Tandem Cycling - Cannondale rt 2

I just posted this in the 50+ forum where there are many tandem riders, but I'm grateful for all advice

So, again

Good evening all

Any of you keen tandem riders got an opinion about the bike cited in the thread title above, for long distance rides?

Spouse'o mine and I took a trial ride on one a few weeks ago. We both were very impressed - compared to our 20 year old Santana, it seemed extremely zippy - and the shifting and the braking were a whole generation better than ours. Made us feel like athletes, much faster for same output.

But, I'm wondering - it felt pretty responsive, but maybe a bit 'twangy' if that expresses anything. Not arsh, but a bit less absorbent of road buzz. Which is only what I might expect from a tandem half the weight of the one I have.

I'm asking, because for our 25th anniversary I'm tinkering about buying one and joining an outfitted tour from Calais to the Mediterrean. Could do it on singles, andthat'd begood, but to stay happy on a quick tandem would be ever better.

All advice and views thankfully received

We rode or 2005 Cannondale on Bike Virginia for 300 miles in 5 days and the bike did great. We did not carry any gear, just the trunk pack with snacks, tools and rain gear.

http://video.cannondale.com/images/10/CUSA/spec/9RT2_wht.jpg
Lighter means faster with less effort and the aluminum frame is going to give a more stiff feel for the road than than a steel frame. For an outfitted tour, it should make it both easier and more fun and enjoyable!


.

Our C'dale tandem rides like a dream. We're not exactly a lightweight team. It flexes just a tad but always provides a reassuring feel. When we had it heavily weighted down during our tour last summer it was predictable and confidence-inspiring.

We love it. However, I can't compare to other tandems as this is the first we've owned.

Andy

Can't comment on Cannondale, but if traveling to Europe, I'd give long and serious consideration to a coupled tandem. It varies by airline, but at least some are charging hundreds of dollars each way. We don't pay anything extra, since ours fits into regulation suitcases.

Can't comment on Cannondale, but if traveling to Europe, I'd give long and serious consideration to a coupled tandem. It varies by airline, but at least some are charging hundreds of dollars each way. We don't pay anything extra, since ours fits into regulation suitcases.

Thanks all for your comments - very encouraging

About the couplers - I'm a Brit, living in Bahrain (Middle East) and test rode the Cannondale in UK during a recent vacation, and I think it's only right to buy the bike from the shop that let me test it - so I'd buy it there, do the French tour, and swallow the excess baggage charge to bring it back to Bahrain, which would be less than the shipping cost anyway!

We have a "07 C'dale and it has been great. Together we are under 300lbs so the light weight and stiffness works well for us. We do a lot of riding with singles lately and the riding works out very well. On the flat to slightly dwn hill we approach 30mph and the singles like riding in the slip-stream foa as long as they can. It is our first tandem, looking at price and the overall usefullness it is a great ride. We did the ETR this year and had a ball. We live in NH so this bike does make riding hills fun and chading down singles and more fun! Not bad for a couple 50's!

We retired last year at age 65 and bought our first tandem. We were lucky enough to find a brand new 2004 Cannondale Road with disk brakes in large/medium. We are very happy riders. I'm 6'3" and 235 lbs, my wife is 5' 4-1/2" at 115. The longest 1 day ride so far was the 53 mile medium ride at the Midwest Tandem Ralley last month. Top speed on the big downhill was 36 mph. So far we have enjoyed over 1600 miles of trouble free riding. Great handling, shifting, and braking. Hope you enjoy your Cannondale as much as we have enjoyed ours.

Can anyone tell me how much this C'dale T2 weighs? Thanks

Can anyone tell me how much this C'dale T2 weighs? Thanks

Just venturing a guess it feels like the low to mid 30 range. My single is a 17 lb C'dale and there does not feel like a major difference. Compared to some of the other bikes I hve lifted this one feels light.:giver::giver:

I would suspect if the Dale is in the 30 pound weight range it is at the highest levels. Our '02 Dale road tandem was 34+ pounds after we stripped it down and installed lighter wheels and fork.

Also, weighing a tandem without pedals seems disingenuous somehow as a bike without pedals is not roadworthy.

