Road, touring or cross bike? - Page 3

08-24-2004, 05:58 PM

Hello Yellowstone,
Just my 2 cents worth I have a Bianchi Volpe that I ride to work darn near
every day plus to weekend rides and some touring. It is loaded with lights
fenders racks and panniers and I LOVE this thing. I bought the bike in 2000
and have well over 15,000 miles on it now. Other than brake pads and tires
no real problems to speak of.
For what its worth

Jim
Riding in Dayton Ohio (yes even in the snow)

08-24-2004, 06:30 PM

Yellowstone Yeti wrote:

> My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size?

I don't think you stated your size, but: I think the differences you'll
notice in a road bike (vs. touring bike) are twitchier handling and lack
of low gears.

A touring bike will probably feel more stable and relaxed in its
handling, but you may prefer the "sporty" response to steering inputs.
OTOH, I've ridden with folks that were always dodging left and right 6"
at a time, unintentionally. I think their hair-trigger bike geometry
might have been part of the cause. And remember that even if you like
that twitchiness at mile #5, you may hate it at mile #95.

The road bike won't be "faster." The touring bike will have the same
aerodynamics, and with the proper tires it'll have the same rolling
resistance, practically speaking. That's what effects your speed.

> By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.

To me, that would settle it. A touring bike is essentially as good as a
road bike for unloaded riding. A touring bike is unbeatable for loaded
touring.

Incidentally, I don't understand the current fashion of choosing a
cyclocross bike for, say, touring. Seems to me like it's just a fashion
thing. "Hey, I'm too cool for a touring bike. I got a macho bike
that's designed to be carried through the mud! But, er, I'm going
touring on it."

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

08-24-2004, 06:30 PM

Yellowstone Yeti wrote:

> My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size?

I don't think you stated your size, but: I think the differences you'll
notice in a road bike (vs. touring bike) are twitchier handling and lack
of low gears.

A touring bike will probably feel more stable and relaxed in its
handling, but you may prefer the "sporty" response to steering inputs.
OTOH, I've ridden with folks that were always dodging left and right 6"
at a time, unintentionally. I think their hair-trigger bike geometry
might have been part of the cause. And remember that even if you like
that twitchiness at mile #5, you may hate it at mile #95.

The road bike won't be "faster." The touring bike will have the same
aerodynamics, and with the proper tires it'll have the same rolling
resistance, practically speaking. That's what effects your speed.

> By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.

To me, that would settle it. A touring bike is essentially as good as a
road bike for unloaded riding. A touring bike is unbeatable for loaded
touring.

Incidentally, I don't understand the current fashion of choosing a
cyclocross bike for, say, touring. Seems to me like it's just a fashion
thing. "Hey, I'm too cool for a touring bike. I got a macho bike
that's designed to be carried through the mud! But, er, I'm going
touring on it."

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

08-24-2004, 06:30 PM

Yellowstone Yeti wrote:

> My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size?

I don't think you stated your size, but: I think the differences you'll
notice in a road bike (vs. touring bike) are twitchier handling and lack
of low gears.

A touring bike will probably feel more stable and relaxed in its
handling, but you may prefer the "sporty" response to steering inputs.
OTOH, I've ridden with folks that were always dodging left and right 6"
at a time, unintentionally. I think their hair-trigger bike geometry
might have been part of the cause. And remember that even if you like
that twitchiness at mile #5, you may hate it at mile #95.

The road bike won't be "faster." The touring bike will have the same
aerodynamics, and with the proper tires it'll have the same rolling
resistance, practically speaking. That's what effects your speed.

> By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.

To me, that would settle it. A touring bike is essentially as good as a
road bike for unloaded riding. A touring bike is unbeatable for loaded
touring.

Incidentally, I don't understand the current fashion of choosing a
cyclocross bike for, say, touring. Seems to me like it's just a fashion
thing. "Hey, I'm too cool for a touring bike. I got a macho bike
that's designed to be carried through the mud! But, er, I'm going
touring on it."

