Touring - Reasons one should buy a dedicated touring bike.

There are always lots of posts by people who have a bike that isn't a tourer and want to know if they can tour on it. Other people want to buy a bike to tour, but want it to do other things as well. They're considering a "compromise bike" - one that can tour, but also commute, do centuries, etc. - so they're considering a non-tourer that can be used to tour.

I've opined many times that you can tour on almost any bike, because I've done so at various times in my life, for various reasons, and had some wonderful trips.

However, I thought it might be interesting for people to state why an actual "touring bike" is best for touring, provided you agree with me that this is true. If you don't agree, feel free to weigh in - I'm not trying to prove anything, just get some discourse flowing.

* * * * *

I love to take long, self-supported tours - enough so that I invested in a "real" touring bike. I bought a Surly LHT frame (before they offered the complete) and built it up. I chose it based mostly on the number of positive comments on this forum, as well as the reasonable price. There are many other tourers that I've read about that I'd consider as well if I were buying one today.

When you get a true touring bike, such as the LHT, you get all the extra fittings. It has eyelets for racks and fenders front and rear, three water bottle mounts, a fitting for carrying a couple of spare spokes on the chainstay, a chain hanger, and even a pump peg. Just those fittings alone make it desirable for a tourer; you don't have to worry about how you're going to attach things.

Another feature a tourer gives you is longer chainstays, which means the rear panniers will be a little further back, which means your heels won't hit them on each revolution. I have size 14 feet, so this is important to me. On an old 10-speed I toured on in the 70's I had to keep my feet steady. If they slid backwards a centimeter, they hit the panniers.

Another nice feature on tourers is the ability to take wider tires. 23cm tires might be nice on a road bike, but on tour you need cushioning - both for your body and for the bike, to prevent pinch flats, broken spokes, etc. I have 32cm tires on my LHT which roll nicely but are very comfortable. If I was touring on a softer surface (the Katy Trail, dirt roads that are part of some routes, etc.) I might even go larger. I think I can put up to 50cm tires on my LHT.

I had issues with broken spokes on a road bike I used for touring in the 90's. I started out fine, but broke my first spoke halfway through the tour. Towards the end the wheel was completely worn out and I was breaking spokes every couple of days. I think it's vital that a tourer, have strong wheels, especially for someone carrying a big load. I like 36-spoke wheels with excellent hubs, strong rims, and double-butted spokes. Most of the good-quality tourers have strong wheels

Handling is another issue. On the non-touring road bikes I've toured on, there has been some whippiness (exacerbated by the fact that I have large-framed bikes - I'm 6'4".) Unloaded they've been fine, because that's what they were designed for, but load them up, get going fast (like down a hill) and they've shimmied so badly that I thought something would break. My LHT exhibits none of this, no matter how fast I've gone, and I'm sure other tourers are similar.

Another aspect of handling is how "twitchy" the steering is. You want to be able to keep a straight line, which can be difficult when you're climbing a mountain pass with a big load, going only 4 or 5 miles per hour. When I first road my LHT unloaded around home, the handling felt just a little weird. I was used to my road bike. However, on tour I love how it handles.

Comfort is big on tour. At home I go on long rides, but seldom on successive days, and never day after day for weeks. On tour that's exactly what I do. Discomfort starts to mount with each passing day, until you might be forced to take a rest day just to give your body a chance to stop hurting. I set my LHT up so that it's as comfortable as possible. One thing I can't change is the geometry of the bike. On the LHT the geometry choices are made in part for comfort; on my road bike they're made for quick handling and speed; comfort isn't much of a concern.

The brakes on my road bike work fine for stopping me and the bike; they wouldn't fare as well stopping me, the bike, and 30 pounds of stuff. My LHT has cantilever brakes, which have more stopping power. I'm considering switching to V-brakes before next summer, because I love them on my mountain bike. I couldn't do either on my road bike.

One last factor to mention is the peace of mind. I'm a worrier on tour; I can't help it. I'm almost always by myself, which adds to my worrying. I worry about whether my bike will break. I worry about finding a campsite. I worry about finding a place to buy food before nightfall. My LHT has completed three long tours with nothing breaking. Since I trust my bike so much, my worrying has diminished considerably. If I was on a less-sturdy bike I might worry that something would break (something unrepairable) in the middle of nowhere. It's nice not to worry so much.

* * * * *

So, I think my touring bike is best for touring. Can it do other things as well? Sure. I think it would make a great commuter. It can carry a load, either on the racks or in panniers. It has fender mounts for commuting in inclement weather. It's a little heavier than my road bike and the gearing is a lot lower, so I can say it's not as fast. However, for commuting I don't think that's a big deal.

I've ridden my LHT in centuries, and on recreational rides around home. It's fine for both, and very comfortable. Sure, I prefer my road bike, but if I could only afford one, the LHT would be very acceptable.

