Gunnar bike for touring

[landotter]

Gooserider wrote:
> "landotter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Jack Murphy wrote:
> >> I have a Gunnar sport that I overload for long weekend tours. Am
> >> beginning
> >> to plan for a full touring bike. I see from Gunnar that they will
> >> customize
> >> one of their frames to give it more of a full on touring geometry for not
> >> much more than stock, and several hundred less than the Waterford.
> >>
> >> Anyone know about these bikes? I'd like to get a steel frame touring
> >> bike,
> >> and don't want to spend a fortune.
> >
> > Gunnar and Waterford are one in the same. Gunnars are usually a bit
> > simpler without lugs and with powdercoat. It's still a damn fine frame.
> >
> > Best deal for frame alone is a Surly LHT. But the best value overall
> > for a steel touring bike, is either a Fuji Touring, or even a Windsor
> > Touring for $600 via mail order. The latter's made on the same line as
> > the Fuji, AFAIK, you just need to go through it and replace the bits
> > you don't like as if it were a kit. I've heard a couple owners of the
> > Windsors had trouble with the spokes braking in the rear, but if you
> > have your local shop (or yourself) detress and hand tune it, you should
> > be fine.
>
> I have a Gunnar Sport, and it's a great bike. It's not a full-on touring
> bike, and I don't think that the extra cost for custom geometry to get
> Gunnar to make one is worth it. If I was in the market for a touring bike, I
> would go with the Surly LHT.

Hey, I was looking at a few pics of a Gunnar Sport, as I've only seen
the mtb frames close up, and it does look like they'd do just fine for
light touring with moderate rear bags and a goodly sized handlebar bag.
Do you think its beefy enough to handle 35# or so in the rear and maybe
a tenner in a bar bag? Or is the tubeset going to get all wiggly with
such weight? It's a really refreshing update on the formerly ubiquitous
"sport-touring" bikes we had in the 80s, that's for sure. I'd love one
in my stable. The OP might be just fine on one, if the load is kept
light.

 

[[email protected]]

"landotter" <[email protected]> wrote:

>On the other hand, if you know how to size yourself and can tweak a
>bike, the Windsor is an incredible value. But, and this is a serious
>but, don't expect bikesdirect to jump through hoops if something is
>wrong.

Understood.

Maybe I should buy a used Windsor off eBay to keep
price down even more?

What I'm wanting to do is buy very cheap almost
disposable gear..... tweak my riding style next spring,
learn what I need and don't need..... THAN go bike the
heavy duty stuff for a Trans-am tour.

 

[[email protected]]

"Ozark Bicycle"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Agreed, if you are a skilled home mechanic, the bikes from Bikes Direct
>are a killer deal. They are still a decent value if you pay to have a
>competent mechanic set them up.

I can set it up fine..... I was into biking big abt 15
years ago.

I just haven't ridden since then and my big obstacle
will be getting back in shape.

I intend to get back in shape by commuting to work by
bike abt 10 miles a day.

I also intend to use the ultra-light method of
touring.... hopefully

 

[[email protected]]

"Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:

> If I was in the market for a touring bike, I
>would go with the Surly LHT.

what abt co-motion americano?

 

[Gooserider]

