filterlessjoe

I would like to get into the world of bikepacking. My plan is to stick to the Rockies for a while with touring based camping trips, but I would like to do some something like the continental divide and ultimately some major trips outside of the US (thinking about central and south america).

As to which bike to get, I am pretty split much split on the Surly Ogre and the Salsa Fargo 3. I don't have the money right now, so basically I am just trying to figure out which bike I should set my heart on. It seems to me that based on frame geometry and handlebars, the Fargo leans towards the touring side of mountain bike touring and the Ogre leans toward the Mountain biking. Is that an accurate assessment?

Does any one have experience with both bikes, or advice that I should keep in mind? I'm an amateur with big ideas, so I'm super open to whatever you guys can tell me.

fietsbob

hard tail mountain bikes generally are fine.. road riding a suspension fork
is probably not needed.

Surly and Salsa are both one company QBP.

29ers are a 622 rim, 26" tires are 559 rims ,
more common to find 26" spares in the boonies
of say.. Brazil, Bolivia..

egear

I have a Fargo build underway. Nice frame. Personally I liked the Fargo the best out of the Surley, Salsa cycles I compared. It has more
braze-ons then anything I have seen. I rode one at Freeze Thaw cycles and it felt good. Went with the medium size. That said I have tryed to use my 700CX O-8 off road and it was not a great sucess, to tall. I hope to have mine on the trail by months end.

pacificcyclist

If you are planning to tour outside of the USA, then I suggest you sticking with 26" wheels as they are more accessible parts wise in South America and Asia as well as Europe.
Any cheap 26" hardtail without the front suspension fork will work and will save you lots of money putting towards nicer racks like Old Man Mountain or Tubus.
Fargo bikes are simply off-road bikes with drop bars. If that's what you want, that's a good platform to start but 700c and or 29er tires and wheels are not at all accessible in 3rd world countries. You need to keep this in mind.

Last but not least, you also need to factor in the cost of taking your bike on a plane. Some airlines charge nothing, but most airlines these days nickel and dime you to death with excessive luggage fees!

cyccommute 

It depends on how much 'mountain biking' you want to do. If your route is mostly on paved roads or on very smooth dirt roads, a rigid bike is probably best. If your routes and desires lean more towards routes that may be rougher and more rocky, a rigid bike quickly loses it's allure as does a bike with drop handlebars. Drops put you way out over the front wheel and, when things get steep, being that far forward can be challenging. You need some very good bike handling skills and some steely nerves.

The Surly suffers from a couple of issues. First it's has a very short wheelbase (look at the curved seat tube) . If you are pulling a trailer that's not going to be an issue but if you carry bags, you'll be clipping them all the time with your heels. Second, the rear facing dropouts are a pain when (not if but when) you have to change a flat. The rear facing drop outs are okay for single speed but not so great for a derailer equipped bike.

If you want to do some thing like the Adventure Cycle Great Divide Trail, you'd be better off with a suspension fork on a hardtail at the least. Spend some money on a good fork with a lockout for those times when you ride pavement. I, personally, like Fox which go from full rigid to silky smooth with the flick of a lever.

If you want the ultimate off road touring bike, look for a Moots YBB softtail bike. Takes the edge off rear wheel strikes, improves rear wheel traction and the rear suspension is as simple as it gets. They aren't cheap. Even used you are looking at a wad of cash to buy one but they do make excellent off-road touring bikes.

fietsbob

that last issue had me buy a Bike Friday Pocket Llama, the 406 BMX style tires are also common.

and they made their travel bike line to pack into a Suitcase, to skirt "Bike" surcharges..

Wouldn't hammer down hill racing, but It's fine on unpaved roads
or poor condition paved(?) ones..

Jude

I have a Troll (26er version of the Ogre) and the rear dropouts are a PITA, but it's not that huge of a deal. It's just something to get adjusted to.

Still, if I were getting a 29er, I'm not sure if I'd have picked the Ogre or Fargo. Ogre definitely has more versatility, but the touring geometry of the Fargo has a lot going for it.

Does the Fargo take suspension forks if you want to switch? That could be a deciding factor.

mikhalit

It does, the latest version (Fargo 3) measures 468mm axle to crown (like 80mm travel suspension fork if i remember correctly). Same as Ogre btw.

filterlessjoe

Hmm I didn't know surly and salsa were he same but I Jess that makes sense seeing as how so many of the parts on the surly are salsa parts.

filterlessjoe

That sounds great but i gotta look at something closer to $1500 or 1000. What kind of bike should I be looking at? Do a lot of bikes come with braze for panniers?

