Using racing bike for touring - Page 2

Yvonne who? writes:

> Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If you have, what pannier
> system did you use, and was it successful or were there any problems?

> I've been looking at an entry level racing bike for this purpose. It doesn't have braze-ons for
> panniers and have been advised that a seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.

Try looking at the pix at:

http://tinyurl.com/adls

These are all "racing" bicycles, the only kind I would consider for my touring. Early pictures are
Cinelli and Masi bicycles and some of the later are Ritchey and Johnson frames.

Jobst Brandt jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

yvonne585@msn.com (Yvonne) wrote in message
news:<e0a1f37a.0311230133.2d960c01@posting.google.com>...
> Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If you have, what pannier
> system did you use, and was it succesful or were there any problems?

I toured quite a bit in Germany on a 1986 Cannondale Criterium racer. I was 20-22 years old and
didn't know any better. I also had a great time. I carried maybe 20 pounds divided between a large
handlebar bag and a large seat wedge, sleeping and eating in human settlements instead of cowboy
style. Today I prefer to carry more and stay outside, and I wouldn't recommend a racing bike. These
packing techniques are worth studying, though: http://milly.org/rambouillet/

yvonne585@msn.com (Yvonne) writes:

> Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If you have, what pannier
> system did you use, and was it succesful or were there any problems? I've been looking at an entry
> level racing bike for this purpose. It doesn't have braze-ons for panniers and have been advised
> that a seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.

I've used racing bikes for touring using a trailer. The particular trailer I actually used was a
thing called a 'bike hod' which I cannot recommend since its center of gravity was too high and it
had an unnerving propensity for overturning on fast downhill bends. I plan to buy myself a BOB Yak
or similar one-wheel trailer which I believe will be a better solution.

However, I'm completely sold on the principle of using a trailer. The benefits include at the end of
the day having an uncluttered bike from which you can simply unhook the trailer and go off for a
blast; having relatively little effect on the handling and feel of the bike; and, when manhandling
it for example when getting on and off trains, having two easy loads instead of one awkward and
unmanageable one.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'd rather live in sybar-space

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 13:16:46 -0500, Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote:

>The most common mechanical failure with bikes overloaded for touring is spoke breakage in the rear
>wheel. For a load like this, I'd recommend a pair of low-rider _front_ panniers. Most front wheels
>are way overbuilt compared with rears, and it is very unusual to have any problems in front.
>
>This also will provide more even weight distribution, and avoid issues of heel clearance with the
>rear panniers.

For about 5 years now I've been using a front low rider rack only. It works really well for me. I
see almost no people doing it around Chicago. People think balance is poor. Of course it is harder
to ride with no hands, especially with only 1 pannier, which is what I do most of the time, but my
experience is that the front end has more inertia and in fact the front tire is more likely to grab
the pavement. Spoke breakage in the rear wheel is reduced.

I think hitting heels on a pannier is only an issue if you use the largest panniers. I have size 13
(Euro 48/49) feet and never came close to hitting medium sized MEC panniers on cyclocross frames.
Not even close.

These days road racing bikes often do not have any eyelets, making it difficult to attach anything
to the frame. Cyclocross framesets are much more suitable to setting up with racks.

> It's also sometimes feasible to temporarily install a touring fork on a racing bike for this
> purpose.

Yeah, or even a cyclocross fork, which are pretty easy to find. This is a much better solution, then
you can put the other rack on the back for lighter weight stuff.

Bob VonMoss

Bike-Chicago Email List http://home.mindspring.com/~bvonmoss/bikechicago.html

>You might also use a seatpost rack for light/bulky stuff like a sleeping bag.
>
>Sheldon "Front Loading" Brown

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:28:39 -0400, Commuter Cyclist <commuter@cyclist.not-an-address> wrote:

>real touring bike ... relaxed geometry, better gearing and so on).

These days the geometry on most of the remaining touring frames is not that relaxed. For example,
most touring bikes have a head angle around 72-73, which is about the same for the regular road
racing frames. Usually the head tube is 1-2 cm less than comparable frames and the chain stays are
longer. Even the seat tube angles are about the same. Of course TT bikes have very aggressive
geometry compared to a touring frame.

