Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - Vintage Peug UO-8 frame for long distance?

i just got this old beater UO-8, which rides pretty nice. It seems to have what may be a comfy geometry, but they are rather heavy, tho lighter than Schwinn Varsitys. Anyone done long rides on one of these?

When I first started riding brevets, years ago, I was riding a 79 Peugeot Competition Light with all the Stronglight components still on it. It worked fine. I did rides through 1200k on it as well as the Furnace Creek 508. It's not nearly as comfy or have as good of a ride as my Colnago C-50 but it wasn't horrible. It'll work fine if that's what you want to use it for.

i just got this old beater UO-8, which rides pretty nice. It seems to have what may be a comfy geometry, but they are rather heavy, tho lighter than Schwinn Varsitys. Anyone done long rides on one of these?

Maybe that'll work fine for you. The only reason I'd hesitate is that that is a pretty low-end-steel bike to be riding for the really long miles. For the last two years, my daily commuter (20 mile round trip) was an '84 Trek 400 which was made with third-rate Tange steel (Mangalloy 2001). The steel just didn't have the nice, springy and light feel of the higher-end steel that is in my randonneuring bike. By the time I'd get home, my legs just felt worn out. So I bought an '82 Trek 614 frame, which is first-rate Reynolds 531 steel: $150 (w/shipping) on EBay. It's a joy to ride it. When I stand in the hills, the bike just accelerates, instead of making my thighs burn.

Craigslist in DC has a Peugeot PX10 Reynolds 531 bike for $250. There are plenty of options in bikes from the 70's & 80's that are made with good-quality steel and that are at very attractive prices.

Nick

Road Fan - here's my little story. I know everyone has their own and yours might be different. One of my aspirations was to get a "proper" bicycle for the longer rides - so I focused on what fittings the bicycle has, and used that and geometry as primary features. Yes, cost was also a factor, but I thought a new bike with new equipment would be the ticket. I bought a Surly LHT - which has nominally better tubing than a U-08, and geometry that's a little more relaxed - especially at the back end of the machine. I put on racks fore and aft, fitted it out with bar end shifters, so it could manage a front bag, put a 30-40-50 triple on it so I'd have plenty of climbing range, built some really nice wheels using A719 rims - pretty much the whole works, except for a lighting system.

I rode it a bunch in 2008, and on club rides, I had no problems hanging until about the fourth or fifth climb of the ride. Then, for some reason, I'd always lose it. Drank plenty of water, made sure I was eating - nothing seemed to help much. No matter. Entered my first official 200K this past March. It was chilly, sloppy, drizzly and very, very hilly. I had cramps before I'd ridden 15 miles. I had lost all contact and was riding on my own. I made it to the first control with 7 minutes to spare. :eek: I decided to bail, and drove home very disappointed.

I realized that very day that the bike was too heavy (32 pounds before gear), and the frame just sucked the life out of my legs. Despite all the mechanicals functioning perfectly - it just wasn't the right tool for the task. Maybe if I rode in Florida, or Kansas it would have been fine, but I don't live there. I came across a nice vintage 34-48 crankset, and a 14-32 freewheel, and I re-geared my old Fuji Finest. I built up some super wheels with Pro Am hubs and Cr-18 rims, put a slightly less beefy rear rack on it, some full fenders, a little bell, a mount for the front bag, and transferred my computer. What a difference!!! It weighs five pounds less, is no slower going down hills, and much faster going up.

From 30 feet away, this bike could be confused for a PX-10 (same white/chrome scheme, very close in geometry), because I think this model was pretty much a knock-off of it. This is a really long-winded way of suggesting that I think you'd be happier riding a lighter and more responsive bicycle than that U-08 - especially if you are facing any hills. Certainly, it could be made to work, but why torture yourself? That said, it's all relative, since someone with an 18 pound rando bike could just as easily make the same argument about my rig. :o

p.s. - I've since traded that LHT for an '83 Colnago, and a Moser. Some day, I'll try riding them - just not on a brevet.

...p.s. - I've since traded that LHT for an '83 Colnago, and a Moser. Some day, I'll try riding them - just not on a brevet.

Why not use the Colnago or Moser on a Brevet???? That's what my Colnago is used for. :)

btw, my Peugot is a PX-10...

Why not use the Colnago or Moser on a Brevet???? That's what my Colnago is used for. :)

btw, my Peugot is a PX-10...

