Touring - touring "coversions"

anyone else done/doing/thinking/hating/loving/confused with this?

here is my friends. im planning something along the same lines...

http://myspace-648.vo.llnwd.net/01172/84/64/1172354648_l.jpg

You mean something like this?
http://img144.imageshack.us/img144/4637/loadedtourlg2.jpg

yea, like a mtn bike/hybrid frame made into a touring bike

It would really depend on the bike. You need to look at the geometry of the frame closely before you proceed too far. Relatively new mountain bikes probably won't make as good a loaded touring bike as some of the older ones. Most of the new ones (around 2000 +) have shorter chainstays then older ones. The older ones tend to be rather heavy, too, unless you get into much higher level bikes. Touring bikes don't need to be superlight but they don't need to be pushing 40 or 45 lbs either.

Something else to consider is cost. Refitting a bike for touring can be pouring good money after bad. I've done many, many upgrades and, while it's fun and satisfying, it is never cheap. Not if you are honest about it anyway. If you sit down and really add up the cost, it often works out to be cheaper just to buy a new touring bike.

If you are going to pull a trailer, just about any mountain bike will do. Personally, for off-road touring or combination road/off-road, I'd probably use a mountain bike with a lockable front shock and a trailer before I'd use bags. If I'm going strictly road touring, I use bags.

As for the picture you show, it looks good but I'd probably investigate a different bar. That one locks your hands into one position which can lead to all kinds of numbness problems. A straight bar or a riser both with barends would be a better choice. I've ridden bikes with only one position and, unless you enjoy that pins and needles feeling when you hands go to sleep, I much prefer more hand positions.

How about my old school Cyclocross bike turned into a touring bike?

[QUOTE=cyccommute] Refitting a bike for touring can be pouring good money after bad. I've done many, many upgrades and, while it's fun and satisfying, it is never cheap. Not if you are honest about it anyway. If you sit down and really add up the cost, it often works out to be cheaper just to buy a new touring bike. QUOTE]

+1 I've got too much money in this one from the mid-90's "old" Schwinn shop. This Schwinn Transit is almost unique, I've never seen another one, and it was part of Schwinn's last gasp to compete in the LBS market aside from the Paramount. The dimensions are almost exactly those of the Trek 520, with about one inch longer top tube and one-half inch higher BB. You can see it has a lot of miles on it and I can sit it all day, but if I had to do it over again....I probably would not.

'92 Trek 930 ( I thought it was a '93 til yesterday :o )

http://i18.tinypic.com/2egbo8m.jpg

I've got too much money in this one from the mid-90's "old" Schwinn shop. This Schwinn Transit is almost unique, I've never seen another one, and it was part of Schwinn's last gasp to compete in the LBS market aside from the Paramount. The dimensions are almost exactly those of the Trek 520, with about one inch longer top tube and one-half inch higher BB. You can see it has a lot of miles on it and I can sit it all day, but if I had to do it over again....I probably would not.
And you'd probably be wrong. I have seldom seen an over-the-counter touring bike that didn't need a lot of component replacements to make it optimal. Because of that and because touring bikes are pretty rare anyway, you end up building one up from scratch 9 times out of 10. And so the frame becomes only a small part of the equation. In short, you don't actually save anything by buying a complete touring bike.

So convert a bike if you like, or buy a touring bike from a major brand or get a LHT frame/fork and build a new one up yourself. It will all come out pretty much in the same catagory - what you want you can have.

anyone else done/doing/thinking/hating/loving/confused with this?

here is my friends. im planning something along the same lines...

http://myspace-648.vo.llnwd.net/01172/84/64/1172354648_l.jpg

...loving it. That's one of the cleanest conversions I've seen yet. That black/silver combo is beautiful in my eyes. And those Surly racks are so...utilitarian. I'm wondering if those "North Roads" type handlebars really work to prevent hand problems?

...loving it. That's one of the cleanest conversions I've seen yet. That black/silver combo is beautiful in my eyes. And those Surly racks are so...utilitarian. I'm wondering if those "North Roads" type handlebars really work to prevent hand problems?

Yes, a beautiful job. And, yes, North Road bars do help relieve hand numbness and general discomfort if you have trouble using a more stretched out setup with drops. In other words, if you have back problems or arthritis issues in the shoulders, neck or collar bones, NR's are a great solution. They also help a lot with carpal tunnel problems.

Drops do give the rider hand position options, but that's because with drops, you need them. Properly balanced between saddle and bars, you don't get fidgety with NR's.

