echo victor 

I've been interested in trying a low trail bike with a handlebar bag for possible future randonneuring and just general riding. However, I've held off due to needing to either have a fork re-raked or buy a new fork with longer rake. But just recently I was looking over some old catalogs and came across some geometry tables I hadn't seen before. And it turns out that my early '80s Fuji S12-S LTD is indeed a low trail bike.

So we're all on the same page, my understanding is that anything around 40-45 mm and lower is considered "low trail." While the exact rake on the S12-S LTD is not available (they didn't have the full geometry printed in the catalog for the years of that model), the Fuji Touring series bikes which descended from the America and S12-S LTD are listed as having 65 mm fork offset/rake. In the 1983 catalog (geometry tables are in 1984) there's an overlap and both the America and S12-S LTD plus the first of the Touring series bikes were present, and since they appear to have similar forks (actually the rake on the Touring appears to be a little less), I figured I would measure the rake on mine. My (admittedly not perfect) measurement suggests that the S12-S LTD has a rake of at least 65 mm, maybe a bit more.

Plug that into Jim's trail calculator with the 73 degree head tube angle and 27x1 1/4 wheels & tires yields 39 mm of trail. So even without converting to smaller wheels, this is a low trail bike. Interestingly, I suspect it the engineers at Fuji were explicitly borrowing from existing low trail designs: on a page at Jan Heine's site, there's an image with geometry of an older randonneur bike (maybe a Singer?). It shows a 72.5 degree head tube, 67 mm rake, 45 mm trail (though Jim's calculator finds it as closer to 40), and 450 mm chainstays (or chainstay horizontal, anyway). My S12-S LTD has a 73 degree head tube, 65+ mm rake, ~39 mm trail, and ~435-445 mm chainstays (semi-horizontal, so semi-adjustable). So the geometry is really very similar (in fact, even my seat tube and top tube measurements seem to be similar).



I know there are plenty of sport-touring style bikes from the late '70s and early '80s which were standard medium trail, but it seems Fuji took a different tack on some of its sport-touring models. Now I'm curious about other models from that era and which might be secretly low(er) trail. Anyone have a link for geometry tables for '70s Raleighs?

On the whole, I'm pretty pleased, because it seems like this Fuji is a good candidate to build out as a randonneuse (despite the dearth of braze-ons). Sorry for the lack of photos - if anyone's interested, I'll try to take some and add them here.

I look forward to hearing anyone's thoughts or comments. Thanks for reading.

SlowRoller

Have fun: https://hiddenfortress.org/geometry/Brand.html

echo victor 

Thanks! I thought I'd seen something like that once before. Unfortunately, it only has 2 Raleigh entries for an International and a Competition. As much as I'd like to have one of those sometime, I haven't got either.

Did Raleigh not publish their geometry specs?

Cougrrcj

I'm lost with frame geometry, but all I can say for sure is my old S-10S in 23" (57cm?) had a longer wheelbase than any of my college dormmates that also rode 23" frames because when I used the rollers I had to adjust the rollers to accept my longer bike. Look at the toptube length of the '74 S-10S in that linked chart - long toptube, long fork rake, relatively long chainstays (for a 57cm frame). My bike has dual eyelets at the rear to accommodate both rack and fenders, and the front has only one. Still, not a bad 'sport-touring' rig. Not in the full-tourer LHT category, but a nice easy-riding bike. Yeah, only a straight-gauge hi-ten frame, but probably strong enough for 'moderate touring'. I rode mine on a 1000-mile roundtrip and was not 'beat up' at the end.

The same frame-size Univega Viva Sport that I picked up last year does not have that same long wheelbase and is a much livelier ride. Not so sure I'd like to ride it on a tour though.

sailorbenjamin

I've measured a few;

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...base?highlight=

DIMcyclist

It wouldn't surprise me; it's been my understanding that Fuji took quite different developmental line with their bikes in focusing more on commuter & touring models than did most of the other Japanese makers.

