View Single Post
Old 08-19-19, 06:43 AM
  #18  
staehpj1
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,868
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1251 Post(s)
Liked 755 Times in 561 Posts
Originally Posted by Trevtassie
Ummmm, you mean like remote areas in South America, where a ripped up tire is a show stopper, until you can organise a decent new one? I get the impression the OP isn't going to be credit card touring. There's nothing lively about a bike loaded for remote touring, it's gonna be as heavy as hell anyway, food, fuel, maybe extra water. Even touring in Europe, if you are camping you end up with a reasonable load.

There currently is only one officially tubeless touring tire in a size that will fit the OPs bike, the Surly Extra Terrestrial in 26" x 46mm. I can't recommend them because I haven't used them, only the 2.5" version, which I ran tubeless, and they suck because the mileage you get isn't very good heavily loaded. The 46 may be different as the tread pattern is much closer, and even then they are going to come in around 800g or so anyway.
Yep, that is a reason/place where it may make sense and where heavy stiff tires are the most common approach. My thought has been that before I'd consider carrying tires twice as heavy I'd consider carrying a spare or even two spares if I was that worried. I am not saying that I'd necessarily do that, but that I'd consider it before going to the extreme of double the weight in tires. It is probably moot because old age seems to be creeping up on me faster than I seem to be tackling items on my bucket list these days and touring in South America probably won't happen for me with a lot of other things on the list ahead of it. Also the thing is I have gotten to the point that I just don't want to ride a bike with 50# of stuff on it or carry a backpack with more than a UL base, few days of food/fuel, and a water filter. I can see myself doing another few multi thousand mile tours camping and cooking, but they will be with a base weight of well under 20#. The same for backpacking,. I'll probably do more moderate length backpacking trips, but there will be water to filter and food resupply points every few days. I am getting too old to be a pack mule even though I am not yet 70.

I have only toured in the US, so maybe this is naive, but I'd still suggest that just maybe it isn't impossible to travel relatively light regardless of where you go in reasonably temperate or hot climates until the distances between food and water resupply get too great. As you say food and fuel can be heavy and can be the limiting factor in whether fairly light travel is possible. I have generally not found it too hard to backpack with a base gear weight of 10-14# of camping and cooking gear. Add 2-3# of food and fuel per day depending on how carefully you pack and what foods are available at restock points. Water isn't too big of a problem when surface water is available to filter/treat, otherwise it can be a pretty big deal.

I have generally found that applying those same methods used in backpacking worked fine for touring and that most typically restock points have been much more frequent except when I went off road touring. I was packed fairly heavy by my current standards for a trip across the Southern Tier with 14# base weight. Since then I managed to pick some nicer gear that allowed a bit more comfort and protection from the elements without additional weight and even with a possibility of trimming a bit depending on specific choices for a given trip.

So all of that leaves me with a question that may shoot a huge hole in my possibly very naive preconceived notions. How far between resupply points do folks touring in South America typically need to go when on a trip like the folks I tend to run into who are riding from Alaska to the tip of Argentina?
staehpj1 is offline  
Likes For staehpj1: