View Single Post
Old 08-24-23, 11:02 AM
  #49  
LeeG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,206
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times in 64 Posts
Originally Posted by jefnvk
Just out of curiosity, what is the acceptable length of everyone on a "touring" bike for chainstay (measured along the frame, not a plumb dropping from the rear axle)?

I was working on my cheap build today, and it was nice out, so I loaded up the intended panniers and went out for a rice. Keeping in mind that the rack is not the intended rack, and the one I am planning on using sits higher and a little further back, I was heel striking occasionally. This got me thinking, and I measured it out exactly. The chainstay on my Miyata 610, which never had a heel strike issue and has 5mm longer cranks, is 438mm, and the MTB having issues was 439mm. Effectively the same. Is this truly long enough on a touring bike?

For reference, I am planning on using a similar rack to the Miyata, which sits 8cm higher and 1cm further rear than the cheap commuter rack on the MTB, and I've got midget 8.5 feet.

That’s a little like asking what’s the ideal shoe size then discovering shoes come in different widths and applications. If you like how the bike rides and it still rides well with the amount of gear you carry then it’s an acceptable length.
But! if you really like rear panniers and you really like a rear loaded bike then longer is better. For me handling issues are more significant than heel strike as there’s no way I’d head out with my heels hitting the bags. So instead pushing the panniers back and dealing with the tail wagging the dog handling why not move panniers to front low riders and plop a drybag on the rear rack? For me that preserves handling and rear wheel life. If that’s not enough gear capacity then short/shallow rear panniers.
If you think about it road racing bikes from the ‘60’s had 43-44 cm chainstays and they weren’t designed for carrying a heavy rear pannier load. Sport/racing has dominated bicycle design so much that people have toured everywhere on bikes with loads cantilevered past the rear axle but that doesn’t make it optimum.
That said 18” or 46 cm is a good ball park but I’d be damned if I’ll ever put a heavy load behind the rear axle again. It’s like getting your basic 1/2 ton pickup and actually putting 1000lbs in the bed and the suspension has a couple inches left and the headlights are pointing off the road,
Yeah, now I think 48-50cm is where it’s at.

oh crap, zombie thread.

Last edited by LeeG; 08-24-23 at 11:14 AM.
LeeG is offline