See the Trek 930 above. Those are NR's and I use that bike for the occasional century at about the same frequency that use my 520. Until three weeks ago, I had NR's on the 520 as well. Now, it has Nitto B115 drops. The test is still in progress and the NR's are the standard to beat for me. I consider NR's to be the mosty ergonomically correct handlebars ever made.

nice job!!!!

this is my giant yukon that i converted into a low cost touring bike ... this also appeared in the adventure cycling handbook (http://www.amazon.com/Adventure-Cycling-Handbook-Worldwide-Planning/dp/1873756895)

Some nice bikes guys. Here is my conversion of a Cannondale BB Hybrid. After using this for the past 4 years I would like to give a real touring frame a go to see how different a proper bike handles. I have had no problems with this. The flat bars killed me while on tour until I swapped them out for the trekking bar.

http://www.crankk.com/pics/bike.jpg

Converting a Mt. Bike does not have to be expensive. We bought everything for the touring bikes we are using here in Southeast Asia either second-hand or from eBay (http://www.vwvagabonds.com/Bike/BikeTales02.html)...

http://www.vwvagabonds.com/Bikes2.JPG

My old tour guiding MTB converted to touring mode. There wasn't much to convert, except for the front rack on the suspension forks.

So convert a bike if you like, or buy a touring bike from a major brand or get a LHT frame/fork and build a new one up yourself. It will all come out pretty much in the same catagory - what you want you can have.

I agree with cyclintom & Mono: after riding my Giant '02 steel MTB Boulder converted to a road bike (stem extensions, bar extensions, new seat, etc.) Had taken a $ 300 bike and invested another coupla hundred in it until it reached the point that no more investment or changes would make much difference.

I decided to get an LHT & build it up. The difference in positioning was remarkable. At 6'5", the geometry of the MTB had 'accomodated' my size but the Surly truly fits me. I've ridden both off & on and find the touring bike is the one I WANT to ride, the MTB conversion is my backup. Haven't toured with the Surly, just commute on it for 50-60 miles / wk at this point. Will tour this coming summer.

But others will tell you their own stories as illustrated below. I myself saved for a year & took the leap to a genuine touring frame & do not regret the investment at all - the pleasure and comfort of the LHT has been worth the ca. $ 1500 I've got invested in it.

And you'd probably be wrong. I have seldom seen an over-the-counter touring bike that didn't need a lot of component replacements to make it optimal. Because of that and because touring bikes are pretty rare anyway, you end up building one up from scratch 9 times out of 10. And so the frame becomes only a small part of the equation. In short, you don't actually save anything by buying a complete touring bike.

So convert a bike if you like, or buy a touring bike from a major brand or get a LHT frame/fork and build a new one up yourself. It will all come out pretty much in the same catagory - what you want you can have.

Most of the production touring bikes that are readily available could hit the road tomorrow with little modification. A Cannondale T-series is tour ready, with proper gearing and equipment. The only addition needed would be a low-rider rack. The gearing is very suitable. The Trek 520 is tour ready, even if it has a little too high a gear. Change the rear cluster to a 14-34 and add a low-rider and it'd be ready for a cross country trip. The same holds for the Fuji Touring or the REI touring bike.

None of the bikes listed are necessarily optimum and each might need their own tweeks to make them worthy but the tweeks are only going to amount to a few tens of dollars.

I'm not trying to argue against building your own touring bike from anything you have but I just want to caution that it's not necessarily a cheaper way to go.

Most of the production touring bikes that are readily available could hit the road tomorrow with little modification. A Cannondale T-series is tour ready, with proper gearing and equipment. The only addition needed would be a low-rider rack. The gearing is very suitable. The Trek 520 is tour ready, even if it has a little too high a gear. Change the rear cluster to a 14-34 and add a low-rider and it'd be ready for a cross country trip. The same holds for the Fuji Touring or the REI touring bike.

None of the bikes listed are necessarily optimum and each might need their own tweeks to make them worthy but the tweeks are only going to amount to a few tens of dollars.

I'm not trying to argue against building your own touring bike from anything you have but I just want to caution that it's not necessarily a cheaper way to go. I agree with all the sentiments in this post. Buying off the shelf is always going to be cheaper than building up with the same level of componentry -- it's simply a case of economies of scale.

HOWEVER, much also depends on the experience of the owner. A new touring rider will take pretty well whatever is presented and ride with it. It's only after doing X number of miles that some of the shortcomings or personal preferences might become evident, and then the tweaking might start.

The four fundamental areas of change on an off-the-rack bike would seem to me to be: Seat (I would swap out the original immediately for a Brooks); wheels (the best quality rims, DT Swiss of Wheelsmith Spokes and likely LX hubs); rear rack (Tubus for me); and brake pads (Koolstop originals).

