The Golden Boy 

"Baited?"

Whether you want to place emotional component to my post- that's on you. I feel I respectfully replied to your post. Additionally, I feel slighted that you're accusing me of "bickering" while engaging in thoughtful discussion.

Your original statement is "we'll have to agree to disagree about the SP being so different than the regular Voyageur." That has NOTHING to do with opinion.

The 1984 and 1985 Voyageur and Voyageur SP are made from entirely different tubing. That's all that matters. Different bike. End of story.

My entire premise is based off the assumption that the Voyageur SP is simply an upgrade package onto the Voyageur. It is not.

At the time I wrote that paragraph containing the geometry assertion, almost a year ago, it was based on the 1984 Schwinn Dealer Catalog page on the Voyageur SP

Notice the angles on the 23" bike.









Does the dealer catalog state they are different? Yes. Now, do I believe the angles are similar, if not identical to the Voyageur and that the catalog contains a misprint? Yes.

Are the Voyageur and the Voyageur SP the same frame. No.

The Golden Boy 

By the way, I do not mean to imply that the "regular" Voyageur is "inferior," it has always been an upper tier bike; in fact, for one year the Voyageur was Schwinn's flagship model.

No model of the old Schwinn Voyageur was a poor bike.

T Stew

Thanks for all the replies, and the pics are great! All very helpful.

As far as the SP versus the rest, well the comparison does seem to change with each model year, but it is clear they came with better tubing which is the heart of the bike, plus of course several other better components. How much that matters to us individually is opinion... I mean my most used 2 bikes both have Suntour components, one with bottom end the other next to top end. I like the bottom end ones better for actual use. Some of that is probably due to wear and tear over the years and how finicky some of the parts are to get tuned right. So opinions can vary, that's perfectly fine. And the fact remains the SP's are much harder to come buy and likely higher priced. While I think I'd rather have a VSP, I don't want to 'hold out' for one, or pay out the nose either, so probably going to go with another Voyageur. But would snatch one up if I found it for a decent price even if I had another tourer.



According to the specs 85 had a 21" option just like every other Tenax framed Schwinn I have looked up. I have 21, 22, and 23 inch frames on my other Schwinns and they all seem fine to me. I just might not be experienced enough to tell the difference. The 23" frame has a standover that starts to press the man-parts a bit unless I dismount onto good level ground, so just for that reason 23" is my limit and prefer to go just a tad smaller, given the option. My 23" is a TruTemper (LeTour) so a little bit different though, and with the different frameset and geometry of the Columbus Tenax or SL/SP could be different. Like always I should try it out first, but that is hard to do shopping ebay. Local craigslist is preferable, but I haven't seen one on there in months.

I do prefer the Schwinns, just because that is what I started with, familiarized myself with, and ended up getting several. But like I said I do keep looking for other tourers as well.

Very nice! Green is my favorite color and I have yet to get a bike in green.
@The Golden Boy and @jamesj those are beautiful VSPs! And those two 11.8's really look nice too, I really think they look classy and love the chrome accents.




Thanks for the comments, I'm really curious about that model since it probably shows up the most. I guess sometimes being heavy and dull isnt such a bad thing, when it comes to loaded touring. But with the positive comments on the Tenax framed Vs I'd hate to go with a heavier duller frame if the other option is out there and is a bit lighter and livelier. Just curious, did you get another tourer or switch to a different style altogether?

badger_biker 

I don't mean to divert from the OP's intent on a Voyageur discussion but I'm not very familiar with the Schwinn Super Sport models and am intrigued by gugie's.

@gugie - have you posted other pictures of you SS SP in other threads that I can view and what year is it? If not can you post a couple close ups of the front rack. I've never seen the fork crown side rack mounts like it has. Also an interesting rack design. Fantastic job on the bike and nice touch adding Canti's to it.

BTW - regarding my previous post in this thread. One other rather major difference between my 86 and 87 Voyageur models is that the 87 has Maillard hubs with their prone to pitting cones but the 86 has much better cartridge bearing hubs. Doesn't really matter if you plan to swap to 700c but makes a difference if you want to keep the very nice Wolber Super Champion 58 27" rims.

toavii

The gal has an '82 Voyageur SP with pretty beat paint, albeit all original. Too bad it's a 19 or I could send it your way. The lack of braze-ons would likely make it a year to stay away from though. Only have one water bottle mount, a rear rack braze on, and eyelets for racks/fenders. Side pulls too...

