If you ever head south, stop by the thrifty guy's workshop. I have a couple of interesting tandems right now, including a nice Burley Duet. I also have a late 1970s Motobecane with a spare.

As Pompiere said, it is a Peugeot TH8, 1983. I couldn't say if it is exactly like P's - I recall he posted pics of his a few months ago - and most likely they are the same. Peugeot made two models, the TH8 with double diamond configuration and the TM8 (I think it was called) with diamond/mixte configuration. I don't believe they made the TH8's in different sizes. So it might not fit you two.

The thing is, it has double lateral tubes running from the headset to the DOs, and also a pretty large oval keel tube. I don't know if that is how Peugeot made them throughout its life but I do know the competing French tandems from Motobecane and Gitane were not like that. In any case, we have been quite happy with it, have put in thousands of miles including two mini-tours with the bike loaded to 100 lbs. (Yeah, it is a bear that way, but once unloaded at the end of the day it feels like a rocket.) The French components have been quite good. Our concessions to modernity are the stoker's crank is 140mm, and wheels. The rims are Mavic A319, supposedly touring rims, the front hub is a Shimano 105 while the rear hub is the original Atom.





If I were buying a tandem today I'd go more modern. Brifters would be nice for the occasional shift when I'd rather not take a hand off the bars or when the terrain goes up and down and up and up and down and down and up and down all in about 30 seconds. Our bike weighs about 40lbs without its racks; a newer bike would be lighter. I'd probably consider Co-motion first or perhaps a custom Seven for big bucks, but it isn't about brand, it's about feel and fit. But the thing is, Sharon really really really likes how she fits ours so she won't let me even think about another one. On the bike I may be the captain but she is the rear admiral.

Plus, ours is the coolest bike in the state.

On further review... I'm not recommending a TH8 necessarily but I think you might fit one. My doctor says I'm 5'9" (I respectfully disagree because I was always 5'10.5", but what do I know? ) and I fit the front just fine. Sharon is 5'2" and the rear is marginally big for her so she can't quite straddle her TT comfortably.

F00, if you are really looking for a tandem, there are lots of little things to be aware of. You can learn lots from the Tandem forum, but sometimes that's like reading the Roadie - if it ain't the latest bestest thing then it ain't good enough to converse about.

A tandem is not just a larger version of a solo bike. The bike is indeed bigger and the psychology is different. Your stoker MUST be able to yield ALL control to you. Some people can't do that. Your stoker MUST have COMPLETE faith in your judgment. Some people can't do that either. The captain's Job 1 is the keep the bike safe. Job 2 is to keep the stoker happy. Some forms of communication are important, especially the word "Bump". However you can usually have a nice conversation while riding. With most teams the stoker can't see the road ahead but has more freedom to look around at the passing scenery. If the captain has a helmet mirror the stoker must not try to look over the captain's left should to see the road.

Mechanical things on a tandem are different. Most have nutted rear wheels because a QR skewer may not hold the wheel tightly enough. A rear flat must be fixed without removing the wheel unless you carry a BFW. Wheels carry more load (though we have only 36 spokes rear, 32 spokes front). The captain can't see the derailleurs and can't hear them very well either so shifting takes some faith. (With a triple up front, I'm happy to have only a 5-spd FW instead of 6 or 7.) Braking and turning take more distance - with braking people think they can't brake instantaneously like they can on a solo bike, but when you get right down to it you can't instantly come to a stop on a solo bike either. You always need some distance so the difference is really about anticipation. Tandems don't go uphill so well, so low gearing is essential. However they fly downhill with the least provocation.

[MENTION=252763]Flog00[/MENTION] - Jim has some really good advice. My wife is not a biker but loves to ride occasionally. The tandem has been a great experience for us. IMHO size and fit are key, everything else can be "fixed." Do talk to wrk101. Our Burley Duet came to us through him.

I don't know the year but it is about a 1994 vintage. It had a 6 speed Suntour Accushift in the rear with Indexed barcons. I have since "upgraded" to a 7 speed. It works very well for us. It is nearly stock, otherwise, including the 48 spoke wheels!

Keep in mind that you don't want to look for a frame dimension equal to your single. The captain needs to be able to straddle the TT and spread their legs out far enough to support the bike while the stoker rotates the cranks into position for the Captain to step into the pedal. You don't want to fight having you shins or calf's turn black and blue because the TT is too high!

Riding a tandem is significantly different in nearly every way.

Perhaps you could provide a description of the type of riding you expect to be doing and how often.

LOL @ steel tandems suck - as though they're all the same.

IDIOT - it's not the material, it's the tubing diameters and placement of tubes. YOU CAN HAVE RIGID, OS, STEEL TANDEMS. A vitus aluminum tandem would be whippier than Indiana jones.

This OS tubed steel tandem most certainly doesn't suck.

Brooks B17s?

Tandem bicycle

I texted about this bike, yet to hear from him.

B72 is my guess. I have a couple.

People love these saddles but I have only felt comfy if sitting bolt upright on one. Any forward lean at all and I much prefer the B17 or one of the Pro models.

Huge matter of differences with the fellow ranting here. We were focusing on C&V, plus I highly doubt its a common occurance that we carry cast iron V8 engine blocks.

I'll try to be brief. But just as a reminder and not to slight any manufacture, often makers have price point different models. The Santana Arriva mentioned caters more budget price point and a very popular seller. While at it, that company offers frames in steel, aluminum, titanium and carbon fiber. Let's keep going............ select triple, quads or hex.

The ranting dude knows nothing about the exclusive specific tubing made for them way back, frame design, fillet brazed, head tube specifics. The coined name Marathon has some real meaning. It makes no economic sense to keep making them like that again. That's all. I've had C'dale ally and clearly know the characteristic differences.

Then the issue of forks comes up. Back up a bit to vintage. There was a time that all bikes used a common 1" steerer. That does not make them bad. Millions are still around today. There's some great vintage tandem forks too. Twin plate crowns, some quality cast types.... nothing wrong with having them today. He's making it seem as if their failing left and right. I happen to like the nostalgia, style of these. Also, good for one if they like the looks of a shapely fork, unicrown, this or that.

BTW: Not vintage but thought I'd share a few pics of state-of the -art brand new, STEEL frame, top tier hand made by someone who you should well recognize.

There is a Burley Paso Doble for sale down the street. Very modern in contrast to our C&V tastes but looks to be a decent deal for the 1,000.00 asking price. I have this distant dream of being a stoker in a race where something is at stake. Sounds like fun.

After several years of reading post on BF, it has become clear there is a concern about the human frame fitting the bike frame.

Clearly a human frame of 400lbs and 6' 7" is not near the center of the bell curve of human factors of design of most bicycles. It is no wonder that every steel bike is unacceptable. Considering that frame of reference, also having some education (degree) in mechanical engineering, I would be more concerned about AL as a frame material of choice than steel (at least it gives you a warning). Any OS tubing would be marginal or the beginning tubing of choice for such a human frame. The fact that any bike designed for the most common range of human factors works at all is an amazing statement of the safety factor considerations in design!

Judging most bicycle design, including material, and components, with such a frame of reference using declarative statements such as "...believe me when I tell you all steel frames suck!" is more a reflection of the persons perspective than any truth in the statement. For him they suck. For the majority of us, discussing C&V, they are great! It is all relative. Some times the frame of reference is an outlier. That is not good or bad, just a data point. However, the presentation might be judged as good or bad, acceptable or objectionable.

[MENTION=252763]Flog00[/MENTION] - Go and test ride the Trek T200. Bill McCready (founder of Santana) thinks very highly of the first generation Trek tandems (T50, T100, T200). The share the same frame, and are laterally stiff. The frame is butted Cr-Mo steel, TIG welded. They are not very light, they are stable.

