jorgsofi
03-02-07, 06:55 AM
I'm considering these two, under $1,000 complete bike options as my touring bike (LHT will be available as a complete bike this spring, according to Surly's website). Which one do you prefer? Why? Thanks.
View Full Version : Bianchi Volpe Vs. Surly Long Haul Trucker. Pls. Help Me Decide.
Pages :
[1]
2
spokenword
03-02-07, 07:22 AM
I'm considering these two, under $1,000 complete bike options as my touring bike (LHT will be available as a complete bike this spring, according to Surly's website). Which one do you prefer? Why? Thanks. Depends on the degree of touring and riding that you anticipate.
The Volpe is more of a sport touring bike and, I think, will be a more enjoyable bike if you're touring light or doing self-supported centuries. The LHT is a loaded touring bike and is designed for carrying a full set of panniers and functioning well while weighed down. If you're going to be doing multi-day tours with panniers, then I'd lean towards the Surly.
With that said, I think both bikes are pretty close and have a lot of overlap in function. What would probably be more useful is for you to test both and decide based on fit. Find a LBS that stocks Surly and see if they'd be willing to order one for you to test ride.
The Volpe is more of a sport touring bike and, I think, will be a more enjoyable bike if you're touring light or doing self-supported centuries. The LHT is a loaded touring bike and is designed for carrying a full set of panniers and functioning well while weighed down. If you're going to be doing multi-day tours with panniers, then I'd lean towards the Surly.
With that said, I think both bikes are pretty close and have a lot of overlap in function. What would probably be more useful is for you to test both and decide based on fit. Find a LBS that stocks Surly and see if they'd be willing to order one for you to test ride.
Bekologist
03-02-07, 09:07 AM
Long Haul Trucker!
zowie
03-02-07, 09:38 AM
Depends on the degree of touring and riding that you anticipate.
The Volpe is more of a sport touring bike and, I think, will be a more enjoyable bike if you're touring light or doing self-supported centuries. The LHT is a loaded touring bike and is designed for carrying a full set of panniers and functioning well while weighed down. If you're going to be doing multi-day tours with panniers, then I'd lean towards the Surly.
Which would you recommend if you're going to be touring light and doing self-supported centuries but weigh as much as many people do with full panniers?
The Volpe is more of a sport touring bike and, I think, will be a more enjoyable bike if you're touring light or doing self-supported centuries. The LHT is a loaded touring bike and is designed for carrying a full set of panniers and functioning well while weighed down. If you're going to be doing multi-day tours with panniers, then I'd lean towards the Surly.
Which would you recommend if you're going to be touring light and doing self-supported centuries but weigh as much as many people do with full panniers?
spokenword
03-02-07, 09:57 AM
Which would you recommend if you're going to be touring light and doing self-supported centuries but weigh as much as many people do with full panniers?
still go for the Volpe. The point about touring bikes being "built for carrying weight" is only partially covered by how much gross weight can be placed on it (and is generally handled by wheel strength and frame materials) but also where that weight is being mounted. When it comes to carrying the rider, the Volpe and LHT are fairly similar -- both are steel bikes with 36 hole wheels.
The double-triangle diamond of your traditional bike frame is anticipates that most of the weight on the bike will come down the seat tube to the bottom bracket. So it's built to take a rider and balance their weight across the frame and wheels.
What loaded touring bikes tend to have, that sport touring bikes don't have, are reinforced chain and seat stays, as well as a heavier fork. This provides stability when you're adding weight from racked panniers -- which would cause shimmying on lighter bikes, because you're now adding weight that is not centered on the frame.
Loaded touring bikes also tend to have longer chainstays, to move panniers further back and reduce the chance of your heel striking the front of your panniers on the upstroke. The Volpe has a chainstay length of 425mm, the LHT is 460mm. So you can mount larger panniers on the LHT without worrying about how it impacts your pedaling. This design choice, however, affects nimbleness because your wheelbase is now longer, so if you're not going to be riding with panniers, then you're better served with a sport touring bike.
So how much you weigh doesn't matter as much as how much your stuff weighs. All other things, like construction material and wheel quality being equal.
still go for the Volpe. The point about touring bikes being "built for carrying weight" is only partially covered by how much gross weight can be placed on it (and is generally handled by wheel strength and frame materials) but also where that weight is being mounted. When it comes to carrying the rider, the Volpe and LHT are fairly similar -- both are steel bikes with 36 hole wheels.
The double-triangle diamond of your traditional bike frame is anticipates that most of the weight on the bike will come down the seat tube to the bottom bracket. So it's built to take a rider and balance their weight across the frame and wheels.
What loaded touring bikes tend to have, that sport touring bikes don't have, are reinforced chain and seat stays, as well as a heavier fork. This provides stability when you're adding weight from racked panniers -- which would cause shimmying on lighter bikes, because you're now adding weight that is not centered on the frame.
Loaded touring bikes also tend to have longer chainstays, to move panniers further back and reduce the chance of your heel striking the front of your panniers on the upstroke. The Volpe has a chainstay length of 425mm, the LHT is 460mm. So you can mount larger panniers on the LHT without worrying about how it impacts your pedaling. This design choice, however, affects nimbleness because your wheelbase is now longer, so if you're not going to be riding with panniers, then you're better served with a sport touring bike.
So how much you weigh doesn't matter as much as how much your stuff weighs. All other things, like construction material and wheel quality being equal.
zowie
03-02-07, 10:31 AM
Your explanation is very convincing.
supcom
03-02-07, 10:43 AM
FWIW, the Bianchi has a standard road triple that might be a bit high for fully loaded touring.
trace22clawson
03-02-07, 12:27 PM
+1 on the LHT. I like the volpe. And If I were buying a bike purely for long distance rides or fitness then I would go with the volpe. However, if you are going to throw any type of touring into the equation.. then I say LHT. I noticed that the '07 volpe is classified as a cyclocross bike. The braze-ons that used to be on the front fork are gone on the '07 model. If you're going to go that far... might as well go with a carbon fork.
