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


Go Back   > >

Long Distance Competition/Ultracycling, Randonneuring and Endurance Cycling Do you enjoy centuries, double centuries, brevets, randonnees, and 24-hour time trials? Share ride reports, and exchange training, equipment, and nutrition information specific to long distance cycling. This isn't for tours, this is for endurance events cycling

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-14-12, 10:43 AM   #1
larsson
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Bikes:
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Fixed/SS frame recommendations for LD riding

I used to have a Surly Cross Check that I rode single-speed for long road/gravel rides. I'm considering building another one, but a few things about the frame (toe overlap, short headtube) have me looking around for other options before I get another. I'm looking for something with fairly relaxed geometry and I'd really like to have the option to run larger tires (at least 32mm). The On-One Pompino is a good candidate, but I can't get myself to like the look of the seatstays on it. Is there anything else that's similar out there, or should I go with another Cross Check?
larsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-12, 05:52 PM   #2
BenHud
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Have you looked at the surly steamroller? I have one that I've used for a few 100 mile rides, and I'm planning to do a 200k on it next month. Surly's website says it can take tires up to 38. I have 700x28 on mine with fenders. With that setup, my toes just barely touch the fender at very slow speeds. The only thing I don't really like about it, is the frame only has bosses for one bottle cage. I've attached a second cage with strap-on bosses, but it seems a little chintzy. It also doesn't have cable stops, so you have to use full length housing to run a rear brake, but that doesn't bother me.
BenHud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-12, 07:11 PM   #3
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 14,108
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 418 Post(s)
The Steamroller has even steeper geometry and more potential for toe overlap than the Cross-Check. Have you ever had any true mishaps on the road, or are you just worried it might happen?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-14-12, 09:21 PM   #4
larsson
Newbie
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Bikes:
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I never wrecked on my old Cross Check because of the overlap, but had a few scary moments when I took it on some tight trails. It's really not that big of an issue though. I really don't know if there's another production frame that can compare to the versatility of the CC for my needs, but I've been trying to search around before I go ahead and order something.
larsson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-12, 03:47 PM   #5
Netdewt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Bikes:
Posts: 332
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm also interested in this discussion. Steel is probably preferable to aluminum, right?

What about the All-City Nature Boy?

Last edited by Netdewt; 10-29-12 at 03:53 PM.
Netdewt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-29-12, 04:14 PM   #6
lonesomesteve
Senior Member
 
lonesomesteve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
There are about ga-jillion old sport touring frames from the late 70s through early 80s out there that make excellent single speed rando bikes. Almost all road bikes from that era have horizontal dropouts, and many also used strap-on shifters and cable guides, which I think is a plus for that application. Most have clearance for tires up 28mm with fenders, and quite a few could handle even 32mm with fenders.

I did most of my randonneuring this year on a 1982 Trek 311 set up as a single speed. I love that bike for randonneuring type rides. It's not the lightest bike out there, but it's certainly no heavier than a comparably equipped Cross Check. I have a weakness for the old Treks, but they aren't the only bikes of that era that would make very capable randonneuses.

And the prices on those old bikes are pretty good too. I paid $75 for my Trek 311. That's the complete bike, not just the frame.

lonesomesteve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-24-12, 10:00 AM   #7
Chesha Neko
Senior Member
 
Chesha Neko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 295
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'll let someone with more knowlegde judge the geometry, but how about the Surly Ogre:

http://www.culturecycles.com/2011/12...-ready-winter/

Seems like in full kit it could go just about anywhere.
Chesha Neko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-25-12, 12:11 AM   #8
Coluber42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Medford, MA
Bikes:
Posts: 336
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I second the 70's/80's road frame suggestion, particularly the earlier end of that spectrum. Even the ones that were higher-end and used for racing have more tire clearance than a modern road frame, and the ones a notch or two down the line have more. Alternatively, since such things have become sort of trendy not only in the fixie world but also in the rando world, there are getting to be a fair number of modern versions that are similar, from places like Rivendell and Velo Orange. Also, even the racier ones have less toe overlap than modern road bikes, partly due to a somewhat longer wheelbase but also due to longer fork rake. And it just so happens that the longer rake/lower trail geometry is particularly favored for randonneuring because it handles better with a front load. Something like an early 70's Raleigh International might be a good bet.

My rando bike is my absolutely beloved 1974 Raleigh Professional, which is set up as a fixie and which I've been riding long distances on for probably ten years. This isn't the best photo, but it was convenient: http://www.dillpicklegear.com/wp-con...-19-48_293.jpg
Unfortunately the steerer of the original fork broke a few years ago and I replaced it with what you see there, which has less rake. One of these times, I'll dig up another more like the original, because I liked the handling better and this one gives me a tiny bit of toe overlap with the fender.

FWIW, I commute on a Surly CrossCheck and it feels like riding a cinder block compared to my Raleigh, even when the weight is equalized with luggage. There's no comparison.

Alternatively, you could always use a White Industries eccentric hub, which would open up more frame possibilities since you could use vertical dropouts. My better half has one on a Ritchey Breakaway for travel, and he loves it. It doesn't slip and if anything it's even easier to adjust the chain tension than with a normal hub. Not the cheapest thing you can find, but a high quality and very viable alternative.
Coluber42 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 03:12 AM.