Because I ride a 56cm frame, and these are 60 and 59 cm frames respectively (plus the Moser is at least as heavy). Better size for my son, than for me. :)

If I wanted to go "stupid light" (relatively speaking from a vintage POV), I'd saddle up the hot-rodded Trek 760, or swap the Raleigh Team Pro back over to a geared configuration. Truly, the Fuji is a great combination of comfort and good riding qualities. No doubt I could find better, but I'm pretty happy with it.

Having a bike that fits is a priority...:) I don't know if my bike is stupid light but it is lighter than the majority of rando bikes. It usually weighs around 25-26lb fully loaded before a 1200k.

I'll have to get the rest of the dimensions, but this UO-8 has probably the most relaxed geometry I've seen, save perhaps the Trek 720 classic tourer: Wheelbase 108 cm, chainstays 45 cm, BB drop 7.5 cm, seat tube 55 cm c-c, top tube 57 cm, seat tube angle 72 degrees, head tube 72 degrees, fork offset 6 or 6.5 cm. It's a little bigger than most of my bikes, but it feels good.

I bought it for errand running to and through some rougher parts of town, but after checking the geo, I think this frame (especially with the high fork offset) had potential for some other uses. I plan to put my 700C clincher wheels with Gatorskins on it, to see how it rides.

I'm quite familiar with better steel frames, owning a Trek 610, a Woodrup, a Mondonico, and a classic Masi. I'm not crazy about either the 610 or the Woodrup on longer rides. The Woodrup is cushy, but has a high BB that I find makes the handling quite sluggish. The 610 is a bit too quick-steering as is the Mondonico. Neither the Mondonico nor the Masi have room for fenders with decent sized tires. The Masi is a beautiful combination of ride and handling, but it's a classic and I don't intend to doll it up with fenders and wide-range gears. With it's racy Campy Nuovo Record setup it really isn't suited for me to use for long distance. i just don't have the climbing legs (and body!) it needs.

BTW, PX-10 geometry varied quite a bit over the years. I have a 1969 (in boxes!) that is 73/73 with a middling amount of trail, and I have heard newer ones (post '75 if I recall) are much more upright with steeper angles and very fast steering.

...BTW, PX-10 geometry varied quite a bit over the years. I have a 1969 (in boxes!) that is 73/73 with a middling amount of trail, and I have heard newer ones (post '75 if I recall) are much more upright with steeper angles and very fast steering.

I don't know if I would call it's steering "very fast" but it is probably faster than the U0-8. What is the point of needing the relaxed geometry? Are you going to be carrying a big load or something? Are you thinking of using it for randones?

The plan for me would be to build my UO-8 with 700c, raised handlebars, a triple and probably a 7-8 speed cassette in the back (bar-end shifters naturally). The thing is very comfortable, and unlike some on this board, I haven't found it all that exhausting for quite some time. Last weekend I did 50 miles on it, and that was with 52X19 and 26X1-3/8 tires on coaster brake steel rims. Ultimately, I'd see throwing a big handlebar bag on it (front and rear racks, maybe a saddle bag too) and taking it on brevets and centuries...

I have a raleigh professional as well (though not a team pro) and while comfortable, I could NEVER see riding that thing much farther than 75 miles or so. i'm just too bent over on it.

I don't know if I would call it's steering "very fast" but it is probably faster than the U0-8. What is the point of needing the relaxed geometry? Are you going to be carrying a big load or something? Are you thinking of using it for randones?

I'm thinking of randonnees, yes, with a front bag.

I'm thinking of randonnees, yes, with a front bag.

Compare this to your PX-10.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_jfJf3GdX2mQ/StUd2LjXE0I/AAAAAAAABbQ/sRdYXVZab6I/s640/IMGP2393.JPG

the OP would not be alone in riding this class of bike, look at some of the pictures of PBP. OTOH, I couldn't talk myself into doing such a thing. Brevets in the U.S. are unsupported for the most part. Often this means supported, but you might have to wait a good long time for someone to get out to you and pick you up. The U0-8 was mostly outdated when it was sold. It's a bike meant for 30km rides out into the countryside where you drink some wine and admire the view. If you are going to try to go with a vintage bike, I'd go upscale a little. Depending on where you are, that might not be that hard.

but they are rather heavy, tho lighter than Schwinn Varsitys.there's something heavier than a varsity?

the OP would not be alone in riding this class of bike, look at some of the pictures of PBP. OTOH, I couldn't talk myself into doing such a thing. Brevets in the U.S. are unsupported for the most part. Often this means supported, but you might have to wait a good long time for someone to get out to you and pick you up. The U0-8 was mostly outdated when it was sold. It's a bike meant for 30km rides out into the countryside where you drink some wine and admire the view. If you are going to try to go with a vintage bike, I'd go upscale a little. Depending on where you are, that might not be that hard.