If I were a racer, I certainly wouldn't want to ride my LHT, so that's about the only thing it's highly unsuitable for.

* * * * *

To sum up, you can tour on almost anything, but if you're going to do much loaded touring, there are good reasons to consider a "real" touring bike.

Good post. I vote for this to be a sticky. It is wise to help people transitioning from racing to touring to consider these points. I also support the point of view that touring on any bike is better than not touring at all but that a good fit between kit and job is a good thing. Peace.

My LHT has cantilever brakes, which have more stopping power

Really? My experience is just the opposite.

Well thought out post.

My Americano (as configured with S&S couplers, B17, SKS fenders, BB7's, XR's) weighs in at 29.8 lbs, considerably more than comparably "high" end road bikes. Yet I prefer it while riding solo because it is comfortable and incredibly stable.

So I guess I compromised too. But from the perspective of starting with a purpose-built touring bike.

A frame made of substantial steel will be solid and predictable,
when the rear mass wants to bend the top tube and things start shimmying
going too light will make the trip less comfortable..
Well Set Up cantilever brakes which have the caliper and lever working together
have excellent stopping power.

My Cantilever favorite uses older parts, a lever with the cable coming out the top.
which pulls more cable, from Modolo, and a set Of Scott-Peterson Self Energizing cantilevers.

.. On pretty thick wall tubes on frame and fork, so the braking forces dont torque
the tube the bosses are mounted onto.

Lighter tubes with thinner wall benefit from booster arches to resist that torque.

Big Blue Toe (http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?64725-BigBlueToe)
I just got a new LHT in 58cm with 700c wheels, After riding it, I am selling my other bikes, It will get a lot more miles going to the store and to visit family than it will touring, but I too love self supported l o n g rides, more days the better,

I need to add, to ride it empty is a lot more like riding in a luxury car compared to my Allez which is like a sports car,.

Basically, can you tour on something other than a touring bike, obviously you can. Is a touring bike better, goes without saying, to the extent you can define a need that is solved by a touring bike, rather than some other type. You have to be able to define the use accurately, and distinctly. So an obvious one would be a Bike Friday New World Tourist for a trip where you need to pack your bike. You can't stash a full frame in a suitcase if the bike is not designed for it. Heavily laden touring is another. The facts are though, that one can get by on extremely light gear these days, and such gear does not require heavily constructed bike, or even panniers. At that end of the spectrum a bike might not need to be all that different from a non-specialized for touring bike.

Basically, can you tour on something other than a touring bike, obviously you can. Is a touring bike better, goes without saying, to the extent you can define a need that is solved by a touring bike, rather than some other type. You have to be able to define the use accurately, and distinctly. So an obvious one would be a Bike Friday New World Tourist for a trip where you need to pack your bike. You can't stash a full frame in a suitcase if the bike is not designed for it. Heavily laden touring is another. The facts are though, that one can get by on extremely light gear these days, and such gear does not require heavily constructed bike, or even panniers. At that end of the spectrum a bike might not need to be all that different from a non-specialized for touring bike.

+1

Defining a "touring bike" puts the cart before the horse (so to speak...)

We'd resolve alot of bike choice dilemas by first determining what we intend to carry. If we think we can get away with a tarptent, quilt, and alcohol stove rather than a 2-person tent, synthetic sleeping bag, and multifuel stove, respectively, we can get away with some framebag / saddlebag configuration rather than panniers / trailer. Carrying less reduces the different utility of the dedicated touring bike.

Really? My experience is just the opposite.

Interesting. I admit, I haven't done any testing to determine the accuracy of this statement. I've relied on people's reports. I have tested cantilevers vs. V-brakes though, and I'm convinced the V-brakes are easier on the hands.

Big Blue Toe (http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?64725-BigBlueToe)
I just got a new LHT in 58cm with 700c wheels, After riding it, I am selling my other bikes, It will get a lot more miles going to the store and to visit family than it will touring, but I too love self supported l o n g rides, more days the better,

I need to add, to ride it empty is a lot more like riding in a luxury car compared to my Allez which is like a sports car,.

Hm. My road bike is also an Allez. I'm not selling it though. I love having both it and the LHT (along with my mountain bike and my shopping bike with the Bob trailer.) :thumb:

BBT, you were saying cantis are more powerful than road brakes, not V brakes, right? Maybe that is the confusion. It's true Vs with MTB levers are more powerful than cantis with road levers, but it gets a lot more interesting when comparing cantis with road levers to Vs with road levers, on different fork geometries. Either is a good choice.

