Dawes Audax or Galaxy??

Quoted post said:

Originally posted by limpet
Hello all, a while ago I had a trip in France on an adapted road bike, with a rear rack held on with tie wraps etc, and although I enjoyed it the bike did suffer from instability on downhills. due in no small part to also having a bar bag attached on a bike with a shortish wheelbase.
I am hoping to go back and I would like to do the job properly this time.
To that end I was looking at buying a Dawes Galaxy, that was until I saw they do an Audax bike.
The current model I think is tig welded 631, but I am looking at an older model which is made from 531c.
So what I am really asking is what are the relevent merits of the Galaxy versus the Audax?
The spec of the Audax appeals, ie STI, lowish weight, etc. but is the Galaxy a better bet ie more comfortable, stable, tougher.
Anyway all I am asking for is some honest advice.
Many thanks

Limpet

I haven't ridden the Dawes Audax, but I do own a Dawes Galaxy. I find it to be a nice comfortable ride, although some of the components are in my opinion under specced for a bike of that price. The Alivio hubs that came as stock left much to be desired, as did the cantilever brakes.

The friction shifters on the other hand, are (again IMHO) much better suited to touring than STI's, are more robust and easier to fix, replace cables, bodge etc if they do fail.

Fitting a rear rack is a doddle as is a front rack.

I was also dissapointed in the saddle (which retailed at £13) and duely replaced it with a selle Italia flite saddle, which I know is a race saddle, but it fits my a*se which is what matters. The seat stem was also too short for my height, despite the bike being a good fit.

My DG also came with PLASTIC (yes PLASTIC) pedals, which I think is a total [censored] take on a £700 bike. Finally the chain blew apart on my very first ride as well!!!! (Talk about a terrible run of luck ;-) )

The parts that I replaced were as follows.
-: Brake calipers were replaced with Avid Shorty 6 calipers which I am very happy with, (although the front is slight squeaky but nevermind)

:- Wheels were replaced with a custom built set, comprising of Hope mono hubs front and rear and mavic T520 rims, VERY VERY VERY nice wheelset!

:- saddle replaced with Selle Italia Flite Gel. But everyone knows saddles are a personal thing. This works for me.

:- Seatpost replaced with an Easton EA50 I nicked off my little bros mtb.

:- New chain.

:- new cassette with higher top gear (I think thats the right way round)

:- New pedals. I put on a set of shimano A515 clipless pedals, which are very comfy.

All that said my DG is now pretty much exactly as I want it, and although at first I was desperate to get a set of STI's, I have come to realise that I am far better off with a set of friction shifters due to the very big top chainring and the very small granny ring. I love it and wouldn't change it for the world. After all these upgrades, I had it revalued by my lbs, and I was told to insure it for around £1300. I also have a huge box of spares! It's just a shame it doesn't get ridden more as I have nowhere to store it at university, and the only storage facilities are outside. F*** that for a game of soldiers. (That said my mtb is inside with my mucking around and tuning it on an almost daily basis, but I never told you that! ;-) )

Hope this has all helped. I love my Galaxy. Great fun to ride.

In message <[email hidden]>, limpet <usenet-
[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Hello all, a while ago I had a trip in France on an adapted road bike, with a rear rack held on
with tie wraps etc, and although I enjoyed it the bike did suffer from instability on downhills.

Quoted message said:

To that end I was looking at buying a Dawes Galaxy, that was until I saw

they do an Audax bike.

a lot depends on exactly what you intend to use the bike for and also what other bikes you have. I
assume from the post that you have a road bike, that does the job when you want to travel light and
fast? what sort of tourer is your bent?

Both should be comfortable for long days in the saddle, both should cope with reasonable loads. The
Audax is really a fast tourer, it should be fine with the lighter loads of B&Bing, hotels, hostels
etc. It does of course have a lighter frame, lighter wheels, probably less mudguard clearance etc.
ad I wouldn't expect it to be quite so tough.

The Galaxy, is the classic tourer, it should cope well with heavy loads, it should be more stable
(but also a bit less lively unloaded), it should be a tougher, with tougher wheels that will take
wider tyres if necessary, useful for rougher roads, tracks etc.