If he updated the drivetrain and handlebars/stem, what would be the problem?

Compare this to your PX-10.

http://lh5.ggpht.com/_jfJf3GdX2mQ/StUd2LjXE0I/AAAAAAAABbQ/sRdYXVZab6I/s640/IMGP2393.JPG

I'm not that familiar with Fujis, so I don't think I can compare. But I'm really talking about UO-8s not PX-10s. But for the record, I've explored fendering the PX that I have, and there really is minimal space for fenders, even with tubular wheels. I'd want to split the fenders, Portland-style.

What did you want to point out?

Real nice bike, BTW!

If he updated the drivetrain and handlebars/stem, what would be the problem?

I'd plan updates for gearing, reliable brakes, and fit/comfort, but I don't see updatng the drivetrain just for the fun of it. But I don't compromise reliability. This bike has ancient and really worn out SunTour derailleurs on stem shifters. Just to get tight mechs that don't wobble I'm going to change over to some spare Shimano 600 6207 stuff, with friction stem shifters. This bike (a 1970's model) has a complication on the downtube - a right side DT shifter braze on. I don't have the complementary left side lever band on, and not ready yet to cut off original features. I usually prefer DTs even on longer rides, I don't see putting them on this bike.

I also jsut discovered the steer tube is bent - haven't decided what to do about that, save find a cheap one. It's an opportunity to go to a 22.2 fork, but I wanted this bike to experience the shape of that old-style Peug fork with the sharp and deep bend at the end.

For wheels I'll probably use my 126 mm Shimano/Mavic clincher freewheel wheels (tubulars will then go on the Trek 610), 14-28 with a triple to widen the useful range. Some triples are really cheap out there, and maybe I can use my Shimano 600 spindle with some French cups. Have to look into this! This project is mostly from my parts box, so far!

the OP would not be alone in riding this class of bike, look at some of the pictures of PBP. OTOH, I couldn't talk myself into doing such a thing. Brevets in the U.S. are unsupported for the most part. Often this means supported, but you might have to wait a good long time for someone to get out to you and pick you up. The U0-8 was mostly outdated when it was sold. It's a bike meant for 30km rides out into the countryside where you drink some wine and admire the view. If you are going to try to go with a vintage bike, I'd go upscale a little. Depending on where you are, that might not be that hard.

I'm not looking for up-to-date. I want to experience a very old-fashioned frame design. That's why I wanted one of these bikes.

I'm not that familiar with Fujis, so I don't think I can compare. But I'm really talking about UO-8s not PX-10s. But for the record, I've explored fendering the PX that I have, and there really is minimal space for fenders, even with tubular wheels. I'd want to split the fenders, Portland-style.

What did you want to point out?

Real nice bike, BTW!

I guess the tire clearance is a bit tighter on a PX-10. Otherwise though, the Fuji Finest bears a remarkable resemblance to a PX-10 - especially the white ones. Fitting them out for randonneuring would be pretty similar (aside from the fenders apparently).

I guess the tire clearance is a bit tighter on a PX-10. Otherwise though, the Fuji Finest bears a remarkable resemblance to a PX-10 - especially the white ones. Fitting them out for randonneuring would be pretty similar (aside from the fenders apparently).

Well, they're both white with chrome socks, yours seems to have more chainstay, and I can't tell anything about your Fuji's front end geometry. Have you ever measured the frame?

Does that have vertical dropouts? I can't do such a good fender line near the BB, due to my long horizontal dropouts and the resulting chainstay bridge placement. Also just needs tire clearance for wheel removal.

It's got semi-horizontal drops. Need to insert/remove the rear wheel with the tire partially deflated. (Not such a big deal to me.) I'm pretty sure the angles are 73 - 73. The top tube is virtually identical to the seat tube's 56 cm length. Chainstays are 44.5 cm to where I have the axle.

But no matter what you do to components, it's still a third-rate steel frame, at best, and not likely to be a pleasure to ride for long distance. Seems like your best bet would be to stick a few temporary, "good enough" parts on there and go out for a long bike ride before you spend a great deal of time and energy on this project.

What year 610 are you riding? Up until 1982, the 610's had a head angle of 73 and rake of 55 for trail of around 48 (with 700C wheel and 700x28 tire). That's fairly low trail, a lot lower than either of my two main rando bikes, very stable with a handlebar bag, and hardly what I'd describe as fast steering. My '82 614 has Reynolds 531 with Ishiwata fork.

If he updated the drivetrain and handlebars/stem, what would be the problem?

