Moisture

What do you guys think of bombtracks line of touring bikes? I'm looking to start doing some mild touring this spring.

10 Wheels

Way too pricey

CargoDane

It's in "Commuting"?

Anyway, I took a look, and to be honest, the one that speaks to me the most is one from their "urban" line:

https://bombtrack.com/2021-munroe-cargo/


But (and this is big to me): None of their bikes seems to have a split backstay for a belt - not even one in their "Urban" line - which makes all of them less of an option for me.

Edit: And they're steel. Not something I want at all.

10 Wheels

One can Tour on any bike.
Fred here did ,2000 miles on a $60 bike camping the entire ride.

mev

Your subject line is rather misleading.

Anyways, here is Stu with his bike cycling through northern Australia.

indyfabz

They’re on to him in General.

indyfabz

Glad to see he fixed his flat.

mstateglfr 

What does this have to do with the thread title?

saddlesores

nonononono!!!!!!!!!! that's now how forums are s'posed to work.

the person that opens a photo thread normally starts it off by
posting a few pictures to get the conversation going.

i would'a thunk you were flogging bombtrack bikes, but you didn't
bother to include a link. and the new milleminal way is to add a
link to your youtube channel review where you can monetize the
clicks, tricking other forum members into visiting your space.

i'm afraid your method is just plain lazy and rather pointless.

https://tse2-mm.cn.bing.net/th/id/OI...j?pid=Api&rs=1

dgodave

Why does there need to be "bomb" in the name?

Its like "Surly". Who wants a bike named after behaving like a spoiled jerk? (Well, I do... but thats despite the name, not because of it).

mstateglfr 

Wow, can't say either of those names bother me in the least. I have never given a second thought to either, really.

When I hear 'bombtrack', i think of 'bombing down the track', meaning going fast on a route/run.

Interesting how a name can disappoint/offend someone and not another person.
Naming products has to be exhausting for companies- weighing the positives and negatives, seeing how the name translates, etc.

dgodave

"Surly" sounds like an appeal to 90's pre-teen wanna be skaters.

(Disclosure: I love my Surly Krampus, which Surly named after a very mean northern European anti-Santa beast.)

dgodave

Mods please move^^^ to politics section.

Happy Feet

I deleted it for you. The connection did not even cross my mind. I'm Canadian. No offense meant

But now you have it in your quote. You can delete that by editing the post.

dgodave

Haha. I was totally kidding. No offense taken.

Happy Feet

OMG... YOU were being Surly!

dgodave

I blame my bike.

Moisture

Why don't you like steel.

Thst bike looks weird. Is it for cargo?

saddlesores

the Munroe Cargo

6061-T6 aluminium frame with hydroformed downtube, through axle dropouts and cage, rack and fender mounts.

CargoDane

Oh! That is nice! Perfect! Thank you

CargoDane

Yes, it's for cargo (Or simply just a bag for work or grocery getting or whatever). It's sort of like a miniature Omnium cargo. Or what is referred to as a "short john" (as opposed to a "long john".


As for steel, I don't like it, because I don't like it. Corrosion being one of the reasons as I don't do "good-weather bikes", I ride my bikes year round, and I don't like the weight of steel bikes either. Now, people can own steel bikes as much as they do, and I have to admit that a lot of "pretty" bikes I stumble upon are steel (no sarcasm, I do mean they're pretty).

The Omnium Cargo I own myself is made from titanium because I didn't want their "standard" frame which is steel. I haven't owned a steel bike for 25-30 years or so as it is something I actively avoid.

In the end, it is not some deep "belief" I feel the need to "convert" people to or whatever. It is just a personal preference.

That said, I have just been corrected that that particular model of theirs is actually alu, so that's good! It still doesn't have a backstay splitter for a belt, but at least the frame is not something that needs maintenance itself.

Moisture

True, aluminum is much more resistant to corrosion.

As for me personally, I prefer Steel because of its ride quality. My old aluminum bike was simply too stiff and jarring. I don't need this type of stiffness. I understand that newer aluminum framed have come a long way with comfort and all, but a newer style aluminum frame really doesn't weigh any less than a high quality vintage Chromoly frame.