My one complaint about the LHT (and this is purely personal choice) is that the "complete bike" as it will be sold comes with bar end shifters. I prefer the STI shifters. Pure touring cyclists will tell you to go with bar ends for there simplicity and the ability to use friction shifting in a pinch... and they are probably right. But if you are a hardcore touring cyclist, you wouldn't be considering the volpe in the first place.
If you plan on carrying stuff on your bike... go with the LHT, you'll have a lot more options on how you can use the bike.
My one complaint about the LHT (and this is purely personal choice) is that the "complete bike" as it will be sold comes with bar end shifters. I prefer the STI shifters. Pure touring cyclists will tell you to go with bar ends for there simplicity and the ability to use friction shifting in a pinch... and they are probably right. But if you are a hardcore touring cyclist, you wouldn't be considering the volpe in the first place.
If you plan on carrying stuff on your bike... go with the LHT, you'll have a lot more options on how you can use the bike.
thekorn
03-02-07, 02:35 PM
[ The braze-ons that used to be on the front fork are gone on the '07 model. If you're going to go that far... might as well go with a carbon fork.
It's too bad they took the braze-ons away. As this thread suggests there are not many real touring bikes available. My older volpe has a great fork. But I sure do like the unicrown fork on the LHT.
Also- my experience is that even cheap shimano (RSX) brifters are extremely reliable. For gearing I prefer a road triple with an 11-30 mountain cassette in back.
It's too bad they took the braze-ons away. As this thread suggests there are not many real touring bikes available. My older volpe has a great fork. But I sure do like the unicrown fork on the LHT.
Also- my experience is that even cheap shimano (RSX) brifters are extremely reliable. For gearing I prefer a road triple with an 11-30 mountain cassette in back.
trace22clawson
03-02-07, 10:01 PM
I don't know if you have considered any other bikes... you seem like you have narrowed it down to these two. But, if not... take a quick peak at the Rocky Mountain Sherp 30 if you are considering touring.
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t2/trace22clawson/02-22-07_0805.jpg
http://i156.photobucket.com/albums/t2/trace22clawson/02-22-07_0805.jpg
Bekologist
03-02-07, 11:18 PM
Isn't the Volpe outfitted with EGADS! a quill stem? blech.
charles vail
03-03-07, 01:24 AM
LHT will have a better (more comfy) ride due to longer wheelbase. Plus it will be a better all around bike should you decide to load up....and you may! I like quill stems and Bianchi is only doing what alot of makers did for years. All of my vintage 80's rides have quill stems and if you use a good one, there is nothing wrong with them. I have Nitto stems on all three of my bikes and I weigh 260 with no flex issues on the stem. The ability to raise and lower the stem with ease at the beginning of the riding season or later in life is a handy thing. Still I'd get the LHT, its a well designed frame that can carry a load.:D
My bikes: http://www.myspace.com/eccentriccyclistcharlie
My bikes: http://www.myspace.com/eccentriccyclistcharlie
mmonce
03-03-07, 03:33 AM
I'm considering these two, under $1,000 complete bike options as my touring bike (LHT will be available as a complete bike this spring, according to Surly's website). Which one do you prefer? Why? Thanks.
See the link below for my review of the Trek 520. I have owned mine for several years and she is built like a tank, never left me stranded. I use mine for commuting and towing a Chariot kid's trailer.
http://spokesandbeans.wordpress.com/
See the link below for my review of the Trek 520. I have owned mine for several years and she is built like a tank, never left me stranded. I use mine for commuting and towing a Chariot kid's trailer.
http://spokesandbeans.wordpress.com/
fat_bike_nut
03-03-07, 10:59 AM
I'm considering these two, under $1,000 complete bike options as my touring bike (LHT will be available as a complete bike this spring, according to Surly's website). Which one do you prefer? Why? Thanks.
I'd prefer the Long Haul Trucker. But then, I'm more of a fully loaded tourist-type than a century rider :o
The Long Haul Trucker is built with better components in some places (Shimano XT hubs & rear derailleur), and it's got bar-end shifters. I like using friction shifters more than indexed (it's nice being able to shift through five gears in one shift), and the Shimano Dura-Ace shifters can be switched between the two modes.
But, since this is the Long Distance Cycling forum and not the Touring forum, I'd be more inclined to take the Volpe, if "light touring" and "double centuries" are more your thing.
I'd prefer the Long Haul Trucker. But then, I'm more of a fully loaded tourist-type than a century rider :o
The Long Haul Trucker is built with better components in some places (Shimano XT hubs & rear derailleur), and it's got bar-end shifters. I like using friction shifters more than indexed (it's nice being able to shift through five gears in one shift), and the Shimano Dura-Ace shifters can be switched between the two modes.
But, since this is the Long Distance Cycling forum and not the Touring forum, I'd be more inclined to take the Volpe, if "light touring" and "double centuries" are more your thing.
eofelis
03-03-07, 11:19 AM
For a light touring bike, how about the Surly Pacer? Although it is only available as a frame and only takes road caliper brakes.
My Pacer as comfy and rugged as my LHT, but a bit light and faster.
I've also had a Trek 520 (2002) and it rode very nicely.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Surly Crosscheck. It looks like a great all around bike. My bf has one and he really likes it. I'd love to have one, but the smallest size is still too big for me!
My Pacer as comfy and rugged as my LHT, but a bit light and faster.
I've also had a Trek 520 (2002) and it rode very nicely.
