Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling - velo orange

I called velo orange today to find out when they would have more rando frames in my size they said they were discontinuing the rando frame and they were making a new frame model but they couldn't tell me any specs or even if it was realy going to be a randonnaing frame or not so i am looking for a frame similar to the VO rando that will accept a low rider front rack. thanks for the help.

I found a sasla casseroll frame and fork for 589.00 in my size of 51 they dont have the complete bike in 51 what do you think of this deal.

The Casseroll is a great bike, but that's not a smokin' deal, since the frame/fork is normally $599. Complete they can be found around $1100.

Or should i splerge and get a boulder cycles for 1500 is the boulder worth the extra money thanks. That is for frame and fork. I would realy like to buy a bike complete if i could find the right one in my size.

I called velo orange today to find out when they would have more rando frames in my size they said they were discontinuing the rando frame and they were making a new frame model but they couldn't tell me any specs or even if it was realy going to be a randonnaing frame or not

VO seems pretty up to date with details about their frames. I haven't heard anything about discontinuing the Rando. They have overstock of the large sizes and they are on sale. Apparently they're designing a pass hunter frame. seems like a nice bike.

In my opinion, the VO randonneur is functional, but weird. If it were my money, I would definitely go for the Boulder. It really depends on what you mean by "worth it." I can't say that the two bikes would function differently enough that you could tell the difference while blind-folded.

In my opinion, the VO randonneur is functional, but weird. If it were my money, I would definitely go for the Boulder. It really depends on what you mean by "worth it." I can't say that the two bikes would function differently enough that you could tell the difference while blind-folded.

Just curious what you think is weird about the VO randonneur. If the two function so closely that you can't tell the difference between a VO rando and the Boulder Bikes rando, then it's hard to see what's weird about the VO rando.

Thanks,

Nick

Jan Heine recently wrote a blog post about how expensive bikes are worth it. I read it and while I agree with him in general principle, I wouldn't want to make most of the assertions he did. I've always been a bike snob, that's a burden I have to live with. I think it's worth a substantial premium to avoid a factory built frame, but everyone has to make up their mind on that question.

I caught up to someone riding a VO randonneur and my first thought was that it was someone's home-built first/only frame. I think it's clunky looking and the fork is bent inelegantly. It's apparent they tried to copy a French randonneuse, and didn't want to waste too much money doing a better copy.

Why not a Surly CrossCheck, or something like that? Plenty of other good frames to choose from.

please list some of the other good frames thanks

Jan Heine recently wrote a blog post about how expensive bikes are worth it...

It'll probably shock some people here but I actually agree with Jan's opinion on this. The difficult thing is that not all expensive frames are made equally. Some are definitely better than others. If I'm correct, the Boulder is a custom made frame with would put it in a completely different class than the VO. If it was my choice, I'd spend the extra money on the Boulder hands down.

Jan Heine recently wrote a blog post about how expensive bikes are worth it.

The question is always "Worth what?" The choice to spend money on one thing (a more expensive bike) is the choice to not spend money on something else. Whether that more expensive bike is "worth it" depends on the nature of that "something else". If that something else is another luxury, then the more expensive bike may be "worht it." If that something else is providing food and shelter for loved ones, it's probably not worth it. :)

It looked to me like I could build a VO Rando bike - starting with their build kit, and adding decent quality new parts - for right around $1850. While I drool over the Boulder Bikes rando, my guess is that you are looking at at least $1000 more than that.

please list some of the other good frames thanks

Surly CrossCheck (http://surlybikes.com/bikes/cross_check)
Several from Soma Cycles (http://www.somafab.com/frames)
Salsa Casseroll (http://salsacycles.com/bikes/casseroll/)
I know there's more, just can't think of any at the moment.

It would probably help if you had a more specific set of criteria... there are plenty of road bike frames that you can put a touring fork on and get lowrider racks on. Nashbar makes a decent touring frame for $100, plenty of people like them.

How similar to the VO Rando does it have to be? Plenty of touring bikes would fit the bill, and some more relaxed steel road bikes would work, too.

I thought the specs on the VO Rando were quite good with the exception of 2:
1. Largest tire with fenders is 700C x 28 to 30. 32's are a no go with fenders & fenders are good on brevets.
2. Fork rake is 53 mm & with a 700Cx28 gives 51.3 mm of trial. This is slightly above the 50 mm upper limit for low trail 700Cs.
Other than above, the bike seems nice, nice TT cable stops, DP brakes, proper HA and SA.

If I was looking for a reasonably priced rando frame I think the Boulder would be on top of the list by a pretty wide margin.

