Heya folks. Fairly new rider here. Right now I own a Kona Dew FS (link) which I'm riding to get in shape, have some fun, pick up the groceries, etc. I'd like to graduate to a long commute (about 20 km) and, in the future, light touring. By light touring I mean charity rides throughout Alberta and perhaps the Rockies, things like that. Amount of gear carried could range from none to a small tent and food.

So my main dilemma is whether a new bike would be a significant upgrade for my purposes, and if so, whether a touring bike or an appropriate cyclocross bike would be the best choice.

On to my questions that I would be very appreciative if you could help with:

1. Will a touring/cyclocross bike give a significant speed advantage during my commute over my current hybrid assuming the tires stay the same?

1a. If they're not a major upgrade in terms of weight/speed, are there any modifications I can make to my Dew FS for faster riding?

2. Is a cyclocross bike that can handle panniers a better choice than a touring bike for light touring and my commute (that is, will it go faster)?

As a point of reference, here's the bikes I'm looking at:

Touring - Surly LHT, Rocky Mountain Sherpa 30, Trek 520, Cannondale Touring 2
Cyclocross - Specialized Tricross Triple, Opus Sentiero, Surly Cross Check

Thanks much for any and all help.

If the tires are the same and the motor, you is the same , NO .. faster just means you put more work into the pedals.

then the effort is mostly pushing air molecules out of the way..

If you want to go faster for the same effort the requirement is smoothing airflow past your body and bicycle.

You do that thru Streamlining , fairings , maybe a Velomobile. [fully faired recumbent HPV]

You can get a lighter bike , and use higher pressure tires , and gain more efficiency ,
and train to get tucked in a more aerodynamic body position , just like the Pro racers,
and train in general to get stronger physically,
but speed is a result of the effort the rider puts into the riding.

Well, if I'm going to go just as fast on my hybrid as on any bike, that will certainly save me a lot of money.

You have a nice bike with gearing for touring.
If you have knobby tires, changing to slick tires would give a smoother ride.

For touring you want comfort over speed.

Figure out how to put racks on it and go.

I would say the LHT and 520 are similar , the component pick is a bit different.

you can shave weight off what you have by taking off the suspension fork, and replacing it with a long bladed suspension corrected fork , ..

A faster type of ride is Brevets , the grandaddy is Paris Brest Paris.. bike with a light but cushioning tire in say
a 32 width fairly slick, 700c or 650B. a light thin wall tubed frameset
drop bars a good sized Handlebar bag and a Largish British saddle bag is a pretty classic setup..
Velo Orange in Maryland, has been offering gear for that style of machine, for a couple years..
mudguards of polished aluminum racks bags frames, components , etc..

Speed is all the engine really. So you might gain a tiny speed increase with a super light weight bike, but that's not the sort of bike you want for touring ... the Dew is a good choice for touring anyways.

If you have the money you can go ahead and get a new bike but not really any reason to especially for the light touring you say you want to do.

1. only if you can't lockout your front shock or get into a more aerodynamic position on your Kona with the handlebars a few inches lower than the seat.
a. get the handlebars into a position a couple inches below the seat, bar ends, use clipless pedals, and learn to spin with power. In other words a bike set-up for higher speeds REQUIRES that you put out more horsepower, if you aren't putting out more hp efficiently it's a small improvement just changing posture on the bike or other mechanical changes.

2. only if you can put out more hp, 35mm tires on a Dew or a Cross bike won't matter if your max comfortable hp only gets you up to 15mph on either bike, more than that and you need to get into a more efficient posture for greater hp output, and put out that greater effort.

Upgrade for Light Touring?
Heya folks. Fairly new rider here. Right now I own a Kona Dew FS (link) which I'm riding to get in shape, have some fun, pick up the groceries, etc. I'd like to graduate to a long commute (about 20 km) and, in the future, light touring. By light touring I mean charity rides throughout Alberta and perhaps the Rockies, things like that. Amount of gear carried could range from none to a small tent and food.

So my main dilemma is whether a new bike would be a significant upgrade for my purposes, and if so, whether a touring bike or an appropriate cyclocross bike would be the best choice.

On to my questions that I would be very appreciative if you could help with:

1. Will a touring/cyclocross bike give a significant speed advantage during my commute over my current hybrid assuming the tires stay the same?

Not much. You'll get a little speed advantage if you ride a bike with drop bars because of the better aerodynamics. Is that worth the cost of a new bike? I don't know.

1a. If they're not a major upgrade in terms of weight/speed, are there any modifications I can make to my Dew FS for faster riding?

I'd put on some narrow, slick tires and call it good.

2. Is a cyclocross bike that can handle panniers a better choice than a touring bike for light touring and my commute (that is, will it go faster)?

I don't think so. There's not that much difference, and you'd have the same motor.

As a point of reference, here's the bikes I'm looking at:

Touring - Surly LHT, Rocky Mountain Sherpa 30, Trek 520, Cannondale Touring 2

From what I've read, these are all excellent choices. I have the Surly and can attest that it's a very competent tourer. I've had no trouble and I love mine.


