bikemig 

I did have to file the front brake a little bit on the Raleigh but I did not need to file the brakes on the Moto GR.

Sedgemop 

Good to know. I've been wanting to make a gravel bike out of a Moto GR for a while. This might be the winter.

3alarmer 

...that's the best deal on a large steel frame I saw on a quick look at the Chicago CL. I had one of those in a smaller size, and it has enough clearance for fenders and 27" wheels, IIRC. If you're fitting it with 700c wheels, and no fenders, you should be good to go,

Those were relatively high quality frames, made in Asia by Panasonic (I think), the three mains are butted, and the rest of the tubing is unnamed. I enjoyed riding this one around for years, until I sold it on to someone.

Sedgemop 

I'd inquire about tire clearance on this one too.

https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-v...-restored.html

Sactown_Albert 

If that is the case, adapting a more typical 22 stem just involves gripping the insert portion of the stem in sandpaper and twirling until you sand it down to the proper diameter. This has been done for years to deal with the French stem conundrum.

bikemig 

I'd be concerned about taking that much material from a stem (22.2 to 21.15); with a French stem you are simply taking it down from 22.2 to 22.0.

repechage

those are 27”. Exchange for 700c or tubulars and more room.

repechage

‘that bike is just a terrific fusion of eras. No buyer yet?

3alarmer 

.
...on the Voyageur frames, they definitely do not have a short top tube. That's why you see most of them with relatively short stems, which is how they were sold.
Regardless. I have a long torso, relative to my overall height and inseam length. The cycle shown in my photo fit me very well, even with that shorter stem.

But if you're dead set on a frame with a shorter top tube, that's not the frame you want to buy. But it does meet all your other requirements, at a bargain price. As you can see, for a while I had it set up with 27" wheels and 32mm Schwalbe tires. I can't recall exactly, but I think it might be fully chromed under that black paint.

iab

I'm taking it to the Madison swap. I'm too lazy for any other transaction.

X3speed

think 700x35 would fit?

repechage

the radius of a 700c is 4mm smaller, looking at the brakes the pads are not crammed up, so that clearance should be

OK, the chainstays will be the limiting factor, I do not know if they are indented or round oval round. Sliding the axle back will assist also.

Inquire as to the chainstay metalwork about the current tire.

Doug Fattic 

if I was looking for a gravel bike for myself, I would focus on 60's/early 70's frames when center pull brakes were popular (in other words before Campy regular reach 47/57mm brakes came on the market around 1970). Centerpull brakes had a longer distance between the attaching bolt and the brake shoes. This makes more room for fatter tires. Sometime in the late 70's, Campy started making shorter reach brakes and so did the Japanese. These were often 39 to 49mm (Campy short reach being a bit more). Frames designed for these brakes are what I would avoid. This group is going to be the big majority of what's available. Now it has become popular to use fatter tries necessitating longer reach brakes again. One thing to realize is that builders design a frame for the brake shoe to be either at the top, middle or bottom of the brake slot. That of course affects the available space to fit a tire. My solution would be to take a small 6" ruler with me to measure what space is available.

Sedgemop 

Bike is being sold here on the site. Better off asking the seller about clearance. He can tell you for sure rather than us guessing.

X3speed

haven’t heard back yet

X3speed

this bike is nuts!

Piff 

High trail is preferred for gravel, right? I imagine just about any 80s touring bike would work great. Japanese touring bikes often were shorter along the top.

X3speed

ideally 58tt, 63st, short stem.

repechage

Big travel holiday weekend…

Sactown_Albert 

Should have been more explicit that my suggestion was to start with a French stem which is significantly more available than the proprietary 21.15 stem used by Schwinn.

bikemig 

Removing that much material from a quill stem, besides being a PITA, would scare the heck out of me. YMMV, though.

bikemig 

You might be better off looking for a bike with a 58 cm top tube (which will quite possibly also have a 58/60 cm seat tube). You can get the height you need with the seatpost (there are plenty of tall seatposts out there) and you can get the handlebars up with a nitto technomic or a quill threadless adapter.

Too expensive at $365 (but prices will trend down during the winter) but this 60cm '73 Raleigh Super Course is in nice shape and has lots of clearance for fat tires,
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace...9-8acfdcef4eca

I linked to this earlier but my vote would go to this 70s era Fuji S12s:
https://www.facebook.com/marketplace...e-e42d9526a0e4

Vintage Fujis are very well made bikes and this will make an excellent platform for a gravel mutt. One potential downside to the Fuji, though, is that you may have to do a 650b conversion to get the tire size you want.

Here is a piece from Sheldon Brown talking about why top tube length matters more than seat tube length. I think he's right:

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

Classtime 

If the intended use is to race on gravel, shorter chain stays are preferred. What is our budget?

iab

Just wondering, why does that matter one iota at all? Greater races with greater racers have been done with long chain stays. They had long chain stays when roads were were pretty much mostly gravel, why were they wrong then?

theblackbullet

If you're allowed to run non-original wheel size, I personally would be looking to do a 27 to 700c or 26 to 700c conversion. This is my 84 850 converted from 26" to 700c that I use as a gravel bike:



It's setup with barcons mounted on Paul thumbies seem to be legal as well?







1983 Trek 520 converted from 27" also clears the same 700x38c GravelKing Slick without any trouble.