Frames like the 1980s Myiata 1000, Centurion Pro Tour, Trek 620, Bridgestone Touring, etc., any favorites and why? Is there really any substantial difference between the frames of the different manufacturers? Seems like the tubing is one type or another of db, geometry is pretty similar so..... Not asking about the components, just the frames.

thanks, Brian

They all tried to match each other in terms of features. Frames made later in the 80s have more features: rack braze-ons, water bottle braze ons, dropout adjuster screws, lowrider braze ons, canti mounts, etc. Later bikes also have lighter tubing that is in some cases triple butted. For example, a Miyata 1000 at the end of production in the 80s is far superior to a Miyata 1000 made in the early 80s.

So, it depends not only on manufacturer but more importantly on year.

Some of the lower level ones did not have canti brakes. Some are not suitable for bar cons. Some have braze ons for front racks, some don't. Some have longer stays. In the mid 1980s, weight was pretty similar up and down the touring product line, as weight was less of a concern. Check out Miyata touring bike weights in 1987. All had triple butted cromoly main frames.

If you are looking for a deal, everyone recognizes the handful of top of the line models. Get past that, and you can find deals, as pretty much all the Japanese manufacturers and brands had touring bikes.

And be really careful with individual models. Specs changed every year or two, most of the time for the better, sometimes for the worse.

I have a 1984 Trek 620 by the way. I had a 1983 a couple of years ago. Significant changes/improvements from the 1983. Go to vintage Trek site, 1983 chain stay was 44cm for the 620, 1984 was 45.5cm (meanwhile, 720 was 47cm). 84 620 had canti brakes, 83 had side pull caliper brakes; 84 front rack braze ons, 83 none; 84 two sets of bottle cage braze ons, 83, one; 84 531CS forks and stays, 83 manganese fork and stays. The 1983 geometry for the 620 was the same as their other 600 series racing/road bikes. Both years had the "wonderful" Helicomatic rear hub.

1987 215 ST: 26.8 pounds

1987 615 GT: 26.6 pounds

1987 100 LT: 26.6 pounds

I have never owned a true touring bike but I am partial to the Fuji Americas, Touring Seris and Saratogas perhaps because I worked on alot and rode with people who loved them.

I did sell and work on a few Cdale tourers but always thougt the a loaded tourer with ultrlight frame was a bit odd.

I had a FUJI touring series IV and it was a heck of a nice bike. It was a 1985 model I believe, triple butted cromoly, canti's. etc.

Depends.

What type of touring? Fully loaded touring (i.e. tent, food, everything), is different that "Credit Card Touring" (buy food, stay in hotels), which is different than "Supported touring" (someone else shlepps your stuff about) which is different than short day-or-two touring (so-called S24O). Also, where are you going? Developed world with roads, or 3rd world/back country? The later you will more likely need a Moutain bike.

My opinions are as follows:

Mainstream (Japanese-built...except Trek and Cannondale) US touring bikes did not generally have canti-lever brakes and a full accompanyment of braze-ons until about 1984 +/-. If you are going fully loaded touring, you will need the cantilever brakes and all the attachment points you can get. Most companies went "all-in" about 1984 with touring bikes, and the industry pretty much lived off of 1-years production for about 2-3 years. By 1987, most companies were out (Cannondale, Schwinn, Miyata, Mariushi and more or less Trek, were the exceptions). The big names included:

Centurion Pro Tour
Schwinn Voyager
Lotus Odyssey
Specialized Expedition
Miyata 1000
Trek 720 or 620
Cannondale, Shogun, Nishiki, SR, Mariushi all had models but I cannot remember the names.

Any of these will do you just fine. There were differences in component spec's and some braze-ons, but they are all similar except the Cannondales are Aluminum, and the Trek 720's were rather unique in their unnusually long chainstays and Reynolds 531 tubing. These frames may ride a bit differently,and you will love the or hate them, but that is about it. The components are all old enough that you may wind up replaceing them with either the same if you like them, or newer things. (Some of the Treks used some less common French parts)

I personnally have/had a Lotus Odyssey, Expedition, Trek 620, Pre-tour, Schwinn Voyager and Myata 1000. I think the Expedition (1983, built by Miyata) and the 1000 were the best built, but I like the riding qualities of the Lotus (1984) the best. I will add that the differences are subtle, but the thing I really like about the Lotus is that it rides as well unladen as fully loaded. I will also note that the Schwinns seem to have the worst build quality/consistancy (frames). This will certainly stir up an argument here, and I am not interested in depating it. I sold them for years, and continue to work on older bikes from the frame up, and I stand by that statement, but don't want to digress from your inquiry. By 1988, Trek was down to only the 520, and it started to morph/have compromizes with other models. If you look at the 1990 520, the frame is identical (except tubing) to their new hybrids 790, and 770. I have one of these, and the trail has been increased for reasons I can only speculate. The result is that despite being able to load the front end down, the handling suffers. I will also note that my wife's 1989 Miyata 1000 is probably one of the nicest bikes I have seen and very well thought out. I have seen a similar vintage Mariushi that was of similar quality, but I never rode it, so I canot say as to how well it performs.

