cyccommute 

Unloaded and for the application that you are using it for, I'm sure the Mercian is a great bike. If I were looking for a racier bike than my touring bikes, I'd probably go for a similar geometry. I have an old Cannondale road bike with 16" chainstays that is quick, light and rougher 'an a cob that I'd like to replace but since I don't ride it much anyway I can't justify it. The Mercian would be a great bike for organized tours as well as centuries. And, unloaded, it wouldn't be hard to handle on downhills or anywhere else for that matter. I'm sure it's a great ride. But for the type of touring that I do and, from what I get from reading these forums, a majority of people on the touring forum do, it wouldn't be my choice for loaded touring.

cyccommute 

Good price! The Cannondales can be a bit harsh unloaded (kind of like driving an unloaded truck) but put on 30 or 40 lbs of gear and the ride smooths out and they are a dream to ride!

I have a 2.8 frame race bike from '89 and upgrades are fairly easy. I completely modernized the bike (STI, freehub, seal bottom bracket, the whole 9 yards) and all the upgrades were easy to do. There weren't any issues of fit or adjustment.

Good luck and have fun.

SteelCommuter

Frame shimmy on any loaded touring bike shouldn't happen. Were these touring bikes? Are you a very heavy or big guy? Was the load placed well? What kind of frames were these? What wheels and forks? These things have to be considered when the frame is chosen, but any material could work and be stable. After all, touring tandems can be made of steel or aluminum. I think you rushed to judgment, although I'm glad the Cannondale works for you.

Experiences may be different, but usually they make sense when understood in context. People who weigh 250 pounds need different tubing and components than a lightweight like myself at 160. I'd be more concerned about hubs, BB, handlebars, seatpost, rims, tires, and the fork (its build and the trail).

From what I hear, Co-motion tackles the issue of heavy riders by using tandem components, and they are making a frame initially designed by the Riv folks for super heavy riders called the Mazama.

halfspeed

I've put bags on my old Bianchi Volpe with 425mm chainstains. Heelstrike is just not that big of a deal with proper consideration of racks and bags. Long chainstays are nice, but not nearly as critical as some claim.

As far as the Mercian is concerned, the stock spec. is mostly a reference. They can be built to order for no extra cost, so neither the chainstay length nor anything else in the standard spec should scare anyone.

The "steel is whippy" and "aluminum is harsh" cliches are mostly bogus. A good frame builder can tune the behavior of the frame based on tubing selection and frame geometry. It's all about making the right set of comprimises.

And the Atlantis is not a loaded touring bike? ROFL!

bkrownd

I don't think it's really "bogus" - I think it's probably quite true of what people are experienced with, and the different ways the two materials are typically used to construct a frame. Most ppl are riding (relatively) low-cost stock bikes, rather than high-dollar custom jobs. When I got my first steel bike I was stunned by how far the frame bends with some lateral pressure on the end of the crank. "Whippy" is spot-on. (However, I don't plan on packing heavy loads so it doesn't bother me much, and may even help a bit on the gravel and broken pavement that's common here.)

SteelCommuter

And you didn't think it was the crank arm that was bending? Was this a touring bike? I've never even seen a stock LHT, but something tells me the many owners that frequent this forum wouldn't agree that it was "whippy." That's a production frame. I've never heard of a Trek 520 owner complaining of that. What are these inexpensive poorly designed stock touring bikes you speak of? Please be specific, because we should know.

Look, if touring bikes of any material became whippy with a load, it wouldn't even be used. With the proper tubing, it could be flexy or stiff, whatever was needed.

Ah well, this is getting way off topic from the OP, which was nothing about making unfounded generalizations. Gosh, I guess we better tell all those people making steel single and tandem touring frames that you just can't do that. They can call you and get the real deal.

Let's get back to suggesting *touring* bikes.

bkrownd

What is a "touring bike"? It's whatever you happen to explore the highways and byways with. Mine is whippy. I didn't say yours was. YMMV

mike_khad1

Is anyone familiar with the Trek 620? Someone has offered to sell me theirs. He hasn't quoted a price as yet.

halfspeed

No. It really is bogus.