Personally I'd suggest the Galaxy (or another tourer) , a tourer is probably the most versatile bike
you can have, it's 'more different' from the road bike in a way that would be more useful IMO.
--
Chris French, Leeds

In message <[email hidden]>, davebee <usenet-
[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

limpet said:

Hello all, a while ago I had a trip in France on an adapted road bike, with a rear rack held on
with tie wraps etc, and although I enjoyed it the bike did suffer from instability on
downhills. due in no small part to also having a bar bag attached on a bike with a shortish
wheelbase. I am hoping to go back and I would like to do the job properly this time. To that
end I was looking at buying a Dawes Galaxy, that was until I saw they do an Audax bike.

Quoted message said:

I haven't ridden the Dawes Audax, but I do own a Dawes Galaxy. I find it to be a nice comfortable
ride, although some of the components are in my opinion under specced for a bike of that price.

but not enough to put you off buying :-)

Quoted message said:

The friction shifters on the other hand, are (again IMHO) much better

suited to touring than STI's, are more robust and easier to fix, replace cables, bodge etc if
they do fail.

Though I don't use STI, I think this is on overrated virtue. modern gear systems are very reliable.
most people don't tour that far away from civilization, if it does go wrong you can just carry a
pair of downtube shifters to stick on the bike if necessary. And in the days of mail order and CC a
replacement is only a couple of days away if you can't find a bike shop.

I was also dissapointed in the saddle (which retailed at £13) and duely replaced it with a selle
Italia flite saddle, which I know is a race saddle, but it fits my a*se which is what matters.

<snip> My DG also came with PLASTIC (yes PLASTIC) pedals, which I think is a total [censored] take on a
£700 bike.

<snip>

Most people who by a Galaxy are probably fairly experienced cyclists who will have definite
preferences regarding saddles and pedals (most going for clipless/SPD). It's a fair argument that it
is better to but cheap but serviceable parts on like this which will probably be replaced anyway.
Rather than add to cost with better component.

Many (most at GBP700?) raod bikes don't come with any pedals.

--
Chris French, Leeds

chris French said:

Personally I'd suggest the Galaxy (or another tourer) , a tourer is probably the most
versatile bike you can have, it's 'more different' from the road bike in a way that would be
more useful IMO.

I'd second that, I have never used a Galaxy but I do have a 531 Raleigh Tourer. For years it was my
only bike and was used for commuting, shopping, day rides, Alps and of course long tours*.

If you think you might want to ride fully loaded with camping gear go for the tourer, you can always
remove the racks and maybe mudguards until you really need them.

*From one week in East Anglia to 3 months across America.

On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 20:06:03 GMT, limpet
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

[snip Galaxy v Audax]

The Galaxy is a strong, stiff bike which handles load well. If you are intending to do kitchen-sink
touring it's a no-brainer.

I have not ridden the Audax. I have a light tourer / audax bike which is noticeably lighter but also
less stiff than the Galaxy it replaced and prone to shimmy when loaded.

I am also a big fan of lever shifting. I know modern systems are reliable, but when you are in a
foreign country and trying to keep up a schedule you might want the reassurance of being able to
switch to friction mode if the derailleur takes a knock or something.

I heard tell of someone who washed out of PBP because their STI packed up. I am no longer sure this
is not an urban myth perpetrated by the Galaxy Owners Club in an attempt to sell more Carradice
saddlebags, but being a former Galaxy owner and current user of bar-end shifters I intend to treat
it as Gospel ;-)

Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
chapmancentral.demon.co.ukchapmancentral.demon.co.ukOpen ↗

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at the University of Washington.

Thankyou all for taking the time to reply to my post,

You are quite right I already ride a road bike, a Dave Lloyd with a 753 frame.
I was concerned that a Galaxy might be too different to what I am used to, but by the sound of things it is probably the most sensible choice.
I personally have no worries about STI etc. as I have been using Campag Ergo for at least 5 years on the Lloyd and have not had a hint of a problem despite coming off more times than I care to remember. ( mostly my fault ).
Also as there is a possibility I may want to take a one man tent with me on the odd occasion I suppose we are really talking about a proper tourer.