As to building up a bike, the cost of the wishlist items would be as much as the frame, and would go along the lines of a Cro-Mo frame (something like a Thorn) and with 26" rims, drop bars and maybe with S&S coupling; a Rolhoff 14sp rear hub; Schlumff Mountain Drive; a SON dynohub up front; Velocity Dyad rims with DT Swiss spokes; canti brakes; Tubus rear rack; Brooks saddle, and French-style front rack, bag and panniers. The Thorn is not a given, as there are plenty of solid Cro Mo MTB frames with good dimensions from the 1980s still kicking around in Australia, in which case the add-on bits definitely would be WAY more expensive than the frame :)

Based on my research Trek 700 Multitrack series have same frame geometry as Trek 520. The Trek 700, 720 and 730 have decent asian frames, with the Trek 750 having a double-butted high-end frame made in USA. Trek 750 has pannier bosses on the fork but lacks a 3rd bottle mount - a nitpick IMHO.

Trek 900-series mountain bikes about '97 and older with no suspension forks make great conversions. Again, the 900-930 have decent steel frames, with the 950 being the top-of-the-line double-butted lighter frame.

All of the above will take mountain bike triple cranksets, mountain hubs and derailleurs. Keep the 7-speed cassette and derailleur for what some people say is an indestructible combination. You can mount a 48-38-28 triple crankset (square-taper type), a new front Shimano LX derailleur to give yourself awesome gears. Add some trekking "butterfly" type handlebars for all day hand comfort.

You can apply above logic to many older MTB with a steel frame.

Keep in mind that it matters not so much what you ride, but that you do.

Most of the production touring bikes that are readily available could hit the road tomorrow with little modification. A Cannondale T-series is tour ready, with proper gearing and equipment. The only addition needed would be a low-rider rack. The gearing is very suitable. The Trek 520 is tour ready, even if it has a little too high a gear. Change the rear cluster to a 14-34 and add a low-rider and it'd be ready for a cross country trip. The same holds for the Fuji Touring or the REI touring bike.

None of the bikes listed are necessarily optimum and each might need their own tweeks to make them worthy but the tweeks are only going to amount to a few tens of dollars.

I'm not trying to argue against building your own touring bike from anything you have but I just want to caution that it's not necessarily a cheaper way to go.
I think we're agreeing. A Cannondale tour-ready bike isn't cheap. Nor the Trek version either. I'm not saying they're expensive. What I'm saying is that generally speaking you're pretty much going to spend between $1K and $2K for a touring bike if you're being careful. You can get it cheaper or a whole lot more expensive but thinking you're going to build one on the cheap without ever having done it before is not going to happen unless you're really a whiz.

Trek 900-series mountain bikes about '97 and older with no suspension forks make great conversions. Again, the 900-930 have decent steel frames, with the 950 being the top-of-the-line double-butted lighter frame.


Thats what I ride. a 920 and it has a great light cromoly frame. I am lucky that I happened upon th efame and fork set. If you can get one at a good price you should take it.
Also Mr. Polak, didnt they introduce the 900 series in 92 or 93? I may be mistaken. SET ME STRAIGHT

I think we're agreeing. A Cannondale tour-ready bike isn't cheap. Nor the Trek version either. I'm not saying they're expensive. What I'm saying is that generally speaking you're pretty much going to spend between $1K and $2K for a touring bike if you're being careful. You can get it cheaper or a whole lot more expensive but thinking you're going to build one on the cheap without ever having done it before is not going to happen unless you're really a whiz.

I certainly agree. However, a T-800 can be found for some below $900 if you are lucky. My current favorite inexpensive touring bike is the Fuji Touring. MSRP is $900 and I got a NOS for my daughter in 2005 for $500. It's a good bike for $900 but a great bike for $500. It will last a good long time or at least until you want to upgrade to something much better ;)

Yes, a beautiful job. And, yes, North Road bars do help relieve hand numbness and general discomfort if you have trouble using a more stretched out setup with drops. In other words, if you have back problems or arthritis issues in the shoulders, neck or collar bones, NR's are a great solution. They also help a lot with carpal tunnel problems.

Drops do give the rider hand position options, but that's because with drops, you need them. Properly balanced between saddle and bars, you don't get fidgety with NR's.

See the Trek 930 above. Those are NR's and I use that bike for the occasional century at about the same frequency that use my 520. Until three weeks ago, I had NR's on the 520 as well. Now, it has Nitto B115 drops. The test is still in progress and the NR's are the standard to beat for me. I consider NR's to be the mosty ergonomically correct handlebars ever made.
I agree about the handlebars myself. I have retained the stock handlebars on my Specialized CrossRoads due to the fact I have no hand, arm, or back problems with them. I had ordered Trekking bars from nashbar to put on the bike when converting it and there sitting in a closet. In the interim I have rolled up over 3,000 miles on the bike with the stock bars. If it ain't broke, don’t fix it. My bike fit's my geometry exactly and the trekking bars are not required, for now anyway.