VintageRide

I have posted my 1981 Fuji S12S a number of times but in case you have not come across it here are some images. I decided on one of these as a frame only project to test a low trail setup without spending too much - I had the frame cold set to 135mm to accept modern 9 speed Shimano gearing ( 11-34 ) Fortunately I had most of the parts on hand to make it a 650b conversion which further reduced the trail. I measured somewhat crudely around 65mm of rake, and I have seen 70mm listed but regardless with 650b wheels it comes out in the neighborhood of 35mm of trail or less. I loaded my smaller V.O. front bag with at least 5 pounds, probably more like 7 or 8 and the bike felt quite good, I really enjoy riding it. The widest tire it will take with 45mm fenders just clearing ( with some slight bending in ) in the case of the front fork is 38mm. You might get 42mm Hetres fitted without fenders, I never tried it although I have them on another bike. Plenty of bottom bracket height too, the bike just feels and looks like it was made for it. The longish 44 cm chain stays help as well I think. Not too short or long. The main frame is straight gauge chrome moly with hi ten forks and stays but the way I have it set up it is a fine riding and handling bike, it would be something else I am sure if it could take the wider 42mm Hetres but even with the 38mm Soma B Lines it is quite comfortable. I woud love to get a hold of an America of the same year - or an '82 model as I am positive they have the same geometries from at least 1980 - 1982 along with the S12S Ltd except that the America is made entirely of chrome moly steel. I also like the metallic brown on the Fuji frame I purchased and I would actually have fork rack mounts added and repaint an America that color if I ever find one in my size - I believe blue was the only color offered in the years mentioned. My frame is a 56 cm center to center with a 56 cm top tube which I prefer even though I can ride a 59 cm easily, I like the shorter top tube. I had to buy some Dia Compe 750 center pull brakes but that was about it. Most people would probably not spend what it has cost me for all of the parts - the Brooks B17S was worth more than I paid for the frame but I will say this - outside of having a somewhat lighter and nicer made custom or production frame I would rate what Fuji put together with the S12S and other models that shared the same geometry is something that really works if you want a 650b low trail bike. They may not have the name or status of certain French makes and their imitators but they are exceptional bargains that are worthy and very capable designs. Granted they are not as integrated as a purpose built randonneur bike would be but again, for a modest amount a knowledgeable frame builder could update one. Knowing what it would cost for a custom or other high end rando frame and having experienced how nice even the mid level ones are I think the Fuji America in particular would make an exceptional low cost alternative - and any other equivalent quality Japanese make that has the same geometry.

mikemowbz

What a coincidence. I was just thinking about this bike when I read the OP...then scrolled down to your post, and pics.

I remember you speaking about the low-trail characteristics of this Fuji out front of Production Way SkyTrain.

Those Hope/CXP33 wheels proved a good complement to my Proctor.

jptwins

I'm a big fan of my Fuji S12S-Ltd. I have used it for all the purposes you have and was wildly successful with large front loads, which seems an indication that it is indeed low-trail.


This bike has been my experimentation bike and has gone through a lot of iterations:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jpbiker...7628207070109/

My main problem was that the rear bridge stay prevented me form being able to use 700x32c with fenders without rubbing.

But it's currently set up as a Rivendell-style country bike with 700x38 and no fenders:


Enjoy!
Geoff

Cougrrcj

I see on that chart listed above that the wheelbase of a 57cm '74 S-10S is 106.7 with a fork offset of 6.35, and a toptube length of 58.5. Take a look at the other Fuji 56-58cm frames. None come close to that long frame, long wheelbase. I look at 'race' bikes and see that the front tire is very close to the downtube, and the rear tire comes very close to the seat tube. Very little fork rake. To me that says 'twitchy'. All I know is that the longer wheelbase of my old S-10S makes for a very comfortable stable ride. Now with this chart I can see why I like that bike so much!

I have access to a digital protractor (measures angles to an accuracy of 0.1°), so if someone wants to, they can enter the frame angle values for the S-10S that are missing from that chart. And I can add measurements of some of my other bikes if desired. Since this chart was generated in 2010 (and the contact email addy), I'm not sure if those are still valid.

SlowRoller

I'm not sure if there are geometry specs listed in these catalogs, but you may want to dig through these resources:

https://www.velo-pages.com/main.php?g2_itemId=26665
https://bulgier.net/pics/bike/Catalogs/

VintageRide

After spending a few months now riding the Fuji it feels more "natural" then most high trail bikes I have had. Much easier to hold a line with more predictable handling traits - more confidence inspiring I think. I was going at least 50 kph down hill on one road and the Fuji tracked the white divider between the bike lane and the road even while pedaling quickly. I find most bikes without a stabilizing front load will move around or need correcting when pedaling at higher rpm - body movement affecting the bike to some degree. Nice to turn around when riding and the bike does not tend to move with you as well.

echo victor 

Wow, guys, those are some very nice looking Fujis. @VintageRide, I see you've got a Rawland Stag, too - isn't that also a low trail bike? How would you say the Fuji stacks up against it? I should have guessed I wouldn't be the first person around theses forums to have noticed this about the S-model Fujis.

@SlowRoller, thanks for the links. I'll have to check those out in more detail over the weekend.

VintageRide

Echo victor - it has been a few months since you asked about the Stag ( designed as a low trail 650b bike )- somehow I thought I had answered your question. I will say the Stag is lighter the way it is set up and feels easier to maneuver but then the Fuji has more weight on the front so the slower response is actually a better thing at higher speeds, and handling overall is quite predictable. Also, the Fuji with the 38mm Soma tires vs the 42mm Hetres on the Stag. well the Stag has a slight edge in comfort with lower pressures but I would give the nod to the Fuji, as it feels quite smooth even with less tire volume. The Stag has lighter standard gauge tubing although the chain stays are a bit shorter at 43 cm and the fork is stouter, I think the even smaller diameter stays and fork help give the Fuji more resiliency, though it does not feel flexy. One could do a lot worse!

Bianchigirll 

I never noticed any ill effects from using my front bag on any bike. But then again my bag is like a change purse compared to those steamer trunks some of you guys tote around.