Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Commuting Bicycle commuting is easier than you think, before you know it, you'll be hooked. Learn the tips, hints, equipment, safety requirements for safely riding your bike to work.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-30-16, 07:40 AM   #1
eladh7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
eladh7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Bikes: Cinelli CoCo LoCo
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thoughts between 2 touring bike models.

Hello everybody,

I'm new here So please be gentle

I'm considering between 2 touring bike models.
1. CINELLI Hobootleg 2017
2. TREK 520 Disc 2016

Those the only two i'm looking due possibility of shipping to my state.
No meter what I will choose I will be happy to upgrade my custom specialized allez that served me over Europe last summer in lot of pain carry 30kg on it over the Alpes .
Both Bike take's of me invest of 1000-1200 euro totally, so no issue on that, just to say that the CINELLI coming with TUBUS Rear and Front Carriers, Rear and Front Fenders and the TREK is naked with only rear rack.

My concern is about the visual, I more like how the CINELLI frame look like, so this is for now my choice,
But I need your thoughts about the component of each one and for the long term uses.
I get used to sti shifters on my commuting bike, Why those touring bike used friction shifting? more durable?

Also I'm not sure that Disc brakes will be the best for ultra remote place touring, What do you think?

Thanks for your help, travelers

Elad

Last edited by eladh7; 12-30-16 at 07:43 AM.
eladh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 07:54 AM   #2
zze86
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Bikes:
Posts: 349
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Sounds like you've pretty much answered your own questions. Many people touring prefer friction shifters because of reliability. Any possibility of test riding either one before buying?

Last edited by zze86; 12-30-16 at 07:58 AM.
zze86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 08:00 AM   #3
eladh7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
eladh7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Bikes: Cinelli CoCo LoCo
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ha i'm glad to hear that.
No chance even to watch, No such of touring culture in my country=no touring bikes.

Thanks
eladh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 08:14 AM   #4
JReade
Senior Member
 
JReade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Bikes:
Posts: 1,559
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Friction shifters will almost* always work. If your rear der brakes, and you have to replace it with something you find in the middle of nowhere, odds are you can ride with friction shifters and that for a while. If indexing gets out of tune, you may have to take it in to get looked at, not so with friction.

Looking at those bikes though, the bar ends are indexed for the rear and friction for the front. Normally they have an option to switch from friction to index, but index for the rear is common.
JReade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 10:17 AM   #5
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 8
Posts: 27,222
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2611 Post(s)
They're different Brands , Do You Have a Retail Dealer In your town selling Both?
[or even someplace to help you put the bike together properly from the shipping carton?]

My Town Shop just has The Trek 520.. they Trek bikes and the 520 models, have been fine for decades.
(mostly with Rim Brakes; they still make rim brake 520 models today)

Cinelli was never known for Touring bikes, They made their name in racing .. I expect Its A Taiwan Company (huge, making many brands )
painting it for who ever sells them, Probably Fine.

See: http://www.bikeforums.net/touring/


What Is Your Country?

Last edited by fietsbob; 12-30-16 at 10:38 AM.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 10:27 AM   #6
Timequake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: PNW
Bikes: 1982 Univega Gran Turismo
Posts: 195
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 97 Post(s)
Should probably post/move to the touring forum. Lots of people there will help you out.
Timequake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 10:28 AM   #7
bikemig 
Senior Member
 
bikemig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Middle Earth (aka IA)
Bikes: 1960 Olmo Gran Sport, '69 Raleigh Robin Hood, 70s Peugeot UE 8 and PR10, '78 Trek TX900, '79 Trek 510, 80s Melton, '82 Trek 720, '87 & '91 Specialized Stumpjumpers, '93 Trek 950,and '93 Bridgestone RB1, MB1, X02
Posts: 12,930
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2420 Post(s)
https://www.adventurecycling.org/def...est_OGrady.pdf

https://www.adventurecycling.org/res...blog/trek-520/

These are reviews of older versions of those 2 bikes. Both bikes will be fine for your intended use. The tubus racks are a big plus for the cinelli; the disc brakes are a plus for the trek.

I think they're very close but I prefer slightly the trek mainly for the disc brakes.
bikemig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 10:40 AM   #8
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 8
Posts: 27,222
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2611 Post(s)
The 520D now has a fitting on the left rear dropout for s kickstand, the rear rack is Aluminum .
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 10:47 AM   #9
GamblerGORD53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
Bikes: 2013 Custom SA5w / Rohloff Tourster
Posts: 1,122
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
The ONLY shifting/ shifter that ALWAYS works is on a ROHLOFF14. So far mine has 10,600 miles in 2 years, impossible to break. Set 'n forget. It's the Rolls Royce of bike equipment.