Yes, a beautiful job. And, yes, North Road bars do help relieve hand numbness and general discomfort if you have trouble using a more stretched out setup with drops. In other words, if you have back problems or arthritis issues in the shoulders, neck or collar bones, NR's are a great solution. They also help a lot with carpal tunnel problems.

Drops do give the rider hand position options, but that's because with drops, you need them. Properly balanced between saddle and bars, you don't get fidgety with NR's.

See the Trek 930 above. Those are NR's and I use that bike for the occasional century at about the same frequency that use my 520. Until three weeks ago, I had NR's on the 520 as well. Now, it has Nitto B115 drops. The test is still in progress and the NR's are the standard to beat for me. I consider NR's to be the mosty ergonomically correct handlebars ever made.

You are only thinking about skeletal issues with the bars. I'm thinking about nerve issues. I've ridden bikes with flat bars that lock you in one place similarly to the bars pictured (I know you can move your hands around a little on those but "little" is the operative word here). Taking 6 weeks to get the feeling back in my hands was a far more frightening proposition then some discomfort in my neck and shoulders on the bike. It's not a case of being balanced on the bike but rather being able to change the position of your hands to get blood flowing back to the ulnar nerve. That's why I suggest people have more hand positions. More hand positions can be acheived with drops or with flat bars and barends.

I started using NR bars recently and I find that with bar ends on them. YEA THEY LOOK WEIRD. They can offer 4 good hand positions. Including if you have brake levers , placing them near the first turn in the bar and then use those as hand rests. That is the most comfortable for me. It feels just like when you rest up on the top of drop bars.

It's not a case of being balanced on the bike but rather being able to change the position of your hands to get blood flowing back to the ulnar nerve.
Reducing compression of the ulna nerve, rather than getting the blood flow, I think.

Reducing compression of the ulna nerve, rather than getting the blood flow, I think.

Picky! Picky! :D

'92 Trek 930 ( I thought it was a '93 til yesterday :o )

http://i18.tinypic.com/2egbo8m.jpg

JCM,

What brand/model are your bars and stem? Do you have a pic of this setup looking forward from the seat? I have a 92 Trek 750 that I think I want to do something similar to like yours.

Thanks,

Ken

JCM,

What brand/model are your bars and stem? Do you have a pic of this setup looking forward from the seat? I have a 92 Trek 750 that I think I want to do something similar to like yours.

Thanks,

Ken

Hi Ken,
I have a bud who is also re-fitting a 750 this way. I'm sorry for the huge pic. I can't drive acomputer very well.

The bars are cheapo Wald. The model is North Road. They are steel 22' wide as opposed to the original 20". The clamp area is 25.4mm (1"). There are alloy types available thru Rivendell/Nitto called Dove. NR's are not like cruiser bars at all. Nor are they like Albatross bars, a very classy model.

The stem is just the old 22.2mm off the now dead Trek 830 in the pics. Looks like an overhead construction boom or something :o . I'll eventually put a Nitto Dirtdrop stem on there.

Trek 930
http://i13.tinypic.com/2vma34i.jpg
Trek 520 with adjustable stem
http://i18.tinypic.com/4hs3go9.jpg
Trek 830 from the rear/oblique
http://i18.tinypic.com/2lbkww1.jpg
http://i16.tinypic.com/2a0alxj.jpg

Picky! Picky! :D

:D
I think that was what I was trying to allude to; reducing compression by reducing weight on the hands. Maybe I've just lucked out with this setup. I know it's counter-intuitive for long trips, but it really does work. I do have drops on my 520 currently. Nitto B115's, which are quite shallow, and mounted pretty high.

If you sit down and really add up the cost, it often works out to be cheaper just to buy a new touring bike.

It is easy to forget that there is a value in having an older, less expensive bike...

-On tour it is often necessary to ride in the rain and leave the bike outside for long periods of time. Rust on a new expensive bike can kill the joy of riding in the rain.

-When loading bikes on a bus, train, boat, and especially airplane, a few scratches on an old, inexpensive bike are easily forgotten.

-Old bikes are heavier for good reason. They have far less plastic. Plastic is fragile.

-Old bikes are more fixable, new bikes are more disposable.

When adopting a new lifestyle (for example: the cycle tourist) it is tempting to want the newest and best, to prove our dedication to the change. We found that in the act of converting our bikes to tourers we were able to ease into things, to think about each change as a "need" or a "want", to gain an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the machine.

By purchasing a bike off the rack you lose these advantages.

http://vwvagabonds.com/BikesTorturingtheBikes.jpg

"If you sit down and really add up the cost, it often works out to be cheaper just to buy a new touring bike."

Hmmm... I don't know about that. My 930 cost me $100 of CL. The components came off my old 830, which I bought new back in '88 for $500. After all this time, do I count that against the 930? I really can't because the 830 was probably worth, maybe, $100. So, I figure I have $200 into it, plus $40 for tires.

