing to do with hardcore clients, it has to do with being simplistic. And there are plenty of areas in the USA you could be at and find yourself walking for hours maybe days if no one comes by to give you ride. I use to ride into the mountains in California from my home and be no more then 50 miles from a town large enough to have a LBS...but imagine walking 50 miles or so! Now imagine your in the middle of Texas someplace or Montana or...I think you get the idea. Touring experts like Adventure Cycling do create maps with touring routes and with LBS's marked so you can find the nearest one wherever your at, but again there are plenty of places where a walk would be a daunting task.

Sure anything can go wrong like a crank, but those problems are far rarer then shifting problems, and when your fully loaded you need gears. Also when your fully loaded it's more secure to handle a loaded bike with barends then it is with STI or Ergo. Thats the reason why "hardcore" touring bike manufactures use the older technology because it works better in that type of application.

This is not to say you can't use STI or Ergo for heavy touring because there are folks that do, but most of those that do use the newer technology are doing light or credit card touring.

By the way there are MTB touring people that don't even ride on main roads like most tourers do, they ride National Forest Service trails and there is also a trail that goes across the entire US (can't think of the name) but those people also need reliablity in a big way.

That's true, but it's not the full story. I've never had an STI shifter fail on me yet -after many tens of thousands of miles. Sure, they are more complex and would be very difficult to fix (nigh on impossible by many accounts) but I can't say I lay awake at night worrying about my shifters. What I do get -convenience, easier shifting and a better control grip way -offsets any mechanical issues that might occur. A similar logic would be to go back to a 3-5 speed cluster at the back, I mean, after all, there are less parts, it's more rugged and reliable and people used to tour on 3-5 speeds with no problem?

I do take your point that STIs breaking outside the area of an LBS could be a problem though -however, realistically, one has to ask how often you find yourself touring in that kind of environment? Admittedly I'd go with barcons with a friction mode if I decided to tour across outer Mongolia or something, but well, I don't go to outer Mongolia touring (though I'd love to!). So why do Rivendell and Beckman use barend shifters? Well I'd guess they cater to more hardcore clients, the shifters still do the job (and are probably cheaper to spec on the bike while offering that "ruggedness") plus the perceived hardcore touring that may be done.

So, to me, newer componentry offers way better performance and convenience, but with the caveat that reliability is going to be less (how much less is a big question for debate) and hence you take that into account for your touring destination. There is no question for me for my current touring destinations STIs are the way to go -but, as I previously stated, I wouldn't choose them for shifters to take them to the middle of nowhere where no LBSs are available.

I agree, only to a point. Let's not forget that we live in the age of UPS. There is almost no point on the planet where you couldn't get parts for anything...not just bikes...within 2 days. If you are really remote, it might take a couple of more days.

As for old tech - friction shifters, etc. - being better, I've used them. I used a lot of different systems. They all had their quirks, like the hesitation shift and the ever popular "I hope the front derailer drops onto the little cog in the middle of this big hill so that I can actually ride to the top...Oh, DAMN! It's not going to do it!...Yes it is!...Oh crap, the chain is around the bottom bracket" shift/walk :D , amoung others. Thanks to mountain bikes and their need for getting shifts under incredible torque, we now have systems that will shift in just about any place or situation.

Suprised by a big hill after a blind corner...no problem! Just start popping the gears and the bike will make the shift. Front shifts are smooth and quick without all that grinding of teeth...both the bike and yours. What's not to like?

As for fixing any shifter...index, friction or STI...in outer Mongolia, good luck on that. If the shifters breaks on you out in the middle of nowhere, you are going to be riding a 3 speed or a 5-6-7-8-9-? speed. 'Cause if it's busted- no matter how uncomplicated or complicated- it is is busted. I doubt that anyone without a machine shop to make new parts can fix it...no matter what shifter it is.

It has nothing to do with hardcore clients, it has to do with being simplistic. And there are plenty of areas in the USA you could be at and find yourself walking for hours maybe days if no one comes by to give you ride. I use to ride into the mountains in California from my home and be no more then 50 miles from a town large enough to have a LBS...but imagine walking 50 miles or so! Now imagine your in the middle of Texas someplace or Montana or...I think you get the idea. Touring experts like Adventure Cycling do create maps with touring routes and with LBS's marked so you can find the nearest one wherever your at, but again there are plenty of places where a walk would be a daunting task.

If you can't mcguiver something together to keep yourself from walking 50 miles, you have no business being in the middle of nowhere! I'm confident that there is no mechanical breakdown that I couldn't deal with to keep from riding at least part of that 50 miles, short of a major wheel failure. That includes a broken frame.