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Surly Crosscheck. It looks like a great all around bike. My bf has one and he really likes it. I'd love to have one, but the smallest size is still too big for me!
charles vail
03-03-07, 06:33 PM
Well......there is certainly little disadvantage to riding a "touring bike" on a century or any long distance ride for that matter. Thousands of riders do just that, in organized multi Kilometer rides, every year. The fact that a touring bike weighs maybe two pounds more at the maximum, is extra weight that will never be noticed and probably appreciated, eventually!!! I've visited the john and lost more, so its a moot point IMHO!!! What you get with a touring style bike is, fittings and geometry for carrying a load of stuff, should you ever want to. In addition, you get a frame that is built to take more weight. One thing some have overlooked is that the long chainstays give a better chainline and a smoother ride on rough roads. A less severe chainline makes shifting easier, allows more gear combos and decreases chain and cog wear to some degree. Probably not important to the casual rider but for the high mileage guy it can be a nice bonus. You will notice this feature if you do alot of your own mechanic work and if you want to get the most mileage out of your drivetrain.:eek:
fat_bike_nut
03-03-07, 07:33 PM
Wow, didn't realize that touring bikes could be good for that, too. I just figured that a "true" touring bike wouldn't have quite the HIGH gears that people look for in a fast, single-day long distance rider :D
Oh, and Bek, this doesn't look like a quill stem to me:
http://www.bianchiusa.com/07_volpe.html
Oh, and Bek, this doesn't look like a quill stem to me:
http://www.bianchiusa.com/07_volpe.html
Bekologist
03-03-07, 09:45 PM
I stand corrected!
But I'm still voting for the Long Haul Trucker.
But I'm still voting for the Long Haul Trucker.
fat_bike_nut
03-03-07, 11:23 PM
I stand corrected!
But I'm still voting for the Long Haul Trucker.
Hey, I agree. I like the Surly more, myself :D
But I'm still voting for the Long Haul Trucker.
Hey, I agree. I like the Surly more, myself :D
ldesfor1@ithaca
03-04-07, 04:28 PM
i toured this summer on a LHT and thought it to be a great touring bike, very good for my 280ish pounds of rider and gear. I went to commute on it in september and it just felt really sluggish and slow, and really not fun to ride fast. It feels too stable, it's heavy and the long chainstays make lifting the front end up a chore.
I have a crosscheck now that is not any lighter, but is much more fun to ride, plus gives me the ability to ride trails/ try cyclocross (higher bb, a bit more tire clearance), can go singlespeed or internal gear hub very smoothly and can still be toured on (get a LHT fork if you need braze ons for a rack).
Think about a built up crosscheck with a mtb crankset (have your lbs cut you a deal?)
i've never ridden a volpe, but:
if you are not planning on touring with a ton of weight or want to use the bike for other things, go Volpe
If you are only going to tour on it, the the LHT is the way to go.
To think about:
you will likely change the tires on the Volpe to touring tires
does shifter type matter? sti on the Bianchi, barcon on the Surly
I have a crosscheck now that is not any lighter, but is much more fun to ride, plus gives me the ability to ride trails/ try cyclocross (higher bb, a bit more tire clearance), can go singlespeed or internal gear hub very smoothly and can still be toured on (get a LHT fork if you need braze ons for a rack).
Think about a built up crosscheck with a mtb crankset (have your lbs cut you a deal?)
i've never ridden a volpe, but:
if you are not planning on touring with a ton of weight or want to use the bike for other things, go Volpe
If you are only going to tour on it, the the LHT is the way to go.
To think about:
you will likely change the tires on the Volpe to touring tires
does shifter type matter? sti on the Bianchi, barcon on the Surly
jorgsofi
03-05-07, 04:53 AM
Everyone, than you for your great replies. I am indeed looking to do more light, fast touring (centuries, etc.) than heavy load, long distance touring. From your responses, it would seem I should be leaning towards the Volpe. Any other suggestions? I'd like to get a Rivendell, for instance, but price too high for me. Someone mentioned Surly Pacer. I wonder how much that would cost to build up with decent components. Any opinion on Jamis Aurora? Thanks again.
Hocam
03-05-07, 08:31 AM
I went for the inbetween and built up a surly crosscheck. It's a lighter frame than the LHT with shorter chainstays but plenty of tire clearance. I also have two sets of wheels for it, a city set of 32 hole velocity dyads laced to dura ace front, ultegra rear (haven't laced the rear yet) and a touring wheelset I got for cheap - 36h Ritchy zero's laced to mavic T221's. I might use the city wheels for brevets if the roads are nice and there isn't too much grade change, they'll have a 12-27 cassette (9 speed) where the Ritchys have 11-34. Though I may swap the 11 and 12s on the cassettes.. we'll see.
I also find dropping from a 53/39 to a 46/36/26 just makes me use the smaller cogs instead of almost never using them with the 53. The only time I could spin out a 46/11 would be at a very fast decent where I might not feel safe going even faster. Now, I have a 26/34 to help with any rediculously steep grades, which I have yet to touch in Philly, haven't hit the manayunk wall yet though so we'll see.
Also, I'll be running 26's on the city wheels, 35's on touring set.
I also find dropping from a 53/39 to a 46/36/26 just makes me use the smaller cogs instead of almost never using them with the 53. The only time I could spin out a 46/11 would be at a very fast decent where I might not feel safe going even faster. Now, I have a 26/34 to help with any rediculously steep grades, which I have yet to touch in Philly, haven't hit the manayunk wall yet though so we'll see.
Also, I'll be running 26's on the city wheels, 35's on touring set.
Portis
03-05-07, 08:59 AM
Isn't the Volpe outfitted with EGADS! a quill stem? blech.
Nope.
Nope.
trace22clawson
03-05-07, 09:24 AM
Jamis Aurora? Yep, I like it. But still - that's a touring bike... and not as good as the LHT. If you have decided against a touring bike then you shouldn't keep going back and looking at different ones.
I think there are other bikes out there that are in the same category as the Volpe that are better performers. As mentioned above, the Surly Crosscheck and I really like the Specialized tricross - both these bikes would meet your "light touring" requirement.
I think there are other bikes out there that are in the same category as the Volpe that are better performers. As mentioned above, the Surly Crosscheck and I really like the Specialized tricross - both these bikes would meet your "light touring" requirement.
charles vail
03-05-07, 12:14 PM
Everyone, than you for your great replies. I am indeed looking to do more light, fast touring (centuries, etc.) than heavy load, long distance touring. From your responses, it would seem I should be leaning towards the Volpe. Any other suggestions? I'd like to get a Rivendell, for instance, but price too high for me. Someone mentioned Surly Pacer. I wonder how much that would cost to build up with decent components. Any opinion on Jamis Aurora? Thanks again.
