Touring bike with S&S couplers: What wheel size??



K

Ken Pisichko

Guest
I am getting measured up for a custom frame so that a proper
touring bicycle can be made to fit. I am getting S&S
couplers with the frame so that it can fit into the
proverbial 26" X 26" X 10" box for aircraft use. I will set
the bike up so the cranks and chainring can remove with the
allen wrench "thingy".

Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels? Does it matter? There
will be front and back racks for the panniers to remove and
other things - like water bottle holders. I will probably
need 2 of those containers each time I go "away".

Suggestions as to wheels - AND your rationale/experiences -
would help make a final decision.

Ken Winnipeg, Canada
 
> I am getting measured up for a custom frame so that a
> proper touring bicycle can be made to fit. I am getting
> S&S couplers with the frame so that it can fit into the
> proverbial 26" X 26" X 10" box for aircraft use. I will
> set the bike up so the cranks and chainring can remove
> with the allen wrench "thingy".
>
> Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels? Does it matter?
> There will be front and back racks for the panniers to
> remove and other things - like water bottle holders. I
> will probably need 2 of those containers each time I
> go "away".
>
> Suggestions as to wheels - AND your rationale/experiences
> - would help make a final decision.
>
> Ken Winnipeg, Canada

Hi Ken. The first thing is to determine what it is you want
from a custom bike, and why a non-custom would not suit you.
Almost anyone can be fit just fine with an off the rack
bike, with minor changes such as seat position and stem
length/height. If you want to specify some unusual
characteristic, such as some special braze-ons, then custom
is the way to go. It's not the only way to get couplers; Co-
Motion is one maker that will include them. I bought a
custom made Mariposa from Bicyclesport in Toronto 23 years
ago not because my proportions are unusual but to get some
nice features, and I still use the same bike (among others),
so the relatively high cost has turned out to be a bargain
for a fine bike.

I went with 700c wheels, with enough clearance for fenders
and fairly fat tires. I can fit up to 35mm tires, although
I always use 28mm. The question of 700c versus 26 inch is
argued a lot, and you probably won't get a definitive
answer here. Both sizes are widely available in a lot of
different constructionsand widths. Rolling resistance and
puncture resistance varies more among tires than any
difference in RR due to diameter, and the gear ratio
difference is not an issue with the many options in rings
and cogs available. I guess the answer is that it doesn't
matter. But get 36 spoke wheels for loaded touring. Because
of rear wheel dish, your front wheel is the stronger, so
put the heavy stuff up front.

Some makers construct integral racks of steel tubing. Very
nice, very tough, but the Blackburns on my bike have held up
very well so I have no complaints about them. Integral racks
could be a problem for a bike that's going in a box.
Couplers didn't exist when my bike was made, so I modify
cardboard or the plastic equivalent in order to fit the
complete bike, fenders and racks included. No airline
problems, but things may be different since I last flew with
that bike.

Good luck with your new bike, and let us know what you
end up with.

--
Ted Bennett Portland OR
 
Ted Bennett wrote:

> Hi Ken. The first thing is to determine what it is you
> want from a custom bike, and why a non-custom would not
> suit you. Almost anyone can be fit just fine with an off
> the rack bike, with minor changes such as seat position
> and stem length/height.

I am 6'4.5" and have had to build extended seat posts with a
"set-back" on the 2 bikes I use for riding around the city.
The road bike (30 y.o. Peugeot) is more efficient than the
chinese garage sale MTB. Since I trued up the wheels and
used the Park tensiometer i realize how much better things
are when the wheels are set up properly. Duhhh! OK, so I am
slow on some things, but anal I am not.

> If you want to specify some unusual characteristic, such
> as some special braze-ons, then custom is the way to go.

Yes, purpose-built add-ons are really nice - instead of just
using bolt-ons.

> It's not the only way to get couplers; Co-Motion is one
> maker that will include them. I bought a custom made
> Mariposa from Bicyclesport in Toronto 23 years ago not
> because my proportions are unusual but to get some nice
> features, and I still use the same bike (among others), so
> the relatively high cost has turned out to be a bargain
> for a fine bike.

True, but I wouldn't want to use either of the 2 bikes I
have with S&S couplers. The couplers alone would cost much
more that the price of the 2 bikes combined.