Thanks again
Please do keep the advice coming I find it all most interesting and very helpful.

Limpet

limpet said:

You are quite right I already ride a road bike, a Dave Lloyd with a 753 frame. I was concerned
that a Galaxy might be too different to what I am used to, but by the sound of things it is
probably the most sensible choice.

It probably is the most sensible in terms of load carrying, durability and tyre clearance but you
might indeed find it too sluggish and hard work compared your road bike to thoroughly enjoy -- as I
do with my Raleigh tourer after I've been riding my racer exclusively for a while.

Quoted message said:

I personally have no worries about STI etc. as I have been using Campag Ergo for at least 5 years
on the Lloyd and have not had a hint of a problem despite coming off more times than I care to
remember. ( mostly my fault ).

The design of Shimano STI is completely different from Campag Ergo.

~PB

Just zis Guy said:

I am also a big fan of lever shifting. I know modern systems are reliable, but when you are in a
foreign country and trying to keep up a schedule you might want the reassurance of being able to
switch to friction mode if the derailleur takes a knock or something.

Me too. My #1 bike has STi, works great, a real luxury but there is really nothing wrong with good
old DT shifters (I have never used bar enders so I can't comment there).

limpet said:

Hello all, a while ago I had a trip in France on an adapted road bike, with a rear rack held on
with tie wraps etc, and although I enjoyed it the bike did suffer from instability on downhills.
due in no small part to also having a bar bag attached on a bike with a shortish wheelbase. I am
hoping to go back and I would like to do the job properly this time. To that end I was looking at
buying a Dawes Galaxy, that was until I saw they do an Audax bike. The current model I think is
tig welded 631, but I am looking at an older model which is made from 531c. So what I am really
asking is what are the relevent merits of the Galaxy versus the Audax? The spec of the Audax
appeals, ie STI, lowish weight, etc. but is the Galaxy a better bet ie more comfortable, stable,
tougher. Anyway all I am asking for is some honest advice. Many thanks

Limpet

--

I have a dawes audax in the 531C frame and it's the smallest frame. I put a light (tubus fly) rack
on the back, which can carry 2 panniers, but won't take really heavy loads. Comfortable (I'm a
novice rider and the longest so far was nearly 35 miles IIRC) though I've had to make quite a lot of
changes due to being short and the frame being too long along top tube for me (mostly in the
stem/riser department) - a consequence of smallest frame yet still 700C wheels.

Depends I think what you'll use it for. If taking heavy loads touring then I'd say probably the
galaxy, as the frame is stronger/heavier and it's more designed for touring, the audax is more aimed
at lighter touring or versatility between touring/day rides/general purpose etc.

I've found it a bit twitchy going downhill, but this is almost certainly due to me being a nervous
cyclist (and downright terrified when going down hills at any sort of speed!) and also the
modifications I've made to bring the bars further back. If you're also short (I'm 5'4) I can go into
more detail if needed.

I might consider changing it for a custom-built frame, but probably not now that I have done the
changes I needed - the only other thing I'd give it up for is a recumbent trike :-) That's purely on
me being far happier lower to the ground and on three wheels not two, absolutely no reflection on
the audax lacking anything :-)

I find it a lovely bike to ride, has the advantage that even with the amount of gizmos on it I can
still shoulder it to get it up and down my stairs, which would be impossible with a galaxy. Oh, the
STI shifters are the best thing since sliced bread, and the range of gears on it are great too.

Velvet

On 16/2/04 2:32 pm, in article [email hidden],

Velvet said:

I have a dawes audax in the 531C frame and it's the smallest frame. I put a light (tubus fly) rack
on the back, which can carry 2 panniers, but won't take really heavy loads. Comfortable (I'm a
novice rider and the longest so far was nearly 35 miles IIRC) though I've had to make quite a lot
of changes due to being short and the frame being too long along top tube for me (mostly in the
stem/riser department) - a consequence of smallest frame yet still 700C wheels.