The specs for most of the bikes you are mentioning include slightly 1.5cm longer chainstays a heavier constructed fork, more braze on attachments (if you ever want them) lower bottom bracket (more stable ride) longer overall wheelbase and slightly more stable steering. If you want a all around bike that can be used for alot of different things, a LHT is a inexpensive, utilitarian machine that will accel at loaded touring or carrying a rider that is already heavy. The Jamis Aurora is a touring configured bike also but the gearing I don't think is as good as the complete LHT will be 48x36x26 &11-34 as opposed to 52x42x30 & 11-32 for the Aurora. The parts on the proposed complete LHT are very smartly chosen and while the Aurora probably is available right now, I don't think it is as good as a LHT. The LHT frame is nicely done with a actual fork crown and nice dropouts and powdercoat rather than paint (Aurora) which will chip easier. If I were concerned about more crisp handling I would get a Crosscheck for the simple fact that is can take wider tires when you need them! The Pacer is not a bad bike just more limited to smoother road surfaces because of the tire width limitation, especially with fenders. The Bianchi Volpe isn't a bad machine but in stock form you will probably change the tires right away. I ride a couple of 80's lugged steel bikes that are more like a Rivendell Homer Hilsen. These are essentially older,made for 27" American sized wheels and converted to 700c that then allow me to use wider tires and still retain either long reach sidepulls or centerpull brakes,rather than cantilevers that I don't prefer.;)
My bikes: http://www.myspace.com/eccentriccyclistcharlie
The specs for most of the bikes you are mentioning include slightly 1.5cm longer chainstays a heavier constructed fork, more braze on attachments (if you ever want them) lower bottom bracket (more stable ride) longer overall wheelbase and slightly more stable steering. If you want a all around bike that can be used for alot of different things, a LHT is a inexpensive, utilitarian machine that will accel at loaded touring or carrying a rider that is already heavy. The Jamis Aurora is a touring configured bike also but the gearing I don't think is as good as the complete LHT will be 48x36x26 &11-34 as opposed to 52x42x30 & 11-32 for the Aurora. The parts on the proposed complete LHT are very smartly chosen and while the Aurora probably is available right now, I don't think it is as good as a LHT. The LHT frame is nicely done with a actual fork crown and nice dropouts and powdercoat rather than paint (Aurora) which will chip easier. If I were concerned about more crisp handling I would get a Crosscheck for the simple fact that is can take wider tires when you need them! The Pacer is not a bad bike just more limited to smoother road surfaces because of the tire width limitation, especially with fenders. The Bianchi Volpe isn't a bad machine but in stock form you will probably change the tires right away. I ride a couple of 80's lugged steel bikes that are more like a Rivendell Homer Hilsen. These are essentially older,made for 27" American sized wheels and converted to 700c that then allow me to use wider tires and still retain either long reach sidepulls or centerpull brakes,rather than cantilevers that I don't prefer.;)
My bikes: http://www.myspace.com/eccentriccyclistcharlie
Hocam
03-05-07, 12:46 PM
Charles, why don't you like cantilevers?
fat_bike_nut
03-05-07, 01:06 PM
Charles, why don't you like cantilevers?
Maybe because cantilevers aren't as easy to set-up as sidepulls or center-pull caliper brakes? :p
Maybe because cantilevers aren't as easy to set-up as sidepulls or center-pull caliper brakes? :p
jorgsofi
03-05-07, 05:27 PM
Wow! Thank you for your responses. It's great to be helped by such knowledgeable people. Well, it seems that, despite all the votes for Bianchi Volpe, Surly tends to make better frames and sell them with slightly better components when offering them as complete bikes. This bike is actually for my wife. She's about 5'6" and 115 lbs. So LHT could probably carry her weight two or three times. She won't be doing loaded touring, and will mainly do centuries and half centuries. I like the fact that the Crosscheck can take wider tires, but I know she'd appreciate the stability of the LHT. She doesn't care for speed, and likes to feel safe on a bike. Given this, which would you choose between Crosscheck and LHT?
Hocam
03-05-07, 06:13 PM
Crosscheck.
Mines plenty stable and you really don't need the LHT if you're not hauling serious gear or weight.
Mines plenty stable and you really don't need the LHT if you're not hauling serious gear or weight.
fat_bike_nut
03-05-07, 11:35 PM
Wow! Thank you for your responses. It's great to be helped by such knowledgeable people. Well, it seems that, despite all the votes for Bianchi Volpe, Surly tends to make better frames and sell them with slightly better components when offering them as complete bikes. This bike is actually for my wife. She's about 5'6" and 115 lbs. So LHT could probably carry her weight two or three times. She won't be doing loaded touring, and will mainly do centuries and half centuries. I like the fact that the Crosscheck can take wider tires, but I know she'd appreciate the stability of the LHT. She doesn't care for speed, and likes to feel safe on a bike. Given this, which would you choose between Crosscheck and LHT?
Why don't you have your wife do test rides on the bikes and let her decide?
Why don't you have your wife do test rides on the bikes and let her decide?
charles vail
03-06-07, 12:03 AM
Charles, why don't you like cantilevers?
Bingo! fat_bike_nut:D Its a minor point but side or centerpulls are a speck easier to set up plus they won't ever bust off the fork since they are attached with a bolt in a drilled hole rather than brazed on. This of course is probably a unlikely occurance but.....you never know!
Bingo! fat_bike_nut:D Its a minor point but side or centerpulls are a speck easier to set up plus they won't ever bust off the fork since they are attached with a bolt in a drilled hole rather than brazed on. This of course is probably a unlikely occurance but.....you never know!
charles vail
03-06-07, 12:19 AM
Wow! Thank you for your responses. It's great to be helped by such knowledgeable people. Well, it seems that, despite all the votes for Bianchi Volpe, Surly tends to make better frames and sell them with slightly better components when offering them as complete bikes. This bike is actually for my wife. She's about 5'6" and 115 lbs. So LHT could probably carry her weight two or three times. She won't be doing loaded touring, and will mainly do centuries and half centuries. I like the fact that the Crosscheck can take wider tires, but I know she'd appreciate the stability of the LHT. She doesn't care for speed, and likes to feel safe on a bike. Given this, which would you choose between Crosscheck and LHT?
