Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

New 920 frame on the way

Notices
Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

New 920 frame on the way

Old 09-02-20, 02:51 AM
  #1  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Thoughts on a Trek 920

For many decades I was only a road rider until I bought a Cross Check in 2016. It was great not being limited to smooth dirt trails but the Surly was not very comfortable on rides much over 4 or 5 hours. Truth be told I bought one a size smaller than normal because I wanted more stability off road but my priorities have changed and now want to do more touring and still be capable off road.

My point of this post is to get others opinions of my choice of a new bike. After lots of reading I settled on a Trek 920. I ordered a frame only as I usually replace most parts to my liking anyway and from what I read the only real complaints are they come with too large of a cockpit and built a tad heavy. I plan to use this for multi day road / offroad touring some of which will be camping out.

I would rather stick to cable actuated brakes and possibly a 1x drivetrain but the last disc brake bike I had was a Giant OCR touring (first year) and I was not impressed. I am still undecided on the rest of the build.

Last edited by daviddavieboy; 09-02-20 at 04:38 AM.
daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 09-02-20, 09:01 AM
  #2  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
Why even consider a 1x, given that you'll be carrying camping stuff? A 42/28 double gives you so much better range. The shimano grx or whatever it is seems like a great option , but you'll have to research the details.

Mechanical discs work rather well, certainly the popular ones do that are tried and true, spyre, old school bb7s.

when carrying any load, lower gearing has no downsides, and a 42-11 will still get you to a good 55kph to spin out speed with 700 wheels, but all the times a 20 gear inch or less low gear will get used is way more important.

just be wary of thinking that a 1x is the bees knees.
also as a roadie be wary of your expectations of what is needed for a low gear.
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-02-20, 02:21 PM
  #3  
ClydeClydeson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 411
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked 141 Times in 105 Posts
Hydraulic brakes are the cat's pyjamas, really. I expect there have been some improvements since I was using Avid BB5s, but my experience switching to some mediocre hydraulic brakes (Hayes Stroker Trail) then good hydraulic (Shimano SLX) was that hydraulics are far superior. They may be more complicated to maintain and service than cables, but hydraulic systems are less likely to require repair or maintenance (in my experience).
ClydeClydeson is offline  
Old 09-02-20, 04:44 PM
  #4  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 7,749

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2075 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 388 Times in 327 Posts
I think you will find most people that do much touring want a wider range of gearing than you can find on most 1X systems. My derailleur touring bikes have triples.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 09-03-20, 06:04 AM
  #5  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
Why even consider a 1x, A 42/28 double gives you so much better range. The shimano grx or whatever it is seems like a great option , but you'll have to research the details.
Mechanical discs work rather well, certainly the popular ones do that are tried and true, spyre, old school bb7s.

just be wary of thinking that a 1x is the bees knees.
also as a roadie be wary of your expectations of what is needed for a low gear.
Thanks for your feedback. On this side of the continent I don't think I would ever encounter anything I would need a 28 cog. My wheels are 29er with 42mm sawtooth tires and a 51x10 12 speed. If I were to venture to the Rockies I am sure more gearing would be a must. I have not encountered a hill out here that I have not been able to climb with a 34-50 and a 11x32 cassette.(on pavement) I do see you point though about the extra weight and will surly rethink my gearing. Plus a 11 speed road crank looks much nicer than the 1x.

Originally Posted by ClydeClydeson View Post
Hydraulic brakes are the cat's pyjamas, really. I expect there have been some improvements since I was using Avid BB5s, but my experience switching to some mediocre hydraulic brakes (Hayes Stroker Trail) then good hydraulic (Shimano SLX) was that hydraulics are far superior. They may be more complicated to maintain and service than cables, but hydraulic systems are less likely to require repair or maintenance (in my experience).
I am trying to keep the mechanics as simple as possible. I have even heard of hydro brake issues after extended periods of being unused. There will be times I will be at least a day away from anywhere. I found a set of spyre-c calipers new on marketplace for $100 CDN and ordered a set of TRP classic levers. I will probably use Shimano bar end shifters.

Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN View Post
I think you will find most people that do much touring want a wider range of gearing than you can find on most 1X systems. My derailleur touring bikes have triples.
I am rethinking this one for sure. On your bikes with triples, what cassette gearing are you using? I can return the 12 speed one I bought and get a 10 speed. Then I could use a derailleur I already own. (105 med cage or XT long cage)
daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 09-03-20, 07:46 AM
  #6  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
Daveyboy, your comments about gearing are classic roadie view. As you haven't toured before, just realize that it's a different kettle of fish--but we've all toured extensively with varying loads on varying terrain, and we realize that you will only see what gearing you need when you've actually toured.

Another aspect to take into account with touring is taking care of your knees, and to get past a roadie view of what is sufficiently low gearing. What is low enough depends on many factors, but let's be realistic, you'll only know what works for your load, terrain and legs when you actually do it (and try to be honest of what low you need, not to be affected too much by "roadie shame" of the HTFU factor)

Good luck with figuring out what works best for the type of riding/load that you'll be doing.
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-03-20, 08:31 AM
  #7  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
Re top end gearing. Totally get liking going fast on downhills, I'm very comfortable going fast and regularly spin out my 50-12 to about 70-75k, but for touring, do take into account that skewing your gearing to a lower range generally works better and is way more practical, especially when taking into account being on gravel etc.
Lower gearing range doesn't mean you need to descend slowly, in fact the highest speeds I've descended have been on touring bikes tucked in way past spin out speeds, and going around corners fast and eeking out kph around an apex isn't about gearing.

With a touring load, appropriate low gearing to allow for good cadence's means your stronger over the day, so overall faster and fresher.
Cheers
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-03-20, 08:37 AM
  #8  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
Another sales point for a double or even egads, a triple, is running a tighter cassette.
We all love closer shifts, faster, nicer on legs with tighter cadence control.
Win win
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-03-20, 09:31 AM
  #9  
jfoobar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 145
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times in 10 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
Why even consider a 1x, given that you'll be carrying camping stuff? A 42/28 double gives you so much better range. The shimano grx or whatever it is seems like a great option , but you'll have to research the details.
The new Trek 520 Grando comes with 42/28 with an 11-36 cassette. Front derailleur is Tiagra, rear is GRX 400. I am likely gonna be picking up one of the new Disc Truckers soon but am unsure yet whether I will buy the complete bike or do a build-up from a frame. If I go the latter route, I may very seriously consider replicating the 520 Grando drivetrain rather than going with a triple. My current main bike has a road compact with an 11-32 cassette and I can ride on the 34 ring all day and never spin out except on rare downhills. Seems to me that a 42 ring should be more than I would ever use. The gear inches for both 28/38 and 26/34 (the lowest gear on a factory Disc Trucker) is 21 for both.
jfoobar is offline  
Old 09-03-20, 03:42 PM
  #10  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 7,749

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2075 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 388 Times in 327 Posts
Originally Posted by daviddavieboy View Post
...
I am rethinking this one for sure. On your bikes with triples, what cassette gearing are you using? I can return the 12 speed one I bought and get a 10 speed. Then I could use a derailleur I already own. (105 med cage or XT long cage)
You probably are not interesting in replicating what I am using, my gearing is technology from a couple decades ago.

I built up my first touring bike in 2004, at that time used a 11/32 eight speed Sram cassette with 11/12/14/16/18/21/26/32 sprockets. And partly for convenience, I am also using that cassette on my folding bike, rando bike and two touring bikes. It is quite convenient from a maintenence standpoint if most of your bikes use the same cassette and chains.

Touring bike cranks, I suspect you would not want to use what I have, I am running a half step plus granny crankset, half step is pretty much out of favor now. Those cranks are 46/42/24. But a granny gear of 24 teeth and a big ring of 46 teeth are certainly in a good range for touring smallest and biggest chainrings.

One of my touring bikes, the 24T granny chainring is silver so almost impossible to see it in this photo:



Rando bike, using a road triple crank, 52/42/30, but that bike rarely carries more than a bag of groceries for weight, so my granny gear of 30T on my rando bike is not appropriate for touring bike weights.

Rando bike photo:



Although the technology described on the above bikes is a couple decades old, it works so well for me that I have no desire to change these bikes to different gearing.

I have a 10 speed road bike with compact double crank, but the gearing is not low enough for touring so I do not provide details on that here. I bought that as a complete bike, did not build it up myself.

Last edited by Tourist in MSN; 09-03-20 at 03:50 PM.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 09-03-20, 04:11 PM
  #11  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
Re triples, it's tricky because it's hard to get sti shifters that will work.
On my light tourer it has 10 year old 9 speed technology, 50/39/30 changed to a 26 granny. Works great but I'd prefer a 48/36/26 with a smaller granny. One of my wife's bikes has a ten speed 11-36 and 48/36/26 but uses trigger shifters.
My heavy duty expeditiony bike is full on mtb triple 44/32/22 and 11-34, but it was set up specifically for some Latin American trips where I knew I'd be carrying a crapload of stuff and riding on bad roads and some stupid steep stuff. A crankset this small would be frustrating lightly loaded, it can be for me,but works great when carrying 40lbs of stuff and especially in very mountainous areas.
This bike has drop bars but I use gevenalle shifters which are unique in how they work and are placed.

sti is so much fun to use, it seems the recent doubles and wide cassettes are a neat option.
and as I brought up, you can always go with a tighter cassette if you don't need a 21 gear inch low. I used a 21 g.i. low for a long time and find it works well, but again depends on all the various factors, load weight, riding terrain and your legs.
djb is offline  
Old 09-03-20, 06:56 PM
  #12  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 7,749

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2075 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 388 Times in 327 Posts
Shifters for triples, my errand bike is an early 90s mountain bike, it is the only bike I have with indexed front shifter on a triple crank. My other triples are all friction based shifters. My derailleur touring bikes use bar end shifters, my rando bike has a brifter for the rear, friction downtube shifter for front.

I am not saying you NEED a triple, but after you proposed a 1X system, I thought it best to point out that going the other extreme is common for touring.

Shimano and Sram have not really put a lot of effort and design work into a good touring drive train because selling new components for loaded touring is not in great demand. Right now, gravel seems to be the latest craze, so that is where we are seeing lots of emphasis from the big manufacturers. Thus it is getting difficult to find good triple based touring drive trains.

And touring where you want reliability, a drive train that is easily repairable, parts that are easy to replace, and robust components is often not part of the design goals from the big manufacturers. The photos above of two of my drive trains used XT derailleurs from the 90s, cup and cone rear wheel bearings that use quarter inch ball bearings, and square taper cranks. The only thing that is fairly new tech in those photos is that one bike uses a TRP rear disc brake.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Likes For Tourist in MSN:
Old 09-03-20, 07:05 PM
  #13  
Marcus_Ti 
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
 
Marcus_Ti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,304

Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2329 Post(s)
Liked 374 Times in 236 Posts
I'll pile on the advice that 1x is going to be a problem; gearing range wise. Granted, 1x setups today can get close to the gearing range doubles support. The lowest off-the-shelf gearing you'll get with 68mm BBs is 46/30 up front in 11/12 speed....which can go fairly low (sub 1:1) and respectably high (4:1). But even on paved roads when you're hauling 30-40+lbs of gear plus yourself will not feel that low at the end of a long-day in the saddle.

It all depends on how much stuff you're touring with.

Seriously, find a backpack and put 30-50lbs of barbell weights in it and try riding your bike up a hill with the gearing you have. You'll understand real quick.

