Are touring bikes old fashioned?

[Carlton green]

Hi All

There has been some great advice. So, thank you. I think simplicity is the way to go,

Amen to that bit.

Another vote for simplicity here.

The more complex stuff is wonderful until it breaks - sooner or later virtually everything breaks - at which point you’re stuffed and particularly so if you’re in the middle of nowhere. Simple stuff might not allow you to make the quickest or easiest of progress but (because there’s less to go wrong with them) well made simple items just keep working, or rather they keep working for much longer than complex items and are easier to fix when they do eventually wear out or break. That simplicity is rather helpful when you’re either not near a specialist dealer who has the rare widget that you (would otherwise) need or you have little money to pay for what complex repairs might be possible (and necessary with complex stuff).

My every day bike has a three speed hub, I wouldn’t necessary recommend one for a long tour but folk have very successfully used them to tour the Continent and more. I’m slower on that simple bike than on one with derailleur gears, but the three speed hub needs next to no maintenance whereas the derailleur geared bike does need hours of my time and does consume more ‘spare’ parts. As hub gears go the SA 3 speed is dated, but the more modern multi speed ones can require both expensive and hard to get parts and special oil (cheap and common mower oil goes in my SA).

TLDR. It’s all a ‘trade-off’ but simple can, overall, be surprisingly effective.

[djb]

but the three speed hub needs next to no maintenance whereas the derailleur geared bike does need hours of my time and does consume more ‘spare’ parts.

I certainly get the certain advantages of igh, but unless a derailleur hanger gets bent, the system is generally extremely consistent over a long period after initial setup and a turn of barrel adjuster after cable settling in.
But ya, igh certainly have some advantages. Here in Montreal they are fairly rare. I wouldn't say no to one as a commuter, but it can be hilly here. Would be nice in our winters too, I ride all Canadian winter, ie -10c -20c and an igh would be great.
But the old derailleur bikes I use as commuters work and are there, so just use them.

[Carlton green]

but the three speed hub needs next to no maintenance whereas the derailleur geared bike does need hours of my time and does consume more ‘spare’ parts.

I certainly get the certain advantages of igh, but unless a derailleur hanger gets bent, the system is generally extremely consistent over a long period after initial setup and a turn of barrel adjuster after cable settling in.
But ya, igh certainly have some advantages. Here in Montreal they are fairly rare. I wouldn't say no to one as a commuter, but it can be hilly here. Would be nice in our winters too, I ride all Canadian winter, ie -10c -20c and an igh would be great.
But the old derailleur bikes I use as commuters work and are there, so just use them.

My comment was merely to contrast the care that, in my experience, each system required. Well that and to encourage as much simplicity in component choice as is practical - asking the question ‘how easy is it going to be to repair in some remote place’?

As a commuter I used derailleur gears in all weathers and yes they do work and they can work well. However dished wheels on derailleur geared bikes tend to need trueing much more frequently than the non-dished wheels on hub geared bikes. I’ve always used freewheels with derailleurs and found the drive side cone life to be limited and I’ve bent axles too. Derailleur geared bikes get loads of crude on the transmission and hub geared bikes both tend to be cleaner and are very much easier to clean up. Jockey wheels wear and you normally don’t have those on hub geared bikes. Indexing systems on derailleur bikes are a complexity waiting to either go wrong or be accidentally broken. I prefer to use friction shifters - which are robust - but perhaps I’m too ‘Old School’. Derailleur in the rear spokes or bent in use, it’s rare but it’s happened to me.

Yep, derailleur gears are great but to some extent it’s swings and roundabouts (what you gain on the swings you in at least in some part loose on the roundabouts).

[djb]

Yup, six of one, half a dozen of the other.
When setting up my more recent tough touring bike for some longish Latin America trips about 5 years ago, I was seriously considering a rolhof, but in the end stayed with derailleurs mostly from a budget angle (a rolhof would cost about the equivalent of my return flight plus at least a month of daily expenses) and just feeling comfortable with what I knew.
My personal experience with hubs, axles and rims have been very good (touch wood twice) over the decades and that bike loaded up reasonably heavily stood up well over trips adding up to a good 5 months (touch wood again)

But really, if I had the extra money, I would try a rolhof.

[Carlton green]

... and just feeling comfortable with what I knew.
My personal experience with hubs, axles and rims have been very good (touch wood twice) over the decades and that bike loaded up reasonably heavily stood up well over trips adding up to a good 5 months (touch wood again)

And there we have it, it’s a case of what we personally know and have personal experience of (through use of particular parts on particular bikes that we have then tested, ridden and found to be fit for our purposes).

