Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Touring
Reload this Page >

Fully loaded carbon ?

Notices
Touring Have a dream to ride a bike across your state, across the country, or around the world? Self-contained or fully supported? Trade ideas, adventures, and more in our bicycle touring forum.

Fully loaded carbon ?

Old 11-23-19, 05:11 PM
  #51  
DeadGrandpa
Senior Member
 
DeadGrandpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Carolina
Posts: 1,210

Bikes: Too many, yet not enough.

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 491 Post(s)
Liked 307 Times in 198 Posts
Originally Posted by JohnJ80
Interested in hearing about your experiences with the Extrawheel trailer especially it's performance uphill. We're planning a couple of tours, our most "touring" centric bikes are still some performance cross bikes and we didn't enjoy the ride with 20-30lbs on the bike in rear panniers. We're thinking that the Extrawheel trailers using our fairly light (at least in comparison to full on touring bikes) cross bikes and the trailers is about a wash to the weight of the fully loaded touring bike so the only real difference is the addition of a lightly loaded wheel's rolling resistance. Does that sound about right?

Bottom line, we are fairly light weight on touring gear and will keep it all around 25lbs and certainly below 30lbs.
I rode 500 miles in Alaska pulling the ExtraWheel trailer. Most of the time, I forgot it was there. I took a spill on a straight gravel downhill, as I tried to improve my line by moving to another tire track. Wheels somehow went out from under me. The trailer came un-hitched from the bike, but nothing was damaged and I picked myself up and carried on. Uphill wasn't a big deal. Certainly I shifted to a lower (small chain ring) gear, because "weight is weight" and even a moderate 6% grade can get tiring after 4 or 5 miles. I've ridden a steel touring bike with front and rear panniers and a trunk bag. It was a Novara Safari and I liked it until it got crushed in a rear-ended. Heavy bike, though. Comparable loaded ride experience but overall the trailer saved me from buying a full blown touring bike. My every day bike became a touring bike, just add the ExtraWheel trailer. To be clear, I still had a handlebar roll, full frame bag and seat bag, and I carried 4-5 days of food+ lots of water, so the trailer came in very handy.

So yeah, I like my trailer, but I tend to look at few previous purchases as "mistakes". If you're comfortable riding your cross bike for hours at a time, and the gearing is low enough for the terrain you want to ride, I see no reason to have a dedicated touring bike. I could certainly be wrong, but I like my modified carbon Jamis for all pavement riding and some gravel (though I wish I could fit wider tires). The ExtraWheel trailer lets my Jamis be my (almost) anything bike.
DeadGrandpa is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 05:42 PM
  #52  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by BigAura
For me fully-loaded means carrying gear on front and rear and gear should include sleeping, cooking, tent, plus room for a reasonable amount of clothing and personal items. I would not recommend this kind of carbon-rig for expedition touring such as I did on my Alaska tour.

.

I understand the definition of fully loaded to be about what you carry and not necessarily how you carry it....so sleeping stuff, cooking, tent, plus room for a reasonable amount of clothing and personal items is fully loaded to me. Whether a bike is also good for adventure riding is going to depend on tire clearance, maybe suspension and certainly the ability to carry sufficient supplies. You can do all that with many types of frames.


The 25mm tire limit on my carbon Cervelo means that I would not strike out on any really rough stuff with it, but for road touring and light gravel it's great. As you can see you don't need frame inserts or multiple bikepacking bags to tour "fully loaded". But I hanker for bigger tires to give me a few more options so a carbon Specialized Diverge is top of my list and I think that will be an excellent on and off road touring/adventure bike.


nun is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 06:09 PM
  #53  
Miele Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,655

Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times in 640 Posts
Originally Posted by DropBarFan
Wow, Haanjo 5C Carbon rated for 300 lbs, same as Surly Trucker! Today I did a grocery run on 5C--almost 30 lbs stuff in front panniers on Tubus Tara rack, surprisingly little flex & no shimmy at 28 mph.

IMHO both traditional touring bikes & "adventure" bikes limit tire width too much. Wide tires give a huge increase in comfort for a minor speed penalty. My avg speed on Haanjo 5C with 54mm tires is the same as Surly Disc Trucker with 50mm tires & gives a much softer ride, I rarely have to slow down for bumpy stretches.
That's precisely why I started adapting rigid frame/fork MTBs to drop-bar touring set ups. I can put 26" x 2.125 knobby tires on any of those without problem and still have room for full fenders. On the dirt logging/mining roads I tour on those 26" x 2.125 knobby tires come in real handy.