We have a T50. Ibis made a very nice tandem in the late '80s and early '90s - when the come to market, they tend to be expensive.

+10 Its a proven fact that all steel frames suck. Despite this, I have limited my 100+ accumulation to steel because, well, I am an idiot. Until I wise up, I will probably continue to make the mistake of buying steel bikes. Bought another one over the weekend. This insanity MUST end! Hopefully I will find similar idiots in my marketplace to relieve me of most of them. When the rest of my market wises up, I am going to be stuck with quite a large pile of steel scrap. Unfortunately, most are not even my size!

Lets see, scrap steel is bringing 3 cents here. So a 30 pound bike will give me 90 cents... This is going to be bad.... really bad. Hopeless, very grave situation here.....

I think I will go take one of my crappy steel bikes out for a ride this afternoon. Hopefully it will not leave me stranded. Better take the cell phone just in case, and leave a route map with my wife.

If the crappy steel bike and I make it back, I will have to celebrate it making one day more with my favorite beverage. The beverage thankfully comes in an aluminum container, so I know it will not let me down.

You know I've always felt those of us with tandems should start a national movement to captain for blind or sight impaired people. Riding a bike is something most of us can't imagine living without. We should DO THIS!

Great point. The DT spin-on tightening skewer should be mandatory for all QR tandem wheels. I couldn't order one fast enough. Modern tandems are always QR, usually, but I won't ever use anything but DT skewers on the rear wheel of the tandem. Front wheels have always usually been QR even when the rear was bolt-on.

Done!

Bicycling Blind | Connecting blind cyclists with sighted pilots.

There's a local club in San Diego. I searched for one up here but couldn't find one.

Cool tandem hulls! (Is there a bike in that pic? I thought we were talking about bikes. Oh, it's way down at the bottom. Never mind. )

What would happen if that anchor fell on the steel frame! Don't you think carbon would hold up better?

Nah. Carbon would shatter. With that steel bike it would just bend the fork.

Okay, maybe this tandem thing is impossible on our current budget. My wife is 6'1" with long legs and arms and I don't think she'll have enough room.
The only saving grace might be the fact that she like to be rather upright, so maybe straight bars and an upright style saddle would make the stoker compartment "feel" bigger?

I suggest you try the tandem forum. Folks there can help identify the manufacturers, models, and years when the stoker compartment elongated from the 'classis' of 70s and earlier to the modern sizing. That seems to me to be the best place to start...

Eric
- 87ish Centurion Ironman, 1997 Trek 2120 (now a C&V, according to the comments I get), and 200? Trek T1000

It was clear to me when shopping that although everyone voiced the usual concern about "fit", that when it comes to the frame, it's really about getting the bike fit right as normal in the front compartment, and the only really important statistic on the rear compartment was standover. There are a limited number of boom lengths, all longer than needed, and the slight differences are between companies, not between sizes. (That's why Gates is able to offer one tandem timing belt with distance to be adjusted by choice of ring size.) Tandems East or other shops will gladly sell you a nigh-infinite variety of stoker stems and seat posts, to get the reach and stack to be whatever she wants.

XLarge Santana Visa Tandem 1993?

I'm going to try to arrange a test ride of this bike.
I hope to attend a regatta in Cleveland and can swing over to check it out. It is a biggun'. If I can straddle it I think it has good room for Stephi.

F00, that Santana looks like a pretty nice bike as seen through the tube of Internet pictures. The seller describes is as having centerpull brakes but they look like linear-pull to me, or a form of cantilever. He probably has no idea what real centerpull brakes look like!

Check the state of the headset. On a newer bike like that it wouldn't be too hard to find a replacement, but it's worth checking if it needs it.

It doesn't look especially big but with no reference points that's hard to judge.

Check out how it handles. IIRC, Santanas are known for having high stability. Some people say they are sluggish, but some people absolutely love them for that. Maybe you can find a reference online for that particular model.

Good luck with it!