Another touring "what bike" thread - Sub 1K

[HobbesOnTour]

The load on the bike is worth considering.

I've ridden - and fallen off - an overloaded hybrid.

Such a bike would be a dead loss on a multi day self supported tour.

I beg to differ.
I toured, fully loaded, for a few years on an aluminum, no brand, cheapy hybrid with front suspension, longest tour being in the region of 6000km.

However, the op has said no to hybrids so this side road is kind of moot.

For me, the most important thing is comfort.
After that, probably gearing.
Then the ability to carry what I'm expecting to carry.
Then ease of maintenance, availability of components. Budget plays a part in this.
I like bikes that can take big tyres. I have more options. It's cheaper to change tyres than a bike for different touring opportunities.
I'm in favour of rim brakes for the simple reason that it took me long enough to figure out how to maintain them!
I'd agree on the limits a flat handlebar can have on gizmos & gadgets. I did try Butterfly once. Didn't like them.

To sum up, a view of the "whole picture" is what is required.
The OP has given a pretty clear picture of his intentions for the bike and I wish them well on their hunt!

 

[Blue Hills]

The load on the bike is worth considering.

I've ridden - and fallen off - an overloaded hybrid.

Such a bike would be a dead loss on a multi day self supported tour.

Steel tourers are designed to be ridden loaded.

The likes of the Spa tourers and Galaxy have a good name for stability.

That loaded enough for you palerider?
And I have had more on it.
I also have a hewitt tourer but will happily tour on the "hybrid" above. And have.
Later in that ride I overtook a roadie

Edit, that bike at the mo has two front lights, a garmin and 2 bells,thanks to a simple holder attached to the bars.

 

[CanucksTraveller]

@Vantage
Oh I know Lejog has been done on Bromptons, unicycles etc but my general thinking longer term is that the best bike for a job is very probably the one that someone designed for that job. Hobbes' current awesome achivements aside!
I think unless you're going for novelty, or an extra challenge, or a record.... if you're aiming to tour, it's probably not a bad idea to get a tourer.

The daft thing is that I'd love to tour on my road bike, it's perfectly nice to ride all day but being plastic it won't take it.

 

[Vantage]

I completely agree with all of that

 

[HobbesOnTour]

@Vantage
if you're aiming to tour, it's probably not a bad idea to get a tourer.

The thing is, that you could ask 5 people for a definition of "touring" and get 7 different answers!

It's a bugbear of mine that there will be regular posts from new people saying "I want a tourer to go on a tour" without ever really thinking about what kind of tour they want to do. Depending on their choice they could well be limiting themselves further down the road or seriously overspending on specs they don't need

That's certainly not the case here because we know exactly what you want and how it will be used.

Apologies for the slightly off topic, but I tend to think of lurkers reading these threads.

Hobbes' current awesome achivements aside!

😊
I don't mean to be falsely modest but there is nothing particularly awesome about my cycling achievements. It's cycling a bike! (With the ocassional day off for rain😊).
In fairness, though, there is an awesomeness in the locations. Getting to the locations was nothing to do with the bike, and all about me and what's between my ears.
What's between my ears started being developed in baby, baby steps.

For touring, the bike is only part of the equation, at least to me.

(Now I really, really have to get back to my Spanish homework!!)

 

[HobbesOnTour]

The daft thing is that I'd love to tour on my road bike, it's perfectly nice to ride all day but being plastic it won't take it.

Ok, this is probably off topic, but have you considered a trailer? Something like the ExtraWheel?
Yes, it's heavier but it means you get to carry gear on your road bike, the one you know, trust and are comfortable on.

Or a bikepacking setup with minimalist gear?

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

On that bike itself skipdiver, do you really think it is up to loaded touring? I'm not too bike-techy but to me it looks if anything a bit too elegant.

