Help finding a suitable touring frame? (long)

Paul Myron Hobson said:

I've also be looking for a good frame that can double for *light*
touring

I checked most major bike companies and didn't see anything labeled as a
tourer that really caught my eye. Did I miss someone? If I bought a
complete bike, I'd definitely part it out since I currently have nicer
stuff just laying around.

It might be worth taking a look at a Giant OCR or Specialized Tricross.
I don't know if Giant sell just the frame, and Specialized only do so
for the (silly priced) S-Works versions, so they'll probably fail your
requirements on that point. Otherwise they seem a pretty good mix of
performance and practicality.

Paul Myron Hobson said:

I checked most major bike companies and didn't see anything labeled as a
tourer that really caught my eye. Did I miss someone? If I bought a
complete bike, I'd definitely part it out since I currently have nicer
stuff just laying around.

Thanks!

Not interested in the Jamis Aurora? or was that what they jacked from you?

I *lurve* my Aurora.

-Luigi

--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Hey y'all,

So I got some bad news from the orthopedic surgeon yesterday: my healing
has pretty much just plateaued. He said I should find a good
stopping/break point in my graduate research and spend some more time in
a cast 🙁 (all that physical therapy down the drain)

In the mean time and for a while afterwards, I seriously need to take it
easy - multiple gears and handlebars fairly high up. Coincidentally,
I've also be looking for a good frame that can double for *light*
touring (3 or 4 days over to my parents' house) and somewhat speedy road
rides. I pretty much have all the components, just need a frame, fresh
fork, headset, and appropriate stem. I prefer caliper brakes over
cantis right now, b/c of the adjustment is so easy. But, I'm cool with
cantis if need be. My current SS commuter which has felt dern stable
loaded up (with beer :p) has a 1025 mm wheelbase.

I'm torn between getting a "relaxed" road frame like the Soma Smoothie
ES or something more hardcore like the Soma Double Cross. The Smoothie
ES (1007 mm WB) can take 32 mm (as big as I go) tires with fenders and
standard (57 mm) reach caliper brakes. It's got double eyelets on the
rear and single on the front. It's a pretty light frame to boot.

Then there's the Soma Double Cross (1026 mm WB). For all I can tell,
it's a slightly lighter Surly Cross Check. Double eyelets front and
rear, canti bosses, clearance for 38 mm tires w/ fenders.

Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check and Long Haul Trucker. I
think the LHT may be a bit much for me. Cross Check seems more
reasonable, has a 1014 mm WB (1064 mm for the LHT). Both have rear
double eyelets. Only single in the front for the Cross Check, which
comes with horizontal drop outs - maybe a plus? I could definitely go
SS easily...but that's not really a selling point right now.

I checked most major bike companies and didn't see anything labeled as a
tourer that really caught my eye. Did I miss someone? If I bought a
complete bike, I'd definitely part it out since I currently have nicer
stuff just laying around.

Thanks!

\\paul

Trek 520

Paul Myron Hobson said:

Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check

Always a good choice for an all rounder. It has a purty crowned fork
to boot. I also do like the Soma Smoothie, at least by the looks and
specs.

If you want something on the cheap, Nashbar's got their aluminum
cxcross frame for a hundred right now. It ain't pretty, but it'll get
the job done. Add their carbon cxcross fork and you'll hit right
around 250 with shipping. You'll have to go canti, but some Oryx
cantis are pretty affordable.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

Paul Myron Hobson said:

Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check

Always a good choice for an all rounder. It has a purty crowned fork
to boot. I also do like the Soma Smoothie, at least by the looks and
specs.

If you want something on the cheap, Nashbar's got their aluminum
cxcross frame for a hundred right now. It ain't pretty, but it'll get
the job done. Add their carbon cxcross fork and you'll hit right
around 250 with shipping. You'll have to go canti, but some Oryx
cantis are pretty affordable.

Isn't the BB mounted higher on this bike than a normal non-cross frame?

RBrickston said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

says... On Jul 26 said:

Quoted message said:

Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check

Quoted message said:

Always a good choice for an all rounder. It has a purty crowned fork
to boot. I also do like the Soma Smoothie, at least by the looks and
specs.

