Speccing a tourer

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
User avatar
meic
Posts: 19355
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Postby meic » 9 Oct 2008, 9:23pm

They make 28mm ultragators to fit on 26" wheels, the same tyre I choose to put on my 700C wheels. I dont think there is much difference to choose between them.
However it is much harder to get decent fat tyres for a 700C wheel.

Personally I would prefer to have the 700C wheels on both my bikes but it is too late to change now.
Yma o Hyd

rogerzilla
Posts: 1551
Joined: 9 Jun 2008, 8:06pm

Postby rogerzilla » 9 Oct 2008, 9:54pm

HamsterSkins? They lasted a month on my bike. Three punctures and two tyrefuls of embedded glass shards later, they went in the bin. They didn't even grip that well.

User avatar
speedsixdave
Posts: 810
Joined: 19 Apr 2007, 1:48pm
Location: Nottingham, UK

Postby speedsixdave » 9 Oct 2008, 11:17pm

Think seriously about whether you want a front disc. I mocked Thorn's recalcitrant attitudes but my Fort fork with front disc is not very comfortable. Fundamentally, if you want a fork stiff enough to resist the asymmetric loading of the disc, it will not do the cushioning job that you are used to with 531 700c forks. That, unfortunately, seems to be physics.

On the plus side, it stops brilliantly (Avid BB7 road 160mm), and doesn't wear out your rim. The braking is good enough to make me never want to use a rim brake again. But every time I hit a bump, my wrists say ow...

Mine has 26's. I can't tell whether they're faster or slower than 700s. I have Schwalbe Marathon Supreme 2.0", which are certainly not heavy and have not flatted yet (the kiss of death words!), and are mighty grippy.
Big wheels good, small wheels better.
Two saddles best!

reohn2

Postby reohn2 » 10 Oct 2008, 4:33pm

speedsixdave wrote:Think seriously about whether you want a front disc. I mocked Thorn's recalcitrant attitudes but my Fort fork with front disc is not very comfortable. Fundamentally, if you want a fork stiff enough to resist the asymmetric loading of the disc, it will not do the cushioning job that you are used to with 531 700c forks. That, unfortunately, seems to be physics.

On the plus side, it stops brilliantly (Avid BB7 road 160mm), and doesn't wear out your rim. The braking is good enough to make me never want to use a rim brake again. But every time I hit a bump, my wrists say ow...

Mine has 26's. I can't tell whether they're faster or slower than 700s. I have Schwalbe Marathon Supreme 2.0", which are certainly not heavy and have not flatted yet (the kiss of death words!), and are mighty grippy.


Is this on the new Rohloff equiped bike you were buying/building up ? if so tell us about it,what did you finish up with.

glueman
Posts: 4354
Joined: 16 Mar 2007, 1:22pm

Postby glueman » 10 Oct 2008, 5:39pm

If you're 5' 3" I would go for 26" (559) wheels. The rest of the bike geometry will come together more naturally than a 700 which may have an insanely steep seat tube and a bottom bracket that'll need a step ladder at your size.

If you want the bike for serious loaded touring a bigger air pocket in the 1.5 - 1.75 tyre region will help no end for comfort and stop pinch punctures and daily inflation regime. If you do want to tour light svelter tyres are available, I know someone who audaxes on 559 Panaracer Paselas and they're a near ideal road tyre.

Re. discs they work better with suspension because as speedsixdave said forks hefty enough for the forces aren't comfy. Also V's or deep drop dual pivots are much easier to service on tour.

User avatar
speedsixdave
Posts: 810
Joined: 19 Apr 2007, 1:48pm
Location: Nottingham, UK

Postby speedsixdave » 10 Oct 2008, 10:27pm

reohn2 wrote:Is this on the new Rohloff equiped bike you were buying/building up ? if so tell us about it,what did you finish up with.


Good point, reohn, will do. But wait a week or so! Having ridden it for six months or so now, I have refined my requirements and have a little pile of new bits ready to go on the thing when I can find a couple of hours to fit them. And when that's done, I'll take a snap or two and post them, and tell you how it all works.

But as a spoiler, the Rohloff is ace. In twenty years' time, it will be well worth the money!
Big wheels good, small wheels better.

Two saddles best!

User avatar
speedsixdave
Posts: 810
Joined: 19 Apr 2007, 1:48pm
Location: Nottingham, UK

Postby speedsixdave » 10 Oct 2008, 10:55pm

More thoughts on discs. A disc at the rear is not such a bad idea, as there are fewer issues with rigidity. However, it then gets in the way of your rack. There are plenty of ways round this (such as the Topeak disc-fitting rack, a good option for £30), but they're all bodges at the moment, and all (I think) less good than without a disc.

I've really gone off v's and cantilevers in recent years - I find them hard to adjust accurately (esp. cantis), and the pads wear in a ridiculously uneven manner on v's. V's with parallel-push linkages are better in this respect, but seem to be increasingly rare, and there's a whole lot more to wear, stick, squeal etc. My v's always pull unevenly too, or one side doesn't spring back properly. This is almost certainly my fault.

Dual pivots are light years better in these respects, but either don't have the depth or the stopping power for loaded bikes on big tyres. But probably the best option for lighter bikes.

These are personal opinions, from a lazy man who really doesn't like maintenance. I will happily accept that for proper expedition touring, the simpler v and canti brakes are probably a better bet. But for commuting and everyday use, discs are pretty much fit-and-forget, they work better in the wet, and they don't destroy your rims. I've ridden my new bike the 17km to and from work every day for the past six months with no maintenance at all, and the disc is still excellent, while the rear v-brake pads are worn and one side rubs a bit on my less-than-perfectly-true rim.

But, as we said above, it's not very comfortable. Slightly off topic, but I'd love to see some proper suspension forks for road bikes. Cannondale seem to do something suitable, but proprietary and on an aluminium frame. Suspension forks for 26" wheels seem all to be for off-road use, with 2"+ of travel. On the road 1" travel is more than plenty. Those exposed sliders are a rubbish idea, too. Sometimes I miss my Moulton!
Big wheels good, small wheels better.

Two saddles best!

JohnW
Posts: 6448
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Postby JohnW » 11 Oct 2008, 12:19am

reohn2 wrote:I was going to say what Julk said,of course there are other makers,Mercian for one who could accomodate you.
The one thing that I would think you would struggle with is gettting a heavy duty touring bike equiped with Campag and I'd also question their hubs for such a bike.Also spares could prove to be a probblem in the back of beyond whereas Shimano spares can be obtained almost anywhere*

*I don't want to turn this thread into a Campag V Shimano debate.


Yeah - when I was building up my new Mercian frame, I'd resolved that it would be all Campag. My bike is a traditional tourer, a bit on the nippy side for Audax work. I researched and researched and to my surprise, I came up with Shimano Ultegra for all but the XT rear changer and the Campag chainset.

Look into it before you decide (you are doing, aren't you - hence this thread), and talk to your wheelbuilder. Ponder long and hard over the width of the rear end.