The Cinelli does look nice, but seems to have a short frame and toe overlap. I couldn't find their measurments.

Last edited by GamblerGORD53; 12-30-16 at 10:52 AM.
GamblerGORD53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 10:51 AM   #10
mstateglfr 
Senior Member
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Bikes: '87 Miyata 912, '80 Schwinn Voyageur 11.8, '90 Fuji Saratoga, '90 Diamondback Ascent EX, Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4
Posts: 4,950
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1249 Post(s)
1- the bar end shifters on both bikes are friction front shift and indexed rear shift. The Microshift brand shifters on the Cinelli offers the option to friction shift the rear derailleur, but indexed shifting is the default. Depending on what model shifters the Trek has, there is a chance the rear shifting can be indexed or friction. Some Shimano bar end shifters are indexed only for the rear.

2- The Cinelli comes with Tubus front and rear racks. Thats a huge plus.

3- Bikes have equally comparable derailleurs, cassette, and crankset.

4- Trek has 36h wheels while Cinelli has 32h wheels. Without knowing anything on build quality, more spokes = stronger wheel.

5- Bikes have equally comparable wheelset component quality. I would rather have the Cinelli's tires as they are wider and i like em more than the Bontrager hardcase.

6- Cinelli bike's frame tubing is more respected. Trek's tubing will be plenty strong, its just not name brand. Having a name brand tubing matters to some.

7- The biggest difference, to me, is the brakes. I have multiple cantilever brake bikes and love them. My touring bike has canti brakes and it stops a heavy rider and gear just fine, even with the rims are wet. There are many who swear canti brakes dont work well, but I am convinced their brakes arent set up properly. There is still something to be said for disc brakes. If you plan to scream down a mountain road carrying full gear in the rain, disc brakes will stop you better.

8- The cable routing on the Cinelli is all on the top of the top tube. This is common for some MTB and adventure/gravel bikes because it keeps the cables from getting as dirty. But the Cinelli also uses full cable housing, which will keep the cables clean and well functioning. I have cables routed this way on 2 bikes and it works for me. Some dont like the look which is why I mention it.

9- What is the geometry of the Cinelli? Knowing the bottom bracket height, chainstay length, trail, etc will help compare the bikes for fit. Seems pretty important to not easily find online.



I would go with the Cinelli every day of the week, but thats completely because of personal reasons. I love the mix of it being a touring bike and adventure bike, it has more personality than the Trek, its an iconic name, I like the canti brakes, and it looks sharp.
But the Trek is a really solidly spec'd bike.
mstateglfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 11:59 AM   #11
JReade
Senior Member
 
JReade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Charlotte, NC
Bikes:
Posts: 1,559
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 70 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
9- What is the geometry of the Cinelli? Knowing the bottom bracket height, chainstay length, trail, etc will help compare the bikes for fit. Seems pretty important to not easily find online.
Hobootleg | Cinelli

Right on the manufacturer site.
JReade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 12:06 PM   #12
mstateglfr 
Senior Member
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Bikes: '87 Miyata 912, '80 Schwinn Voyageur 11.8, '90 Fuji Saratoga, '90 Diamondback Ascent EX, Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4
Posts: 4,950
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1249 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JReade View Post
Hobootleg | Cinelli

Right on the manufacturer site.
Good link.
I should have phrased my comment differently. I didnt find gerometry from a google search as the cinelli website wasnt on the first page of results. Geometry is usually pretty easy to get from the initial 5 or so google results.
mstateglfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 12:09 PM   #13
eladh7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
eladh7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Bikes: Cinelli CoCo LoCo
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thank you all for comments.

In Israel there is no even one brand that importing touring models.
As I said, my last trip was with my road bike allez with custom rear rack and it was horrible on gravel because the frame was very short. So you said the cinelli looking shorter frame then the trek, Is it limit with overloaded stuff? here is the frame geometry(at the end):
Hobootleg | Cinelli

After body measurement, all of my road bike have effective TT of 53.7mm very comfort on that, but dunno how it suit for my in a touring bike with the same TT. I had never ride in a touring frame. the cinelli have effective TT of 54 in medium size? it can be fit?

Plus, you said that the benfit of disc brake is over wet condition. but you don't mention how can you fix a rotor in scenario of bending in Nowhere.
eladh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 01:05 PM   #14
InTheRain
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Puget Sound
Bikes: 2007 Rocky Mountain Sherpa 30 (bionx), 2015 Cannondale Synapse Carbon Ultegra
Posts: 1,925
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 129 Post(s)
For commuting, it's a trade off. The tubus racks are nice. However, if you really are going to tour a lot, then keep it simple... canti brakes, and friction shifting. For commuting, I care for neither. I have a touring bike with STI shifting and I converted from canti brakes to disc brakes. But, my touring bike is for commuting... not touring. I also added a Bionx electric motor. Let's be clear - this is the commuting forum... not racing, not touring, not fitness. All those other types of cycling are great, but this is where you come to look for advice and discuss issues primarily for commuting on a bicycle. Plenty of folks want to turn the discussions into something other than commuting.