One thing I notice with rear pannier racks and panniers is that if the weight is behind the axle (further away from the seat-tube) that shimmy can happen fairly quickly. I had shimmy occur once on a shakedown ride with a loaded MTB. I got off the bike, loosened the straps holding the rack to the seatstays, slid the rack forward about 1/4" or 1/2" (it wasn't much) and the shimmy was immediately gone.

I think that eventually there will be carbon fiber touring bicycles and/or frames offered. In my opinion the reason they're not yet is that manufacturers are more interested in other areas where they can sell more bicycles/frames rather than in a niche market such as touring.

Cheers
Miele Man is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 06:19 PM
  #54  
Miele Man
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 4,655

Bikes: iele Latina, Miele Suprema, Miele Uno LS, Miele Miele Beta, MMTB, Bianchi Model Unknown, Fiori Venezia, Fiori Napoli, VeloSport Adamas AX

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1324 Post(s)
Liked 927 Times in 640 Posts
Originally Posted by djb
absolutely, especially with 2lb-3lb tents and everything nowadays.

clothes arent especially heavy, thats a given, but one can see how it would be easy to add on weight for one person bit by bit depending on diff things--carrying some extra warm clothes, maybe full rain gear that isnt all lightweight (my better rain jacket is a bit heavy, didnt want to spend 300 bucks on a lighter one), maybe a heavier tent (mine is more like 5lbs and a bit, didnt want to spend 400 or 500 bucks for a 2.5lb one person tent) , add a camera, a laptop or a tablet, chargers for them, a cell phone, and you end up with X more pounds too, add in a spare tire and extra tubes if going somewhere where it might be really hard to find replacements-add a few more pounds, a water filter or whatever is a bit of weight also, maybe extra spare parts and or tool kit if going off somewhere far off and want to be really independant.

its that what I was getting at, that yes its easy to pack light or lightish depending on the situation, but sometimes the situation ends up being diff and its fairly easy to find 50lbs on the bike, especially for a longer trip with a wide range of temps and or more unknowns making it wiser to take extra stuff.
Did you look inside my touring gear when it's packed? LOL You sound a lot like me. When I tour in Northern Ontario, Canada, I need to take stuff for warm weather and for cool weather, for dry weather and for wet weather. Since my touring up there is well away from sources or resupply, I have to carry all my food for the entire two weeks duration of the tour with me. I also carry more bike repair tools than I would if touring on paved roads where I could catch a ride if something broke.

Cheers
Miele Man is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 06:27 PM
  #55  
linus
Crawler
 
linus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OH~ CANADA
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 211 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by nun
I understand the definition of fully loaded to be about what you carry and not necessarily how you carry it....so sleeping stuff, cooking, tent, plus room for a reasonable amount of clothing and personal items is fully loaded to me. Whether a bike is also good for adventure riding is going to depend on tire clearance, maybe suspension and certainly the ability to carry sufficient supplies. You can do all that with many types of frames.


The 25mm tire limit on my carbon Cervelo means that I would not strike out on any really rough stuff with it, but for road touring and light gravel it's great. As you can see you don't need frame inserts or multiple bikepacking bags to tour "fully loaded". But I hanker for bigger tires to give me a few more options so a carbon Specialized Diverge is top of my list and I think that will be an excellent on and off road touring/adventure bike.


The worst part of the setup is not what you have or how much, it's how you carry them. Having weight that high is probably the worst part of the setup.
linus is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 07:02 PM
  #56  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by linus
The worst part of the setup is not what you have or how much, it's how you carry them. Having weight that high is probably the worst part of the setup.

Moment is the critical factor and as most of the weight is under my bum it has minimal effect...also we are talking about pretty low gear weights.
nun is offline  
Likes For nun:
Old 11-23-19, 07:23 PM
  #57  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 13,192
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2732 Post(s)
Liked 955 Times in 785 Posts
Originally Posted by Miele Man
Did you look inside my touring gear when it's packed? LOL You sound a lot like me. When I tour in Northern Ontario, Canada, I need to take stuff for warm weather and for cool weather, for dry weather and for wet weather. Since my touring up there is well away from sources or resupply, I have to carry all my food for the entire two weeks duration of the tour with me. I also carry more bike repair tools than I would if touring on paved roads where I could catch a ride if something broke.

