MTB Drivetrain on Touring (road) Bike

HKEK said:

I just bought a 2007 Jamis Nova frame to build into a light touring/
commuter bike. I want to build this rig using the touring concepts of
using components that are fairly rugged, reliable, and easy to service
or repair wherever one may roam alone. On such rigs, one would not
find "brifters", i.e., dual control levers. Using that concept as a
guide, friction shifters would be preferred over index shifters.

Bar end shifters allow for both indexing and friction.

Quoted message said:

Cantilever brakes would be preferred over disc brakes.

Alternately linear pull brakes, if you have the correct levers from
Cane Creek or Dia-Compe. Cheap Tektro linear pulls upgraded to Kool-
Stop pads is a near fuss free brake setup.

Quoted message said:

And fenders are
preferred over staying home. 🙂

But of course. I've been loving my Planet Bike Cascadias in our recent
gloopy weather. Aluminum fenders are even more handsome, but also loud
on gravel and they dent.

Quoted message said:

Question #1: I am thinking of using a 9-speed MTB cassette and a MTB
triple chainring. With these components, do I also need to limit my
choices to MTB derailleurs front and rear?

The derailleur simply needs the capacity for the largest cog.
Nashbar's got the basic Deore derailler on sale for $18 right now.
That's all the derailleur ya need for most applications.

The classic crank choice would be a Sugino triple. XD300 or XD600 if
you want alu rings. 26-36-46

landotter said:

HKEK said:

I just bought a 2007 Jamis Nova frame to build into a light touring/
commuter bike. I want to build this rig using the touring concepts of
using components that are fairly rugged, reliable, and easy to service
or repair wherever one may roam alone. On such rigs, one would not
find "brifters", i.e., dual control levers. Using that concept as a
guide, friction shifters would be preferred over index shifters.

Bar end shifters allow for both indexing and friction.

Quoted message said:

Cantilever brakes would be preferred over disc brakes.

Alternately linear pull brakes, if you have the correct levers from
Cane Creek or Dia-Compe. Cheap Tektro linear pulls upgraded to Kool-
Stop pads is a near fuss free brake setup.

Quoted message said:

Question #1: I am thinking of using a 9-speed MTB cassette and a MTB
triple chainring. With these components, do I also need to limit my
choices to MTB derailleurs front and rear?

The derailleur simply needs the capacity for the largest cog.
Nashbar's got the basic Deore derailler on sale for $18 right now.
That's all the derailleur ya need for most applications.

The front derailleur should be matched as closely as you reasonably can
to the curve of the largest chainring, so you'll want a mountain
derailleur intended for a 46-tooth large ring. Since you're using a
non-indexing shifter for the front, the cable pull difference of Shimano
mountain vs road front derailleurs is moot.

Any indexing Shimano rear derailleur will work with any Shimano indexing
shifter. You can use an 8-speed or 10-speed rear derailleur with your
9-speed cassette, no problem. Your only concern is the capacity of the
derailleur. If you use a Deore derailleur with your mountain gearing,
you shouldn't have any problems. The GS (medium cage) derailleurs can
handle up to a 32-tooth cog in the back. If you want a 34, you'll want
to get an SGS (long cage) derailleur. However, with a 26 small ring and
a 32 large cog, if you run 32-622 tires you'd have a low gear of 22
inches, which is a real stump puller. Probably no need to go to a 34.

I'd suggest using Ultegra indexing bar end shifters (as opposed to
downtube, or non-indexing) because they'll give you improved control.
For brake levers, the Tektro R200A units are comfortable, good quality,
and versatile. For brakes, get units that you can use linear-pull
(V-type) pads on, because they'll work better and it'll be easier to
find replacements. The Tektro Oryx and Avid Shorty brakes both qualify.
You might also be able to get the Nashbar branded version of the Tektro
Oryx brakes on sale.

For light touring, linear pull brakes would probably be overkill IMO,
and it would be harder to find replacement levers if you broke one. With
cantilevers, any old road lever would do in a pinch.

Sounds like a fun ride.

Mike Johnson

Michael Johnson said:

For light touring, linear pull brakes would probably be overkill IMO,
and it would be harder to find replacement levers if you broke one. With
cantilevers, any old road lever would do in a pinch.

But but but...you're more likely to damage a canti arm in a tipover. :-
P Honestly, I've never heard anyone breaking a regular lever on tour,
perhaps I should get out more. The Oryx brakes are indeed fine as
well...but what if you break a straddle wire!! ;-)

Seriously, though, the advantage of not having a cable hanger in the
way might be worth it and I'm projecting, as those new Cane Creek
levers look to be an advancement in shape from the R200a's they
rebrand:

http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPBRKLEVRD/BR5070

They also let you run a front disc if that's something that appeals to
ya.

landotter said:

Michael Johnson said:

For light touring, linear pull brakes would probably be overkill IMO,
and it would be harder to find replacement levers if you broke one. With
cantilevers, any old road lever would do in a pinch.

