How hard is it to BUILD a touring bike?



"A touring bike... is a bike with racks. There is a geometry
difference
with say a road or tri bike, but it's not that great really."

the industry is recovering from the Armstrong Era where all bikes were
Tour racers or worse" no gap between seat tube and rear tire, forks
pointed straight into the amacite. Very responsive, nervous geometry.
Darty. Darty over varying road surfaces all day with wind blowing you
right and left ad nauseum and ura gonna be one tired dude.
Touring geometry, and NOT 27" sport-touring geometery, delivers a
platform on which the rider pedals power straight ahead. Turning is
incidental. Which isnot to say turning response is poor like itsa
bicycle not an Eldorado convertible. turning response is good but
itsnot a GTour racer in the hands of a real racer type.

This is relative to the Commuter's Dilemma: do I ride an MTB or a
sports tourer with drop bars?
All my commuting is done down long straights not thru the woods and
across the lawns to wherever so the sports-tourer is ace here.

The sports tourer or whatchucallur "normal" geometry until the NUT
DEPT gets to messing around with it, is a suitable compromise between
Tour racer and touring bike made easier on the touring nerves with a
big fat round Conti TT carcass or as fat and round as can be fit
between the old ten speed chainstays.
 
datakoll aka gene daniels wrote:
>
> "A touring bike... is a bike with racks. There is a geometry
> difference
> with say a road or tri bike, but it's not that great really."
>
> the industry is recovering from the Armstrong Era where all bikes were
> Tour racers or worse" no gap between seat tube and rear tire, forks
> pointed straight into the amacite. Very responsive, nervous geometry.
> Darty. Darty over varying road surfaces all day with wind blowing you
> right and left ad nauseum and ura gonna be one tired dude.[...]

Mr. Armstrong never had issue with bicycle fit:
<http://www.dollreference.com/images/kenner_stretch_armstrong.jpg>.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
 
On Apr 5, 7:00 pm, Woland99 <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Apr 4, 6:18 pm, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
>
> > Guys I'm unemployed and between jobs.... so went back
> > to school full time
>
> > Therefore money IS tight
>
> > BUT... I went out and bought a Novara Randonee for this
> > summer
>
> > I'm having second thoughts and may return it... not
> > only for the reason that money is tight.... but that
> > I'm wondering if I can build  bike cheaper or if not
> > cheaper that is better somehow.
>
> > I know the frame is the heart and soul of a bike.... if
> > I bought a GOOD frame could I populate it with low
> > grade components for use this summer and upgrade when
> > back to work?  I was even thinking I could use
> > components form a yard sale bike for now.
>
> > advice?  how to get a good bike but do it in  fashion
> > that makes sense given my financial constraints
>
> > I don't mind spending some money as gasoline is so high
> > right now I'm pretty set on bike riding EVEYWHERE this
> > summer.... besides just touring and for fun
>
> One thing you should probably consider in touring bike is
> ergonomics. You do not want to ride long distances on bike
> that does not fit. I do not think that saving 170 bucks
> getting that Windsor is worth it. But - if you really dislike
> Randonee then I guess that is good enough reason to keep looking.
> I thing that perhaps keeping it for few months and searching on
> ctaigs is a better tactic than getting something that has worse
> components and costs couple hundred less.

Yup. I almost bought a Windsor last fall but decided to get a city
tootler at the LBS and support them instead. It was on sale for under
$600 for a while, and I figured that even if I eventually had to
rebuild the wheels on some LX hubs with good spokes, it was still a
fine deal--but when you consider that those hubs and spokes cost ya a
hundred bucks, then $70 more to get the discounted and better quality
Randonee is a no-brainer.

I'd return it if money was tight for real--Craigslist plus a couple
hundred in parts and racks gets you a bike that'll tour, just not a
shiny new solution out of the box.
 
In article <[email protected]>,
DougC <[email protected]> wrote:

> A touring bike... is a bike with racks. There is a geometry difference
> with say a road or tri bike, but it's not that great really.

Disagree. The geometry difference is great.
Much longer chainstays, much lower bottom bracket,
much less responsive front end.

Racing front end geometry is quick at lower speeds,
stable at extreme speeds. Touring front end geometry
is stable at lower speeds.

--
Michael Press
 
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 03:03:44 GMT, Michael Press <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Disagree. The geometry difference is great.
>Much longer chainstays, much lower bottom bracket,
>much less responsive front end.
>
>Racing front end geometry is quick at lower speeds,
>stable at extreme speeds. Touring front end geometry
>is stable at lower speeds.

True in days of old... is that still true today? (that is a question,
I don't follow modern frame trends that closely).

I thought most bikes today, even "touring" bikes, short of a retro
builder, were really tight geometries more suitable to racing.
 
