Bea wrote:On the Thorn website it says about the MK3 "The Mk3 is aimed at experienced cyclists. Whilst there is plenty of clearance for “larger than average sized feet” wearing “proper” cycling shoes and system pedals (or steel toe clips) there may not be clearance -between “trainers” and the mudguard". And if there's something I'm not is an experienced cyclist.
I'd go for the MK3 otherwise (I changed my mind yet again!) because I realised that my panniers fully loaded wouldn't weigh more that 10kg so that sort of bike should be fine (let alone that I'm lighter than an average male rider).
Bearing this type of bike, what other makes would you consider in a lower price range? I know we should aim for the best but am I not being too pretentious going for such a good bike so soon in my "cycling life"?
If you are pedalling a bike correctly with your feet in the right position, I can see no reason why trainers or shoes should give less clearance that "proper" cycling shoes. I would also add that "proper" cycling shoes give you a distinctly better riding experience than trainers, because the soles are stiffer. I've just graduated to a pair of specialised road shoes with spd's after 45 years using trainers and toeclips and I am well pleased with the improvement in comfort and safety. (easier to detach the feet from the pedals compered to toe clips). As I previously stated a Dawes (Horizon or Galaxy), or a Raleigh Royal if you want to go cheaper still, would be excellent choices for a first proper touring bike. Ther is nothing pretentious about wanting the best though and if it's a matter of a few quid a month to get a Galaxy over an Horizon, I'd be going for it!. I have a '94 (I think!) Galaxy that I rebuilt recently and I love it. (http://www.picasaweb.google.co.uk/saudi ... axyrebuild)