Using racing bike for touring

"David L. Johnson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:33:15 +0000, Yvonne wrote:

Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)? If
you have, what pannier system did you use, and was it succesful or were
there any problems?
I've been looking at an entry level racing bike for this purpose.
It doesn't have braze-ons for panniers and have been advised that a
seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.

There is no problem. I have used two different racing bikes for touring,
with no trouble from the bike. You are not carrying that much weight, so
could use just rear panniers with maybe a front handlebar bag. That's
what I use.

I secure the rear rack to the frame with "P-clamps" from a hardware store.
The "P" is their shape, and the rack mounts attach to the leg. They even
come with rubber padding to protect the frame. BTW, they are meant to
hold cable, so look in the electrical section.

You need to be careful to get the panniers back far enough to avoid heel
contact, but that can be done. My stays are quite short and it works well
for me.

You will also want to get triple chainrings. The extra weight, even
35lbs, makes climbing much harder.

--

David L. Johnson

__o | "What am I on? I'm on my bike, six hours a day, busting my
ass.
_`\(,_ | What are you on?" --Lance Armstrong
(_)/ (_) |


I run an old CADEX ALM1 MTB for 3rd world touring - Suntour components for
reliability / maintainability ....but lets not go into that.......

Over the years my various rack attachments have become increasingly more
flexible as I find even with decent racks I get fatigue fractures at the
rack mounting points. Currently my rear and front lowrider racks are largely
held on with car fuel-line size hoseclamps, with innertube rubber acting as
a buffer.
Works for me.

Hugh Fenton

(Yvonne) wrote in message . com...
Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)?
If you have, what pannier system did you use, and was it succesful or
were there any problems?

I toured quite a bit in Germany on a 1986 Cannondale Criterium racer.
I was 20-22 years old and didn't know any better. I also had a great
time. I carried maybe 20 pounds divided between a large handlebar bag
and a large seat wedge, sleeping and eating in human settlements
instead of cowboy style. Today I prefer to carry more and stay
outside, and I wouldn't recommend a racing bike. These packing
techniques are worth studying, though: http://milly.org/rambouillet/

Yvonne wrote:

Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)?
If you have, what pannier system did you use, and was it succesful or
were there any problems?
I've been looking at an entry level racing bike for this purpose.
It doesn't have braze-ons for panniers and have been advised that a
seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.

I replied:

The most common mechanical failure with bikes overloaded for touring is
spoke breakage in the rear wheel. For a load like this, I'd recommend a
pair of low-rider _front_ panniers. Most front wheels are way overbuilt
compared with rears, and it is very unusual to have any problems in front.

This also will provide more even weight distribution, and avoid issues
of heel clearance with the rear panniers.

There are a number of front racks/panniers that don't require braze ons.
It's also sometimes feasible to temporarily install a touring fork on a
racing bike for this purpose.

After giving this some more thought, it occurred to me to call upon the
trigonometry I learned in high school, and calculate the results of such
a modification. I knew it would work, but I hadn't done the math before.

Typical "road" forks are about 37 cm from axle to crown race.

Typical "hybrid/cross/touring" forks are about 40 cm.

Typical distance from the rear tire patch to the fork crown is about 100
cm.

In this instance, the substitution of the taller fork would slacken the
head angle by 1.7 degrees, say from 73 to 71.3 degrees, certainly a
highly appropriate head angle for a touring bike. The seat tube angle
would also be reduced by the same amount, which is generally a Good
Thing for a touring bike, and the 3 cm greater handlebar height this
makes possible is also likely to desirable for a touring cyclist.

I then calculated the trail, to see how the handling would be liable to
be affected:

Figuring the stock road setup with 23 mm tires and 42.5 mm fork rake,
the trail comes out to 58 mm.

Figuring the modified version with 32 mm tires and 47.5 mm fork rake,
the trail comes out to 66 mm.

This is also an improvement for touring conditions.

In checking my math, I Googled upon a really nice page for calculating
trail: http://www.kreuzotter.de/english/elenk.htm#top

Sheldon "Numbers" Brown
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Anyone who cannot cope with mathematics is not fully human. |
| At best he is a tolerable subhuman who has learned to wear |
| shoes, bathe, and not make messes in the house. |
| --Robert A. Heinlein |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

(Yvonne) writes:

Has anyone used a racing bike for touring (carrying 15kg/35lbs max)?
If you have, what pannier system did you use, and was it succesful or
were there any problems?
I've been looking at an entry level racing bike for this purpose.
It doesn't have braze-ons for panniers and have been advised that a
seatpost carrier would be unsuitable for this weight.

I've used racing bikes for touring using a trailer. The particular
trailer I actually used was a thing called a 'bike hod' which I cannot
recommend since its center of gravity was too high and it had an
unnerving propensity for overturning on fast downhill bends. I plan to
buy myself a BOB Yak or similar one-wheel trailer which I believe will
be a better solution.

However, I'm completely sold on the principle of using a trailer. The
benefits include at the end of the day having an uncluttered bike from
which you can simply unhook the trailer and go off for a blast; having
relatively little effect on the handling and feel of the bike; and,
when manhandling it for example when getting on and off trains, having
two easy loads instead of one awkward and unmanageable one.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'd rather live in sybar-space

In article , Jeff
Wills wrote:

Sheldon Brown wrote in message
...
There are a number of front racks/panniers that don't require braze ons.
It's also sometimes feasible to temporarily install a touring fork on
a racing bike for this purpose.


