Touring: The fall itch

[Ken M]

**That seems reasonable to me. I've met a lot of people over the
years that think because they can do a century unloaded without
too much trouble, that doing a century on a loaded bike
every day should be not that big a deal... **

Yeah I have run into a few like that also. I can ride a century, but
haven't tried it on a ' loaded ' bike yet.

**I would also recommend a few shakedown weekend trips **

I did a sort of shakedown with my rear rack and panniers load up to the
max 35 pound rating. Just to see how the bike would handle with the
extra weight, and to see how I could handle the weight. It slowed my
down about 1.5 to 2.0 mph. So I figure with fully loaded front panniers
that should slow me down by another 1.5 to 2.0 mph. So my normal
cruising speed on level ground is about 16 to 17mph, so I figure the
loaded speed to be about 11 to 13mph, I think.

Ken

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 23:09:02 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:

> I assume modern tents now pack down to
>nothing at all, but I've camped with old pup-style tents that were a
>pretty big piece of bulk.

My _Eureka Moonshadow Duo_, which is more of a 1.5-person tent than 2 for
me (but I'm a big guy), weighs 2.4 kilos and packs down to less than a
down sleeping bag does, plus the poles. It's a tunnel, so it's not
self-supporting like a dome and you have to have at least 3 pegs in to get
it up, which is a bit of a disadvantage. But I like it. It's my hiking
tent, but it probably works very well for loaded touring. Was 180 euros,
and I believe it still is. Incidentally: When you're walking, it's weight
and not bulk.


Jasper

 

[Ken M]

**When you're walking, it's weight
and not bulk.**

Yeah I hiked the Appalichian(sp?) Trail in Virgina for about two weeks
about 6 or 7 years ago. So yeah I know what thats like too. Thats
another personal goal for me, to hike the entire trail!

Ken

 

[Booker C. Bense]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
Ken M <[email protected]> wrote:
>**That seems reasonable to me. I've met a lot of people over the
>years that think because they can do a century unloaded without
>too much trouble, that doing a century on a loaded bike
>every day should be not that big a deal... **
>
>Yeah I have run into a few like that also. I can ride a century, but
>haven't tried it on a ' loaded ' bike yet.
>
>**I would also recommend a few shakedown weekend trips **
>
>I did a sort of shakedown with my rear rack and panniers load up to the
>max 35 pound rating. Just to see how the bike would handle with the
>extra weight, and to see how I could handle the weight. It slowed my
>down about 1.5 to 2.0 mph. So I figure with fully loaded front panniers
>that should slow me down by another 1.5 to 2.0 mph. So my normal
>cruising speed on level ground is about 16 to 17mph, so I figure the
>loaded speed to be about 11 to 13mph, I think.
>

_ Not everbody agrees with this, but most people prefer the
handling with 4 panniers rather than 2. I think the 2.0 mph
you lost with panniers has more to do with the aerodynamic
resistance than the weight per se. I think you'll be about
the same with the front panniers. What happens on the hills
is an entirely different story though. BTW, you might check
out the bike touring list at www.phred.org and there is
also the biketouring 101 site.

http://www.bicycletouring101.com/

and lastly


http://www.crazyguyonabike.com/

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQx4ecWTWTAjn5N/lAQFm+AP+OyNgqJ4/QeDzyIVhqH1ArD766cFgo6nx
sZTz58CTda5jR143EoY7pVKjTNusHoOV4xAXU9Jgs8spdTmoMmJI8g+++aziIWbg
fQ1IfmAEh52fWFh6G0ytqzHKh+alznqKVQg1m31kNwZMnR6CF9GMOm7jYDeyDOBj
xNVdoTrzbQo=
=ntnr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ryan
>
> *Indeed, there are a fair number of touring bikes (even with drop
> bars) that are built on 26" wheels, for the perfectly good reason that
> the smaller wheel is stronger*
>
> Yes I am aware of the fact that some older touring bikes are built
> around 26 inch wheels, but I was under (the wrong) impression that most
> were being built around 700c these days.

I don't think your impression is wrong: most touring bikes, dedicated
touring bikes, are probably still built around road wheels.

That doesn't mean it's a big deal: given that you're talking about using
either your very nice, already-on-slicks MTB, or buying several hundred
dollars worth of bikes that are unlikely to be faster, more reliable, or
more fun, I can't recommend changing bikes, especially for several
hundred dollars.