Just venturing a guess it feels like the low to mid 30 range. My single is a 17 lb C'dale and there does not feel like a major difference. Compared to some of the other bikes I hve lifted this one feels light.:giver::giver:

You can easily evaluate how gross weight changes in a tandem will 'feel' by adding or removing dead weight from the frame, e.g., add or remove water bottles filled with... water, pennies whatever you need to achieve the weight difference you're looking for. It's not exact since the weight distribution is focused, but it's close enough to approximate what you'll experience in terms of the influence on acceleration, climbing or lifting the thing over your head to put it on top of a car. Just be sure that your water bottle cages are either strong enough to hold anything other than water and/or are temporarily secured with some Duck/Duct tape or a bungee cord.

If you a place to carry water for a long ride test, use a camelbak. Now, before you say that carrying water on a camelbak won't make the bike any lighter go take your clothes off and look in a mirror and then ask yourself, "Just how much added-value is there to be had in trimming weight off the bike?"

If you a place to carry water for a long ride test, use a camelbak. Now, before you say that carrying water on a camelbak won't make the bike any lighter go take your clothes off and look in a mirror and then ask yourself, "Just how much added-value is there to be had in trimming weight off the bike?"


I hate being fat and slow, but it seems to help going down hills...your post about the mirror must be Halloween induced, it's just scary

PK

You can easily evaluate how gross weight changes in a tandem will 'feel' by adding or removing dead weight from If you a place to carry water for a long ride test, use a camelbak.


Hate to say it but camelbacks on a Tandem are the best thing you can do. We found early on that any movement by the stoker will affect the handling- and I don't fancy the pilot riding one handed while he has a drink.

We use the camelbacks on every ride but still carry bottles for emergency's- OR topping up the canelbacks.

You can easily evaluate how gross weight changes in a tandem will 'feel' by adding or removing dead weight from the frame, e.g., add or remove water bottles filled with... water, pennies whatever you need to achieve the weight difference you're looking for.
... and if I want to know what taking off 5 lb from a bike without water bottles would be ... water bottles filled with ... helium? :lol:

... water bottles filled with ... helium? :lol:

Or nothing... :thumb:

But, nice try...:rolleyes:

There was a comment posted here http://http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=594883 which suggeted replacing the C'dale aluminum fork with a carbon one to reduce weight; might be a way to lessen the twang you felt.

There was a comment posted here http://http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=594883 which suggeted replacing the C'dale aluminum fork with a carbon one to reduce weight; might be a way to lessen the twang you felt.

Your link is broken,

The thread you are referring to is still near the top of the page, but others have also made that switch before. If I recall our Cannondale Fatty Tandem fork was nearly 1kg (2+ pounds), the Winwood Muddy Cross was just over 500 grams, a significant weight savings but also a much better ride with the less stiff and more forgiving carbon fork.

I think an aluminum tandem is great for entry level, but I would have reservations about the material on a second tandem, one that you're apt to use for many more years. Aluminum is a disposable metal; anytime it flexes, it is "work-hardening," forming microscopic cracks, becoming more brittle, until it reaches the point where it breaks. Aluminum frames are harsh-riding because they are designed not to flex - their longevity depends on not flexing. Lack of flex is great for track frames, or even for road racing frames for pros who will throw away the frame after one season or less. Anytime you flex an aluminum frame, you are shortening its life, unlike steel or carbon fiber, which are designed to flex up to a point before damage starts happening, and that point is certainly greater than for aluminum, which has no threshold for flex.

So, from a cost and durability standpoint, I would favor a steel tandem, preferably with couplers (what's the point of having a tandem unless you can fly to different places with it?).

Luis

Aluminum is a disposable metal; anytime it flexes, it is "work-hardening," forming microscopic cracks, becoming more brittle, until it reaches the point where it breaks. Aluminum frames are harsh-riding because they are designed not to flex - their longevity depends on not flexing. Lack of flex is great for track frames, or even for road racing frames for pros who will throw away the frame after one season or less. Anytime you flex an aluminum frame, you are shortening its life, unlike steel or carbon fiber, which are designed to flex up to a point before damage starts happening, and that point is certainly greater than for aluminum, which has no threshold for flex.

Luis


While aluminum is known to be stiff, and there is plenty of reading about modulus of elasticity, in regards to aluminum, titanium and steel, anything can fail.

Carbon or graphite fibres obtain elasticity in conjunction with a proper matrix.

