and I’ve not heard of many STIs failing

I have. In the last couple of weeks; 2 pairs of Ergo’s and a pair of Force. Not strictly ‘STI’ for the terminally pedantic but…

This is like a lot of things cycle related; lot’s of experiences and opinions and all equally valid.

The OP will have his own predilection’s to add just to complicate matters 🙂

Because it’s too much faff (personally I’d rather not shift the front more than I have to), and with modern kit you can achieve the same effect with a closish ratio cassette and wider spaced chainrings – if you had a 32T big cog, then you get the same gear range with a 50-40-26 chainset and a 27/28T big cog, which allows you to have single tooth steps at the smaller end of the cassette.

@boblo – wow, have never heard of an ergo failing – what’s gone wrong with them?

26 isn’t low enough for ‘proper’ touring.

I did Lon Las Cymru a couple of weeks ago. Of the four of us:

One had a 6 speed Bromie, he walked….a lot. Gearing much too high.

One had a road triple, 30 front to 28 rear lowest gear. He walked any hills over 25%.

One had a touring triple, 28 front to 34 rear lowest gear. He walked any hills over 25%.

I had a touring triple, front 24 to 32 rear lowest gear. I didn’t walk.

We all had similar camping loads and are of similar fitness.

I’m not sure why “proper” touring has to involve hills over 25%. Plenty of great places where such climbs aren’t an option even if you go searching them out. Have done most of my touring with a 26/27 bottom gear without wishing for lower.

Of course 26/34 is also almost the same gear as 24/32 if we’re getting absolutist about chainring sizes.

Well it doesn’t but it might. I can also easily change to 22 or 20 on the front and 34 on the back and do so if the tour looks like it needs it. ‘Easily’ being a chainring or cassette change nothing else.

Aracer, you’re probably a really strong rider, perhaps don’t carry camping loads, tour for months or haven’t come across steep hills on tour (or any combination of the above) but, if we’re specifying a ‘proper’ tourer (the OP’s thread title), we should be mindful of gearing limitations and building in some flexibility.

Well there’s proper and there’s proper – I don’t suppose most people go off for months (the OP did clarify that wasn’t the plan), nor are there actually many unavoidable really steep hills around. Maybe it’s just me, but whilst I quite like hills, the main aim of touring for me is to get from one place to another (whether that place is a waterfall, abbey, or maybe even the top of a hill), and there’s a certain art to planning efficient routes which don’t go over the steepest hills possible. Sure some hills you have to do – have spent the night in hill towns – but they’re not mostly the steepest. Of course the wonderful thing is the possible variety, but having a much wider range than you need can also be a compromise as it results in larger gaps between gears (see the old-fashioned half-step solution to that mentioned above).

Not trying to argue that your way is wrong – clearly for what you do it is very right – simply that there are also other possibilities which still count as touring. The last long trip we did on the tandem was 1000km in 10 days, which I’d have thought most people would consider to be touring – have circumnavigated Brittany and Normandy, and over multiple trips travelled all the way from Perpignan via Marseille to La Rochelle. All with a 26/27 bottom gear! (also all in what seems like a previous life – last trip of more than 1 night was 10 years ago 🙁 )

Ok so I’m forming an outline plan for the bike and I’m going triple with a super low gear for climbing 25%’ers loaded. I decided that as a couple of routes I have set out include some steep bits of Yorkshire (for my test routes) then I’m off to the Lakes for a week and there I think I’ll find some sections where I’d rather peddle up than walk up too.
Don’t worry about the big gear, 50 on the front and something like 12 rear will be more than enough for what I intend to use it for, and loaded I see that I’d barely use this anywhoo’s.
I’ve chatted with Spa Cycles and they’ve got some lovely bikes in stock, just need to plan a weekend up to see family and I’m in the shop at the same time.

Next stage planning includes luggage 😆

Then, then filling the panniers 😆

I like going over the biggest hills. 🙂

Luggage – I’ve got Ortlieb but would go for Carradice next time, if this lot ever dies.

Seven Dwarwes customer service roulette with Spa BTW – once in a while you end up talking to Grumpy.
🙂

There’s light touring/Audax, long distance road, long distance adventure.