Cheers
I think too another factor is that younger folks will put up with less stuff, and less comfort, and or some folks are just more tolerant of minimal stuff and just living with x amount of discomfort.

and as you say, diff areas and range of temps and stuff all play a part too, as your Black flies, little black flies in North Ontar ee ario scenario can attest.

djb is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 07:32 PM
  #58  
linus
Crawler
 
linus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OH~ CANADA
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 211 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 15 Posts
Originally Posted by nun
Moment is the critical factor and as most of the weight is under my bum it has minimal effect...also we are talking about pretty low gear weights.
LOL...ok. I guess MotoGP tech and cycling techs are wrong.
linus is offline  
Old 11-23-19, 07:53 PM
  #59  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by linus
LOL...ok. I guess MotoGP tech and cycling techs are wrong.
There's a couple of things going on and as panniers on racks are generally a long way from the center of mass of the bike it's better to mount them down low close to the contact point with the ground. Putting a saddlebag tight up against the seatpost is a way to keep the center of mass very close to the rider and minimize effects on the handling of the bike. It's also nice that there's no issue with keeping the weight balanced between two panniers. It's a set up that's been used for many decades and has been adopted widely for bikepacking, although there is a tendency to add top tube and frame bags too. The handlebar bag position isn't ideal, but again the weight is quite low at about 6 lbs loaded and the convenience is worth it. Having everything in just two bags that don't mount to the frame makes the set up very versatile so that almost any bike can be used to tour. It also makes it easy to lift the loaded bike over obstacles and up and down stairs.

But to answer the OP's question, if a bike has the attachment points be it carbon or steel you can use racks and panniers, but make sure the geometry is right as well. As an example you can fit a rear rack to a carbon Specialized Diverge and hang some panniers on there, but make sure you don't get any heal strike.

Last edited by nun; 11-24-19 at 11:26 AM.
nun is offline  
Old 11-24-19, 12:19 PM
  #60  
tyrion
Senior Member
 
tyrion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 4,077

Bikes: Velo Orange Piolet

Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2228 Post(s)
Liked 2,011 Times in 972 Posts
Originally Posted by nun
Moment is the critical factor and as most of the weight is under my bum it has minimal effect...also we are talking about pretty low gear weights.
I too find that location - right under the rear of the seat - a good place to carry a fair amount of weight.
tyrion is offline  
Old 11-24-19, 01:51 PM
  #61  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by linus
You can be defensive all you want, but stop preaching BS.
Thanks
nun is offline  
Likes For nun:
Old 11-24-19, 02:07 PM
  #62  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by tyrion
I too find that location - right under the rear of the seat - a good place to carry a fair amount of weight.
I tend to carry a fair amount of weight on top of the saddle as well.

Yes, the old Carradice saddlebag has worked well for a long time. It’s interesting to note that originally it was not intended to be used with a rack and that there are versions specifically made to avoid tire rub on bikes with fairly low saddles. People often complain that the reflective decals on their bag’s flap point upwards away from traffic, well that’s because it’s designed to be visible with the bag strapped to the seat post rather than a rack.Using one with a rack is also not optimal as it moves the mass farther from the rider. The farther the load gets from the rider the greater the “tail wagging the dog” effect happens and then you want to get the load down low.

Last edited by nun; 11-24-19 at 02:31 PM.
nun is offline  
Likes For nun:
Old 11-24-19, 02:31 PM
  #63  
Leebo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 5,721

Bikes: Kona Dawg, Surly 1x1, Karate Monkey, Rockhopper, Crosscheck , Burley Runabout,

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 854 Post(s)
Liked 111 Times in 66 Posts
Steel works for me. Bike is 30, gear+food+water is never less than 30. Steel frame vs crabon frame difference? 2-3 lbs? Cheers.
Leebo is offline  
Old 11-24-19, 05:10 PM
  #64  
mev
bicycle tourist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Austin, Texas, USA
Posts: 2,279

Bikes: Trek 520, Lightfoot Ranger, Trek 4500

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 462 Post(s)
Liked 250 Times in 171 Posts
Originally Posted by Carbonfiberboy
Carbon is actually the easiest material to repair on tour. All you need is some epoxy and fiberglass or carbon tows. You could even carry a very light repair kit with some sandpaper, a little bottle of resin, hardener, and some carbon fiber tows. Most modern metal frames would be extremely difficult to repair, but carbon is fairly simple if you educate yourself. Just google: "repair carbon fiber frames yourself".
What are the failure modes for carbon frames failing and what is the reliability?