[rareposter]

Another vote for simplicity here.

The more complex stuff is wonderful until it breaks - sooner or later virtually everything breaks - at which point you’re stuffed and particularly so if you’re in the middle of nowhere. Simple stuff might not allow you to make the quickest or easiest of progress but (because there’s less to go wrong with them) well made simple items just keep working, or rather they keep working for much longer than complex items and are easier to fix when they do eventually wear out or break. That simplicity is rather helpful when you’re either not near a specialist dealer who has the rare widget that you (would otherwise) need or you have little money to pay for what complex repairs might be possible (and necessary with complex stuff).

TLDR. It’s all a ‘trade-off’ but simple can, overall, be surprisingly effective.

Well said - it also throws up the issue of stuff that is complex in itself (like a Rohloff hub, which is not user-serviceable, requires specific wheel-building knowledge to lace up and which has zero spare parts availability without going through Rohloff themselves or a specialist distributor) however in use it is extremely simple and reliable. You're trading off the ability to fix it yourself for the fact that it shouldn't, under normal use, need any fixing.

Same with disc brakes - yes, they're more complicated than rim brakes especially on initial installation but they're a sealed system, spares (pads and rotor) are cheap to buy and easy to carry and they're not wearing out your rims so the extra complexity is worth the greater reliability elsewhere.

It's up to each rider to determine their particular trade-off point in terms of cost / convenience / usage / expected reliability.

[djb]

And there we have it, it’s a case of what we personally know and have personal experience of (through use of particular parts on particular bikes that we have then tested, ridden and found to be fit for our purposes).

yup, agree.
I did however with the forementioned bike, have disc brakes for the first time. Found it a bit frustrating at first learning the new skills dealing with them and figuring out how to avoid the pain in the behind aspect at times.
But was willing to try something new, and happy now that I did and am fairly comfortable with them now and am reasonably good at troubleshooting mechanical systems now (have no experience with hydros though).

Before getting the bike, I had however read enough reliable trip journals of folks using the same mechanical Avid BB7's, so had a reasonable expectation of how they'd be living with them over a long trip, as well as an idea of pad life, although that can vary greatly with the rider, how they brake and conditions.

I figure its good to embrace new technology sometimes, and make the judgement call of if its worth it in the big scheme of things.

[BikeBuddha]

Well, I took the advice of DooDah, and checked out Thorn. They make a frame that can be fitted with derailleurs, rohloff, disc brakes, and can later be fitted with a belt drive. I suggested a Chris King headset, but they recommended to use what they fit, and have Chris King Later.

So it all go gets very complicated that I think I will end up not making a decision. I just don't have the personal experience like i do with hiking. I know what to look for in tents, and boots, and clothing, but bikes are just beyond me. You ride them.

My aim is to have a bike that I can just leave and perhaps never come back. Work my way about Scotland, the UK, Europe, or much further afield. I fancy Africa. And that remains my aim.

But now I hear that having a rim brake system with a roholoff hub would require some specialist wheel making knowledge to replace rims.

There are just too many pitfalls.

Simplicity is best. Longevity and replacibility is best. But is Tom Allen right, and that rims work just as well as discs?

[Vorpal]

Well, I took the advice of DooDah, and checked out Thorn. They make a frame that can be fitted with derailleurs, rohloff, disc brakes, and can later be fitted with a belt drive. I suggested a Chris King headset, but they recommended to use what they fit, and have Chris King Later.

So it all go gets very complicated that I think I will end up not making a decision. I just don't have the personal experience like i do with hiking. I know what to look for in tents, and boots, and clothing, but bikes are just beyond me. You ride them.

My aim is to have a bike that I can just leave and perhaps never come back. Work my way about Scotland, the UK, Europe, or much further afield. I fancy Africa. And that remains my aim.

But now I hear that having a rim brake system with a roholoff hub would require some specialist wheel making knowledge to replace rims.

There are just too many pitfalls.

Simplicity is best. Longevity and replacibility is best. But is Tom Allen right, and that rims work just as well as discs?

A rim braking system & Rohloff would not require more specialist knowledge than other types of wheel building. You need not worry about that.

Frankly, if I were going to buy a new Thorn, I would go with their recommendations.