I'm wondering if when I ride a road bike with side pulls if I don't impose more load than the average person loaded. Yet I don't need special brakes. I think a lot of this stuff is just conventional thinking. The 140 pound guy who wants a Sakkitt for loaded touring vs the 270 pound guy on the road forum who wants a twinkle toes special in unobtanium. I've done 4500 posts, mostly on this forum, and we aren't any further ahead in quantifying real needs. It's like radio with various formats. We ought to be able to say what a person needs based on their actual load, body size etc... As a framebuilder I'm kinda embarrassed because that kind of tailoring is something we could do. It is done to some extent, but still within the formats, and it isn't a quantified thing it's people with various opinions, or relying on their tubing supplier. I know some folks might disagree, but you walk into an archery shop and they can quickly match your arrows to the kind of shooting you do, relative to: draw weight; head weight; release type; bow type and performance level; arrow type brand and material; and your size. It's all on a chart.

I'm in the camp that you can tour on almost any bike as long as:

1. You can ride it for long hours comfortably, meaning it needs to fit you well
2. It will handle the loads that you intend to put on it.

With so many rack options today, you can retro fit almost any bike with front and rear panniers and have acceptable heel clearance.

The two greatest problems I see with so many "can I tour on this bike?" threads, is the gearing low enough for where you intend to ride and will it accept a wide enough tire? The rest is fluff. Unfortunately many people that have not done much touring, think that because they can climb a few hills on their lightweight road bike that they can easily do it all day long with an additional 35-40 lbs attached and it just doesn't work that way. Remember also that riding into the wind with those panniers is a lot more work than without and those lower gears come in handy then as well. Same thing with tire widlth, you may cook along on those 23's and low spoke count wheels but get a rough road and a heavy load on the rear and you're going to see more flats, more spoke and rim damage (assuming you're not a flyweight) than if you use at least a 28 on the rear.

Of course this is just one man's opinion but I've toured on enough dedicated and non-dedicated touring bikes to arrive at these conclusions. YMMV

I'm convinced "You can tour on anything!"

Back in the 1960's my buddies and I tried a few weekend tours.
We toured on the one and only bike we had.
They were mostly one speed, with a rat-trap carrier.
We thought the best bike was the delivery boy's because he had a huge steel basket up front.
Nobody had heard of panniers so we all carried backpacks.
Tents were cotton,
Stove was a two burner coleman.
cycling specific clothing didn't exist in our part of the world.

And we had a blast because we didn't know any different.

I miss my "compromise" very much ... my sport touring bicycle. I could put panniers on Machak and tour, then ride a 1200K randonnee (without panniers), then put the panniers on again tour some more all very comfortably. My touring has usually surrounded long distance events ... 1200K randonees, 24-hour races, etc.

Since Machak was stolen, we have decided to go with a titanium long-distance bicycle and a dedicated touring bicycle. But the question is ... if we are going to the PBP next year, and of course going to do some touring around France if we do ... which bicycle do I use?

BBT, you were saying cantis are more powerful than road brakes, not V brakes, right? Maybe that is the confusion. It's true Vs with MTB levers are more powerful than cantis with road levers, but it gets a lot more interesting when comparing cantis with road levers to Vs with road levers, on different fork geometries. Either is a good choice.

I'm wondering if when I ride a road bike with side pulls if I don't impose more load than the average person loaded. Yet I don't need special brakes. I think a lot of this stuff is just conventional thinking. The 140 pound guy who wants a Sakkitt for loaded touring vs the 270 pound guy on the road forum who wants a twinkle toes special in unobtanium. I've done 4500 posts, mostly on this forum, and we aren't any further ahead in quantifying real needs. It's like radio with various formats. We ought to be able to say what a person needs based on their actual load, body size etc... As a framebuilder I'm kinda embarrassed because that kind of tailoring is something we could do. It is done to some extent, but still within the formats, and it isn't a quantified thing it's people with various opinions, or relying on their tubing supplier. I know some folks might disagree, but you walk into an archery shop and they can quickly match your arrows to the kind of shooting you do, relative to: draw weight; head weight; release type; bow type and performance level; arrow type brand and material; and your size. It's all on a chart.

I think the comparison holds true with bicycles.
the subjective measure, is spending the time with the client, on the bike.
that is... to know how a person rides, requires spending time on the bike with them...

BBT, you were saying cantis are more powerful than road brakes, not V brakes, right? Maybe that is the confusion. It's true Vs with MTB levers are more powerful than cantis with road levers, but it gets a lot more interesting when comparing cantis with road levers to Vs with road levers, on different fork geometries. Either is a good choice.

I'm wondering if when I ride a road bike with side pulls if I don't impose more load than the average person loaded. Yet I don't need special brakes. I think a lot of this stuff is just conventional thinking. The 140 pound guy who wants a Sakkitt for loaded touring vs the 270 pound guy on the road forum who wants a twinkle toes special in unobtanium. I've done 4500 posts, mostly on this forum, and we aren't any further ahead in quantifying real needs. It's like radio with various formats. We ought to be able to say what a person needs based on their actual load, body size etc... As a framebuilder I'm kinda embarrassed because that kind of tailoring is something we could do. It is done to some extent, but still within the formats, and it isn't a quantified thing it's people with various opinions, or relying on their tubing supplier. I know some folks might disagree, but you walk into an archery shop and they can quickly match your arrows to the kind of shooting you do, relative to: draw weight; head weight; release type; bow type and performance level; arrow type brand and material; and your size. It's all on a chart.Hardly anyone gets this. It's all so extremely complicated. It's not simple at all. There are so many little tweaks, that added together, can completely change the characteristics of any bike of the same geometry. Then there are tweaks in the geometry! Add that all together and the possibilities are endless. That's one of the fun things about bikes. They're all different. We're all different. Diversity lends spice.