Sure anything can go wrong like a crank, but those problems are far rarer then shifting problems, and when your fully loaded you need gears. Also when your fully loaded it's more secure to handle a loaded bike with barends then it is with STI or Ergo. Thats the reason why "hardcore" touring bike manufactures use the older technology because it works better in that type of application.

This is not to say you can't use STI or Ergo for heavy touring because there are folks that do, but most of those that do use the newer technology are doing light or credit card touring.

"Shifting problems" are a whole different kettle of fish from "shifter problems"! Shifting problems happen all the time and are almost always related to cable issues. Shifter problems, such as a broken shifter, are rare in all shifter types. I've had probably 40 different shifters and 10 different shifter types, and I've had a problem with exactly one shifter. One. And that single one occured when I was trying to change cables on a work stand.

As for the statement "Also when your fully loaded it's more secure to handle a loaded bike with barends then it is with STI or Ergo." That's just plain wrong! Where do your hands spend most of their time on the handlebars? Mine are probably 90% on the hoods or close to them. I almost never use the drops. If the bike handles well with your hands on the hoods, why would it be any less stable to have the shifters there? One of the reasons I don't like barends is the location. On a fast downhill, it's far easier to reach the levers from the drops (the only time I use the drops) than to reach back for the barends...at least for me.

As for the last crack about light or credit card touring, I assure you that I've meet all kinds of people with 'loaded' bikes that use STI. I, personally, do self-supported touring with a 50+ pound load.


By the way there are MTB touring people that don't even ride on main roads like most tourers do, they ride National Forest Service trails and there is also a trail that goes across the entire US (can't think of the name) but those people also need reliablity in a big way.

Yes, it the Great Divide Trail. And, I'm pretty sure that 99+% of the people doing it are on bikes equiped with the STI equivalent shifter (Rapid Fire) on their mountain bikes. Mostly because you can't find a friction mountain bike shifter to save your life! Mountain bikers settled that issue long ago.

I think alot of this thread can be summed up as "personal preferrence"

I have both an old tour bike that I use mostly for commuting http://www.u.arizona.edu/~hankinsj/Mytrek.htm
and a new road bike for club rides and fast rides etc.

The old is heavy, friction shifting and 27" tires.

The new is light, STI, and 700cc.

Both work very well for me for what I use them for.

If I did not have the old trek, I would have no problem finding and buying a suitable commuter/tourer, even if it was a brand new bike.

As for old tech - friction shifters, etc. - being better, I've used them. I used a lot of different systems. They all had their quirks, like the hesitation shift and the ever popular "I hope the front derailer drops onto the little cog in the middle of this big hill so that I can actually ride to the top...Oh, DAMN! It's not going to do it!...Yes it is!...Oh crap, the chain is around the bottom bracket" shift/walk :D , amoung others. Thanks to mountain bikes and their need for getting shifts under incredible torque, we now have systems that will shift in just about any place or situation.

Suprised by a big hill after a blind corner...no problem! Just start popping the gears and the bike will make the shift. Front shifts are smooth and quick without all that grinding of teeth...both the bike and yours. What's not to like?

I don't think you ever rode friction systems or don't know how because the problems you've provided would be from someone who did not have a properly adjusted system and didn't know how to use the system. Touring folks use the friction system all the time and don't have the frustration you went into to and I've been using friction for 30+ years and never had the troubles your explaining; even road racers used friction way longer then STI and Ergo have even been on the market and never had the problems you described. The only time I had a friction shifting problems that would be like you described was back in the early 70's I had a mid 60's Pugh road bike with Simplex derailleurs, those deraillers were horrid.


As for fixing any shifter...index, friction or STI...in outer Mongolia, good luck on that. If the shifters breaks on you out in the middle of nowhere, you are going to be riding a 3 speed or a 5-6-7-8-9-? speed. 'Cause if it's busted- no matter how uncomplicated or complicated- it is is busted. I doubt that anyone without a machine shop to make new parts can fix it...no matter what shifter it is.

This is true. But fortunately I have no plans to go to Mongolia or Sibera to ride.

If you can't mcguiver something together to keep yourself from walking 50 miles, you have no business being in the middle of nowhere! I'm confident that there is no mechanical breakdown that I couldn't deal with to keep from riding at least part of that 50 miles, short of a major wheel failure. That includes a broken frame.

