Hmm...Touring Options?
 

My wife and I are thinking of doing a fairly long tour (Montréal-NYC via Adirondacks and Hudson Valley, unsupported, but no camping gear). We're mostly city bikers, but we've done a couple of longer tours before (8 days in Tuscany, unsupported, on rented hybrid bikes; end-to-end on Prince Edward Island on mountain bikes, when we were young and silly). We don't currently have bikes that seem quite appropriate, and are weighing our options. I'm curious to think about what other people think.

• Option 1: Build up a frame we've got. I've got a 1984 Peugeot P-series that's a flatland daily commuter, with moustache bars and pretty high gears. The frame fits great, but I'd need to give it a triple crankset, which would probably require a new BB and FD, plus a lower-geared freewheel and probably RD. Probably drop bars and brake levers, too. I've also got a 1972-ish Raleigh International frame and fork, which would need all of the above (but would let me keep my commuter as-is). My wife rides my mom's 1961/2 Atala, which would need the same stuff. All this could get pricey and difficult, and might be taking my mechanical skills to their limits, which I'm not sure I want to find out about on the open road.
• Option 2: Buy new bikes. Sure would be easy. We test-rode Surly Long Haul Truckers and liked them. Still, $1200 each seems like a lot to a guy who never spends more than $150 on a bike. Are there other options in that category I'm not aware of? I saw the Nashbar steel touring bike, but I'm hesitant to buy from the Internet sight-unseen.
• Option 3: Buy complete vintage bikes. We're probably not going to do this 'til summer 2014, so we've got time. But we do want reliable bikes that won't strand us, and we definitely want triple cranksets. Your thoughts?

What do you think of the pros and cons, here?

I responded in your other thread, so I'm cutting and pasting.

I'd either build up the International or since you like to spend $150 on bikes, I'd look for some mid to late 80's rigid MTB's. Those have all the parts you want (triples, long chainstays, cantis, fender/rack attachment points, etc.) and if something breaks down the parts are easily found. Around here, $150 buys a lot of vintage MTB.

yeah, I'm a big fan of the Surly LHT (toured a couple times on one) but if you want the same bike for less than half the price, 1980's hardtail MTB is the way to go.

I just built up an early 90's mountain bike for touring and am extremely happy with it for the amount invested (about $130 for the bike, around $150-200 in parts). It also feels great to ride the Michigan roads on 1.85" touring tires and still have plenty of clearance for full fenders. If you have a local bike co-op, you might be able to use them for parts and mechanical help.

Some older Trek and other hybrids came with mid front eyelets for low rider racks. They can be found pretty cheaply too. I picked up Univega via Carisma for next to nothing and it is a great tourer when you want 4 panniers.

don't discount 1990s MTBs, they made decent rigid models into the mid and even late 1990s though by the late 90s they became low end. Still in 1995 you could get a full rigid model with LX components that had fender and rack braze-ons. Keep an open mind. I think mountain bikes are the best way to go.. .inexpensive and very reliable and generally the components are just as good.

If you're going the MTB route, don't get hung up on shifters. You're likely going to need a new chain and cassette anyway and you can get some adapters from velo orange and mount up a friction shifter or order some 8 speed bar cons and mount those on the velo orange adapter (essentially the same as the paul adapter). This is a great way to go.

Lastly, a 26" wheels LHT is just an 1980s MTB frame. I say this because of the geometry. Take a look at how long the top tubes are on these suckers. It is outrageous. Personally I am not a fan of the LHT because of how poorly they fit in my opinion.. if you have to use a 50mm stem and 80mm of spacers that is a poorly fitting frame IMO.

I am guessing there is an argument to be made for a longer, lower top tube resulting in a lower center of gravity and more standover room. My 1990 Schwinn High Plains has similar geometry, with a long top tube and relatively short head tube, and I do appreciate not having to lean the bike much to get on it when it's full loaded. My Miyata 610, however, is at about the minimum standover clearance for myself, and if I have two full panniers on the back, it can want to "flop" pretty hard if I lean it a bit to throw a leg over it.

Here it is minus the front rack. Interestingly enough, with the stem, saddle height and bars, the fit is nearly identical to my 610, just with a lower top tube. Reach and handlebar height are about the same.

http://i.imgur.com/PevxZRG.jpg

Mountain bike +1
Surly is exatly like a Mountain bike but you pay more

Interesting ideas. In practice, do you notice a difference between 26" and 700c, with similar tire widths/treads? I've only ever ridden MTBs with fat knobbies and flat bars, so I can't quite imagine willingly going long distances on one.