I am short (though not quite that short and am thinking of a new bike. I'm interested as to what you
think makes the top tube too long. I have a relatively long body and short legs/arms so currently
have a 19.5 inch frame and a long stem to get the length I need.

Quoted message said:

I've found it a bit twitchy going downhill, but this is almost certainly due to me being a nervous
cyclist (and downright terrified when going down hills at any sort of speed!) and also the
modifications I've made to bring the bars further back. If you're also short (I'm 5'4) I can go
into more detail if needed.

I'm glad it sounds good. I'm tempted to test ride one (the local dealer is only abut 10 miles away
so I could ride over there and try a model).

..d

"chris French" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In message <[email hidden]>, limpet <usenet-
[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Hello all, a while ago I had a trip in France on an adapted road bike, with a rear rack held on
with tie wraps etc, and although I enjoyed it the bike did suffer from instability on downhills.

Quoted message said:

To that end I was looking at buying a Dawes Galaxy, that was until I saw

they do an Audax bike.

a lot depends on exactly what you intend to use the bike for and also what other bikes you have. I
assume from the post that you have a road bike, that does the job when you want to travel light
and fast? what sort of tourer is your bent?

Both should be comfortable for long days in the saddle, both should cope with reasonable loads.
The Audax is really a fast tourer, it should be fine with the lighter loads of B&Bing, hotels,
hostels etc. It does of course have a lighter frame, lighter wheels, probably less mudguard
clearance etc. ad I wouldn't expect it to be quite so tough.

The Galaxy, is the classic tourer, it should cope well with heavy loads, it should be more stable
(but also a bit less lively unloaded), it should be a tougher, with tougher wheels that will take
wider tyres if necessary, useful for rougher roads, tracks etc.

Personally I'd suggest the Galaxy (or another tourer) , a tourer is probably the most
versatile bike you can have, it's 'more different' from the road bike in a way that would be
more useful IMO.
--
Chris French, Leeds

I ride a '98 Dawes Audax and it has always coped with bar bag, saddle bag and two (stuffed full)
rear panniers and me (80kg) on 700x28 tyres without any problems. Typical touring has been 60-70
mile per day UK youth Hostels so haven't tried camping gear as well. Paul.

David Martin said:

Velvet said:

I have a dawes audax in the 531C frame and it's the smallest frame. I put a light (tubus fly) rack
on the back, which can carry 2 panniers, but won't take really heavy loads. Comfortable (I'm a
novice rider and the longest so far was nearly 35 miles IIRC) though I've had to make quite a lot
of changes due to being short and the frame being too long along top tube for me (mostly in the
stem/riser department) - a consequence of smallest frame yet still 700C wheels.

I am short (though not quite that short and am thinking of a new bike. I'm interested as to what
you think makes the top tube too long. I have a relatively long body and short legs/arms so
currently have a 19.5 inch frame and a long stem to get the length I need.

Quoted message said:

I've found it a bit twitchy going downhill, but this is almost certainly due to me being a nervous
cyclist (and downright terrified when going down hills at any sort of speed!) and also the
modifications I've made to bring the bars further back. If you're also short (I'm 5'4) I can go
into more detail if needed.

I'm glad it sounds good. I'm tempted to test ride one (the local dealer is only abut 10 miles away
so I could ride over there and try a model).

..d

Well, I eventually (in desperation) took it to a place that does bike fitting, and specialises in
bikes (and frames) made to measure/spec. They confirmed what I thought, that for me, the top tube
was too long (by several inches) for me, despite the fact that the height was right for my leg
length. This was once we had the bike on a jig (and me on the bike) and they got me into a good
riding position etc.

I rather suspect it is the 700C wheel size on the smallest frame size which has necessitated the top
tube being longer, to prevent toe overlap on the front wheel (I can, if I'm determined, catch the
front mudguard, so there is no room to spare). There's only so close you can have the wheels,
regardless of the height, and I think this is where the mismatch comes from - though it could be me
having shorter arms or torso, given it's not a girlies frame.