BigBlueToe

I'm still not clear on what type of riding you'll be doing. Do you want to ride on roads and go hiking from your campsites, or do you want to ride off-road on trails and dirt roads? If you will mostly be on roads a regular touring bike, like Surly's LHT would be good. If you're going to be on something rough, like the Great Divide trail, you'll want something with something to absorb the jolts.

I rode the northern U. S. portion of the Great Divide last summer. One of the guys in our party did it with a Cannondale touring bike. He did pretty well, although it looked like a struggle. He didn't break any spokes and only had one pinch flat. I used a 29er hardtail I built up from a $99-on-sale frae I got from Performance. I also had no broken spokes, no mechanical issues, and no flats. I felt my bike was much more suitable for the rough conditions. I put a Thudbuster seatpost on it, and I think it was a good thing for that route. I used a Bob trailer.

A lady in our party did it with a full-suspension Cannondale. It was probably comfortable, but the configuration in the back made it hard to secure her rear rack. Her panniers bounced and clanked with every jolt, and the rack eventually worked loose (when she was riding alone and she didn't have a wrench because she knew one of us would have tools.) She didn't have front panniers.

filterlessjoe

definitely on the trails. I think Ill need something more than a LHT or any other road oriented tourer. I guess after seeing all that people have wrote in response to my questions, I am much more open to getting a cheap mountain bike frame and building it up. I suppose I can always get something super nice down the road and switch the components over. What frame did you get from performance?

cyccommute 

I know that a Moots YBB is out of most people's price range. I have one built from a frame I bought used which could fit in the $1500 category but those can be tough to find. I was throwing that out as a suggestion for a future bike and/or something to look for.

You are in luck on the price range however. Most hardtail mountain bikes don't come with fender/rack mounts. At least most of them in the high dollar range. But many of the lower end...i.e. cheaper...mountain bikes come with rack mounts. The Rockhopper, for example, has mounts and comes in a 26er ($880), 29er ($990) or comp versions of each (roughly $1100). They all have forks with lockouts. While the Rockhopper doesn't have the level of equipment that a Stumpjumper does, it would be a better choice for mountain bike touring because it has mounts.

You'll find Trek, Giant, Jamis, etc all have lower level bikes that have mounts while their higher level bikes don't. That's where I'd start looking.

If you want to go super cheap, you could get a Nashbar mountain bike frame for $99 right now and build it to your liking. I've owned a couple of Nashbar frames and they are well made.

filterlessjoe

Well that's encouraging. Thanks. That sounds like the route, Ill probably end up going. I have heard that mountain bikes from the mid eighties and early nineties are best for touring. Does looking for a Giant or a rockhopper from that era seem like a good idea? I know I can find those cheap around here.

bradtx

Those are generally good choices because they're often fully rigid and adapt as versatile tourers. If you're going to ride more challenging surfaces than pavement and graded dirt roads/paths, a front suspension would be good. I'm not a big fan of DS bikes, but I do like Moots' YBB design.

I chose my mountain bike because at the time it was as high up Trek's line up I could go and still have provisions for a rear rack. The fork's too old for a lock out, but I don't think that feature is critical with a well tuned fork. You can very likely find a good bike on CL.

Brad

cyccommute 

I don't think I'd go back that far. If you want to make a touring bike out of a mountain bike, the 80s and early 90s bikes are long wheelbase but they suffer from that wheelbase for off-road use. Long bikes don't climb all that well in rough conditions. They also have 1" headsets which limits your options if you want to (or need to) replace the fork. Suspension forks for them are almost nonexistent.

I'd go with a late 90s to modern bike for those reasons.

I disagree on the fork and a lockout. It depends on the rider, the rider's weight and the rider's riding style. If you are lightweight, you can probably get by without a lockout. However if you are a heavy and/or aggressive rider, there are even forks with lockouts that you can overwhelm. The Fox brand fork have a good lockout that make the shock rigid enough that I can't make them move (heavy, aggressive rider). Other brands aren't nearly as positive. The Rock Shox Reba, for example, never had a positive lockout for me. Even while pedaling in the saddle, I could move the shock through most of its travel with a huge air pressure in the chamber (like 200psi).

filterlessjoe

Do you have any examples of bikes that I should keep my eye out for on CL? I saw a late 2000s rockhopper for 300. My worry is that if Ill need to upgrade components, I might as well get a higher end bike.