I dunno, is the OP proposing to do brevets on this bike? It will do the occasional century, no problem. That's the problem with the forum title, who knows what people think is long distance?

My personal philosophy of bikes is that they are a tool, and I buy the best tools I can afford. That doesn't mean going overboard, but there are affordable bikes out there that make the U08 look like the pretender that it always was. The fact that it is heavy will make it stiffer and less comfortable than the geometry suggests.

I dunno, is the OP proposing to do brevets on this bike? It will do the occasional century, no problem. That's the problem with the forum title, who knows what people think is long distance?

My personal philosophy of bikes is that they are a tool, and I buy the best tools I can afford. That doesn't mean going overboard, but there are affordable bikes out there that make the U08 look like the pretender that it always was. The fact that it is heavy will make it stiffer and less comfortable than the geometry suggests.

He's in Michigan, and he could easily put in a long ride with minimal climbing. That U-08 might work out ok for him on that kind of ride. If he hits any substantial amount of climbing though, I suspect there will be a re-evaluation made in short order. That's what drove home the point that the LHT wasn't going to work out for me. Pushing over 40 pounds up 8% grades, with a few 10%+ and at least one 15%+ climb... made the ride decidedly not fun. Losing five pounds and gaining some lively tubing made a huge difference.

But no matter what you do to components, it's still a third-rate steel frame, at best, and not likely to be a pleasure to ride for long distance. Seems like your best bet would be to stick a few temporary, "good enough" parts on there and go out for a long bike ride before you spend a great deal of time and energy on this project.

What year 610 are you riding? Up until 1982, the 610's had a head angle of 73 and rake of 55 for trail of around 48 (with 700C wheel and 700x28 tire). That's fairly low trail, a lot lower than either of my two main rando bikes, very stable with a handlebar bag, and hardly what I'd describe as fast steering. My '82 614 has Reynolds 531 with Ishiwata fork.

I'm the OP, and I am planning just that, to get it rolling well first, do some 40-50 milers, and see if I like the bike and teh geometry. What it has that is unique and hard to find new is a fork with a lot of offset, around 7 cm measured with the fork off and fixtured on a level surface. I really want to see how that geometry feels. Trail predicts to around 25-30 degrees. Plus it has endless toe clearance and with 700c wheels a fairly low BB. If the bike works well, I'll think through what next - upgrades, get the Woodrup fork raked, whatever.

For me, long distance is 100 (miles or klicks). I'm working my way up and incrementally improving bike comfort to enhance endurance. I get more pain than fatigue. I think I've taken teh Trek 610 about as far as I'd like to without geometry changes (see below).

My 610 is 1984, the year after Trek changed the geometry. The original steering had about 50 mm trail and 73 degree head tube, and I always felt the handling was too responsive to handlebar inputs. I think my style is to steer more with weight. Anyway, it seemed to over-control. I had the fork de-raked, getting the trail up to 58 mm. That slowed down the steering response considerably, but I tried a 'bar bag, and it is hard to ride slow and impossible to no-hand. No-hand works great unladen. I changed it to 700c 28 mm tires in the process. It's fork is (if I understand Trek's vague definition of the tubeset!!) could be MnMo or CrMo. I could just have it raked, but it will drop the front end.

So this Peug is, for me, a cheap (since I'm unemployed, cheap is THE priority now!) way to test low trail and see if I like it before I get real $$$ to spend.

Last night when I pulled the fork I found a bend in the steer tube. LBS is going to see if they can straighten it.

He's in Michigan, and he could easily put in a long ride with minimal climbing. That U-08 might work out ok for him on that kind of ride. If he hits any substantial amount of climbing though, I suspect there will be a re-evaluation made in short order. That's what drove home the point that the LHT wasn't going to work out for me. Pushing over 40 pounds up 8% grades, with a few 10%+ and at least one 15%+ climb... made the ride decidedly not fun. Losing five pounds and gaining some lively tubing made a huge difference.

Well, I've done a lot of Northern Michigan riding, and those roads (Leelanaw Peninsula) are definitely not flat. SE Michigan and South Central have a lot of 100 foot rolling hills, and I'm working on those. There my issue is that I get heartbeat up on the uphills, and the down is not long enough to recover adequately - just need more fitness, I think!

But it's nothing like even the foothills of the Rockies or even western PA. We do have a bunch of 100 mile routes of varying challenge mapped out in the southeast here. I was going up my local hills and the Northern MI ones really well for me, mid-summer. Most of that riding has been on my (30# + w gear) Trek 610 with 13/32 7sp and 39/53 gearing. That range is lower than I need here. Right now it is good to have it, since I've been off the bike for about 8 weeks, until last Sunday.

