Cycling UK Forum

Cunobelin wrote:The problem with the front racks is because the Ortleib design has a small rotating insert to the clip which secures the pannier in place.

Some front racks have a plate that stops this happening such as the Blackburn:

http://www.sjscycles.co.uk/product-0-Blackburn-FL1-STD-NON-Custom-Low-Rider--to-fit-frames-w-out-bosses--Silver-114.htm

If you have that type of rack you can with a bit of an adapation swap the sides so that the lip of the plate faces inwards and not outward as shown, that way the pannier clips still have something to hook around. Still not ideal it has to be said as the Ortlieb clips are designed to go the whole way around the pannier tube/bar so the others racks that "Cunobelin" mentioned were better.

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

Sorry couldn't help a quick reminisce the older I am the faster I was

thirdcrank wrote:I have a pair of Campag Record (chromed steel body) bought from Dave Lloyd in 1980, still running well, chrome failing. I mentioned the TA ones because I presumed this was about buying, not reminiscing (I do much too much of that as it is )

When toeclip and strap standard pedals were the norm' Campagnolo Super Record were that much even then!

They were works of art though, Titanium axles, archimedes threads to help stop water getting in as well as spares like pedal cones; they were a nightmare to regrease, yet character building of course

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

thirdcrank wrote:http://www.specialites-ta.com/produits/trans.htm

When you mention 'over £80" I presume you mean these from TA. I have seen them in Spa Cycles, never used them, never met anybody who has used them, CJ did a very good review a few years ago.

My own impression (based on evidence of use) is that recent TA stuff is not finished, especially the anodising, to their former standard

On the other hand, if you find a shop with a pair of these, I fancy they may be quite old stock - I doubt they are a fast moving line, even at somewhere like Spa.

OGlover wrote:I'm not at all bothered about mudguards: never had them before and not considering getting them; I don't mind getting wet / muddy, as that's what waterproofs are for after all!

The bike will thank you for keeping it cleaner though, prevention is better than the cure, the guards protect the bike as well as you don't forget, as you seem to have opted for the Galaxy then they will have them on, so I suggest leave them on anyway, plus a clean back side is never bad news, especially on a longer tour.

OGlover wrote:How does one measure a "heavy" versus a "light" touring load? I nearly always use paniers, usually about half-full. I'm not sure what their capacity is, but quite a bit under 20 litres each I think.

That would be a light touring load, most front panniers that can be used as small rears are around 20 ltrs a pair, larger rear panniers are around 40 lts a pair

OGlover wrote:The only times when I travel with more than this is when on holidays, but that's only about 10 - 20 days per year. At these times, I'll have a rucksack as well.

If possible always make the bike carry the load, it will be cooler in the summer as well.

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

CJ wrote: The reason shopkeepers like Paul are nowadays seldom troubled by having to return frames under warranty is simply that the warranty period has become so short.

That could well be part of the reason combined with what Chris has said below re' modern man, perhaps riders don't keep bikes for as long, but I would add that as I stated above even in the past when we sent more frames back faulty under warranty it is worth noting that the majority were under two years old, the fault often showing it self early in the life of the bike

CJ wrote:Modern man is not at all distressd when his toys wear out after a few years, since it demostrates how hard he's played with them and gives him a guilt-free reason to buy the latest "improved" model!

I like that saying as well many do indeed buy a new bike just because they want one, except for fathers whose children have reached a standard where they are now going quicker than them; dads are often convinced it simply must be that their children are on new bikes

CJ wrote:Bike shops have always exaggerated the importance of weight and the tiny geometrical differences between touring and racing bikes. It helps them sell two bikes to someone who needs only one, or more typically these arguments are used to shift a racer they already have in stock or can easily get from a main supplier, rather than order in a one-off tourer (hence at less discount) from the likes of Dawes.

If a LBS does that then stop shopping there, both I have worked at care as much about matching the rider up to the most suitable bike than about achieving a sale. This makes sense from whichever way you look it at, firstly the rider will of course get the right bike and secondly from a LBS point of view I have always believed in the long term custom over the short term sale, give a customer the correct advice and they will come back agaian and again, give them poor advice and you will probably lose them as a customer and even worse you may have put them off cycling altogether! I often spend longer selling a customer cycling than I do the bike

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

I don't doubt for a moment that many have broken alloy frames in the past, I would like to emphasize that in my posts I have used statements like "and from the major manufacturers" and "modern" to try and illustrate that over the past few years bikes in alloy from the well know manufacturers have proved reliable and even more so than when the market leaders of their time used mainly steel.