Seriously, though, the advantage of not having a cable hanger in the
way might be worth it and I'm projecting, as those new Cane Creek
levers look to be an advancement in shape from the R200a's they
rebrand:

http://www.bikemannetwork.com/biking/p/COMPBRKLEVRD/BR5070

Product page says:

Price: $47.95
..
..
..
Available Soon

Sorry, 'CaneCreek Drop V Levers for Linear Pull Brake, Silver' is
currently out of stock.

Oops. They do look pretty sleek, though. At more than twice the price of
a set of R200A levers they certainly ought to.

It is an advantage not to have to deal with a cable hanger, but I don't
think that would make that much of a difference to me. Problem Solvers
cable hanger with a noodle does a fine job.

Mike Johnson

Michael Johnson said:

landotter said:

HKEK said:

Question #1: I am thinking of using a 9-speed MTB cassette and a MTB
triple chainring. With these components, do I also need to limit my
choices to MTB derailleurs front and rear?

The derailleur simply needs the capacity for the largest cog.
Nashbar's got the basic Deore derailler on sale for $18 right now.
That's all the derailleur ya need for most applications.

The front derailleur should be matched as closely as you reasonably can
to the curve of the largest chainring, so you'll want a mountain
derailleur intended for a 46-tooth large ring. Since you're using a
non-indexing shifter for the front, the cable pull difference of Shimano
mountain vs road front derailleurs is moot.

Any indexing Shimano rear derailleur will work with any Shimano indexing
shifter. You can use an 8-speed or 10-speed rear derailleur with your
9-speed cassette, no problem. Your only concern is the capacity of the
derailleur. If you use a Deore derailleur with your mountain gearing,
you shouldn't have any problems. The GS (medium cage) derailleurs can
handle up to a 32-tooth cog in the back. If you want a 34, you'll want
to get an SGS (long cage) derailleur. However, with a 26 small ring and
a 32 large cog, if you run 32-622 tires you'd have a low gear of 22
inches, which is a real stump puller. Probably no need to go to a 34.

I'd suggest using Ultegra indexing bar end shifters (as opposed to
downtube, or non-indexing) because they'll give you improved control.

Jan Heine had a spot in the latest Bicycle Quarterly, in which he
compared indexing and non-indexing shifters for 9-speed. He concluded
indexing was preferred (for the rear) because modern derailers don't
give crisp feedback, and are touchy to get precisely in gear.

I'd caution though, with a mountain front, you might want to leave the
front shifter in friction mode; the only difference between Shimano
mountain and road derailers is in the pull on the front.

Pat

Email address works as is.

MTB gearing is going to give you lots of really low gears. That isn't
necessarily what you want on smooth asphalt. The usual setup - road
triple with medium range cassette - might serve you better.

JG

"JG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

MTB gearing is going to give you lots of really low gears. That isn't
necessarily what you want on smooth asphalt. The usual setup - road
triple with medium range cassette - might serve you better.

Depends on how much luggage you're hauling, and how strong you are.

Personally I reckon the road triple with medium range cassette, low of 30x25
or so, isn't low enough. Road triple with wide MTB cassette - 30x34, or
something like a 46/36/26 with a widish cassette (12-28?) would do me. And
in fact the latter was pretty much stock gearing on a galaxy - so MTB triple
(44 big ring) with a 11t sprocket would go high enough.

cheers,
clive

Well, low gear will always be a personal choice. When I was an
average 22 year old, I crossed the US with a 44x31 as a bail out
gear. I have no idea what it would take now. You can have too low a
gear - it will lose traction when you jump on a pedal and below a
certain speed you will spend a lot of nervous energy flopping the
handlebars back and forth trying to keep upright.

If you absolutely need a low gear, you must use a big cog and then
smaller chainrings. But if you don't you end up with so much
crossover you might as well use a single chainring crank, along with
derailleurs that have to do more work than neccessary.

JG

"JG" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You can have too low a
gear - it will lose traction when you jump on a pedal and below a
certain speed you will spend a lot of nervous energy flopping the
handlebars back and forth trying to keep upright.

Experience says I've not found a bike with too low a gear. I'm confident I
could happily ride a bike with a 20x34 gear, ie smallest commonly available
MTB gearing. Heck, that's 2mph at 50rpm - easy stuff. Hauling a loaded
tandem up steep hills here sees us going at 3mph or less (24x32 on the road
tandem, 24x34 on the MTB) - we don't lose traction and I don't flop the bars
around (much...). If it works for an MTB, which tends to be on looser
surfaces than tarmac, it'll work for a touring bike.

That said, my regular bike doesn't have anything like that low. But I don't
use it for loaded touring.

cheers,
clive

Perhaps you just aren't trying hard enough?-)

Anyway, the OP wasn't talking about needing low gears or a fully
loaded tandem. They were talking about simple, robust components for
commuting/light touring. You should not be bashing rocks and twigs
and falling down a lot on the road. That's dangerous!-) Nor will you
need as low gears as you need for a MTB, and the choice of MTB
components may be a mistake...

JG