[PT1029]

To avoid invalidating Rohloff's hub shell warranty, wheel builders need to follow Rohloff's directions. In particular which spokes go in which direction from which side of which hole, and to always rebuild with the new spokes going the same direction from a spoke hole as the old spokes, and not to rebuild into a different sized rim. Plus it is best to use Rohloff spokes as the elbow length matched the flange thickness. They are probably DT Swiss or Sapim spokes, someone might be able to confirm this.
I think there is a video on Rohloff's website on this (I recall seeing the instructions somewhere).
If you are a very good mechanic, you can do it all yourself as a friend of mine did in his hotel room in Thailand, en route to New Zealand, conveniently the Thailand Rohloff distributor had a shell in stock: -

At the 8 o'clock position in the photo you can see the damaged flange.
More recent Rohloffs come with flange rings, a ring that fits round the outside of the flange to reinforce the flange. These can be retrofitted to older hubs (once all the spokes have been removed), but you need the hub serial number to get the correct ring as the flange design has been tweeked over the years.
(Edited for typos)

[rareposter]

So it all go gets very complicated that I think I will end up not making a decision. I just don't have the personal experience like i do with hiking. I know what to look for in tents, and boots, and clothing, but bikes are just beyond me. You ride them.

Get a bike. Literally any bike - I recall that a poster on here offered you use of his if you wanted?
There's a Classified section over here as well: viewforum.php?f=40

If there's a bike you like the look of but it's a long way away, see if anyone on here could help with collection / delivery / sending it part-way.

Find something that's your size, buy that and do a few days around Skye, then around Scotland.
You are never going to learn what you want, what you need, what you like by asking on forums - if anything you're going to get more and more confused and overwhelmed with it all. You are unlikely to find "perfect" by fretting on here about racks and tubing diameter and hubs and braking systems and...and...and...

But then how did you get into walking / camping etc? I'm assuming you didn't just go out and buy a "perfect" tent and all the kit right from the start; you did some short camping trips, built it up, did some longer hikes and so on...?

Many brands have demo bikes or can organise weekend-long hires (sometimes even with collection and delivery) eg https://alpkit.com/pages/bike-rental
If you're in touch with Thorn, see if they have a demo bike.
CycleSense in Tadcaster (near York) also have a decent range of touring bikes - in fact with your previously stated £4000 budget, you could easily buy something like a Koga GrandTourer and still have £2000+ left over and at least start on your touring experience.

[BikeBuddha]

Truth is, I have quite a severe form of mental disorder. Not illness, for that could be medicated, but a disorder. Actually, a few. Its all very tiring, but I wont bore you. But thank you for suggesting I am sophisticated. No one as ever thought that of me.

Richard, at Oxford Bike Works, has been very patient for the past two years, and has helped with all my questions. As have you guys. So, thank you. I hope I can make a decision soon and put me, and all of you, our of my misery.

So, the Thorn frame is rim, disc, derailleur, rohloff, and belt drive ready. Versatile. Yet, is there a compromise to this frame? I'm an ecologist, and recognise that generalist species are not always specifically adapted to one environmental niche, in this case, world touring. I wonder if the accommodation in the frame for a belt drive, though not compromising frame integrity, might be a weakness if the bike got thrown on the back of a truck, or something. This was suggested to me, and I need to investigate this possibility that it could be damaged. Also, perhaps the frame is heavier ? I wonder if the lower weight of the OBW frame would be an advantage? Is its geometry advantagous in some way?

I like the fact that OBW bike comes with Chris King headset as standard. Speaks of aiming for excellence. For, as Three Idiots once said, Pursue excellence, and success will follow, pants down. Perhaps the rest of the bike is excellent, too?

So, any thoughts on the Thorn Nomad frame? DooDah said how much he enjoyed his Raven, so through respect for him and his wisdom, looked at the Thorn, got a similar quote to OBW, and this is why I am here, again, asking questions. Doodah, incidently, once kindly offered to lend me his Thorn Raven, but I have long femurs, his bike was a bit short, I had to work, and my knees were super sensitive to a smaller frame (as I discovered test riding a medium sized Koga World traveller someone borrowed me with the hidden objective of selling me it). I would have liked to have taken up on his offer.


Anyway, that's it.

Your friendly troll....

[rareposter]

So, the Thorn frame is rim, disc, derailleur, rohloff, and belt drive ready. Versatile. Yet, is there a compromise to this frame? Also, perhaps the frame is heavier ? I wonder if the lower weight of the OBW frame would be an advantage? Is its geometry advantagous in some way?

