|
Originally Posted by irwin7638
(Post 23173416)
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...4e5c80e4aa.jpg
I split the weight between front and rear bags. The front bags carry the tent in one, the bed in the other. They each weigh about 6 lbs. The rear has the other stuff and usually weighs 12-15 lbs. Marc |
Originally Posted by Trentkln27
(Post 23465373)
I've changed steeds. While testing with my beloved fuji sportif i found I was getting to much heal strike sometimes and I couldn't get wide enough tires under it to smooth it out. I now have an Ozark trail that I've upgraded the drivetrain on and outfitted with the touring gear I already owned. Food and cooking supplies will go in my front paniers and snacks and other items I want on hand will be in the handle bar bag and top tube bag. My few changes of clothes a multi tool and a few extra parts will be kept in the rear bags with the tent strapped the the top of the rack. I'm hoping this brings the weight forward enough to keep the front end down on climbs. I may move things as I figure out my best strategy
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...4eda0f6140.jpg I hope to do some local trips this spring with mine... https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0229bfd065.jpg |
Originally Posted by Tourist in MSN
(Post 23465572)
That does look better than the road bike for touring with a load. I am not familiar with the brand, but it looks quite capable.
I like to put things that I might need quickly or frequently in the handlebar bag. Sunscreen, bug repellant, chain lube, small multitool. Chain lube, when my drive train is noisy, I want to lube it then instead of in the campsite that night. And I have often forgotten to lube the chain once I am in the campsite. Multi-tool I often carry a big one with lots of tools in my tool bag in the bottom of a pannier, plus a tiny little one with only screwdrivers and allen wrenches in handlebar bag or in a shorts pocket. (My bike touring bike shorts have pockets.) If your tools are in the lower bottle cage, I can tell you from experience that a zippered case like that can let water into it when riding in the rain. Putting a plastic bag over it when raining is a good idea. It is easy to carry a small plastic bag in the case. In hot weather, you might want a water bottle in that cage instead for a third bottle, but it would have to be a small bottle. I see you have a suspension stem. That should smooth out the road a bit too. |
Originally Posted by john m flores
(Post 23465881)
Nice Ozark Trail G.1! Check out Neil Aneja on Instagram. He rode one cross country last summer and I think the only repair he had was to replace a broken rear axle. You've upgraded your drivetrain, so you should be good. What did you go with, btw? I'm thinking of upgrading mine. And how does the bike handle the load?
I hope to do some local trips this spring with mine... https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0229bfd065.jpg |
Originally Posted by Trentkln27
(Post 23465373)
I've changed steeds. While testing with my beloved fuji sportif i found I was getting to much heal strike sometimes and I couldn't get wide enough tires under it to smooth it out. I now have an Ozark trail that I've upgraded the drivetrain on and outfitted with the touring gear I already owned. Food and cooking supplies will go in my front paniers and snacks and other items I want on hand will be in the handle bar bag and top tube bag. My few changes of clothes a multi tool and a few extra parts will be kept in the rear bags with the tent strapped the the top of the rack. I'm hoping this brings the weight forward enough to keep the front end down on climbs. I may move things as I figure out my best strategy
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...4eda0f6140.jpg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...84bc55bd0.jpeg Here, I’ll make it easier. You can see that the Cannondale is quite a bit longer than the Ozark, especially in the chainstay. The Ozark has a 440mm (17.3”) chainstay vs the 460mm chainstay of the Cannondale. The short chainstay makes for a nimble bike in the parking lot but when it is loaded, the load is pushed back behind the axle of the bike. This is going to result in a bike that is wagged by its tail. You can see where the axle is on my bike compared to your bike. I have no problem with kicking the panniers even when they are a bit large, They aren’t as large as your RockBros, however. https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...10e858413.jpeg The other problem with your panniers is that large panniers encourage you to carry more stuff. More stuff moved behind the axle results in more tail wagging. Although you are a bit committed at this point, a larger front bag would be helpful in your situation to help with handling. As it is load the small heavy stuff you might carry into the front bags and keep the rear for light bulky stuff. You might also want to consider a front deck so that you can carry the tent up there to even out the load. |
Originally Posted by cyccommute
(Post 23466092)
The other problem with your panniers is that large panniers encourage you to carry more stuff. More stuff moved behind the axle results in more tail wagging. Although you are a bit committed at this point, a larger front bag would be helpful in your situation to help with handling. As it is load the small heavy stuff you might carry into the front bags and keep the rear for light bulky stuff. You might also want to consider a front deck so that you can carry the tent up there to even out the load.