The question is always "Worth what?" The choice to spend money on one thing (a more expensive bike) is the choice to not spend money on something else. not to put words in his mouth, but I think his assertion was that over time, an expensive bike would not cost more, and you would get a better, more enjoyable bike



It looked to me like I could build a VO Rando bike - starting with their build kit, and adding decent quality new parts - for right around $1850. While I drool over the Boulder Bikes rando, my guess is that you are looking at at least $1000 more than that.I agree, but I wouldn't necessarily equate the two. You can successfully ride long distance on lots of bikes that are even cheaper than the VO, and many do.

not to put words in his mouth, but I think his assertion was that over time, an expensive bike would not cost more, and you would get a better, more enjoyable bike


Do you have a link to the blog?

not to put words in his mouth, but I think his assertion was that over time, an expensive bike would not cost more, and you would get a better, more enjoyable bike

I agree, but I wouldn't necessarily equate the two. You can successfully ride long distance on lots of bikes that are even cheaper than the VO, and many do.

I would agree with that 100%. If you spend the extra money on a good quality bike/frame you won't need to have clearance for balloon tires because you can get the same ride quality with smaller tires. Higher quality parts also tend to last longer. I've done 1200ks on 1970's steel bikes with no problem but it's a heck of a lot more fun, pleasurable and less tiring on good quality equipment.

If you can't afford the higher quality stuff then you just get the best stuff you feel you can justify. It's pretty simple.

Do you have a link to the blog?

It's here: http://janheine.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/why-buy-an-expensive-bicycle/

I asked VO about the tubing used on the Rando and they stated it is
Std diameters (1 1-8" DT, 1" TT) in a 9/6/9 wall and Non Heat Treated. This is approximately the wall used in Columbus SL tubing.
The wall thickness may or may not be good for you depending on weight.

Based on Utterhausen's comments on the VO Rando, the Boulder may be a better chice, albeit higher cost.

Why not a Surly CrossCheck, or something like that? Plenty of other good frames to choose from.

If he wants a lower-cost rando frame, there aren't a lot of choices, and crossers are usually not good randos, at least not if you're planning on carrying a front bag. For a nice road bike, there are a load of decent choices.

In Jan Heine's reviews of the V-O Rando and the Boulder, the riding and handling of the Boulder was at the top with nearly anything he had tested: Weigle, Terraferma, and Ellis. I'd go for the Boulder.

I asked VO about the tubing used on the Rando and they stated it is
Std diameters (1 1-8" DT, 1" TT) in a 9/6/9 wall and Non Heat Treated. This is approximately the wall used in Columbus SL tubing.
The wall thickness may or may not be good for you depending on weight.

Based on Utterhausen's comments on the VO Rando, the Boulder may be a better chice, albeit higher cost.

Exactly, not approximately, as far as my research has shown. I don't think that would be light enough for decent planing, if that's what one wants.

please list some of the other good frames thanks

It all depends on what your purpose is for the bike. If you want a rando/allrounder, the Boulder Allroad is said to be hard to beat at a much higher price. In San Francisco, the Boxdog Pelican is selling out for porteur and rando use. For sport tour, a vintage Trek 620 is (one of my sweet spots) hard to beat. For heavy touring? Well, I wouldn't really know, but maybe the Long Haul Trucker?

What about Bringheli, or other experienced USA KOFs? There's Ebisu, from Jitensha bike shop in Berkeley, CA.

But there are many other choices, such as Bob Jackson, Mercian, Woodrup, Ocean Air, and the Salsas and Surlys.

What's a really good buy? Well, the custom ones I mention are all less than $2000. The factory ones are from half as much or less.

If he wants a lower-cost rando frame, there aren't a lot of choices, and crossers are usually not good randos, at least not if you're planning on carrying a front bag.


I have done four seasons of brevets and unsupported fast long distance riding with a front bagged Crosscheck (bag's down low, on a nashbar rack). It really works fine... when loaded up its cornering is quite uninspiring compared to my Marinoni road bike, but it has never given me a nasty shimmy or anything like that.

OP you might also want to look up the Rawland Nordavinden. This is actually a pretty good year to be thinking about buying a bike that's built in the old fashioned French style, where you set everything up for optimal handling while carrying a front bag. Both Rawland and Ocean Air Cycles are promising to come out with new Taiwan-tigged (ie inexpensive) models in the spring.

I'll have to look at the Crosscheck. I'm assuming the OP wants a bike for long distance riding, and something in the French style. I'm aware people have been happy on many types of bikes in long rides. I've done them on a tourer and a Mondonico - I'm looking for something more French now.

Did you look at the Jamis Aurora series? I have a 2009 that I like a lot and it looks like such a classic bike (excuse the modern seat).

http://i208.photobucket.com/albums/bb232/fstshrk/jamis.jpg

This is a 55cm frame.