A new 520 costs about $1200 naked.

Now, if you get a fully loaded 520 in mint shape like mine, a '98, then the difference is minimal. I paid $550 for it.

When I bought it:
http://i11.tinypic.com/4btbw3t.jpg

To OP,
Looks good to me! I used a 90 vintage Giant Excursion as a commuter/tour bike for a couple of years. Mine was Red with yellow graphics and racks:D As long as it fits well and is comfortable to ride...go for it!

Aaron:)

When adopting a new lifestyle (for example: the cycle tourist) it is tempting to want the newest and best, to prove our dedication to the change. We found that in the act of converting our bikes to tourers we were able to ease into things, to think about each change as a "need" or a "want", to gain an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the machine.

By purchasing a bike off the rack you lose these advantages.


Well said! I might add that converting old bikes is not for everyone, but there's something warm and fuzzy about breathing a second life into an unfashionable rigid mountain bike...and keeps it from going to the landfill!

It is easy to forget that there is a value in having an older, less expensive bike...

-On tour it is often necessary to ride in the rain and leave the bike outside for long periods of time. Rust on a new expensive bike can kill the joy of riding in the rain.

My touring bike is aluminum...no worries about rust;) . With a steel bike rust will only be an issue after many, many years of hard use. A touring bike should be purchased with an eye towards it being abused more than a 'normal' road bike anyway. It'll take it.


-When loading bikes on a bus, train, boat, and especially airplane, a few scratches on an old, inexpensive bike are easily forgotten.

A touring bike is a warrior...you expect them to have scars. I don't buy them for the paint job but for their underlying utility. My 2003 Cannondale is already battle scarred. I expected that from the first day I rode it. If you are worried about the paint job, perhaps you should be touring on it.


-Old bikes are heavier for good reason. They have far less plastic. Plastic is fragile.

My T800 has a much plastic on it as my Miyata 610 did, which is not much. Current touring bikes are lighter because the metalugy of the frames are better. The alloys used for making the bikes - frames and components - are better than they were 25 years ago which is what makes them lighter (although not by much).


-Old bikes are more fixable, new bikes are more disposable.

My 2003 touring bike is just a fixable as my 1983 bike was. It's basically the same bike. In some repects it's more fixable. It has a cassette that is far easier to remove than a freewheel. The headset is adjustable with a single allen wrench instead of multiple wrenchs. The handlebars are much more easily adjusted and removable due to the face bolts as opposed to the standard quill stem. The chain uses a masterlink which is far easier to deal with than the old pins on chains. I haven't changed to an external bearing crankset but I might since those are removable and repairable with a single 8 mm allen wrench.
Modern bottom brackets last much longer and are more easily adjustable than the old spindle and cup type.



When adopting a new lifestyle (for example: the cycle tourist) it is tempting to want the newest and best, to prove our dedication to the change. We found that in the act of converting our bikes to tourers we were able to ease into things, to think about each change as a "need" or a "want", to gain an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of the machine.

By purchasing a bike off the rack you lose these advantages.


The newest and the best do have the advantage of not having to fix and adapt things all the time, however. With a newer bike and newer components, you spend less time making things work and more time just riding.

Let's also not forget that we are a fringe group of a fringe group (touring cyclist in the cyclist group). If we fail to support the companies that make equipment for us by not purchasing that equipment -frames, touring components, etc. - the companies that make that equipment will stop and we will be forced to adapt with suboptimal components. We already see that in the dearth of good production touring bikes.

"If you sit down and really add up the cost, it often works out to be cheaper just to buy a new touring bike."

Hmmm... I don't know about that. My 930 cost me $100 of CL. The components came off my old 830, which I bought new back in '88 for $500. After all this time, do I count that against the 930? I really can't because the 830 was probably worth, maybe, $100. So, I figure I have $200 into it, plus $40 for tires.

A new 520 costs about $1200 naked.

Now, if you get a fully loaded 520 in mint shape like mine, a '98, then the difference is minimal. I paid $550 for it.



I never said that you can't build one for cheaper from an old bike but you really need to be realistic about the costs. I don't doubt what the 930 cost you nor that you used parts off the 830 but consider the other costs. First, the 830 cost you $500 years ago. It might be worth only $100 now, but you paid full price for it so it still costs you $500. Second, did you put new cables and housing on the new bike? Did you use the old crank? Derailers? Shifters? Chain? Cassette (or freewheel)? Wheels? Bar? Stem? If you did use the old parts, how long will they last? Are the old parts compatible with modern stuff if you happen to biff something out in the world? If the wheels don't have 135mm hubs, are you sure you could find a new one in Lewiston, ID, for example? Do the cones of the hub have the proper size axle? Shimano changed them a few years back and modern cones don't work on the old axles. (I found out this the hard way:o ) All of those things add up, along with taxes, to become a significant fraction of a new bike.