|
Originally Posted by Trentkln27
(Post 23466077)
I used claris shifters and front derailleur. I used an acera rear derailleur since it has a larger tooth capacity. I have wtb wheels with deore hubs and a 11-34 rear cassette. The crank is still original and I'll change it when it wears or if I find I need lower gears. This is my slow bike anyways. I still have to trial ride it with a load. Still to cold here in Wisconsin
|
I personally would have no problem with 44 cm chainstays as the stiffness of that rear triangle also comes into play when heavily loading the rear. But I'm betting that I would need a lower gear than what comes standard. I see the largest cog in the back is only a 28t but I can't see what size the chainrings are. Anyone care to share that information? but I'm guessing I might be walking my bike up a few hills (not that there's anything wrong with that.....in my best Seinfeld voice)
|
Originally Posted by john m flores
(Post 23466134)
Nice. BTW, did you have water bottle bosses on the seat tube? I didn't
|
Originally Posted by robow
(Post 23466135)
I personally would have no problem with 44 cm chainstays as the stiffness of that rear triangle also comes into play when heavily loading the rear. But I'm betting that I would need a lower gear than what comes standard. I see the largest cog in the back is only a 28t but I can't see what size the chainrings are. Anyone care to share that information? but I'm guessing I might be walking my bike up a few hills (not that there's anything wrong with that.....in my best Seinfeld voice)
|
Only in Touring and by cycco would I ever come across the claim that 440mm chainstays are short and nimble.
I have size 14 shoes and got along just fine with 435mm chainstays and a full size rear pannier when that was my commuting setup. Seems like a bit of an academic concern more than a real concern. There are bags and racks that allow you to adjust for such a small difference, and that difference doesn't suddenly make the bike handle poorly. |
Originally Posted by Trentkln27
(Post 23466144)
I put a 11-34 casset on. The chainrings are 30/46. After I test ride it around town loaded I'll decide if I'm going to swap cranks
Btw, Samox makes a G3 crankset 44-28 if you need just a little more low |
Originally Posted by robow
(Post 23466189)
Btw, Samox makes a G3 crankset 44-28 if you need just a little more low |
Originally Posted by mstateglfr
(Post 23466175)
Only in Touring and by cycco would I ever come across the claim that 440mm chainstays are short and nimble.
I have size 14 shoes and got along just fine with 435mm chainstays and a full size rear pannier when that was my commuting setup. Seems like a bit of an academic concern more than a real concern. There are bags and racks that allow you to adjust for such a small difference, and that difference doesn't suddenly make the bike handle poorly. I'm relatively tall (6'5) and have long legs and short torso. I like to joke that I have the legs of a 7'2 man. Though storing them is becoming an issue... Anyways, any bike off the rack is always going to be a compromise for me, since large sizes are typically too long and too low for me. That's true with my road bike (Bianchi Impulso) and my touring bike (Disc Trucker). I manage with the shorter chainstays of my road bike, because my riding position on road is more aggressive so the weight distribution is shifted forward. I also don't carry anything at the rear. In fact the handling is really quite nice, especially since the chainstays are actually pretty long (440 mm). With the disc trucker my riding position is higher and shorter, which shifts my center of gravity rearward. Chainstays are 450mm long, so that's still ok. If I add luggage, the weight distribution overall becomes even more rear biased. With heavy rear panniers I can feel the handling becoming a tiny bit squirrelly. If I load the front, the bike does stabilize, but it'd be nice that I didn't get that squirrely feel in the first place. Now if I had say, 430mm chainstays on the disc trucker, my overall center of gravity would be quite a bit more rearward between the axles than it is with 450mm. While 20mm doesn't seem like much, with a touring bike it works cumulatively. Because with 20mm shorter stays I'd then have to push my panniers back by 20mm, which would again shift my center of gravity back. Luckily I have a stiff rack (not the words I predicted I'd write today...) so there's not much sway even if the panniers are pushed back bit. I did use a lighter rack at some point and that thing was unusable. The rack was doing most of the steering, it felt. So it's really a YMMV thing. But considering there seems to be a craze in the gravel industry to make bikes really long in the front end, I can see how even medium stays could become an issue with people who aren't proportionally as challenged as I am. |
On the discussion here on chainstay length, while I think a good touring bike should have long chainstays, it is my general observation that chain stay lengths on touring bikes stayed long for a while, but more recently is getting shorter over time.
I own or have owned a total of four touring bikes. 2004 LHT (it is now gone, frame had a factory defect), chainstay - 460mm. 2010 Thorn Sherpa (likely older, I bought the frame used in 2010), size 610S, chainstay - 450mm 2013 Thorn Nomad Mk II (the frame had not changed for a few years, not sure when introduced), Size 590M, chainstay - 466mm 2017 Lynskey Backroad, size Large, chainstay - 445mm. My road bike (2018 Raleigh Grand Prix), size 580, chainstay - 430mm My rando bike (2015 Velo Orange Pass Hunter), size 590 - chainstay 435mm. I think the 445mm chainstay on my Lynskey, photo below, would be nice if it was longer but 445mm is adequate. My bike shoes range from size 44 to 45, I have adequate heel clearance. All of my bikes listed above have 175mm crank arms. https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...9cfacca82c.jpg The above tire is a 37mm wide Schwalbe Mondial, the fender is 45mm wide. Both are the widest that the frame allows. I suspect that as more people use bikepacking gear instead of conventional panniers, that bike manufacturers no longer feel that chainstays have to be longer for heel clearance. |
My Bianchi Volpe has 425 mm chainstays. No problem with heelstrike with size 43 shoes, 170mm crankarms, Logo rack and Ortlieb panniers.