> I went with 700c wheels, with enough clearance for fenders
> and fairly fat tires. I can fit up to 35mm tires, although
> I always use 28mm. The question of 700c versus 26 inch is
> argued a lot, and you probably won't get a definitive
> answer here. Both sizes are widely available in a lot of
> different constructionsand widths. Rolling resistance and
> puncture resistance varies more among tires than any
> difference in RR due to diameter, and the gear ratio
> difference is not an issue with the many options in rings
> and cogs available. I guess the answer is that it doesn't
> matter. But get 36 spoke wheels for loaded touring.
> Because of rear wheel dish, your front wheel is the
> stronger, so put the heavy stuff up front.
>

Now, why not 40 spokes at the front and more (48) at the
back? The bikes I ride in the city are both 36 spoke -
Peugeot is 27" and Chinese is 26". Both have slick tires.

> Some makers construct integral racks of steel tubing. Very
> nice, very tough, but the Blackburns on my bike have held
> up very well so I have no complaints about them. Integral
> racks could be a problem for a bike that's going in a box.
> Couplers didn't exist when my bike was made, so I modify
> cardboard or the plastic equivalent in order to fit the
> complete bike, fenders and racks included. No airline
> problems, but things may be different since I last flew
> with that bike.
>
> Good luck with your new bike, and let us know what you end
> up with.

I will have the bike built here in Canada . Arvon Stacey
will build it in Alberta. Canadian dollars for the frame and
forks. Don't expect a fancy paint job as the bike is for
travel and commuting, not for gawking/admiring. My Brooks
saddle will be on and I am not sure of the wheels (rims and
hubs) and BB - Phil Wood perhaps, Shimano otherwise.
Deraillers, brakes etc will most likely be from e-bay
(Shimano most likely) Not worried right now about these
things as there is lots of time. Mostly just opportunistic
purchases (NOS and some used). Some things will be purchased
- like fenders and odds and ends. I will probably use 8
speed rear gears, but chain ring will be 3 rings in not-sure-exactly-
what configuration.

Thanks for your thoughts! :)
 
Ken Pisichko wrote:
>
> I am getting measured up for a custom frame so that a
> proper touring bicycle can be made to fit. I am getting
> S&S couplers with the frame so that it can fit into the
> proverbial 26" X 26" X 10" box for aircraft use. I will
> set the bike up so the cranks and chainring can remove
> with the allen wrench "thingy".
>
> Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels? Does it matter?
> There will be front and back racks for the panniers to
> remove and other things - like water bottle holders. I
> will probably need 2 of those containers each time I
> go "away".
>
> Suggestions as to wheels - AND your rationale/experiences
> - would help make a final decision.
>
> Ken Winnipeg, Canada

26 (559mm) rims pack in a smaller suitcase than 700 C
(622mm ) rims

I wouldn't rely on the Sim$%# one key release, which is very
good in damaging the aluminium threads in the crank. A
version with a threaded cap in TI or steel should be OK
--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL www.m-gineering.nl
 
Ken Pisichko wrote:

> I am getting measured up for a custom frame so that a
> proper touring bicycle can be made to fit. I am getting
> S&S couplers with the frame so=

> that it can fit into the proverbial 26" X 26" X 10" box
> for aircraft use. I will set the bike up so the cranks and
> chainring can remove with=

> the allen wrench "thingy".
>=20
> Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels?

I would definitely prefer 559 mm (26 inch) wheels for most
touring=20 applications that involve more baggage than a
change of clothes and a=20 credit card.

Generally, touring isn't about speed. The 559 offers the
greatest=20 choice and availability of tires suitable for
touring on=20 less-than-perfect surfaces.

Just yesterday, I took a delightful ride through the English
countryside =

on a borrowed Thorn Raven, somewhat similar to my own aside
from the=20 handlebars.

Robin had fitted it with Panaracer Tourguard 26 x 1.75
tires, sorry,=20 tyres, and they made the somewhat rough but
otherwise delightful=20 one-lane country roads a joy to ride
on, with no discomfort or worry=20 about road hazards.