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

08-24-2004, 06:30 PM

Yellowstone Yeti wrote:

> My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size?

I don't think you stated your size, but: I think the differences you'll
notice in a road bike (vs. touring bike) are twitchier handling and lack
of low gears.

A touring bike will probably feel more stable and relaxed in its
handling, but you may prefer the "sporty" response to steering inputs.
OTOH, I've ridden with folks that were always dodging left and right 6"
at a time, unintentionally. I think their hair-trigger bike geometry
might have been part of the cause. And remember that even if you like
that twitchiness at mile #5, you may hate it at mile #95.

The road bike won't be "faster." The touring bike will have the same
aerodynamics, and with the proper tires it'll have the same rolling
resistance, practically speaking. That's what effects your speed.

> By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.

To me, that would settle it. A touring bike is essentially as good as a
road bike for unloaded riding. A touring bike is unbeatable for loaded
touring.

Incidentally, I don't understand the current fashion of choosing a
cyclocross bike for, say, touring. Seems to me like it's just a fashion
thing. "Hey, I'm too cool for a touring bike. I got a macho bike
that's designed to be carried through the mud! But, er, I'm going
touring on it."

--
--------------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, remove rodent and vegetable dot com,
replace with cc.ysu dot edu]

08-24-2004, 10:56 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Yellowstone Yeti) wrote in message news:<30bdaaee.0408240546.4a28b272@posting.google. com>...
> I need some help deciding on a new bike. Here's the story: I made a
> deal with my wife. If I can lose 53# and my Clydesdale status, she
> will buy me a new bike. I'm almost there and looking to save some $
> by buying a closeout 2004 model. My limit is $1000 for a complete
> bike. I would like 105 as the minimum component group. My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size? If it matters, I've never ridden a "real" road
> bike since I've been a mtn biker for 20 of my 42 years.
>
> Secondly, can anyone recommend some models for me to check out? I
> think I would prefer steel, due to its durability and longevity. I
> plan on keeping the bike for a long time. I realize that fit will be
> a big part of the decision but I'm just looking to narrow the field a
> bit. The brands available locally are: Trek, Specialized, Lemond,
> KHS, Marin. I'd be willing to drive a bit if you have recommendations
> other than these brands. If anyone can point me to a source that
> breaks down bikes by steel, aluminum, etc., I would appreciate it. By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.
>
> Thanks for the help!

You can certainly keep your mtb for touring, but it shouldn't be hard
to get a bike that can do it all. All the brands in you mention make
perfectly fine road bikes around your price range, but only some are
suitable/adaptable for touring. They can be called "touring", "sport
touring", "cyclocross", whatever. If you want touring (triple) gears
and a steel frame you might look at:

Specialized Sequoia
Lemond Poprad
Jamis Aurora

It may be tough to get full 105 for under $1K, but I wouldn't get
fixated on the component group. Road riding is not as hard on
components as mountain biking so Tiagra will work fine. The major long
term failure point is the STI shifters, but there doesn't seem to be
any consensus that 105 or ultegra versions are significantly more
durable. The major things are the frame and the fit.

Cross/hybrid bikes are not ideal for the kind of riding you describe
(relatively long rides). Too much weight on the seat and too few hand
positions for long term comfort.

As a longtime mtb rider, you will probably not notice a dramatic
difference between a standard road bike and a more tour/sport oriented
road bike. Both will go faster and accelerate better what you are
riding now. But the touring-type bike will probably feel better at
mile 80.