Cannondale touring frame geometry: http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/geo-21.html

size XL head tube angle: 72.5 seat tube angle: 73 top tube length: 22.5" seat tube to top: 23" fork
rake: 5.3cm

Cannondale road bike ridden by team http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/04/geo-14.html size 58cm head
tube angle: 73.5 seat tube angle: 73 top tube length: 22.5" seat tube to top: 23" fork rake: 4.5 cm

differences: touring frame head angle is 1.0 degree more slack and forks have 8mm of more fork rake.

Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote in message
news:<3FC0F98E.4090709@sheldonbrown.com>...
> There are a number of front racks/panniers that don't require braze ons. It's also sometimes
> feasible to temporarily install a touring fork on a racing bike for this purpose.
>

A couple of the Old Man Mountain racks ( http://www.oldmanmountain.com/index.htm ) mount to the
skewer instead of dropout eyelets. Their "Ultimate Low Rider" front rack would be able to carry your
entire load easily.

Jeff

Chris Zacho The Wheelman wrote:

> I used a racing bike to tour with, once. I only carried about twenty five pounds (It was just an
> overnighter), on standard rear and front lowriders, no HB. But it still handled terribly.
>
> The geometry on a racing frame is all wrong for carrying cargo. It's designed for nimbleness, not
> stability, which is what you need if you are going to be loading it down.

My experience is rather different. I use my Cannondale R800 (criterium frame) with a handlebar bag
and rear rack holding panniers for week-long bike camping trips. Sure the bike handles a little
different with the extra load, but I've never noticed any stability or other handling problems. The
bike has no clearance for fenders, but the rear rack serves as a reasonable substitute for one on
the rear and I strap on some cut up plastic soda bottles under the down tube with zip ties to
deflect spray from the front tire away from my legs and feet.

I believe that some racing bikes are longer than others ? My racing bike experience was with a
TSX-UL frame @ 220 lb. I crumpled the down tube when I locked the ft. brake , dog jumped out in
front of me. I had bought the frame used and had no gripes with Bianchi, I emailed them and
explained the situation, there reply was that I was 60 lb. more than the typical bike racer and that
I should get an EROS with a cheaper. heavier and stronger frame. I bought an EROS and two other
Bianchis that I like very much. I guess the point is (you) may have more to do with the touring on a
race bike than the bike. <jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org> wrote in message
news:HJfwb.7708$Wy2.139403@typhoon.sonic.net...
> Yvonne who? writes:
>
> > Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If you have, what pannier
> > system did you use, and was it successful or were there any problems?
>
> > I've been looking at an entry level racing bike for this purpose. It doesn't have braze-ons for
> > panniers and have been advised that a seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.
>
> Try looking at the pix at:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/adls
>
> These are all "racing" bicycles, the only kind I would consider for my touring. Early pictures are
> Cinelli and Masi bicycles and some of the later are Ritchey and Johnson frames.
>
> Jobst Brandt jobst.brandt@stanfordalumni.org

"David L. Johnson" <david.johnson@lehigh.edu> wrote in message
news:esqdnR8qBuVJqlyi4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:33:15 +0000, Yvonne wrote:
>
> > Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If you have, what pannier
> > system did you use, and was it succesful or were there any problems? I've been looking at an
> > entry level racing bike for this purpose. It doesn't have braze-ons for panniers and have been
> > advised that a seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.
>
> There is no problem. I have used two different racing bikes for touring, with no trouble from the
> bike. You are not carrying that much weight, so could use just rear panniers with maybe a front
> handlebar bag. That's what I use.
>
> I secure the rear rack to the frame with "P-clamps" from a hardware store. The "P" is their shape,
> and the rack mounts attach to the leg. They even come with rubber padding to protect the frame.
> BTW, they are meant to hold cable, so look in the electrical section.
>
> You need to be careful to get the panniers back far enough to avoid heel contact, but that can be
> done. My stays are quite short and it works well for me.
>
> You will also want to get triple chainrings. The extra weight, even 35lbs, makes climbing
> much harder.
>
> --
>
> David L. Johnson
>
> __o | "What am I on? I'm on my bike, six hours a day, busting my
ass.
> _`\(,_ | What are you on?" --Lance Armstrong (_)/ (_) |
>

I run an old CADEX ALM1 MTB for 3rd world touring - Suntour components for reliability /
maintainability ....but lets not go into that.......