Literally any bike you get will have some form of compromise somewhere unless you have a truly unlimited budget and a willingness to spec every single part right down to the last spoke nipple. X might be heavier than Y but it might be more robust. Y might not last as long as Z but it might be half the price. At some point, everything comes down to a compromise, be it weight, price, reliability, user-serviceability, availability...

When you go camping, your tent is a compromise between space, weight, ease of pitching, waterproofing and so on, the exact balance of which is for you to decide on that particular trip. I have a tent which is fine for sheltered spots, campsites and so on for up to a few days but it is absolutely not something I would take up a high mountain because it weighs too much, requires a decent ground footprint and wouldn't survive a Force 10. But then I also wouldn't take it to Reading Festival - it's far too nice for that!
There is no such thing as The Best Tent - the tent that is "best" for Everest Base Camp is absolutely not the same as the tent that is "best" for Glastonbury! You just have to find the "best" compromise between those two extremes that suit what you're doing most of the time.

I like the fact that OBW bike comes with Chris King headset as standard. Speaks of aiming for excellence

You can put a Chris King headset, or an XTR groupset, or a Brooks titanium saddle onto a £100 Apollo, none of that would make it a good bike. Headset is one of those things you can spec on a custom build if you want it but it's not the be-all and end-all of a bike choice. You're focusing on the details and missing the bigger picture.

[Carlton green]

The OP’s mistake or misunderstanding is down to thinking that selecting the best bike for yourself is possible through data sheets and opinions. Data sheets and opinions might be a guide towards the right direction but ultimately one has to buy something that’s in the right ball park, use it to see what needs to be changed for your use, change it, use the bike some more, see what else needs to be changed, change it, retest and so on until what you have is near enough right for your needs. There is no such thing as perfection, there are only things that will do the job well enough for you.

Buy something as simple as is practical, know what can be easily repaired where you’re going to and stop worrying about the fine details ‘cause in the bigger picture they just won’t matter. For me it would be derailleur gears and rim brakes ‘cause I know that such stuff is simple, it can easily be repaired or even replaced, and for many decades it has taken people to remote and challenging places all over the world (so it’s fit for purpose). Even if you knew what it was you don’t need the best, what you need is good enough to do the job and easily repairable nearly anywhere.

[slowster]

Truth is, I have quite a severe form of mental disorder. Not illness, for that could be medicated, but a disorder. Actually, a few. Its all very tiring, but I wont bore you.

I suspect that your pattern of posting on here is not only a manifestation of that disorder, but might well also be considered harmful by a medical specialist in the field.

You probably need to recognise when you engage in such patterns of behaviour and make a conscious choice to break them. I realise that this is far easier for me to say than for you to do, but you are the only person who can do it: no one else can do it for you.

I suggest you take a step back and consider your perspective. All that is being discussed is a bike. That's all. In the big scheme of things it's not worth this much angst.

If you are using the question of what bike etc. as a way of distracting yourself from thinking about other, possibly more upsettting or more insoluble issues, it is probably not a very good or effective coping mechanism.

Trying to make absolutely sure you buy the perfect bike is ultimately a waste of both mental energy and of time. Because you will not succeed and will waste time that you could use more profitably.

For an expedition bike the key benchmark is 'good enough'. You will get no major benefit, pleasure or satisfaction from something that is better than good enough. As long as the frame or component keeps working, it's 'good enough'. There are <£40 headsets that will perform as well or even better than a Chris King headset for expedition use, and you will not gain any extra performance or pleasure from one or the other - it's one of those parts which either works and you don't give it any thought, or if it's not 'good enough' you spend all your time cursing it.

The point of buying a bike from Oxford Bike Works or Thorn is that their bikes are already expedition proven. Trying to second guess their build recommendations is unwise: they and their previous customers have already been there, done that, and got the t-shirt. The whole point of buying from them is being able to take advantage of their knowledge and experience, and save yourself the bother of agonising over each individual part.

If you were to get a Thorn or an OBW, it probably would not make much difference which one you chose, so I suggest you pick one and have done with it.

Every day you agonise over a bike for an expedition and put off making a choice, is another day when you could have enjoyed a nice ride.

I enjoyed a ride in the sun today. It was only 25 miles, and it was not an expedition. But it was nice and I can feel the benefit to my mental well-being. Every day you put off making a decision, you are missing out on that.