08-24-2004, 10:56 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Yellowstone Yeti) wrote in message news:<30bdaaee.0408240546.4a28b272@posting.google. com>...
> I need some help deciding on a new bike. Here's the story: I made a
> deal with my wife. If I can lose 53# and my Clydesdale status, she
> will buy me a new bike. I'm almost there and looking to save some $
> by buying a closeout 2004 model. My limit is $1000 for a complete
> bike. I would like 105 as the minimum component group. My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size? If it matters, I've never ridden a "real" road
> bike since I've been a mtn biker for 20 of my 42 years.
>
> Secondly, can anyone recommend some models for me to check out? I
> think I would prefer steel, due to its durability and longevity. I
> plan on keeping the bike for a long time. I realize that fit will be
> a big part of the decision but I'm just looking to narrow the field a
> bit. The brands available locally are: Trek, Specialized, Lemond,
> KHS, Marin. I'd be willing to drive a bit if you have recommendations
> other than these brands. If anyone can point me to a source that
> breaks down bikes by steel, aluminum, etc., I would appreciate it. By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.
>
> Thanks for the help!

You can certainly keep your mtb for touring, but it shouldn't be hard
to get a bike that can do it all. All the brands in you mention make
perfectly fine road bikes around your price range, but only some are
suitable/adaptable for touring. They can be called "touring", "sport
touring", "cyclocross", whatever. If you want touring (triple) gears
and a steel frame you might look at:

Specialized Sequoia
Lemond Poprad
Jamis Aurora

It may be tough to get full 105 for under $1K, but I wouldn't get
fixated on the component group. Road riding is not as hard on
components as mountain biking so Tiagra will work fine. The major long
term failure point is the STI shifters, but there doesn't seem to be
any consensus that 105 or ultegra versions are significantly more
durable. The major things are the frame and the fit.

Cross/hybrid bikes are not ideal for the kind of riding you describe
(relatively long rides). Too much weight on the seat and too few hand
positions for long term comfort.

As a longtime mtb rider, you will probably not notice a dramatic
difference between a standard road bike and a more tour/sport oriented
road bike. Both will go faster and accelerate better what you are
riding now. But the touring-type bike will probably feel better at
mile 80.

08-24-2004, 10:56 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Yellowstone Yeti) wrote in message news:<30bdaaee.0408240546.4a28b272@posting.google. com>...
> I need some help deciding on a new bike. Here's the story: I made a
> deal with my wife. If I can lose 53# and my Clydesdale status, she
> will buy me a new bike. I'm almost there and looking to save some $
> by buying a closeout 2004 model. My limit is $1000 for a complete
> bike. I would like 105 as the minimum component group. My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size? If it matters, I've never ridden a "real" road
> bike since I've been a mtn biker for 20 of my 42 years.
>
> Secondly, can anyone recommend some models for me to check out? I
> think I would prefer steel, due to its durability and longevity. I
> plan on keeping the bike for a long time. I realize that fit will be
> a big part of the decision but I'm just looking to narrow the field a
> bit. The brands available locally are: Trek, Specialized, Lemond,
> KHS, Marin. I'd be willing to drive a bit if you have recommendations
> other than these brands. If anyone can point me to a source that
> breaks down bikes by steel, aluminum, etc., I would appreciate it. By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.
>
> Thanks for the help!

You can certainly keep your mtb for touring, but it shouldn't be hard
to get a bike that can do it all. All the brands in you mention make
perfectly fine road bikes around your price range, but only some are
suitable/adaptable for touring. They can be called "touring", "sport
touring", "cyclocross", whatever. If you want touring (triple) gears
and a steel frame you might look at:

Specialized Sequoia
Lemond Poprad
Jamis Aurora

It may be tough to get full 105 for under $1K, but I wouldn't get
fixated on the component group. Road riding is not as hard on
components as mountain biking so Tiagra will work fine. The major long
term failure point is the STI shifters, but there doesn't seem to be
any consensus that 105 or ultegra versions are significantly more
durable. The major things are the frame and the fit.

Cross/hybrid bikes are not ideal for the kind of riding you describe
(relatively long rides). Too much weight on the seat and too few hand
positions for long term comfort.

As a longtime mtb rider, you will probably not notice a dramatic
difference between a standard road bike and a more tour/sport oriented
road bike. Both will go faster and accelerate better what you are
riding now. But the touring-type bike will probably feel better at
mile 80.

