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


Go Back   > >

Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-18-17, 08:30 AM   #51
Mr IGH
afraid of whales
 
Mr IGH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Bikes:
Posts: 4,145
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 270 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
...And yet... you toured the Rockies in the 80's just fine - as I did. You list a bunch of upgrades which, quite frankly, I don't think make a bit of difference really. 6 vs 9 gears? Cassette vs free wheel? Canti vs disc? Brifters vs friction? They are all just personal choices and not technological show stoppers for touring.
I could ride that old bike, except I gave it to my daughter's boyfriend, to your point, it's still on the road (and really hip with all the cool braze-ons I added). I have no desire to go back to dt shifters, esp in my dotage (I'm 56). Brifters are a safety thing for me, as is indexed shifting. A little harder to set up but well-worth the benefits. Cassette hubs and 135mm spacing makes for a much stronger rear wheel, 9 speed isn't essential but I really like 3x9 gearing compared to 3x6. Smaller gear steps are something I appreciate, esp on long climbs at altitude. And disc are peace-of-mind when I'm on a unfamiliar long steep descent. Drag the rear brake without any worries. Great for club rides when it's gravel-grinder season too.

And TR rims give me a stronger, lighter wheel for no extra cost. If I'm building a new wheelset, why not go TR? The tyre selection has filled out greatly and I can always run standard bead clinchers with tubes.

I like new developments, as does much of the market. We all could tour on Sturmey 3-speeds like they did back-in-the-day, I wouldn't....
Mr IGH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 08:40 AM   #52
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Bikes: Some silver ones, a black one, a red one, an orange one and a couple of titanium ones
Posts: 18,944
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 880 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
Wat

As a big guy, this is completely unfounded. I have 35mm road tures on my touring bike. Its comfortable, im comfotrable, all is great in life. I put about 1400mi on it last year and the road wheelset (130 rear hub plus road tires) is waiting to do it all over again this year.
My touring wheels have over 9000 loaded miles on them and they are standing up just fine as well. They are currently seeing duty on my road commuter bike because my commuter bike's rims wore out after 16,000 miles of commuting and I wanted different wheels for the touring bike.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
A 29er is just a 700c rim thats wider than typical road rims. I wouldnt want anything wider than a 38mm tire for road touring and that will fit just fine in any number of current trend wide 23mm outer diameter 700c rims.
I wouldn't even say that they are necessarily wider than typical road rims. A Mavic A719 is 19mm wide while a Mavic XC719 is also 19mm wide. In the Velocity line, the Dyad is suggested as a mountain rim as well as a touring rim. It's 24mm wide. There are wider mountain rims available but you really don't have to run super wide rims for off-road. All of my mountain bike rims are either XC719s or similar.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
A surly ogre for riding 100mi each day for a week straight on the road?!?! Thats taking tennis racquet to a ping pong match.
Perhaps it's my proximity to the Rockies that colors my ideas towards "adventure" bikes but I have yet to see an adventure bike that would do a better job at off-road touring then just a mountain bike. I've toured off-road with both rigid and suspended bikes and much prefer the latter.
__________________
Stuart Black
New! Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
New! Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
An Good Ol' Fashion Appalachian Butt Whoopin'.
cyccommute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 08:56 AM   #53
shelbyfv
Senior Member
 
shelbyfv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 3,642
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 469 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr IGH View Post
I never implied "tubeless ready" means "tubeless only". It's a fact that TR rims can take standard clincher tyres as well as tubeless. The strength advantage is in the design change. It doesn't cost any extra $$ to make the stronger TR rims compared to the older chincher rims, both are made by extruding.

I first noticed the difference when I replaced my Mavic 319 rims to Stans Flow EX. Same ERD, 80 grams lighter and much more lateral strength. I wondered what could be the reason, a simple examination gave me the answer.