The statement about micro cracks is misleading. This becomes a concern under high cyclic stress, which if a structure is properly designed should be so low to not be a concern. If the component can induce these cracks easily, it is either not meeting material spec, poorly designed, or designed for a limited life.

In regards to carbon being absent from these stress cracks, earlier this week I had a discussion with a pre-preg supplier about carbon laminates developing micro stress cracks in the matrix on flight critical parts. This is making some of the aerospace guys rethink and heading back towards aluminum for some components. A large area of concern should focus on inter-laminate shearing. With thin cross section laminates of proper rigidity, this again should be of little concern.

PK

I'm asking, because for our 25th anniversary I'm tinkering about buying one and joining an outfitted tour from Calais to the Mediterrean. Could do it on singles, andthat'd begood, but to stay happy on a quick tandem would be ever better.

All advice and views thankfully received

You could see about this used Calfee Tetra on the London Craiglist.

CALFEE TETRA -TETRA TANDEM BICYCLE CARBON - £1300 (http://london.craigslist.co.uk/bik/1424324854.html)

http://images.craigslist.org/3k23m53p15O15Te5Sd9ag678729046f3c1f45.jpg


Headset Chris King Black
Shifters 105 9 spd
Brakes Ultegra
Pedals none
Seatposts Easton EC 70 Coda suspension stoker
Saddles Flite captian , womens Fizik stoker
Bars Easton Ea 70 44 Profile Bullhorn stoker
Stems Weyless faux carbon alloy 120mm Easton EA50 90mm plus adjustable stoker stem
Wheelset Velocity semi aero 32spoke White industry hubs 100mm 145mm tandem specific
Rear derailleur Ultegra triple new
Front derailluer 105 triple new
BB Shimano Octalink 105 118mm rear Dura- Ace front both 68mm shells
Tires Veredistien 700x25 600 miles great condition
Dura-Ace cassette 12x 25 Include Sram cassette 11x 34 also for thoses xtra steep hills!
Crankset Zipp Carbon 175mm captian 170mm stoker 53- 42 -30 39T timing Rings Convertable

to a double!
Cages cussi alloy x 4

Interesting crankset, apparently a Zipp 300 (http://www.trisports.com/zicacr.html?productid=zicacr&channelid=FROOG) using an ISIS BB, but this has never been in a tandem version has it, or even a triple?

let's see, according to a currency converter, that would be about $2117. A round trip ticket to London costs ? and the surcharge to bring a bike back?

I'm interested in your comment on road buzz. One of the reasons I bought a steel Santana was the curious lack of road buzz. In general, my wife and I found it to be very comfortable. It may not be as fast as some other bikes, but it handles quite well and we can go long distances (granted, we've done half centuries, not REAL centuries) without feeling beat up at the end of the day. Unless your frame is just shot, why don't you consider updating the bike you've got with 10 speed brifters, new upscale wheels, and good brakes?

I think an aluminum tandem is great for entry level, but I would have reservations about the material on a second tandem, one that you're apt to use for many more years. Aluminum is a disposable metal; anytime it flexes, it is "work-hardening," forming microscopic cracks, becoming more brittle, until it reaches the point where it breaks. Aluminum frames are harsh-riding because they are designed not to flex - their longevity depends on not flexing. Lack of flex is great for track frames, or even for road racing frames for pros who will throw away the frame after one season or less. Anytime you flex an aluminum frame, you are shortening its life, unlike steel or carbon fiber, which are designed to flex up to a point before damage starts happening, and that point is certainly greater than for aluminum, which has no threshold for flex.

So, from a cost and durability standpoint, I would favor a steel tandem, preferably with couplers (what's the point of having a tandem unless you can fly to different places with it?).

Luis

Nonsense.

Aluminum does have some issues with fatigue, but the cycles are completely different. Aluminum does fatigue, but since the Cannondale tandem is so stiff (compared to a wriggly inefficient flexy steel tandem) that it isn't really cycled as much.

I'm 375lbs nowadays and have nothing anymore but Cannondales. Two Cannondale Tandems a 1992 and 1996, a 1989 Cannondale 3.0 road bike, a 1986 ST800 Cannondale touring bike, etc. If someone was going to see one of these bikes fail it would be me. We have almost 600lbs on our tandem it holds up fine.

