New 920 frame on the way
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 926
Bikes: I have a few
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 210 Times
in
104 Posts
Thoughts on a Trek 920
For many decades I was only a road rider until I bought a Cross Check in 2016. It was great not being limited to smooth dirt trails but the Surly was not very comfortable on rides much over 4 or 5 hours. Truth be told I bought one a size smaller than normal because I wanted more stability off road but my priorities have changed and now want to do more touring and still be capable off road.
My point of this post is to get others opinions of my choice of a new bike. After lots of reading I settled on a Trek 920. I ordered a frame only as I usually replace most parts to my liking anyway and from what I read the only real complaints are they come with too large of a cockpit and built a tad heavy. I plan to use this for multi day road / offroad touring some of which will be camping out.
I would rather stick to cable actuated brakes and possibly a 1x drivetrain but the last disc brake bike I had was a Giant OCR touring (first year) and I was not impressed. I am still undecided on the rest of the build.
My point of this post is to get others opinions of my choice of a new bike. After lots of reading I settled on a Trek 920. I ordered a frame only as I usually replace most parts to my liking anyway and from what I read the only real complaints are they come with too large of a cockpit and built a tad heavy. I plan to use this for multi day road / offroad touring some of which will be camping out.
I would rather stick to cable actuated brakes and possibly a 1x drivetrain but the last disc brake bike I had was a Giant OCR touring (first year) and I was not impressed. I am still undecided on the rest of the build.
Last edited by daviddavieboy; 09-02-20 at 04:38 AM.
#2
Senior Member
Why even consider a 1x, given that you'll be carrying camping stuff? A 42/28 double gives you so much better range. The shimano grx or whatever it is seems like a great option , but you'll have to research the details.
Mechanical discs work rather well, certainly the popular ones do that are tried and true, spyre, old school bb7s.
when carrying any load, lower gearing has no downsides, and a 42-11 will still get you to a good 55kph to spin out speed with 700 wheels, but all the times a 20 gear inch or less low gear will get used is way more important.
just be wary of thinking that a 1x is the bees knees.
also as a roadie be wary of your expectations of what is needed for a low gear.
Mechanical discs work rather well, certainly the popular ones do that are tried and true, spyre, old school bb7s.
when carrying any load, lower gearing has no downsides, and a 42-11 will still get you to a good 55kph to spin out speed with 700 wheels, but all the times a 20 gear inch or less low gear will get used is way more important.
just be wary of thinking that a 1x is the bees knees.
also as a roadie be wary of your expectations of what is needed for a low gear.
Likes For djb:
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,606
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 581 Post(s)
Liked 921 Times
in
518 Posts
Hydraulic brakes are the cat's pyjamas, really. I expect there have been some improvements since I was using Avid BB5s, but my experience switching to some mediocre hydraulic brakes (Hayes Stroker Trail) then good hydraulic (Shimano SLX) was that hydraulics are far superior. They may be more complicated to maintain and service than cables, but hydraulic systems are less likely to require repair or maintenance (in my experience).
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,210
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3461 Post(s)
Liked 1,467 Times
in
1,144 Posts
I think you will find most people that do much touring want a wider range of gearing than you can find on most 1X systems. My derailleur touring bikes have triples.
#5
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 926
Bikes: I have a few
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 210 Times
in
104 Posts
Why even consider a 1x, A 42/28 double gives you so much better range. The shimano grx or whatever it is seems like a great option , but you'll have to research the details.
Mechanical discs work rather well, certainly the popular ones do that are tried and true, spyre, old school bb7s.
just be wary of thinking that a 1x is the bees knees.
also as a roadie be wary of your expectations of what is needed for a low gear.
Mechanical discs work rather well, certainly the popular ones do that are tried and true, spyre, old school bb7s.
just be wary of thinking that a 1x is the bees knees.
also as a roadie be wary of your expectations of what is needed for a low gear.
Hydraulic brakes are the cat's pyjamas, really. I expect there have been some improvements since I was using Avid BB5s, but my experience switching to some mediocre hydraulic brakes (Hayes Stroker Trail) then good hydraulic (Shimano SLX) was that hydraulics are far superior. They may be more complicated to maintain and service than cables, but hydraulic systems are less likely to require repair or maintenance (in my experience).
I am rethinking this one for sure. On your bikes with triples, what cassette gearing are you using? I can return the 12 speed one I bought and get a 10 speed. Then I could use a derailleur I already own. (105 med cage or XT long cage)
#6
Senior Member
Daveyboy, your comments about gearing are classic roadie view. As you haven't toured before, just realize that it's a different kettle of fish--but we've all toured extensively with varying loads on varying terrain, and we realize that you will only see what gearing you need when you've actually toured.
