Touring Bike Reminder

Quoted message said:

There are all sorts of reasons to have the real(tm) touring thing(tm) and
Bruce has them all covered.

Tom, I tend to agree with you on the niceness of a bike built for
touring (though this shouldn't stop anyone from touring on most
anything).

I looked briefly at Bruce Gordon, but was dissuaded after reading the
following account:
http://www.downtheroad.org/Equipment/Bikes/bicycles.htm that described
an experience where BG didn't work well for a large (tall/heavy)
individual.

Over the past 20 years, I've had a sequence of six bicycles for
touring, and still been informally looking for number seven:

1) The first touring bike was a no-name 10-speed bike I bought for
$42.50 in a garage sale as a teenager. I started touring on this bike
in college and made multiple trips from Boston to Cape Cod on the
bike. The brakes didn't always work, but as a young invincible male I
would just drag my feet. After a long productive life, it was
decommisioned...

2) Next bike was a "Lotus Odyssey". It came with triple crank, front
and rear racks. This was primary touring bike in college, and worked
well. The Lotus eventually went to a roommate in 1997.

3) In fall of 1991, I bought a "Cannondale T1000" touring bike to use
in riding across the USA in summer of 1992. Also treated myself after
riding >10,000 miles on the Lotus. The Cannondale T1000 was (and
still is) a workhorse touring bike. I traveled both Atlantic/Pacific
coasts of USA and 1/2 way around Australia on this bike. This one
eventually died when the frame cracked while in Northwest Australia
near Broome. It has at least 40,000 touring miles when it died...

4) In 1996, I bought a second Cannondale T1000 touring bike, since I
liked the first one so much. This is still my workhorse touring bike.
For example, I just got back from a ride along the Dalton Highway
(Fairbanks to Prudhoe Bay) on this bike. I rode this one the second
half of the way around Australia.

5) In 2000, I ordered a custom built "Sakkit" bike from Robert Beckman
cycles. This was the bike I was supposed to ride around Australia.
However, it didn't arrive in time (despite being ordered 10 months in
advance of the trip). Once I did try it, the seat post weld promptly
pulled out. Getting that fixed was another multiple month hassle.
I've largely written this bike off as an expensive lemon and makes me
a little more wary of custom frame bikes.

6) In fall 2003, I got an Easyracer recumbent bike. I've put ~8300
miles on it the past 18 months. Wonderful ride, and nice for some
touring. More difficult to fly with and travel with, so I tour with
it for variety when I don't ride the Cannondale.

So with two solid touring bikes [Cannondale T1000, Easyracer Tour
Easy] why I informally looking for another touring bike? I am in
early stages of planning another long trip, hopefully across Asia.
Hence, I'm looking for something good for "third world touring"
Ideally 26" wheels + steel frame. 26" wheels so interchangeable with
mountain bike wheels/tyres and steel frame to make it easier to weld.

--mev, Mike Vermeulen

Tom Kunich said:

I just got back from a short tour in California's gold country. I have a
modified Atala Cyclocross bike that I used as a touring bike. I love this
bike but for longer distances you really do need a special purpose bike.

....

Quoted message said:

If you are thinking of real(tm) touring, think about using the real(tm)
touring bike because in the end you'll appreciate your choice. Like when
your heels don't hit the pannier. Or the front end isn't so light that the
forks oscillate on fast downhills. Or the racks don't break at the welds. Or
the back of the rack actually supports the back of the pannier so that they
don't sag into the rear spokes at speed and scare hell out of you. Or that
the brakes can be disconnected and opened with a load on the bike and
fenders installed and the rear wheel removed and a flat repaired without it
being a major operation.

I understand now why your tour was so short! 😉

Pat

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

....