Last edited by Marcus_Ti; 09-03-20 at 07:08 PM.
Marcus_Ti is online now  
Likes For Marcus_Ti:
Old 09-03-20, 07:07 PM
  #14  
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
indyfabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 28,789
Mentioned: 197 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12514 Post(s)
Liked 4,629 Times in 2,387 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
tighter cadence control.
Very important to me.
indyfabz is offline  
Old 09-04-20, 05:32 AM
  #15  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 7,749

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2075 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 388 Times in 327 Posts
A quick note on costs, when you build up a bike and pick a drive train, some of that is expendable such as chains and cassettes. Some of the newer 1X systems run pretty expensive for expendable items.

This year I replaced three chains and one cassette on my fleet, all were eight speed chains and a 11/32 eight speed cassette. I keep spares on the shelf, so did not need to buy any of it but I did replenish inventory during the past few months, three chains at $12 to $13 for KMC X series from Amazon, bought a Sram 850 cassette from REI for $25. REI website says they no longer stock that cassette but other sellers sell it for comparable price. Thus, replacing worn out expendables on three bikes cost me roughly $60.
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 09-04-20, 02:35 PM
  #16  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN View Post
You probably are not interesting in replicating what I am using, my gearing is technology from a couple decades ago. . . it works so well for me that I have no desire to change these bikes to different gearing.
I am not unfamiliar with multi day trips as I have a classic bike I have used for what you would call "credit card touring". Being said the biggest two days would be 100 mile back to back but typically 60-80 miles/day with many photo/touristy stops.
This is what I am using for extended rides. - 1970 Bob Jackson which I restored a few years ago.



Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN View Post
I am not saying you NEED a triple, but after you proposed a 1X system, I thought it best to point out that going the other extreme is common for touring.
My thinking with the 1x was for simplicity and better clearance off road. I am no stranger to triples either, my last touring bike had a 105 triple (early 2000's) and have many MTBs with them.
daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 09-05-20, 09:18 AM
  #17  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
Originally Posted by daviddavieboy View Post
My thinking with the 1x was for simplicity and better clearance off road. I am no stranger to triples either, my last touring bike had a 105 triple (early 2000's) and have many MTBs with them.
re clearance, I guess that would depend on the 920 bb height as more of a factor no? The new doubles are clearly marketed at gravel riding etc so they must be reasonably ok , and one would think that the diff between a 42t and a 30 whatever tooth chainring probably isnt that much in actual diameter.
I have no experience with the newer systems, but Im sure they are really well engineered and work great. I do know that rd design has improved greatly for having so much less chain slap and all that.
djb is offline  
Likes For djb:
Old 09-05-20, 01:28 PM
  #18  
Tourist in MSN
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 7,749

Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, Perfekt 3 Speed -age unknown, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.

Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2075 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 388 Times in 327 Posts
Originally Posted by daviddavieboy View Post
...
My thinking with the 1x was for simplicity and better clearance off road. I am no stranger to triples either, my last touring bike had a 105 triple (early 2000's) and have many MTBs with them.
I have not looked at the 920 specs, but touring bikes usually have lower bottom brackets because touring bikes (the pavement variety) are less likely to be rode fast into corners, thus a lower bottom bracket is not a problem, and it makes getting on the bike easier, plus lower center of gravity for stability.

Where I have had clearance problems with any kind of bike was Maah Daah Hey trail, had my expedition bike and some of the trail was eroded and you were riding in a depression, that depression was only slightly wider than the width of your pedals and at times the depression could be deeper than your pedal clearance. If you caught your pedal in the side of the trail, that destroyed any momentum you had. I have not had any chainring clearance problems when touring. I think the mountain bikes that were prevalent on that trail had higher bottom brackets, thus their pedals did not catch in the side of the trail like mine did.