Looking at specs on-line isn't a replacement for actual experience. It only takes a single wheel build to understand the difference....
You've missed my point. You said "TR rims take the extra material in the bead and move it to the spoke track, that's why TR rims are stronger and lighter" It sounds as if you are just repeating some advertising copy. There is not "extra" material in a traditional rim vs a TR rim. Both have what's need to hold the bead. Certainly we expect changes in newer products, but there is nothing inherently stronger or lighter in a TR rim, just because it is TR. If you are not using tubeless, all a TR rim does is make it more difficult to change a flat. My experience with my Pacenti rims.
shelbyfv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 09:00 AM   #54
cyccommute 
Mad bike riding scientist
 
cyccommute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Bikes: Some silver ones, a black one, a red one, an orange one and a couple of titanium ones
Posts: 18,944
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 880 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr IGH View Post
I like new developments, as does much of the market. We all could tour on Sturmey 3-speeds like they did back-in-the-day, I wouldn't....
And, yet, you poopoo double butted or triple butted spokes and the benefits they provide. I can find information...not just "observation"... that demonstrates their superior strength over straight spokes. Can you do the same for your claim that tubeless ready rims are somehow stronger than "regular" rims?

Quote:
Originally Posted by shelbyfv View Post
You've missed my point. You said "TR rims take the extra material in the bead and move it to the spoke track, that's why TR rims are stronger and lighter" It sounds as if you are just repeating some advertising copy. There is not "extra" material in a traditional rim vs a TR rim. Both have what's need to hold the bead. Certainly we expect changes in newer products, but there is nothing inherently stronger or lighter in a TR rim, just because it is TR. If you are not using tubeless, all a TR rim does is make it more difficult to change a flat. My experience with my Pacenti rims.
That's my problem as well. The Velocity A23 is a "tubeless ready" design and I don't see any real difference in the profile from a Dyad. I would compare the Helix to other Ringle' rims but I can't find a profile of the Helix.

I would say that tire changes are more a function of tire than of the rim or, perhaps, manufacturer. The A23 isn't any more or less difficult to change a flat than any of Velocity's other rim.
__________________
Stuart Black
New! Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
New! Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Days of Wineless Roads. Bed and Breakfasting along the KATY
Twisting Down the Alley. Misadventures in tornado alley.
An Good Ol' Fashion Appalachian Butt Whoopin'.

Last edited by cyccommute; 03-18-17 at 09:07 AM.
cyccommute is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 09:34 AM   #55
bradtx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana
Posts: 7,379
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 254 Post(s)
It'd be tough to find a more load capable wheel set than what's in an old post of mine:
Rim and tire info, please.

Brad
bradtx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 10:33 AM   #56
tyrion
Senior Member
 
tyrion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Bikes: Novara Randonee
Posts: 662
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 217 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr IGH View Post
And TR rims give me a stronger, lighter wheel for no extra cost.

Might it be the disc brake aspect that gives it better strength/weight, since disk brake rims don't need a braking surface? It's hard to imagine what the magic is about tubeless that would make a wheel stronger than a wheel that needs tubes.
tyrion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 02:03 PM   #57
linus
Crawler
 
linus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OH~ CANADA
Bikes:
Posts: 1,183
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Tubeless Rim

One of the major differences in TL rim design is that the middle track where your tire beads sit when installing the tire and the shoulders on the sides so that when the tire is inflated, it won't loose air while the bead gets to the internal wall.
linus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-17, 05:53 PM   #58
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Bikes:
Posts: 1,395
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr IGH View Post
I could ride that old bike, except I gave it to my daughter's boyfriend, to your point, it's still on the road (and really hip with all the cool braze-ons I added). I have no desire to go back to dt shifters, esp in my dotage (I'm 56). Brifters are a safety thing for me, as is indexed shifting. A little harder to set up but well-worth the benefits. Cassette hubs and 135mm spacing makes for a much stronger rear wheel, 9 speed isn't essential but I really like 3x9 gearing compared to 3x6. Smaller gear steps are something I appreciate, esp on long climbs at altitude. And disc are peace-of-mind when I'm on a unfamiliar long steep descent. Drag the rear brake without any worries. Great for club rides when it's gravel-grinder season too.

And TR rims give me a stronger, lighter wheel for no extra cost. If I'm building a new wheelset, why not go TR? The tyre selection has filled out greatly and I can always run standard bead clinchers with tubes.