I miss my "compromise" very much ... my sport touring bicycle. I could put panniers on Machak and tour, then ride a 1200K randonnee (without panniers), then put the panniers on again tour some more all very comfortably. My touring has usually surrounded long distance events ... 1200K randonees, 24-hour races, etc.

Since Machak was stolen, we have decided to go with a titanium long-distance bicycle and a dedicated touring bicycle. But the question is ... if we are going to the PBP next year, and of course going to do some touring around France if we do ... which bicycle do I use?You're talking singles here? I understand PBP is quite tandem friendly. Can you get the ti bike with touring mods in the rear triangle? Touring together, you won't need 4 panniers.

Hardly anyone gets this. It's all so extremely complicated. It's not simple at all. There are so many little tweaks, that added together, can completely change the characteristics of any bike of the same geometry. Then there are tweaks in the geometry! Add that all together and the possibilities are endless. That's one of the fun things about bikes. They're all different. We're all different. Diversity lends spice.
interestingly enough, the more experienced the cyclist, seemingly the more specific the knowledge.

I'm probably hung up on my titanium mountain bike. But because I get bored so easily now that I'm in my "Old Geezer" years (I'm age 63 and probably have developed ADD), I can't stand to ride the same route more than 3 or 4 times. I think that puts me into touring. Okay - so I'm ready for touring, and I love the snob-appeal of titanium. What do I do? Who builds a decent titanium framed touring bike that won't fall apart?

I'm probably hung up on my titanium mountain bike. But because I get bored so easily now that I'm in my "Old Geezer" years (I'm age 63 and probably have developed ADD), I can't stand to ride the same route more than 3 or 4 times. I think that puts me into touring. Okay - so I'm ready for touring, and I love the snob-appeal of titanium. What do I do? Who builds a decent titanium framed touring bike that won't fall apart?

I've seen a handful of these: http://www.habcycles.com/cross.html

they are nice. and I've seen some pretty funky builds too. that is to say, I've seen some guys over 6'2" with back problems, who have specifically asked for a certain build to accommodate them which in turn keeps them on the bike.

I don't have any personal experience with these guys, but I'm always impressed when I see one. (Typically I come across guys on these bikes around Ventura, Santa Barbara, SoCal)

FYI:

here's another really nice forum : http://www.velocipedesalon.com

here's a thread I searched: "touring" http://www.velocipedesalon.com/forum/f2/visually-pleasing-all-rounders-pics-without-stripping-off-extras-17626.html

this website is full of swank bikes

You're talking singles here? I understand PBP is quite tandem friendly. Can you get the ti bike with touring mods in the rear triangle? Touring together, you won't need 4 panniers.

Yes, singles. And no, the titanium won't modify very easily for touring. We have toured together on a number of occasions, and we do seem to need 4 panniers all up. I keep clothing in one and bedding and kitchen stuff in the other. I'm not sure Rowan is quite as structured as that, but he carries more kitchen stuff than me, plus his bedding and clothing in his panniers.

There is no doubt that any bike can be used for touring. It depends on how far, how much, and what terrain.

In Europe, from my understanding, trekking bicycles have flat bars and are more MTB in configuration. The English style of touring bike is the one on which the Surly, Trek and Fuji touring variants are based.

And it is true that the more experienced the cyclist, the more defined various aspects of design have to be to make the bike more touring specific. Robow also makes excellent points about gearing and tyre size.

Gearing is still an issue that most companies that offer touring models have failed to understand. An article in the most recent newsletter of the Melbourne Bicycle Touring Club profiled touring bikes on display at a recent bicycle expo. With one or two exceptions, the majority still sported 30-42-52 chainrings.

I've also found that the additional features some companies put on touring frames, such as spoke holders and pump mounts, and dynamo mounts... really aren't needed. I used to use the spoke holders on my Fuji Touring because the OEM rear wheel, an Alex rim that broke spokes regularly. Once I replaced it, there were no spoke breakages. So, I have to ask the question, why pay to have something that's redundant, when it's a solution for a problem that shouldn't exist in the first instance.

We are tossing around seriously what to do with our touring plans into the future. I still have my Fuji, but it has a design flaw in the front geometry which makes it quite difficult to ride loaded or not and to keep a straight line -- it's difficult to watch the scenery when the bike is veering off line.