Do you anticipate touring or bikepacking where you would have a ground clearance problem with chainring size?
Tourist in MSN is offline  
Old 09-06-20, 04:42 AM
  #19  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN View Post
Do you anticipate touring or bikepacking where you would have a ground clearance problem with chainring size?
I do. Some of the area is quite rugged. For instance here are a few pics I scouted out. They would be on my 2nd day from home. These are the more ‘tame’ sections, there were places where it is no more than hiking trails and others gravel roads.





As far as specs go the 920 had longer chainstays and more bb drop, more bb height with the sameish reach and stack than a 520. Keep in mind I am buying a bare frame not the complete bike.

Last edited by daviddavieboy; 09-06-20 at 05:02 AM.
daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 09-06-20, 05:50 AM
  #20  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
What will be the tallest wheel set able to go onto the bike? This will at least give you the most clearance. I bought a troll in part because of the versatility of tire options, and the bb is already mtb ish high. I've had it set up in mtb mode with riser bars and 2.5 knobbies, but have 2.5 extraterrestrials to go on stuff like in your photos.
very pretty area btw, the farms remind me of areas in northern Vermont

troll as it is now, with 2in slicks

Last edited by djb; 09-06-20 at 05:56 AM.
djb is offline  
Old 10-13-20, 03:55 PM
  #21  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Mostly done now but ran into a snag with a rack or possibly not installed correctly. With it level the attachment arms just are not long enough. This is not the factory rack but one off amazon. I am thinking itís more for a 26Ē wheel.

daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 10-13-20, 04:02 PM
  #22  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
What will be the tallest wheel set able to go onto the bike?

This is with 2.1 off road tires and still seems to be lots of room. I have a set of tanwall sawtooth tires but they are only 42mm.


daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 10-13-20, 06:38 PM
  #23  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 11,226
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1958 Post(s)
Liked 431 Times in 367 Posts
nice.
Is there less clearance at the rear? often thats a bit of a chokepoint, or at least to be more careful of too little clearance.
Its been a while, so dont recall all the details, but are you happy with that triple you put on it?

oh, re the rear rack arms. The trek bontrager or whateever it is makes a rack that is made for. smaller frames and has longer arms, I put one on my wifes bike, an XS. Cant recall name, but its a dual level rack, to put panniers lower. You might be able to buy just the arms for it.

ps, was wondering what the pink red paint was on your rear wheel....realized it was the rear light....

Last edited by djb; 10-13-20 at 06:41 PM.
djb is offline  
Old 10-14-20, 08:33 AM
  #24  
daviddavieboy 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
daviddavieboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 805

Bikes: Yeah, I have some.

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 86 Times in 46 Posts
Originally Posted by djb View Post
nice.
Is there less clearance at the rear? . . . are you happy with that triple you put on it?

The trek bontrager or whateever it is makes a rack that is made for.

ps, was wondering what the pink red paint was on your rear wheel....realized it was the rear light....
Where the rear tire sits there is about 85mm (a little over 3Ē). The official max size is 2.3 but there are some running 2.8 tires.

Thanks to all all for (seemingly) pushing the triple idea. I am VERY happy with it. IMO it is geared too low for road touring at 17 inch gears but I LOVE it off road I have gone up hills I have had to walk before although it is a bit unnerving when the front tire bobs up.

I tried to get the original rack but that is not available any more. I would pay a premium for one even used. They were sold with the 520 and 920 and are different than the new ones offered by Trek which I donít really like. I was able to modify the one I have for now and I am thinking of the axiom 29er rack as they claim it is good for you 100+ lbs

the red red on the tire is from the tail light (flare-r)



daviddavieboy is offline  
Old 10-14-20, 03:07 PM
  #25  
ClydeClydeson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 411
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 132 Post(s)
Liked 141 Times in 105 Posts
THis thread has convinced me to save up for a 920.
ClydeClydeson is offline  
Likes For ClydeClydeson:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.