Not quite a "beta" level touring bike when it wears an original Sugino AT crankset at first thought, but some mild down-spec of the balance of the components perhaps makes it less than top-of-the-line?
I bought this Nishiki Seral from Goodwill as a back-up bike, and because it's crankset was worth far more than the a$k. I had already secured a Six-Ten as a replacement for my earlier ('77) Miyata Gran-Tour that I had been hammering off road for some years so needed to retire (I donated it).
The Seral handles difficult trail riding about as well as the Six-Ten, helping to keep my CX skills current year-round.
Like the Six-Ten, the frame geometry seems to lean toward the Sport-Touring end of the spectrum (the Six-Ten has 73-degree frame angles versus the 72-degree angles of the Two-Ten and the 1000). A Centurion Pro-Tour is yet more sprightly (subs for a road bike quite frankly, in a good way
).
There was a period of a few years around 2006 when touring bikes flooded into our local thrift stores, with good examples selling for between $20 and $40.
The flood of road bikes had been in the years prior, as many baby-boomers moved up to my hilly foothills region from the bay area but obviously didn't take to riding their old bikes in such hilly terrain.
One can quickly gauge a bike's design intent by measuring how many fingers fit between the tire and the seat tube, more than two and it's a real touring bike (or it's a UO8/9/10), less than two fingers suggests sporting intentions, i.e. a road bike.
These "beta"-level and "sport-touring" bikes usually came with a rear rack, which I find greatly enhances their off-road prowess in terms of weight distribution, with climbing traction helped further by their modest (about two fingers) chainstay-length dimensions.