Quoted message said:

If you are thinking of real(tm) touring, think about using the real(tm)
touring bike because in the end you'll appreciate your choice. Like when
your heels don't hit the pannier. Or the front end isn't so light that the
forks oscillate on fast downhills. Or the racks don't break at the welds. Or
the back of the rack actually supports the back of the pannier so that they
don't sag into the rear spokes at speed and scare hell out of you. Or that
the brakes can be disconnected and opened with a load on the bike and
fenders installed and the rear wheel removed and a flat repaired without it
being a major operation.

The Fuji Touring meets these criteria as well. I love mine.

--
Remove the ns_ from if replying by e-mail (but keep posts in the
newsgroups if possible).

Mike Vermeulen said:

Quoted message said:

There are all sorts of reasons to have the real(tm) touring thing(tm) and
Bruce has them all covered.

Tom, I tend to agree with you on the niceness of a bike built for
touring (though this shouldn't stop anyone from touring on most
anything).

I looked briefly at Bruce Gordon, but was dissuaded after reading the
following account:
http://www.downtheroad.org/Equipment/Bikes/bicycles.htm that described
an experience where BG didn't work well for a large (tall/heavy)
individual.

Ahh, come on Mike. Read the full page that you reference. The guy was
a class A whiner. He complains that a BG bike is not recommended for
his bulk, then whines about the cost of a custom, whines again that
Co-Motion did not put stickers indicating steel type, then whines some
more when he finds out it was True Temper - and apparently never did
the research to find out that True Temper Platinum OX is just as good
for building solid TIG welded frames as anything from Reynolds,
Columbus, etc. After reading all his whines I dismissed the fool as
someone to whom I will not listen.

- rick

Mike Vermeulen said:

Quoted message said:

There are all sorts of reasons to have the real(tm) touring thing(tm) and
Bruce has them all covered.

Tom, I tend to agree with you on the niceness of a bike built for
touring (though this shouldn't stop anyone from touring on most
anything).

I looked briefly at Bruce Gordon, but was dissuaded after reading the
following account:
http://www.downtheroad.org/Equipment/Bikes/bicycles.htm that described
an experience where BG didn't work well for a large (tall/heavy)
individual.

If you read down the page, you'll note Bruce didn't recommend his
bikes because Tim Travis, the author, was tall, not because of his
weight (apparent misstatement up front). FWIW, I'm 1" shorter than
Travis, and outweigh him by a fair bit. When I talked to Bruce
Gordon, he said nothing about my weight. He did note, however, that
I'd have to have a custom bike built for me, because my legs are too
long for his production bikes (34" inseam).

Wonder if the impending departure date didn't allow Tim to wait for a
custom Bruce Gordon bike to be built?

Pat

Email address works as is.

Quoted message said:

If you read down the page, you'll note Bruce didn't recommend his
bikes because Tim Travis, the author, was tall, not because of his
weight (apparent misstatement up front). FWIW, I'm 1" shorter than
Travis, and outweigh him by a fair bit. When I talked to Bruce
Gordon, he said nothing about my weight. He did note, however, that
I'd have to have a custom bike built for me, because my legs are too
long for his production bikes (34" inseam).

This is good to know. Reading between the lines, this says that Bruce
Gordon will do a custom size based on measurements. I'm about 1.5"
taller than the original author and the account I read implied to me
no custom sizes, so I was probably wrong on that...Looks like it is
worth a second look.

I have some time before 2007, but trying to get another touring bike
in enough time to get some shakedown trips to work everything out as
well...

--mev, Mike Vermeulen

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Mike Vermeulen said:

Quoted message said:

There are all sorts of reasons to have the real(tm) touring thing(tm) and
Bruce has them all covered.

Tom, I tend to agree with you on the niceness of a bike built for
touring (though this shouldn't stop anyone from touring on most
anything).

I looked briefly at Bruce Gordon, but was dissuaded after reading the
following account:
http://www.downtheroad.org/Equipment/Bikes/bicycles.htm that described
an experience where BG didn't work well for a large (tall/heavy)
individual.