Quoted message said:

If you want something on the cheap, Nashbar's got their aluminum
cxcross frame for a hundred right now. It ain't pretty, but it'll get
the job done. Add their carbon cxcross fork and you'll hit right
around 250 with shipping. You'll have to go canti, but some Oryx
cantis are pretty affordable.

Isn't the BB mounted higher on this bike than a normal non-cross frame?

It doesn't look abnormally high in the pics online. Chainstays still
slope down towards BB. Don't have the exact specs, though.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

RBrickston said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

says... On Jul 26 said:

> Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check

Quoted message said:

Always a good choice for an all rounder. It has a purty crowned fork
to boot. I also do like the Soma Smoothie, at least by the looks and
specs.

Quoted message said:

If you want something on the cheap, Nashbar's got their aluminum
cxcross frame for a hundred right now. It ain't pretty, but it'll get
the job done. Add their carbon cxcross fork and you'll hit right
around 250 with shipping. You'll have to go canti, but some Oryx
cantis are pretty affordable.

Isn't the BB mounted higher on this bike than a normal non-cross frame?

It doesn't look abnormally high in the pics online. Chainstays still
slope down towards BB. Don't have the exact specs, though.

I perhaps put my question inartfully. Cross bikes universally have a
higher BB, for obvious reasons. Does this upset the geometry the OP is
looking for?

RBrickston said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

RBrickston said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...> On Jul 26, 10:10 am, Paul Myron Hobson <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Always a good choice for an all rounder. It has a purty crowned fork
> to boot. I also do like the Soma Smoothie, at least by the looks and
> specs.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> If you want something on the cheap, Nashbar's got their aluminum
> cxcross frame for a hundred right now. It ain't pretty, but it'll get
> the job done. Add their carbon cxcross fork and you'll hit right
> around 250 with shipping. You'll have to go canti, but some Oryx
> cantis are pretty affordable.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Isn't the BB mounted higher on this bike than a normal non-cross frame?

Quoted message said:

It doesn't look abnormally high in the pics online. Chainstays still
slope down towards BB. Don't have the exact specs, though.

I perhaps put my question inartfully. Cross bikes universally have a
higher BB,

Than what? A tourer? What? Universally higher than what? The frame
angles on the nashbar frame aren't anything radical. The BB will be a
bit higher due to the wider tires compared to a pure road bike.

Quoted message said:

for obvious reasons.

Quoted message said:

Does this upset the geometry the OP is
looking for?

I'd be more concerned with wheelbase and trail than BB height with
light touring. Paul seems to want something a bit more sporty than
your run of the mill heavy tourer. Thus his musings on bikes like the
Cross Check.

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

RBrickston said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

On Jul 26, 7:11 pm, RBrickston <[email hidden]> wrote:
> In article <[email hidden]>,
> [email hidden] says...> On Jul 26, 10:10 am, Paul Myron Hobson <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

> > > Lastly, there's the Surly line: Cross Check

Quoted message said:

> > Always a good choice for an all rounder. It has a purty crowned fork
> > to boot. I also do like the Soma Smoothie, at least by the looks and
> > specs.

Quoted message said:

> > If you want something on the cheap, Nashbar's got their aluminum
> > cxcross frame for a hundred right now. It ain't pretty, but it'll get
> > the job done. Add their carbon cxcross fork and you'll hit right
> > around 250 with shipping. You'll have to go canti, but some Oryx
> > cantis are pretty affordable.

Quoted message said:

> Isn't the BB mounted higher on this bike than a normal non-cross frame?

Quoted message said:

It doesn't look abnormally high in the pics online. Chainstays still
slope down towards BB. Don't have the exact specs, though.

I perhaps put my question inartfully. Cross bikes universally have a
higher BB,

Than what? A tourer? What? Universally higher than what?

Most other bikes.

Quoted message said:

The frame
angles on the nashbar frame aren't anything radical. The BB will be a
bit higher due to the wider tires compared to a pure road bike.

Quoted message said:

for obvious reasons.

Quoted message said:

Does this upset the geometry the OP is
looking for?

I'd be more concerned with wheelbase and trail than BB height with
light touring. Paul seems to want something a bit more sporty than
your run of the mill heavy tourer. Thus his musings on bikes like the
Cross Check.

landotter said:

I'd be more concerned with wheelbase and trail than BB height with
light touring. Paul seems to want something a bit more sporty than
your run of the mill heavy tourer. Thus his musings on bikes like the
Cross Check.