I’ve enjoyed touring on a re-purposed rigid cromo mtb (always go one frame size bigger) as it deals with major off-road excursions without a hitch.

Real joy for me is a ‘proper’ tourer like a Galaxy or my current project (old-school British Eagle Touristique w/531st tubeset. Feels sprightlier than the Galaxy and is really comfortable yet copes amazingly well fully-loaded) Give me a shout if you’re interested it’s a 55/56cm, I’m having to sell off most of my bikes but like a coward am looking for others to make my mind up.

Another one to look at is the legendary Dawes Sardar before it went alu. 26″ wheels, drops, Reynolds tubes and had disc mounts :-). Hard to find, though occasionally pop up, saw one last week on that eBay.

Seven Dwarwes customer service roulette with Spa BTW – once in a while you end up talking to Grumpy.

😆

They were great fixing two busted spokes very very quickly for me on my CX’er back in May.. I literally went for a coffee and they were done.. 😯

Hmm. Sounds like you don’t really need a full blown tourer TBH. Why not a decent steel framed MTB with rigid forks? That’s what I use…

This. Or a road bike with a saddle bag – you really don’t need much gear for overnight adventures. I recently toured round Normandy for 4 nights on my Thorn Audax, with a single pannier.

Aracer, sorry I wasn’t questioning your qualifications and certainly don’t mean to imply I’m right and you’re wrong. There is no right and wrong in this, it’s whatever you get on with.

When I read ‘proper’ I read flexible with low gears and carrying kit. They might well be a wrong assumptions…

I also use an old MTB for ‘adventure’ style touring. That is, off road and off the beaten track though it’s a heavy old beast.

OP, try and get all your kit into two rear Ortleib’s (or whatever you go for). You’ll be happier carrying less kit and saving the ~4kg on additional rack and panniers.

I’ve also had mixed success with Spa and have been told to f@*k off once having enquired a but too enthusiastically about discount 🙂 I still bought from them as I’m thick skinned. They are one of the best traditional touring places left. SJS also qualify but I’m not that keen.

all this talk of gear ratios reminds me of my first big tour, for some reason I had a double chainset with 46/42t chainrings – ah the innocence (& ability) of youth

+1 for spa cycles too

ransos – Member
Hmm. Sounds like you don’t really need a full blown tourer TBH. Why not a decent steel framed MTB with rigid forks? That’s what I use…
This. Or a road bike with a saddle bag – you really don’t need much gear for overnight adventures. I recently toured round Normandy for 4 nights on my Thorn Audax, with a single pannier.

I did consider this route earlier in the thread, as theres a Thorn dealer not too far from work and I really like the look and they also look “racy” which clearly I’m a fan of. However, in the future I will be doing more long distance and more overnight stays and while yes nearly all my overnight stops will be in nice B&B/Hotels, I’ll still need the carry capacity and leisurely pace of a dedicated Tourer with a solid range of gears for the bumps. And, and the Spa Cycles one looks a bit sporty in a sort of Genteel Club kinda way, that appeals as I have some Plus Fours I want to wear whilst riding (kidding)
😀

I’ve just bought a Kona Dew Plus (delivery expected Saturday!), and reckon it fits the bill. 3×8 gearing, hydraulic disks, rims that’ll take up to 40mm tyres, rack and mudguard mounts, and importantly, strong frame and forks. It’s light enough at 12.5kgs as well.

Oh yeah, and you can get one for £419 from Wiggle at the moment 8)

That’s a LOT of change for accessories and pies.

but s/h old ones (which I kinda fancy) come in at £450 odd.

I’ve got this, I keep meaning to either use it or sell it but never actually do either.

[/url]DSC00533 by thisisnotaspoon, on Flickr[/img]

I’ll chuck in a set of ortlieb panniers (2x25l and 2x 20l) and a topeak-dx rear rack for £250? Enough change left over for a Tiagra groupset (although you’d probably want new wheels and a saddle as a minimum too). Having said that I’ve put a worryingly large number of miles on it and all it’s ever needed was brake pads and cables!

jeezzz is that stem broken or have you the body of a orangutan to ride that thing 😆

wicki – Member
jeezzz is that stem broken or have you the body of a orangutan to ride that thing

See seat post height. It’s how all bikes were once!

