RiddleOfSteel

Hi everyone,

I normally amble around the Classic & Vintage section due in large part to my introduction and continuation of "grown up bikes" by way of now-vintage bikes (primarily of the '80s decade). I've had several modern bikes--all road/race in category--aluminum, carbon, a mix, mostly rim brake, one disc. One of the great things that came about in '80s offerings were touring bikes of various stripes. As a tall guy (6'5") and one who loves working on bikes, restoring them, and discovering their ride characteristics, I've been a continuous student of vintage catalogs and geometries.

This leads me to the Trek FX in general. Over a year ago, I acquired a 1985 Trek 620 touring bike--super long chain stays, incredible tire clearance, canti brakes, shifter and bottle cage mounts, etc. Canti brakes are fine, but since learning, volunteering, and fixing all sorts of 26" mountain bikes, hybrid bikes, etc (as part of volunteering at a non-profit bike shop), V-brakes offer incredible power. I ended up having my 620 modified to accommodate mini-Vs (to work with modern brake/shift levers that we see on road bikes) and that has bore fruit. But that was not without inspiration from the FX in general. I forget how I came upon it, but knowing touring bike geometries, the FX had many similarities--frame angles, chain stay length, canti/V-brake mounting, a stack/reach scenario that matched my 25.5"/65cm 620 (and other similarly-sized vintage road and touring bikes). It basically became a tightly and quickly orbiting thought that should I come across a used FX in the XXL / 25" size, and hopefully in an aluminum or carbon fork, that I'd scoop it up. Essentially I was hoping it would be the modern incarnation (or ethos) of the touring bikes of the past.

Enter my coming across a very local (same neighborhood) seller of a tall black FX 7.3. Looked alright from the very average photos, so we met up and I briefly rode the thing (after running back to my place to get a pump as the seller didn't pump up the tires, which were at 20 PSI at best..). Steered great, shifted perfectly, awesome. It was dusk and I didn't get a good idea of the black paint, save for an iPhone flashlight on the bike when I was pumping up the tires. A lovely and very fine metallic. Anyway, I paid the man and I became the very happy owner of a hybrid--my first ever--with the intention of seeing my theory of it making a capable drop bar touring/all-around bike. I had seen drop bar conversion on a few FX's and other hybrids before (on the internet), but wanted to make my own and one that really looked like it was a road/touring bike to begin with.

Firstly, some as-bought photos! Beautiful "Black Titanite" color!



These have always been handsomely-proportioned bikes to me. And they certainly ride and steer as good as they look.


You can start to see the very fine metallic in the paint and the decals. Love it.


We have to get a weight for the frame, fork, and headset. It would be only proper! As-bought (and photo'd), the bike weighed 25.85 lb. Not "light" by road bike standards, but on par for a touring bike, and certainly not unduly heavy. Felt light enough for my ~200 lb self to carry around. The frameset, in direct comparison to the 620, weighed 2,940g in contrast to the as-modernized 620's 3,679g, or to put it more plainly, the FX frameset weighed a whopping 1.6 lbs less! This is not surprising in some ways considering the 20 years advancement in technology in addition to the difference in material. As I had built my 620 to be the 'one bike to rule them all', it was fitted with some really nice Shimano components (second hand Dura-Ace), deservedly so. I had built it to 22 lbs even, which for a huge steel touring bike, is ridiculous, but that's what I specialize in a bit.


One of the really special things about this FX frameset is the fact that it had two ~1mm diameter paint chips. Paint was otherwise MINT. I cleaned it and gave it a good waxing (Meguiar's). Paint is butter smooth.


Detail appreciation Number I forget: the decals are not only metallic, but minimal in size and fuss yet still attractive. Previous years of FX were more extroverted, but these 2014s were really nice.