I like new developments, as does much of the market. We all could tour on Sturmey 3-speeds like they did back-in-the-day, I wouldn't....
Well, it's a bit of the old want vs need discussion if you ask me and don't argue your right to like what you like of course though I'm not sure how brifters are a safety thing. I don't like DT shifters either but use stem shifters for my daily work commuter and probably do more shifting in 1 hour on that in traffic than I do all day touring on a nice shoulder. I have grown to dislike the front index shifters on my touring bike and plan to swap them out for friction next time I change things up (drop bar conversion). I like the micro adjustment they allow for the front derailer.

Smaller spaced gears may be nice I guess but in reality find that I spend most of the time in the middle chainring and just move up and down the rear. That's why friction on the front is good enough for me. Practically speaking 7 gears is plenty for me back there as well. It's shifting gears on a touring bike, not a race car.

And disc vs canti vs V brakes? Again, it all sounds important but this last fall I rode down three major mountain passes (Kicking Horse, Rogers, Coquihalla) using Cantis and had no problem stopping, two out of three in the rain to boot. I also train riding up and down three mountain passes locally (Fraser Canyon, Coquihalla, Manning) as well as the mountain I live on (Sumas), each with major downhill sections. I'm sure there's a bigger test out there somewhere but I haven't found it yet.

I'm all for progress but also keep myself grounded in practical application. If I see something that really adds value I'm all over it but I don't believe in adopting new over old just because it's new. A lot of new ideas turn out to be total crap (Trek's low spoke count adventure wheels for example) and sometimes old technology is still around because it actually works.

No one is denying that people should be able to buy what they want with their disposable income for a hobby but there is a difference between practical improvements and perceived improvements. If I were trying to buy/build a strong bike to carry weight (the theme of the thread) I would not obsess over cassette hubs and rear spacing. I would look directly to a 26" 36-40h wheelset if I could and I would also pick a proven frame design like the LHT. Many many many many many many people, all over he world, use that bike to do heavy, tough tours.

Some people complain that it is not nimble enough but for my tastes, I do not want a nimble loaded touring bike. I want a straight tracking one.
No need to nimbly swerve out of the shoulder into traffic.
Do need to keep going relatively straight down the shoulder for hours and hours at a time when I am a bit tired and slow in the reflexes.
Maybe there's a reason the LHT acts like that.


There is also this whole thing that happens on a forum like this where the participants may or may not representatively reflect the actual activity they are discussing.
It's pretty easy to trend towards new and more expensive options when one is older, has more disposable income, and is probably creating the dream bike they wished they might have had for most of their earlier riding career. I have no data of course, but suspect that many people actually considering a bike tour might not have thousands to drop on an expensive bike, expensive panniers and expensive UL gear plus the expense of the tour itself. I sometimes take a hit for offering a cost conscious approach to touring but think that always describing it in very expensive best case terms might convince some that they cannot afford to do the activity.

You can always spend more if you want but you don't need to spend more to fully enjoy a bike tour. In this case the OP needs a strong bike and, good news, that's not to hard of a hoop to jump through.

Last edited by Happy Feet; 03-18-17 at 06:13 PM.
Happy Feet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-17, 09:33 AM   #59
bradtx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana
Posts: 7,379
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 254 Post(s)
Happy Feet, Several good points and counter points in your post.

I think the OP is looking for a new bicycle that can reliably handle his body weight plus some cargo. The LHT, the REI ADV 1.1, and the as yet unmentioned Fuji Touring would provide for a good starting point.

Brad
bradtx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-19-17, 01:06 PM   #60
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 8
Posts: 25,854
Mentioned: 42 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2243 Post(s)
Like the Trek 720? Have the Dealer Swap the stock wheels for some with 36 spokes, they should work with you

to make the bike more suited to your needs/desires.

the 520 is their 4 pannier touring model , 720 for those who bring less, tour lighter , use more services along the way.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 07:14 AM   #61
edthesped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: N@
Bikes: Huffy Thunder Road
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Maybe I'm a little dense...