See seat post height. It’s how all bikes were once!

I think Wicki is referring to the height of the handlebars. It looks like a real “head down arse up” TT machine!

Rule of thumb used to be that hoods should be at roughly saddle height for touring.

Who’s rule of thumb? I’ve gone a bit more relaxed nowadays, top of bars are only about 4″ below saddle.

That is a wierd position for touring especially the canted up saddle for maximum perenium enjoyment 🙂

Love my Surly Disc Trucker. Ride it more than any bike I’ve ever owned.

This was taken the other day on a quick 3 day tour round Pennines/Yorkshire Dales. Stunning views at the top…

daleftw-12.jpg by Dale FTW, on Flickr

Came across this one the other day when I stopped at Tan Hill. Owned by a Dutch woman who has been EVERYWHERE on it. She’s just got back from 8 months in Mongolia and China on it.

daleftw-8.jpg by Dale FTW, on Flickr

Rule of thumb used to be that hoods should be at roughly saddle height for touring.

Yup, stupid rule.

Hats off to your flexibility sir @ thisisnotaspoon –

Go low pushing a loaded tourer sucks big time especially at the end of a long hot day and the camp site is in that ancient waled bastide at the top of the steepest piece of defensible land in the area…welcome to european touring.

Daleftw – which way did you come up Hartside? My Achilles went going up that on my C2C and I then had to walk most of the hills to Tynemouth from there. 🙁 The cafe at Hartside had some epic tiffin though which lifted my spirits after the beast of the uphill to it from the west.

That Euro touring bike is so typical Euro – no cares about what it looks like, just comfort all the way. Butterfly bars, Rohloff, Maguras – love it!

That Dutch lady must be out for a day ride. There’s not nearly enough kit on there for a Cloggy 🙂

Hats off to your flexibility sir @ thisisnotaspoon –

Thankyou 😛

The setup pretty much matches my road bike so I can sit on the tops/hoods all day and still have the drops there for descending. It may not be the conventional wisdom, but I figure if it’s comfortable on the road bike all day it’ll be comfortable on the tourer too.

The saddle is indeed a bit special, like a Brookes there’s a screw underneath to adjust the tension, but it’s way past saving so it’s sagged in the middle which makes it look a bit nose-up. Really needs replacing, but haven’t got anything both suitably vintage looking and comfortable.

fwiw I’ve not used a full pannier set up for more than a bit of test riding .. all this is just based on multi-day trips with lighter loads. Hence my scepticism of the usefulness of the gearing on some touring bikes I see.

Rule of thumb used to be that hoods should be at roughly saddle height for touring.

Sensible place to start or to consider if it’s even possible, given how many bikes have about 3″ of saddle to bar drop in their showroom build state. It’s where mine end up these days, or within an inch. It’s all personal stuff as ever, I just don’t see any negatives to sitting up a bit and getting the weight off your hands.

As for gearing / doubles on tourers, MTB or trekking triples are great but for the lighter loads I prefer an MTB or road double with bar-end shifters is great, it’s an either/or lever move for the FD with no middle-ground adjustments needed and the range is enough, only losing out on the higher gears that I don’t need. Matched with a wide-ratio rear so that there’s less clicks to hit a low-enough gear.

Never felt the need for exact cadence matches on a touring bike, just find the one that’s ‘just low enough’. Recently did an 8 day on-off road ride in the Alps with ~7kg on the bike and didn’t need higher than a 40-11 gear. I used a 34-48 double on a road trip last year and rarely needed the higher gears. 48-50 outers don’t get much use on my lighter touring bikes and I’d use a 22-32-44 triple if I was going to the big mountains with more weight.
Also prefer shorter cranks on a tourer / multi-day bike so that helps me spin a lower gear. Otherwise I like SS mtbs and tend to have a fairly low cadence on my road bikes so I’m no natural spinner, put me on a slightly heavier bike for a week plus and that approach just wears me out. Gearing down is good.