Another aspect to take into account with touring is taking care of your knees, and to get past a roadie view of what is sufficiently low gearing. What is low enough depends on many factors, but let's be realistic, you'll only know what works for your load, terrain and legs when you actually do it (and try to be honest of what low you need, not to be affected too much by "roadie shame" of the HTFU factor)
Good luck with figuring out what works best for the type of riding/load that you'll be doing.
Another aspect to take into account with touring is taking care of your knees, and to get past a roadie view of what is sufficiently low gearing. What is low enough depends on many factors, but let's be realistic, you'll only know what works for your load, terrain and legs when you actually do it (and try to be honest of what low you need, not to be affected too much by "roadie shame" of the HTFU factor)
Good luck with figuring out what works best for the type of riding/load that you'll be doing.
Likes For djb:
#7
Senior Member
Re top end gearing. Totally get liking going fast on downhills, I'm very comfortable going fast and regularly spin out my 50-12 to about 70-75k, but for touring, do take into account that skewing your gearing to a lower range generally works better and is way more practical, especially when taking into account being on gravel etc.
Lower gearing range doesn't mean you need to descend slowly, in fact the highest speeds I've descended have been on touring bikes tucked in way past spin out speeds, and going around corners fast and eeking out kph around an apex isn't about gearing.
With a touring load, appropriate low gearing to allow for good cadence's means your stronger over the day, so overall faster and fresher.
Cheers
Lower gearing range doesn't mean you need to descend slowly, in fact the highest speeds I've descended have been on touring bikes tucked in way past spin out speeds, and going around corners fast and eeking out kph around an apex isn't about gearing.
With a touring load, appropriate low gearing to allow for good cadence's means your stronger over the day, so overall faster and fresher.
Cheers
Likes For djb:
#8
Senior Member
Another sales point for a double or even egads, a triple, is running a tighter cassette.
We all love closer shifts, faster, nicer on legs with tighter cadence control.
Win win
We all love closer shifts, faster, nicer on legs with tighter cadence control.
Win win
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
12 Posts
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,210
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3461 Post(s)
Liked 1,467 Times
in
1,144 Posts
I built up my first touring bike in 2004, at that time used a 11/32 eight speed Sram cassette with 11/12/14/16/18/21/26/32 sprockets. And partly for convenience, I am also using that cassette on my folding bike, rando bike and two touring bikes. It is quite convenient from a maintenence standpoint if most of your bikes use the same cassette and chains.
Touring bike cranks, I suspect you would not want to use what I have, I am running a half step plus granny crankset, half step is pretty much out of favor now. Those cranks are 46/42/24. But a granny gear of 24 teeth and a big ring of 46 teeth are certainly in a good range for touring smallest and biggest chainrings.
One of my touring bikes, the 24T granny chainring is silver so almost impossible to see it in this photo:
Rando bike, using a road triple crank, 52/42/30, but that bike rarely carries more than a bag of groceries for weight, so my granny gear of 30T on my rando bike is not appropriate for touring bike weights.
Rando bike photo:
Although the technology described on the above bikes is a couple decades old, it works so well for me that I have no desire to change these bikes to different gearing.
I have a 10 speed road bike with compact double crank, but the gearing is not low enough for touring so I do not provide details on that here. I bought that as a complete bike, did not build it up myself.
Last edited by Tourist in MSN; 09-03-20 at 03:50 PM.
#11
Senior Member
Re triples, it's tricky because it's hard to get sti shifters that will work.
On my light tourer it has 10 year old 9 speed technology, 50/39/30 changed to a 26 granny. Works great but I'd prefer a 48/36/26 with a smaller granny. One of my wife's bikes has a ten speed 11-36 and 48/36/26 but uses trigger shifters.
My heavy duty expeditiony bike is full on mtb triple 44/32/22 and 11-34, but it was set up specifically for some Latin American trips where I knew I'd be carrying a crapload of stuff and riding on bad roads and some stupid steep stuff. A crankset this small would be frustrating lightly loaded, it can be for me,but works great when carrying 40lbs of stuff and especially in very mountainous areas.
This bike has drop bars but I use gevenalle shifters which are unique in how they work and are placed.
sti is so much fun to use, it seems the recent doubles and wide cassettes are a neat option.
and as I brought up, you can always go with a tighter cassette if you don't need a 21 gear inch low. I used a 21 g.i. low for a long time and find it works well, but again depends on all the various factors, load weight, riding terrain and your legs.
On my light tourer it has 10 year old 9 speed technology, 50/39/30 changed to a 26 granny. Works great but I'd prefer a 48/36/26 with a smaller granny. One of my wife's bikes has a ten speed 11-36 and 48/36/26 but uses trigger shifters.