Since you finally mentioned it....no, your wife doesn't need a LHT at 115 pounds even with 80 pounds of gear strapped on. The Crosscheck would be fine, in fact, the Pacer might not be a bad choice either given her light weight and being fairly tall. At 5'6" a 700c wheeled bike would allow a frame size large enough for decent clearances,although I have seen a few Pacers built with 650B wheels and that would be a far better choice IMHO! Wider tires in 650B are comfy and since they are smaller diameter they are light enough to still give a zippy ride. Why not just buy her a Bleriot frame from Rivendell or QBP and build her a cool bike. The Pacer wouldn't be bad either just use long reach shimano sidepulls and you'll be fine with 32mm tires and fenders. The only problem with the Crosscheck is that it comes complete with a double rather than a triple crank. If you live in hilly areas get a triple although your gal at 115 pounds probably will climb like a goat. An easy swap of parts either way but wait.....the LHT I think in 54 cm sizes and under comes with 26" tires and a triple so maybe the LHT after all is the best economical choice. Good fit, nice frame design using 26" wheels and commonly available wider tires in small sizes, a triple crank, plus, an economical price LHT all the way!
Since you finally mentioned it....no, your wife doesn't need a LHT at 115 pounds even with 80 pounds of gear strapped on. The Crosscheck would be fine, in fact, the Pacer might not be a bad choice either given her light weight and being fairly tall. At 5'6" a 700c wheeled bike would allow a frame size large enough for decent clearances,although I have seen a few Pacers built with 650B wheels and that would be a far better choice IMHO! Wider tires in 650B are comfy and since they are smaller diameter they are light enough to still give a zippy ride. Why not just buy her a Bleriot frame from Rivendell or QBP and build her a cool bike. The Pacer wouldn't be bad either just use long reach shimano sidepulls and you'll be fine with 32mm tires and fenders. The only problem with the Crosscheck is that it comes complete with a double rather than a triple crank. If you live in hilly areas get a triple although your gal at 115 pounds probably will climb like a goat. An easy swap of parts either way but wait.....the LHT I think in 54 cm sizes and under comes with 26" tires and a triple so maybe the LHT after all is the best economical choice. Good fit, nice frame design using 26" wheels and commonly available wider tires in small sizes, a triple crank, plus, an economical price LHT all the way!
charles vail
03-06-07, 12:22 AM
Why don't you have your wife do test rides on the bikes and let her decide?
Ditto on that one, involve her in the decision process for sure!
Ditto on that one, involve her in the decision process for sure!
cyccommute
03-07-07, 08:37 PM
Since you finally mentioned it....no, your wife doesn't need a LHT at 115 pounds even with 80 pounds of gear strapped on. The Crosscheck would be fine, in fact, the Pacer might not be a bad choice either given her light weight and being fairly tall. At 5'6" a 700c wheeled bike would allow a frame size large enough for decent clearances,although I have seen a few Pacers built with 650B wheels and that would be a far better choice IMHO! Wider tires in 650B are comfy and since they are smaller diameter they are light enough to still give a zippy ride. Why not just buy her a Bleriot frame from Rivendell or QBP and build her a cool bike. The Pacer wouldn't be bad either just use long reach shimano sidepulls and you'll be fine with 32mm tires and fenders. The only problem with the Crosscheck is that it comes complete with a double rather than a triple crank. If you live in hilly areas get a triple although your gal at 115 pounds probably will climb like a goat. An easy swap of parts either way but wait.....the LHT I think in 54 cm sizes and under comes with 26" tires and a triple so maybe the LHT after all is the best economical choice. Good fit, nice frame design using 26" wheels and commonly available wider tires in small sizes, a triple crank, plus, an economical price LHT all the way!
For her weight and size, there's a whole universe of bikes out there to choose from. She can go with low spoke count wheels (especially if you aren't doing loaded touring), light frames, women design, etc. A couple worth a look would be the Trek Pilot 1.2, the Specialized Dolce Elite, or the Bianchi Eros Donna (which gets style points for being the bike with the most panache of the bunch...ummm...Campy;) ). None woman's design bikes to consider might be the Jamis Ventura Comp, or the Specialized Sequoia line or something from Trek.
You need to realized, jorgsofi, weight makes much more of a difference to smaller, lighter women. A 27 lb bike is only 15% of the body weight of someone who weighs 175 lb but it's 23% of a 115 lb woman's body weight. To ride an equivalent bike the guy would have to ride a 40 lb bike every where...not something I'd like to do with regularity. She's not going to beat up a bike like a big guy is either, so you can get away with lighter components and wheels.
If you want a touring bike, the Cannondale T800 might be a good one to look at too. The ride is a bit harsher than the LHT but the frame is somewhat lighter too. Mine, with racks and no special gear to keep it light, weighs in around 27 lb. You could run lighter wheels on it and save some important weight there.
For her weight and size, there's a whole universe of bikes out there to choose from. She can go with low spoke count wheels (especially if you aren't doing loaded touring), light frames, women design, etc. A couple worth a look would be the Trek Pilot 1.2, the Specialized Dolce Elite, or the Bianchi Eros Donna (which gets style points for being the bike with the most panache of the bunch...ummm...Campy;) ). None woman's design bikes to consider might be the Jamis Ventura Comp, or the Specialized Sequoia line or something from Trek.
You need to realized, jorgsofi, weight makes much more of a difference to smaller, lighter women. A 27 lb bike is only 15% of the body weight of someone who weighs 175 lb but it's 23% of a 115 lb woman's body weight. To ride an equivalent bike the guy would have to ride a 40 lb bike every where...not something I'd like to do with regularity. She's not going to beat up a bike like a big guy is either, so you can get away with lighter components and wheels.