"landotter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Gooserider wrote:
>> "landotter" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > Jack Murphy wrote:
>> >> I have a Gunnar sport that I overload for long weekend tours. Am
>> >> beginning
>> >> to plan for a full touring bike. I see from Gunnar that they will
>> >> customize
>> >> one of their frames to give it more of a full on touring geometry for
>> >> not
>> >> much more than stock, and several hundred less than the Waterford.
>> >>
>> >> Anyone know about these bikes? I'd like to get a steel frame touring
>> >> bike,
>> >> and don't want to spend a fortune.
>> >
>> > Gunnar and Waterford are one in the same. Gunnars are usually a bit
>> > simpler without lugs and with powdercoat. It's still a damn fine frame.
>> >
>> > Best deal for frame alone is a Surly LHT. But the best value overall
>> > for a steel touring bike, is either a Fuji Touring, or even a Windsor
>> > Touring for $600 via mail order. The latter's made on the same line as
>> > the Fuji, AFAIK, you just need to go through it and replace the bits
>> > you don't like as if it were a kit. I've heard a couple owners of the
>> > Windsors had trouble with the spokes braking in the rear, but if you
>> > have your local shop (or yourself) detress and hand tune it, you should
>> > be fine.
>>
>> I have a Gunnar Sport, and it's a great bike. It's not a full-on touring
>> bike, and I don't think that the extra cost for custom geometry to get
>> Gunnar to make one is worth it. If I was in the market for a touring
>> bike, I
>> would go with the Surly LHT.
>
> Hey, I was looking at a few pics of a Gunnar Sport, as I've only seen
> the mtb frames close up, and it does look like they'd do just fine for
> light touring with moderate rear bags and a goodly sized handlebar bag.
> Do you think its beefy enough to handle 35# or so in the rear and maybe
> a tenner in a bar bag? Or is the tubeset going to get all wiggly with
> such weight?

Gunnar recommends no heavier a load than 20 pounds on the Sport. I don't
think the tubeset is going to get wiggly, because it's True Temper OS
Platinum(oversized). I think it's more a function of frame geometry. If you
could get your load weight down, sure you could tour on it. I still think
the Surly LHT is a better idea, especially since Surly is bringing out a
complete LHT bike this spring for less than a grand.

It's a really refreshing update on the formerly ubiquitous
> "sport-touring" bikes we had in the 80s, that's for sure. I'd love one
> in my stable. The OP might be just fine on one, if the load is kept
> light.


It's a lot of fun to ride, and is my daily commuter. I put 150 miles a week
on it commuting, and it's very comfortable. I've ridden it 80 miles in a day
with little discomfort. It's not designed to be a full on tourer. I don't
think it's rated to handle a front rack, and there aren't lowrider mounts on
the fork.

 

[Gooserider]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If I was in the market for a touring bike, I
>>would go with the Surly LHT.
>
> what abt co-motion americano?

Since the Surly can be built for about a thousand dollars or so, and the
Co-Motion is listed on their website as $3150, the Surly wins.

 

[landotter]

[email protected] wrote:
> "Ozark Bicycle"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >Here what I turned up in a simple google search:
> >> >http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/windsor/tourist.htm
> >>
> >> would you feel confident taking this level of bike on a
> >> thousand mile tour with camp equipment?
> >
> >If it's properly set-up and geared, yes, without reservation.
>
> So the components and quality of that bike is adequate
> or ore than adequate as far as your concerned?
>
> Its not "junk" by any means huh?

Not at all. The hubs and rims are house branded, though. They're likely
fine stuff, but you never know. If I got it, I'd check the hubs first
thing and adjust if needed. Same goes for the rims, destress the spokes
and retune. They're likely rebranded Alex, which are plenty strong if
tensioned right.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

[email protected] wrote:
> "Ozark Bicycle"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> >Here what I turned up in a simple google search:
> >> >http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/windsor/tourist.htm
> >>
> >> would you feel confident taking this level of bike on a
> >> thousand mile tour with camp equipment?
> >
> >If it's properly set-up and geared, yes, without reservation.
>
> So the components and quality of that bike is adequate
> or ore than adequate as far as your concerned?
>
> Its not "junk" by any means huh?

No, not junk. It does require some prep and set up, though. You can't
just open the box, put some parts in place and ride a 1000 mile tour
(at least not without alot of grief, IMO).

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

[email protected] wrote:
> "Ozark Bicycle"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Agreed, if you are a skilled home mechanic, the bikes from Bikes Direct
> >are a killer deal. They are still a decent value if you pay to have a
> >competent mechanic set them up.
>
> I can set it up fine..... I was into biking big abt 15
> years ago.
>

Here's some what should be done before setting off on a 1000 mile tour:

1) the wheels should be un-tensioned, re-tensioned, properly centered
("dished"), stress relieved and trued with uniform spoke tension.