Stock bikes that are purpose-designed for touring tend to handle well under load regardless of the frame material.

There's a lot of straining at gnats to justify purchases, push products, satisfy vanity and keep us all on the never-ending upgrade treadmill. So we get into constant BS like:

You must have deep V rims for strength
"Steel is real"
Aluminum is stiffer to manage heavy loads
You can't tour without Phil Wood hubs
You're a retro grouch if you don't have STI
Need more rear cogs
700C wheels make you faster
Your chainstays have to be exactly 457mm
Trailer!
No, Bags dammit!
etc. etc. ad nauseum

The dirty little secret is the price performance curve. After a certain point, spending more and more money gets you smaller and smaller improvements. While the difference between a $100 *mart bike and a $1200 touring bike is huge, the difference between the $1200 touring bike and the $5000 touring bike is much smaller.

Fortunately, we're not as extreme as the roadies and I don't think anybody is as over the top as audiophiles.

So, to get back to the OP's question: If you buy a bike that meets your budget, fits well, is designed for your intended use and comes from a reputable manufacturer, then you've got a great bike. If it comes in a color you like, that's a bonus.

BorisBob

Mike, look here for weight loosing:
https://floodtour.tripod.com/2/
Believe me, it works perfectly!
Bob

SteelCommuter

Mike,

It depends on what year it was. Some models were different kinds of bikes in different decades. The 720 was their flagship model but became a wimpy hybrid later. You should have this person tell the serial number under the BB shell. Go to www.vintage-trek.com and use the serial number guide to determine its year and model. The 1984 620 is described at this url:
https://www.vintage-trek.com/TrekBrochure1984Touring.htm

If this bike was in good condition, not too much money, and you do not weigh 220+, then it would be an excellent choice. This only counts, of course, if it fits you. Please do not buy yourself a bike that doesn't fit you just to get a good deal; another good one will always be around the corner.

If you can get some pictures, and the top tube and seat tube lengths, it would be easy to figure out the particular size, and use the above catalog to determine all other specs. The 1984 has been praised by quite a few people.

wagathon

That bike apparently came with Huret's Duopar dr. I had that. They're cranky as far as taking the rear wheel off and putting in back on, but it sure does handle a lot chain, which helps with a triple.

I liked mine. Down tube shifting tho so it's really retro by today's standards. If it were a 25.5" frame in great shape, I'd get it myself--for old times sake--but if it has the center pull brakes, you may want some side pulls for safety's sake--the center pulls don't stop the bike--but it may have catilever brakes so stopping won't be an issue.

cyccommute 

One of the reasons I picked the Cannondale that I currently ride over the Trek 520 was frame flex. I've ridden enough bikes to know the difference between crank arm bending and frame flexure. The 520 flexed too much for my taste. My taste. And, if I suggest a bike based on my taste, what's the problem with that? You like steel. I prefer aluminum. For me. Not for you and not for the guy next to you. For me. I will suggest that others give aluminum a try but if they don't like it...well I don't own stock in Cannondale so it's no skin off my nose.

And, if you do a search, you will find that I do suggest steel bikes. I am very impressed with the Fuji Touring and would readily suggest it to someone on a budget. It's not the best bike out there but it's a good value. It has some issues that I don't like like geometry issues that are not what I would consider ideal but I bought one for my daughter anyway. It performed it's duties like it was supposed to. It does have a problem with shimmy at speeds over about 30 mph, something I've experienced with all the steel bikes I've owned. Maybe it a fluke but it was a problem on all of them.

Now, bikes can be designed to fix any problems. I don't have any argument with that. But I've never had the luxury, nor, I would guess, have most people of having a bike designed for them. I buy production bikes, and only production bikes. If there is a problem with the design, I can't go back to the manufacuterer and say "Redesign this!" If the bike has a problem that I'm not satisfied with, I have to live with that problem. Eventhough I've owned 25 bikes since I started riding them, I don't like throwing money away on something that doesn't work for me. For me.

So when I find something that works for me, I suggest it to others. I don't say they can't buy whatever their heart desires. I may shake my head at their choices but I do not, let me emphasize that, I do not tell them that they can't buy it! I don't say you can't buy a steel or aluminum or, for that matter, stone bike. I may try to persuade them to change their minds but if they don't follow my advice I'm not offended.