RiddleOfSteel

One of the attractive quality of hybrid bikes, to me, is their generous tire and fender clearance. Vintage bikes vary in tire size 'capability', even among touring bikes, which one would hope would be always accommodating. The fact that my Trek 620 is able to handle nominal 700x42 tires and fenders is truly incredible, and a capability that puts it among modern disc-brake-equipped gravel/adventure/cyclocross bikes. Having seen a few FX's in person, they looked more than capable of handling 42mm tires, if not 48mm (again, nominal) tires. Trek would officially say the maximum recommended tire size as 32mm, just like Shimano says their road rear derailleurs can only handle a 27T large cog (they'll do 32T without a fuss if you know what you're doing). We know why the ratings are conservative, but since I don't need to operate on a CYA axis, I am free to explore things.

The results are this: nominal 700x48mm tires (measuring closer to 46mm on 23mm external width rims at 30-35 PSI) don't fit vertically. Under the fork. There is plenty of width at the fork and chain stays, with the seat stays getting a bit snug. One would have to file off the ~7mm tab/extension at the chain stay bridge to get the 48s to clear 'vertically'. Nominal 700x42mm tires (~39.5mm on 23mm external rims at 35-40 PSI) fit without issue and with plenty of vertical and horizontal room to spare. Not enough to comfortably run fenders, but if no fenders, you're home free.

Anyway, I wanted to explore the tire accommodation envelope as almost no information is out there regarding max size/width, and because large, supple tires at appropriately lower pressures (than smaller tires) can really make the ride of a bike enjoyable and much more worry-free (big bumps, cracks, etc). I love riding my bikes, and want other to as well.

Below is the beginning of the drop bar conversion / road-style build up. The tires pictured are Soma Supple Vitesse EX 700x42's. For supple, quality tires that don't break the bank, these are the ticket. Thicker tread (than the SL variants), lighter than say a Pasela (good tires as well), and decidedly cheaper (and maybe a little lighter, depending) than Compass/Rene Herse tires available. All of these are built by Panasonic, mind you, they're just built to different specs. Wheels are DT Swiss R23 Spline (dopey name, but legit wheels) that come in at a light 1,611g. The rims are DT's R460--nothing exotic, just fewer drillings for spokes.



Once we get past the Madman In His Living Room build phase (I do have a stand that I use for things as well), we get to the Crummy Indoor Hallway/Landing Photo phase (apartment life), because it's usually about 12:30 AM by the time I get done with things. Perpetual night owl over here. The components are Tiagra 4700 10-speed, a groupset I got for a good deal off eBay for another build, but had yet to use. V-brakes are the stock ones the FX came with. Seatpost is a used Bontrager carbon example, and the saddle is a Prologo Scratch Pro (my preferred saddle). For all the fancy parts on my '85 620 that resulted in a 22 lb weight (using these wheels, tires, and latex inner tubes), this "ho-hum mid-level Tiagra I'm-not-trying-hard" build came in at...22 lbs even. Love it!


Ok, how about a proper outdoor photo or two??? No bar tape on this, looped extra brake cable length, and I'm smitten. This is a fantastic-looking bike!


Front 3/4 perspective here. 50/34 crankset gearing, and 11-32T out back. For Seattle proper (and extended), gear range is key, especially up all these steep hills that are just around every single corner here.


One of the really pretty details on these FX frames, for me, is the tapered top tube (into the seat cluster/seat tube) and the semi-mono seat stay. Reduces the visual mass at the back in a really clever way that results in a pleasingly svelte look.


More paint detailing. I think you get the picture.

And I'll bury the lede here, but this initial test ride of the FX was not as I expected it. Large tires can have interesting steering results (wheel flop, laziness, interesting lower-speed tracking/handling characteristics), and my 620 with these 42mm tires is no exception. In fact, it's been a bit of a thorn in my side. Geometric trail is 53mm (calculated), which is a sort of no-man's land for me. The FX is between 62-64mm, and I do prefer the grace, stability, and smoothness of longer trail. At 34 PSI in front, and 39-40 PSI in the rear, the FX felt like two bikes when getting out of the saddle to climb. Steering was a little lazy when in the saddle. Granted, I hadn't ridden in nearly two weeks, and sometimes the body and muscles can get out of practice with regard to certain riding aspects, and such was the case here (I soon rode the 620 again and experienced the same, even after having the 620 for year and certifying its good out-of-saddle characteristics).