My heavy duty expeditiony bike is full on mtb triple 44/32/22 and 11-34, but it was set up specifically for some Latin American trips where I knew I'd be carrying a crapload of stuff and riding on bad roads and some stupid steep stuff. A crankset this small would be frustrating lightly loaded, it can be for me,but works great when carrying 40lbs of stuff and especially in very mountainous areas.
This bike has drop bars but I use gevenalle shifters which are unique in how they work and are placed.
sti is so much fun to use, it seems the recent doubles and wide cassettes are a neat option.
and as I brought up, you can always go with a tighter cassette if you don't need a 21 gear inch low. I used a 21 g.i. low for a long time and find it works well, but again depends on all the various factors, load weight, riding terrain and your legs.
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,210
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3461 Post(s)
Liked 1,467 Times
in
1,144 Posts
Shifters for triples, my errand bike is an early 90s mountain bike, it is the only bike I have with indexed front shifter on a triple crank. My other triples are all friction based shifters. My derailleur touring bikes use bar end shifters, my rando bike has a brifter for the rear, friction downtube shifter for front.
I am not saying you NEED a triple, but after you proposed a 1X system, I thought it best to point out that going the other extreme is common for touring.
Shimano and Sram have not really put a lot of effort and design work into a good touring drive train because selling new components for loaded touring is not in great demand. Right now, gravel seems to be the latest craze, so that is where we are seeing lots of emphasis from the big manufacturers. Thus it is getting difficult to find good triple based touring drive trains.
And touring where you want reliability, a drive train that is easily repairable, parts that are easy to replace, and robust components is often not part of the design goals from the big manufacturers. The photos above of two of my drive trains used XT derailleurs from the 90s, cup and cone rear wheel bearings that use quarter inch ball bearings, and square taper cranks. The only thing that is fairly new tech in those photos is that one bike uses a TRP rear disc brake.
I am not saying you NEED a triple, but after you proposed a 1X system, I thought it best to point out that going the other extreme is common for touring.
Shimano and Sram have not really put a lot of effort and design work into a good touring drive train because selling new components for loaded touring is not in great demand. Right now, gravel seems to be the latest craze, so that is where we are seeing lots of emphasis from the big manufacturers. Thus it is getting difficult to find good triple based touring drive trains.
And touring where you want reliability, a drive train that is easily repairable, parts that are easy to replace, and robust components is often not part of the design goals from the big manufacturers. The photos above of two of my drive trains used XT derailleurs from the 90s, cup and cone rear wheel bearings that use quarter inch ball bearings, and square taper cranks. The only thing that is fairly new tech in those photos is that one bike uses a TRP rear disc brake.
Likes For Tourist in MSN:
#13
FLIR Kitten to 0.05C
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska
Posts: 5,331
Bikes: Roadie: Seven Axiom Race Ti w/Chorus 11s. CX/Adventure: Carver Gravel Grinder w/ Di2
Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2349 Post(s)
Liked 406 Times
in
254 Posts
I'll pile on the advice that 1x is going to be a problem; gearing range wise. Granted, 1x setups today can get close to the gearing range doubles support. The lowest off-the-shelf gearing you'll get with 68mm BBs is 46/30 up front in 11/12 speed....which can go fairly low (sub 1:1) and respectably high (4:1). But even on paved roads when you're hauling 30-40+lbs of gear plus yourself will not feel that low at the end of a long-day in the saddle.
It all depends on how much stuff you're touring with.
Seriously, find a backpack and put 30-50lbs of barbell weights in it and try riding your bike up a hill with the gearing you have. You'll understand real quick.
It all depends on how much stuff you're touring with.
Seriously, find a backpack and put 30-50lbs of barbell weights in it and try riding your bike up a hill with the gearing you have. You'll understand real quick.
Last edited by Marcus_Ti; 09-03-20 at 07:08 PM.
Likes For Marcus_Ti:
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,249
Mentioned: 211 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18422 Post(s)
Liked 15,570 Times
in
7,335 Posts
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,210
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3461 Post(s)
Liked 1,467 Times
in
1,144 Posts
A quick note on costs, when you build up a bike and pick a drive train, some of that is expendable such as chains and cassettes. Some of the newer 1X systems run pretty expensive for expendable items.
This year I replaced three chains and one cassette on my fleet, all were eight speed chains and a 11/32 eight speed cassette. I keep spares on the shelf, so did not need to buy any of it but I did replenish inventory during the past few months, three chains at $12 to $13 for KMC X series from Amazon, bought a Sram 850 cassette from REI for $25. REI website says they no longer stock that cassette but other sellers sell it for comparable price. Thus, replacing worn out expendables on three bikes cost me roughly $60.