I don't have direct experience here. I was on a Ride the Rockies once where someone with a carbon fiber front fork had run into an obstacle - splintering the fork in dramatic looking fashion. So a failure like that I see more as a "replace" than "repair" situation.

I figure failures in general are rare for most all bicycle materials. Are they more so or less so for carbon vs. other materials?
mev is offline  
Old 11-24-19, 09:54 PM
  #65  
dwmckee
Senior Member
 
dwmckee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 2,468

Bikes: Co-Motion Cappuccino Tandem,'88 Bob Jackson Touring, Co-Motion Cascadia Touring, Open U.P., Ritchie Titanium Breakaway, Frances Cycles SmallHaul cargo bike. Those are the permanent ones; others wander in and out of the stable occasionally as well.

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 427 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 339 Times in 229 Posts
Originally Posted by 1-track-mind
Ha. I say if you really want to kill touring bikes, then continue to make carbon frames and forks with rack mounts as if they could really handle the weight. Is it planned obsolescence or just stupidity ?
You just have to watch the rated weight these are designed for. Most mfrs will specify rated for a rack load xx pounds. Some of the "light touring" bikes like the Renegade are rated for racks but limited to a 25 - 35 pound load as compared to a full touring bike that might be rated for 50 pounds or even more on the rack in some cases. Supporting rack mounts does not mean rated for a 50 pound load. These new "light" touring bikes have opened up a great class of bikes for weekend credit card tourers that do not want to drag around a full on touring bike. They just are not necessarily designed for a full touring load.

If you are not sure what the limits of a fork or a frame are for touring loads, you should ask the manufacturer what thet are rated for and stay within those limits. There may be carbon forks and frames rated for touring loads, etc...
dwmckee is offline  
Old 11-24-19, 10:16 PM
  #66  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by dwmckee
You just have to watch the rated weight these are designed for. Most mfrs will specify rated for a rack load xx pounds. Some of the "light touring" bikes like the Renegade are rated for racks but limited to a 25 - 35 pound load as compared to a full touring bike that might be rated for 50 pounds or even more on the rack in some cases. Supporting rack mounts does not mean rated for a 50 pound load. These new "light" touring bikes have opened up a great class of bikes for weekend credit card tourers that do not want to drag around a full on touring bike. They just are not necessarily designed for a full touring load.

If you are not sure what the limits of a fork or a frame are for touring loads, you should ask the manufacturer what that are rated for and stay within those limits. There may be carbon forks and frames rated for touring loads, etc...
It's important to be aware of any weight recommendations on a bike and personally I would never clamp anything around a carbon seat post, stay or fork. It's also true that carbon gravel
and endurance bikes with relaxed geometries and places to attach things are great for credit card touring. However, as a full touring load can now be around 20lbs they can also make excellent "fully loaded" bikes using either small lightweight panniers or more bikepacking type set ups. Here's my camping set up. It has everything to be comfortable in 3 season touring.

nun is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 07:41 AM
  #67  
staehpj1
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,837
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 744 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by djb
I think too another factor is that younger folks will put up with less stuff, and less comfort, and or some folks are just more tolerant of minimal stuff and just living with x amount of discomfort.
Maybe there is a little bit of truth to that, but there is another side to it as well...

On the younger folks thing,.. I see plenty of younger folks who pack super heavy and plenty of old guys who pack really light. I pack about as light as anyone I know. I am pushing 70 and don't plan to start carrying much more any time soon.

I have not really found that carrying more stuff really equated with more much comfort in camp and it certainly doesn't equate with more comfort on the bike. I find that with very careful gear choices and planning I am very comfortable with the items in an ultralight load. I don't know if that is because I am "more tolerant of minimal stuff and just living with x amount of discomfort", but it really doesn't feel like it to me. I enjoy my gear choices.

Even when I first started out and packed lots of heavy stuff I quickly realized that part of what I liked about touring was the simplicity of living with limited possessions, simple choices, and a generally simple lifestyle. I realized that a lighter load would be nice too, but a big part of the gear paring was also a matter of just simplifying things for the sake of simplicity itself. When we hit the Ozarks and Appalachians on the first tour (TA) trimming weight seemed like an obvious and big priority if it wasn't already. The Rockies hadn't impressed that on me as much since on the TA the route there was generally well graded with long, but never super steep climbs.