I put on nominal 35mm tires (very used fancy pants Compass Bon Jon Pass tan walls) and that coupled with being able to ride more (wasn't raining!) had the FX feeling, riding and steering fantastically! The aluminum fork revealed it's Always Down To Party nature over my local streets' rougher sections (which are more common than I'd like), but otherwise, the FX is a superb drop bar bike. It wants to move quickly and climb eagerly. I found myself shifting up gears when getting out of the saddle on steeper bits. A bike that loves being a bike and getting its rider involved is such a wonderful thing to discover. I'll swap back to the 42mm tires but use higher pressures and see if that helps the handling and climbing while giving me more cushion over the harsh stuff. I'll be experimenting with reducing the built-in canti brake slop that makes Kool Stop brake pads howl under braking (big pet peeve of mine), but I'm having fun with this FX!

ColonelSanders

The shape of the Trek FX series has always appealed to me, so much so, that even though I would prefer not to have another aluminium framed bike and it likely won't serve a purpose any better than other bikes I already have do, I will at some stage add a FX model of some sorts to my stable of bikes.

RiddleOfSteel

I hear you. Great proportions, especially in the tallest 25" size, which for me is critical as so many companies (including Trek on some of their other models) will have frames/bikes that look decent in a medium size, but as soon as they get large, they get really ugly and disjoined looking. The modern dropped seat stay trend absolutely ruins big frames. The FX takes big tires, has V-brakes for excellent braking, great proportions, but isn't a lame and sloppy riding frame. I am a big fan of lugged steel and will always be, but crummy roads demand an answer to the reality of "steel is real" harsh. :/ Frames that have enough tire clearance and suspension (via tubing choice) built into them, without being a noodle. My "entry level" 1-series Trek 1.5 (aluminum frame, carbon fork with aluminum steerer) is, honestly, a far superior ride than my Davidson Impulse. The dampening of the carbon fork (huge deal), the steering (dead nuts stable), the acceleration (though Impulses are always good at this), and thanks to the modestly sloping top tube, the ability to have more exposed seatpost to flex when big bumps hit.

Everybody will have a preferred geometry and be able to work most optimally with a certain (or several) frame materials. At my height and weight and power level, it seems that is aluminum for me (albeit not perhaps mental aluminum like a Trek Emonda, which I had before...but I'd try it again). My goal would be to find a 7.4 / 7.5 / 7.6 / 7.7 with the carbon fork and call it done. Still, I am a very happy man. Now if it would stop raining, I have some more tire testing to do on the FX...

hokiefyd 

Not that you need another bike (of course you need another bike!), but look also at the steel Trek MultiTrack 7xx series, a bike that eventually evolved into the modern FX 7.x series. I think 1990 was the first year for the MultiTracks, and they lasted through beyond 2000 I think...but the line split at some point into 7xxx aluminum-framed MultiTracks (which bore the current FX) and the steel MultiTracks lived on for several years after as mostly lower end bikes. But in the day (1990s), Trek had some REALLY nice MultiTracks...many with full butted chrome-moly frames and forks and some even with carbon "tubing."

They came with rim brakes, can fit large tires, and are very customizable with traditional bike parts (1" quill stems, many have 27.2mm seat posts, basic and ubiquitous 100/135 hub OLDs, etc.). https://www.bikeforums.net/hybrid-bi...ultitrack.html

I, too, will likely have an FX one day. Several years ago, Trek was painting the FXes with some really stunning paint colors. One of my favorites, though I've never seen one in person, is the FX LTD.

