would you tour on aluminum?
 

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/..._cross_cx3.htm

http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/..._cross_cx2.htm



Budget crisis.

-James

May not be that one, But I own a Koga Miyata '04 WTR, with a 7005 frame .
it is a very well made part , that frame.
A part of their Signature Series Now. Current one seems better in some details..

You are showing a Cyclocross bike , many people adapt them, as tourer-commuters.
The OEM pick for the crankset is over geared, for touring or cross racing .

and Bikes Direct requires You to be the expert that does the assembly
and tune up, to make it all work.
That's the part you skip bypassing the dealer.

Everything is a matter of personal preference. The bike looks ok, but my preferences are a little different than yours. I prefer steel. That doesn’t mean anything is wrong with aluminum, but it is merely a preference. I have big feet and ride a large frame. The top tube is long enough, but the chainstays are a little short, but I could probably live with them by using rearward extenders on a rack. The rack in the photos is aluminum. I prefer a tubular steel rack. No problem. I also prefer a front rack. Mounting a front rack could be a problem. I am an old man. My gearing has evolved over the years and gotten lower. A 50/39/30 crank wouldn’t be suitable for me at this time. I am getting ready to tour cross country with a 42/32/20 crank and a 11-34 cluster. You are probably much younger than I and much stronger. It also depends on what type of touring you anticipate.

Perhaps the question shouldn’t be: is aluminum suitable for touring, but rather is a cyclecross frame optimum for touring? Only you can answer that.

The frame material really doesn't matter much except in racing where some materials may add too much weight. But good touring bikes can be made of a variety of frame materials. I've toured with both steel and aluminum bikes and didn't see any difference that was attributable to the material. Of my current bikes the steel one is more suitable for touring, but that's because it happens to be the one with larger clearances for wider tires and fenders and longer chainstays so the panniers can sit farther back and away from my heels.

I tour on one all the time (Nashbar Touring frame). The ride is as good or better than my carbon road bike from a comfort standpoint. I'm sure tire pressure contributes the most to that ( 80 psi vs 120psi). Possibly the longer wheel base also. Would I want to tour in some third world country with aluminum, probably not as repair options may not be as available as in the states.

Good enough for this guy http://www.bikeradar.com/news/articl...beaumont-18628

I have an aluminum cross bike with CF seat stays that I'm going to tour on, albeit a lightweight CC tour. Personally, I think a lot of the appeal for steel is a relatively low price and ease of repair in remote locations. There are a lot of options depending what you want to do with it. Not to be critical, but the OP's question is like asking if car xyz is any good - if it's a large SUV for a single person living in SF, probably not, but then a VW bug probably won't work for a large household living in a rural location with a long dirt driveway. Different vehicles for different needs, even though people often make choices because appearance or style.

Aluminum, steel. Doesn't matter.

Go with the Dawes for its triple crank and possibly stronger wheels. Or, the Windsor Tourist for a touring specific, budget bike.

I remember when Cannondale came out with the "first" aluminum bike (was it really?) It soon became "common knowledge" that aluminum was light but gave a harsh ride.

That was a long time ago. If the harsh ride thing was ever true, I think the manufacturers have figured it out. My aluminum Specialized Allez is a very comfortable bike to ride.

I've heard great reviews of the Cannondale tourers. If I was looking for a tourer and a Cannondale came along in my size for a good price, I wouldn't hesitate.

Klein had aluminum bikes out for a long time with smaller builders like Charlie Cunningham making custom aluminum bikes before Cannondale.
It was true for the short/steep angled road bikes but in the long wheelbased touring Cannondale it was a fantastic improvement with the only competing alternative big steel tubing mtn bikes. I remember meeting the guy who made/owns Bullseye hubs and he had a super long wheelbased custom aluminum bike. Anyway taking that first Cannondale touring bike out on trails with 35mm tires, solid as anything but a lot lighter and the ride wasn't harsh. It was harsh if you have 16" chainstays and 22mm tires pumped up the 120psi. And you're right the designs have gotten much better especially with the carbon forks.

If that's what I had,I would use it,personally I like steel.In the long run,it doesn't really matter that much.

Mais oui.

I hate aluminum frames!!! That said, my touring bike uses a cheap aluminum Nashbar touring frame. With 700x35 tires mounted, it's darn near as comfortable as my carbon fiber road bike...