I'm not saying, by any means, that rebuilding an old bike isn't fun and rewarding. Nor is building a bike from bare frame and parts. But, depending on what you have on hand - and remember that the parts cost you something to begin with - and what you want to have at the end of it, the cost can be far more than you think. I've been there - several times - both in retrofitting an old bike and building a new one. One of the reasons I bought a new touring bike in 2003 was because it was cheaper than trying to retrofit the old one...and I got a better bike in the bargain.

Oharescrubs,

Reading back over my posts, I can see that it would be easy to come to the conclusion that I "hate" the idea of doing a conversion on an old bike. I would like to clarify that I'm not against doing conversions on old bikes, per say. Nor am I against building bikes from bare frames. I'm not. I've done it several times. Of the four bikes currently in my fleet, only one of them is substantually stock. The other 3 are either upgraded or were built from a frame. One of them is so upgraded that the only stock item on it is the front hub. The touring bike is a dream bike where I spared no expense and has nearly all been replaced...only the frame is original on that one.

But for each of them, I have a complete list of all costs (everything down to the cables and housing) and it's suprising how quickly, and how high, it adds up! As an example, I bought a Las Cruces frame last summer. I swapped parts from my old touring bike and made the bike into a very nice commuter bike. I kept a tally of the old parts and new parts and how much the bike "really" cost me, including the original price of the old parts. It truly astounded me just how much I spent on the bike. Not much on it is top of the line but it adds up. For what I have in parts, I could have purchased a very nice road bike. In hindsight, I probably should have purchased a mid-level road bike and just swapped the parts.

I guess my point is: Do your homework. Look at the bike seriously and honestly. Take into account what parts you'll have to buy and what parts you have on hand. Add them up and, if you have to order things or buy off Ebay, make sure you add in shipping and taxes. Do this before you start on the bike. Only you know the tipping point where a new bike makes more sense to you than upgrading an old one but be honest about it.

If, in the end, you decide to upgrade the old bike, have fun. It is fun. I truly enjoy building my bikes. If you need help, please feel free to post again here or in the mechanics forum or, if you like, contact me directly. I've been doing my own mechanical work for over 20 years and I can help you with anything.

Good luck.

But for each of them, I have a complete list of all costs (everything down to the cables and housing) and it's suprising how quickly, and how high, it adds up! As an example, I bought a Las Cruces frame last summer. I swapped parts from my old touring bike and made the bike into a very nice commuter bike. I kept a tally of the old parts and new parts and how much the bike "really" cost me, including the original price of the old parts. It truly astounded me just how much I spent on the bike. Not much on it is top of the line but it adds up. For what I have in parts, I could have purchased a very nice road bike. In hindsight, I probably should have purchased a mid-level road bike and just swapped the parts.
There is an interesting little sidelight here, though. It's a bit like eating an elephant (an old randonneur analogy). You can look at it as one big meal and turn away in dismay, or you can eat it mouthful by mouthful, and before you know it, there's nothing left!

The same with the cost of that "dream bike". The reasons are the same as why people build boats, construct competition cars, even build houses themselves... the cost impact of dedicating a little bit of money every week to a project is less than whacking out a great big amount out in one hit (or paying exhorbitant interest rates if the money is borrowed). The satisfaction of doing it yourself is only a part of it. You have something tangible to show every week as your project advances... rather than a bank balance figure that hides the fact the someone else is making a profit out of your money.

Yes, you can go in and buy a Fuji Touring for $XXX, but it will be a compromise, and eventually you *will* be upgrading parts of it if you become a dedicated touring cyclist.

A friend of mine imported into Australia from the UK a Thorn frame for his partner. The frame and fork cost around $1200. Not cheap (even though we are talking Australian play money). He then spent the next six months building it up with good parts like LX hubs, Rhino Lite rims, quality derailleurs, and so on. It is a beautiful bike, and quite reasonably he could have bought a complete bicycle of some common brand for the same price as the frame. But his partner loves riding it because it is comfortable, durable and fits her. The impact on their budget was minimal, and he gained tangible satisfaction and pride in doing the build-up.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, my dream touring bike simply cannot be bought off the shelf, and neither can custom frames. A custom frame, however, will cost an arm and a leg, and to enable me to build up what conceivably would be a $6000 bike, I would need to take several years. Do I start now and do it in stages, or save for two years... when the price has hiked to $7000? I'd like to start eating the elephant NOW! :D

Just to give another anecdotal example ...

I converted my Trek 7200 FX to a commuter/tourer for my Pop a few months back. I swapped the handlebars for drops, added bar ends, and picked up a set of brake levers. But my initial calculations omitted the new cables, cable ends, & stem(s). It was still less than a $600 Windsor ... but it was more than $100 (would have been much worse without EBay) and a lot of more work than my initial estimate. Next time I am out there, we will add a rear rack. The new bike isn't as good as the Windsor/Fuji; but for now, it works for him.