Cyclocross - Specialized Tricross Triple, Opus Sentiero, Surly Cross Check

I know nothing, so no comment.

If I were you I'd keep riding the Kona for commuting - maybe put some faster tires on it. If I was going to try "light touring" I'd do it on the Kona. It should be fairly easy to make it work. You can tour on just about anything. If you decide you really like touring and want to go on some longer, self-supported tours, then consider buying one of the tourers on your list. But that's me. I have no experience with a cyclocross bike - I'm a tourer and that's what I'm interested in. Others would have more to contribute on that subject.

Thanks much for any and all help.

You're welcome.

Thanks all for the input. I may someday upgrade for better components and a lighter frame, but it's good to know that my ol' Dew will do for now with no major sacrifices.

Yes, the engine is important of course, but let's not pretend that a heavier hybrid is ever going to ride as quickly as a cyclocross bike. IF speed is a consideration, I would opt for the cyclocross, but IF it isn't, then I would modify the hybrid. A lot of it is personal preference and depends on how fast you like to ride. Some people have no interest in going "fast," while others have no interest in going "slow." I come from a racing background and riding for speed is hardwired into my system, so it's often my preference or at least a consideration.

For example I used to commute to a job that was about 20 miles away. I rode my racing bike at a fast/brisk pace so that I was getting a good workout and still getting to/from work in about an hour. There were showers and a place to stow my stuff, so I treated it like a training ride. More recently, when I was in grad school, I had a 5 mile commute, but nowhere to change or take a shower. I used a hybrid and kept the pace down. It was enjoyable, I got a little exercise, and I wasn't a sweaty mess at school.

So, what I'm trying to say, is that along with the types of rides you are considering, you should also plan on how you plan to ride them.

Personally, I would probably work towards having both types of bikes as they would give you a LOT of flexibility for different types of riding. With a cyclocross bike, you can set it up with rear racks and a handlebar bag and do some light touring and then take that stuff off and put on narrower tires and have a pretty decent road bike if that is attractive. Since you already have the hybrid and the cost is essentially sunk, so I would keep it for urban riding, grocery stores, short rides, just plain fun, etc. But again, that's just me, and I'm not saying what you should do.

Depends. For most riders, the engine really is the dominant factor. Most of the bits you can hang on the bike really won't make a big difference. So if you're struggling to hit 15mph on your hybrid, odds are you'll be struggling just as much on a more specialized bike.

The point where the bike makes a big difference is when the rider can do a big upgrade on the bike, and it's gotten hard to upgrade the engine. My partner's mom and dad helped me gang up on him this year, so he has a new bike. Old mountain bike was about 45lbs, and he was riding it as a single speed, regularly cruising at 15-17mph. Average speed, so including stops. New bike is about 25lbs, is a real single speed, and it fits well. He gained a good 3-5mph average speed from the upgrade. (that's *with* the new bike being geared considerably lower)

We spent about two years hashing out what my partner needed from a bike, puzzling over fit, and just plain thinking. And all the while, he just kept putting miles on his mountain bike working on building speed and skill. At the beginning of those two years, he took a test ride on a bike. Came back swearing it was too slow, and was not what he wanted because it was a single speed. Two years later... that exact bike is the one we ended up buying.

In one extreme, if the rider is already very heavy and has a heavy load, then the weight savings of 5-7 pounds isn't going to make a dramatic difference. But, if the rider is of a normal size and is going to be riding with an empty or light load, then the weight savings will be much more noticeable. With all that in mind, ANY weight savings will be translated into a greater bang for the buck for a constant amount of power input by the rider, irrespective of their conditioning. It's just a matter of whether or not that bang is worth the extra bucks to the particular rider.

In climbing, you might notice 5 pounds. In the flats, you won't. Air resistance is just so much larger than drag from weight at speeds greater than about 10 mph that weight is not much of a factor in the power required to maintain a given speed. That's why time trialists will take a weight penalty for more aerodynamic wheels.

I recommend a rigid fork. Your suspension fork will rob some power. Other than that, your bike is great. It's not super high-end, so you may find the hubs, BB and headset wears out sooner than it would on a better bike. But that's okay, when (if) they do, replace them with good, serviceable parts then.

Enjoy!

Lots of truth to that. There are also some tradeoffs for time trialling with heavier wheels such as the flywheel effect, etc. Also, where I live there are almost no flat roads, so when I think of riding, I instinctively think of climbing.

Does the change in position from having drop bars make a big difference? Right now I have the stock mountain bike handlebars, so it's an upright seating position.

It depends how fast you are riding and if you're actually riding in the drops with a good aerodynamic position. Unless you are routinely above 20 mph, my guess is that it wouldn't make a significant difference. Drop bars are nice for having different hand positions, however, but if you change them to drops then you'll probably have to change the brake handles and shifters as well. Nothing's ever easy, is it?!

Yes, they make a difference. Not so much for the speed, but many people find them more comfortable. However, it might be a challenge getting them to work on your bike, for reasons already mentioned above. Bar-ends, or trekking bars will give you some options without having to make major changes.