Over the years my various rack attachments have become increasingly more flexible as I find even
with decent racks I get fatigue fractures at the rack mounting points. Currently my rear and front
lowrider racks are largely held on with car fuel-line size hoseclamps, with innertube rubber acting
as a buffer. Works for me.

Hugh Fenton

Yvonne wrote:
>
>> Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If you have, what pannier
>> system did you use, and was it succesful or were there any problems? I've been looking at an
>> entry level racing bike for this purpose. It doesn't have braze-ons for panniers and have been
>> advised that a seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.

I replied:

> The most common mechanical failure with bikes overloaded for touring is spoke breakage in the rear
> wheel. For a load like this, I'd recommend a pair of low-rider _front_ panniers. Most front wheels
> are way overbuilt compared with rears, and it is very unusual to have any problems in front.
>
> This also will provide more even weight distribution, and avoid issues of heel clearance with the
> rear panniers.
>
> There are a number of front racks/panniers that don't require braze ons. It's also sometimes
> feasible to temporarily install a touring fork on a racing bike for this purpose.

After giving this some more thought, it occurred to me to call upon the trigonometry I learned in
high school, and calculate the results of such a modification. I knew it would work, but I hadn't
done the math before.

Typical "road" forks are about 37 cm from axle to crown race.

Typical "hybrid/cross/touring" forks are about 40 cm.

Typical distance from the rear tire patch to the fork crown is about 100
cm.

In this instance, the substitution of the taller fork would slacken the head angle by 1.7 degrees,
say from 73 to 71.3 degrees, certainly a highly appropriate head angle for a touring bike. The seat
tube angle would also be reduced by the same amount, which is generally a Good Thing for a touring
bike, and the 3 cm greater handlebar height this makes possible is also likely to desirable for a
touring cyclist.

I then calculated the trail, to see how the handling would be liable to be affected:

Figuring the stock road setup with 23 mm tires and 42.5 mm fork rake, the trail comes out to 58 mm.

Figuring the modified version with 32 mm tires and 47.5 mm fork rake, the trail comes out to 66 mm.

This is also an improvement for touring conditions.

In checking my math, I Googled upon a really nice page for calculating trail:
http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/elenk.htm#top

Sheldon "Numbers" Brown +----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. | At best he is a tolerable
| subhuman who has learned to wear | shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house. | --Robert
| A. Heinlein |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton,
Massachusetts Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts
shipped Worldwide http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

In article <a13b2743.0311232002.3b0703e4@posting.google.com>, Jeff Wills
<jwills@pacifier.com> wrote:

> Sheldon Brown <CaptBike@sheldonbrown.com> wrote in message
> news:<3FC0F98E.4090709@sheldonbrown.com>...
> > There are a number of front racks/panniers that don't require braze ons. It's also sometimes
> > feasible to temporarily install a touring fork on a racing bike for this purpose.
> >
>
> A couple of the Old Man Mountain racks ( http://www.oldmanmountain.com/index.htm ) mount to the
> skewer instead of dropout eyelets. Their "Ultimate Low Rider" front rack would be able to carry
> your entire load easily.
>
> Jeff

I own both the Ultimate Low Rider front and the Sherpa rear and te ULR won't fit on a race bike with
carbon forks. I can rig up some type of U-clamps to clamp the sides of the front rack to the carbon
legs if I want to, but the distributor who sold me the OMM racks recommended against doing this.

> breakage in the rear wheel is reduced.
>
> I think hitting heels on a pannier is only an issue if you use the largest panniers. I have size
> 13 (Euro 48/49) feet and never came close to hitting medium sized MEC panniers on cyclocross
> frames. Not even close.
>

I think it is more of the issue with the length of the chainstays on racing bikes. Racing bikes have
shorter chainstays than real touring bikes, which contributes to their nimbleness and fast handling.
Old Man Mountain racks solved the problem, at least with my Sherpa rear rack, by providing 2 pannier
hook mounting points. The rear rack itself is mounted slightly further away than a regular Jandd or
the cheapo MEC rear rack in relation to the seatstays. This solves the problem with bikes having
short chainstays where your heels would hit the rear panniers.