I moved a pretty clean and original '83 Voyageur down the line this past year. Cleaned up well and predictable ride but not worth keeping in my mind.




Have gone through more than a few touring bikes at this point. They're all generally nice riders and have a great traditional look. Frankly, I'd much prefer the Trek touring bikes of the early 80's to Schwinn's offerings based on the few that I've gone through my hands. Also recently finished an RB-T that I would take over them at first blush too. There's a Tange model Voyageur that's been sitting on our CL for most of the last year. It's not cheap but it's not laughably out there. In fact, I priced my above Voyageur under it and was offered over my asking price (and his) within minutes of posting it... Granted I supplied period front and rear panniers but still.

Around here (Twin Cities area, MN), 80s/90s touring bikes generally pop up with some regularity on our CL. Some very attractively priced. Just have to be good about getting to them first. If you really know what you want, a CL alert may be in order...

oddjob2

Below is my Super Sport 1981, all stock, as described by @wrk101

FrenchFit 

Well, I have plenty other style bikes to ride... I found a vgc gold Univega Gran Turismo frame, direct swap over ... with a few personal tweaks & bling like a Woodchipper bar, hammered fenders, etc.. Very happy with that bike, great for day trips.

gugie 

My bikes are kinda like children-anyone asks, I'm happy to pull out the albums! BTW, It's an 82, and thanks for the compliments!

I'm not sure how off topic this is, as the Voyageur and Super Sport models of this era are very closely related. Outside of the cantilever vs sidepull differences, the frames are very similar. The workmanship, in particular for the Panasonic built frames is outstanding. With no paint I could readily see the perfect shorelines from the brazing, no globs or filemarks anywhere.

I'll leave it to others that might have done the research to let us know what the differences between the two frames are. At first glance, it would seem that the Voyageur has cantilever posts, but that's the only difference I know of. With canti-posts, can I claim this to be a Voyageur? Edit: I was curious, so I'm answering my own question, below:

The Super Sport SP is truly a sports touring model. 17" (SSSS) vs 18" (Voy.) stays, longer wheelbase on the Voyageur, other differences one can compare and contrast with The Golden Boy post, above.

badger_biker 

Thanks for the link. Some very nice additions done before the repaint/pc. Cleaver re-purposing of the front reflector mount!

gugie 

Especially like the two-tone tape job on the handlebars! Very nice!

T Stew

Bringing this thread back again, just re reading it and trying to decipher the small differences here and there between the years. I'm also new into touring bikes and have never messed with panniers and such before so this is a bit unfamiliar for me.

Will the rack mounts on the forks being different between 86 and 87 effect a lot of racks? I'd probably like a rack in the front, not sure how common the 'Blackburn' is or if many racks would share this problem. For that matter the racks that go over top of the tire don't even use those right? Pretty much all the Voyageurs I can tell would take a standard front rack?


One last question if I may, just between the Tenax and perhaps Tange framed Voayageurs, is there any difference in the size of tires or fenders that can be fitted? Seems 27 x 1/4" is standard on them, and that is probably OK, but thinking I may want to go a little bigger if i could (but not sure what all is available for good quality touring tires in 27 3/8 or so).

badger_biker 

The Blackburn Custom Lowrider rack to my knowledge is the only one that splits so a piece goes on both sides of a fork blade. It has no hoop over the top and I'm not sure if they are made any longer. I only noted it because I own one and not having the hole through the fork blade makes it unusable. I think any that do have the hoop would be fine mounting just to an outside braze on.

artclone

In my limited experience, the (OEM or nonadjustable) front racks that mount at the fork crown and the dropout attachment point are interchangeable between 27" Japanese bikes. So any Blackburn-style from a similar bike of any frame size should fit. Maybe even most 700c forks are like this too, not certain.

Rear racks are totally differently sized depending on size and make of bike BUT can be identified for fit by matching the measurement between dropout attachement point and seatstay attachment point (+\- 1/4") Some eBayers will give you these measurements.

On the 85 Voyageur you can fit huge tires. You can often swap in 700c wheels to get even more space. BUT 27" tires don't come larger than 1 3/8" or so which is 32mm inflated I think.

