futuregrace

For my suburban commuter bike I'm looking at the Jamis Aurora and Surly Long Haul Trucker.
7 miles to work, I'll ride it all over though. Mixed between roads, sidewalks, paths. Wish to use rack and paniers and to put Cross tires on it for when off road type trail things. My question as someone who does not yet know too much about bikes are what are the trade offs between these two bikes? How do their steel compare? Is there a way to know which is heaver? and what do I not even know to ask? thanks for any help you can give. I gave up on Poor Man's Rivendell and Now I just want a $1000ish country bike that is fast, can handle hills and comfortable on the my back (not too bent over).

njkayaker

The LHT is designed for loaded (carrying a lot of weight) touring. The Aurora isn't exactly intended for that purpose but it can be used for touring. The Aurora might be a bit better for just riding around.

There isn't going to be a clear, absolute difference between the two.

Keep in mind that 7 miles is nothing. Almost anything would work for that.

Which one is cheaper?

CliftonGK1

The frame is equivalent. Reynolds 520 is 4130 Cr-Mo with a Reynolds sticker on it. No difference there.
The Surly has nicer wheels (Adventurer/XT, vs. ACE19/Tiagra)
The Surly has a better rear derailleur (XT vs. Deore)
The Jamis has STI levers instead of barend shifters. I won't call one "better" since that's a preference call.
They have equivalent cranks, but the Surly has a lower gearing (26/36/48 vs. 30/39/50)
The Jamis stocks nicer tires
The Jamis stocks with pedals, the Surly does not
They're both available in blue

It's a toss up, really. Do want better wheels and rear derailleur at the sacrifice of STI levers, or would you rather have STI levers, a mid-grade rd (totally fine, I use the same one), and entry-level wheels?
If you want to upgrade either one, you'll look at about the same cost for dropping STI levers on the LHT or a better touring wheelset on the Jamis in the future.

Ride them both and see which is more comfortable, and if they're about the same comfort, which one do you think looks better.

jtgotsjets

You could find a used bike in like-new condition that work work wonderfully for a 7 mile commute for half (or less!) of your asking price.

No sense in dropping a g on a brand new touring bike unless you're getting ready to ride a tour.

HardyWeinberg

The biggest difference is wider tire-clearance on the LHT and also the option (or requirement, depending on frame size) for 26" wheels. w/ a 26" wheel frame you can put mtn bike tires onto the LHT.

futuregrace

Thanks, that's what I was needing to know. The Jamis is cheaper by $75. Do you mean the Jamis is lighter by saying not intended for carrying a lot of weight?

futuregrace

What does lower gearing mean? which is better for hills?

Looking at these with interest in doing more riding, 4 days on Katy Trail this summer and we'll see after that. I realize this could be done cheaper, but I'm wanting a good go anywhere type bicycle.

I've never used bar end shifters, do they have clicks to let you know when you changed gear or do you have to get it right by feel like old school shifters? What are some of y'alls opinions on bar end shifters?

z90

I just recently made this decision myself. They're both nice bikes. I went with the LHT because I wanted to be able to run wide studded tires with fenders during the winter. Another reason for me is that the LHT had a longer effective top tube length for a given seat tube length, which allows for a more stretched out cockpit. Also, I just liked the way it felt. At first I was conflicted about the lack of STI shifters, but I find the bar-end shifters to be great. I do have another bike for group rides that has STI and is lighter than the LHT. I wouldn't worry about the weight difference between the two, if there is one. It's just not going to be very important for commuting. By the way my commute is 7 miles(one way), hilly suburban/urban. I seriously doubt you'll find the top gear (48x11) limiting unless you're Mark Cavendish.

njkayaker

If you want 26 inch wheels, then the LHT is it. The cantilever brakes force you to pick one or the other. Anyway, unless you are planning on going to South America, 700c wheels would be fine.

================

A $75 difference means they are the same price. That is, you wouldn't pick one over the other based on that.

The Aurora might be a pound or two lighter. That's not going to be a big deal. Depending on what you like, the Aurora has a shorter wheelbase, which might make it seem a bit more "lively" riding around.

Yes, better for steep hills and carrying more weight.

================

He isn't buying it for this one purpose.

I think STI works a bit better for fast group rides.

z90

On the LHT, the rear shifter is indexed (has clicks) and the front is not. Once you've spent a day riding around, you won't even think about it.

There are several threads that go into the various merits of STI versus bar-end, but in the end, I think it's small potatoes unless you're racing, or maybe going on hard group rides.

envane

I ride an Aurora for my commute, short loaded tours, and even slower club rides. Its a great general-purpose bike. Bar end shifters can be switched between friction (old school) and indexed (clicky). I'm not a fan of bar-end shifter and love STI. The disadvantages to the Aurora are that you're limted to 32mm tires with fenders and it has a shorter wheelbase which causes heel-strike on rear panniers for people with big feet . Also, the Jamis has cantilever brakes (because v-brakes are not compatible with STI shifters) and those are annoying to adjust.

EKW in DC

Lower gearing means more pedal revolutions to travel the same distance. On the front set of gears (chainrings), lower gear = fewer teeth. On the rear gears, more teeth=lower gear. Lower gearing is better for hill climbing... just like in a car.

Modern day bar ends shifters are indexed (i.e., they click), at least generally they do for the rear at least. They have the advantage of being able to operate in friction mode ("old school") if need be in a pinch. A lot of touring officianados like bar ends for their simplicity and ease of repair. STI gear shifts are a little tricky to install, adjust, etc., from what I understand.