And as for making unfounded generalizations, at what point have I, or anyone else here, suggested "Gosh, I guess we better tell all those people making steel single and tandem touring frames that you just can't do that." That seems pretty unfounded to me.

SteelCommuter

My post you quote was not quoting or responding to you. You read the wrong response. Go over it again.

BTW, there are production touring bikes of all materials that are simply will not flex under your body and load, you simply need to be a discriminating consumer. The aforementioned Co-Motion single touring bikes would be plenty stiff for you, unless you are 600 pounds.

cyccommute 

Considering that I like to ride my bikes before I lay down a wad of cash (and I suspect that a lot of people are like that), it doesn't matter that Mercian can build me one for no extra cost. Nor does it matter that a good frame builder can tune the behaviour our a frame based on the tubing and frame geometry. Most people don't have the time or money to have someone build them a bike to spec. Most of us buy them off the shelf. If the bike isn't made right for what we want to use them for, all the tubing selection in the world won't fix it.

My experiences with steel touring bikes has not been the best. Other people have posted here, and elsewhere, similar experiences. Most tend to be large men carrying heavy loads. Someone comes here and asks questions about loaded touring bikes and, if they are big or carry heavy loads, I will suggest a Cannondale over any steel bike, based on my experience. If they come here and say that they have problems with heel strikes, I'll suggest a long chainstay bike, based on my experience. If you have a problem with that...then it's your problem.

Finally, anything written on the Bicycle Forums, by anyone, should be prefaced with, "In my opinion..." So, in that vein, "in my opinion" the Atlantis is not a touring bike. It is a beautiful bike. It is probably a great bike for centuries or orgainized tours but it's too short for loaded touring ... in my opinion.

Better? You willing to make the same statement?

Edit: I was incorrect in my assessment of the Atlantis not being a bicycle suitable for loaded touring. Information that I was provided was incorrect - specifically that the chainstays are 440mm long- which lead me to a incorrect conclusion. I appologize for the error.

All other opinions I have expressed in this thread I still hold.

cyccommute 

You were responding to me...indirectly. I went a little overboard in my response but I've had a fair number of people smacking me, unjustifibly I feel, lately for my opinions. And some of what you said was directed at me (go over it again yourself).

As for having a production bike that does what I want, I already got one. A Cannondale T800. I don't need anything else, thanks.

SteelCommuter

Well, some things are opinions, some are facts. And opinions can be wrong or right. Arguing that the Atlantis is not a touring bike because it has "short" chainstays, say, compared to the Cannondale, does not make much sense. Since an Atlantis has 45.5 cm chainstays, and the T2000
https://www.cannondale.com/bikes/06/geo-21.html
has 45.7 cm chainstays, one might wonder what the magical properties of that 0.2 cm (2 mm) are. Perhaps you are thinking of the Mercian frame, not Rivendell's, called the King of Mercian, which has 43 cm chainstays.

SteelCommuter

I think centerpulls won't be a problem, correctly set up with good pads. Centerpull brakes have the advantage over sidepulls of more clearance for fenders and wider tires, an important thing for all weather touring.

If he didn't like the downtube shifting, he could always get barend shifters for cheap.

Alekhine

About the King of Mercian: Most of the pre-built Kings do have 43-cm chainstays, but I wouldn't want one of those for fully loaded touring, personally, and not just because of the stays. If you look across their range of frames, you'll notice that the stock geometry they list is pretty much the same between what they call tourers and what they call more racy, so it's hardly an indicator of what a Mercian really is or can be, but rather a base model shape they go with for a "typical" human physiology. The in-shop 'completeds' often don't even have all the braze-ons and eyelets you'd want. But if you're willing to wait a few months for them to build it to your desired changes, Mercian will put on whatever sized chainstays you tell them to at no extra charge, along with a host of other options and geometry desires, as halfspeed correctly pointed out. (Halfspeed, btw, put yourself on Mercian's new frappr site)

My own Mercian King has 46-cm stays with Rohloff dropouts and slightly altered geometry per my request, and contrary to what anyone else has to say about it, the thing was designed 100% with loaded touring in mind, including 531-ST (Super Tourist) steel, relaxed angles, cranked-out stays and wide fork, and every braze-on imaginable. The only area where I deviated from the "model loaded tourer" is in choosing 700c wheels, but had I bought an Atlantis instead, I would have had those as well because of my height, and I like 700c anyway.