Ahh, come on Mike. Read the full page that you reference. The guy was
a class A whiner. He complains that a BG bike is not recommended for
his bulk, then whines about the cost of a custom, whines again that
Co-Motion did not put stickers indicating steel type, then whines some
more when he finds out it was True Temper - and apparently never did
the research to find out that True Temper Platinum OX is just as good
for building solid TIG welded frames as anything from Reynolds,
Columbus, etc. After reading all his whines I dismissed the fool as
someone to whom I will not listen.

_ If you can't find someone that says something is terrible on
the internet, then that's a pretty good sign that they have no
customers... There is always one.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQt6OMGTWTAjn5N/lAQGxfwQAlSbl2Y/NCs6dUD5hGO+QhM5u8b53X0R4
eAXOrtc/yzI9d5zgibpR4vksGOLE2kYA40LSByVLB9rukPO41Kt3OIMndfRZ0Owh
+eKYCkveQTZ0AHVTF3HcBfDOkhpHy14pqpTNCuecom3bL1N/Q5ZPgVnYcGeBc80c
i7KXnO2fMSA=
=it7R
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

Quoted message said:

Mike Vermeulen said:

Quoted message said:

There are all sorts of reasons to have the real(tm) touring thing(tm)
and
Bruce has them all covered.

Tom, I tend to agree with you on the niceness of a bike built for
touring (though this shouldn't stop anyone from touring on most
anything).

I looked briefly at Bruce Gordon, but was dissuaded after reading the
following account:
http://www.downtheroad.org/Equipment/Bikes/bicycles.htm that described
an experience where BG didn't work well for a large (tall/heavy)
individual.

Ahh, come on Mike. Read the full page that you reference. The guy was
a class A whiner. He complains that a BG bike is not recommended for
his bulk, then whines about the cost of a custom, whines again that
Co-Motion did not put stickers indicating steel type, then whines some
more when he finds out it was True Temper - and apparently never did
the research to find out that True Temper Platinum OX is just as good
for building solid TIG welded frames as anything from Reynolds,
Columbus, etc. After reading all his whines I dismissed the fool as
someone to whom I will not listen.

As I said, Bruce came to our club and gave a talk. In our area we also have
Bernie Mikklesen, Chris Kelly and Ed Litton. All of these guys had one thing
in common - they didn't have a lot of patience with people.

Bruce struck me as:

1) Friendly - he was a nice guy.

2) Knowledgeable - to this extent he would NOT do something that he thought
was wrong. If Bruce doesn't want to build a bike exactly the way you want it
built up, just buy the frame and fork and do it yourself - after all Bruce
is primarily a framebuilder and not a bike mechanic.

3) Experienced - he didn't come up with these ideas out of thin air but from
his own experience.

So while I appreciate that this guy didn't get along with Bruce Gordon I
think that there's more to the story than what you're reading there. And I'm
not criticizing the guy who wrote that. I'm just saying that you don't get
along with everyone you meet and neither do I.

"Mike Vermeulen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you read down the page, you'll note Bruce didn't recommend his
bikes because Tim Travis, the author, was tall, not because of his
weight (apparent misstatement up front). FWIW, I'm 1" shorter than
Travis, and outweigh him by a fair bit. When I talked to Bruce
Gordon, he said nothing about my weight. He did note, however, that
I'd have to have a custom bike built for me, because my legs are too
long for his production bikes (34" inseam).

This is good to know. Reading between the lines, this says that Bruce
Gordon will do a custom size based on measurements. I'm about 1.5"
taller than the original author and the account I read implied to me
no custom sizes, so I was probably wrong on that...Looks like it is
worth a second look.

I have some time before 2007, but trying to get another touring bike
in enough time to get some shakedown trips to work everything out as
well...

When Bruce came to give his talk he brought a couple of frames. They
impressed me and I've been to quite a few framebuilders shops and I also
built (and raced) custom racing motorcycles for several years.

I also met a guy on the road pulling a trailer on his BG and he LOVED it.
His intent was to ride down to Panama, then to ride back along the Gulf and
eventually hit New York and fly to Europe for the next leg of his tour. I
often wonder what became of him.