Machka's issues with Machak being stolen are well documented, and while it would be possible to modify the Ti bike with two simple holes being drilled and tapped in the rear dropout, and insertion of two Rivnuts in the upper chainstays, it's not something I want to do -- not through any engineering aspect, but because we'd be uncertain of how the frame might handle the touring load.

So we are looking at getting two new frames -- from Thorn, the bike-building arm of St John St Cyclery in England -- and building those up. They are well equipped steel frames with all the "obligatory" braze-ons and eyelets, and they have a good reputation for build quality and value.

We are enjoying the borrowed tandem a lot, but it's ride is a little harsh for my liking and the sizing is not quite right for either of us. We also haven't really toured loaded -- the front fork has eyelets for a rack, and the rear rack already is the wonderful Topeak model with lower rack bars. We also have a trailer that we could tow -- so accommodating our gear would not be an issue. Plus, its standard gearing -- that 30-42-52 chainset that keeps bobbing up -- already is cauysing us issues when climbing.

So it has been mentioned once or twice that we could get a steel Thorn tandem, complete with S&S couplings and braze-ons/eyelets for a great price, and build that up.

We're both experienced touring cyclists, and that might be a bit of a handicap right now. Simply, we are going to have to make a decision one way or the other pretty soon if we are to get used to touring and randonneuring on them before August.

Who knows, we could end up with all three...

At least the Brooks saddles will be broken in!

On brakes, remember that V brakes are a canti brake that was designed by Shimano. The issues with mechanical advantage and cable pull on V brakes attached to standard road levers are well documented. The late Sheldon Brown's pages have a good explanation of mechanical advantage and adjusting brakes to improve power.

My personal jury is still out on rim brakes versus disc brakes for touring purposes. Discs really do have their attractions for me when it comes to touring in dirty conditions. And if I were to go with discs on any touring bike, they would be the cabled variety, not hydraulic.

And, of course, the front fork dropouts and braze-ons do have to be designed with disc brake mounting in mind.

Interestingly, the Thorn frames don't come with disc brake braze-ons.

Interestingly, the Thorn frames don't come with disc brake braze-ons.

That's because they won't fit them even if you wanted them to. They use bladed Reynolds forks and believe (rightly, I think) that the asymmetric forces that a disc brake applies will twist the fork - thus compromising the bike's handling under braking and greatly increasing the risk of the fork failing. The only way to deal with this is to use a more rigid fork, with the obvious implications for ride and feel.

Anyway, V-brakes work fine. I've just bought a Thorn Nomad, which is a heavy bike made a lot heavier by me and my gear. The Deore V-brakes stop me better than any brakes I have previously used and they seem pretty good in the wet, too.

Thanks for the explanation. I knew it was company policy, and they had sound reasons for it.

The model frame we are looking is the Club Tour. We aren't expecting to do much in the way of heavy duty off-road touring, and we expect them to be fairly versatile for everyday use as well as touring.

I agree that V brakes work fine. So do ordinary cantis as fitted to my Fuji Touring. What is important is keeping up the adjustment on any brakes as the pads wear.

My contention in my original post (for which I have done no scientific studies - just repeating "common wisdom") was that cantilever brakes are stronger stoppers than calipers. Don't get me started on side pull calipers versus the center pulls I had in the 70s.

My second contention, based on experience, was that V-brakes are stronger stoppers than cantilevers.

95% of the time any brakes I've used have been fine. (I don't include discs in my remarks, because I've never used them.) However, when doing a long descent, like coming down from the top of a mountain pass, my hands start to ache quite painfully from squeezing the brake levers so long. This is where I've noticed the superiority of my V-brakes. My hands ache substantially less.

I'm considering switching to V-brakes on my LHT before this summer's tour. (I need to have some project, right?) I understand that you have to use special levers for V-brakes. I think it would be a worthy experiment.

I'd like to try discs too, but I guess I'll have to get a new frame for that. That's going to be a problem. I can't see getting tired of my LHT for many, many years. (My last tourer maded it 15 years before I replaced it, and it wasn't nearly as nice as my LHT.) Hmm. Maybe one of these years I'll want to try the Great Divide Trail, and will need more of an expedition tourer for that.

Rowan, I can heartily recommend the Thorn bikes. We have three in our household - I ride a Raven Tour every day and have a Audax 853 for weekend runs and my wife rides a Thorn Sherpa every day.

As for the Club Tour, well Scott Napier used one to set the world record for the Pan American Highway, so it must be sturty enough.

http://www.worldrecordsacademy.org/travel/fastest_to_cycle_the_Pan-American_Highway-Scott_Napier_sets_world_record_90395.htm

As for braking and rim wear; SJS offer Rigida rims with CSS coating. I have been using those for the last three years here in Iceland, riding year round through salt and snow and sand. Probably around 25000 km and no sign of wear and they work well in the wet too.