Apart from a handlebar bag, I carry everything on the rear. No handling issues whatsoever. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e0d98e9382.jpg |
My chainstays on my "touring" bike, are 430mm, and with 44 size shoes and cranks of 175mm, and full panniers, I have no issues with heel strike. Now I'm not saying I would want them any shorter, nor am I saying that a little longer may not be better but given that in the past I have toured easily on bikes with 440 and less chainstays, it would not be a deciding factor in ruling the bike out for me personally.
|
Originally Posted by Trentkln27
(Post 23466098)
The tent and rear bags with everything the have in them is 18 lbs. I have roughly 10 up front depending on what food is packed up there. I may add a rack up front to hold some more weight up front. I still have to do a test run but the little bit in my yard is world's better that my fuji. Everything is light enough that the bike isn't too cumbersome
|
Originally Posted by john m flores
(Post 23465881)
Nice Ozark Trail G.1! Check out Neil Aneja on Instagram. He rode one cross country last summer and I think the only repair he had was to replace a broken rear axle. You've upgraded your drivetrain, so you should be good. What did you go with, btw? I'm thinking of upgrading mine. And how does the bike handle the load?
I hope to do some local trips this spring with mine... https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...0229bfd065.jpg |
Originally Posted by imi
(Post 23466313)
My Bianchi Volpe has 425 mm chainstays. No problem with heelstrike with size 43 shoes, 170mm crankarms, Logo rack and Ortlieb panniers.
Apart from a handlebar bag, I carry everything on the rear. No handling issues whatsoever. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...e0d98e9382.jpg I was listening to a cycling podcast where it was mentioned that it's weird that different frame sizes have the same chainstay length. I hadn't really given it much thought but now it seems so obvious. Larger frame sizes should absolutely have longer chainstays. A taller rider is sitting more rearward of the bottom bracket than a shorter rider. To achieve the same weight distribution the chainstay would need to go back as well. My point is: The bike in your picture is a pretty small size. It's unlikely you'd have any handling issues with rear loads even with CS length of 425mm. For a smallish frame size 425mm isn't that short of a CS. If we had more proportional wheel sizes smaller frames could have even shorter CS's. Your stem length also doesn't seem to be all that short, which means the reach on said frame is nice and short. That in turn means more of your weight is at the front wheel which helps negate the luggage weight of the rear wheel. I tried to use myself as an example in my earlier post, because it's really not possible to make overaching statements how short chainstays are bad for touring. It depends. And for anyone else reading this, that's the real takeaway. Make sure the weight distribution works before loading up the rear. Even a short rider may get into trouble if they're riding a really long gravel bike which forces them into using a 40mm stem, yet which still has short chainstays. A well balanced bike is likely not going to be an issue even with short chainstays. |
Originally Posted by elcruxio
(Post 23469058)
My point is: The bike in your picture is a pretty small size. It's unlikely you'd have any handling issues with rear loads even with CS length of 425mm. For a smallish frame size 425mm isn't that short of a CS. If we had more proportional wheel sizes smaller frames could have even shorter CS's.
Your stem length also doesn't seem to be all that short, which means the reach on said frame is nice and short. It’s a Bianchi Volpe 55cm c-c frame with 55cm virtual top-tube and 100mm stem, so pretty ”medium”, but not modern long t-t geometry. I am 5’8” but with proportionally long arms and legs, but shorter torso than the male norm. The fit and handling is like no other bike I’ve ever had. I’m thinking of trying four panniers this summer, partly so as not to have a dry bag on the rack (just my guitar), but mainly as in recent years I have been carrying a bit more gear to cope with the ever more unpredictable weather in Europe: heatwaves, storms and flooding… |
Originally Posted by elcruxio
(Post 23469058)
..
I was listening to a cycling podcast where it was mentioned that it's weird that different frame sizes have the same chainstay length. I hadn't really given it much thought but now it seems so obvious. Larger frame sizes should absolutely have longer chainstays. A taller rider is sitting more rearward of the bottom bracket than a shorter rider. To achieve the same weight distribution the chainstay would need to go back as well. .... My Thorn touring bikes have different chainstay lengths for different sizes, my Nomad Mk II came in 8 sizes, they had 4 chainstay lengths for the 8 sizes. And my Thorn Sherpa had 11 sizes, there were 4 different chainstay lengths for the 11 sizes. Both of those models are out of production. But I am not aware of any other brands that do that. |
Originally Posted by elcruxio
(Post 23469058)
I think it's pertinent to point out that frame size directly correlates with weight distribution, center of gravity and potential issues potentially caused by short chainstays.
