But wait! There's more! As an extra added bonus, here is a photo of a tent I claim to own being used on a tour I claim to have taken:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/105349603@N05/19293357935/in/album-721576552637

whats the story with that beauti.great tent also.

lads lads calm down sure tis only a bike thread no need to get excited.

Where goes the line when an apple turns to an orange? One of the big questions of our generation.
Of course the 920 resembles the disc trucker more than the LHT, which I don't have, but kinda do have since I have a disc front. Anyways the 920 is much, MUCH closer to the disc trucker than for example my 29er XC bike. The only real difference is that the 920 takes slightly larger tires, which in my book isn't all that big a difference. And it's aluminum of course, which kinda should make the bike cheaper, not more expensive. Weird that.

And how exactly was the handling different? Because now that I again check out the geometries it would seem you like a sluggish slow steering bike, which the 920 is, at least when comparing to the LHT.
Differences.
LHT has a steeper head angle = faster steering
LHT has less trail = faster steering
LHT has shorter chainstays = faster steering
LHT has shorter wheelbase = faster steering.
LHT has less BB drop = funnily more suitable for offroad in this regard.
This at least in the size 61, which is what I ride.

I also can't see why the 920 frame is so superior to the LHT. I'd wager the differences are really quite small, except that the LHT has more versatility in carrying stuff such as pump, extra spokes etc.

When considering the components, I was talking about my LHT, which is self built. It's well under 2k and has better components than the 920. Better wheels, better crank, better shifters, better brakes, better chain even. Actually, the rear derailer isn't as good, but a cheaper rear mech works just as well. I've noticed a good front mech is actually more important.

You needing new wheels is just an inkling I have. I doubt you have the experience for long ultralight tours so I suppose you'll do a few short ones and stop touring altogether and go trolling other forums (hopefully)

Thanks. He made this just before he started manufacturing his own dropouts with his new mill. The ones he makes now have the Engin logo on them. On the left chain stay there is a mini LOVE statue decal. It's a Philly thing. And that's not paint but rather Cerakote, which is a ceramic coating primarily used to coat firearms. Tougher, lighter and cheaper than paint.

Nope. It's a thread about an alleged bike. I threw in the tent because the OP described his alleged tent in a separate thread that was started for posting photos of your shelters.

Is your seatpost clamp backwards?

It is. The frame builder built the bike that way to better keep grit and water out of the slot in the back of the seat tube. He said if it bugs me I can always turn it around.

It's been two days and squeezy hasn't figured out how to post pictures.
I'm beginning to suspect the bike doesn't actually exist.

(just kidding, I knew it the whole time)

Looking at pictures on the trek website, is it really a combination of external and internal routed cables on a touring bike? Is it the brake cable (hydo fluid line) or the shifter cable that is internal?

Amazingly, yes. The rear brake line is routed inside downtube, shifter cables are external, presumably to engage cable stop/minimize cable friction. If I had an aluminum touring frame, I would definitely cut big holes in the downtube just to hide a single housing. Cause we all know this will save 20g of weight, be super aero plus look cool. Besides, what could possibly go wrong from cutting holes at the ends of an aluminum downtube that will bend and twist thousands of times on every bike ride?

Downtube internal shift cables. There's an interesting opening just above the BB about 2 cm x 0.5 where the cables come out and go to the deraileurs. Hopefully my son or his friends will help me post photos.

Wait what? I did not notice that before! That's almost even more idiotic than having 28 spoke rear wheel on that thing. Why would they do that? It serves no reason whatsoever. Makes the frame weaker, makes cabling more fiddly (and trust me, trek internal routing is sometimes like straight from the soviet union with the 'innovations' and all that. Lose a tiny ferrule and you use all internal cabling capabilities for example), forces you to cut housings and have exposed cable which is a contamination risk etc etc etc. If they were smaht, they would have allowed for full length housings especially for shifter cables.

Except of course they expect riders to use the massive front rack to carry a full tool set including surgical clamp tweezers, flashlight and rare earth magnets (that's what I use to route internal cables)

So where did you get your engineering degree from? And what testing equipment do you own?

you poor man! where in the world do you live that's so far from a starbucks?