RiddleOfSteel

From about 1990 to about 2008, I consider Trek and pretty much all manufacturers outside of Cannondale to be non-viabilities to me and other people around 6'5" (my height). 26" MTBs and Multitracks, while super cool, look great for people nearly a foot shorter than I. I harbor no ill will. Super tall MTBs look horrible, take it from me, so rocking traditional touring bikes with plenty of tire clearance and 700C wheels instead of is-this-for-ants 26" wheels (if making a frame to fit me--26" is proportional for smaller frames) has been the best way to go. Even the darling of classic touring, the 650B wheel (584mm BSD vs 559mm BSD of 26" wheels), looks a bit odd, if silly, on a 65cm frame.

In 2008, Trek introduced their new generation of road bikes, and with that, H1 and H2 fit, of which my '08 1.5 is (H2). Available in a myriad of sizes up to 64cm (which I have, 62cm frames fit, too), it was a welcome reintroduction to big frames offered by them, having previously done so since their inception in 1976 and running through to about 1990 with true 25.5" (~65cm CTT) frame size offerings. Specialized offered big frames, too, but they look overly swoopy and goofy. Cannondale never abandoned anyone, but their 66cm (road frames) and 27" ST tourers (68.5cm) both had top tubes 1-2cm too long for me, and I've owned a 66cm 1989 SR800 before.

I am a long-time student of companies that offered properly tall frames, and I have a keen aesthetic sense. I wish we got more zany paint job bikes from around 1990 onto tall bikes because I love them. For now though, I'll just settle for having restored ones. Love the stuff, it's just that none of it was even remotely close to being my size or looking good in any large size.

Thank you for reminding me of the FX LTD. The OG "TREK" graphics look a little out of place on such a bike, especially when I've had half a dozen (at least) late-'70s to early '80s Treks that sport these decals, but the rest of the build is pure class (I mean, even with those graphics, it's still pure class, let's be real here). Carbon fork, too. One of the things vintage Treks were really good at was, regardless of paint color, the metallic flake in said paint color was 10/10 on the enthusiasm scale. That's a lot of fun. My '82 720 (tourer) is metallic taupe with metallic brown HT and ST panel. Incredibly understated and 'mature', but it sparkles in the sun. Can't put modern/aggressive black components on it--polished silver only, and tan wall tires, as God intended. Trek and their colors: it's been a journey.

RiddleOfSteel

Well it's been a couple of weeks and a lot of work on other bikes (and just work in general), but I was finally able to complete a delightful heretical build of the FX as I had alluded to earlier: as much 9000-era Dura-Ace as I could stuff into it minus brake calipers and of course $$$ wheels (which I wouldn't have wanted for this anyway). The result is a 9.35kg / 20.5 lb XL-sized bike.

Was able to get it out for a mini test ride at lunch and then a longer ride that day (yesterday evening) of about 24 miles. Tire pressures at 36 in front and 44 in the rear for these Soma 42mm tires. 35s at a higher pressure are still the ideal, but bumping the pressure up on these 42s helped keep the sluggishness away. Shifting was a breeze, the brakes were predictably strong, and with the extra bump in pressure, the bike's out-of-saddle character (and in-saddle character), as in it's springiness, were felt. This is easily the best bike for reaching and maintaining speed over all road surfaces that I've built, and here in Seattle, that, for me, counts for a lot. Maybe you or I don't necessarily get fatigued from jarring roads so much as we get increasingly annoyed and mentally "over it" with smaller tires/stiffer frames. I need to and want to get faster, but I was able to diesel on the flats. Sure, it's easier to whip around on a race bike, and I still very much like that, but man if this FX isn't just effortless in its speed and comfort!



Getting into the madness, which you can get into as well if you so choose(!), we have an Specialized S-Works 110mm stem holding some 211g FSA SL-K carbon handlebars for some always-appreciated vibration dampening. These Dura-Ace STIs actually still need some Tri-Flow spray into/through them as the colder it gets, the more often the gummed up original grease causes 'air shifts'.