Sheldon "559" Brown Bristol, U.K. +--------------------------------------------------------
---------+
| I'll be traveling in France and England throughout the
| month | of June. I hope to remain online, but don't
| know what sort | of 'Net access I'll be able to get...
| | I lost 190 MB of mail due to mailbox overload in mid
| June, | so if you wrote me and din=92t get a reply, try
| again. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------
------+ 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
 
26 wheels will fit better than 700. 130 rear spaced wheels
will fit better than
135. Small frames will fit better than large frames. Racks
add more difficulty to the packing. Good luck. B

(remove clothes to reply)
 
by fit better, I am referring to fit in the travel box B

(remove clothes to reply)
 
Originally posted by Ken Pisichko
I am getting measured up for a custom frame so that a proper
touring bicycle can be made to fit. I am getting S&S
couplers with the frame so that it can fit into the
proverbial 26" X 26" X 10" box for aircraft use. I will set
the bike up so the cranks and chainring can remove with the
allen wrench "thingy".

Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels? Does it matter? There
will be front and back racks for the panniers to remove and
other things - like water bottle holders. I will probably
need 2 of those containers each time I go "away".

Suggestions as to wheels - AND your rationale/experiences -
would help make a final decision.

Ken Winnipeg, Canada

I would go with 26" wheels for the packing application.
I ride a custom S & S coupled touring bicycle with 26" wheels.
We also have a 700C S & S coupled touring tandem with a case designed just for it.
It takes time and practice to pack and unpack/assemble them, but the efforts are quite worthwhile. I would practice at home and learn what "custom" packing materials like pipe insulation and velcro straps speed the process while protecting your frame.
Another poster mentioned using 130 mm OLD to save some space; but I would forgo that space savings for the additional durability and standardization of 135 mm OLD. Another poster mentioned Co-Motion; their Americano ( Available with S & S couplers) uses 145 mm OLD rear wheel... a very durable set-up and worth some consideration, but it is only one of a few standards used in the tandem world.
If you have a large budget for racks, Tubus makes stainless steel tubular racks that are very strong and you don't need to worry about scratching off the paint and dealing with rust.
Another consideration, that I am surprised that Sheldon Brown didn't mention... but also a budget buster: Rohloff 14 speed rear hub. I think Sheldon is using that hub in his touring bicycle.
I would suggest using either a splined bottom bracket as more suitable for installing and removing the cranks in the pack/unpack application.
Velocity Synergy 26" rims have a OCR version for rear wheel that builds into a more durable rear wheel than most anything you can find from Mavic. I was using Mavic's D521 rims, but have changed to Velocity's Synergy rims... and am quite please with them.
 
Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels? Does it matter?
> There will be front and back racks for the panniers to
> remove and other things - like water bottle holders. I
> will probably need 2 of those containers each time I
> go "away".

I used 26" wheels and packed the bike and most gear for a
2-week ride in a single of those backpack-style
containers: http://todd.cleverchimp.com/bike/paccoast/pag-
es/suitcase.html
 
[email protected] (B) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> 26 wheels will fit better than 700. 130 rear spaced wheels
> will fit better than
> 135. Small frames will fit better than large frames. Racks
> add more difficulty to the packing. Good luck. B

If you are using the S&S case, this poster is completely
correct - 700C wheels barely fit! Actually, if you have
anything larger than 23's on the rims, you may find the
wheels actually press firmly against the inside walls,
possibly subjecting the wheels to undue stress during
transit. As a safeguard against abuse by the airlines
inspectors I began removing the tire completely from the
upper wheel (I know this sounds srange, but it would take
too long to explain. Just believe me). Things improved
considerably when I switched from the S&S case to the case
supplied by Ritchey for its Breakaway bicycle. By the way,
just to follow up on a previous post, if you decide you
don't really need a custom bike, the Ritchey seems to be a
nice less-expensive alternative to S&S coupled frames. Hope
this helps....Fred
 
On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 21:37:37 -0500, Ken Pisichko <[email protected]> wrote:

>I am getting measured up for a custom frame so that a
>proper touring bicycle can be made to fit. I am getting S&S
>couplers with the frame so that it can fit into the
>proverbial 26" X 26" X 10" box for aircraft use. I will set
>the bike up so the cranks and chainring can remove with the
>allen wrench "thingy".
>
>Should I use 700 wheels or 26" wheels? Does it matter?
>There will be front and back racks for the panniers to
>remove and other things - like water bottle holders. I will
>probably need 2 of those containers each time I go "away".
>
>Suggestions as to wheels - AND your rationale/experiences -
>would help make a final decision.