From the OP
Quote:
I plan on camping each night with a small tent, and travel rather minimally.
I interpret this to mean he's more concerned about his weight not the weight of his gear. Does he really need a tank of a touring bike to accomplish what he's trying to do or would a "sport touring" bike with decent wheels fit his needs while providing something a little more fun to ride after the anticipated 10 days of light touring are finished?

I see bikes have been narrowed to the LHT and 1.1. Between those two I'd take the 1.1 as you get more for your money but having been down this path in the past and having chose the Randonee if I were doing it again I'd buy something a little more sporty and focus on solid wheels, unless of course I planned on carrying the kitchen sink with me then it would be the Randonee (aka 1.1), Marrakesh or Advocate Cycles Sand Country...

Last edited by edthesped; 03-20-17 at 07:18 AM.
edthesped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 08:55 AM   #62
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Bikes:
Posts: 1,395
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Perhaps...

I take a small tent and still consider that I pack rather minimally. Last trip I did not take a stove, cookset, spare shoes etc... and still use a couple of panniers and a HB roll. What if we say 25lb is a minimal traditional load (not going down the UL pathway which was not mentioned). That puts the total load here at 275lb's.

Remember, this will include weight of bags, racks, water and food. It all has to be carried by the bike.

Now let's look at it another way.

A 160lb rider comes to the forum and says they plan to tour with 115lb's of gear. Without arguing about what they are bringing, would you still suggest a sporty bike or a proven load capable model?

Last edited by Happy Feet; 03-20-17 at 09:01 AM.
Happy Feet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 09:05 AM   #63
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: 148 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Perhaps...
A 160lb rider comes to the forum and says they plan to tour with 115lb's of gear. Without arguing about what they are bringing, would you still suggest a sporty bike or a proven load capable model?
Wow, that's 275lbs !

(joke)

-Snuts-
Snuts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 09:12 AM   #64
edthesped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: N@
Bikes: Huffy Thunder Road
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Happy Feet View Post
Perhaps...

I take a small tent and still consider that I pack rather minimally. Last trip I did not take a stove, cookset, spare shoes etc... and still use a couple of panniers and a HB roll. What if we say 25lb is a minimal traditional load (not going down the UL pathway which was not mentioned). That puts the total load here at 275lb's.

Now let's look at it another way.

A 160lb rider comes to the forum and says they plan to tour with 115lb's of gear. Without arguing about what they are bringing, would you still suggest a sporty bike or a proven load capable model?
Okay, what's the limiting factor for weight on bikes? I pushed the OP's weight for a few years and did "light touring" on a Jamis Coda Sport with the Boy Scouts and constantly breaking spokes on the rear wheel led me to the Randonee, knowing what I know now I'm convinced all I truly needed were better wheels. Going to the Randonee from the Coda was quite a change in the ride and I found myself wanting a sportier ride. The OP is following a similar path being that he already owns a Defy...

In my mind buying a full on touring bike for a couple of short'ish light tours is like buying a pick up truck so you can haul wood to build a doghouse... Unless of course you really want a pick up truck.

edit: I neglected one more part of this... Isn't the design of the touring bike to be stable with heavy panniers? Will it ride the same carrying all of the load on the seat vs, spread out across front and rear panniers?

Maybe a cargo bike would be a better option.

Last edited by edthesped; 03-20-17 at 09:20 AM.
edthesped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 09:48 AM   #65
Happy Feet
Senior Member
 
Happy Feet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Bikes:
Posts: 1,395
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 359 Post(s)
Well.. the OP already owns a light sporty bike (giant defy) so why would he buy a second one? Seems he is looking for something stronger.

One could look at an L HT as limiting or opening another avenue the OP doesn't currently possess.

With two sporty bikes he would not be able to engage in any more loaded touring than he can do now unless he bought a third bike.
Happy Feet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 10:15 AM   #66
edthesped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: N@
Bikes: Huffy Thunder Road
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
This is true, my only point is that the OP should really think about what he wants and needs before buying. If the OP doesn't plan on ever loading up the bike with panniers and wants to do 100mi days maybe a heavy touring bike is the wrong tool for the job. I really like my Randonee but if I were planning on 100 mile days without a lot of gear it wouldn't be my first choice to ride whether I weighed 160lb or 260lb...