08-24-2004, 10:56 PM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Yellowstone Yeti) wrote in message news:<30bdaaee.0408240546.4a28b272@posting.google. com>...
> I need some help deciding on a new bike. Here's the story: I made a
> deal with my wife. If I can lose 53# and my Clydesdale status, she
> will buy me a new bike. I'm almost there and looking to save some $
> by buying a closeout 2004 model. My limit is $1000 for a complete
> bike. I would like 105 as the minimum component group. My question
> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
> especially at my size? If it matters, I've never ridden a "real" road
> bike since I've been a mtn biker for 20 of my 42 years.
>
> Secondly, can anyone recommend some models for me to check out? I
> think I would prefer steel, due to its durability and longevity. I
> plan on keeping the bike for a long time. I realize that fit will be
> a big part of the decision but I'm just looking to narrow the field a
> bit. The brands available locally are: Trek, Specialized, Lemond,
> KHS, Marin. I'd be willing to drive a bit if you have recommendations
> other than these brands. If anyone can point me to a source that
> breaks down bikes by steel, aluminum, etc., I would appreciate it. By
> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
> two week fully loaded tours/year.
>
> Thanks for the help!

You can certainly keep your mtb for touring, but it shouldn't be hard
to get a bike that can do it all. All the brands in you mention make
perfectly fine road bikes around your price range, but only some are
suitable/adaptable for touring. They can be called "touring", "sport
touring", "cyclocross", whatever. If you want touring (triple) gears
and a steel frame you might look at:

Specialized Sequoia
Lemond Poprad
Jamis Aurora

It may be tough to get full 105 for under $1K, but I wouldn't get
fixated on the component group. Road riding is not as hard on
components as mountain biking so Tiagra will work fine. The major long
term failure point is the STI shifters, but there doesn't seem to be
any consensus that 105 or ultegra versions are significantly more
durable. The major things are the frame and the fit.

Cross/hybrid bikes are not ideal for the kind of riding you describe
(relatively long rides). Too much weight on the seat and too few hand
positions for long term comfort.

As a longtime mtb rider, you will probably not notice a dramatic
difference between a standard road bike and a more tour/sport oriented
road bike. Both will go faster and accelerate better what you are
riding now. But the touring-type bike will probably feel better at
mile 80.

08-25-2004, 08:50 AM

Frank Krygowski wrote:
> Yellowstone Yeti wrote:
>
>> My question
>> is: do I buy a touring bike, road bike, cross bike? I've done quite
>> a bit of touring in the past on a mountain bike. In fact, that is my
>> "road" bike right now-an early 90s steel Fisher mtn bike with slicks.
>> It is heavy, slow, and the perfect bike for losing weight. Do I keep
>> it as my touring bike and buy a faster, lighter road bike? Or do I
>> buy a decent touring bike and use it for all of my road riding? Will
>> I notice the difference between a road bike and a bare touring bike,
>> especially at my size?
>
>
> I don't think you stated your size, but: I think the differences you'll
> notice in a road bike (vs. touring bike) are twitchier handling and lack
> of low gears.

He didn't state his size, per se, but he did mention that he was close
to a weight loss of 53# and his wife had mentioned "Clydesdale status,"
which implies to me that he's tall as well as big (but I could be wrong
there). As long as he's over about 5'6" he won't have any trouble
finding a touring bike that fits. (I mention that because while looking
at touring bikes for my husband, I noticed that few companies make
touring bikes small enough for *me*.)

>> the way, I'll be using the bike primarily for fitness rides of 20-60
>> miles, but working up to a century ride. I'll also be doing 1 or 2
>> two week fully loaded tours/year.
>
>
> To me, that would settle it. A touring bike is essentially as good as a
> road bike for unloaded riding. A touring bike is unbeatable for loaded
> touring.

Even with my admittedly meager experience, I'd have to agree with Frank
on that one. I don't think YY will regret getting a touring bike if he
actually does do two week fully-loaded tours each year. He might very
well regret getting a road bike if he tries to do the same thing.

-km

--
the black rose
proud to be owned by a yorkie
[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]