Originally Posted by
Squeezebox
2.3 tires aren't wide enough? It comes with 2.0 tires, fenders will work with the 2.0 I don't know about the 2.3 with fenders.
I like the thru axles, Sram stuff is good. The bar ends were my biggest complaint, rather expensive to replace. I do like the frame. But it's not their best aluminum. It might not be as light as you would expect. You might check the wt vs the Fargo. I'm pulling 28 lbs out of my memory, ??? I think that's with racks & fenders ?? The saddle is nothing great, but I kept in anyway.
For some folks there is their rant about 28 spoke wheels. My opinion is their rant is completely invalid. The wheels are fine. I went to 35 mm tires. There aren't many bicycles with a low gear in the low 20s. I like my 920. I'm 50 lbs overweight and with gear the bicycle is great.
Epic round-the-world? I'ld go to Co-motion.
The specs I remember were 2.25" without fenders and 2.0" with. But even 2.3 is small IMO for the kind of back-country adventures many are doing nowadays. The Fargo specs are up to 3".
Nice to know you've liked your experience with your 920 even with the short comings you've pointed out.
Personally I'm building up an adventure style bike based on the Surly World-Troller frame and using 2.5" tires (albeit 26"). I'm looking toward the future and hopefully doing the Great Divide and/or the Baja Divide (trails not races!). For the Baja Divide in particular my 2.5" tires would be a minimum!