I can generate considerable wattage (enough to horizontally deflect the bottom bracket on just about anything else I've ever ridden but 'dale) and its the spaghetti like nature of steel frames that caused me to seek out Cannondale way back in the day when I was racing NORBA events and got tired of the steel bikes wasting so much of my pedaling energy.

Cannondale has made millions of bikes. How many frame failures have you ever seen a picture of? Seriously.

We've all seen pictures of Santana fork steerers failing catastrophically, who has ever seen pictures of a Cannondale tandem frame failure? Ever?

There is so much nonsense out there from the 'steel is real' cult regarding Cannondales. The other day I was reading a blog from a guy who was pulling his old Cannondale road bike out of the cobwebs. He wanted a bad weather beater bike to use in the rain and sleet when he didn't want to use his steel bike. He stopped riding it because he thought the ride was harsh. He rode it. This guy hadn't ridden anything but steel in years. He then said he didn't understand why he stopped riding it, as it wasn't harsh riding at all. He was astonished that the bike accelerated so quickly. He used the same language I always use. That Cannondales accelerate like a rocket bike.

There are lighter bikes, but nothing is more efficient than a 'dale. The wattage that goes in, goes out. Say that about your carbon, titanium, steel bike.

The fact of the matter is that a Canondale (tandem, road, touring bike etc.) is an EPIC frame. A Cannonale touring bike with frame size selected like it was a Riv does everything a Rivendell country bike does, but faster, lighter, and better. So it doesn't have lugs. Fine. Throw a Rivendell lugged stem on it. Throw a lugged fork. A Cannondale 3.0 road frame was the lightest frame in the world when it made its debut almost twenty years ago. It was also the stiffest frame ever measured by the Bicycling Magazine 'tarantula' test jig. The funny thing is that those 3.0 frames are still epic. Even in the modern era of high zoot carbon a twenty year old C'dale 3.0 frame more than holds its own. Throw a modern carbon fork on it, with a carbon post and modern kit (the frame spacing on '89 and later bikes were either 128mm to accomodate both 126 & 130, and then just 130mm) and discover how it takes thousands of dollars of frameset to equal the performance of a bike you can find on craigslist for less than $400. As for a Cannondale mountain bike the HeadShok design is still amongst the lightest, stiffest, and best designs ever. There is a reason that Merlin liscensed this for their Titanium bikes. It just made the most sense. In the latest/greatest fad nonsense of mountain biking this design was considered disposable, but a high end Cannondale aluminum mountain bike with a Headshok and non-disc brakes will embarass the boat anchor bikes being sold today. Cannondale tandems are a thing to behold. No they aren't a custom Calfee or a magnesium Paketa, but you can't find a better bike without spending thousands upon thousands of dollars. You can find a used Cannonale tandem for around $1200~2000. It doesn't have the vanity and snob appeal so essential to the other tandems, but its got more bang for the buck. Throw the same high end kit at a Cannondale that gets draped on the other machines and it will more than hold its own. You can't compare a Santana aluminum tandem to a Cannondale, let alone a steel one.

Great bikes. Period.

If Cannondales were Italian, they would be everything people think Colnago is.

Trust me, in about another five years the steel is real crowd will have largely disapated (save the Surly diehards). There will be a renaissance of sorts with vintage Cannondale and Klein frames. Already a German company has figured out how to make the Klein pressed in bottom bracket retrofit to allow those Klein frames to be used today. Not a problem with Cannondales.

Cannondale makes some great stuff.

What it ain't is pretentious. Just rocket fast, lighter than anything not exotic, and amongst the most efficient tandem frame there is. The funny thing is that a Cannondale tandem is exactly what the Santana propaganda espouses (why Santana establishes the standard but fails to live up to its own standards still boggles my mind to this day).

...

Trust me, in about another five years the steel is real crowd will have largely disapated (save the Surly diehards). There will be a renaissance of sorts with vintage Cannondale and Klein frames. Already a German company has figured out how to make the Klein pressed in bottom bracket retrofit to allow those Klein frames to be used today. Not a problem with Cannondales.

...

Not intending to take this off topic but, Can you provide a link please, I would love to get my Klein Quantum back on the road again!

Not intending to take this off topic but, Can you provide a link please, I would love to get my Klein Quantum back on the road again!

Reset Racing BBS...
http://www.reset-racing.de/reset/innenlager_index_1.htm#bbscartridge

You'd need to check with Reset or Klein to make sure it would work on your frame. I have no idea how well these works, I just remember hearing about them from a couple of Klein MTB owners.