2) the hubs should be opened up, cleaned out, re-greased with a good
marine grease and properly adjusted.

3) ditto for the headset

4) the cable housings should be trimmed to the proper length and the
ends properly finished; the cables properly trimmed and capped

5) the headset, brakes and derailleurs properly adjusted

6) for loaded touring, you will want a lower gear. At a minimum, swap
out the 30T inner ring for a 26T

http://www.parktool.com/

is a good place to learn some skills and procedures. Click on "repair
help".

I'm sure I'm forgetting something important.... :-(


> I just haven't ridden since then and my big obstacle
> will be getting back in shape.
>
> I intend to get back in shape by commuting to work by
> bike abt 10 miles a day.
>
> I also intend to use the ultra-light method of
> touring.... hopefully

 

[Jack Murphy]

From the OP:
I'll look into the Surly and the Windsor. I need to get a solid reliable
touring bike for not too much money, since I really want to extend my
touring in the next year or two. I do long weekend tours, want to begin
doing 2 week tours and some day cross country.

Here's proof that the Gunnar Sport can carry full touring gear, if a bit
wobbly at high speeds:

http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/pics/01/docs/00/00/12/67/small/DSC00437_2.jpg?v=38

This has old Blackburn low rider mounts on the front fork, maybe 45 lbs full
of gear including tent, cookstove, water pump etc.

I've taken it into the Ozarks, where damn right the 30/25 gearing wasn't
adequate!
http://members.cox.net/jmurphyjr/Ozark2004/index.htm

Here in Kansas the hills aren't so long (there are some but you have to go
look for them) so not such a problem with gearing.
http://members.cox.net/jmurphyjr/Butler_County05/index.htm
or http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/doc/page/?o=lt&page_id=28210&v=2p (same
story)

But still I have to watch the wobble at speed, its not the bike to ride no
handed when fully loaded... And I know I don't want to keep loading this
bike down so heavy, its asking for trouble.

Last spring I was rolling back into town after a long weekend tour of about
250 miles, flying the last couple of miles with a 30mph tailwind, trying to
beat the storm and listening to Carmina Burana. I had noticed a bit more
wobble than usual but didn't suspect anything. Got home and noticed the rear
wheel was a bit out of true, look closer and see the rims (Mavic Open Pro,
10k miles on them) cracked, spokes ready to pop out! Yikes. So yah,
something a bit heavier duty would do well. I can't seem to tour without
hitting gravel or dirt for 3-10 miles somewhere, its always a cool road to
take but I wonder if I'll make it on this Sport.

I commute on this bike, fenders racks and lights this time of year. But
presto-chango in spring and summer I put on narrower tires and strip off the
fred stuff, and I hang right in there with the fast guys on club rides.
Touring is excellent fitness prep for other riding, if you work it hard
enough. That bikes feels so light and responsive without all that gear on
it! I love this bike, but know its time to get a bit more of a clydesdale
for touring.

Thanks for the tips.

Jack Murphy

 

[[email protected]]

"Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Since the Surly can be built for about a thousand dollars or so, and the
>Co-Motion is listed on their website as $3150, the Surly wins.

wow I didn't realize the price diff!

 

[[email protected]]

"Gooserider" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Since the Surly can be built for about a thousand dollars or so, and the
>Co-Motion is listed on their website as $3150, the Surly wins.

what's your opinion on titanium as a touring or cross
bike material?

 

[SMS]

Jack Murphy wrote:
> I have a Gunnar sport that I overload for long weekend tours. Am beginning
> to plan for a full touring bike. I see from Gunnar that they will customize
> one of their frames to give it more of a full on touring geometry for not
> much more than stock, and several hundred less than the Waterford.
>
> Anyone know about these bikes? I'd like to get a steel frame touring bike,
> and don't want to spend a fortune.