Everything that I have done with my touring bike has been to make it into a really great commuter - that is it's primary purpose. I have a road bike for fitness and distance rides.

Last edited by InTheRain; 12-31-16 at 02:41 AM.
InTheRain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 07:28 PM   #15
martianone
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Northern VT
Bikes: recumbent & upright
Posts: 2,005
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
IMHO - cyclists sweat details of bike specs vs. bike specs, but miss the bigger picture of getting an optimal fit. Ride the bike that fits better!
martianone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-16, 09:42 PM   #16
GamblerGORD53
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Elevation 666m Edmonton Canada
Bikes: 2013 Custom SA5w / Rohloff Tourster
Posts: 1,122
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 446 Post(s)
The 53 Cinelli is really short, 1031 mm vs the Trek 54 at 1048, with 10 mm longer chain stays. The Trek shows lower standover, so maybe see if the 57 will fit and get a shorter stem 80mm. A longer TT is best for other than drop bars.
I would get the disc Trek that also has a stronger fork. That would allow future switching to a trouble free Sturmey Archer DRUM brake, mine with dyno has 20,600 miles. Guess you will need stronger racks and more money. They both have bar end shifters that I wouldn't want.

PS The 56 Cinelli is likely your size, it is a better 10 mm longer TT. My goof. 100 mm stems are NOT better or necessary. A taller frame will also reduce reach.

Last edited by GamblerGORD53; 12-31-16 at 10:13 AM.
GamblerGORD53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 05:57 AM   #17
eladh7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
eladh7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Bikes: Cinelli CoCo LoCo
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I mentioned couple of time's that I don't have the models in the shop for test ride.
That's why I'm asking you over the measurement table and I need to live with it.
I had mistake to open the thread into the commuting forum, my use will be over ultra touring only.
I take into account all what you say. But I prefer more the cinelli because the overall look.
I don't want the frame will be limit me, So I have question about touring geometry:
For details only I am 172.5cm height and 82cm inseam, from What I got in the body measurement is I need looking for road frame with 53.7ETT.
i'm asking simple, the 53.7ETT is a general guide how reach you gonna be over the handlebar, but this
measure number is only for the road bike because i'm sitting aerodynamic that impact the way my body sitting on the bike(more reach). SO If I need 53.77ETT on a road bike and more "Reach", That's not say's that I need less "Reach" in a touring frame because my upright sitting? many touring bikes I saw are strange measure with shorter reach and longer ETT compared to road bikes. I have colnago road bike with 53.7ETT but the reach is above 380, and must touring frame with the same ETT, are below that.

Last edited by eladh7; 12-31-16 at 08:06 AM.
eladh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 08:13 AM   #18
Slaninar
Bike Gremlin
 
Slaninar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Novi Sad
Bikes: Custom made on Scott Speedster frame, Custom made on a 1996. steel MTB frame (all but frame changed at least once in the past 20 years).
Posts: 3,305
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 576 Post(s)
For touring... for most things but racing actually, I'd avoid more than 8 sprockets in the back.

Friction shifters are a big plus IMO.

Brakes? I'd look for a frame that has a V-brake option as well as a disc mount one. Put some mechanical disks and long pull brake levers (there are drop bar versions as well), so in case of emergency, I can put any V-brake on the bike and continue.

Then again, I am a jinx. You'll probably do fine with any bike and any equipment.
Slaninar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 09:03 AM   #19
Snuts
Mid Tour!
 
Snuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Soon back in Edmonton Alberta
Bikes: Marin Muirwoods Racked out for this years Tour, Norco Indi 4 racked out from last years tour, Giant Defi II for week-end ripps.
Posts: 571
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Elad, welcome to the forum.
I have read your thread a few times. Seeing you have done a bit of touring in Europe, I am looking at this from that point of view.
I understand a more "everyday" bike rather than your road bike. I too have a road bike for zipping around, but do a lot more riding on my heavy bikes (touring and commuter).
Both of your choices are very comparable in my opinion. So it comes down more to your perspective, and preference. I, like you think the Cenelli is a very attractive bike. With your size, and touring gear weight the 32 spoke wheels, and cantilever brakes will be all you ever need. For a larger cyclist the 520D has slight advantages.
As for the gearing, you will love it packing a little, or a lot of gear, running errands, or touring.
As for size to order in, you are right in between a Med and a Large on the Cenelli site. By your measurements you seem to be long in the leg for your height. If so, I take it you are short in the Torso, and long legs and arms. If this sounds like you, then lean towards the Large frame. You can get a shorter stem if the bike is a bit of a stretch for you.