I put some tires similar to these

http://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product...65_-1___202472

on my modern mountain bike to commute one day. My speeds were very similar as when I ride a 700c bike, but I kept finding myself running out of gear inches. The wide range cassette with the MTB triple just wasn't tall enough to commute on. If I was going to build a drop bar version, I'd probably go 51/48/granny. In reality, I live in FL and could get by with a 48 all day.

If you've got the time to look....why not consider buying some C&V touring bikes? They can be found for (usually) reasonable prices and have all the eyelets/braze-on's you need, and usually with a triple.

I have a Schwinn Passage that's real nice. And of course there's some Trek's out there that people seem to like.

I've grown to really like the ride of 26" tires. With smaller sizes and higher quality tires, they seem plenty speedy. If you're converting an older mtb, you're more likely to notice the difference in the laid back geometry and in weight of the overall bike due to the stouter tubing, both of which aren't really a detriment for loaded touring.

Schwalbe and Continental make some very nice touring and road tires in 26" sizes (1.25-2"+). It's also possible to get some cheap 26" road tires that work well (definitely much better than knobby tires). I've been running some Forte Metro 26x1.5" semi-slicks from Performance Bike and they're very light.

Another benefit for touring is that with the same number of spokes, the smaller diameter 26" wheels will be much stronger than a 700c or 27" wheel.

If you're touring, you're not going to be moving very fast anyway. If you can find the secret sauce in a frameset and get the magic fit, the beefier tires and overall geometry of a vintage MTB conversion can make for a very rewarding ride.

The downsides of going vintage are that you'll need to completely strip and reassemble any bike you buy. You will almost certainly need to replace parts as well, which can quickly get you near new bike pricing.

I think the best way to answer this question is by asking another one. What would you gain by purchasing or building a dedicated touring bike, and what do you give up by not riding a hybrid or general-purpose road bike? If you're not carrying more than water, a couple changes of clothes, and a credit card, you don't really need the pack-mule capabilities of a touring-specific setup.

If you like doing your own work the vintage mtb route can be very rewarding. I've converted a couple to drop bars for friends and they both love them. One chose stems shifters and the other went with clamp-on downtubes. VO parts can make older road frames into capable touring machines too but I find the vintage MTB just easier and cheaper to convert and how can anyone turn down the wider tires?

I didn't like the MTB geometry when it was new (for any distance, at least). BB was higher than I liked. Others may be happy with it.

Anyway It can work, but it seems a little strange to spend extra to build up something you wouldn't like as well as what you're used to.

The P-series you have linked looks perfectly fine for the job. Repack the bottom bracket and hubs if it's been a while. Put a hundred miles or more on it and check all the nuts & bolts for tightness - but a new bike would need that too.
You could put something like a 34-42 double on it, or maybe even a triple for not very much, especially if you have a local co-op. The front derailleur ought to be fine with that You know the bike, you know what noises it ought to make, it's comfortable - and that's huge.
At some point, there may be a hill you'll want to walk regardless of the low gear. But a 34/28 is about a 32 inch low. That's not bad for a tour without tent, stove, sleeping bag, etc..
You're talking about 600 miles roughly, yeah? You maybe do that in 3-6 months of commuting, and this should be less stressful on the bike.

For the other, If she's comfortable with the Atala, then why not look for something about the same size & geometry?
If used, there are some pretty solid older road bikes, like a Nishiki Olympic, a Miyata 110 or 112, various Univega, and some others that don't get a premium for the name plate. Total cost for one rearranged Peugeot and one "new" bike ought to be in the 2-4oo range, I'd think.

But if new ...
I've not ridden one, but the head tube is relaxed and the wheel base is on the long side. It looks cool, and a little retro, I think.
http://www.somafab.com/archives/product/buena-vista
http://www.somafab.com/wp-content/up..._fork1_800.jpg

The reliability is an interesting thing. My experience is not good with new bikes in the 4-5oo range. YMMV. Would put my money elsewhere.

Interesting question. I guess I'm a road-bike snob and know little about mtbs. So my opinion doesn't count for much. But if it was me planning what you're planning...

I build up the International. As I read (or mis-read) your note you are going to be doing mostly road-biking, and covering a long distance overall even if each day won't be so long. On a trip like that the most important feature would be energy loss per mile, or if you prefer, efficiency. And then comfort. Road bikes evolved to be efficient and comfortable. The balance between the two varies with the bike, of course. Maybe an mtb is good at both too, but I wouldn't know.

When you throw in the aesthetics of the International the decision becomes easy. Your aesthetics may be different.