On Apr 4, 9:20 pm, Werehatrack <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Apr 2008 18:18:52 -0500, [email protected] may have said:
>
>
>
> >Guys I'm unemployed and between jobs.... so went back
> >to school full time
>
> >Therefore money IS tight
>
> >BUT... I went out and bought a Novara Randonee for this
> >summer
>
> >I'm having second thoughts and may return it... not
> >only for the reason that money is tight.... but that
> >I'm wondering if I can build bike cheaper or if not
> >cheaper that is better somehow.
>
> >I know the frame is the heart and soul of a bike.... if
> >I bought a GOOD frame could I populate it with low
> >grade components for use this summer and upgrade when
> >back to work? I was even thinking I could use
> >components form a yard sale bike for now.
>
> >advice? how to get a good bike but do it in fashion
> >that makes sense given my financial constraints
>
> >I don't mind spending some money as gasoline is so high
> >right now I'm pretty set on bike riding EVEYWHERE this
> >summer.... besides just touring and for fun
>
> First off, in my experience, a good-name older bike that can be had
> for less than a quarter of the price of a current unit is generally a
> much better value than a new bike, and a nifty-frame bike built with
> third-rate new **** instead of decent kit will ride like a crappy,
> cheap bike instead of a good one.
>
> In your situation, I'd be looking for a respectable older bike with a
> reasonably light frame and obsolete but good-quality gruppo that I
> could take my time upgrading to where I wanted it.
>
> In point of fact, I am doing just that with a Trek 640; sure, it'll
> never be as light as a Madone, but I hardly think that the four-figure
> difference in the amount I would have to spend is justified when my
> riding isn't at the level where bleeding-edge techie goodness is going
> to win me anything.
>
> If your needs are mostly for transport rather than competition, and if
> a given bike gets you where you need to go, then in the long run it's
> probably good enough.
>
> My recipe for a touring bike: Find an older roadie with eyelets, slap
> on slightly wider tires and a touring rder and cassette, add
> accessories as their need presents itself, and otherwise just keep
> pedalling.
>

I'm using an '87 Trek 400 - not so much for touring, per se, but for
my 10-25 mile (x2 daily) commute. It cost me $109 on ebay plus
another $45 shipping. So far it does get me there and here again, and
feels pretty good chewing up the miles. I figure on upgrading
components as they need replaced, or as suitable ones happen to come
along.
 
try a $15 deore rear deray-has a double pivot, keeps chain from
snagging manhole covers
 
On Apr 5, 9:07 pm, still just me <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 03:03:44 GMT, Michael Press <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Disagree. The geometry difference is great.
> >Much longer chainstays, much lower bottom bracket,
> >much less responsive front end.
>
> >Racing front end geometry is quick at lower speeds,
> >stable at extreme speeds. Touring front end geometry
> >is stable at lower speeds.
>
> True in days of old... is that still true today? (that is a question,
> I don't follow modern frame trends that closely).
>
> I thought most bikes today, even "touring" bikes, short of a retro
> builder, were really tight geometries more suitable to racing.

Surly LHT has head tube angles ranging from 70 to 72 degrees,
depending on size. All sizes have 46cm chainstays. Trek 520's a little
bit tighter, but not much - it has 45cm chainstays, and its biggest
size has a 72.5 deg HT.

Compare that to my mid-90s 59cm Guerciotti - 41cm chainstays and a 74
deg HT.

IMO, the chainstay length is the biggest deal - No way could I run
rear panniers if they were 2 inches closer to my (size 12) heels. I'm
having to use an extra-long rack to begin with.
 
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 09:21:05 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
>[email protected] wrote:
>>For $600 you can get a decent touring bike with free shipping and very
>>minor assembly
>>
>>http://bikesdirect.com/products/windsor/tourist.htm
>>
>>This may be exactly what you need. Supposedly this is the same as the
>>Fuji touring and is coparable to the Trek touring both of whih cost
>>more $$$
>
>That is a pretty good deal. I've looked at it in the
>past.
>
>At $600 it even includes free shipping to 48 states....
>not bad at all
>
>I paid $770 for the Novara Randonee...... plus abt $20
>gas to drive to get it. So I guess the Windsor would
>have saved me $200 I could have spent on gear and
>clothing. Hmmm....
>
>Still.... I keep thinking I could cabbage some thing
>together with the $25 Ross MTB frame I have.... and
>have more money for shoes, tent, gear
>
>Choices choices.... especially hard when money is low

Used might be great, or might not be. It would be better if you had a
basement full of parts, and a shop full of tools, and your time was
worth nothing -- oh wait, if you're a student, you fit the time part.
Hard to say how good a used bike is unless you've built up the
wrenching experience to eyeball it (and fix the bike if you're wrong).
If you want to ride a bike a lot, enjoy your Randonee. If you'd
rather fret over every dollar than ride, you can entertain the buy
used or build it up idea. You pay your money, you take your choice!