But 700c tires have no limits besides the rim width of your wheels. There are threads on swapping out 27" wheels for 700c wheels. Some higher-end and/or late 80s up touring bikes came with 700c wheels.
@wrk101 mentions Miyata 615GTs which are often cheap and have 700c wheels and are probably better bikes than the earliest Miyata 1000s.

T Stew

Edited to add: that reminds me would anyone happen to have the standover height of a 23" Tenax V'ger? My 23" LeTour is right at my limit...

There is a fairly inexpensive '87 V'ger on ebay with a dented top tube.
Schwinn Voyageur Touring Randonneur Bike 32 1 2 in Columbus Steel | eBay

I've been debating, but unsure if that dent would cause any issues with loaded touring. For a cheaper bike just for whatever I wouldn't care, but questioning buying something with light damage for loaded touring. Not sure if this would introduce a 'shimmy' or something like that, perhaps even a point of failure if one was loaded heavy and hit a pothole. Thoughts?

I don't mind if anyone else jumps on it btw, or I wouldn't post it.

The Golden Boy 

I wouldn't.

One will come around. It's about being patient, deciding on how much you want it vs. you're willing to pay for it, and having the money when one becomes available.

Don't settle- especially when you're clearly going out looking for a specific model of bicycle, and one that isn't outrageously uncommon.

What differences are you seeing between the 86 and 87 fork rack mounts?

I have the old style Jim Blackburn style racks on my bikes, so I don't use the mid-fork braze on. As mentioned, the mid-fork braze on is exceptionally handy for low-rider style racks. The low rider racks hold the weight of your load lower- lowering the center of gravity. Other racks can use the mid-fork braze on- the Tubus "Tara" and "Duo" racks would be low rider racks that would use the mid fork braze on. Additionally, racks like the Nitto M1, M12 and M18 racks can be configured to use the mid fork braze on, or the braze ons on the fork ends.

I prefer the platform type racks as I prefer a 'front bag' to front panniers- but I'm not carrying a whole kitchen sink with me. But panniers can be mounted on this type of rack as well.






There was a thread about racks: https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vi...ilarities.html

The rear rack on my Voyageur SP is an adjustable Blackburn.




I would advise against getting a 'jim blackburn' rear rack that has non-adjustable stays. Those were racks that were produced as an OEM accessory for that model and size of bike. In my experience, the stays don't bend so nicely.

Regarding tires- It seems the older touring bikes were built for 27" wheels. So 27 x 1 1/8, 1 1/4 and 1 3/8 tires are available. For my Voyageur SP, I haven't tried, but I don't think I could get inflated 1 3/8" tires between my front brakes- 1 1/4" is difficult.

The only 27 x 1 3/8" tire I know of is the Loose Screws Sand Canyon. They're nice tires. Right now, I have one on the rear of my Trek 620.

jjames1452 

I have owned two chrome Voyageur 11.8's. While beautiful bikes, I sold them both.
I love my '85 Voyageur. It has been enhanced with better wheels, still Shimano hubs laced to Open Pro rims, fenders, Brooks seat, bag and tape.
It is a forever keeper, as it does everything well. It is comfortable, fast enough, and versatile in bad weather, and tougher for the midwest climbs.
(and yes - I adjusted the seat before riding - it was finished in winter and I couldn't wait to get a picture - like a kid at Christmas)

artclone

@jjames1452
love it! Might be an '86 model though, not that it matters.


@T Stew. I too would avoid the bike with the dented top tube. Even if it doesn't collapse the frame, it will annoy you forever.

Keep looking. There was a pristine Voyageur SP here in the Bay Area a couple weeks ago for $250 best offer -- I posted it in the Craigslist thread. Keep an eye on that thread. And use Search Tempest and one will turn up. Search also for Nishiki Crestas, Miyata 6xx/1xxx, Univega, Trek 520/720, Specialized, Fuji Touring, Bianchi . . . there are many fine Japanese touring bikes besides the Schwinns.

T Stew

Thanks for all the comments fellas!

Art... yeah I missed that one, even with shipping and perhaps paying someone for helping me I'd have taken it in a heartbeat if it was my size. I check craigslist routinely but just what I can drive. Way too much hassle/risk trying get something from the other side of the country. And I have been checking about daily since last summer and around here there has been like 2 V'gers is all and they were both the 90+ models and larger iirc. Just not a lot of the better 80's Schwinns around here.

TGB... your probably right. but I don't mind having a non pristine bike either if it is cheap, and can always upgrade later right? For now other than my $80 LeTour (I think) I don't even have anything that will take racks, and I want to utilize my bike a bit more without having to put stuff in backpacks.