I'll have to look at the Crosscheck. I'm assuming the OP wants a bike for long distance riding, and something in the French style. I'm aware people have been happy on many types of bikes in long rides. I've done them on a tourer and a Mondonico - I'm looking for something more French now.


for sure, me too. i will likely get a low trail frame for brevets this year too, just felt like sticking up for the xcheck since i do think it's false that it's not a "good rando". Interestingly i have heard tell that for a lot of riders, old-fashioned french style bikes are not good randos. The light tubing is supposedly great for someone like Jan who stays seated almost all the time and can spin fast and round, but less useful for people who stand and mash, or pedal square. And low trail is prone to shimmy. i remember that a lot of people had that problem with kogswell p/r's. if the internet is correct you have to load up a low trail bike right, have the right body position, and buy a needle bearing headset on eBay at midnight to keep the shimmy monster away.

OP you might also want to look up the Rawland Nordavinden. This is actually a pretty good year to be thinking about buying a bike that's built in the old fashioned French style, where you set everything up for optimal handling while carrying a front bag. Both Rawland and Ocean Air Cycles are promising to come out with new Taiwan-tigged (ie inexpensive) models in the spring.

The Nordavinden looks very promising, but the bike I'm excited about is the Ocean Air. I spoke to Rob (plus I think most of this is on his blog) and bikes will MADE IN THE USA (not Taiwan), which is something I really like. He's making an interesting choice too, that, again, I like: brazeons for centerpull brakes. I'm very excited to see where this takes them.


It all depends on what your purpose is for the bike. If you want a rando/allrounder, the Boulder Allroad is said to be hard to beat at a much higher price. In San Francisco, the Boxdog Pelican is selling out for porteur and rando use. For sport tour, a vintage Trek 620 is (one of my sweet spots) hard to beat. For heavy touring? Well, I wouldn't really know, but maybe the Long Haul Trucker?

Early 80s low trail Treks are great. The Surlys that I've ridden are a little dead.
You also hit the nail on the head with this BDP. That's one bike I'm enchanted with.


Or should i splerge and get a boulder cycles for 1500 is the boulder worth the extra money thanks. That is for frame and fork. I would realy like to buy a bike complete if i could find the right one in my size.

You might ask if they're still running the special. I thought they had a discounted rate in the winter. Boulder's on my wish list, but I'm watching Ocean Air with great anticipation.

sorry, my mistake!

i remember that a lot of people had that problem with kogswell p/r's. if the internet is correct you have to load up a low trail bike right, have the right body position, and buy a needle bearing headset on eBay at midnight to keep the shimmy monster away.The Kogswells had problems. There were a number of them that had forks that were nearly an inch too long. So they had extra wheel flop and the headtube angle was slacker than it was supposed to be. This results in less trail than originally spec'd as well. These factors would tend to promote shimmy. My low-trail bike definitely self-steers a little more than a high trail bike, but it has never shimmied on me once. From what I've learned about the Kogswells while looking into the fork issue, it is clear that they are not a good example to look at. Except maybe as a reason to spend a little more money on a frame with a better history behind it.

The Nordavinden looks very promising, but the bike I'm excited about is the Ocean Air. I spoke to Rob (plus I think most of this is on his blog) and bikes will MADE IN THE USA (not Taiwan), which is something I really like. He's making an interesting choice too, that, again, I like: brazeons for centerpull brakes. I'm very excited to see where this takes them.

.

Hmm... Is there anything about the Ocean Air frame that you like besides the centerpull brakes and American manufacture? I'm asking out of pure curiosity as am deciding which one of these frames to get.

Early 80s low trail Treks are great. The Surlys that I've ridden are a little dead.
You also hit the nail on the head with this BDP. That's one bike I'm enchanted with.

You might ask if they're still running the special. I thought they had a discounted rate in the winter. Boulder's on my wish list, but I'm watching Ocean Air with great anticipation.

I must have caused confusion. The '80s Treks are not low trail, not one of them - calculate out the geometries based on the Vintage-Trek brochures. Mine is low trail because I had a custom fork made for it.

Plus, double-check with Boulder. I'm pretty sure they ended the "window" for buying a Boulder with discount, back in December. Since then, Mike Kone told me he was raising the price for custom design.

The price of an Ocean Air is not much less than a Boulder. What I like about the OA is the 72 degree frame angles, low trail, long chainstays, and long front center. Like a Peugeot UO-8. I think I could work with an OA, without going custom.