To an extent in the early years, especially the unbranded variety that are all to common place, many alloy frames did indeed break at such a high rate it was not acceptable, fortunately I have had the luxury of never having to work in retailers that stock these quality of products. My advice is to buy from a recognised manufacturer as even their budget bikes have had an extensive amount of R & D and it shows. Of course alloy frames have also now been around long enough for many of the earlier problems to have been ironed out.

I completely agree with 'OGlover', the Trek Pilot is indeed a much tighter clearance machine and only really suitable for light touring and fast day rides, Audax for example, the Dawes Audax range being a much nearer comparison, I had mentioned them to illustrate a point I was making about the Trek and Specialized touring and Audax bikes in general as apposed to suggesting them as an alternative to the heavier load carrying capacity capabilities of either the Galaxy or Specialized TriCross.

In conclusion you need to look at what you want out of the bike, an Audax bike can to an extent take quite heavy loads



As you can see I have done just that above and have done two week tours just like that (although not Lejog I have to say, that was a supported tour so I was just gettibg to Lands end ) , but it is all a bit Russian Roulette, with heavier weight the bike is less manouverable for last moment pot hole avoidance for example, the thinner section tyres and rims result in a more delicate wheel so you do have to take more care as a result. The more specific Touring bikes will also be more stable under load, although I personally get use to the feel of a fully loaded Audax bike.

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

Oracle wrote:Paul Smith

Well, my friend and I have both had cracked aluminium alloy frames, so I can only speak from experience; perhaps we were both very unlucky.

OGlover

Bear in mind that Trek Pilot clearances are still relatively tight and if you are tall (and presumably have large feet) you will get front toe overlap with the wheel and that’s without mudguards. Not insurmountable and I have ridden bikes with this situation, but why bother when you can get a bike that will definitely meet all your needs including the heavier panniers? Also, don’t forget you need a bike that is designed to carry weight that includes consideration of the wheels, which I don’t believe the Trek Pilot is really designed for – great bike for say Audax, but for touring with panniers I believe there are better bikes available.

Funny thing is Trek do make one, it is the 520, the one below was their 2006 model which strangely they marketed on their website and in their brochure without guards, hence the picture we took ourselves.



The workmanship was really good, the specification high and gave superb value when compared to the competition, we even advertised it in the CTC magazine and at a competive price, yet it did not sell well at all. We are inclined to find that cycle manufacturers, like retailers get known for a certain type of product, so although Trek make a superb tourer it does not sell (with us anyway) that well, yet we sell a large amount of Van Nicholas audax and touring bikes so we should have been able to .

By the same token Specialized also make a superb Audax bike called a Sequoia (although not steel), fast geometry with a slightly higher front end for mile eating fast comfortable riding, mudguard clearance and pannier bosses with a triple set up:


Apparently due to poor UK sales they no longer import it (they were always sold out when i tried to order them though...), yet Trek import a comparible range known as Pilot that is extremely similar and sells very well!



As I mentioned I think it is in part because they simply are not known for that kind of product, where as Dawes are, so I expect that audax and touring bikes represent a far higher percentage of their overall sales.

I think you may also have a point regarding customers expectations as to how long they intend to keep a bike and as such how they relate to long term warranties. Of course bikes these days in real terms are far cheaper than they were, which will of course influence riders train of thought, I would go as far to say that the topic of warranty is seldom even raised by customers.

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

Si wrote:If only specialized made a nice steel galaxey-type tourer - ho hum.

Another thought, perhaps people (tourists aside) don't care so much about long warrantees these days because they tend to change bikes much more often?

You do not have to spend a fortune, manufacturers like MKS make some reasonable price traditional pedals





Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

DaveP wrote:I get the impression that I have managed to be as clear as mud, again.
I didn't realise that Wellgo made clipless pedals, perhaps "traditional" would have been a better description than "standard" - I actually want to use toeclips.

There comes a time when one starts to wonder why others enthuse about silky smooth bearings. I think I may have got there, I have looked on line and there doesnt appear to be much on offer between £20 and £80, and I can't tell if the pricey ones are worth it. "It costs loads so it must be good " is an ideologyI have worked hard to escape from, so any endorsements for good quality pedals suitable for touring would be most useful.