Guess who totally planned the cable housing matching the inner Trek logo lines?


All that Dura-Ace commanding ye olde run-of-the-mill stock Tektro V-brakes with pulse-tastic Kool Stop pads (my favorite). If you get on them pretty good, it's a pleasant combination of wind chime and flute.


I love these cranks. 9000 is simply one of the prettiest modern groupsets to me.


I will draw your attention to the pièce de résistance of this ENTIRE bike! Thanks to being in Seattle and having nice parts get chucked in with the regular ones, this is a fully carbon Parlee front derialleur mount for braze-on style front derailleurs. I might have paid $5 for this much-more-than-five-dollars piece that was sitting in the bin forever (and likely would have continued to). It weighs nothing, and the front derailleur here weighs an official 76g, which feels like nothing in my hand. I definitely should have cleaned it better! Oh, and those are inner tube valve stem nuts being used as spacers to...well, actually I don't need them anymore now that the Parlee mount is on there (and so thin).


Running an 11-32T cassette is a long cage conversion (6800 Ultegra GS inner and outer cage) 9000 rear derailleur. Works really well.

RiddleOfSteel

Some other relevant details for those curious about tire clearances with the given pressures (+/- a psi or two) among other things:

Rear seat stay clearance. Not a lot of room--about 4.5mm average at a 45° and a nice 9.5mm from the top of the tire to the underside of that brake bridge. Depending on your fenders and daringness, they'll either just fit or will be a big "NO WAY".


A little over 6mm of lateral clearance at the chain stays. Plenty!


That fender mounting tab (out of focus) is a touch under/around 4mm from the 'top' of the tire. I never had rub from that area (not that one would at that clearance level) nor any others.


The fork provides the most consistent clearance for these tires at about 7.5mm laterally, at the 45's, and vertically/radially (top). Nice.


You'll have your preferred saddles, and mine happens to be Prologo's Scratch Pro from a few generations back. Normally 134mm in width, this is a 143mm wide one and is even more comfortable. Extra width and stainless steel rails vs Ti rails won't save me grams, but my backside sure likes it. Of course, below the saddle is one item that really does work--a carbon seat post. This is conveniently a Bontrager unit, so keeping at least that part "in the family."

Kobe 

Thanks for doing the legwork on this. i have been thinking of picking up a 25" FX disk, but the size is relatively rare and I was not sure how well proportioned it would be.

I had no plans on doing a drop bar conversion but with the way yours turned out you got me thinking of giving it a try. Not sure I would attempt it with the disk version, but the V brakes seems relatively easy to do.

wilddonkey

Nice ride

cheesesandwich

Did the same with my old FX but with canti brakes. Put on wide tires and went for gravel ish ride when gravel bike with dropbar were unheard yet here. Got some looks from the mtb people..lol. Sold it because I wanted to try carbon. I can't afford space for 2 bikes and there was a bit of regret after I sold it.

RiddleOfSteel

Not a problem! The 25" size is rare, which I suppose isn't surprising to us since all bikes that could come in our size seldom do. And if a 25" FX wasn't hard enough to find, spotting a FX 7.4 and higher in a 25" is another order of magnitude harder.

I think it is the carbon FX's, especially as they'll be disc and within the last handful of years, that have a longer top tube (and resulting reach number), though for now the aluminum disc models still have legacy FX geometry numbers, at least in stack and reach.

If you find a FX disc that is cable operated instead of hydraulic, I think that makes it a ton easier and less intimidating to do a drop bar conversion. Not that you or anyone else is unable to split open a hydraulic setup and put in a mechanical/cable caliper in, but it's a hurdle nonetheless. I like the V-brake for the ease of setup/conversion as well as the frame and fork being built lighter and less beefy. Ride quality in almost every case takes precedent over the wet braking convenience of disc.

Bogey Speedwell

first thanks for sharing this. This looks like an awesome build and fun to ride for sure.