Magnus Thor
Iceland

I'm probably hung up on my titanium mountain bike. But because I get bored so easily now that I'm in my "Old Geezer" years (I'm age 63 and probably have developed ADD), I can't stand to ride the same route more than 3 or 4 times. I think that puts me into touring. Okay - so I'm ready for touring, and I love the snob-appeal of titanium. What do I do? Who builds a decent titanium framed touring bike that won't fall apart?

Bill Davidson, Seattle, has a built a fair number of titanium touring bikes. I would trust a Davidson not to fall apart.

He has experience in "plain" touring bikes, S&S couplers, disc brakes, Rohloff hubs. Davidson is based at Elliott Bay Bicycles, my LBS, so I get to see their custom jobs on their way out to customers. Big variety in bikes and builds, just give them a shout if you are interested in a titanium touring bike. Reasonable prices and lead times.

My contention in my original post (for which I have done no scientific studies - just repeating "common wisdom") was that cantilever brakes are stronger stoppers than calipers. Don't get me started on side pull calipers versus the center pulls I had in the 70s.

My second contention, based on experience, was that V-brakes are stronger stoppers than cantilevers.

95% of the time any brakes I've used have been fine. (I don't include discs in my remarks, because I've never used them.) However, when doing a long descent, like coming down from the top of a mountain pass, my hands start to ache quite painfully from squeezing the brake levers so long. This is where I've noticed the superiority of my V-brakes. My hands ache substantially less.

I'm considering switching to V-brakes on my LHT before this summer's tour. (I need to have some project, right?) I understand that you have to use special levers for V-brakes. I think it would be a worthy experiment.

I'd like to try discs too, but I guess I'll have to get a new frame for that. That's going to be a problem. I can't see getting tired of my LHT for many, many years. (My last tourer maded it 15 years before I replaced it, and it wasn't nearly as nice as my LHT.) Hmm. Maybe one of these years I'll want to try the Great Divide Trail, and will need more of an expedition tourer for that.

the note in regards to hand/forearm fatigue has long since left my memory due to the use of disc brakes.
I have a buddy who keeps insisting that his early 90's Kona is still state of the art, while I admire his will to stick to something in his head, sometimes I feel bad for him especially when the subtle differences in 20 years of bicycle "progression" comes to the forefront.

cantis are stronger than calipers
(MTB vs Road)
and
V's are stronger yet yet...
discs are pretty much it, when it comes to braking performance... how much you need is a different story, and of course there are a lot of disc brake kits out there.

discs on the road, are fantastic.
i.e. Surly Big Dummy with any kind of a load, I like to use 203mm rotors (which are the largest "common" size) which really turns the bike into a very consistent platform, from hauling to well... hauling my girlfriend around town, simply because she likes me to sherpa her around.

when I had my Hunter 29er built up, I never had any other brake in mind.
when a person stops to consider what kind of forces are applied to a bicycle...
its not that whopping brute force we can put into the pedals, that is the greatest...
but rather... the brake.

that brake lever induces a whole lot more force into a bicycle than anything else... short of crashing into something.
again... its the stopping, that is the greatest force which is put into a bicycle.

Since Machak was stolen, we have decided to go with a titanium long-distance bicycle and a dedicated touring bicycle. But the question is ... if we are going to the PBP next year, and of course going to do some touring around France if we do ... which bicycle do I use?

The touring part of your time in France is for sure....PBP could be over after 1 or 2 days if something goes off the rails. I'd go with a touring bike and make it work for PBP.

I've seen a handful of these: http://www.habcycles.com/cross.html

they are nice. and I've seen some pretty funky builds too. that is to say, I've seen some guys over 6'2" with back problems, who have specifically asked for a certain build to accommodate them which in turn keeps them on the bike.

I don't have any personal experience with these guys, but I'm always impressed when I see one. (Typically I come across guys on these bikes around Ventura, Santa Barbara, SoCal)

Those are some really nice bikes. I will see what I can do. I'll probably need to get on a plane and go down to Florida and visit them, to get their help and measurements to get a price quote.

Titanium sure is nice stuff to build a durable bike out of, isn't it? That's what I love about my GT Xizang. I bought her new over 15 years ago and she's still beautiful and solid as a rock. I love a metal that's strong, a little springy, super durable, and will never rust or corrode. Buy it once and never worry about it again (other than to worry about scumbag bike thieves).

Those are some really nice bikes. I will see what I can do. I'll probably need to get on a plane and go down to Florida and visit them, to get their help and measurements to get a price quote.

Titanium sure is nice stuff to build a durable bike out of, isn't it? That's what I love about my GT Xizang. I bought her new over 15 years ago and she's still beautiful and solid as a rock. I love a metal that's strong, a little springy, super durable, and will never rust or corrode. Buy it once and never worry about it again (other than to worry about scumbag bike thieves).

personally I know 3 people who are riding their Merlins which are probably early 90's

The touring part of your time in France is for sure....PBP could be over after 1 or 2 days if something goes off the rails. I'd go with a touring bike and make it work for PBP.
Thanks for your wisdom, vik. We are certainly taking on board what you say.