I have a friend who does a lot of loaded touring and rides
an S&S equipped bike. He's a big guy (like about 6'5" or
so), so has a huge frame with 700C wheels. He manages to get
everything (including pannier racks, etc.) into the
requisite two boxes. I know he doesn't remove the cranks
when he packs the bike.

jeverett3<AT>earthlink<DOT>net
http://home.earthlink.net/~jeverett3
 
RE/
>Suggestions as to wheels - AND your rationale/experiences -
>would help make a final decision.

I'm long on rationale, short on experience.

Having said that, and knowning nothing else....I'd favor 26"
wheels just because that tire/rim size is so widely-
available. Also, if you spec'd your widths liberally enough,
you'd have more option tire-width-wise....right up to
fullblown MTB tires.
--
PeteCresswell
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Fred Roses) wrote:

> bicycle. By the way, just to follow up on a previous post,
> if you decide you don't really need a custom bike, the
> Ritchey seems to be a nice less-expensive alternative to
> S&S coupled frames. Hope this helps....Fred

And if you're even cheaper than that, the Ritchey BreakAway
design is available from Dahon even more cheaply:

http://dahon.com/allegro.htm

$1600 for any Ultegra-y bike is not bad. For one that folds
in half without provoking a warranty claim, that's
spectacular.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected]
http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/ President, Fabrizio
Mazzoleni Fan Club
 
[email protected] (Fred Roses) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Things improved considerably when I switched from the S&S
> case to the case supplied by Ritchey for its Breakaway
> bicycle. By the way, just to follow up on a previous post,
> if you decide you don't really need a custom bike, the
> Ritchey seems to be a nice less-expensive alternative to
> S&S coupled frames. Hope this helps....Fred

Please note that the Ritchey Breakaway case is actually not
within the airline legal limits for free baggage. When you
measure the lineal dimensions, it's bigger than the limit by
I believe 2 inches. Now, the airline counter may not
actually meaaure and you may get away with it, but contrary
to Ritchey's public claims, their case is NOT within the
legal limits. Further, they know it (I've discussed with
them, they've acknowledged it, and their explanation is that
the airlines don't actually measure) and they continue to
make the knowingly false claim.
 
[email protected] (Eagle Jackson) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Please note that the Ritchey Breakaway case is
> actually not within the airline legal limits for free
> baggage. <snip>

You're correct, and Ritchey pushes it a little further by
bumping out the middle of the case to accommodate the
cassette. Actually, I love this feature because the cassette
sits upright in the middle of the S&S case, threatening to
scratch anything in the vicinity (like downtubes). For what
it's worth, my bike in a Ritchey case has travelled around
the world 3 times now with nary a raised eyebrow about the
size. I usually fly in business class, however, where some
of the rules might be a little relaxed. Fred
 
RE/
>And if you're even cheaper than that, the Ritchey BreakAway
>design is available from Dahon even more cheaply:

I got the Ritchey on my Curtlo because Curtlo said they
didn't do S&S.

The Ritchy's collar and securing nut is already rusting
badly. Couple that with the fact that if that sucker comes
loose, it's all over; and I regret having settled for the
Ritchey system.

S&S couplings, OTOH, are stainless steel and rock-solid even
if the collars are loose.
--
PeteCresswell
 
The Richey will cost about the same as my custom built
bike when everyting is added together. The custom frame
starts at $1200 and add another $600 for the S&S couplers.
So that is $1800 Canadian. By the time I get the other
parts the price will be approaching the Richie price in
Canadian dollars. Mind you, many of the other parts will
be from e-bay with some NOS and some probably used. Wheels
and BB will be made up and new rspectively. Then of course
there is shipment across the border and 14% taxes and a
$35 charge for the Fedex or UPS brokerage fee, and... I
ahve to caompare things here because there are some
"interesting" price differentials when getting "things'
from the USA into Canada.

I know that I can get up to $200 worth of parts into Canada
duty free when out of Canada for 48 hours. Now if I take the
boys camping/fishing in MN that means $600 of parts duty/tax
free. That should cover the hubs, rims and BB at least. I
cannot do that with a complete bike/frame from the USA

The fellow in Alberta does the frames and forks in powder
coating, so that should be pretty durable. No fancy two-tone
jobs (unless another coat is applied on top of the powder
coat. Oh well, it doesn't matter as the bike is to be used,
not gawked at. The S&S couplers won't be "sculpted" either
as that will add to cost and won't help "structural
rigidity" one little bit.