I have serviced the Wellgos but they're not exactly smooth!
I was intrigued to find three bearing assemblies with 12 balls and one with 13. I just put it all back where it came from, with fresh grease. Sometimes its best not to ask

Some do to the original owner, see warranty section here http://www.specialized.com/bc/sbcfaq.jsp and interesting some do not http://www.dawescycles.com/dawes/warren ... mation.htm

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

Si wrote:

Part part of my job description has always been processing frame warranties, twenty years ago I would often send two to five frames back to the likes of Raleigh and Dawes (when both were still the market leaders and still made their own frames in Nottingham and Birmingham respectively) and now I can honestly say that I can't recall the last time a frame failed as a result of a fault.

That being the case, and I've no reason to doubt it, why are frame warrantees getting to be so short? Surely if frames were better built and lasting longer then the manufacturers ought to make the warrantees longer as they'd not be expecting so many back and a longer warrentee would be another incentive to buy a particular bike.

As we are refering specifically about the Specialized Tricross then worth noting that Speciliazed build quality and after sales are one of the best in the industry.

I can understand everyones concern as alloy when compared to steel supposedly has the most performance drop off, which in fairness only really effects a racing cyclist where a few percent reduction in performance can make the difference (especially in their heads) of winning or coming second, in reality that applies more to the older lighter frames when Pro’ riders used extremely light versions (now most pro teams use Carbon ot Titanium). Modern budget frames use a heavier, more robust alloy and are of course aimed at a different style of riding. They are now the most common option in the mid range and upwards frame sets and from the major manufacturers, Specialized included, I am pleased to report that warranty problems are now lower than they have ever been and that includes back in the day when steel was the norm'.

Part part of my job description has always been processing frame warranties, twenty years ago I would often send two to five frames back to the likes of Raleigh and Dawes (when both were still the market leaders and still made their own frames in Nottingham and Birmingham respectively) and now I can honestly say that I can't recall the last time a frame failed as a result of a fault.

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

Oracle wrote:Hello OGlover

Might I suggest you take careful notice of the comment by Reohnn2 regarding frame warranty. I have owned an aluminium alloy frame and it broke - I have another aluminium alloy frame that is lighter and faster than my 753 frame, but I know my 753 will outlast all the aluminium alloy frames, particularly when in touring mode with a bit of extra weight. So my advice would be the Dawes Galaxy or Audax.

You also say you're willing to compromise a bit of speed for reliability. So the Dawes Galaxy/Audax wins again!

Wellgo are indeed cheap and cheerful, that does not mean no good though, yes better pedals have smoother longer lasting bearings but you pay for that, all a bit swings and round abouts really, do you buy some at say £20.00 that last two years, or £40.00 for four.

Of course weight to some is an issue, but for most the small weight saving there is much less of a consideration. Many start with Wellgo to see if they will like clipless, worth noting that most don't change pedals when they descover they do.

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

DaveP wrote:It looks as though going out in the rain today might have finished off my Wellgo pedals, one of them has started ticking!
I'll have a go at it, but I suspect the real answer is replacement. They've been value for money, and I wouldn't really mind the same again.
All the same, If I were to have an unguarded moment, what better quality items might I consider?

Please lets not have another discussion about spd's or not!

That is correct, think of a Tricross as a slightly quicker Galaxy as apposed to a racing bike, as most of the equipment will be along the same lines as the Galaxy range, the main difference will be in the frameset. It will indeed give a more sporty stiffer ride, along the flat it will feel similar, but at times it will feel more lively, most noticeable when climbing out of the saddle or accelerating out of corners etc.

Both can be used for touring and tow path riding, the Galaxy will probably have a more relaxed geometry, I could not see the geometry on the Dawes Website but a 56cm Tricross has a 73 degree seat, 72 degree head, expect a Dawes Galaxy of similar size will more likely have a 72 degree Seat and head tube, the one degree difference will make the bike feel more stable, comfortable yet as a result less lively.

To try and help you relate to the above, back when bikes normally had a more uniform diamond shape frame, a touring bike, 23" would be 72 degree parallel, a 23" racing bike 73 degree parallel, (modern diamond shape frames still use similar angles, see geometry here) that along with the tighter clearances are what made a race bike feel lively and quick and a touring bike feel stable yet slower. So as you can see the Tricross fits somewhere in between, which as Specialized are marketing this is a bike for the rider who only wants one machine to fulfill a variety of tasks means that the geometry chosen does make sense.