I have been looking at the FX series as well, but kind of longing for my first drop bar bike since the 80’s, that would fit the bill of that 3 way intersection of gravel, touring and endurance.

as one who is just recently back into riding, just want to make sure I understood the following quote correctly;

You feel the aluminum frame is more comfortable than steel on gravel surfaces?

RiddleOfSteel

To answer your question: no, I did not say/do not think that. You took a select portion out of a paragraph that was dealing with a larger topic and then applied them to a gravel application that I never spoke of or alluded to. Granted, that second sentence (which was really a fragment) is incomplete, which is an unfortunate product of a million thoughts not coming out in order/coherently. Sorry about that.

Anyway, let's start with an empty table here and put some basic things on it so we can all start at a common premise:

1) One can make a steel frame really nice or really harsh. One can make an aluminum frame really nice or really harsh. One can make a carbon frame really nice or really harsh/dead.
2) Some riders can be sensitive to how a bike feels. Other riders either don't care or can't tell differences in bike feel. A bunch of other people are somewhere in the middle in that regard. And then there is preference and tolerance on top of that.
3) There are wheelsets that are heavy but decent feeling. There are wheelsets that are heavy and brutal. There are light wheelsets that are harsh/brutal. There are light wheelsets that feel great.
4) There are Apocalypse-Ready Anti-Puncture 9,000,000 Quintuple Marathon TPS 8.750 Dual Iron Rhino XXXXXL Hunny Bun Pass tires out there that do their job well but are as heavy as a battleship and ride like a brick. On the other end are tubulars. Near those tubulars are supple, light tires of larger than race bike volume.

This is all to say that there are considerable variables when it comes to the frame, the components, and the rider. You could add saddles in there as well as major factors that give a certain range of experiences. Heck, put proper fitment in there, too. I do not know your riding history or style or preferences outside of what you've just told me, so I can't prescribe a specific solution. However, I have built and ridden many bikes from road/race to sport touring to touring to gravel, and am pretty tuned in to both obvious and subtle characteristics.

A solid steel frame with proper/relaxed geometry, sturdy wheels, and beefy tires will probably feel reassuring and steady on gravel (or road) due in large part to the weight of the bike and its handling characteristics. Will it be fast or spritely? Not likely unless you're a beast or like rocking down hill at speed. Heavier bikes have their place and have plenty of benefits, as do lighter bikes that can flit and glide over the rough stuff (or road surface).

I like your ideal intersection of gravel, touring, and endurance. It's about where I am as well. Kinda like bikes long ago, haha. A good vintage touring bike is plenty durable, with good geometry for loads and for unloaded descents. The gravel/endurance element is taken care of by generous tire clearances. A number of vintage sport touring bikes have shorter wheelbases, but still decent tire clearances. I know there is an Endurance road bike category, but until very recently, and with disc, they never really allowed tires over 28mm, which when coupled with the marginally longer wheelbase, didn't seem like an honest effort. The original hybrids took touring and mountain geometry elements and have evolved since then.

The FX and others like it (that can clear big tires) are an excellent option because you can put smaller tires on it and it won't feel slow, as well as put larger tires on it and greatly increase comfort and capability over uneven terrain (they also won't be slow if they have supple casings). If you had to change one element on a bike you have and like, or want to get, to increase comfort and capability, regardless of frame material, in my opinion and experience it would be the tires (and resulting appropriate pressure settings). A change in tire size can move the needle on bike feel/comfort significantly. You can help the frame material component out by paying for a nicer one or a different one, but tires will be a faster and cheaper change. Do you need a Compass/Rene Herse offering at $90+ a tire? If you want. You can get halfway there with a Pasela for what, $35? Or most of the way there with a Soma Supple Vitesse EX like I have (was $54 when I bought new ones, now $65 or so). Crappy tires on cars suck, and we know this. The same is true for bikes.