Probably it's time to spend a fortune. The Windsor is okay, but spending
on an entry level touring bike, and then buying a good touring bike down
the road is going to cost you more.

Just be sure whatever you buy has the following:

-Minimum of three sets of bottle braze-ons
-Braze-ons for front and rear racks, fenders, pump peg, spoke holder,
-4130 cromolloy tubing, no aluminum frame touring bikes!
-Quill stem, but if not possible, be sure that they don't cut the
steering tube too short, as for a touring bike you'll want the option of
a higher bar position
-wheels that can handle 38mm tires
-Rear wheel with a minimum of 36 spokes, front wheel with a minimum of
32 spokes
-Long wheelbase
-Internal wiring for lights, and preferable an internal hub dynamo in
the front

Personally, for the mid-range I'd get the Surly Long Haul Trucker. For
the high-end, I'd get a Bruce Gordon BLT--quickly, as there are rumors
of his retirement. I just saw a friend on Saturday that was riding a
BLT, it's like the perfect touring bicycle.
("http://www.bgcycles.com/blt.html").

 

[[email protected]]

SMS <[email protected]> wrote:

>Probably it's time to spend a fortune. The Windsor is okay, but spending
>on an entry level touring bike, and then buying a good touring bike down
>the road is going to cost you more.

Yeah...I've had that thought as well that maybe it less
costly and more time efficient to just go ahead and
spend a fortune now.

Like you say Id buy a used cheap bike..... then turn
around and sell it for a better bike at some point
anyway.

What to do what to do?

My concern is I don't have any equipment..... and good
bike. and all the equip I will need could easily cost
3k... maybe more.

>Personally, for the mid-range I'd get the Surly Long Haul Trucker. For
>the high-end, I'd get a Bruce Gordon BLT--quickly, as there are rumors
>of his retirement. I just saw a friend on Saturday that was riding a
>BLT, it's like the perfect touring bicycle.
>("http://www.bgcycles.com/blt.html").

Wow BG is retiring huh?

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

[email protected] wrote:
> SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Probably it's time to spend a fortune. The Windsor is okay, but spending
> >on an entry level touring bike, and then buying a good touring bike down
> >the road is going to cost you more.
>
> Yeah...I've had that thought as well that maybe it less
> costly and more time efficient to just go ahead and
> spend a fortune now.

Why? Something like the Windsor is inexpensive, and perfectly adequate
for what you want to do at present. Sure, if you become an ultra
tourist, you will either wear out alot of parts (hubs, headset, BB,
etc.) that aren't as durable as the stuff on a much more expensive
touring bike and/ or you will get the urge for "something better". But
the Windsor will have "paid for itself" in the process. OTOH, if you
decide that you don't enjoy having a touring bike, you can sell the
Windsor without getting financially hosed; after all, it's only $600
delivered to your door.
>

 

[landotter]

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >Probably it's time to spend a fortune. The Windsor is okay, but spending
> > >on an entry level touring bike, and then buying a good touring bike down
> > >the road is going to cost you more.
> >
> > Yeah...I've had that thought as well that maybe it less
> > costly and more time efficient to just go ahead and
> > spend a fortune now.
>
> Why? Something like the Windsor is inexpensive, and perfectly adequate
> for what you want to do at present. Sure, if you become an ultra
> tourist, you will either wear out alot of parts (hubs, headset, BB,
> etc.) that aren't as durable as the stuff on a much more expensive
> touring bike and/ or you will get the urge for "something better". But
> the Windsor will have "paid for itself" in the process. OTOH, if you
> decide that you don't enjoy having a touring bike, you can sell the
> Windsor without getting financially hosed; after all, it's only $600
> delivered to your door.
> >

No sh*t. I've had "cheap" Taiwanese and Japanese factory frames that
fit and rode just great, and I had no qualms about upgrading the rest
of the bike, as the value was good to me, not the market. $600 will
barely get you a frame, fork and BB even if you go for the LHT, which I
doubt is significantly better made. Even if you decide, "I want some
much stronger touring wheels", well, you can reuse the gimpier ones
that came on it and mount them with skinnies for faster and lighter
runs. I think of more inexpensive bikes more as "kits", as you'll often
want to replace a component or two, but in the end, it's still a great
deal.

