Bike Forums - best touring bike.

Bike Forums (https://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)

- Touring (https://www.bikeforums.net/touring/)

- - best touring bike. (https://www.bikeforums.net/touring/707246-best-touring-bike.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by antokelly (Post 12108354)

no toe overlap issue simples.

This one actually isn't so simple. Sometimes toe overlap is simply a side effect of the combination of the desired geometry and frame size. For example, my Co-Motion Americano has a little toe overlap, which I knew about ahead of time, since it was one of the things I discussed with Dwan Shepard when I was speccing the bike. I thought I could just tell him I didn't want overlap and then he could wave his magic bike geometry wand to avoid it, but the fact is that if you change one aspect of the frame geometry, then it affects everything else. So if you want the nice stable handling that a touring bike should have (especially while carrying a load), then the fork rake and trail have to be a certain way, and the other dimensions and angles are constrained somewhat too by your body size and the wheel size. The 26" wheeled tourers are much less likely to get toe overlap issues, but then you're talking about more of an offroad expedition bike, which many people feel isn't as efficient on the road. It's always a series of compromises.

You seem to be after a lightweight, agile road bike in terms of feel, but that's kind of at odds with the requirements for a touring bike. You can't have it all in the one bike - it's like trying to make car that has all the carrying capacity of a Landrover and the sporty handling of a Porsche. You can try to make a compromise, but the end result probably won't carry stuff as well as the Landrover, and won't handle as well as the Porsche. Your Thorn might feel heavy, but that's because it's designed to carry heavy loads over long distances while being very comfortable and stable. If you're looking for light and agile then just about any road bike can do that, but that bike probably won't feel very good when you throw a full touring load on it. If they could do this, then they would, trust me! Always compromises.

The reason I like my Co-Motion Americano is that it does the desired task superbly - that is, carry a heavy load without flexing like a wet noodle, and it fits me perfectly, which makes it feel wonderful to ride. At the same time, it's not heavy like a boat anchor, and while it doesn't feel like a fast road bike, it does feel really nice while climbing. I think fit has the biggest effect on how the bike feels while unloaded, whereas the other aspects of the frame don't come into play until you load it up. The bike is rock solid, and that's just what I wanted.

Neil

thanks Neil well then the co motion sounds like my kinda bike .if that's as light as a touring bike can go then i would settle for that,besides co motion have a great reputation for making quality bikes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBRDude (Post 12107157)

Two big mistakes in analysis here. First, you're assuming that an "equivalent" frame is somehow using the same amount of material irrespective of what materials are used, which is how you're getting those weight numbers. That completely ignores the benefits of higher strength to weight ratio materials. Second, you're mistakenly comparing the Ti frame to an aluminum one; the Fargo comes in steel and Titanium, not aluminum.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBRDude (Post 12107168)

That's one of the worst defenses I've ever seen, and then you try to justify it by pretending that it's my fault. The only one comparing cheese to chalk is your absurd attempt to pretend that an equitable comparison between frames somehow involves the same amount of material used. Just laughable.

Look at my first post. I clearly said 'assuming that [the frames are] built exactly the same'.

You are the one who brought up the non sequitur of saying that since a carbon fiber mountain bike weighs 25 lb, a titanium framed bike should weigh less. Comparison of the titanium Fargo frame weight to the steel Fargo frame weight is valid. Comparison of the titanium frame Fargo to an aluminum framed touring bike would be valid. Comparison of the Ti Fargo to a carbon fiber touring bike would be valid. But comparing the Fargo to a mountain bike is just wrong. It does not follow.

I have two titanium bikes. I love them. They are cool bikes, the material is tough and both are made locally. However, neither is significantly lighter than similar aluminum bikes. Neither is lighter than an equivalent...by all the measure of equivalent...carbon bike. The bikes...a Moots YBB and a Dean El Diente Super Lite...are made from custom drawn titanium tubing that is very different than the tubing that you'll find on the Ti Fargo. The Dean is a $3000 frame that weigh 2.2 lb (1 kg). That's piggish compared to a carbon bike (Scott CR1, 890 g or around a pound).