Glass smooth roads make every bike feel like a hero. Crummy roads or rough gravel require a different solution, and large tires (and the ability to fit them on/in one's bike) do wonders on that front. A Davidson Impulse or a vintage Colnago etc will be amazing on smooth roads, but will bring one to their knees over the rough stuff. Those are top-shelf steel bikes, but can only fit 25-28mm tires. Tubulars and high quality clincher tires ease the hits, but those race bikes are going to be jackhammers, and those steel frames will not be able to rescue their rider. Enter in the FX, a bike decidedly not for racing or fast/competitive riding, made of aluminum largely, with a steel or aluminum fork in most cases, but there it goes on 38mm tires, not bludgeoning its rider to death over bad roads. Put 25s on it and it's as bad as the steel offerings, but go back to the big stuff and it's a much better place to be.

Bogey Speedwell

forgive me.

thanks for the info

RiddleOfSteel

Forgiven / Please don't worry about it! Perhaps I should have just said, to your question, was, "It's a more complicated equation than steel or aluminum. Frame material is a factor, but it is not the primary factor." That would have probably answered your question technically, but you're still left with, "Well then what is best/what does he mean/what's a good solution?" The novel-length response afterwards was the "how" or fuller explanation of why I said what I did, and the practical experience I've had that back up what I say. I'm also preempting questions that you and others may have given the above two-sentence answer, and I simply want to be helpful in disseminating the immense amount of information out there and provide context to experience and thought. I've tried many different frame materials, geometries, and component setups, and there isn't a one-size-fits-all solution. There are general guidelines that help initially, but it can fall into subjectivity quickly if one wishes to dig in or optimize. I've been consciously and subconsciously hunting the "God Particle" when it comes to what makes a good or the best frame or riding experience for a while now, and while fun, it can't be found. There are always new discoveries and reconsiderations of previously-held thought that happen.

t2p

Kool Stop brake pads are great !

Even old cantilever brakes can provide decent performance with Kool Stop brake pads

t2p

42mm tire seems big for road riding ?

at a minimum they will be relatively heavy

but I'm old school and away from bike riding for two decades

have one old road bike in the basement with 23mm Super Comp HDs - and recall when we thought 23's were 'big' lol

RiddleOfSteel

42s are large if you come from small 23s. I've run 23s and 25s for a while. Big tires absolutely do not have to be heavy, and the ones I run are not heavy for their size. Welcome to 2022 and not 2002. Most commuter tires, anti-flat tires, hybrid tires, and MTB tires are really heavy with thick tread and thick sidewalls. Heavy, stiff, and generally slow-rolling. 500-600g a pop, up to 900g (2 lbs). These nominal 42mm tires I ride here weigh just 380g officially (pretty darn close in actuality). I run them, depending on the bike, anywhere from 34/40 (f/r) to 39/44 PSI. Going to latex tubes saves even more weight and allows them to spin up more quickly. Light, supple casing and the right pressure and you're set.

The ability to roll over crappy city streets 1) at speed 2) without fatigue that comes from being jostled around on small tires is a revelation. The wheelset also plays a pivotal role. Heavy, plodding wheels will dog anybody, as will a dull frame. It's really a system that is best matched to its rider. Most people are happy with whatever. I've been in (vintage, mostly) road bike land--plenty of experience with the small tire stuff. The conversion to big tires was a light bulb moment, having been skeptical before then and inching up in size experimentation very slowly prior to that.