If you want a touring bike, the Cannondale T800 might be a good one to look at too. The ride is a bit harsher than the LHT but the frame is somewhat lighter too. Mine, with racks and no special gear to keep it light, weighs in around 27 lb. You could run lighter wheels on it and save some important weight there.
charles vail
03-07-07, 09:28 PM
For her weight and size, there's a whole universe of bikes out there to choose from. She can go with low spoke count wheels (especially if you aren't doing loaded touring), light frames, women design, etc. A couple worth a look would be the Trek Pilot 1.2, the Specialized Dolce Elite, or the Bianchi Eros Donna (which gets style points for being the bike with the most panache of the bunch...ummm...Campy;) ). None woman's design bikes to consider might be the Jamis Ventura Comp, or the Specialized Sequoia line or something from Trek.
You need to realized, jorgsofi, weight makes much more of a difference to smaller, lighter women. A 27 lb bike is only 15% of the body weight of someone who weighs 175 lb but it's 23% of a 115 lb woman's body weight. To ride an equivalent bike the guy would have to ride a 40 lb bike every where...not something I'd like to do with regularity. She's not going to beat up a bike like a big guy is either, so you can get away with lighter components and wheels.
If you want a touring bike, the Cannondale T800 might be a good one to look at too. The ride is a bit harsher than the LHT but the frame is somewhat lighter too. Mine, with racks and no special gear to keep it light, weighs in around 27 lb. You could run lighter wheels on it and save some important weight there.
Actually,I tend to agree on the weight factor however the OP did say his wife "wanted to feel safe on the bike, doesn't care for speed that much and likes wider tires". For these reasons I still go with either a LHT or a Crosscheck and swap out for a triple crank if they ride hills alot. Depending on how performance orientated she becomes I don't think the added weight in the wheels/tires or frame for that matter will affect her that much. My wife prefers simular features on her bike as does my daughter and in my daughters case, she keeps up with me fine. The wife and I are both in our late fourties so conditioning is where we lack. It is true though that there are some lighter bikes out there that will take wide tires and that also have more conservative handling qualities......I don't know,its always a trade off and tough to decide sometimes!:)
You need to realized, jorgsofi, weight makes much more of a difference to smaller, lighter women. A 27 lb bike is only 15% of the body weight of someone who weighs 175 lb but it's 23% of a 115 lb woman's body weight. To ride an equivalent bike the guy would have to ride a 40 lb bike every where...not something I'd like to do with regularity. She's not going to beat up a bike like a big guy is either, so you can get away with lighter components and wheels.
If you want a touring bike, the Cannondale T800 might be a good one to look at too. The ride is a bit harsher than the LHT but the frame is somewhat lighter too. Mine, with racks and no special gear to keep it light, weighs in around 27 lb. You could run lighter wheels on it and save some important weight there.
Actually,I tend to agree on the weight factor however the OP did say his wife "wanted to feel safe on the bike, doesn't care for speed that much and likes wider tires". For these reasons I still go with either a LHT or a Crosscheck and swap out for a triple crank if they ride hills alot. Depending on how performance orientated she becomes I don't think the added weight in the wheels/tires or frame for that matter will affect her that much. My wife prefers simular features on her bike as does my daughter and in my daughters case, she keeps up with me fine. The wife and I are both in our late fourties so conditioning is where we lack. It is true though that there are some lighter bikes out there that will take wide tires and that also have more conservative handling qualities......I don't know,its always a trade off and tough to decide sometimes!:)
cyccommute
03-08-07, 08:51 AM
Actually,I tend to agree on the weight factor however the OP did say his wife "wanted to feel safe on the bike, doesn't care for speed that much and likes wider tires". For these reasons I still go with either a LHT or a Crosscheck and swap out for a triple crank if they ride hills alot. Depending on how performance orientated she becomes I don't think the added weight in the wheels/tires or frame for that matter will affect her that much. My wife prefers simular features on her bike as does my daughter and in my daughters case, she keeps up with me fine. The wife and I are both in our late fourties so conditioning is where we lack. It is true though that there are some lighter bikes out there that will take wide tires and that also have more conservative handling qualities......I don't know,its always a trade off and tough to decide sometimes!:)
You could probably put at least a 28cm tire on most of the bikes I listed which is still pretty wide. Heck we used to tour on 1 1/4. The 28 might not be as comfortable as a 32 or 37 but it's not super narrow either. Especially for lighter women, weight becomes an important factor for long rides. If he does go with an LHT, I'd still try to spec it with some low spoke count wheels to save weight. She's not going to need the beefiness.
You could probably put at least a 28cm tire on most of the bikes I listed which is still pretty wide. Heck we used to tour on 1 1/4. The 28 might not be as comfortable as a 32 or 37 but it's not super narrow either. Especially for lighter women, weight becomes an important factor for long rides. If he does go with an LHT, I'd still try to spec it with some low spoke count wheels to save weight. She's not going to need the beefiness.
charles vail
03-08-07, 09:22 AM
You could probably put at least a 28cm tire on most of the bikes I listed which is still pretty wide. Heck we used to tour on 1 1/4. The 28 might not be as comfortable as a 32 or 37 but it's not super narrow either. Especially for lighter women, weight becomes an important factor for long rides. If he does go with an LHT, I'd still try to spec it with some low spoke count wheels to save weight. She's not going to need the beefiness.