Below is my "light" setup going from PGH to DC in 4 days...

Last edited by edthesped; 06-23-17 at 06:59 AM.
edthesped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 10:30 AM   #67
Leebo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Boston
Bikes: Kona Dawg, Surly 1x1, Karate Monkey, Rockhopper, Crosscheck , Burley Runabout,
Posts: 4,477
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 389 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyccommute View Post
A "29er" is just a 700c (622mm ISO) wheel. There is nothing "special" about them. Some people are work under the delusion that "tubeless ready" imparts magical qualities to a rim that makes them orders of magnitude stronger than "regular" wheels.

They aren't. Rims don't matter any way. Many spokes make for a strong wheel. Many stronger spokes make a stronger wheel.
For me, at 6'4" 29ers tend to fit better. I sit between the wheels as opposed to over them. And the roll over ability off road is great. As you know, the three parts of the wheel, rim, spokes and hub, all work together to make a good wheel.
Leebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 10:32 AM   #68
Leebo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Boston
Bikes: Kona Dawg, Surly 1x1, Karate Monkey, Rockhopper, Crosscheck , Burley Runabout,
Posts: 4,477
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 389 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoControl View Post
^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^

Big guys need 29ers. Period. Get yourself a Surly Ogre or a Salsa Fargo. Done.
I tour on a Surly Karate Monkey( steel framed 29er) Works well. Plenty of space for frame bags in the main triangle. Lots of options to put stuff on the frame.
Leebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 10:39 AM   #69
Leebo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Boston
Bikes: Kona Dawg, Surly 1x1, Karate Monkey, Rockhopper, Crosscheck , Burley Runabout,
Posts: 4,477
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 389 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstateglfr View Post
My disagreement was 3 fold. You addressed 1 of them, though passively addressed another with your picture.

1- it was claimed that big guys need 29er wheels to tour. I disagree and find that requirement, as an opiniin stated as fact, to be absurd.
Totally agree with you that 50s will be more comfortable compared to road tires. 35s and 38s will also be more comfortable than typical road tires. 50s for road only...thats getting up there at the extreme end of where performance on pavement is sacrificed for comfort, compared to slightly smaller volumes with less rotating weight. But sure, 50mm tires will be comfortable, we agree.

2- the Ogre is overkill for road only tohring where 100mi per day is being knocked out as its built for off pavement bikepacking. Its built heavier than necessary for smooth long road cycling.

3- 100mi per day with a flat bar will bring many a man to tears. This was my other reason for criticizing the Ogre- 100mi or road riding per day will typically be more comfortable on drop bars due to the many hand positions.
Lots of options. 250lbs + gear on 35 mm tires? What psi will be needed? Max? YRMV. OP, how much gear are you planning on bringing and how to carry? Flat bar, alt bar, jones bar, lots of options. I use a flat bar with sweep + bar ends, way comfortable.
Leebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 11:44 AM   #70
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: 4,389
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 974 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leebo View Post
Lots of options. 250lbs + gear on 35 mm tires? What psi will be needed? Max? YRMV.
With gear and my 230# body, I run them at 90psi, so under max.
mstateglfr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 02:27 PM   #71
bradtx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Pearland, Texas
Bikes: Cannondale, Trek, Raleigh, Santana
Posts: 7,379
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 254 Post(s)
edthesped, Last summer I experimented using my distance roadie, instead of the touring bike. The touring bike won, even with a 20 lb. max load. For the few corners that I could really rail on the roadie in 100 mi., it just wasn't worth it. The longer wheelbase, slacker geometry, and larger tires (25 mm vs. 32 mm) were simply better for probably 99 of those miles.

The OP already has a 'sporty' handling bicycle that in all honesty he could probably tour lightly with, but there would be a lot less of a load capacity margin than if using a dedicated touring bike. To me it just makes good sense that he's considering an expedition level touring bike.