"(Pete Cresswell)" wrote:

> RE/
> >And if you're even cheaper than that, the Ritchey
> >BreakAway design is available from Dahon even more
> >cheaply:
>
> I got the Ritchey on my Curtlo because Curtlo said they
> didn't do S&S.
>
> The Ritchy's collar and securing nut is already rusting
> badly. Couple that with the fact that if that sucker comes
> loose, it's all over; and I regret having settled for the
> Ritchey system.
>
> S&S couplings, OTOH, are stainless steel and rock-solid
> even if the collars are loose.
 
Fred Roses <[email protected]> wrote:
> If you are using the S&S case, this poster is completely
> correct - 700C wheels barely fit! Actually, if you have
> anything larger than 23's on the rims, you may find the
> wheels actually press firmly against the inside walls,
> possibly subjecting the wheels to undue stress during
> transit.

errr, deflate them? i have an S&S touring bike with a 60cm
c-c top-tube and 700C wheels (i'm an apartment dweller and
given my only 2 bikes it's gonna be 700C). i have to remove
the cranks and rear derailleur to fit everything in the
(soft) case but it goes in easily with room to spare (i
stuff in my rack, fenders, zefal pump, jerseys, shorts,
shoes, etc, etc).

> decide you don't really need a custom bike, the Ritchey
> seems to be a nice less-expensive alternative to S&S
> coupled frames. Hope this helps....Fred

too big -- not check-in legal.
--
david reuteler [email protected]
 
Fred Roses <[email protected]> wrote:
> You're correct, and Ritchey pushes it a little further by
> bumping out the middle of the case to accommodate the
> cassette. Actually, I love this feature because the
> cassette sits upright in the middle of the S&S case,
> threatening to scratch anything in the vicinity (like
> downtubes).

umm, no. on mine the cassette sits face down against the
padded downtube. there is no "S&S approved" method of
packing a bike into the hard or soft case and its varies
quite a bit by the size and model of bike. when i first got
my bike i sat down and took a few hours to figure out the
best way to pack it (think tetris).
--
david reuteler [email protected]
 
David Reuteler <[email protected]> wrote:
>Fred Roses <[email protected]> wrote:
>> If you are using the S&S case, this poster is completely
>> correct - 700C wheels barely fit! Actually, if you have
>> anything larger than 23's on the rims, you may find the
>> wheels actually press firmly against the inside walls,
>> possibly subjecting the wheels to undue stress during
>> transit.
>
>errr, deflate them? i have an S&S touring bike with a 60cm
>c-c top-tube and 700C wheels (i'm an apartment dweller and
>given my only 2 bikes it's gonna be 700C). i have to remove
>the cranks and rear derailleur to fit everything in the
>(soft) case but it goes in easily with room to spare (i
>stuff in my rack, fenders, zefal pump, jerseys, shorts,
>shoes, etc, etc).
>
>> decide you don't really need a custom bike, the Ritchey
>> seems to be a nice less-expensive alternative to S&S
>> coupled frames. Hope this helps....Fred
>
>too big -- not check-in legal.

I can get my 58 cm bike into the soft case without
removing the cranks, but I had difficulty doing so in a
way which didn't result in one or both wheels getting bent
out of true. This is particularly true since the case is
almost always openned, unpacked and repacked by the TSA
baggage screeners in the US after I've checked the bag in.
I could never find a way to get the wheels well enough
supported that a pile of baggage on top of the soft case
wouldn't torque the wheels one way or the other, and while
a trip to a bicycle shop at the destination was always
sufficient to true them again I disliked having to rely on
finding a bike shop.

I decided the hard case would fix my wheel problems, but
found that even with the cranks off I could just barely fit
the bike into a borrowed 26x26x10 hard case, which meant to
me that the probability that the TSA guy would be able to
get the bike back into the case well enough to close it
again without crushing something was probably zero.

I instead bought the 12" wide hard case. With the extra 2
inches the bike fits in fairly easily, and the wheels come
out of it as round as they went in. And while this case is
obviously as out of spec as the Ritchey case, none of the
check-in people so far have even given it a second look so
I've not yet been hassled for an oversize baggage fee. Then
again, come to think of it, so far I've only taken it on
airlines where I was either a frequent flier or was flying
on an expensive ticket, so I've yet to find out if flying in
a cheap seat makes a difference.

Dennis Ferguson
 

Similar threads