I must have caused confusion. The '80s Treks are not low trail, not one of them - calculate out the geometries based on the Vintage-Trek brochures. Mine is low trail because I had a custom fork made for it.
,,,

That depends on how you define "low" in low-trail. My Rivendell Rambouillet has about 57mm of trail with 700Cx32 tires. My '84 Trek 610 has about 49.5mm of trail with 700Cx32 tire and about 46.5mm of trail with a 650Bx35 tire. My Gunnar Sport with a custom Waterford (A Homer Hilsen) fork raked to 64mm has about 37mm of trail with a 650Bx35 tire. It's impossible to ride the Ram no-hands with a 10-pound Berthoud handlebar bag, but it is easy to ride no-hands on either the Trek or Gunnar. So, to me, there are models of early 80's Treks that have "low-enough" trail even if they're not getting down to 40mm. My list of "low-trail" Treks is as follows:

All have 73 degree head angle, 55mm rake = 46mm trail w/700Cx32.
1976 700=R531+New Continental Oval (NCO) fork
1977 700=R531+NCO
1978 710=R531+NCO, 910=Columbus SL/SP+NCO
1979 710=R531+NCO, 910=Columbus SL/SP+NCO
1980 710=R531, 910=Columbus SL/SP
1981 61x=R531+Ishi Fork
1982 613/614=R531C mangalloy + Ishi mangalloy Fork -- rear-rack + water-bottle cage
1983 600/620/630/640 = R531C mangalloy + mangalloy fork -- rear-rack + water-bottle cage
1984 610 has 52mm rake=49.6mm trail

Nick

I generally look at 40 mm or less as "low," but I've had the experience where I just need "a little lower than this" or some other bike seems to be "low enough for me right now."

Well, we do read the Trek brochures the same way - I agree with all your numbers. I accept that "low" trail is fuzzy and hence a judgement call, but I still think low means 40 or less, for 700c. Jan Heine had an article about this ("how low is low?") that I've been having trouble finding on my disorganized bookshelf. An old Boblist thread talked about there being a mid-trail range in which nothing good seemed to happen, hence my sensitivity to it. Heine (of course!) had comments on that, as well. I gotta find that article!

I think some of the '70s Treks had more laid back head angles, at least in the smaller sizes - as low as 71 degrees if I recall right. Could be they were levels of tubing lower than the 700 models.

Hmm... Is there anything about the Ocean Air frame that you like besides the centerpull brakes and American manufacture? I'm asking out of pure curiosity as am deciding which one of these frames to get.

Mander, the two things I like best are the Paul centerpull brakes (with appropriate brazeons) and the fact that its MUSA. Rob (OceanAirCycles) is a cool guy and I've spoken to him about the bike. He's thought through a lot of things and I have faith in his design.

Is it a perfect design? Well for purely aesthetic reasons, I'd like a threaded fork and the color choices aren't my favorite, but short of going with a custom frameset, I don't think I'll get everything I want.


The price of an Ocean Air is not much less than a Boulder. What I like about the OA is the 72 degree frame angles, low trail, long chainstays, and long front center. Like a Peugeot UO-8. I think I could work with an OA, without going custom.

I like the long chainstays on the OAC, too.

The price on the Ocean Air has only been announced as "a threshold price that I think will make everybody happy, it will be well above the china price, but below the limited competition I have here in the states, and it will include the Paul brakes since they are integral to the design." (Ocean Air Cycles blog (http://oceanaircycles.com/2012/02/02/masu-preliminary-color-options/#comment-1113)

I like the OAC and hope to hear more about them soon. If Rob's going to go head to head with the Rawland Nordi, I think he needs to get a price out and take preorders soon.

Just curious what you think is weird about the VO randonneur. If the two function so closely that you can't tell the difference between a VO rando and the Boulder Bikes rando, then it's hard to see what's weird about the VO rando.

Thanks,

Nick

I don't have experience of the VO to say it's wierd, or of the Boulder to say it's better. I can say that I think the shape of the VO always strikes me wrong, traced back to the dog-leggy fork. I can also share what BQ said in their ride tests: the BQ ride test said it was decently capable, I think they felt it was kind of surprising for the price. But the gushing prose was much higher for the Boulder, (and even more so for the) Ellis, MAP, and Terraferma, not to neglect Jan's beloved old Frenchies. Pedaling efficiency was reported as better with the other four plus Frenchies, as were ride quality on the rougher patches of road or not-road. These four higher-priced American bikes have much thinner-walled and more costly tubesets than does a VO Rando. Can't say much about the tubesets of the vintage French bikes.

I recall his blog amplified these preferences in a more general direction.

I recall talking to VO about the fork, and they did try to get the maker to use a better-shaped mandrel. As we can see, it was not a successful attempt. Managing subcontractors can be a messy PITA.

I like the OAC and hope to hear more about them soon. If Rob's going to go head to head with the Rawland Nordi, I think he needs to get a price out and take preorders soon.

Again, we're on the same page. I'm not too concerned about Rob competing with the Norda. Rawland has some sense of establishment, but his concept of the bike remains squishy and hard to pin down. Every so often Sean at Rawland publishes a new snipped of information, which he soon takes down out of the eye of his customers. I will not pay ahead for a name and a concept. In contrast, Rob is willing to share his latest details and leave themout there until he needs to update them. I like that.