The difference in the mounts is one protrudes out and the other is flush. The fella I quoted earlier said he could not get his rack to work with the one style. I just didn't know how common an issue this would be. Of course I could just do as you have and get a rack that doesn't use the mid fork mounts anyhow. Was looking at one of the (88-89?) ones with the chrome fork that doesn't even have the mid fork rack mounts anyhow. I've never had racks before so I am just not sure what I want or can get, would rather not limit my options though but maybe not a big deal.

Tires, I thought I saw Paselas in 27 1 3/8 but I must have imagined it. 1 1/4 is probably fine, I'm not using anything that wide now anyhow.

The Golden Boy 

I haven't seen Paselas in 1 3/8"

The fork braze ons are similar, if not identical. The protruding portion is a spacer that comes with the bike. It's still on most of the bikes, but a lot of people take them off. The only thing that may be different is that some bikes have the braze on going through the fork leg or M5 vs M6.



To me, I prefer having the load in the back. It's nice to have the phone and stuff where you can get to them- but you can carry a bunch of stuff in rear panniers and not even notice it. When I first started commuting, I had my work stuff in a backpack- it sucked. You felt every bit of weight and it got all sweaty behind the backpack. Panniers make it much nicer to carry stuff.

artclone

The fork braze-ons are good for lights too:

mobilemail

I'm not sure what you consider driving distance, but Schwinn Voyageur

Loose screws has some 27x1-3/8 tires https://www.loosescrews.com/product/...8-folding-tan/
I had them on my '86 Voyageur back in the day, but they left very little clearance. In fact, one time I was forced to ride through some fresh tar and my back wheel clogged up big time! With panaracers I would stick to the 1-1/4.

T Stew

Nice looking bike you found there mobile... way too far for me to drive. My driving distance is Ohio, with maybe the exception of Pittsburgh area or right across the border to PA. There is a very similar emerald voyager on ebay as well, but a tad bit more plus $125 shipping. *sigh*

Yeah this is what I brought up, Badger says he could not get his front rack to work on the earlier style since it did not go through the fork blade. Apparently the 87+ go through the fork leg but the earlier ones did not? Again, this is probably not significant except for his particular case. Yes, I'd like to carry most of the load on the rear but also have front ready with racks if need be.

msnede1

I have to completely agree with The Golden Boy here. I have both an 85 Voyageur SP and an 82 Voyageur and, while both are fine bikes, the SP really takes the cake. That being said, they can be hard to find. As mentioned earlier, the earlier Voyageur models are missing some key touring essentials like bottle braze-ons and a triple crank, although the later models included these. So that being said, look for a Voyageur SP if you can find one, but rest assured that the regular Voyageur is still a great bike.

Also, the SP definitely does "exude class!"

artclone

Nobody is arguing that the Voyageur SP isn't a nicer bike than the Voyageur. Nobody in this thread anyway.

That said, for OPs desired specs, encouraging the OP to focus on model name is a mistake. For what he wants, a '85 Voyageur will "take the cake" over an '82 Voyageur SP (as sharp as the '82 is).

The way major bike brands (also car and boat and plane) work is that features of higher end models get passed down to later years' lower end models. So you'll see early Voyageur SPs without fork bosses and Columbus tubing, early Miyata 1000s without canti brakes and spline tubing, etc. . . features found on the "lower end" models from later years (Voyageur, 615). There's often more difference between model year than between model name.

If you just look at bike names and not features, you'll miss out on some gems.

The Golden Boy 

It seems the OP is looking for "the best" bike- and hoping to find that.

As mentioned the "top of the line" 1982 Voyageur has nowhere near the features of the "basic" Voyageur.

I think what the OP is searching for is the apex of the Voyageur/Voyageur SP.

While the 85 VSP has the Columbus SL/SP frame and all the top of the line, highest end parts- the 87 has the indexed shifters and the Deore shifting pieces...

There's a give and take between all of that. The 1985 Voyageur SP has a Columbus SL/SP frame. That's THE bike to have. It has most of the badass equipment that available at that time. If indexed shifting were a consideration- the 85 VSP was the most advanced frame, and the MT-60 components were the highest functioning components of their day.

Again- to find that 'top of the line' Voyageur- find an 85 VSP frameset and upgrade from there.