This year I replaced three chains and one cassette on my fleet, all were eight speed chains and a 11/32 eight speed cassette. I keep spares on the shelf, so did not need to buy any of it but I did replenish inventory during the past few months, three chains at $12 to $13 for KMC X series from Amazon, bought a Sram 850 cassette from REI for $25. REI website says they no longer stock that cassette but other sellers sell it for comparable price. Thus, replacing worn out expendables on three bikes cost me roughly $60.
#16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 926
Bikes: I have a few
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 210 Times
in
104 Posts
This is what I am using for extended rides. - 1970 Bob Jackson which I restored a few years ago.
My thinking with the 1x was for simplicity and better clearance off road. I am no stranger to triples either, my last touring bike had a 105 triple (early 2000's) and have many MTBs with them.
#17
Senior Member
I have no experience with the newer systems, but Im sure they are really well engineered and work great. I do know that rd design has improved greatly for having so much less chain slap and all that.
Likes For djb:
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,210
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3461 Post(s)
Liked 1,467 Times
in
1,144 Posts
Where I have had clearance problems with any kind of bike was Maah Daah Hey trail, had my expedition bike and some of the trail was eroded and you were riding in a depression, that depression was only slightly wider than the width of your pedals and at times the depression could be deeper than your pedal clearance. If you caught your pedal in the side of the trail, that destroyed any momentum you had. I have not had any chainring clearance problems when touring. I think the mountain bikes that were prevalent on that trail had higher bottom brackets, thus their pedals did not catch in the side of the trail like mine did.
Do you anticipate touring or bikepacking where you would have a ground clearance problem with chainring size?
#19
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 926
Bikes: I have a few
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 210 Times
in
104 Posts
As far as specs go the 920 had longer chainstays and more bb drop, more bb height with the sameish reach and stack than a 520. Keep in mind I am buying a bare frame not the complete bike.
Last edited by daviddavieboy; 09-06-20 at 05:02 AM.
#20
Senior Member
What will be the tallest wheel set able to go onto the bike? This will at least give you the most clearance. I bought a troll in part because of the versatility of tire options, and the bb is already mtb ish high. I've had it set up in mtb mode with riser bars and 2.5 knobbies, but have 2.5 extraterrestrials to go on stuff like in your photos.
very pretty area btw, the farms remind me of areas in northern Vermont
troll as it is now, with 2in slicks
very pretty area btw, the farms remind me of areas in northern Vermont
troll as it is now, with 2in slicks
Last edited by djb; 09-06-20 at 05:56 AM.
#21
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 926
Bikes: I have a few
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 210 Times
in
104 Posts
Mostly done now but ran into a snag with a rack or possibly not installed correctly. With it level the attachment arms just are not long enough. This is not the factory rack but one off amazon. I am thinking it’s more for a 26” wheel.
#23
Senior Member
nice.
Is there less clearance at the rear? often thats a bit of a chokepoint, or at least to be more careful of too little clearance.
Its been a while, so dont recall all the details, but are you happy with that triple you put on it?
oh, re the rear rack arms. The trek bontrager or whateever it is makes a rack that is made for. smaller frames and has longer arms, I put one on my wifes bike, an XS. Cant recall name, but its a dual level rack, to put panniers lower. You might be able to buy just the arms for it.
ps, was wondering what the pink red paint was on your rear wheel....realized it was the rear light....
Is there less clearance at the rear? often thats a bit of a chokepoint, or at least to be more careful of too little clearance.
Its been a while, so dont recall all the details, but are you happy with that triple you put on it?
oh, re the rear rack arms. The trek bontrager or whateever it is makes a rack that is made for. smaller frames and has longer arms, I put one on my wifes bike, an XS. Cant recall name, but its a dual level rack, to put panniers lower. You might be able to buy just the arms for it.
ps, was wondering what the pink red paint was on your rear wheel....realized it was the rear light....
Last edited by djb; 10-13-20 at 06:41 PM.
#24
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Great White North
Posts: 926
Bikes: I have a few
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 210 Times
in
104 Posts
Thanks to all all for (seemingly) pushing the triple idea. I am VERY happy with it. IMO it is geared too low for road touring at 17 inch gears but I LOVE it off road I have gone up hills I have had to walk before although it is a bit unnerving when the front tire bobs up.
I tried to get the original rack but that is not available any more. I would pay a premium for one even used. They were sold with the 520 and 920 and are different than the new ones offered by Trek which I don’t really like. I was able to modify the one I have for now and I am thinking of the axiom 29er rack as they claim it is good for you 100+ lbs
the red red on the tire is from the tail light (flare-r)