All just depends on what amount of kit you like to take with you, all-up weight etc. One day I’ll do a full luxuries ride with 30kg just for the hell of it.. Had a couple of RTWers staying here recently and I rode one of their bikes briefly – wow. The route would need to be able to justify that amount of gear for me, if it did it’d be an amazing ride 😀

I did consider this route earlier in the thread, as theres a Thorn dealer not too far from work and I really like the look and they also look “racy” which clearly I’m a fan of. However, in the future I will be doing more long distance and more overnight stays and while yes nearly all my overnight stops will be in nice B&B/Hotels, I’ll still need the carry capacity and leisurely pace of a dedicated Tourer with a solid range of gears for the bumps.

I did a 12-day LEJOG credit card tour using the Audax and two small panniers. You absolutely don’t need a full-on tourer for what you’re describing, plus it’s easy enough to fit lower gears to an audax-style bike. Though you probably won’t need lower gears if you stick with a lighter bike and less luggage…

Rule of thumb used to be that hoods should be at roughly saddle height for touring.

Yup, stupid rule.

Not really. Use proper deep drops and start off with hoods or bars at saddle height. Adjust up and down to suit your riding.

Deeply unfashionable and no longer easy with modern frame and fork design. But I reckon that’s why shallow drop bars seem so popular now – people are forced to have their bars set too low to start with.

Adjust up and down to suit your riding.

Ah, quite a different rule.

Aye, shallow drops, fok aren’t flexible enough, used to flat bars I guess.

There are no rules to touring, just do what works for you.

I had a good look around the UK Audax website last night (after 15 laps of Sprints around Regents Park on the roadie, god that was dull 😮 )
There seems to be a lot of events 200k+ on there and just wondering, that’s some distance for a days ride isn’t it. I know I do it on the roadie with mates but then speeds are greater and we’ll crack that in 4-5hrs but an Audax, shirley thats an all day job and most of the evening?
I kinda think my rides will be 80-100k a day max, kick back a bit and smell the Roses kinda thing.
Your mileage would be something similar to my expectations yes?

There seems to be a lot of events 200k+ on there and just wondering, that’s some distance for a days ride isn’t it. I know I do it on the roadie with mates but then speeds are greater and we’ll crack that in 4-5hrs but an Audax, shirley thats an all day job and most of the evening?

You can do 200km in 4-5 hours?

Aye, shallow drops, fok aren’t flexible enough

It’s more than that.

Previously bars had a deep drop, but a lot more time was spent in the drops and the hoods was the more upright position, and there was a decent difference between them.

The hoods has now become the default position*, so they’ve moved lower to maintain a decent aero/performance position, consequently the drop has had to be become shallower and now the drops are much less used, and the difference between drops and tops/hoods is much less marked.

For touring, and indeed normal riding, the deeper drops and higher bars makes more sense, gives a much bigger difference between positions and you can make more regular use of the drops.

*Combination of decent ergonomics on the hoods with the advent of STIs/Ergos, coupled with the fashion for stem slamming 😉

See my really crappy exaggerated illustration below 🙂

I hate to piss on your chips, but that CB of mine was refurbed in the early 80’s when it gained the 600 groupset, and those bars are pretty shallow! I’ve no idea how old the frame is!

It’s not something you can pin on sportiveists, unless you think they got the idea from old touring bikes, note the CB has a long HT and fairly short drops.

Why are head tubes so short these days ?

Why are some head tubes so short these days ?

Some are, some aren’t. Cervelo make a selling point of having long headtubes as their rationale says it’s more aero as no one can ride a bike with a short headtube and still get their forearms level. The downside of that is some pro’s can, so you end up with pro’s riding frames that are much smaller but with 140mm stems. And most ‘sportive’ frames have longer headtubes, and they’re no longer the poor relation in aluminium or low grade carbon, there’s often an equivalent tot he race bike at each price point.

But in general you can raise a stem, but you can’t lower it, so a frame with a short headtube can fit more people than one with a long headtube.

I still ride a ‘race’ frame despite having never raced. It’s like going out for a blast in a Lotus Elise on a Sunday morning, a Golf GTI would be just as quick and a lot more comfortable, but I’d rather the responsive / twitchy / mildly uncomfortable ‘toy’.