I can't comment on my Royal's handling when heavily laden as it's not how I use it. They tend to be well regarded, as does the Randonneur, which was a posh Royal with a higher spec. All I carry is a water bottle, a small saddle pack with tools and a mini rucksack on my back if needed. If I want to carry anything heavier I tend to use a Pioneer, as mine have racks and wider tyres. The frames certainly have some spring in them, it's not like riding a steel girder with no comfort.
Its important to remember that most old-school steel bikes, irrespective of whether road racers or heavy duty tourers, all used main frame tubing with the same external diameters, and the rear stays are often the only visible clue as to the strength, along with the wheelbase & head and seat angles. If you take the rack and mudguards off a 531ST touring frame it will not look much different to one of regular 531.
Even the benchmark production Tourer, the Galaxy, was only made in regular 531 until well into the 1980's. Then they upgraded to ST spec tubes, and Raleigh did on their later tourers, which also had canti brakes. Forks made from 531ST are thicker and will flex less than regular 531, as they are designed for a bigger load, especially front panniers.
The elegant look is a feature of most steel bikes, and they look their best in frame sizes around 23", which makes the tubing look slender without the field gate appearance that the really large 25" frames suffer from. I don't think small frames look as pleasing as the larger ones, especially where the head tube is short.

 

[Bonefish Blues]

With low riders on the front and double panniers at the rear I happily rode my Royal all day whilst cycle camping. Shod with 27 x 1 1/8 Specialised tyres too, IIRC. Perfectly stable and well up to the load.

 

[Vantage]

I don't think small frames look as pleasing as the larger ones, especially where the head tube is short.

I have to agree with that.
My old 26" wheeled Spa Touring with its long head tube looked almost graceful in appearance.

The current Spa Wayfarer with it stupidly short head tube (to facilitate 700c wheels) looks like its been squished between 2 buses.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

Although I'm not a huge fan of sloping top tubes on anything other than MTB's, I do much prefer the look of the 26" wheel Spa Touring model. You can see some similarity to this 1990-ish 26" Dawes MTB. Change the knobblys for a pair of Marathons and a add decent rack and you could tour on one of these!

The head tube on the Wayfarer looks excessively short, even allowing for the bigger wheels. I struggle to understand the thinking behind this, because on a non-racing bike you generally want the bars fairly high for comfort and good visibility. I see no point in having a short head tube then having to set the stem much higher to compensate. Might as well just have a bigger frame with a taller head tube to start with.

 

[rivers]

Or a bikepacking setup with minimalist gear?

As Hobbes says, have you thought of a bikepacking set-up for your roadie? I did a short bikepacking tour on my carbon road bike, and it is doable. However, depending on where you're planning on going, your gearing may not be appropriate. A 34/28 in the hills of Devon and Cornwall on a bike that weighed 16kgs instead of 7, made for some tough and slow climbing. I've just finished setting up my aluminium winter/gravel/cross bike up for bikepacking with much lower gearing.
Saying that, a gravel bike might give you what you're looking for as well.
Good luck in your search for the perfect bike.

 

[Blue Hills]

Quick thought canuck, if not buying a new bike from Spa I would budget separately for good wheels. Many new bikes headed for touring come with "OK" wheels but not the best.
I would recommend Spa's handbuilt Sputniks.
The bike i pictured up above cost me £30, kind of, but it does have spa sputniks on it. And a tubus rack.

 

[raleighnut]

I have to agree with that.
My old 26" wheeled Spa Touring with its long head tube looked almost graceful in appearance.
View attachment 502265
The current Spa Wayfarer with it stupidly short head tube (to facilitate 700c wheels) looks like its been squished between 2 buses.
View attachment 502266

Why have such a short headtube and then a stack of spacers on the steerer

 

[Blue Hills]

Why have such a short headtube and then a stack of spacers on the steerer

Don't the revered thorn tend to that?
Or at least use lots of spacers?
Always looks damn odd/ugly to me.
Am sure they have their reasons/theories, but I have no idea what they are.

 

[Pale Rider]

Don't the revered thorn tend to that?
Or at least use lots of spacers?
Always looks damn odd/ugly to me.
Am sure they have their reasons/theories, but I have no idea what they are.

I think it has something to do with reducing the number of frame sizes needed to accommodate most of the population.

It being possible to increase the effective frame size of a bike by spacers, an angled stem, and a long saddle post.

Reducing the effective frame size is all but impossible.

The designer Mike Burrows is credited with introducing this concept with his Total Compact Road (TCR) road geometry when he was working for Giant.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/icons-of-cycling-giant-tcr-206346