Wow, your quite the biker man; even with a broken frame your going to be able to ride it home? I would sure like to see that, what kind of duct tape to you use? or do you carry a tig welder? explain how your going to fix a broken frame especially if your riding AL or CF like most do today that will lead to complete failure of the frame. At least with steel your do have a good chance of riding it home; regardless frame failure is very rare. And most people that go on tours and people like myself that go into remote areas can fix "most" things that go wrong, that's why they dare to go in the first place. I don't even carry a cell phone with me unlike most riders on this forum!



As for the statement "Also when your fully loaded it's more secure to handle a loaded bike with barends then it is with STI or Ergo." That's just plain wrong! Where do your hands spend most of their time on the handlebars? Mine are probably 90% on the hoods or close to them. I almost never use the drops. If the bike handles well with your hands on the hoods, why would it be any less stable to have the shifters there? One of the reasons I don't like barends is the location. On a fast downhill, it's far easier to reach the levers from the drops (the only time I use the drops) than to reach back for the barends...at least for me.

The barend shifters for most tourist is the only thing they'll use. Please note, I never said that ALL tourers use barends, I even said some use STI and ERGO. But those that have used both, "most" prefer barends on heavy loaded bikes due to having better control. I HAVE NOT GONE TOURING YET WITH A HEAVY LOADED BIKE THUS I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED EITHER SYSTEM TO SEE WHICH IS BEST. It may turn out that your right, I might prefer STI or ERGO over barends; but of the heavy touring folk I have spoken to about 75% prefer and use barends.

As for the last crack about light or credit card touring, I assure you that I've meet all kinds of people with 'loaded' bikes that use STI. I, personally, do self-supported touring with a 50+ pound load.

I met very few people that do light loaded touring using barends...except for me and I was using downtube!



..

Wow, your quite the biker man; even with a broken frame your going to be able to ride it home? I would sure like to see that, what kind of duct tape to you use? or do you carry a tig welder? explain how your going to fix a broken frame especially if your riding AL or CF like most do today that will lead to complete failure of the frame. At least with steel your do have a good chance of riding it home; regardless frame failure is very rare. And most people that go on tours and people like myself that go into remote areas can fix "most" things that go wrong, that's why they dare to go in the first place. I don't even carry a cell phone with me unlike most riders on this forum!

I didn't say I was going to ride it home. I said I could macguiver something so that I wouldn't have to walk 50 miles. Broken frame: No real problem. I carry about a dozen zip ties with me where ever I go and a sharp knife (3.5" blade is best). If the frame breaks, you can splint it with a tree limb - either inside or outside - pull it all together with the zipties and gently ride it to where you can get help. Fortunately, I've not had to do this but I have the stuff to do it just in case.

The frame material is a red herring. If the frame is broken, it's broken and doesn't depend on the material. By the way, it's a myth that aluminum and carbon will fail without warning. I've broken frames made of steel and frames made of aluminum. Both broke the same way. I could hear the frame creaking long before it broke.


The barend shifters for most tourist is the only thing they'll use. Please note, I never said that ALL tourers use barends, I even said some use STI and ERGO. But those that have used both, "most" prefer barends on heavy loaded bikes due to having better control. I HAVE NOT GONE TOURING YET WITH A HEAVY LOADED BIKE THUS I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED EITHER SYSTEM TO SEE WHICH IS BEST. It may turn out that your right, I might prefer STI or ERGO over barends; but of the heavy touring folk I have spoken to about 75% prefer and use barends.

I met very few people that do light loaded touring using barends...except for me and I was using downtube!


Shifters are a personal preference. I would say that it's probably pretty evenly split between integrated brake/shift levers and bar ends. I don't think it's a control issue (a heavily loaded bike will perform just a well with both types). Either one beats the living crap out of downtube!

I didn't say I was going to ride it home. I said I could macguiver something so that I wouldn't have to walk 50 miles. Broken frame: No real problem. I carry about a dozen zip ties with me where ever I go and a sharp knife (3.5" blade is best). If the frame breaks, you can splint it with a tree limb - either inside or outside - pull it all together with the zipties and gently ride it to where you can get help. Fortunately, I've not had to do this but I have the stuff to do it just in case.

That would be interesting to see if a bike would hold up long enough to get home with zipties and sticks! I guess in a situation like that, even though very remote, I too would try anything regardless how silly it might seem. But I don't carry zipties because that anything requiring that kind of repair is so remote I just don't worry about it.

The frame material is a red herring. If the frame is broken, it's broken and doesn't depend on the material. By the way, it's a myth that aluminum and carbon will fail without warning. I've broken frames made of steel and frames made of aluminum. Both broke the same way. I could hear the frame creaking long before it broke.