Now we have to decide whether to tandem it, go with singles, or just go the whole hog, buy the three frames, build them up, ride them, and make a final decision then!

Thanks for your wisdom, vik. We are certainly taking on board what you say.

Now we have to decide whether to tandem it, go with singles, or just go the whole hog, buy the three frames, build them up, ride them, and make a final decision then!

If you have the cash the only way to know is to try bikes back to back for a reasonable time period. Unless you guys have tandem experience it will probably take several weeks to get the bike setup and work on your team skills until you'll be at a point of comfort where a reasonable comparison to single bikes would be possible.

Given that you guys have lots of experience with single bikes I think you won't be satisfied with a tandem as your only option, but maybe two touring singles and a rando tandem would be a nice combo?

That way you can always press your singles into rando service should you want to and with a trailer you'd be able to tour on the tandem as well.

BTW - I'm in the slow process of considering a tandem for my GF and I. Deciding if I just buy the one I want to tour on and give it a year...worst case sell it if it doesn't work out. Or buy a used low cost tandem as an experiment, but I'm worried that may not give a true reflection of how we'd like a nice machine.

If you started from scratch like I did 5 years ago, you'd have no realistic idea of what you needed to tour on comfortably. With the knowledge gained, were I to start anew, I'd get myself a dedicated steel touring frame and build it out. No way I could ride a stock bicycle across country comfortably. Wrong bars, wrong stem, wrong gearing, wrong saddle, wrong tires, etc. Nearly all the components on a frame become very personal with experience. I'm sure age plays a big role also.

I've twiked my old Diamondback aluminum road frame, at considerable cost, to the point that it is a very comfortable ride. A set of aero bars will be next. Now, if I could just find a saddle that would fit my rear, I'd be a happy camper.

If you have the cash the only way to know is to try bikes back to back for a reasonable time period. Unless you guys have tandem experience it will probably take several weeks to get the bike setup and work on your team skills until you'll be at a point of comfort where a reasonable comparison to single bikes would be possible.

Given that you guys have lots of experience with single bikes I think you won't be satisfied with a tandem as your only option, but maybe two touring singles and a rando tandem would be a nice combo?

That way you can always press your singles into rando service should you want to and with a trailer you'd be able to tour on the tandem as well.

BTW - I'm in the slow process of considering a tandem for my GF and I. Deciding if I just buy the one I want to tour on and give it a year...worst case sell it if it doesn't work out. Or buy a used low cost tandem as an experiment, but I'm worried that may not give a true reflection of how we'd like a nice machine.


We have borrowed a tandem to try it out and see if we like it. We have had it since the middle of August and have done a bit over 1000 km on including a 200K brevet last weekend (see Tandem forum). So we have determined that we like riding a tandem ... and so ... now what.

I do like your idea of two single touring bicycles and a rando tandem.

We have borrowed a tandem to try it out and see if we like it. We have had it since the middle of August and have done a bit over 1000 km on including a 200K brevet last weekend (see Tandem forum). So we have determined that we like riding a tandem ... and so ... now what.

I do like your idea of two single touring bicycles and a rando tandem.As you know, we did a little touring on our Speedster with only rear panniers. A nice thing about the tandem is that we only needed one of a lot of things: panniers, rack, pump, bike spares and tools, etc. Plus only needing one tent, bag, stove, pot set, etc., etc. Two can travel almost as light as one. Going upwind on our loaded tandem was no biggie. Hardly noticed the difference on the flat. I'd think about a rando tandem that'll tour and keep your present road bikes. We still use our singles sometimes. Could rando on any of them if Stoker would get a little weirder . . .

I see CoMo now has a Rohloff Speedster with discs, two Gates belts, steel fork, coupler option. Hmmm.

it was fun to discover that our racing limo is also a cool touring bike.

If you started from scratch like I did 5 years ago, you'd have no realistic idea of what you needed to tour on comfortably. With the knowledge gained, were I to start anew, I'd get myself a dedicated steel touring frame and build it out. No way I could ride a stock bicycle across country comfortably. Wrong bars, wrong stem, wrong gearing, wrong saddle, wrong tires, etc. Nearly all the components on a frame become very personal with experience. I'm sure age plays a big role also.


This is as true as it gets.

There aren't many things left on my old Fuji that are original. Wheels were a major issue, saddle another. The stem's gone although the bars are the same.

It's a bit like grandma's axe...

I certainly doubt if I will ever buy a complete bike from a shop ever again. After four or so bike builds from scratch in the past four years, I have a fair idea of what I want and where to get it at good prices.

Essentially, though, that decision-making has come from experience.

It's a bit like grandma's axe...

I certainly doubt if I will ever buy a complete bike from a shop ever again. After four or so bike builds from scratch in the past four years, I have a fair idea of what I want and where to get it at good prices.