 

[SMS]

[email protected] wrote:

> Wow BG is retiring huh?

I was talking to a guy who just got a Bruce Gordon, and he told me that
there are not a lot of sales and Bruce is living off savings. Not
surprising, since the market for touring bicycles peaked about 20 years ago.

 

[landotter]

SMS wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Wow BG is retiring huh?
>
> I was talking to a guy who just got a Bruce Gordon, and he told me that
> there are not a lot of sales and Bruce is living off savings. Not
> surprising, since the market for touring bicycles peaked about 20 years ago.

It's a shame, as his bikes are beautiful and very fairly priced. It's
also a shame as a touring style bike makes a great all-rounder for
folks wanting to ride to work or the bike path, get some exercise, and
even tour, by gosh. The mtb on tarmac trend is still fairly strong due
to some wierd hangups guys have, at least round here, but flat bar
roadies and sporty hybrids are coming back, and perhaps in a few more
years folks will realize that drop bars were the right way to begin
with.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

landotter wrote:
> Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > > SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > >Probably it's time to spend a fortune. The Windsor is okay, but spending
> > > >on an entry level touring bike, and then buying a good touring bike down
> > > >the road is going to cost you more.
> > >
> > > Yeah...I've had that thought as well that maybe it less
> > > costly and more time efficient to just go ahead and
> > > spend a fortune now.
> >
> > Why? Something like the Windsor is inexpensive, and perfectly adequate
> > for what you want to do at present. Sure, if you become an ultra
> > tourist, you will either wear out alot of parts (hubs, headset, BB,
> > etc.) that aren't as durable as the stuff on a much more expensive
> > touring bike and/ or you will get the urge for "something better". But
> > the Windsor will have "paid for itself" in the process. OTOH, if you
> > decide that you don't enjoy having a touring bike, you can sell the
> > Windsor without getting financially hosed; after all, it's only $600
> > delivered to your door.
> > >
>
> No sh*t. I've had "cheap" Taiwanese and Japanese factory frames that
> fit and rode just great, and I had no qualms about upgrading the rest
> of the bike, as the value was good to me, not the market. $600 will
> barely get you a frame, fork and BB even if you go for the LHT, which I
> doubt is significantly better made. Even if you decide, "I want some
> much stronger touring wheels", well, you can reuse the gimpier ones
> that came on it and mount them with skinnies for faster and lighter
> runs. I think of more inexpensive bikes more as "kits", as you'll often
> want to replace a component or two, but in the end, it's still a great
> deal.

Agreed, I doubt the LHT is a *significantly* better frame, aside
(possibly) from the cosmetics of the welds and frame/fork alignment.
(The LHT does, of course have something of a cult following. To me,
that is worth precisely $0, but others may see things differently.)

 

[landotter]

Ozark Bicycle wrote:

> Agreed, I doubt the LHT is a *significantly* better frame, aside
> (possibly) from the cosmetics of the welds and frame/fork alignment.
> (The LHT does, of course have something of a cult following. To me,
> that is worth precisely $0, but others may see things differently.)

"Ohmigod, is that, like a *Surly* or what?"

Worth about the same to me. The Surly's are well designed and priced
for what you get, but there's no sex factor outside the good design.
They're straight enough, the welds are clean enough, and the powdercoat
is just fine. Move along.

I have been having a bit of a crush on the new Kona Paddy Wagon, which
is equally pedestrian in its assembly, but I can't help loving sparkly
blue with yellow decals. /swoon.