My crystal ball says you'll return the Randonee, spend a lot of time
(and money) over the summer trying to get a cheap bike and make it
work, and late in the year bemoan the fact that you didn't get to ride
as much as you thought you would.

Pat
Email address works as is.
 
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 16:27:25 -0500, DougC <[email protected]> >
>A touring bike... is a bike with racks. There is a geometry difference
>with say a road or tri bike, but it's not that great really.

The geometry difference also allows you to use fatter tires, i.e.
bigger than 700Cx28, which not many non-touring road bikes can handle.
IMHO they're great for soaking up bumps and rough roads; YMMV. Fatter
tires also handle heavy loads with aplomb.

Pat

Email address works as is.
 
On Apr 6, 1:24 pm, Patrick Lamb <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 09:21:05 -0500, [email protected] wrote:
> >[email protected] wrote:
> >>For $600 you can get a decent touring bike with free shipping and very
> >>minor assembly
>
> >>http://bikesdirect.com/products/windsor/tourist.htm
>
> >>This may be exactly what you need.  Supposedly this is the same as the
> >>Fuji touring and is coparable to the Trek touring both of whih cost
> >>more $$$
>
> >That is a pretty good deal. I've looked at it in the
> >past.
>
> >At $600 it even includes free shipping to 48 states....
> >not bad at all
>
> >I paid $770 for the Novara Randonee...... plus abt $20
> >gas to drive to get it. So I guess the Windsor would
> >have saved me $200 I could have spent on gear and
> >clothing. Hmmm....
>
> >Still.... I keep thinking I could cabbage some thing
> >together with the $25 Ross MTB frame I have.... and
> >have more money for shoes, tent, gear
>
> >Choices choices.... especially hard when money is low
>
> Used might be great, or might not be.  It would be better if you had a
> basement full of parts, and a shop full of tools, and your time was
> worth nothing -- oh wait, if you're a student, you fit the time part.
> Hard to say how good a used bike is unless you've built up the
> wrenching experience to eyeball it (and fix the bike if you're wrong).
> If you want to ride a bike a lot, enjoy your Randonee.  If you'd
> rather fret over every dollar than ride, you can entertain the buy
> used or build it up idea.  You pay your money, you take your choice!
>
> My crystal ball says you'll return the Randonee, spend a lot of time
> (and money) over the summer trying to get a cheap bike and make it
> work, and late in the year bemoan the fact that you didn't get to ride
> as much as you thought you would.
>
> Pat
> Email address works as is.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

ifn YOU don't take IT apart and bolt/adjust IT back together then
where yuo at? NOWHERE THAT;S WHERE.
Somewhere there's a list of touring frame makers but I lost it. Try
'Bruce Gordon'
the geometeries extend out toward the Plains so to peak as specialty
building allows discretion, finesse and logic to overtake gross
debilitiating consumerism.
and check this out eeyyayayahahhhaa

http://www.fullyloadedtouring.com/
 
In article <[email protected]>,
still just me <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 03:03:44 GMT, Michael Press <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Disagree. The geometry difference is great.
> >Much longer chainstays, much lower bottom bracket,
> >much less responsive front end.
> >
> >Racing front end geometry is quick at lower speeds,
> >stable at extreme speeds. Touring front end geometry
> >is stable at lower speeds.
>
> True in days of old... is that still true today? (that is a question,
> I don't follow modern frame trends that closely).
>
> I thought most bikes today, even "touring" bikes, short of a retro
> builder, were really tight geometries more suitable to racing.

Hank answers this.

I meant to add that 450 to 460 mm chainstays make a
more comfortable ride, particularly when combined with
70 degree forks for a long wheelbase.

--
Michael Press
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mycophiles
A Seat Too Small and Hard and Big and Uncomfortable: The Dangers of a Poorly Fitting Saddle
Replies
6
Views
58
Cycling Equipment
GearGuru99
GearGuru99
C
Why does my bike make a clicking noise when I pedal hard?
Replies
30
Views
176
Cycling Equipment
BikingRyan
BikingRyan
KMC
My chain skips gears when I pedal hard – how do I fix that?
Replies
0
Views
136
Cycling Equipment
KMC
KMC
E
Carbon MTB wheels: Durable enough for hard hits?
Replies
27
Views
396
Cycling Equipment
rich glynn
rich glynn
T
Reynolds assault + powertap gs + wheel lacing - how hard is it??
Replies
3
Views
3K
Cycling Equipment
CAMPYBOB
CAMPYBOB
Top Bottom Back