Well, hope this might help. Enjoy your new ride. Let us know how it works out.



-Snuts-
Snuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 10:02 AM   #20
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 8
Posts: 27,222
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2611 Post(s)
bending in no where ?

more likely is getting the disc bent , while the wheel is off the bike, and the bike is boxed up to ship the bike with you, when you fly somewhere else.

.. then You would remove the disc from the wheel , pack it separately, then put it back on when you re assemble your bike at your destination.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 10:08 AM   #21
letibell
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: tuscany . Italy
Bikes:
Posts: 19
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Toe overlap

Yes, cinelli hobo has toe overlap. Size 53 and my feet are size 41 European number. I had this bicycle but I had to sell it cause I didn't like how it rode. Very beautiful,yes,but it was not worth its price at all.
letibell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 10:31 AM   #22
eladh7
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
eladh7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Bikes: Cinelli CoCo LoCo
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snuts View Post
By your measurements you seem to be long in the leg for your height. If so, I take it you are short in the Torso, and long legs and arms. If this sounds like you, then lean towards the Large frame. You can get a shorter stem if the bike is a bit of a stretch for you.



-Snuts-
Thank's for your opinion.
I have short torso and maybe short arms ass well(685mm), but from my perspective if you have short torso it means that the upper body are sort = short reach to the handelbar, and stack is more impact for the long legs. am I wrong?

"letibell" have you mention the Toe overlap. I have different bike that have the problem but I feel fine on the bike. so not sure if it's rule that point the frame is too small.
I have kind of big feet is 44 eurpean.
You are a taller guy?
eladh7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 12:21 PM   #23
Snuts
Mid Tour!
 
Snuts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Soon back in Edmonton Alberta
Bikes: Marin Muirwoods Racked out for this years Tour, Norco Indi 4 racked out from last years tour, Giant Defi II for week-end ripps.
Posts: 571
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 149 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by letibell View Post
Yes, cinelli hobo has toe overlap. Size 53 and my feet are size 41 European number. I had this bicycle but I had to sell it cause I didn't like how it rode. Very beautiful,yes,but it was not worth its price at all.
There is the kind of advice with weight.
It is a rather short wheelbase bike in all sizes.
You can't go wrong with a 520. I near bought one myself a couple of months ago. I did ride it, loved everything about it short of the bar-end shifters. Not my style, the test ride proved that for me (and a Kona).

Good luck with your decision. Keep us informed.




-Snuts-
Snuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 03:00 PM   #24
mstateglfr 
Senior Member
 
mstateglfr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Des Moines, IA
Bikes: '87 Miyata 912, '80 Schwinn Voyageur 11.8, '90 Fuji Saratoga, '90 Diamondback Ascent EX, Black Mountain Cycles Monstercross V4
Posts: 4,950
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1249 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slaninar View Post
For touring... for most things but racing actually, I'd avoid more than 8 sprockets in the back.

Friction shifters are a big plus IMO.

Brakes? I'd look for a frame that has a V-brake option as well as a disc mount one. Put some mechanical disks and long pull brake levers (there are drop bar versions as well), so in case of emergency, I can put any V-brake on the bike and continue.

Then again, I am a jinx. You'll probably do fine with any bike and any equipment.
Indexed shifting is 30+ years old at this point. 3 decades to adjust and improve.
And 9sp is over 20 years old at this point.

Basically, 9sp and indexed, which is whats on the bikes, have 20-30 years of refinement and time to get into the mainstream so repair components can be had.

As mentioned, the microshift 9sp shifters can adjust between indexed and friction. Best of both worlds so the .001% of miles ridden where indexing doesnt work, friction can be used.

I love friction and have it on a couple bikes still, but 9sp simply shouldnt be called unreliable or less reliable than 8sp. Neither should indexed shifting, especially when friction is available if needed.
mstateglfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-16, 04:18 PM   #25
Sci-Fi
Senior Member
 
Sci-Fi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 1,297
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
The only way the OP is going to know how each bike performs with the typical load out the OP generally carries is after they choose to order one or the other. Your center of balance will be the key and will determine how comfortable the ride is under load as well as its handling predictability. The Trek would be the safe choice for heavy, self contained touring, but the Cinelli may have more responsive handling for light to medium loads. It's a compromise the OP has to decide what's more desirable for their requirements/expectations.
Sci-Fi is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:02 AM.


 
  • Ask a Question
    get answers from real people!
Click to start entering your question.
I HAVE A QUESTION