I was listening to a cycling podcast where it was mentioned that it's weird that different frame sizes have the same chainstay length. I hadn't really given it much thought but now it seems so obvious. Larger frame sizes should absolutely have longer chainstays. A taller rider is sitting more rearward of the bottom bracket than a shorter rider. To achieve the same weight distribution the chainstay would need to go back as well. My point is: The bike in your picture is a pretty small size. It's unlikely you'd have any handling issues with rear loads even with CS length of 425mm. For a smallish frame size 425mm isn't that short of a CS. If we had more proportional wheel sizes smaller frames could have even shorter CS's. Your stem length also doesn't seem to be all that short, which means the reach on said frame is nice and short. That in turn means more of your weight is at the front wheel which helps negate the luggage weight of the rear wheel. I tried to use myself as an example in my earlier post, because it's really not possible to make overaching statements how short chainstays are bad for touring. It depends. And for anyone else reading this, that's the real takeaway. Make sure the weight distribution works before loading up the rear. Even a short rider may get into trouble if they're riding a really long gravel bike which forces them into using a 40mm stem, yet which still has short chainstays. A well balanced bike is likely not going to be an issue even with short chainstays. First RideI went all mushy about my old bike and what a friend it was and how I felt guilty about abandoning it for a shiny new bike. I gushed about how we had been through so much and how it was a good bike, how nothing could ever match that sweet old bike, etc.WHAT A LOAD OF CRAP! Okay the new one is just a bike - a Cannondale T800. For those of you who don't know touring bikes the Cannondale T series has always had good reviews - stiff bike, good ride, yada, yada, yada. I figured that it was mostly hype but the bike was on sale and it looked good from a numbers point of view. Very long chainstays -18'- nice component selection, proper tires and wheels for loaded touring. After I found the right size, the price was just too good to pass up. I put racks on it (a Tubus up front and a Delta on the back), changed the saddle to a Brooks and made a couple of other modifications and started riding the wheels off. Over a month I have put a little over 500 miles on it because, no matter what, you never take a brand new bike on a tour! I found the bike to be okay. It handled well and rode well. It did tend to push the corners (understeers for those of you who don't know what that means). Out of the saddle (this is sounding more and more like a Bicycling magazine review, 'The bike felt like it was mounted on rails '), it surged ahead when it was supposed to and it doesn't beat you up when you ride in the saddle, although the ride is a little harsher than my old steel bike. Then I started riding the bike back and forth to work with 30 lbs of rice and beans. I wasn't doing this because I was planning on going anywhere the next month but just to test the bike, if any bad juju fairies were listening. I did replace the rear rack with a Tubus which was much more stable than the Delta. The first time I pushed away from the curb my impressions of the bike and how good my old bike was changed dramatically!! This bike was made to carry a lot of stuff! It went from behaving like an oversprung truck to riding like a Coupe de Ville! And a good Coupe de Ville at that - not one of those made in the '70's but like a 50's version! The steering that wanders was gone! The harsh ride was gone! You go into a corner hard with that kind of load and you come out on the other side, well, just like the bike is on rails! One of the most disturbing quirks of the old Miyata was that under a touring load, you couldn't stand up to pedal. If you did manage to stand to pedal up a hill, the pedal strokes had to be straight up and down without any movement in the horizontal plane. If you rocked the bike side to side, the bike would wiggle all over the road like a snake. But with the 'Dale, you can stand up, you can sit, you can even ride no handed and the bike rides just like, well, just like it's on rails! I can't wait to see what it would do if I were to load it up and say ride it from eastern South Dakota to Memphis, Tenn. in about 3 weeks. Not that I would ever want to do that if any bad juju fairies are listening. |
Originally Posted by Trentkln27
(Post 23468800)
I have one weekend trip on it officially scheduled. I'll be riding 101 miles a rail trail here in Wisconsin
|
When it comes to packing and touring, everyone is different. Do you want to take the kitchen sink with you or go as light as possible? Only you can decide, but by all means get as many opinions and info as possible. In 2022/23 I did a perimeter tour of the US. I was on the bike for 323 days, did 10,520 miles and climbed over 400,000 feet. I never did a tour in my life but I did a lot of research and decided what worked for me. I used a mix of Tailfin and Apidura bags and they were flawless. In total I gave myself about 100 liters of storage, and never used the whole capacity.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f443b11b7c.jpg |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:59 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.