A couple of the Old Man Mountain racks
( http://www.oldmanmountain.com/index.htm ) mount to the skewer
instead of dropout eyelets. Their "Ultimate Low Rider" front rack
would be able to carry your entire load easily.

Jeff

I own both the Ultimate Low Rider front and the Sherpa rear and te ULR
won't fit on a race bike with carbon forks. I can rig up some type of
U-clamps to clamp the sides of the front rack to the carbon legs if I
want to, but the distributor who sold me the OMM racks recommended
against doing this.

breakage in the rear wheel is reduced.

I think hitting heels on a pannier is only an issue if you use the
largest panniers. I have size 13 (Euro 48/49) feet and never came
close to hitting medium sized MEC panniers on cyclocross frames. Not
even close.


I think it is more of the issue with the length of the chainstays on
racing bikes. Racing bikes have shorter chainstays than real touring
bikes, which contributes to their nimbleness and fast handling. Old
Man Mountain racks solved the problem, at least with my Sherpa rear
rack, by providing 2 pannier hook mounting points. The rear rack
itself is mounted slightly further away than a regular Jandd or the
cheapo MEC rear rack in relation to the seatstays. This solves the
problem with bikes having short chainstays where your heels would hit
the rear panniers.

Unfortunately, I know a buddy of mine who just bought a nice super
light carbon bike (a Trek 5900) (can be lifted by just your pinkie) and
bought the OMM racks for touring with it!! I can see start seeing
problems with attachment points on both carbon legs and seat stays that
they were chewed by some kind of side load stress. I am also surprised
the pair spoking wheels didn't start buckling with all that weight on.

Now, I know he would have many valid reasons to tour with such a nice
and expensive bike, but my concern would be with bikes with carbon legs
and now carbon seatstays like the new 2004 Trek 2200 with Third
Dimension Technology.

I would be more at peace if my friend would use both a large saddle bag
(like a Carradice) and a handle bar bag to tour with his nice light
race bike rather than OMM racks. He also towes a trailer sometimes
when he needs more space, but he is happier with his trailer than with
his OMM racks.. Go figure..

In article xhhwb.219568$275.832671@attbi_s53, Peter
wrote:

Chris Zacho The Wheelman wrote:

I used a racing bike to tour with, once. I only carried about twenty
five pounds (It was just an overnighter), on standard rear and front
lowriders, no HB. But it still handled terribly.

The geometry on a racing frame is all wrong for carrying cargo. It's
designed for nimbleness, not stability, which is what you need if you
are going to be loading it down.

My experience is rather different. I use my Cannondale R800 (criterium
frame) with a handlebar bag and rear rack holding panniers for week-long
bike camping trips. Sure the bike handles a little different with the
extra load, but I've never noticed any stability or other handling
problems. The bike has no clearance for fenders, but the rear rack serves
as a reasonable substitute for one on the rear and I strap on some cut up
plastic soda bottles under the down tube with zip ties to deflect spray
from the front tire away from my legs and feet.


You can actually put fenders on racing bikes now. I am not sure about
the brand name, but the buddy of mine who owns an Atlantis bought a
pair of carbon fibre fenders. Light and expensive as hell, but works
with any racing bikes. They are very thin and I think easily breakable
if you crash.

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:34:11 -0600, Todd Kuzma
wrote:
We see a lot of cross-country tourists at our shop. Since
we are in Illinois, we typically see them somewhere in the
middle of the trip. So, we get to see a lot of what works
and what doesn't. We sell a lot of saddles (after a rider
finds that the saddle that was comfortable on 30 mile local
rides doesn't necessarily work for 80 miles a day for
several weeks).

I hate to risk starting a war, but I'm interested to know:
Have you observed any trends in saddles for such riders? As in,
what the happy ones already have, and what the unhappy ones buy?
What commonly feels good on the long-distance butt?

Todd Kuzma
Heron Bicycles
Tullio's Big Dog Cyclery
LaSalle, Il 815-223-1776
http://www.heronbicycles.com
http://www.tullios.com
--
Rick Onanian

Rick Onanian writes:

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:34:11 -0600, Todd Kuzma
wrote:
We see a lot of cross-country tourists at our shop. Since
we are in Illinois, we typically see them somewhere in the
middle of the trip. So, we get to see a lot of what works
and what doesn't. We sell a lot of saddles (after a rider
finds that the saddle that was comfortable on 30 mile local
rides doesn't necessarily work for 80 miles a day for
several weeks).

I hate to risk starting a war, but I'm interested to know:
Have you observed any trends in saddles for such riders? As in,
what the happy ones already have, and what the unhappy ones buy?
What commonly feels good on the long-distance butt?

There's a potential for a fallacy here. What the happy ones already
have are certainly good long distance saddles, but what the unhappy
ones buy may only appear to be good long distance saddles, and they
may (for all we know) arrive at another LBS another week down the
trail still more unhappy. And of course, with saddles, one size
notoriously does not fit all.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I'd rather live in sybar-space

On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:05:02 GMT, Simon Brooke
may have said:

... And of course, with saddles, one size
notoriously does not fit all.

Now, there's a candidate for understatement of the week!


--
My email address is antispammed; pull WEEDS if replying via e-mail.
Yes, I have a killfile. If I don't respond to something,
it's also possible that I'm busy.
Words processed in a facility that contains nuts.