Right on! ........I remember those days..... 27x1 1/4" with aluminum rims if you were fortunate but often steel. Bad deal when it rained!!! Ten speeds and somehow we managed to climb every hill in a 42x28! The really cool guys had a Italian or a French bike with sew up tires. Remember that plastic bar tape in all kinds of colors? If you wanted to figure out how far or fast you went, you used your map and a wristwatch with a pencil and paper or one of those little odometers on your front fork! Real wool & chamious shorts or just plain gym shorts or sweats, Beta Biker shoes, I still have mine......those were the days!;)
Right on! ........I remember those days..... 27x1 1/4" with aluminum rims if you were fortunate but often steel. Bad deal when it rained!!! Ten speeds and somehow we managed to climb every hill in a 42x28! The really cool guys had a Italian or a French bike with sew up tires. Remember that plastic bar tape in all kinds of colors? If you wanted to figure out how far or fast you went, you used your map and a wristwatch with a pencil and paper or one of those little odometers on your front fork! Real wool & chamious shorts or just plain gym shorts or sweats, Beta Biker shoes, I still have mine......those were the days!;)
cyccommute
03-08-07, 12:11 PM
Right on! ........I remember those days..... 27x1 1/4" with aluminum rims if you were fortunate but often steel. Bad deal when it rained!!! Ten speeds and somehow we managed to climb every hill in a 42x28! The really cool guys had a Italian or a French bike with sew up tires. Remember that plastic bar tape in all kinds of colors? If you wanted to figure out how far or fast you went, you used your map and a wristwatch with a pencil and paper or one of those little odometers on your front fork! Real wool & chamious shorts or just plain gym shorts or sweats, Beta Biker shoes, I still have mine......those were the days!;)
My Beta Biker stayed in the toe clip when I hit the side of a car. It was still there when the cops brought the shattered remains back home to me about a week and a half after I got out of the hospital. I still have the twisted wreckage in my garage.:(
My Beta Biker stayed in the toe clip when I hit the side of a car. It was still there when the cops brought the shattered remains back home to me about a week and a half after I got out of the hospital. I still have the twisted wreckage in my garage.:(
Ktea
03-08-07, 01:55 PM
OP, I'm about the same height/weight as your wife and I ride a 54 cm Surly Crosscheck. It's comfortable and solid on long rides but not so heavy that it takes any fun out of riding. I highly recommend it. It handles the worst potholes NYC can offer, is a great grocery getter and takes panniers like a champ.
stormchaser
03-08-07, 07:09 PM
I might add I am looking to change soon to either a cross or touring frame and one factor is the BB height. Cross bikes have higher than roadie BB's and touring frames will have a lower BB. Lower BB means less weight on arms/hands more on the saddle.
Would be nice for those of you that have/had both to discuss the difference.
Thanks
MATT
Would be nice for those of you that have/had both to discuss the difference.
Thanks
MATT
charles vail
03-08-07, 08:21 PM
I might add I am looking to change soon to either a cross or touring frame and one factor is the BB height. Cross bikes have higher than roadie BB's and touring frames will have a lower BB. Lower BB means less weight on arms/hands more on the saddle.
Would be nice for those of you that have/had both to discuss the difference.
Thanks
MATT
I'll bet there isn't more than an inch difference. It has little to do with weight distribution but more to do with having a slightly lower center of gravity for a slightly more stable ride (tour bike frame) or higher for ground clearance (cross bike) for better clearance over obstacles and cornering. These are very sublte differences but they do matter to some degree.:D
Would be nice for those of you that have/had both to discuss the difference.
Thanks
MATT
I'll bet there isn't more than an inch difference. It has little to do with weight distribution but more to do with having a slightly lower center of gravity for a slightly more stable ride (tour bike frame) or higher for ground clearance (cross bike) for better clearance over obstacles and cornering. These are very sublte differences but they do matter to some degree.:D
CdCf
03-09-07, 04:39 AM
You could probably put at least a 28cm tire on most of the bikes I listed
That, I'd like to see! :D ;)
That, I'd like to see! :D ;)
cyccommute
03-09-07, 07:46 AM
That, I'd like to see! :D ;)
Flame on!....Phzzzzttittiiiiiittttt. Flame off. I get it now. Cut me some slack, I'm 'Merican! We're metrically challenged...says the chemist:o
28mm, i.e. 1/1000th of a meter, not 1/100th.
Flame on!....Phzzzzttittiiiiiittttt. Flame off. I get it now. Cut me some slack, I'm 'Merican! We're metrically challenged...says the chemist:o
28mm, i.e. 1/1000th of a meter, not 1/100th.
jorgsofi
03-09-07, 08:42 AM
I've been reading, as well as my wife, all of you great ideas. She is now leaning more towards the CrossCheck, given the lighter weight. Downside is CrossCheck comes complete, but with a double instead of a triple (swapping out of knobbies isn't a problem). This would entail an extra cost. Meanwhile, LHT already comes with a triple (and a nifty Sugino XD at that!). LHT is also available with 26" (which may be better for the smaller frame she'll probably end up picking as it reduces toe overlap, something those of us shorter than 5'9" tall have to contend with when riding with 700C), and as someone pointed out the BB is lower than the CrossCheck -- possible making for a more comfy ride. So she's torn between the two, as neither 'complete' version seems to offer the ideal combination of attributes she seeks. If you were in her position and had to pick between LHT and CrossCheck, which one would you pick and why? Thanks again for your help.
charles vail
03-09-07, 10:25 AM
I've been reading, as well as my wife, all of you great ideas. She is now leaning more towards the CrossCheck, given the lighter weight. Downside is CrossCheck comes complete, but with a double instead of a triple (swapping out of knobbies isn't a problem). This would entail an extra cost. Meanwhile, LHT already comes with a triple (and a nifty Sugino XD at that!). LHT is also available with 26" (which may be better for the smaller frame she'll probably end up picking as it reduces toe overlap, something those of us shorter than 5'9" tall have to contend with when riding with 700C), and as someone pointed out the BB is lower than the CrossCheck -- possible making for a more comfy ride. So she's torn between the two, as neither 'complete' version seems to offer the ideal combination of attributes she seeks. If you were in her position and had to pick between LHT and CrossCheck, which one would you pick and why? Thanks again for your help.
Given her concerns about stability, comfort and not being concerned about riding as fast as possible I'd just get a LHT. The front end is taller and will allow a higher handlebar (you can always make it lower) My daughter rides a converted steel mountian bike with drop bars and Ritchey 1.4" tires (36MM) This frame is tig welded chromemolly and about the same guage as the LHT. I think it weighs around 26 pounds with fenders and a brooks saddle. Not heavy and not too light. A simple, sturdy bike, that is both stable and has low enough gearing for any steep hill and allows a good rider position, plus it can take racks if desired.