My old GT MTB weighs 20lb, which is impressive for an aluminum hardtail. My friends Norco Monterey SL is made from cromoly but its also super light. A very high quality frame.

My 25" steel framed Norco is a bit heavier, maybe around 25lb but the geometry of the bike fits me so well that the efficiency really helps to make up for it.i feel faster on climbs and in.general even with the extra weight. Bonus that it adds to the smooth ride quality.

mstateglfr 

Your bike with MTB tires and a suspension fork was too jarring? You prefer steel because you have very limited experience and what you have works for you. A preference without experience has limited value.
You declared a wildly ill fitting MTB was the perfect fit for you and now claim your next bike is perfect fitting. Its as if you dont know much yet.

A quality new aluminum frame weighs less than a quality vintage steel frame.
A size 56 CAAD12 frame weighs just under 1100g. A size 56 531 road frame from 40 years ago would have weighed 1850g +/- 100g.
That is a significant difference in frame weight.

Your GT bike does not weigh 20#. Add 10# to that.
A Norco Monterey SL was nicer than the standard Monterey, but it was not 'a very high quality frame'. It was a good mid-range general road frame.

CargoDane

Aluminium can be non-jarring as well. It's about geometry (and wheel base) mostly. That said, my mini-velo (Dahon Smooth Hound) can be jarring too under the right circumstances, but that is not due to the material.

I've had loads of alu bikes, and apart from the mini-velo none of them was jarring. Least of all is the Bullitt (a long john). It is by far the least "jarring" bike I own (it even feels "soft" at times). The Omnium cargo (Ti) feels much stiffer than the Bullitt, but it is not jarring despite the oversized tubes compared to the steel version (steel omnium). It just feels stiff as it should be when you carry a lot of weight.

I think you're confusing lack of flex with "jarring". I don't think flex is a good thing, regardless of the material. In fact, you have to have a minimum of stifness to the rear frame to use a Rohloff hub, if not, it will jump gears or not shift properly. I have seen some titanium bikes with the same diameter as a steel version, you don't want that as that is making the whole bike more flexy than the steel version.
Carbon can be made as stiff as you want it, or as flexible as you want it. It all depends. It's not the material choice that makes the difference, it is how you implement it.

But it doesn't matter. My preferred metal is titanium. When it does flex due to loads, you don't fatigue it like you would an alu frame, and you don't have the weight or corrosion of steel. Carbon is great for some things too.

My fork on the Omnium is steel. Luckily, it isn't a super expensive fork, so if it begins to rust, is otherwise damaged, or I suspect it is rusting inside, I can buy a new one for little money. That said, I'd prefer a fork made from (oversized) titanium for weight, ease of mind, strength, and corrosion resistance. I'd consider a BMX vert fork from CF if I could figure out how to attach a tab for the steerer rod (both my cargo bikes employ steerer rods).A custom titanium fork would not have that problem.

Moisture

I weighed the GT at exactly 21lb. That was with the suspension post which weighs almost 2 pounds. Obviously if I had to use over 100mm of spacers, stem risers, a riser stem, riser handlebar... It not a good fit.

My current Norco is just about maxed out for me in terms of standover clearance. Some other 64cm frames out there actually won't fit me at all. I'd have to go with around 62cm or 61 depending on the bike.

The reach on the norco is well on the short side, and the stack at roughly 640mm is about the best ill get unless we're talking about a newer bike which has a sloped top tube. Plus, thanks to my tall quill stem and riser bars, the stack is plenty high enough.

so how much better of a fit can I possibly get? Pretty much any bike i find out there with sufficient stsndover clearance will have either a very similar or even more drawn out stack to reach ratio than what i already have. Plus, being threadless, the stem won't be very high up.

I understand that jts the reach which determines how the bike fits when pedalling out of the saddle, and the ETT which determines the fit inside the saddle - both of these measures feel super comfortable to me and the power transfer is effective.

In the future, id get something with a slightly shorter reach so that my butt hovers more directly over the saddle when pedalling standing up, and then I won't need to have such a high stack.

I think I have a good understanding by this point of what I need in terms of fit.