Note that I ended up getting two stems since our initial guess for fitting him was off.

There is an interesting little sidelight here, though. It's a bit like eating an elephant (an old randonneur analogy). You can look at it as one big meal and turn away in dismay, or you can eat it mouthful by mouthful, and before you know it, there's nothing left!

The same with the cost of that "dream bike". The reasons are the same as why people build boats, construct competition cars, even build houses themselves... the cost impact of dedicating a little bit of money every week to a project is less than whacking out a great big amount out in one hit (or paying exhorbitant interest rates if the money is borrowed). The satisfaction of doing it yourself is only a part of it. You have something tangible to show every week as your project advances... rather than a bank balance figure that hides the fact the someone else is making a profit out of your money.

Yes, you can go in and buy a Fuji Touring for $XXX, but it will be a compromise, and eventually you *will* be upgrading parts of it if you become a dedicated touring cyclist.

A friend of mine imported into Australia from the UK a Thorn frame for his partner. The frame and fork cost around $1200. Not cheap (even though we are talking Australian play money). He then spent the next six months building it up with good parts like LX hubs, Rhino Lite rims, quality derailleurs, and so on. It is a beautiful bike, and quite reasonably he could have bought a complete bicycle of some common brand for the same price as the frame. But his partner loves riding it because it is comfortable, durable and fits her. The impact on their budget was minimal, and he gained tangible satisfaction and pride in doing the build-up.

As I have mentioned elsewhere, my dream touring bike simply cannot be bought off the shelf, and neither can custom frames. A custom frame, however, will cost an arm and a leg, and to enable me to build up what conceivably would be a $6000 bike, I would need to take several years. Do I start now and do it in stages, or save for two years... when the price has hiked to $7000? I'd like to start eating the elephant NOW! :D

I certainly agree. My wife would choke me if she knew how much my touring bike cost but you can sneek little bits of it past her without her noticing. However that doesn't mean that it costs any less. My first mistake was probably in adding up all the parts. Ignorance is bliss;)

cyccommute:

Your points are well taken. Ok, let's toss in the cost of my 1988 original purchase for the mid-level 830. I got virtually everything off it except the actual brakes. Yes, new cables. The only thing I salvaged off the 930 is the frame set. The components are in remarkable condition as I didn't ride the 830 very much over the years. It's kind of a time capsule, if you will. The 930 is the one that was worn. Sure, things can go wrong in some remote spot. kaka pasa. But, I'm still well lower than the cost of even the commonly available Trek 520, new. BTW, I ain't knockin' your position at all. I love the dedicated tour machines.

EDIT: Man! I have really screwed up this thread with that huge IMG. Apologies to all...

Hi Ken,
I have a bud who is also re-fitting a 750 this way. I'm sorry for the huge pic. I can't drive acomputer very well.

The bars are cheapo Wald. The model is North Road. They are steel 22' wide as opposed to the original 20". The clamp area is 25.4mm (1"). There are alloy types available thru Rivendell/Nitto called Dove. NR's are not like cruiser bars at all. Nor are they like Albatross bars, a very classy model.

The stem is just the old 22.2mm off the now dead Trek 830 in the pics. Looks like an overhead construction boom or something :o . I'll eventually put a Nitto Dirtdrop stem on there.

Trek 930
http://i13.tinypic.com/2vma34i.jpg
Trek 520 with adjustable stem
http://i18.tinypic.com/4hs3go9.jpg
Trek 830 from the rear/oblique
http://i18.tinypic.com/2lbkww1.jpg
http://i16.tinypic.com/2a0alxj.jpg

JCM,

The Wald online catalog shows 2 "Touring Style" models. The small sketches they include make it hard for me to exactly determine which model you have on the 930. They show a Model 8095 that is 22-3/4" wide, but the sketch makes it look more swept back than the bars on your 930. They also show a Model 815 that is 20-1/4" wide that looks less swept back based on the sketch. It looks like it would be in between MTB riser bars and NR bars. Based on the dimensions you listed, I believe yours is the 8095 and the sketch just doesn't present the angles very well. Can you confirm this by any chance?

Thanks,

Ken

JCM,

The Wald online catalog shows 2 "Touring Style" models. The small sketches they include make it hard for me to exactly determine which model you have on the 930. They show a Model 8095 that is 22-3/4" wide, but the sketch makes it look more swept back than the bars on your 930. They also show a Model 815 that is 20-1/4" wide that looks less swept back based on the sketch. It looks like it would be in between MTB riser bars and NR bars. Based on the dimensions you listed, I believe yours is the 8095 and the sketch just doesn't present the angles very well. Can you confirm this by any chance?