For credit card tours, I think canti-lever brakes are optional, as good center-pull brakes work as well with the lessor loads (I would stay away from side-pulls). The Earlier Trek 520's, Miyata 610, Schwinn Le Tour Luxe/Passage, Centurion Elite GT, etc all work very well.

For short tours, and non-go fast racing bike will do. Mid-1980's sport-touring bikes are ideal, plentiful and cheap.

Just MY opinions.

To that list, add Centurion Elite GT and Lotus Eclaire. There are plenty more.

Touring bikes tend to sell at a premium, 75% more than an equivalently equipped road bike. On a budget and a short tour, nothing wrong with a rigid frame mtb. And FWIW, friends of mine rode coast to coast on a pair of Cannondale hybrids (they also rode all over the Canadian Rockies).

Someone earlier posted a video off you tube, of a group of college student touring across the USA on JC Penney 10 speeds. They were either rebranded Huffys, with the god awful rear disc brakes. Anyway, despite riding really crappy bikes, they all made it. I am reading a book about two high school kids that toured from CA to WA on two very basic bikes. And that was when there were many spots without roads, proving you can tour with anything (but be a lot more comfortable with something efficient!) I met a guy this summer, touring coast to coast on his Surly LHT. Fully loaded, it weighed in at 95 pounds! He was making it just fine, at about 60 years young.

I've had this 82 Miyata for about a year and a half. I don't tour so it doesn't serve it's purpose. It's a nice riding bike, but I only use it when I need to tow my kids. In about 84, most of the 'serious' touring bikes came manufactured with three sets of bottle mounts, mid fork threadings for lowriders, and 700c wheels.

This bike will be gone before the end of summer.

Rodger Love the last picture with the small fry standing there. Is he asking "where do I sit dad"

Had an early 80's Nishiki Royale - sidepull brakes, no rack braze ons, 27" Araya rims. Chromoly main triangle, carbon stays and forks, as I recall. It was a really, really good touring bike. It had bar end shifters, but no braze ons to support them, as I recall.

I sold it and bought an 84 Trek 620 which on paper was much better. On the road, it may have been somewhat better, but it had some limitations too. I'd be really hard pressed to say it was better than the Royale. A little more convenient in some ways, but not better in a meaningful way, and I used them both to tour through steep hills/mountains.

I've attempted to attach a vintage pic of the 620 parked next to a friend's Nishiki Cresta (not mine - the pictured bike was an 84 or 85) - these two bikes are at most a year apart. The pic was taken in early 86, I think. The water bottles froze, so it got a snapshot.

Kind of funny, note the Duopar on the Trek and the 3 pulley derailleur on the Nishiki.
Second picture is the 81 or 82 Nishiki without braze ons. It was better than it should have been.

Had friends do some fairly serious touring (1k miles and up) on things like a Ross Gran Tour, a Nishiki Olympic 12, a Fuji Espree (?) and Monterey, a Cannondale ST 400, and a variety of Concorde's and Schwinns. Really, anything that would take a triple crank, had alloy rims and eyelets for at least a rear rack worked fine. A 40" wheelbase in a 23" frame was kind of a dividing line too. Anything more was finesse, really. I just picked up a Miyata 112, and with a slight gearing change, it'd be just fine.

I wanted one of those in a bad way back then. No Fuji dealers within 50 miles at the time, at least none that would stock a touring bike. I think that'd bump really hard to the top of my list if I was looking for a vintage touring frame. Didn't they have braze ons for extra spokes?

I'm partial to the Dawes Super Galaxy. I have also had a 1985 Trek 620 that was fantastic, it had every braze on you can think of. That said, I hate canti brakes and am just fine with modern long reach dual pivots. My Super Galaxy fits my need more, which is really a "sport touring" setup.

I've had a few 80s Japanese tourers pass through the fleet: Univega Gran Tourismo, Fuji Touring Series III, Miyata 610. They all rode fine though I didn't tour on them, so they were overbuilt for my needs. My favorite and a current keeper is a '94 Bridgestone RB-T. Chainstays aren't crazy long, geometry is more sport touring than touring, and weight isn't bad.

Panasonic offered a few nice models - the PT-3500, PT-5000, and Touring Deluxe, in ascending order in the hierarchy. I'm pretty fond of my Schwinn Voyageur SP, which has a Panasonic-made frame.