The YBB comes in at around 4.4 lbs (2.0 kg). It has a little more metal in it because of the soft tail but my Specialized Stumpjumper Pro has a frame that is around 3 lbs (1.5 kg). The soft tail mechanism on the Moots does not weigh 500g! These two bikes, with the exception of the soft tail are absolutely equivalent by any measure you'd care to compare. They are the same size (same volume of metal), they are the same strength (both are tough as nails), they even have similar construction. But the Moots is about 1.5 lb heavier because the titanium used in its construction is heavier per unit volume.

I am not, nor have I ever said, that you shouldn't buy the Ti Fargo. Titanium is cool tough stuff. If you want it, go for it. But don't go into the purchase with expectations of fantastic weight savings. You'll be disappointed in the aspect. I'm sure that the Ti Fargo weighs a little less than the steel Fargo. Just don't expect the difference to be what you'd see between steel and carbon fiber. It's just not going to happen.

OK, let's back up because you clearly aren't paying attention to what I wrote.

First of all, I never suggested that a titanium bike should be significantly lighter than a CF bike. That's all in your head. My only comparison was between a titanium hard tail and CF suspended frame. Someone asked what I thought the final build weight would be of a Fargo Ti would be, so I used my CF suspension bike as a starting point and then pointed out that a hard tail titanium frame should be a bit lighter than a CF suspended frame. I assume this because because a hard tail has a less complicated geometry and no shock, but even so, I never said the difference should be significant. I then went on to say that there would be an even bigger weight savings by losing the front shock, so that a fully NON-suspended version of a Fargo Ti with a Tubus rack could or should be comparable in weight to my fully suspended CF bike.

Your arguments below don't work for two reasons. The first, as described above, is that in your rush to condemn my thinking as "chaulk to cheese," you got dipped your chalk in your own cheese. Second, even hinting that two bikes 'built the same,' but with different materials should mean that they both use the same volume of material undermines your credibility on the issue.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 12112607)

First, I'm not comparing the Fargos. I never mentioned them. You are the one who brought up carbon fiber mountain bikes and then assumed that titanium should weight about the same as the CF mountain bike frame. You just can't compare the two materials...on a density basis...nor can you compare a road frame to a mountain frame. If the frames were made of the same material and made the same way, i.e. the same volume of material, the titanium frame would weigh a lot more. For a complicated frame like a dual suspension frame, these suppositions aren't too far off. You couldn't thin out the titanium too much (or steel or even aluminum for that matter) because of the complicated construction and numerous welds required to fabricate a dual suspension mountain bike.

If the Fargo (or any bike for that matter) came in all four materials...carbon, aluminum, titanium, steel...the carbon would be the lightest. The aluminum would be the next lightest, the titanium would be 3rd and the steel would be the heaviest. Even taking into account the strength to weight ratios. This is because of the way in which the materials have to be constructed. The aluminum, titanium and steel have to be welded so they have limitations on how much material you can cut out and how much material you have to leave behind and still have a strong enough structure to do the job.

Look at my first post. I clearly said 'assuming that [the frames are] built exactly the same'.

You are the one who brought up the non sequitur of saying that since a carbon fiber mountain bike weighs 25 lb, a titanium framed bike should weigh less. Comparison of the titanium Fargo frame weight to the steel Fargo frame weight is valid. Comparison of the titanium frame Fargo to an aluminum framed touring bike would be valid. Comparison of the Ti Fargo to a carbon fiber touring bike would be valid. But comparing the Fargo to a mountain bike is just wrong. It does not follow.

I have two titanium bikes. I love them. They are cool bikes, the material is tough and both are made locally. However, neither is significantly lighter than similar aluminum bikes. Neither is lighter than an equivalent...by all the measure of equivalent...carbon bike. The bikes...a Moots YBB and a Dean El Diente Super Lite...are made from custom drawn titanium tubing that is very different than the tubing that you'll find on the Ti Fargo. The Dean is a $3000 frame that weigh 2.2 lb (1 kg). That's piggish compared to a carbon bike (Scott CR1, 890 g or around a pound).