Brad
bradtx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 02:49 PM   #72
edthesped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: N@
Bikes: Huffy Thunder Road
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradtx View Post
edthesped, Last summer I experimented using my distance roadie, instead of the touring bike. The touring bike won, even with a 20 lb. max load. For the few corners that I could really rail on the roadie in 100 mi., it just wasn't worth it. The longer wheelbase, slacker geometry, and larger tires (25 mm vs. 32 mm) were simply better for probably 99 of those miles.

The OP already has a 'sporty' handling bicycle that in all honesty he could probably tour lightly with, but there would be a lot less of a load capacity margin than if using a dedicated touring bike. To me it just makes good sense that he's considering an expedition level touring bike.

Brad
I would agree with you as far as the roadie is concerned. My recommendation is for a light/sport tourer along the lines of an AWOL, Sequoia, RLT 9, Vaya etc... Something that takes wider tires would be a must for me. My bike in the pic above is a vaya and is a light touribg bike with​ 40mm wide tires, not a roadie by any stretch...
edthesped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 03:22 PM   #73
edthesped
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: N@
Bikes: Huffy Thunder Road
Posts: 615
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 112 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edthesped View Post
I would agree with you as far as the roadie is concerned. My recommendation is for a light/sport tourer along the lines of an AWOL, Sequoia, RLT 9, Vaya etc... Something that takes wider tires would be a must for me. My bike in the pic above is a vaya and is a light touribg bike with​ 40mm wide tires, not a roadie by any stretch...
From the salsa sales pitch...

Quote:
VAYA
ANY ROAD / GRAVEL / LIGHT TOURING

Vaya is our road adventure and light touring bike, designed to handle any road surface, from pavement to gravel to dirt. The tubing selection and stable geometry across the line makes for a bike that feels great unloaded or loaded for a fast tour, soaking up unpredictable surfaces mile after mile, from one town to the next. Vaya is an extremely versatile machine, always ready and able if the path turns less than ideal.
Geometry...

http://salsacycles.com/bikes/vaya
edthesped is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 04:26 PM   #74
Standalone 
babylon by bike
 
Standalone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Haven, CT, USA
Bikes: Road, Cargo, Tandem, Etc.
Posts: 3,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
My cheapskate clyde touring solutions: I've had success with vintage Trek 620 and a mid eighties Raleigh Alyeska (see also Kodiak) I'm 6'4" 205. A good steel bike with average to decent wheels isn't going to blow up on you if you don't pack uber-heavy and you don't go bashing into every pothole you find. Fatter tires will buy you a lot of wiggle room in terms of what kinds of hits your wheels can take.

This is if you want to go touring on the cheap. That's what I always try to do!

I also have a rigid hybrid fuji that I did a lightweight xtracycle build on. I would tour on it no doubt! Lots of ways to get a big bike. Currently building up a very large old reynolds steel raleigh MTB for trail touring.
__________________
The bicycle, the bicycle surely, should always be the vehicle of novelists and poets. Christopher Morley
Standalone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-17, 04:29 PM   #75
Standalone 
babylon by bike
 
Standalone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Haven, CT, USA
Bikes: Road, Cargo, Tandem, Etc.
Posts: 3,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 64 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradtx View Post
edthesped, Last summer I experimented using my distance roadie, instead of the touring bike. The touring bike won, even with a 20 lb. max load. For the few corners that I could really rail on the roadie in 100 mi., it just wasn't worth it. The longer wheelbase, slacker geometry, and larger tires (25 mm vs. 32 mm) were simply better for probably 99 of those miles.

The OP already has a 'sporty' handling bicycle that in all honesty he could probably tour lightly with, but there would be a lot less of a load capacity margin than if using a dedicated touring bike. To me it just makes good sense that he's considering an expedition level touring bike.

Brad
A goood tourer will also have steering that gets responsive and predictable under load. My Alyeska is like that. The rake and trail of the fork have that special magic.
__________________
The bicycle, the bicycle surely, should always be the vehicle of novelists and poets. Christopher Morley
Standalone 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 12:26 PM.


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