Best thing to do is give it a try - thoroughly recommend it. Chances are if you're taller than
me you wouldn't find a problem with the TT length vs height of frame anyway, cos they can afford
to make the frame taller without spacing the wheels further apart once you get a bit bigger than
my frame :-)

Like I said, apart from this niggle, which is probably a lot more niggly to *me* as an inexperienced
cyclist (and this being the first bike with drops etc), it's a lovely bike, a real pleasure to ride.

Velvet

David Martin said:

I am short (though not quite that short and am thinking of a new bike. I'm interested as to what
you think makes the top tube too long. I have a relatively long body and short legs/arms so
currently have a 19.5 inch frame and a long stem to get the length I need.

Unfortunately, not many of us are averagely proportioned. Me, I have either a slightly short trunk,
or slightly long legs, for my 5'10" height. This in the past has lead me into the mistake of buying
a slightly too large frame (based on leg length alone)

I always felt just a little too stretched out on my Super Galaxy. This has been remedied by morphing
the Super G onto a Mercian frame. (Had them braze everything in exactly the right place so that
everything came off the SG and was fitted onto the M)

I am now the proud owner of a "Mercian Super Galaxy" ;-) I also wondered about a Roberts tourer
designed for women, as women's leg to body ratio is similar to mine.

From your description of yourself, I'd guess that the longish Dawes my suit you fine.

--
Cheerful Peddling John Mallard

David Martin said:

I am short (though not quite that short and am thinking of a new bike. I'm interested as to what
you think makes the top tube too long. I have a relatively long body and short legs/arms so
currently have a 19.5 inch frame and a long stem to get the length I need.

I think you should buy your bike from a good shop with a fitting jig. Given the amount of money
you're looking at spending you should make sure you get it right. Most/some shops will allow you the
price of the fitting against a new bike. Don't get too hung up on the idea of having a Dawes - there
are other makes of toureres and why should anyone just follow the herd, anyway?
--
Michael MacClancy Random putdown - "I've just learned about his illness. Let's hope it's nothing
trivial." - Irvin S. Cobb www.macclancy.demon.co.uk www.macclancy.co.uk

On 16/2/04 6:30 pm, in article
[email hidden], "Velvet" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Well, I eventually (in desperation) took it to a place that does bike fitting, and specialises in
bikes (and frames) made to measure/spec. They confirmed what I thought, that for me, the top tube
was too long (by several inches) for me, despite the fact that the height was right for my leg
length. This was once we had the bike on a jig (and me on the bike) and they got me into a good
riding position etc.

that sounds really good. On my road bike I have 165mm cranks which feel much nicer than 170 for
spinning and will give that fraction of an inch more toe clearance.

Quoted message said:

I rather suspect it is the 700C wheel size on the smallest frame size which has necessitated the
top tube being longer, to prevent toe overlap on the front wheel (I can, if I'm determined, catch
the front mudguard, so there is no room to spare). There's only so close you can have the wheels,
regardless of the height, and I think this is where the mismatch comes from - though it could be
me having shorter arms or torso, given it's not a girlies frame.

As I am a couple of inches taller than you it may make all the difference.

Quoted message said:

Best thing to do is give it a try - thoroughly recommend it. Chances are if you're taller than me
you wouldn't find a problem with the TT length vs height of frame anyway, cos they can afford to
make the frame taller without spacing the wheels further apart once you get a bit bigger than my
frame :-)

i don't think I'd want a bigger frame. I like to be able to stand over the frame and I only have 29"
inside leg.

Quoted message said:

Like I said, apart from this niggle, which is probably a lot more niggly to *me* as an
inexperienced cyclist (and this being the first bike with drops etc), it's a lovely bike, a real
pleasure to ride.

Sounds like just what I am looking for.

..d

David Martin said:

Velvet said:

I have a dawes audax in the 531C frame and it's the smallest frame. I put a light (tubus fly)
rack on the back, which can carry 2 panniers, but won't take really heavy loads.