Mercian is a smart company to buy from in my opinion if you're looking to spend a good grand+ on a frame. Despite that they are over the Atlantic from most of us forumites, they are hella reliable and very easy to deal with, and they'll deliver a quality custom at a low cost (for a custom) in 5 months or less (mine took that long because of all the oddities I asked for - I think I was their first customer wanting Rohloff dropouts, because soon after I ordered it, they put on their website news section the message: "Now offering Rohloff dropouts!").

In cyccommute's defense, the C-Dale tourers are some of the best prepackaged bikes available for touring at their price-point, and aluminum is fine to tour on if the bike is built for it, but I disagree with his generalized assessment of steel, only because it is so general. Steel can be all things to all men, depending upon the design of the bike and the particular steel used. He apparently just never found the right one for him, and I'm not going to argue with that because there's no argument to be made against opinion, but my own opinion is that a steel bike under load doesn't have to behave the way he's described.

cyccommute 

Numbers quoted elsewhere were 440 for the Atlantis, based on a 16.9" (430mm) chainstay and a difference of "only 0.39". That would put the chainstay on the Atlantis at 440mm, too short "in my opinion". I was unable to find any figures at all for the Atlantis on the Rivendell website (I checked) so I went with the number provided. There is a large difference between a 440mm chainstay and a 455mm (or 457mm), especially if people are having trouble with heel strike. Proper conclusions can only be drawn from the proper information. If I was in error, then I'll admit it but I haven't been able to find information to the contrary. I will stick to "my opinion" that any stay less than around 450mm stays are too short for loaded touring...again "in my opinion".

Edit: I was incorrect in my assessment of the Atlantis not being a bicycle suitable for loaded touring. Information that I was provided was incorrect - specifically that the chainstays are 440mm long- which lead me to a incorrect conclusion. I appologize for the error.

All other opinions I have expressed in this thread I still hold.

SteelCommuter

Easily found:
https://rivbike.com/html/bikes_atlantis_5.html

The 44.0 is for the smaller 559 (26") wheel frames. The chainstays lengthen to 45 and 45.5 cm as sizes increase, which makes sense. My size (I'm 5'11") has 45.5 cm stays.

Thanks, Alekhine, for a very elegant response. Mercian sounds like a wonderful company, and I'm sure your KOM is a fantastic tourer. Mark, the OP, should also consider them, based on your report.

markwebb

Someone said "a good frame builder can tune the behaviour of a frame based on the tubing and frame geometry"

I don't think that would apply to any stock aluminum frame - I don't think there is any frame building craftsmanship in a stock generic alum frame. Pretty much utilitarian with ugly welds and in general not a very comfortable ride. Most are built in Asian factories with cheap labor. Not much in the way of craftsmanship. You get what you pay for.

Keep spinning - it's the experience and social aspects and good health that's important !

cyccommute 

If you go through the Rivendell Bike website, the details of the frame geometry are not easily found. I did find them eventually (just now) and yes, I was in error about the Atlantis geometry.

Edit: I was incorrect in my assessment of the Atlantis not being a bicycle suitable for loaded touring. Information that I was provided was incorrect - specifically that the chainstays are 440mm long- which lead me to a incorrect conclusion. I appologize for the error.

All other opinions I have expressed in this thread I still hold.

cyccommute 

Thank you for your defense and for stating what I have been saying about the Mercians' listed geometry as not being a good fit for a touring bike. It is what I have been saying all along. I would also like to point out that I have not said anything bad about steel bikes, only that they were not the best fit for me.

bkrownd

Ah, the old "you get what you pay for" lie. You pretty much hit every lame stereotype on your way to that one, too. Congratulations. My beloved comfy aluminum bike says "hi!"