A leading question :notamused:

That said, if touring in the USA/Canada/Western Europe then Al would be easy to repair - or if there is a catastrophic failure public transpo and replacement bikes/frames are available. OTOH,

IF travelling outside those places - say Cuba, Namibia, Vietnam - the best approach IMHO is to use steel. I could not imagine repairing my expedition grade Arvon-built in outback Australia if it was aluminium (!). OTOH, for that repair all that was needed was a bead of SS to stabilize a BB lockring that was the wrong one (and put on by a LBS in Canada - and they were reputable and supposedly knowledgeable). The trip would have ended there IF the frame was Al. Locktite and duct-tape were not solutions :(

Steel is what my Greenspeed GTO is made of, and I don't own any bike with carbon/aluminium frames/forks.

YMMV :p

I would (and do) tour on an aluminum bike. A 1999 Cannondale T700 (caad 2). My wife has a 2000 C'dale T800 (caad 3). Both give exceptionally smooth rides, and we're lightweight riders.

Given that, however, I wouldn't tour on the two models you listed. You can get the Windsor Tourist for roughly the same money, and it'll do a much better job.

I owned a Cannondale T400 alu touring bike from back around 1990, very strong, only thing I didn't like was the lack of space for wide tires & the short wheelbase. But I would have no problems touring on aluminum per se, I wish there were more production aluminum tourers with ample & comfy geometry.

"all that was needed was a bead of SS to stabilize a BB lockring that was the wrong one (and put on by a LBS in Canada - and they were reputable and supposedly knowledgeable). The trip would have ended there IF the frame was Al."

Epoxy should have done it, it would retain the BB without a lockring. Carbon and epoxy or epoxy and wood will repair a lot of aluminum problems. Welding is probably not a roadside option in most places.

The SS weld bead gave way after another 1000 km. The issue (discovered by another LBS when I returned to Canada) was that the Truvalev lockring that the first LBS used had a hole that was larger than the appropriate Shimano lockring, for the Shimano cartridge he used. He should have changed the lockring as well. So much for expertise at the first LBS :(

I kept tightening the lockring and using Locktite until I found a copper mine near the road. The welder/boilermaker at the mine had SS which he used. The only way to get an Al frame repaired was to put the bike on a truck and take it to Mt. Isa or to Darwin. The Locktite worked for only a short while. I'll bet a dollar to a donut that the same may have also been true of the epoxy. Then of course there would have been the issue of getting the BB out when it came time to "fix the bike" after the trip ended ... That would have been a b***h to do.

No matter, I finished the tour. On the Folder forum folks suggested some Chinese folders that have Al frames. They may be fun for riding around, but not for sustained touring - IMHO and YMMV. :p

Actually, I think you'll have a hard time touring without aluminum, but it could be done, I suppose.

I also have the nashbar touring frame and while I'm not a tourer, it's just something I"m contemplating doing, i commute heavily on it loaded up with 25lbs and I weight 245. it rides great. i love it and at $99 (sometimes $89 not to mention nashbar always having sales) it's the best deal out there.

Love my Cannondale T2000 - by far the most stable, comfortable and responsive touring bike I've had. Load it up - no flex, no wobble - ever.

Well not all touring bikes are road style. I'm not an expert on bikes but I built up a touring bike this winter using a titanium MTB thinking it would be the best thing since sliced bread. The front load turned out fine but I never could figure out a way to stabilize the rear load to accept much more than a tent and sleeping pad. The Ti had too much flex. I have a feeling that a nice cheap rigid aluminum frame would have worked much better my expensive titanium frame. In fact a friend is doing the same thing with an aluminum frame and the exact racks right now so I'll know real soon.

Have you considered a trailer? If I went back in time I would have just done that.

Aluminum gets a bad rap but I've ridden some really comfy bikes made out of the stuff. By the way I don't know your physical condition but the gear ranges on those two motos wouldn't be enough for me carrying a load personally.

I will add that I had a giant rapid that flat bar road bike that I put a rack on last year. IT had fairly relaxed geometry and a good chainstay length. I thought it rode fine because I had nothing to compare it to. Now that I have this nashbar touring frame, it's night and day difference. the bike just rides SOOOO smooth, it doesn't even feel like I have anything on the bike,

I have toured on both including a thousand mile ride on a Cannondale racing aluminum frame. The design of the bike is what matters and the material is inky a minor issue. Most love steel though.

I've got over 3,000 miles touring on an aluminum frame. It works fine for me.