If I can do a 100 mile before next spring I might be ready to try smaller brevets next season. In 50 miles I don't have any food issues, I can keep fueled.

So that's where I'm at with "long distance."

Aside from the winter weather, Michigan sounds like my kind of place. ;)

My perspective... Hills at 5%... no problem. Hills above 5%... not fun. Hills above 10% ... I grumble. Hills above 15% ... I risk cramping. Hills above 20% (yes, there are a couple, but generally not very long) ... I walk. :lol:

Aside from the winter weather, Michigan sounds like my kind of place. ;)

My perspective... Hills at 5%... no problem. Hills above 5%... not fun. Hills above 10% ... I grumble. Hills above 15% ... I risk cramping. Hills above 20% (yes, there are a couple, but generally not very long) ... I walk. :lol:

Well, come on up here sometime, I'll show you some good rides! And maybe a Peugeot.

I thought you had some good bikes. I think riding a clunker is a lot easier when you aren't used to the good stuff. I've had a down moment or two on most of my longer rides this year, and I think riding a heavy bike would have produced significantly more.

Well, come on up here sometime, I'll show you some good rides! And maybe a Peugeot.

Some Ohio State fans gave me directions to Ann Arbor. :D No way am I coming up until at least May though. I have temperature standards. :p

Some Ohio State fans gave me directions to Ann Arbor. :D No way am I coming up until at least May though. I have temperature standards. :p

At least 'til after football season. But I've found Columbus to be pretty darn frigid.

I used mine for touring in the mid to late '70s. I topped it off with a Brooks and bar cons. I forget the exact gears, but I came up with a combo that had a top of 90 or so and some fairly low numbers for the time and very even gaps between the ratios. And Kirtland panniers front and back.

http://www.pointhappy.com/gcf/VENICE.JPG

there's something heavier than a varsity?

Not as far as I know! I was saying the Peug UO-8 (1972 afaik) is not as heavy as a Varsity. 30# before dismantling, now 25# as finished.

I thought you had some good bikes. I think riding a clunker is a lot easier when you aren't used to the good stuff. I've had a down moment or two on most of my longer rides this year, and I think riding a heavy bike would have produced significantly more.

I do, a Woodrup, a Trek 610, a Mondonico, and a Masi. Bringing up the rear is a not -yet built 1968/9 PX-10. None of them have the typical French porteur or randonneuse geometry, with a lengthy curved fork, long chainstays, lots of rake, and not much trail. I wanted to sample this design. These bikes all have trail in the 57-62 mm range, and most have toe overlap.

Rather than go out and buy a custom fork or heaven forbid a custom bike (still unemployed!) I decided to try it on this bike. So far I've over hauled it and built it up (after fixing the bent fork) mostly with Shimano 600, original on my Trek 610. The idea is to get it set up right, then use it for cooling weather rides here in and around Ann Arbor, including some not-so-nice surrounding towns.

PRELIMINARY RIDE REPORT:

I took it out yesterday for a quick spin around the block. The ride was harsh and jittery, due to tires at 95 psi front and rear, and I think due to the sriffer frame. It should be stiffer than, for example Columbus SL, because the tube walls are probably the thickness of the SL's butts, around .9 mm perhaps. Handling response to the handlebars was reasonably quick and precise.

I took it out this morning for a mile into town for coffee. I had the Gators at 70 psi, a bit low. It felt sluggish at this pressure; next ride will be 75/85 psi. The gearing is 52/42 and 13/23, not as low as I'm used to, but ok in town. The handling was again pretty decent. Several things were the most notable: The bike rode in a perfect straight line if I wanted to, at around 3 mph. I did this while chatting with my friend with whom I was to have coffee. None of my other bikes have that low-speed stability. It no-handed like it was on rails, being resistant to my jinking and wiggling, and needed a definitive lean to enter a turn. I think I'd call this understeer. Another feature was while climbing at low speed: goes in a straight line with no tendence to dart from the BOL into traffic (no feline tendencies, lol!). I also found I need to fine-tune the saddle positioning and angle the 'bars up a little bit. Another centimeter of stem extension wouldn't hurt, either! I don't think Ilike stem shifters, even though these Sachs are the nicest ones I've seen. I think I have a Shimano 600 downtube dual-lever setup in the parts room ...

The ride was softer with the softer tires, but I think they are too soft, since coasting was slower than I like. Need to inflate up to 75/85, like I said. I could see the benefit of a fatter more efficient tire. It would probably be on a 27 inch wheel.

Tomorrow if I can I'll take it out for a 20 miler on my 2-lane roads.