Cost no object, starting from zero, I'd probably recommend one of
several drop-bar bikes, maybe with cross levers as a concession to your
flat-bar preferences, and choosing either a 26" or 700c bike almost at
whim (though the rougher the tour, the more 26" wheels make sense). That
said, I think the bike you have is fine.

Here's another perspective: I have a bunch of bikes in my pile. If I was
going to go on a loaded tour right now, I would probably use either the
70s Motobecane (huge clearance for tires and fenders) or the 80s Bianchi
(adequate clearance, and the tires and rack are already on the thing). I
would avoid using my FC race bike (no rack mounts, wheels too light),
and I might use my hardtail Kona MTB, but I don't like fighting the fork
on climbs, and I like having extra hand positions.

I definitely wouldn't take the fixie (I'm a wimp), the 7-speed BMX
(doesn't fit me), or actually...I definitely wouldn't take the race bike
because it's crazy.

> *I assume modern tents now pack down to
> nothing at all*
>
> Yeah the tent and bag I have really pack down well, the tent weights
> about 3 pounds and the bag is about the same.
>
> Ken

--
Ryan Cousineau [email protected] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

 

[The Wogster]

Ken M wrote:
>
> **I assume you have a time when you
> need to return, and a list of places you want to go, schedule or not,
> you usually end up with one anyway.**
>
> Well actually I have already cleared it with my employer, and I have an
> open ended return date there. I have no pets or anything like that that
> need to be cared for. I don't have to worry about the rent, I alway pay
> for a year up front and I just took care of that a couple of months
> ago. SO REALLY I don't have any special timetable to follow, I can
> pretty much just get on the bike and ride.
>

Must be nice....

W

 

[Ken M]

** I'd probably recommend one of
several drop-bar bikes **

Well, that might be an option, but it seems to me that due to some back
injuries from some years ago, every time I get on a bike with drop bars
I get a pain in my back that keeps me from riding for long periods of
time. I have tried different size frames, saddles, saddle hieghts etc
etc etc and can't seems to overcome the pain, thats why I ride my MTB
more than my rode bike. And why I thinking of a ' hybrid ' for the
tour.

Ken

 

[Ken M]

** think the 2.0 mph
you lost with panniers has more to do with the aerodynamic
resistance than the weight per se. I think you'll be about
the same with the front panniers.**

Well I think you might be right, but I am sure the weight has a little
something to do with it.

** What happens on the hills
is an entirely different story though. **

Well from what I can tell from my reading the adventure cycling route
is pretty flat from central TX to southern CA, oh yeah I am riding
backwards from east to west. Here in Florida it's flat flat flat, so
it's pretty tough to train on hills.

Yeah I know about crazyguyonabike.com I love that sight! Funny to read
some of the things people write in journals.

Ken

 

[Ken M]

** Must be nice.... **

LOL, I try to live a simple life, one that lets me go off on some
adventure at the drop of a hat, almost.

Perhaps when I find an adventure compatable female unit, and spawn some
outdoors type kids the ' adventures ' will have to be more planned
ahead.

Ken

 

[Booker C. Bense]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email protected]>,
Ken M <[email protected]> wrote:
>** think the 2.0 mph
>you lost with panniers has more to do with the aerodynamic
>resistance than the weight per se. I think you'll be about
>the same with the front panniers.**
>
>Well I think you might be right, but I am sure the weight has a little
>something to do with it.
>
>** What happens on the hills
>is an entirely different story though. **
>
>Well from what I can tell from my reading the adventure cycling route
>is pretty flat from central TX to southern CA, oh yeah I am riding
>backwards from east to west. Here in Florida it's flat flat flat, so
>it's pretty tough to train on hills.

_ Flat is relative. While it may not cross the rockies, I can't
imagine a route through West Texas, New Mexico and Arizona that
doesn't go in and out of quite a few river valleys at least and
there are a couple challenging mountain ranges you either have
to ride around or over. I'll have to look at the ACA map, but I
would keep the low gears. Nobody ever complained about having
too low a gear on a long tour.