After that optimizing the gear choices became an obsession, not only to trim weight and bulk, but to optimize the effectiveness of the gear. During the same period I was doing some backpacking and much of the optimizing was shared between the two pursuits. In that process i managed to work out choices that worked for me offering a light weight setup that I could live comfortably with.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 08:08 AM
  #68  
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montreal Canada
Posts: 13,192
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2732 Post(s)
Liked 955 Times in 785 Posts
hi staep, good point on the hiking thing, we have friends who are serious hikers and they have become more and more minimalist with age, their small pack weights are impressively low. You know, I very much see your point in terms of as we get older, there is probably more chances that we want to go lighter simply from the "its less work" angle, so we can still do the distances we did when we were younger for less effort, and I certainly see myself going in that direction.

I still think some folks are more resilient, for want of a better word, and I still think that as we get older, we probably on the whole dont put up with stuff that we never thought of when younger, but its also realistic to say that we probably get smarter, so we can choose less stuff etc that will still give us X comfort properly, so maybe better choices with , hopefully, a bit more wiseness.

I guess all I can say is that the folks like you who are older than I am yet are still very active, have always been something that I admire, dont know if admire is the right word, but Ive always thought it was cool to see "old folks" out doing stuff, better than me often, when I was in my 20s or 30s or whatever--so bottom line, its neat and I guess a good example, to see folks older than oneself doing self supported activities, and something Ive always thought, "well, I want to that active at X age" in my future.

dont know if that comes across wrong (hope it doesnt) but this is one aspect of bicycling that I love, that if one stays active doing it, its certainly a sport or activity that one can do well into geezerdom (as you put it, which made me chuckle). Especially in Europe, I love seeing folks much older than you are tooling around on their bikes in daily use, or on bike trips or whatever.

well , off to work, its a bit above freezing today again, nice break from the -10c stuff we've been getting lately, cheers
djb is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 08:10 AM
  #69  
staehpj1
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,837
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 744 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by dwmckee
You just have to watch the rated weight these are designed for. Most mfrs will specify rated for a rack load xx pounds. Some of the "light touring" bikes like the Renegade are rated for racks but limited to a 25 - 35 pound load as compared to a full touring bike that might be rated for 50 pounds or even more on the rack in some cases. Supporting rack mounts does not mean rated for a 50 pound load. These new "light" touring bikes have opened up a great class of bikes for weekend credit card tourers that do not want to drag around a full on touring bike. They just are not necessarily designed for a full touring load.

If you are not sure what the limits of a fork or a frame are for touring loads, you should ask the manufacturer what thet are rated for and stay within those limits. There may be carbon forks and frames rated for touring loads, etc...
Everyone has different needs and wants to carry different loads. Those light touring models are fine for some folks needs for self supported touring even for long tours. Heck some folks manage with full on road race bikes.

On the trip length thing... I for one never found that I needed anything more for a long (even coast to coast) trip than I'd carry for a short trip. I pretty much carry the same stuff regardless of the trip length. My gear is very versatile and while I might be tempted to mail some things home or have some things mailed to me from home as the season changes I have not generally needed to do so. I typically don't do trips much under 1000 miles, but if I were to go for a week end I would carry the same stuff. I managed to do the ST from San Diego to Pensacola (mid Feb to mid March time frame) with 14# of camping and cooking gear and didn't change gear along the way. I did get a room now and then, but definitely had full camping and cooking capability and did so most of the time. I did wish I had swapped my bivy for a bug bivy when I got to Louisiana, if I had it to do over I'd make that swap.

Not everyone wants to travel that light, but it certainly wasn't "weekend touring" or "credit card touring". I carry everything I need to camp and cook so it is fully self supported touring. FWIW, I find it kind of offensive when folks call it "credit card touring" or otherwise imply it somehow isn't real "fully loaded" touring because I am not carrying enough stuff.

I find the same thing when backpacking. I was always amused when I was backpacking in the Sierras and I would be asked several times per day, "what are you carrying in that tiny backpack". I'd always answer "the same stuff you are carrying in that huge one". Then we would compare notes and I would generally have a smaller lighter but fully functional version of every item they said they were carrying.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 08:14 AM
  #70  
staehpj1
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,837
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 744 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by djb
dont know if that comes across wrong (hope it doesnt)
Came across fine by my read
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 08:23 AM
  #71  
staehpj1
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,837
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 744 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by nun
Moment is the critical factor and as most of the weight is under my bum it has minimal effect...also we are talking about pretty low gear weights.
Not sure how true the first part is or isn't, but I think the bolded part is kind of key here and the lighter the weight the more so. The more weight you carry there the less true it will be.