FWIW, I have heard of a lot more people who are looking for a true touring bike opting for the LHT.

As CliftonGK1 pointed out, though, a lot of it just boils down to preferences. I'd suggest trying to test ride both of them and see which feels better... and look closely at which looks better in your eyes, too. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. My eye likes the LHT more, but that's just me...

z90

Both of these bikes will have plenty low enough of a low gear for lightly loaded riding, (and plenty of high gear). I can't speak from direct experience for fully loaded touring, but from what I've read, the LHT is better geared for that.

CliftonGK1

Lower gearing is better for hills. The smaller the chainring (front) and larger the cog (rear) it is easier to pedal. Both the Jamis and Surly have a 34t cog in back. The Surly has a 26t ring, and the Jamis has a 30t ring.

I like my bar ends. You can use them in friction (old-school) or index (click) mode. They're easy to switch between modes in case your index adjustment goes haywire. They're rugged, and they're serviceable (which most STI levers are not: break it, and you commonly have to replace it.) If you do break a bar end shifter, a pair is under $100 instead of $150 or more for a single STI lever.
I actually keep my bar ends on friction (old-school) mode, but I lean a little bit toward the retro-grouchy side.

hubcap

I like Jamis bikes, but I wouid go with the LHT for you stated uses. However, you could get by doing the Katy trail with a single speed. It's pretty flat.

InTheRain

I liked CliftonGK1's comparison of the two bikes. Based on my riding style and preference I would lean toward the Aurora. The biggest influence for me is the STI shifting. Other than that, I'm pretty neutral. Again... that's my "preference." I'm not saying that it's "better."

HardyWeinberg

There is one outright bad design feature to the jamis, the integrated seatpost-collar-thingy. It apparently doesn't break often enough for them to go to a separate seatpost collar but if it does on yours, that would be the end of the frame.

Pscyclepath

I looked at the same choices a few weeks ago, when I had to replace my commuter. I wanted another Cross-Check, but the current colors didn't really appeal to me and I was looking at something that could easily accommodate front racks. I test rode a Long Haul Trucker, a Jamis Aurora, and an Aurora Elite, my LBS had bikes on the floor that I could compare directly. I bought the Trucker. The Jamis' were wonderful bikes, but I liked the overall fit and feel of the Trucker a little better, as well as the gearing and bar-end shifters.

Given your riding description, you may want to look at a Surly Cross-Check in addition to the Trucker and the Aurora. I swapped out the 'cross tires on mine for a pair of Continental Gatorskins, and it was very much a go-anywhere do-anything bike that still kept the feel of a good steel roadie. The Trucker and Auroras had just a little longer wheel base (for touring & stability) and so felt just a little less "nimble" than my old Cross-Check.

neil

The Aurora is slightly less tank-like. It is a touring bike though, and is certainly capable of taking the weight, if loaded touring (fully self contained with tent, stove, etc.) is your thing. I don't know the LHT's weight, but my Aurora, with rack and fenders, weighs about 30lbs.

As noted above, the shifting components and wheels are spec'd slightly higher on the LHT complete. Surly also sells frame only so that you can pick your own parts (I don't believe Jamis does this). The brifters add to the price of the Aurora, and may or may not be worth it depending on your preference. I love riding with brifters, but when they break, they are not repairable. Bar-ends are very simple, and basically just don't break...worst case scenario is having to use friction mode.

Myself and a few friends all own Auroras, and I'm the only one to break a brifter, and it was my fault for stringing the shifter cable incorrectly. Shimano replaced it under warranty though, so the only harm was losing my bike for a month while I waited through the warranty process.

I don't see tire clearance being a problem, I have more than enough clearance on the fenders and could use bigger tires without problem.

I'd test ride both bikes. I've never been on an LHT, but have heard good things. The Aurora is a fantastic ride, and I do highly recommend it.

sygyzy

Wow, great comparison by CliftonGK1.

OP, let us know what you decide.

z90

For me it would have been a problem. The clearance where the chainstays meet the main triangle is pretty tight for much above a 32

z90

For me, for commuting, fatter tires=good. 37mm on the LHT > than 32mm on the aurora. Others may like a skinnier tire, but for potholes and street grates, give me my wide tires.

CliftonGK1

The problem with the Travel Contact isn't the width; it's that the Travel Contact is a multi-surface tire so they gave it a smooth center and huge cornering lugs. Unless you're cornering on loamy grass or loose dirt/gravel, those lugs are nothing more than a means of reducing your contact patch and making cornering a sketchy issue.

Normally I'm not one to promote Vittoria tires of any type, especially over a Continental tire; but in this case it's warranted. Surly should have put a City Contact or even a Town Ride on there instead of the Travel Contact. Heck, if they're going to promote the LHT as a touring bike, just use the Conti Touring Plus (Conti's version of the Marathon Plus).

exile

I've test ridden both bikes when I was in the market for a touring bike. If memory serves me correctly the Aurora was a little lighter and seemed to have quicker handling compared to the LHT. The LHT however rode very smoothly and felt more inclined to just roll (however I test rode one in Ithaca and the other in Philly). I think the LHT has more braze-ons as well.

For the LHT they recommend you size down one size from your regular road bike frame. For me that put me on 26" wheel size for the LHT at the time.

Like others suggest go out and ride both. Its up to you on how you want your bike to preform.

z90

Man, that sounds like it makes sense, but it sure hasn't been my experience. The bike feels super solid in corners, never even close to sketchy.