In conclusion if you want a stable versatile comfortable bike then a Galaxy will be fine, if you want something along the same lines yet with a slightly quicker set up then the Tricross is worth considering

Paul smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

OGlover wrote:

Tallis the Tortoise wrote:Am I right in thinking that the tricross is more of a racing bike? I'd be very inclined to go for the galaxy (I own one myself). Racers are all very well for zipping around on a Sunday afternoon but I certainly wouldn't want to live with one long term, especially as my bike is my only vehicle. A galaxy with mudgaurds, wider tyres and a rear rack is a very goo workhorse bike and not as sluggish as you may think. I completed the Lymington 1000km audax last summer on mine.

Andy

Hi Andy,

Thanks for your thoughts. This will also be my only bike. The Tricross is not marketed as a racing bike as such: the makers (and sellers) claim that it can be used for civilised off-road trails and light touring as well. I think it's frame and wheels are not as light as a true racer.

If you had all the pieces that enabled you to assemble the SKS guards as I show above then they are not needed.

There is a possibilty that the wrong stay to the mudguard bridge fittings have been sent, perhaps packed wrongly at the SKS factory and unoticed by SJS Cycles, an easy things to miss, a retailer would normally assume that all fittings are correct. Some guards have only six attachments, two each side at the back but only one each side at the front. Some also have a slightly different attachment from the stays to the guards, they do indeed have groved plastic discs that allow the stay to slide up and down to effectively adjust the length, quite common that these were also double stays, most common with atb guards that needed extra rigidty.

If this is the case you would more than likely only have six fitting bolts as well.



They may also look slightly different from the above as well as they attach to the discs in a slightly different way that the stays to the bridges do normally (as below), the disc effectively forming part of the bridge

.

This is only one possibilty of course, but the fact that you have six of these pan shaped discs would match up with what I mention above. I found the SKS website of no use either and confess I don't recall the brand of the attachments I mention, they are not common these days so am working from memory!

Paul_Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

meic wrote:I wish I could send photos but it is too dificult with my equipment.
I already identified the stay end covers(like teats) and the plastic pop out eyelets that bolt the front stays to the mudguard braze ons.
The mystery pieces are 6 black plastic pieces.
They are shaped like a pan with a groove running in the top of its short squat handle. Coming out the bottom of the pan, going up, is a cylinderical pillar with a slight flat towards the handle.
The pan is 10mm diameter and 4mm deep. The total height including the pillar is 10mm. The handle is 5mm long and 3mm wide.
They each have the SKS logo stamped on the base of the pan and a different number on the inside of each one (7, 9, 13,23,24 & 26)
They remind me of the little trim caps you get to put in screwheads to hide them from view.
This is quite a little riddle isnt it. Sorry if it drives you as mad as the last clue on a crossword!

It is a relatively well known fact that Red wine has a rich source of antioxidants that is good for the heart (one normal wine glass size a day for women and two for men), apparently though it is not all red wine, anyone know what variety it is that is good for us? Would be great if retailers had a label on the shelf indicating which were the healthier option as well as how dry or fruity they were etc, it is down to the regions and variety of grape used I believe.

I have been able to find out that they key is in the grapes, so eating red grapes will have a similar effect, but hey if I am going to have the occasional glass of red with a meal then I would at least try and make it a healthy option if I can.

Paul_Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

This picture may help:



To quote the manufacturer re' the clips at the front, "The quick release Secu-clips are far safer than standard fixings, preventing front wheel lock up in case of a foreign object getting trapped between guard and wheel"

The other little plastic bits are as reohn2 correctly stated, they are simply little caps to cover the sharp stay ends

Paul Smith
www.bikeplus.co.uk

[quote="meic"]I got an excellent pair of SKS mudguards off Spa cycles cheap and no hassle. The only problem is it has some funny little black plastic bits with it that I havent a clue what they are. Everything works fine without them, it just puzzles me.
Dealing by mail order has its problems I had a misunderstanding with Settle cycles. They werent very happy about my questioning that they supplied me an unsuitable piece of kit but happily gave me a full refund on the grounds I didnt like it! Problem is we both lose out on the deal which in a shop would not have even happened.[/quote