The YBB comes in at around 4.4 lbs (2.0 kg). It has a little more metal in it because of the soft tail but my Specialized Stumpjumper Pro has a frame that is around 3 lbs (1.5 kg). The soft tail mechanism on the Moots does not weigh 500g! These two bikes, with the exception of the soft tail are absolutely equivalent by any measure you'd care to compare. They are the same size (same volume of metal), they are the same strength (both are tough as nails), they even have similar construction. But the Moots is about 1.5 lb heavier because the titanium used in its construction is heavier per unit volume.

I am not, nor have I ever said, that you shouldn't buy the Ti Fargo. Titanium is cool tough stuff. If you want it, go for it. But don't go into the purchase with expectations of fantastic weight savings. You'll be disappointed in the aspect. I'm sure that the Ti Fargo weighs a little less than the steel Fargo. Just don't expect the difference to be what you'd see between steel and carbon fiber. It's just not going to happen.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBRDude (Post 12113909)

Your arguments below don't work for two reasons. The first, as described above, is that in your rush to condemn my thinking as "chaulk to cheese," you got dipped your chalk in your own cheese. Second, even hinting that two bikes 'built the same,' but with different materials should mean that they both use the same volume of material undermines your credibility on the issue.

I have provided you with an example of a titanium bike and an aluminum bike that are equivalent...the Stumpjumper and the YBB. The YBB has a little more material to it because of the minimal rear suspension on the bike. But that rear suspension doesn't weigh a pound. Even if it did, the titanium bike still wouldn't weigh less than the aluminum bike.

Aluminum frames are made of aluminum tubing not aluminum rod. For a bicycle application, the wall thickness of a quality aluminum bike is around 0.06". Titanium wall thickness is 0.035" (same as steel) in many bicycle applications. An aluminum bike of the same size and construction as a titanium bike is going to be at least the same weight as the titanium frame because of titanium's higher density.

Now you could use lots of tricks to make the titanium lighter but then you could do the same with aluminum or, for that matter, steel. For a touring application, the bikes are going to be even more similar because titanium and aluminum have about the same stiffness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 12114570)

None of which, of course, has anything to do with my comparison of a fully suspended CF bike to a non-suspended Ti bike + rack as a means to estimate the weight of the Ti frame. Fail. The only one talking about the difference between Al and Ti is you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBRDude (Post 12114640)

As I have contended all along, comparing a fully suspended carbon fiber mountain bike to a non-suspended road touring bike is as silly as comparing chalk to cheese. It does not follow. To use your own term, it is a fail. I suspect that Positron's estimate of about 30 lb for the bike after building it up is about right, if not a little generous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyccommute (Post 12115610)

The Fargo is not a road bike. Maybe you're confused because the picture has drop bars. Had you read even the first line about the bike on the Salsa website, you would have seen this: "The Fargo Ti is our titanium, drop-bar, off-road adventure bike." Fail.

Here is the best touring bike hands down

http://travellingtwo.com/gallery2/d/...r+14+years.jpg

From the ACA article and even the PathLessPedaled folks point it out, there is no wrong way other then making excuses that keep you from riding.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ullearn (Post 12119828)

Here is the best touring bike hands down

From the ACA article and even the PathLessPedaled folks point it out, there is no wrong way other then making excuses that keep you from riding.

Great pic. Love the bike and the guys facial expression. Classic.

Quote:

Originally Posted by robow (Post 12083223)

I agree as stated above, an excellent custom build would be the absolute best. Everything else by definition will contain some compromise.

Exactly. There's is no one-size-fits-all. What is perfect for one person would be a poor choice for others. Eg, some want to tour on heavy, fat-tire bikes that can go anywhere. Others want a bike that is relatively light weight and fast for riding on good roads.