A bicycle like the LHT can be ridden for a lifetime if its taken care of. The weight difference between the Crosscheck and LHT is fairly insignificant and as others have stated, you can switch out the wheelset if you want a quicker accelerating bike, later on. Keep the sturdy wheels for daily slogging around. I don't see any overiding reason not to ride this style of bicycle. Its just a good all around design and the added weight in the sturdy frame will be appreciated eventually. Components wear out and can always be swapped around but the frame is the heart of the bike and once you find a good fitting one I think it is advantageous to stick with it!
Given her concerns about stability, comfort and not being concerned about riding as fast as possible I'd just get a LHT. The front end is taller and will allow a higher handlebar (you can always make it lower) My daughter rides a converted steel mountian bike with drop bars and Ritchey 1.4" tires (36MM) This frame is tig welded chromemolly and about the same guage as the LHT. I think it weighs around 26 pounds with fenders and a brooks saddle. Not heavy and not too light. A simple, sturdy bike, that is both stable and has low enough gearing for any steep hill and allows a good rider position, plus it can take racks if desired.
A bicycle like the LHT can be ridden for a lifetime if its taken care of. The weight difference between the Crosscheck and LHT is fairly insignificant and as others have stated, you can switch out the wheelset if you want a quicker accelerating bike, later on. Keep the sturdy wheels for daily slogging around. I don't see any overiding reason not to ride this style of bicycle. Its just a good all around design and the added weight in the sturdy frame will be appreciated eventually. Components wear out and can always be swapped around but the frame is the heart of the bike and once you find a good fitting one I think it is advantageous to stick with it!
chipcom
03-09-07, 11:26 AM
Despite the obvious push for the LHT
1. If you want an 'off-the-shelf' bike, get the Volpe.
2. If you want to build up the bike to your specs, get the Crosscheck.
Better yet - take her shopping to test ride a wide variety of bikes, narrow down to a list of what she liked best, then do a comparison of those to see which will fit the desired application better.
FYI, I have a nice touring bike - but I ride my xcross or road bike for most of my commuting, centuries, doubles and day tours. The touring bike is great for loaded distance touring, but it's not nearly as fun or fast for those times when I don't need to carry more than the essentials for the day.
1. If you want an 'off-the-shelf' bike, get the Volpe.
2. If you want to build up the bike to your specs, get the Crosscheck.
Better yet - take her shopping to test ride a wide variety of bikes, narrow down to a list of what she liked best, then do a comparison of those to see which will fit the desired application better.
FYI, I have a nice touring bike - but I ride my xcross or road bike for most of my commuting, centuries, doubles and day tours. The touring bike is great for loaded distance touring, but it's not nearly as fun or fast for those times when I don't need to carry more than the essentials for the day.
bokes
03-09-07, 11:27 AM
The LHT has a super low BB, not very good for riding off-road. So if you want the option for a ride on singletrack, I'd go with the Volpe.
jorgsofi
03-09-07, 12:32 PM
Some clarifications:
My wife will only be riding on pavement or smooth non-paved surface. No major 'off road'.
The LHT will be available as 'off-the shelf' in April, so Volpe would not present an advantage strictly in this regard.
Building up a Cross Check to her specs with decent components will probably get her up to at least 1,250 (not including labor), which exceeds her $1,000 limit.
My wife will only be riding on pavement or smooth non-paved surface. No major 'off road'.
The LHT will be available as 'off-the shelf' in April, so Volpe would not present an advantage strictly in this regard.
Building up a Cross Check to her specs with decent components will probably get her up to at least 1,250 (not including labor), which exceeds her $1,000 limit.
ragboy
03-23-07, 10:54 PM
Get the Cross Check complete bike. It's one of the most option-loaded bikes out there.
If she rides it for a while and decides she needs the third chain ring, you can add it, but I don't find the double chain ring to be a problem at all.
The stability issue for someone with the small build such as your wife is insignificant between the two models IMHO.
If she rides it for a while and decides she needs the third chain ring, you can add it, but I don't find the double chain ring to be a problem at all.
The stability issue for someone with the small build such as your wife is insignificant between the two models IMHO.
Donkey Hodie
03-24-07, 12:12 AM
I've been trying to make this same decision for over a year now...Volpe Vs. LHT Vs. Xcheck?? I think i have finally narrowed it down to either the LHT or Xcheck. A progression but, after reading this thread, I still cannot make up my mind.
If it comes down to deciding that I need a triple and not a double, then I will pick the LHT complete instead of the crosscheck(especially if getting the xcheck built up custom with a triple raises the price to 1250.00 from 1000.00). I like the idea of being able to go on a serious heavy loaded tour if I ever find the desire or time to do so. In the case that I do decide to do a serious heavy loaded bicycle tour, I would probably buy a touring bike just for that occasion(with the intentions of using it for future tours, commuting and light touring). If I could get the crosscheck built up with a triple for the same price as the complete xcheck/LHT then I would probably go with that instead of the LHT(considering that most of my riding will be long distance day rides, suburban commuting, light city riding, and light touring). But otherwise for the price and minimal differences, I will go with the LHT for the triple.
Maybe I shouldn't worry about having a triple? I live in a fairly hilly area(western massachusetts), but perhaps I could just strengthen my legs to the point where a tripple would just be extra weight? I don't know because I am a noooooooooooooob.
If it comes down to deciding that I need a triple and not a double, then I will pick the LHT complete instead of the crosscheck(especially if getting the xcheck built up custom with a triple raises the price to 1250.00 from 1000.00). I like the idea of being able to go on a serious heavy loaded tour if I ever find the desire or time to do so. In the case that I do decide to do a serious heavy loaded bicycle tour, I would probably buy a touring bike just for that occasion(with the intentions of using it for future tours, commuting and light touring). If I could get the crosscheck built up with a triple for the same price as the complete xcheck/LHT then I would probably go with that instead of the LHT(considering that most of my riding will be long distance day rides, suburban commuting, light city riding, and light touring). But otherwise for the price and minimal differences, I will go with the LHT for the triple.
Maybe I shouldn't worry about having a triple? I live in a fairly hilly area(western massachusetts), but perhaps I could just strengthen my legs to the point where a tripple would just be extra weight? I don't know because I am a noooooooooooooob.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.