_ Booker C. Bense



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQx79ZGTWTAjn5N/lAQFLbQP+M61o2cTKHw/7EQl/NQTSdMI1zk+d1stB
dIFTnqOmiNiQEc0+u8KvxhNlFe+pRcVlwGRQ+jtO/86r38Gayo2ab1KhiUjr2QVU
jEpPf1/q+UBdUxOD5FPnHhAED7v/D0oKcjZQBKXp0lUZlp2TiR9JC35d3pLtE4ln
f2hLoMYNLek=
=vya1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Ken M]

** Flat is relative. While it may not cross the rockies, I can't
imagine a route through West Texas, New Mexico and Arizona that
doesn't go in and out of quite a few river valleys at least and
there are a couple challenging mountain ranges you either have
to ride around or over. I'll have to look at the ACA map, but I
would keep the low gears. Nobody ever complained about having
too low a gear on a long tour. **


Yeah I guess flat would be relative, but If you've even been to FL,
especially south FL you would know what I mean when I say it is flat,
picture a piece of swiss cheese on a table. Yeah I think I understand
about low gears. And weight. Just for laughs I took a little ride to
the LBS here in town and knowing that they sell mostly treks, I went
and checked out the current generation of bikes they are offering. WOW
what a difference!! My current steel trek weights a ton compared to the
newest ALPHA Aluminum models. I think I am in love.

Ken

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 7 Sep 2005 05:49:42 -0700, "Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Well, that might be an option, but it seems to me that due to some back
>injuries from some years ago, every time I get on a bike with drop bars
>I get a pain in my back that keeps me from riding for long periods of
>time. I have tried different size frames, saddles, saddle hieghts etc
>etc etc and can't seems to overcome the pain, thats why I ride my MTB
>more than my rode bike. And why I thinking of a ' hybrid ' for the
>tour.

Then keep your current bike, it should work. I'm buying a touring bike at
$ridiculous, and it'll probably be the 26" version. The
SomewhatLocalBS/custom bike manufacturer I'm going to clearly sells more
of the 28" wheel versions, but they very specifically have 26" wheel
version of the same available for the Rough Stuff and going far away from
the civilised world (since 559 parts, tyres, and tubes are more available
than 622, worldwide, and often cheaper too -- this may be due to the MTB
standards developing when world trade was more than a trickle, so the
whole world adopted the same sizing standards for MTBs, whereas for
regular bikes, wheel sizes and threading standards are much more variable.
Anyone know?).

As long as your bike can mount the racks, fenders, and lights (don't
forget the lights. For touring, generator-powered probably best, either a
good bottle generator for occasional use or a generator hub in the front
wheel for regular use), and is comfortable enough to use for extended
periods of time, I wouldn't worry too much about it. Touring bikes
typically have more relaxed geometry, which can make them more comfortable
for extended periods. You might want to think about one or the other fancy
not-just-flat-bars with multiple hand positions, nowadays there are types
of bars aplenty that are not drop bars and still offer multiple hand
positions.

Jasper

 

[Ken M]

** Then keep your current bike, it should work **

It WILL work I have no doubts about it. But on the other hand, I went
to the LBS this morning, they are a Trek dealer, to look at a couple of
different models, the 7000 series is now out of the running for my
money, after looking at one, it looks like clearence for fenders in
minimal, and it has a funny stem on it, and it uses a threaded steerer
tube. The 3700 and 4300 Trek Alpha Aluminum models are a huge step up
from my current steel Trek. Better drivetrain, better brakes, better
wheels oh yeah and it feels like a feather compared to my boat anchor
steel frame mtb.

Ken

 

[Jasper Janssen]

On 7 Sep 2005 11:06:02 -0700, "Ken M" <[email protected]> wrote:

>It WILL work I have no doubts about it. But on the other hand, I went
>to the LBS this morning, they are a Trek dealer, to look at a couple of
>different models, the 7000 series is now out of the running for my
>money, after looking at one, it looks like clearence for fenders in
>minimal, and it has a funny stem on it, and it uses a threaded steerer
>tube. The 3700 and 4300 Trek Alpha Aluminum models are a huge step up
>from my current steel Trek. Better drivetrain, better brakes, better
>wheels oh yeah and it feels like a feather compared to my boat anchor
>steel frame mtb.

Make sure they're repairable if they break on your tour in the middle of
nowhere, or worse yet in hurricane-flattened land. Especially the wheels.

Jasper