The Rbt looks good(and vaguely familiar), nlerner. Good to see pictures of it in use.

1984 ProTour took me twice down the California coast Santa Cruz to San Luis Obispo, plus all over central California. I keep it because of the memories (my first adult bike), but my touring days are over.

Thanks, Roger!

I have a 1977 Fuji S10-S that I love and it rides like a dream. I also have a Fuji Touring Series IV. I haven't had a chance to take it on a long ride yet but it seems to be pretty nice. Since riders have such a wide preference and everyone is physically different I think that a lot of what makes for a good touring frame is how well the frame fits the rider.

Some riders prefer a trailer over bags or to use a combination of the two. Some riders are smaller/lighter and so they don't need the mechanical advantage of cantilever brakes.

If you find a frame that fits you well and gives you the right riding position, it is very possible to turn it into a decent touring bike.

As I find myself often doing, I agree with Bill's advice. I just snagged a 1985 Miyata 210 off CL over the holiday and was surprised how important the year is for that particular bike once I started reading (in terms of components...I know you asked specifically about frames). I trust you've checked out the Show Your Vintage Touring Bike thread... man, I've learned a lot from that thread over the years. If you're in the market, good luck, and I wish you many happy touring miles!

I have touring experience with a fuji touring series 4, a trek 720, trek 620, a cannondale T400, and recently a Miyata 1000. For lighter touring I have used a trek 630, Bianchi Rando, and schwinn sports tourer. With some of these much more experience than others, but had enough loaded time on each to form an opinion of them.

The trek 720 is by far the most flexy frame of the bunch, almost to the point of being a handful in some cases, and it would easily scrape the fenders with the rear wheel if I pushed it on a climb. Outside of that, it's nice and light. Ultimately, not my cup of tea due to it being very flexy and losing a bit of feel under load (great under light loads however). Some people love this bike, and I had mine long enough to know just how different it was. If you want a compliant ride with a bit of flex to comfort you, this is the bike.

The 620 was a real nice bike, but the rear stays are almost too long, again resulting in fender rub. Otherwise, a bit more stout than the 720, and slightly preferred (by me) to the 720. Was wrong size (too large) and the long stays made it feel like driving a truck. I would have loved to keep it, but it was purchased knowing that the size might not work out. Made a tidy profit.

The fuji series 4 is my favorite of the entire list. It comes with a great set of features, a just stout enough frame (very similar to the 620, but with shorter stays so it feels tighter). It carries spare spokes (as somewhat unique feature), has all the touring mounts etc that any of the others have, and has an awesome paint job. I still have it, and toy with the idea of modernizing it (but really like it as is).

The cannondale tourers are a close second to the fuji. They are light, stiff, and somehow not punishing. They also have the advantage of being more versatile for every day and non-touring uses. The one I had was a bit too small, so I always have my eye out for a good ST model. If you had just one bike, this might be the one.

The miyata 1000 (an 84 model) is very stout compared to the other steel bikes, and rides very well. The only thing wrong with it thus far is the gearing selection was not good for half stepping. It's a recent pickup for me, and I intend to fully kit it out this year. The ride is lovely however, and it is the essential heavy tourer from the early 80's (narrow bars and all). You can't go wrong with one of these.

All the full on tourers were early to mid 80's models, and it is really interesting how different they were. The cannondale was the relative hot rod. The 720 the lightweight (of the steelies) with sort of a narrow tire frame flex theory. The 620 was probably the most standard of the bunch, but could have used stronger rims and larger tires. The 1000 by far the stiffest and almost as responsive as the cannodale (despite much larger tires) - I feel the most confident "off roading" on this of the bunch if that is something you'd ever see yourself doing.. The fuji 4 was what you'd get if you put all the others together, and made it look just as classy as could be.

Of the light tourers I've ridden the 630 is my favorite. The sports tourer is a great riding frame though (if you like frames that absolutely do not flex in the bottom bracket). The rando is on my sell list (it's just too much of a tourer ride without the touring features), and again the fenders rub on the climbs.

Any how, that's my drivel to "contribute" to the topic.

This:

Oh...the chainline! Ow!

Keep your eyes peeled for a Shogun Alpine GT



Maybe I should have held on to this one... it was a tad small though.

Tange Infinity, very straightforward clean brazing, sweet ride, all the expected touring braze-ons, pretty paint, 40-spoke rear wheel...

I found a nice one this past summer, but it was too small. Yard sale, 20 bucks. I've flipped several touring bikes and to me, this one was pretty impressive.

My Univega Gran Turismo.

Fully loaded on tour at the plage de l'argentière on the Mediterranean coast in France in October


I modified it when I got back. The brake levers were killing my hands on the mountain roads, so I switched those, and I added a dynamo lighting system.