A myth? A myth maybe in regards to AL, CF or even TI failing for no reason is true, but I've seen people who's bikes have broke (mostly AL) that when a crack developed it went very fast to sudden failure. I've seen the after results of CF forks snapping suddenly without warning in LBS's. BUT in almost all incidences something happened while riding, like hitting something like a curb or whatever, that damaged the fork or frame without the rider finding the problem till later; problem is that once they go they go fast. BUT there was a female pro racer whose CF fork gave out for no reason or warning and had a serious crash in the middle of a race. I have a friend that weighed 240 pounds (mostly muscle not fat as one would assume) that broke (since 1985 til 2003) 2 Vitus's, 2 Klien's and 3 Cannodale's in the bottom bracket area where the rear stays join due to overpowering the frames...we think. Anyway he has since gone to steel and now has a Gios Compact which he got as a back up to when the first Cannondale broke, and a Rivendell and no problems...yet. He hasn't nor has any desire to try CF. Steel on the other hand you could ride with a crack in the frame and not worry about it breaking suddenly because the crack would spread very slowly instead of quickly like the other materials. http://www.rivbike.com/html/101_framematerials.html http://www.rivbike.com/html/101_pureopinions.html Fortunately failure of any kind related to material is rare.

Speaking of myth's here's an interesting site regarding all sorts of cycling myths:
http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/lifestyle/myths.htm

Shifters are a personal preference. I would say that it's probably pretty evenly split between integrated brake/shift levers and bar ends. I don't think it's a control issue (a heavily loaded bike will perform just a well with both types). Either one beats the living crap out of downtube!

Downtube shifters are only crap in heavy touring, they just don't work well for that application due to difficulty maintaining control; they are not crap to use other wise, in fact they are the lightest set up even today and they are easy to maintain and they shift a bit faster other types of friction systems due to shorter cable lengths-but slower overall because you have to reach for the shifter (that's why you have to think ahead); and you can feather or trim the front which is why Lance Armstrong was using a friction downtube shifter for the front during the Tour on certain events. Most people who don't like downtube shifters in normal use, not touring use, usually don't like water bottles (weird comment) but anyway it has to do with their unsureness of their bike handling skills, they don't feel comfortable removing a hand off the bars to reach for a shift or a water bottle.

..

That would be interesting to see if a bike would hold up long enough to get home with zipties and sticks! I guess in a situation like that, even though very remote, I too would try anything regardless how silly it might seem. But I don't carry zipties because that anything requiring that kind of repair is so remote I just don't worry about it.


It's a mountain bike trick. I've not seen it in person but have read accounts of people riding many miles out of the woods...gently...to their vehicles.


A myth? A myth maybe in regards to AL, CF or even TI failing for no reason is true, but I've seen people who's bikes have broke (mostly AL) that when a crack developed it went very fast to sudden failure. I've seen the after results of CF forks snapping suddenly without warning in LBS's. BUT in almost all incidences something happened while riding, like hitting something like a curb or whatever, that damaged the fork or frame without the rider finding the problem till later; problem is that once they go they go fast. BUT there was a female pro racer whose CF fork gave out for no reason or warning and had a serious crash in the middle of a race. I have a friend that weighed 240 pounds (mostly muscle not fat as one would assume) that broke (since 1985 til 2003) 2 Vitus's, 2 Klien's and 3 Cannodale's in the bottom bracket area where the rear stays join due to overpowering the frames...we think. Anyway he has since gone to steel and now has a Gios Compact which he got as a back up to when the first Cannondale broke, and a Rivendell and no problems...yet. He hasn't nor has any desire to try CF. Steel on the other hand you could ride with a crack in the frame and not worry about it breaking suddenly because the crack would spread very slowly instead of quickly like the other materials. http://www.rivbike.com/html/101_framematerials.html http://www.rivbike.com/html/101_pureopinions.html Fortunately failure of any kind related to material is rare.

Speaking of myth's here's an interesting site regarding all sorts of cycling myths:
http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/lifestyle/myths.htm


A crack in any frame material is past the point of failure. But aluminum does not get a small crack and then just break in two without warning. I've broken cranks ...creaked for weeks but I was just to stupid to notice. I've had rims fail in many modes...sidewall cracked, broken between every eyelet, spokes pulled out of the spoke holes... but they all gave some notice and didn't fail catastrophically.

The only frames and parts that did fail catastrophically...and without warning...have been steel parts! One old mountain bike frame when 'ping' and was broken at the rear dropout as well as the rear axle. The other was a steel axle on a pedal that broke off as I was riding without any kind of warning.

And, of course, there is always that dreaded 'ping' of a broken spoke.