Correct. During my continuing recovery, this bike, would probably see
75% use commuting, 25% riding for the hell of it (fast, maybe). Once
cleared from the Doc, commuting goes back to the SS, so this bike would
see >80% sporty stuff and <20% light touring (optimistically).

My thinking is that I'll keep the fork long and handle bars higher for
now. When I'm ready, I'll move them down for a sportier feel. When I
decide to hit the road for a couple of days, I'll easily be able to move
them back up.

re: Wheelbase...
Now, my understanding is that a longer wheelbase is more stable under
load, especially on descents. I'm not planning on doing any totally
unsupported, long tours (for now). We're talking "debit card" touring
at best. I'll take my tools/supplies, a little food, and another two
days worth of clothes, and a light sleeping bag - tops. Point is, I'm a
lightweight. All that stuff + my 135# has got to be less than most of
the roadies on Madones I see around here. Is wheelbase that much of an
issue for me? (whether or not it's the bike I need, I *really* like that
silver Soma Smoothie ES, http://somafab.com/smoothieES_brik2.jpg)

re: Trail
What determines the trail? Is that the rake of the fork? How's it
affecting my decision here?

thanks,
\\paul

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:49:21 -0400, Paul Myron Hobson
<[email hidden]> wrote of longer wheelbase for loaded touring:

Quoted message said:

All that stuff + my 135# has got to be less than most of
the roadies on Madones I see around here. Is wheelbase that much of an
issue for me?

With a shorter wheelbase it's heel clearance that may restrict your
ability to fit adequately sized panniers.
--
zk

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:49:21 -0400, Paul Myron Hobson
<[email hidden]> wrote of longer wheelbase for loaded touring:

Quoted message said:

All that stuff + my 135# has got to be less than most of
the roadies on Madones I see around here. Is wheelbase that much of an
issue for me?

Zoot Katz said:

With a shorter wheelbase it's heel clearance that may restrict your
ability to fit adequately sized panniers.

Ahh, that's what I've been missing. Thanks!

\\paul

Paul Myron Hobson said:

re: Trail
What determines the trail? Is that the rake of the fork? How's it
affecting my decision here?

Cap'n Bike sez:

"Trail is the distance from the contact point of the front wheel with
the riding surface to the intersection of the steering axis (head
tube) with the surface. The trail is a function of the head angle, the
fork rake, and the tire diameter. Trail has a major effect on the
handling of a bicycle. More trail increases the bicycle's tendency to
steer straight ahead. A bicycle with a largish trail dimension will be
very stable, and easy to ride "no hands". A bicycle with a smaller
trail dimension will be more maneuverable and responsive."

http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/trail.html

That said, don't worry about it except to keep in mind that pure
touring bikes do feel quite different than "sport touring" all
rounders like the Volpe and Cross Check. It's just fun to learn about
so you can be the smartest bike nerd in the room. ;-)

If the 650b wheelsize doesn't bother you, look at the Rivendell
Bleriot or Kogswell P/R.

landotter said:

Paul Myron Hobson said:

re: Trail
What determines the trail? Is that the rake of the fork? How's it
affecting my decision here?

Cap'n Bike sez:

"Trail is the distance from the contact point of the front wheel with
the riding surface to the intersection of the steering axis (head
tube) with the surface. The trail is a function of the head angle, the
fork rake, and the tire diameter. Trail has a major effect on the
handling of a bicycle. More trail increases the bicycle's tendency to
steer straight ahead. A bicycle with a largish trail dimension will be
very stable, and easy to ride "no hands". A bicycle with a smaller
trail dimension will be more maneuverable and responsive."

http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/trail.html

That said, don't worry about it except to keep in mind that pure
touring bikes do feel quite different than "sport touring" all
rounders like the Volpe and Cross Check. It's just fun to learn about
so you can be the smartest bike nerd in the room. ;-)

landotter said:

Paul Myron Hobson said:

re: Trail
What determines the trail? Is that the rake of the fork? How's it
affecting my decision here?