Unfortunately, I know a buddy of mine who just bought a nice super light carbon bike (a Trek 5900)
(can be lifted by just your pinkie) and bought the OMM racks for touring with it!! I can see start
seeing problems with attachment points on both carbon legs and seat stays that they were chewed by
some kind of side load stress. I am also surprised the pair spoking wheels didn't start buckling
with all that weight on.

Now, I know he would have many valid reasons to tour with such a nice and expensive bike, but my
concern would be with bikes with carbon legs and now carbon seatstays like the new 2004 Trek 2200
with Third Dimension Technology.

I would be more at peace if my friend would use both a large saddle bag (like a Carradice) and a
handle bar bag to tour with his nice light race bike rather than OMM racks. He also towes a
trailer sometimes when he needs more space, but he is happier with his trailer than with his OMM
racks.. Go figure..

In article <xhhwb.219568$275.832671@attbi_s53>, Peter <prathman@attbi.com> wrote:

> Chris Zacho The Wheelman wrote:
>
> > I used a racing bike to tour with, once. I only carried about twenty five pounds (It was just an
> > overnighter), on standard rear and front lowriders, no HB. But it still handled terribly.
> >
> > The geometry on a racing frame is all wrong for carrying cargo. It's designed for nimbleness,
> > not stability, which is what you need if you are going to be loading it down.
>
> My experience is rather different. I use my Cannondale R800 (criterium frame) with a handlebar bag
> and rear rack holding panniers for week-long bike camping trips. Sure the bike handles a little
> different with the extra load, but I've never noticed any stability or other handling problems.
> The bike has no clearance for fenders, but the rear rack serves as a reasonable substitute for one
> on the rear and I strap on some cut up plastic soda bottles under the down tube with zip ties to
> deflect spray from the front tire away from my legs and feet.
>

You can actually put fenders on racing bikes now. I am not sure about the brand name, but the buddy
of mine who owns an Atlantis bought a pair of carbon fibre fenders. Light and expensive as hell, but
works with any racing bikes. They are very thin and I think easily breakable if you crash.

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:34:11 -0600, Todd Kuzma <tullio@TheRamp.net> wrote:
>We see a lot of cross-country tourists at our shop. Since we are in Illinois, we typically see them
>somewhere in the middle of the trip. So, we get to see a lot of what works and what doesn't. We
>sell a lot of saddles (after a rider finds that the saddle that was comfortable on 30 mile local
>rides doesn't necessarily work for 80 miles a day for several weeks).

I hate to risk starting a war, but I'm interested to know: Have you observed any trends in saddles
for such riders? As in, what the happy ones already have, and what the unhappy ones buy? What
commonly feels good on the long-distance butt?

>Todd Kuzma Heron Bicycles Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
>http://www.heronbicycles.com http://www.tullios.com
--
Rick Onanian

Rick Onanian <spamsink@cox.net> writes:

> On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:34:11 -0600, Todd Kuzma <tullio@TheRamp.net> wrote:
> >We see a lot of cross-country tourists at our shop. Since we are in Illinois, we typically see
> >them somewhere in the middle of the trip. So, we get to see a lot of what works and what doesn't.
> >We sell a lot of saddles (after a rider finds that the saddle that was comfortable on 30 mile
> >local rides doesn't necessarily work for 80 miles a day for several weeks).
>
> I hate to risk starting a war, but I'm interested to know: Have you observed any trends in saddles
> for such riders? As in, what the happy ones already have, and what the unhappy ones buy? What
> commonly feels good on the long-distance butt?

There's a potential for a fallacy here. What the happy ones already have are certainly good long
distance saddles, but what the unhappy ones buy may only appear to be good long distance saddles,
and they may (for all we know) arrive at another LBS another week down the trail still more unhappy.
And of course, with saddles, one size notoriously does not fit all.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'd rather live in sybar-space