Essentially, though, that decision-making has come from experience.

This seems like where most folks end up. Once you know what works, why buy a compromise built for an "average" rider? You spec it, then you can use a mixture of used and new parts where it counts.

This is as true as it gets.

There aren't many things left on my old Fuji that are original. Wheels were a major issue, saddle another. The stem's gone although the bars are the same.

It's a bit like grandma's axe...

I certainly doubt if I will ever buy a complete bike from a shop ever again. After four or so bike builds from scratch in the past four years, I have a fair idea of what I want and where to get it at good prices.

Essentially, though, that decision-making has come from experience.

I guess it depends on your needs. Although I prefer my fully custom LHT. In a pinch I could buy a stock LHT and just swap in my saddle and tires of choice. The rest of the build is fine and I'd replace as they wore out. I think even with internet scrounging it would be cheaper than building from a frame. If you are not happy with stuff like wheels & drivetrain/shifters then there wouldn't be any savings.

I guess it depends on your needs. Although I prefer my fully custom LHT. In a pinch I could buy a stock LHT and just swap in my saddle and tires of choice. The rest of the build is fine and I'd replace as they wore out. I think even with internet scrounging it would be cheaper than building from a frame. If you are not happy with stuff like wheels & drivetrain/shifters then there wouldn't be any savings.

But building a bicycle isn't necessarily all about doing it cheaper than buying an off-the-shelf bicycle ... isn't it more about doing the build ... the thrill of the hunt (so to speak) to find all the parts, and the joy of building it yourself?

But building a bicycle isn't necessarily all about doing it cheaper than buying an off-the-shelf bicycle ... isn't it more about doing the build ... the thrill of the hunt (so to speak) to find all the parts, and the joy of building it yourself?

+1 on that.
if it ain't riding bikes, working on bikes, lurking on the internet... BIKES...
build, rebuild, tear down, try this, try that... repeat

A dedicated touring bike + a second set of lighter wheels with tighter gearing is a very versatile combination.

But building a bicycle isn't necessarily all about doing it cheaper than buying an off-the-shelf bicycle ... isn't it more about doing the build ... the thrill of the hunt (so to speak) to find all the parts, and the joy of building it yourself?

It can be both. Just depends on the situation really. I enjoyed building my fully custom LHT, but if I had to replace it tomorrow I'd buy a stock one because the cost savings vs. the benefit of going custom isn't that great. When I built my LHT there was no complete bike available. OTOH I know that I have lots of other unique bike projects I can do that have to be custom to get my need to research and tinker taken care off.

The reason I suggested looking a stock LHT was that you will probably want to customize your rando tandem and if you are getting 3 bikes [really 4 based on cost] it makes sense to save some $$ on the touring bikes since there are some decent stock models available and splurge on the rando tandem were customization will probably pay better dividends.

If you can afford to customize all 3 go for it! I would never tell anyone to restrain themselves on bike builds if it's within their budget...:thumb:

But building a bicycle isn't necessarily all about doing it cheaper than buying an off-the-shelf bicycle ... isn't it more about doing the build ... the thrill of the hunt (so to speak) to find all the parts, and the joy of building it yourself?

This certainly sums it up for me. I could have spent much less on a complete LHT and gotten a bike of similar quality. Building mine from a frame was costly - especially since it was intended to be a bike I would tour on for many years - I didn't want to settle. I looked for parts on Ebay, but mostly went with brand new, and while I didn't go for top-end components, I did make sure they were all very high-quality.

I would contend that the extra expense was worth it when you factor in all that I learned, how intimately I know every part on the bike, the tools I acquired (hey, tools are an investment, right?), and the fun and satisfaction that I enjoyed.

But building a bicycle isn't necessarily all about doing it cheaper than buying an off-the-shelf bicycle ... isn't it more about doing the build ... the thrill of the hunt (so to speak) to find all the parts, and the joy of building it yourself?

So with you on this. It defiantly makes the winters go by easier. Converting the Trek 520 back from commuter to touring as I am typing this.

How about retrieving a bike from the local rubbish dump for the frame and fork and building it up from there?

I can feel a new thread coming on about a build using a Shogun Alpine GT that I picked up for nothing today... Machka and I could have matching touring bikes yet if I do a parallel rebuild of my old Shogun 400 fixie as a geared touring bike. Spread rear stays, bullhorn bars, bar-end shifters....

Oh, and yes, the Shogun Alpine has braze-ons and eyelets on fork and rear triangle for racks (note plural) and mudguards/fenders. The front fork is actually better equipped than the 400.

Stay tuned folks!!

I think this post by Russ on The Path Less Pedaled sums it up the best and keeps in mind what matters - http://pathlesspedaled.com/2010/11/youre-doing-it-wrong/

"seen where gear self-consciousness has kept people off the bike, and that is just plain wrong"