Aluminum is a disposable metal; anytime it flexes, it is "work-hardening," forming microscopic cracks, becoming more brittle, until it reaches the point where it breaks. Aluminum frames are harsh-riding because they are designed not to flex - their longevity depends on not flexing.


Aluminum does have some issues with fatigue, but the cycles are completely different. Aluminum does fatigue, but since the Cannondale tandem is so stiff (compared to a wriggly inefficient flexy steel tandem) that it isn't really cycled as much.

How about we leave discussions on metallurgy to the experts instead of reducing what are very complex and subjective characteristics, behaviors and performance into overly biased junk science?

There are numerous technical papers on the Web that discuss this stuff in great detail and even Cannondale's owners manuals go to great lengths to educate owners about aluminum, fatigue life and frame inspections in Section 101, and has done so for many, many years.

All bicycle and tandem frames have a finite life (period) because infinite life would make them so darn heavy that no one would ride them. However, assuming there weren't any defects in the materials or fabrication process and they were designed properly most lightweight road frames will outlast the average owners.

If the owners aren't average and put very heavy demands on their frames due to higher than average weight (600lbs is about 1.6x average), heavy unsupported touring loads, higher than average mileage, higher than average loads due to competitive riding or extensive riding in mountainous terrain, or if the frames have been damaged then it's reasonable to assume that those frames will wear out in less time than the tandems owned by average teams.

The latter is why ALL safety critical tandem components (frame, fork, wheels, bars, seat posts, stems and brake cables) should be inspected for evidence of any durability issues on at least an annual basis, and perhaps more frequently as they get older or if they are subjected to the heavier use described above. Tandems used for technical off-road riding are a different animal and should be inspected after any hard crash and perhaps twice a year or more frequently as they get older.

As for cracks, all metal frames crack due to fatigue, at the microscopic level... it's normal. It only becomes a problem if the frame materials thickness and density doesn't keep those microscopic cracks from growing. It's also not a good idea to get yield and stress cycles confused, even if they are truly moot points for a forum like this: your builders have taken all of the metallurgy and material properties into consideration in designing and fabricating the frames we all ride. If they didn't, lawsuits and word of mouth stories of failures would have put them out of business long ago. However, let's be frank: if a tandem team has unusual requirements they would be well served to make sure the tandem they are riding is up to the challenge by talking directly to the builder. I'd venture a guess that neither Co-Motion or Santana would recommend a 600lb team ride one of their off-the-shelf tandems and even Cannondale's tandem designers would wince a bit when presented with mtnbke's posting, i.e., 600lb team on 12 and 17 year-old tandem frames and forks.

--- cutting to the chase ---

Aluminum is an excellent frame building material for tandems (period). Well designed aluminum tandem frames use tubing thicknesses, diameters and manufacturing methods that make them just as reliable as steel or titanium and in many cases there's not much difference in 'stiffness', just weight unless the builder decides to make the frame stiffer or lighter by selecting a different alloy, greater wall thickness, more or less butting or different diameter tubes.

Cannondale has always made an outstanding, robust and durable tandem frame: overbuilt from day one when they were only sold as framesets in the 80's (period). With any luck, the same level of quality that we now take for granted in Cannondale's tandem frames will remain unchanged under Doral's ownership given that Doral has moved tandem production overseas to the same factories where they build their Schwinn, Mongoose and GT-branded bikes.

Wow, this thread seems to have legs!

Thanks to you all for your interest, and for all the informed advice

You know how it is when you're almost ready to make a purchase decision - and the other stuff comes onto your radar....?

I'm certain the Cannondale is a great bike ---

But an S+S coupled Co Motion Speedster is now singing sweet songs to me. I like steel, and at this stage of my life I'm not going to buy a whole lot more tandems

Tandem Geek, you're a motor-biker too. I just decided that chopping my Africa Twin for a KTM Adventure wouldn't add too much pleasure, and the price difference would cover the Co Motion

And all in all, I prefer the pedalling to the motoring

Ride safe, all

But an S+S coupled Co Motion Speedster is now singing sweet songs to me. I like steel, and at this stage of my life I'm not going to buy a whole lot more tandems

OOOHhh. Excellent choice! So long as the bike fits and any cost-premium you pay for the couplers (and hopefully the cases) will be amortized by future travel opportunities.