I will say that I have toured with a little lighter load in a similar location and found the weight's effect on handling pretty minimal.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 09:34 AM
  #72  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by staehpj1
Not sure how true the first part is or isn't, but I think the bolded part is kind of key here and the lighter the weight the more so. The more weight you carry there the less true it will be.


I will say that I have toured with a little lighter load in a similar location and found the weight's effect on handling pretty minimal.

The biggest mass on the bike is the rider and if you start hanging heavy stuff on the bike a long way from the rider then the farther away from the rider and the heavier it is the greater the change to the way the bike handles. If you can get that mass very close to the rider then it's almost like the rider just being a bit heavier, at least when in the saddle. Putting heavy stuff low down makes the bike fee sluggish, but it's stable and that was always the touring norm because weights and volume could be quite large and any practical solution meant that bike handling had to be sacrificed. But with lightweight bikepacking type setups (which I know you were using well before the current fad for them) it's possible to reduce weight and volume so that you don't lose all the feel of a bike.


As to your point about young tourers carrying a lot of stuff and older ones going lighter I think the explanation is experience. If you've toured a few times you realize that the pain of carrying useless stuff is not worth it. I remember a young touring couple blog about their gear list and they included a paella pan which was quickly sent back.
nun is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 09:40 AM
  #73  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by staehpj1
Not everyone wants to travel that light, but it certainly wasn't "weekend touring" or "credit card touring". I carry everything I need to camp and cook so it is fully self supported touring. FWIW, I find it kind of offensive when folks call it "credit card touring" or otherwise imply it somehow isn't real "fully loaded" touring because I am not carrying enough stuff.

.
I agree with this, but the on area where I think the "light fully loaded touring" approach has some issues is in expedition touring where you might be away from re-supply for many days. I pack knowing that I'm probably never going to be more than 100 miles from a store. If I was on the Dawson Trail I might want to be able to carry more food and water and have some warmer clothing.
nun is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 09:50 AM
  #74  
staehpj1
Senior Member
 
staehpj1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 11,837
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 744 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by nun
The biggest mass on the bike is the rider and if you start hanging heavy stuff on the bike a long way from the rider then the farther away from the rider and the heavier it is the greater the change to the way the bike handles. If you can get that mass very close to the rider then it's almost like the rider just being a bit heavier, at least when in the saddle.
Yes, but you will probably really notice it when out of the saddle if you tend to rock the bike side to side. Some riders do that when they climb and some don't so it may or may not matter much depending on that and obviously how much weight we are talking about is a big factor as well.

Putting heavy stuff low down makes the bike fee sluggish, but it's stable and that was always the touring norm because weights and volume could be quite large and any practical solution meant that bike handling had to be sacrificed.
Yeah, I agree. Also if the weight is down low it probably won't be noticed as much when rocking. Again, this may or may not matter much depending on whether the rider. likes to get out of the saddle and rock the bike side to side.
staehpj1 is offline  
Old 11-25-19, 10:40 AM
  #75  
nun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,670

Bikes: Rivendell Quickbeam, Rivendell Rambouillet, Rivendell Atlantis, Circle A town bike, De Rosa Neo Primato, Cervelo RS, Specialized Diverge

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 180 Post(s)
Liked 43 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by staehpj1
Yes, but you will probably really notice it when out of the saddle if you tend to rock the bike side to side. Some riders do that when they climb and some don't so it may or may not matter much depending on that and obviously how much weight we are talking about is a big factor as well.


Yeah, I agree. Also if the weight is down low it probably won't be noticed as much when rocking. Again, this may or may not matter much depending on whether the rider. likes to get out of the saddle and rock the bike side to side.
The weight low down makes the bike turn sluggishly and there's always the issue of balancing the panniers. I like putting the weight under the saddle because for 90% of my riding I don't notice it. Out of the saddle it does make the bike feel a bit top heavy at first, but you quickly get use to it and I find myself climbing out of the saddle a lot. My handlebar bag has more of an effect on handling most of the time, but as you point out the low weight keeps that to a minimum.
nun is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.