Like I've said above/before, on smooth roads, all bikes and all tires feel like heroes. But as soon as you introduce less-than-ideal roads (aka the world we live in, especially in cities), keeping in mind we're not 17 anymore, the big tires that roll fast are a Godsend. I am, for all intents and purposes, as fast on big tires as I am on small tires. Road/race bike or converted hybrid or vintage touring bike. And I've done this plenty of times over a varied 24 mile loop.

t2p

I'm slowing moving into 2022 after a long excursion from 2002 (and more 1992)

Agree with your comments and observations on tire size - although some appear to be pushing the pe
dulum a little too far when using overly heavy tires and / or very low psi

Your tires at 380g are certainly not objectionable (and are lightweight especially for their size)

I did use latex tubes back in the day - the pink Air B tubes

However - now I just began to use TPU tubes

RiddleOfSteel

There is indeed a balance to size vs speed or whatever one is trying to do. The big stuff is either MTB (of course) or gravel, which can see some big sizes. Thankfully a big 27.5" or 650B tire size can split the difference between large air volume/cross-section and keeping overall diameter down (compared to a 700C/29er tire of similar width). I have found that a nominal 42mm width tire is about the biggest I'd like to go in either 700C or 650B trim as that size introduces some wheel flop characteristics absent in smaller sizes. If the frame is compliant enough (regardless of material), lately I've found that the ~35mm tire width/size is a really nice Goldilocks size. Plenty light (if you buy such a tire), with enough volume for proper suspension, yet enough road feel/not squishy when you don't want it. Everyone will be different, but I run (very used, bought that way) Compass Bon Jon Pass 35s on my '82 Trek 720 and that is a sublime combo with the wheels that I have on it.

80s Rider

Nice work.
I have an older 7200FX, which I bought to convert to dropbar. So far it hasn't happened. The thing is just too comfortable with the flatbars, and I'm not getting any younger.

RiddleOfSteel

Man if it ain't broke...

I cut 20mm off the steerer, swapped V-brakes, and put on larger rings. It's down to 20.3x lbs, and that's after putting lighter wheels and tires (slightly smaller) to get it to 20.0 lbs on the nose, but it just didn't have the life that it did with these DT Swiss wheels and larger 42mm Soma tires. 53/39 chainrings for bombing down hills do gear me up, but look super legit and I don't spin out on long downhills, which was a goal. The TRP mini-Vs from a different build hug the 42s really well. I dropped a little weight with them, but they look the business, stop well, and really complement the componentry. Long wheelbase, big roll-over-anything tires, comfortable critical components, light weight and lively, killer looks--what more does a guy need? Cool part is that one can replicate this for a ton cheaper (and a pound or two more in weight, still light!) if they just chuck some R3000 Sora on it and bump to bigger tires!

Glam shot. In real life, it's even more of a butch-yet-sleek road bike+. Love it.


You can get equal performance from other, much cheaper mini-V brakes and normal-length V-brakes that weigh nearly or essentially the same, but they won't look as hot as these. At least to me. [not that the stock FX V-brakes looked bad--they looked totally fine!]


Best looking modern crankset, IMO. Still. Looked great with the 50/34 combo, but stepping up to the 53/39 was almost intimidating as it now looked like a Real Road Bicycle crankset that I better have a worthy frame to hang it off of. Gulp.


Ultegra 6800 11-32T cassette run by a standard Dura-Ace 9000 rear derailleur with a 6800 GS cage setup. Don't be worried about making it work, people! Also, I show this as, to keep the new chain clean, I cleaned not only the faces of each cog, but the flats of every single tooth/valley between the teeth. This is the, maybe, second time I have ever gone to that length to clean a freewheel/cassette. I am glad it's over!

fishboat

Completed yesterday. B-day present for my GF. Most importantly..it fits her. Gravel-ish bike with the right top tube length and will run 38-42mm road or gravel tires.

2007 Trek 7.5FX WSD. Previous owner never rode it..probably doesn't have 50 miles on it.

Ultegra 6503 3x9 shifters, Tektro 510 canti's, Koolstop pads, Tiagra front and rear derailleurs, OEM 3x crank, upgraded to 11x30 cassette. Shimano 324 SPD pedals. OEM saddle..we'll see how it rides. It'll probably get swapped out for a Brooks that fits her well. Gravelking Slicks 700x38mm. Fast bike!

t2p

double sweet - super job !

only thing I'm adverse to is shortening the steerer - once you cut you can't get it back !

.