Cap'n Bike sez:

"Trail is the distance from the contact point of the front wheel with
the riding surface to the intersection of the steering axis (head
tube) with the surface. The trail is a function of the head angle, the
fork rake, and the tire diameter. Trail has a major effect on the
handling of a bicycle. More trail increases the bicycle's tendency to
steer straight ahead. A bicycle with a largish trail dimension will be
very stable, and easy to ride "no hands". A bicycle with a smaller
trail dimension will be more maneuverable and responsive."

Heh, I just measured the fork off set on my older bike that's very
twitchy. The old Tange fork has something like 80mm of offset compared
to a newer Tange which has only 50mm. Now I know why it feels like
it's "oversteering".

Trail is weird when you've come to believe that more fork rake, like
on old roadsters and cruisers increases stability, when in actuality
it's the head angle that does that, and the fork offset decreases the
huge trail these angles can give, providing such beasts with quicker
steering than they otherwise would.

I had to fiddle with a pencil a little till my brain finally got what
the "caster" effect is all about.

Paul Myron Hobson said:

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 02:49:21 -0400, Paul Myron Hobson
<[email hidden]> wrote of longer wheelbase for loaded touring:

Quoted message said:

All that stuff + my 135# has got to be less than most of
the roadies on Madones I see around here. Is wheelbase that much of an
issue for me?

Zoot Katz said:

With a shorter wheelbase it's heel clearance that may restrict your
ability to fit adequately sized panniers.

Ahh, that's what I've been missing. Thanks!

It's usually a good sign if there's room enough to mount a frame pump
between the seat tube and fender.
--
zk

On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:14:15 +0000, landotter wrote:
<discussion on trail snipped>

Kogswell Cycles has a handy front-end geometry/trail calculator on their
website:

http://www.kogswell.com/geo.php

--
Luigi de Guzman
http://ouij.livejournal.com

In article <[email hidden]>,

Paul Myron Hobson said:

landotter said:

I'd be more concerned with wheelbase and trail than BB height with
light touring. Paul seems to want something a bit more sporty than
your run of the mill heavy tourer. Thus his musings on bikes like the
Cross Check.

Correct. During my continuing recovery, this bike, would probably see
75% use commuting, 25% riding for the hell of it (fast, maybe). Once
cleared from the Doc, commuting goes back to the SS, so this bike would
see >80% sporty stuff and <20% light touring (optimistically).

My thinking is that I'll keep the fork long and handle bars higher for
now. When I'm ready, I'll move them down for a sportier feel. When I
decide to hit the road for a couple of days, I'll easily be able to move
them back up.

Buy a cyclocross bike and be happy. The entry-level CX bikes, especially
the ones from North American makers, are supremely versatile: sturdy,
responsive, not too heavy, and yet they mostly have mounts for racks and
fenders.

A CX bike works fine as a road-race bike as well. You give up a tiny
amount of aerodynamics, and some will argue that cantis are a little
fussier to set up than caliper brakes (and they'll probably be right).

But so what? It's otherwise the perfect sawzall bicycle.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Paul Myron Hobson said:

landotter said:

I'd be more concerned with wheelbase and trail than BB height with
light touring. Paul seems to want something a bit more sporty than
your run of the mill heavy tourer. Thus his musings on bikes like the
Cross Check.

Correct. During my continuing recovery, this bike, would probably see
75% use commuting, 25% riding for the hell of it (fast, maybe). Once
cleared from the Doc, commuting goes back to the SS, so this bike would
see >80% sporty stuff and <20% light touring (optimistically).

My thinking is that I'll keep the fork long and handle bars higher for
now. When I'm ready, I'll move them down for a sportier feel. When I
decide to hit the road for a couple of days, I'll easily be able to move
them back up.

Buy a cyclocross bike and be happy. The entry-level CX bikes, especially
the ones from North American makers, are supremely versatile: sturdy,
responsive, not too heavy, and yet they mostly have mounts for racks and
fenders.

A CX bike works fine as a road-race bike as well. You give up a tiny
amount of aerodynamics, and some will argue that cantis are a little
fussier to set up than caliper brakes (and they'll probably be right).

But so what? It's otherwise the perfect sawzall bicycle.

It thought he was looking for a semi-long distance touring bike. The cross
geometry isn't going to be that comfy, imo. Plus I wonder what the higher
BB does for handling.