Touring - Should I buy a touring bike?

I'm getting ready to buy my first new bike in 25 years and cannot decide what to do. I am a pretty large person (6 ft 3 in, 300 lbs) and am really in a quandary. I normally ride about 15-20 miles at a time and have no trouble doing that. I don't have any immediate plans for actually touring, though long distance riding does appeal to me.

I currently have a 42x34 low gear and do have to use it, as I live in East Tennessee where the hills are many and some are pretty steep. New bikes with triples do give me as low a gear (or pretty close), but a touring bike would be even lower. I weigh more with just me on the bike than many of you do with a loaded bike so a lower low and wider tires might be things that I should look at. I am not that concerned with being superfast, although I do want to be able to make a reasonable spped out on the road. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

Hi,
because you are so tall, you need a fairly stiff frame.
Aluminum may be your best bet. You need to go visit a few bike shops and try a few biles. The most important thing is fit.
When you try a bike, make sure you get out of the saddle on a hill and see how it responds. If it feels mushy, it ain't for you.
Try a Specialized Seqouia. It has a lot of the things you are looking for. Trek and Bianchi have aluminum cyclocross bikes. Swap the tires for something smooth, and a cyclocross bike becomes a fine road machine. I am guessing from your post we are talking a price that's under a grand.

I had not given any thought to a bike like the Sequoia-- I have testridden an Allez Sport, though. I thought that it rode fine, but wondered about the tires, given my weight. I have read about others having wheel and spoke problems with the Allez, which would, of course be worse with me. In addition, both the Allez and the Sequoia cost about the same ($820), but the Allez comes with Tiagra and 105, while the Sequoia comes with Sora.

I weigh 250 and am 6'. I found the best bike for me is a steel framed cyclocross bike. I got a Surly Cross Check. There are other brands available as well. I had mine built with 105 components, including a triple. I have Mavic open wheels, a 36 spoke hub on the rear and a 32 on the front. The Surly bikes have places to mount racks. I could do some touring on this thing if I had the time.
I recently added a Brooks B17 saddle that really makes riding easier. With the Brooks, I can wear whatever pants I want and don't have to wear the superhero spandex padded stuff.


BTW: From reviews and threads that I had read on the Specialized models, the wheels seemed to be a weak spot.

Hi,
1) try a cyclocross, see what you think
2) you can swap out the wheels at the time of purchase.
You can either get beefier wheels at the same price, or you can upgrade a bit for a few bucks.
3) With bikes like those Specialized that have three grades of the same model; there is a large benefit to getting the middle model. I'm not thrilled with the components on the base models (they're not actually bad, just blah) while the midgrade has pretty nice gear. The top of the line didn't strike me as worth the money
in the Seqouia. Actually, I wasn't sure why they were charging so much more. You really need to try a bunch of bikes.
4) For long distances, I wouldn't want to be bent over all that far.

I've had a Trek XO cyclocross bike for about 3 years. It's been a very nice, versatile, reliable bike. Some of the stock components are starting to wear out (the rear deraullier), so I'm in the process of replacing w/105.

Cyclocross bikes are a great choice because they can be used for just about anything except fully loaded touring. If you want something that's comfortable for long rides, they're fine. If you're only doing long distance light touring (no camping equipment), a cyclocross will fit the bill. A bike designed for fully loaded touring can be used for just about anything, but it's heavy and slow, so it's not the best choice for a general purpose machine.

I had not given any thought to a bike like the Sequoia-- I have testridden an Allez Sport, though. I thought that it rode fine, but wondered about the tires, given my weight. I have read about others having wheel and spoke problems with the Allez, which would, of course be worse with me. In addition, both the Allez and the Sequoia cost about the same ($820), but the Allez comes with Tiagra and 105, while the Sequoia comes with Sora.

Being a 250'lber I would suggest staying away from the Allez Sport, the stock wheels on the thing really suck! When I first bought it I took it back to the shop each time to have the spokes retensioned, I retensioned them myself recently and haven't had problems with them, but to me, out of the box and after three visits to that LBS I have serious doubts about their reliability under load for any length of time. So I have to concur with spoke problems from experience. Perhaps if you ride on perfectly smooth roads with no expansion joints, patches or potholes you'd be OK, and I'd be interested in moving where you found such a road! I am 6'1" and can tell you my 520 although an older model feels very "twitchy" with my weight sitting up so high, and on the Allez I sit about as high but don't experience the twitchiness. It is no problem with a few bags on the front or back, but otherwise it takes some serious getting used to. The newer 520 may ride a little lower but I have my doubts once again.

My most recent purchase is a Stumpjumper Comp. I can tell you the bike is built like a tank, but very light weight, excllent quality components through out. I never thought I would consider an MTB but it has turned out to be my favorite bike. It is actually more comfortable both ride and fit than a Hybrid I have. Not saying it's the right bike for you, however I would highly recommend including a ride or two on a mountain bike, before deciding on anything, you might be surprised. I used to be a mahser as opposed to a spinner, but have learned the advantages of spinning over the past year, my MTB is more comfortable spinning at high RPMs than any of my other three bikes I ride. The only downsides of the Stumpjumper in my book are the tires which can be switched for something smoother if I want to ride on roads, and the fact that although it's probably blasphemy for MTB'ers, it has no accomodations for a rear rack, which can also be over-come. And I know most the MTBs that aren't aimed at a competition level do include rack/fender eyelets on the frames, if touring or the convenience of having some room to carry clothes and lunches. I can't stand wearing a back-pack, but love to have a rack trunk and/or panniers for carrying work to clients offices!