Anything can break. Generally speaking, however, almost everything gives some kind of warning of impending failure. We just don't listen.


Downtube shifters are only crap in heavy touring, they just don't work well for that application due to difficulty maintaining control; they are not crap to use other wise, in fact they are the lightest set up even today and they are easy to maintain and they shift a bit faster other types of friction systems due to shorter cable lengths-but slower overall because you have to reach for the shifter (that's why you have to think ahead); and you can feather or trim the front which is why Lance Armstrong was using a friction downtube shifter for the front during the Tour on certain events. Most people who don't like downtube shifters in normal use, not touring use, usually don't like water bottles (weird comment) but anyway it has to do with their unsureness of their bike handling skills, they don't feel comfortable removing a hand off the bars to reach for a shift or a water bottle.

I never said that downtube shifters were crap. I said that STI and barends "beat the living crap" out of downtube. I've ridden them all. STI is just more convenient, in my opinion, then barend shifters. Both are way more convenient than downtube. Yes, downtube have shorter cable throws but that's not an issue with modern pinned and ramped cranks and cassettes. If you move the lever on the shifter (and your bike is in proper adjustment) the shift is going to happen. And, in most cases, it's going to happen right now and be buttery smooth. That's why I've argued that modern shifters are just plain better than the old frictions stuff. I've shifted both. I wouldn't go back for all the rice in China.

I wouldn't go back for all the rice in China.

Seconded! Unless I had absolutely no choice, no more non-indexed shifting for me!

I never said that downtube shifters were crap. I said that STI and barends "beat the living crap" out of downtube. I've ridden them all. STI is just more convenient, in my opinion, then barend shifters. Both are way more convenient than downtube. Yes, downtube have shorter cable throws but that's not an issue with modern pinned and ramped cranks and cassettes. If you move the lever on the shifter (and your bike is in proper adjustment) the shift is going to happen. And, in most cases, it's going to happen right now and be buttery smooth. That's why I've argued that modern shifters are just plain better than the old frictions stuff. I've shifted both. I wouldn't go back for all the rice in China.


Again personal preferrence. I agree that STI are more convenient and that is what I prefer, but I do not like barends.

In Fact I have an old trek 720 that I use mostly for commuting that I am putting downtube friction shifters on. I can't afford to upgrade everything needed to use STI, so to get rid of the barends I am putting the downtubes on.

That's why I've argued that modern shifters are just plain better than the old frictions stuff. I've shifted both. I wouldn't go back for all the rice in China.

Would you go back for all the TEA instead of the rice in China?

Suntour made the best friction shifting derailleurs in the world, and those shift fast and smooth especially if someone knows how to use them. It does take some practice and thought to properly shift friction units, unlike todays STI and ERGO you don't need much practice to get it right. I liken it to the difference between a manual car vs an automatic; people will argue the same thing that an automatic will shift faster then a manual, but I use to race cars and hung with people that did and we could shift the manual's as fast as any auto and proved on many drag strips; but people prefer autos today in the USA because they don't take any thought. Someday I fear bikes will have total automatic shifting with probably an option to semi-manual override it.

Wow, I started quite a thread!

My two cents: I like friction shifters because they're simple and easy to use. They don't require much adjustment after you get them set up. Newer STI shifters stay adjusted really well, it's true, but I don't really want to adjust derailers or shifters at all. Are friction shifters better than new STI shifters? Probably not, it's just a matter of personal preference.

I'm still looking around for an old touring frame, or even a complete bike. I live in the Bay Area and people tend to price them way above market value. I found an old Miyata at a used bike shop here in Berkeley, a really nice touring bike with bar-end shifters, great brakes and true wheels. Nice ride. It was an early 80s model, really scratched up and kinda ugly looking. The guy wanted $400! I know I can do better than that if I deal with a private party. I'll take your advice and start asking around at my local bike shop. Somebody's got to have a nice old ride taking up space in their garage that they'd be willing to part with.

Cheers,

Dustin

Wow, I started quite a thread!

My two cents: I like friction shifters because they're simple and easy to use. They don't require much adjustment after you get them set up. Newer STI shifters stay adjusted really well, it's true, but I don't really want to adjust derailers or shifters at all. Are friction shifters better than new STI shifters? Probably not, it's just a matter of personal preference.


It's indeed a personal preference, but most riders today never rode a bike with friction so they have no desire to do so; and if someone was to go to friction after using nothing but STI or ERGO they get frustrated with the learning curve, say some cuss words and give up and convert the bike into a fixie...I would probably do the same thing if I was raised without knowing how to use a friction system!