Tandem Geek, you're a motor-biker too. I just decided that chopping my Africa Twin for a KTM Adventure wouldn't add too much pleasure, and the price difference would cover the Co Motion

Yes, indeed. And it's pretty much a mind-bender when you start to realize that your bicycles and motorcycle acquisition costs end up in the same league than can be played-off against each other. We considered selling off a relatively unused off-road tandem to cover more than 1/2 of the cost of a second-hand 2004 BMW R1150RT.... Scary, to say the least once they're parked next to each other and you try and reconcile the cost difference. And, of course, as your example shows it works both ways.


And all in all, I prefer the pedalling to the motoring

I use the motorcycles for transportation, because I prefer bikes over cars & trucks... The bicycles are, unfortunately, strictly used for recreation and fitness as using them for transportation is just not practical where we live / work / shop. But, ultimately, I prefer riding anything with two wheels vs. a steel cage on four wheels.

I think an aluminum tandem is great for entry level, but I would have reservations about the material on a second tandem, one that you're apt to use for many more years. Aluminum is a disposable metal; anytime it flexes, it is "work-hardening," forming microscopic cracks, becoming more brittle, until it reaches the point where it breaks. Aluminum frames are harsh-riding because they are designed not to flex - their longevity depends on not flexing. Lack of flex is great for track frames, or even for road racing frames for pros who will throw away the frame after one season or less. Anytime you flex an aluminum frame, you are shortening its life, unlike steel or carbon fiber, which are designed to flex up to a point before damage starts happening, and that point is certainly greater than for aluminum, which has no threshold for flex.



Luis

Many people are still riding C'dale road bikes from the 80's with tens of thousands of miles on them and are still going strong. So while Aluminum doesn't have a fitgue limit such as Steel or Ti, the properties of Aluminum are well know to bike diesigners, and you can easily design an Al bicycle fram that will last a very long time.

And as for Al only being for entry level bikes, Co-Motion is making a nice business selling high Aluminum tandems. Our Robusta has about 8,000 miles of hard use on it now and is doing just fine.

We've just bought a C/dale RT2 about four months ago and can honestly say we are delighted,we already have a 2001 Santana Arriva which we really like too, but I've got to say the Cannondale is a much quicker bike,all the power goes straight to the back wheel,the BB7discs are awesome,but what really surprised us was how comfortable the Cannondale is and how well it handles,as good if not better than the Santana.
We've just completed a three day tour in North Wales(UK)and took it in preference to the Santana.We both agree if we had to downsize to one tandem it'd be the Santana that we'd show the door.
The only thing we don't like about it is the rather agricultural looking front fork but if you want a stopper up front like a BB7 it needs something the hang onto:)so we'll put up with a bit of agriculture

Buy the Cannondale you won't regret it.

Once again, thanks all, for giving me lots of information and food for thought

To share a little background, and possibly interest for your leisure reading

Spouse o'mine and I rode bikes together on our first dates. We both read a 'bicycling' magazine in about 1990 featuring a rave review of an orange Co Motion Double Espresso tandem. We both thought 'cool name, cool company, cool colour, maybe we should try that'

Tried out a Burley Duet and a Santana Visa with the very generous folk at the 'Bicycle Outfitter' in Los Altos, CA. Good people

Back in UK, bought a 'twin lateral' Orbit for 300 pounds (which was about what it weighed) from a fellow who had been the Queen's silversmith. You can imagine the condition it was in, from such a meticulous perfectionist. Fancy lugs on Reynolds 531 tubes, Sun Tour gears, 2 rim brakes from the right hand lever and a drum on the back from the left handle, and it would stop quite reliably within the same week.

Still have it, back in UK. I guess it's something of the same attraction as having a Morgan sports car - by everything rational it's far short of a Toyota Echo, but just look at it!!

Many happy miles. It had a pair of 'Maxicar' hubs - didn't know and still don't what they were, but onlookers have identified them and said 'wow'. All I know is they rode like magic carpets

Then got an older model Santana Visa. All of a sudden we could stand to climb, could descend without whimpering. So much better

Many happy miles with the kids growing up, parents on one or other of the tandems and kids on the back

Now I'm looking for the next step change equivalent to from Orbit to Santana

And your advice and experience are very much appreciated! Ta!