Can you help me find my dream bike?

[hidingfromheadwinds]

Looking for suggestions on my dream bike for touring and camping!
Ideal specs:
-Rim brakes
-Front and rear pannier compatible
-Road and gravel friendly wheels/tyres with a fair amount of grip but not so sluggish on the roads as a MTB (cyclo-cross tyres or similar)
-Available in a XS-S frame (depending on geometry)
-2nd hand or new-not fussed but something that will last
-Quite like the idea of running just the 1x ring at the front but not essential

Any links, ideas, advice welcomed

[reohn2]

Surly LHT.

[fossala]

How much are you willing to spend?

[pwa]

I know you said rim brakes, but if you want tyres that can do gravel you might reconsider that. If so.....https://www.shandcycles.com/bikes/stoater/
I expect they would do 1 x 11 if you wanted that.

[hidingfromheadwinds]

by fossala » 2 May 2019, 11:02am

How much are you willing to spend?
------------------------------------------------
£500-£1200

[reohn2]

Doh,forgot about the obvious.Spa cycles steel tourer:- https://www.spacycles.co.uk/m1b0s21p298 ... eel-Tourer

[pwa]

Have a look at this page for ideas.

https://www.spacycles.co.uk/m1b0s21p0/B ... d-Sportive

[PH]

-Front and rear pannier compatible

As soon as you want this you're into traditional tourer territory. The rest gearing/wheels/tyres is adaptable.
Spa Cycles* is always worth a look for anything touring, even if they don't have what you're looking for it'll give an idea.
The traditional touring bike is about as un-sexy as it gets, but if you're buying for capability rather than image, it's hard to think of anything else that would meet your criteria so well.

*In the time it took me to type this, you already have two links...Spa aren't the only game in town, but they are a good place to start, not least because they encourage you to go and have a ride on one.

[m-gineering]

Looking for suggestions on my dream bike for touring and camping!
Ideal specs:
-Quite like the idea of running just the 1x ring at the front but not essential

A single ring on a touring bike is fine, provided you have a Rohloff

The bicycle industry as a whole doesn't care about touring, so promoting a solution which solves their problems (gets in the way of suspension, difficult to design etc) and can be sold as New&Improved for the same money makes sense. On a loaded touring bike you need all the gearing range you can get (unless you're very fit and sure you won't have a bad day), and riding under normal circumstances on tiny chainwheels and cogs isn't great either

[hidingfromheadwinds]

Looking for suggestions on my dream bike for touring and camping!
Ideal specs:
-Quite like the idea of running just the 1x ring at the front but not essential

A single ring on a touring bike is fine, provided you have a Rohloff

The bicycle industry as a whole doesn't care about touring, so promoting a solution which solves their problems (gets in the way of suspension, difficult to design etc) and can be sold as New&Improved for the same money makes sense. On a loaded touring bike you need all the gearing range you can get (unless you're very fit and sure you won't have a bad day), and riding under normal circumstances on tiny chainwheels and cogs isn't great either

Would it not just run off of a larger cassette? I usually ride road and used to 2 rings which is fine but I have 3 on my MTB which is just a faff!

[slowster]

If you had to choose, would you prefer a bike that is:

A. Optimised for riding loaded with panniers, but doesn't handle as nicely when ridden without panniers, or

B. Optimised for unladen/lightly loaded riding, and can cope with heavily laden touring, but which does not handle as nicely as A. when loaded up?

[LittleGreyCat]

<snip>

Would it not just run off of a larger cassette? I usually ride road and used to 2 rings which is fine but I have 3 on my MTB which is just a faff!

I think that your view might change once you are carrying a load.

My Spa Wayfarer has 3 * 9 which seems about right so far.

It also seems happy to use most of the rear cogs from any one of the front three.

I think once you go above 9 gears at the back then the chain gets thinner and more fragile and the gear change in general less robust.

Then again if you find you don't need the granny gears on your MTB when doing serious climbing 2 rings at the front might be plenty!

[m-gineering]

Would it not just run off of a larger cassette? I usually ride road and used to 2 rings which is fine but I have 3 on my MTB which is just a faff!

A loaded touring bike is 15-20% heavier than unloaded. So on a climb you're 15-20% slower for the same power, and the climb takes 15-20% longer and you don't want to run out of steam. And all without the option of calling it a day and heading for the car if you have an off day.

Assume you now have standard mtb triple gearing, 22-34 lowest, 42-11 topgear, total range 590%

To sort off get the same you' d have to fit a 11-50 cassette (455% range), with a 32 chainring in front . This gives you less options on level ground with wider gaps in the gearing, and you're on a small ring all the time which doesn't run as smooth/efficient as larger rings. If you suddenly encounter a steep incline you have to ratchet like mad to get the chain from right to left. With a front derailleur it is a single clunk and you immediate problem is solved

[reohn2]

M-engineering
Spot on

[charliepolecat]

Spa cycles steel tourer:

It's a nice looking bike and being steel is a favourite, but at a little over 30 lbs, a bit on the heavy side, don't you think?

I expect they would do 1 x 11 if you wanted that.

The Salsa Journeyman Apex 1700 has just that and I think it's a big mistake, and as has been said above, done solely in my opinion to make it easier to make than easier to ride. The 1700 is a nice bike otherwise coming in at about 25 lbs and about a thousand quid + shipping.

https://salsacycles.com/bikes/journeyma ... apex_1_700