I do know that I could just BARELY stay with him on the climbs and I was on
a road racer and weighed a good deal less than him and I had only 50 miles
in so far while he was over 80 for the day and his trailer weighed in at
something like 100 lbs.

I'm 6'4" and 200 lbs. 34" inseam.

I've had a Schwinn Voyager (nice bike but tended to wobble when loaded), a
Bottecchia (again a VERY nice bike but also didn't like a full load) and the
Atala which is an excellent bike (actually just short of perfect (sic)) but
the wheelbase is just a little lacking and my heels hit the pannier if I'm
not careful to mount them all the way aft. I've never had much trouble with
toe overlap though.

And in any case Bruce Gordon makes the best racks I've seen since they are
designed to really support the bags.

David Kerber said:

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

...

Quoted message said:

If you are thinking of real(tm) touring, think about using the real(tm)
touring bike because in the end you'll appreciate your choice. Like when
your heels don't hit the pannier. Or the front end isn't so light that the
forks oscillate on fast downhills. Or the racks don't break at the welds. Or
the back of the rack actually supports the back of the pannier so that they
don't sag into the rear spokes at speed and scare hell out of you. Or that
the brakes can be disconnected and opened with a load on the bike and
fenders installed and the rear wheel removed and a flat repaired without it
being a major operation.

The Fuji Touring meets these criteria as well. I love mine.

As do the Roberts Tourers : I love mine.

--
Walter Mitty
-
Useless, waste of money research of the day : http://tinyurl.com/3tdeu
" Format wars could 'confuse users'"
http://www.tinyurl.com

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:1JBDe.1192

Quoted message said:

When Bruce came to give his talk he brought a couple of

frames. They

Quoted message said:

impressed me and I've been to quite a few framebuilders

shops and I also

Quoted message said:

built (and raced) custom racing motorcycles for several

years.

Quoted message said:

I'm 6'4" and 200 lbs. 34" inseam.

So, are you saying Bruce Gordon makes bikes that are your
size?
(without going excessively custom)
This is about my size, and I thought BG stopped a short of
that (bad pun intended).
http://www.bgcycles.com/blt.html is the specs for his basic
road model, and this seems to come in sizes up to 56 cm. The
Rock N Road has a 59 cm. Being a retro-grouch I'm riding 25
inch frames now, which would seem to translate into 63 cm.

Mike Kruger said:

So, are you saying Bruce Gordon makes bikes that are your
size?
(without going excessively custom)
This is about my size, and I thought BG stopped a short of
that (bad pun intended).
http://www.bgcycles.com/blt.html is the specs for his basic
road model, and this seems to come in sizes up to 56 cm. The
Rock N Road has a 59 cm. Being a retro-grouch I'm riding 25
inch frames now, which would seem to translate into 63 cm.

I am pretty sure that Bruce Gordon frames measurements are not the same
as classic sizing. Why else would he be producing a 38cm frame? That
seems really small in the classic sizing. You may see this more along
the lines of mountain bike sizing (sloping top tube, extra standover,
etc.)

In other words, I think you could try taking his measurements and
contacting him about sizing. Have a chat, he really knows his stuff.

David

Mike Kruger said:

"Tom Kunich" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:1JBDe.1192

Quoted message said:

I'm 6'4" and 200 lbs. 34" inseam.

So, are you saying Bruce Gordon makes bikes that are your
size?
(without going excessively custom)
This is about my size, and I thought BG stopped a short of
that (bad pun intended).
http://www.bgcycles.com/blt.html is the specs for his basic
road model, and this seems to come in sizes up to 56 cm. The
Rock N Road has a 59 cm. Being a retro-grouch I'm riding 25
inch frames now, which would seem to translate into 63 cm.

With the same inseam, Bruce told me I would need the 59 cm on the Rock
N Road; the 56 cm max on the BLT would be too small. Between the
sloping top tube and the long head tube, I guess that makes up 3-4 cm.

Pat

Email address works as is.