I put the same rack on my own Dawes Audax, based on your suggestion in the group I think, and I'd
heartily recommend it to anyone else. This is a right combination.

Quoted message said:

I am short (though not quite that short and am thinking of a new bike. I'm interested as to what
you think makes the top tube too long. I have a relatively long body and short legs/arms so
currently have a
19.5 inch frame and a long stem to get the length I need.

I use the '02 Dawes Audax model, which is a 531c frame, lugged construction, and it's a perfectly
good bike. I'm fairly stumpy-legged too, so a 57cm (22"😉 frame only gives me a couple of inches of
clearance when stood over the top tube. However, everything else worked so well for me that I
bought it.

The bike handles fine up hills: I've taken it with (moderately) loaded rear panniers up the steepest
hill in Durham with very little trouble.

You'll probably get a wider range of gears on the Galaxy, which will make hills more comfortable.
Also look out for the tube difference: older Audax models use Reynolds 531c tubing, the Galaxy uses
slightly stronger, slightly heavier 531st. Replacement forks etc. can still be found for both. More
on the differences: bretonbikes.comreynolds.htmOpen ↗

You may find clearance for light fittings tricky to organise around the fork crown on the Audax:
there's not a great deal of clearance there between the brakes and the crown. Apparently this can be
solved with a longer bolt fitting and washers, and given that I've got my eyes on a bar bag, I may
be giving this a try. One of the other posters in this thread mentioned things might be better laid
out on the Galaxy.

Build quality seems very good, though the machine is quite underspecced if you're bothered about
your place on the Shimano ladder. I'm not, but I hope this means that my money has gone into the
frame rather than (relatively) disposable componentry. Newer versions of the Audax (2003+) fix this
- though with a frame redesign thrown into the mix. Hm.

I can't compare the Audax and the Galaxy for comfort: I've only sat on the former for long rides.
It's very comfortable, but then I use a Brooks saddle, and that will tend to blur distinctions.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've found it a bit twitchy going downhill, but this is almost certainly due to me being a
nervous cyclist (and downright terrified when going down hills at any sort of speed!) and also
the modifications I've made to bring the bars further back. If you're also short (I'm 5'4) I can
go into more detail if needed.

I find the the handling is good up tp 35mph downhill, although anything above that becomes scary.
Unloaded, that is.

Quoted message said:

I'm glad it sounds good. I'm tempted to test ride one (the local dealer is only abut 10 miles away
so I could ride over there and try a model).

The Audax is a good compromise if you want a nippyish machine for day rides, Audax events, and
everyday commuting and shopping. The Galaxy does all that at a slightly more relaxed pace, but can
lug heavy tents and kettles up mountains too.

--
Andrew Chadwick You never hear a Cricket crowd chanting "who's the [censored] in the hat?"

limpet <[email hidden]> wrote ...

Quoted message said:

Hello all, a while ago I had a trip in France on an adapted road bike, with a rear rack held on
with tie wraps etc, and although I enjoyed it the bike did suffer from instability on downhills.
due in no small part to also having a bar bag attached on a bike with a shortish wheelbase. I am
hoping to go back and I would like to do the job properly this time. To that end I was looking at
buying a Dawes Galaxy, that was until I saw they do an Audax bike. The current model I think is
tig welded 631, but I am looking at an older model which is made from 531c. So what I am really
asking is what are the relevent merits of the Galaxy versus the Audax? The spec of the Audax
appeals, ie STI, lowish weight, etc. but is the Galaxy a better bet ie more comfortable, stable,
tougher. Anyway all I am asking for is some honest advice. Many thanks

I've toured for several years on my (Thorn) Audax bike, and find I have no problems with instability
when load-carrying. This is probably because I like to use front low-riders, plus rackpack for hotel
tours, or rear panniers for camping. The last Dawes Audax I saw had the fork bosses for low-riders.
The other main difference to think about is tyre size. On the Audax, you'll be limited to 28mm by
the brake reach, but the Galaxy will go up to 37mm at least. Fatter tyres are better if you venture
off-tarmac, and can feel more stable on fast descents as the bump impact is less.