Thanks,

Ken

I've never looked at the Wald on-line stuff. I just saw the pic in the LBS catalog and pointed at it saying, "get me those." The descriptor definitely said 'North Road'.

I'll google up the site now and get back to you...

OK, after Googling around a bit, it seems there are several references to those being the North Road's I'm talking about (8095). They are also very comfortable when used upside down. They did this back in the days when drops only came on racing/club machines.

JCM,

Thanks for the confirmation. I'm going to order these for my 750.

Ken

JCM,

Thanks for the confirmation. I'm going to order these for my 750.

Ken

NR's upside down
http://i17.tinypic.com/4dot9jt.jpg

With bar bag
http://i18.tinypic.com/4btkc54.jpg

Here is the bike I will be converting to a touring/commuting set-up. It is a bonded Titanium framed Miyata Elevation 8000 circa 1993 or so. Component wise it is an lx/xt mixture. I bought it new in 93 and am going put the orginal fork back on it, get a rack and some fenders and have some fun.

http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o61/mudman93/P1010157.jpg

What do you all think?

Mud

A good bike. But, my personal bias would tell me to get an older, more traditional steel mtb to convert. They will often have all the hardpoints on the frame and forks for hanging your stuff on. Dime a dozen, too. I don't know about your original forks??

If you go with this one, raise the bars and maybe think about a more suitable design for long travel. To me, and others may differ, that means just about anything but those straight MTB bars. Install a less performance oriented saddle and make it a more comfort type. Not a full-on Barcolounger, but a good touring specific type.

Add full fenders wit a good long front flap.

GO over to 50 plus and look at the bike WillisB just finished. Thread: re:Hand Pain He installed drop bars, which I am rather cool to, but for alot of people, they work.

The original fork is rigid, chromolly and threaded. This will give me plenty of ability to raise and lower the bars with the quill stem. As far as the handlebars, I will probably go with a trekking bar. With the exception of the tires, the bike is still in it's fairly aggressive offroad set-up. The frame and fork have all the appropriate fastening points and even a place that a third waterbottle or pump can be mounted under the downtube. I have thought about just getting an old steel frame but I already own this bike and besides for the most part this has just been hanging on the wall.

I think building your own bike from parts is only worth it if you have a really good reason like ultimate customization. Ending up with an old bike with antiquated parts (unless vintage is your thing), doesn't make much sense if the end result is just a bike that isn't any different, or superior, in components than what you can get off the floor at huge savings.

I'm big, I have a long torso, I need a custom frame; I prefer a B17 saddle; I like Paul brakes (one example of where new doesn't mean plastic, though another would be the Nashbar all metal brakes that cost 16 bucks a pair,) Every single part of the bike with the exception of the seat post is something where I have a particular part in mind. Paul is about the only really extravagant thing, in some cases I like the lower grade stuff, like I like LX deraileurs over XT. You can't buy the tires I like for 40 dollars a pair. So in the end, like Cyclecomute, I end up paying more to build a non-stock bike, but as long as the stock bike wasn't really an option I guess that's OK. A person could be very satisfied with stock though, so it isn't guaranteed that custom is required. I do think a lot of people end up buying poor quality ony marginally different bikes over and over, never getitng to the next level. That's what is being marketed to us. Think of all the LHT threads.

I did try to build from a frame once, using a donour bike and it really didn't work. My donor was to be an MTB, with good quality components. These are the parts that didn't fit for starters:

- headset, stem, etc.. for various reasons, partly beause they aren't road, 1" or threadless.

- Cranks probably would have worked though they were a little short.

- Frame required 700C wheels, and new stuff didn't carry freewheels.

- Brakes did work, but not that well on the fork, and I needed new levers, and either bar ends or brifters.

2 years later the only donour part that is still on the bike are the racks, and the rear brake, and the head light. All of those will be off, by this summer.

Here is my TREK 920. The Only thing original is the fork and frame. I have over time when from a 15 speed friction drive train, to a 24 speed index shifter drivetrain, now at a 21 speed drivetrain. All the parts came off a junker DiamondBack Mountain Bike. I have 26x1.9 Comfort Tires. I have installed reflectors everywhere I could. It has North Road Bars with Bar Ends. The Triangle came out of a automobile safety kit and I fashioned it on there with a Conuit Hanger.
http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/th.aacffbefd9.jpg

It is a bonded Titanium framed Miyata Elevation 8000 circa 1993 or so. Component wise it is an lx/xt mixture.

I wouldn't trust any bonded frame farther than I could throw it. Trek, Raleigh, and Specialized all had problems around the same time with their "bonded" (glued) frames seperating down the road a few years. Honestly I think thats a terrible idea for a touring bike that is going to be seeing loads.