Congratulations! Buying a bike can be an agonizing experience; more so when done by committee.

I hope you enjoy your bike. It will take you to new places, some may even be relatively close to home.

You received a lot of guff about your choice, some of it undeserved, but also some that you initiated. The 920 will handle most situations; and if it does not work out, it is not an irreversible or irrevocable decision.

Have fun, and use that bike. Your goal should be to wear it out!

Where are your pictures? Let's talk about that first

Since you are questioning his assessment and opinions, I think you should answer the same questions.

He needs his son (One he has mentioned lives in NY) or his son's friends to help him figure out how to load photos even though the process for doing so has been explained in detail at least once in this very thread. How convenient.

Wow are there a lot of haters on here. Enjoy your bike man. You don't have to prove anything to these clowns. Just ride it and have fun.

Well, he did bring it upon himself somewhat by basically insulting almost everyone over the last couple of months at one point or the other.
That being said; I'm actually hoping he does have a bike and can get out and ride because I have always thought that practical application tends to temper theoretical ideology. Probably the biggest disconnect in this case has been a whole lot of supposing and not enough doing. At the end of the day I believe most people want others to be successful while touring and if that's what happens with Sq it will be a happy ending for all (or should I say beginning?).

Riding a bicycle is supposed to be fun!

Shoulda had a V8

What has also been slightly irritating in the case of Sq is that he asks questions which he already has his mind set on already, insults everyone who disagrees on the choice or have other suggestions, insults people who have made different choices and promotes his (still unrealized) choices over others and insults people who point out the faults in the bike Sq has already chosen to be the grand tourer of his life.

Honestly, the 920 is just riddled with issues. it IS a good concept, having 29er tires on a 700c touring rig, especially if you have fender clearance is a fantastic idea. More tire clearance doesn't mean you can't use thinner tires for tarmac tours. But the 920 just is not well implemented.

28 spoke wheels are the obvious issue, especially with the heavy duty racks implying you can carry 4 panniers through single track. Again, if the wheels were actually engineered for such stuff (deep vee, triple butted spokes, reinforced spoke bed and extra high spoke tensions) they might be really good for that intended purpose. But the wheels are just lower mid level 29er wheels, which have a lot of know issues such as cracking rims, broken spokes, etc etc (did a bit more research on this)

Gearing is a bit weird as it's a double so might be interesting on bigger hills. I'd go for a triple but whatever. The component set overall is very mid level stuff, which doesn't support the massive price tag.

Internal routing on a tour bike is just not a good idea. It isn't. Fiddling with that stuff at a well stocked bike garage can be frustrating and usually requires at least some sort of fiddly tools (like i've mentioned before, I use strong magnets and surgical tools to deal with internal routings). Doing that stuff on tour in the wild would be an absolute nightmare. And cables do snap occasionally. And on a longer tour it might become relevant to swap the shifter cables just as a part of routine maintenance, especially not that Sq has supposedly put brifters of his bike, which are quite sensitive to good quality good condition cables. It would have been much smarter to pump the frame full of attatchment points so you'd get a full length gear cable housings. Not the easily contaminated thing the 920 now offers. You wouldn't need to make as many housing cuts, no fiddling, just one cut on housing, one cut on cable. That's it. More starts to require a cable cutter. Not to mention that while internal routing holes might not make the frame noticeably weaker, they certainly don't make it stronger.

It just is not a good bike in it's current form. It's overpriced for what it is, and it's not suitable for its marketed intended use. And all this forum did in the beginning was to try to convey that to Sq, who had already decided that the 920 was his dream bike, insulted everyone who criticized the bike and all the people who rode something else, like the LHT made from very low grade steel tubing and which rides very badly (although it's actually more nimble than the 920)

I continue to disagree with you on all counts.

I don't see what purpose continuing this thread could possibly serve.

Hey Squeeze, it's quite the drama you've created around the posting of pics.

I keep checking the thread to see the pics, but alas...none yet