PJC posted the message below on the Surly LHT & CC Group today. I agree with pretty much everything he said and thought it would be worthwhile to capture his comments in a blog post. I've included my reply below his comments which are particularly focused on my changing opinion of the suitability of a Rohloff hub for an adveture touring or expedition touring bike:
"Hey Gang,There's been a lot of excitement over Salsa's new Fargo on the 29erboard on mtbr, and I count myself among the early enthusiasts. Itlooks like a great bike and I can't wait to ride one. But I'm going tosubmit that Surly's 26" wheeled LHT is a better adventure andexpedition bike.Here's how I think about it. For me, an adventure bike needs to bethe following things:- Versatile. I want to be comfortable pedaling for ten hours onasphalt, gravel or dirt, day after day; I want to be able to mountslicks and go on a training ride with the local road club when I'm farfrom home; I want to be able to ride pretty demanding singletrack; Iwant to be able to ride with panniers; at home, I want to a bike thatmight be decent on grocery runs. In practice, a bike is probablygoing to be good at a small number these things, but I want to be ableto do them all and have the bike be at least reasonably up to it.- Easy to ride. The geometry needs to be such that it doesn't takemuch vigilance from me to pilot. There are going to be times when Iam at 17,000 feet, bonked, cold, and in the dark. My bike can't be yetanother challenge. The thing is, I also want to be able to go fast onflat paved roads, or twisty road descents. And I want the bike tohave good enough manners off-road. And when I'm in really dense urbanareas, I want to be able to see traffic and be maneuverable.- Durable. Basically I don't want to even think about the fragility ofthe bike. I'm not totally convinced that an aluminum frame is wrongfor adventure touring, but if there is even a slight chance that I'llneed someone to weld the thing while on the road, I don't want theoption excluded. More realistically, if the derailleur hanger or thefork or whatever get bent, I want to just bend them back (withinreason).- Not overly precious or prissy. The bike is going to get roped tothe roof of buses and the back of pack mules, clipped to a steelbasket for a gorge crossing, or tossed in the bucket of an empty dumptruck. I want to be able to shrug off the inevitable dents or nicks.Some airlines still allow you to check the bike unboxed. When it's anoption, I want to be able to do that without caring that it might getscratched.- Not have cost me a lot. The bike could get lost or stolen, and Idon't want to be devastated. This is going to be relative, of course,but, for me, certainly under US$2000, while under US$1500 would beeven better.- Repairable on the road, all over the world. Stuff is going tobreak, and I want to be able to substitute and improvise with what isavailable to me locally until I can have specialized gear shipped.Given this wish list, I have not found anything better than the LHT.I've ridden it with panniers in Asia, Europe, Mexico, and, of course,at home in the US. I've raced it in mountain bike races (not my firstor even second choice, but it happened) and on frozen lakes withHakkapelitas. It goes along pretty good with slicks when I'm in thedrops, I can mount 2.35 Nevegals on it for offroad, and on most toursrunning Marathon cross 1.5's is good enough for anything resembling aroad or dirt path. On singletrack the bb is a little low for log hops,but riding the tops makes a lot of stuff surprisingly doable (I havetop bar levers that you sometimes see on 'cross bikes, though I don'trun them on my actual 'cross bike). If someone said that I could keeponly one of my bikes, this one would be it.Are there other bikes that could do these things? Yeah, probably. Butsome popular choices fall short for me. Thorns are a fair bit moreexpensive, and I have no interest in Rohloff hubs (heavy, theirdurability seems overstated, and junky but serviceable derailleurs arereadily available to run with shifters in friction mode). I don'thave any reliable info on how big a tire can be mounted on the Dawesofferings. The Rivendell Atlantis is a gorgeous bike, but that's alsoa downside. Some continental bikes look pretty good, but the Koga-Miyata's, for instance, are aluminum. And then anything with anintegrated rack won't do for me when I want to take all the heavystuff off and just go riding where ever I am. There are definitelysteel mountain bikes that can be converted to adventure use, but theywould have to have long chain stays for pannier heel clearance,couldn't be too flexy, and need a long headtube for drop bars (I'vedone long tours on flat bars and I don't care that much about nothaving the much ballyhooed multiple hand positions. But I like dropsfor going fast.)So what about that Fargo? I totally want one for riding here in theUS. But as far as winning the adventure bike prize, the Fargo's wheelsize is basically a deal breaker for me. My main race bike is asinglespeed 29er, and I'm not looking back to 26ers as far as mountainbiking goes. For better or for worse, though, the wheel size thatcame to be the American standard for mountain bikes in the 80's is nowthe most widely available around the world. Sure, a well build wheelisn't likely to implode, but in the overall scheme of bicyclecomponents, the wheels are a worrisome blend of fragile/difficult-to-improvise/showstopper-if-you-don't-have-it. Moreover, though tirescan be booted and stitched together, there is some wear and damagethat just can't be readily managed.You sometimes hear people say that in this era of global access toconsumer goods, you can just have a wheel or a tire shipped to youwhere ever you are. There's something to that, but I've seen tires inshops and stalls in towns that don't have phones, let alone internet.For a lot of places that I want to ride, there's a much higher premiumplaced by locals on the availability of bike tires than on having apost office.So, I'm sticking with the trucker for now. I think it's the best thata US based adventure rider who is going to range far and wide can do.Nice job, Surly!Other thoughts:- If I was too tall to ride a 54 or smaller LHT, then I guess I'dconvert an old mountain bike for adventure use.- What's my real basis for comparison? I've toured on a converted 1989Wicked Fat Chance with rear panniers (West Coast of USA), a Santa CruzSuperlight pulling an Extrawheel trailer (Pakistan, India, Nepal,Tibet), a Karate Monkey with rear panniers (East Coast of USA), an80's Bianchi steel road racing bike with a large Carradice seat postbag (USA, UK, China), a recent vintage Felt aluminum/carbon fiber racebike with seatpost bag (East Coast of USA, France), and a Bike Fridayfolding bike pulling its suitcase (East Coast of USA, Ireland, France,Spain). None of those were catastrophes. Indeed, the Superlight --in spite of being absolutely wrong by every bit of conventional wisdom-- was probably the best. Of course, I was fortunate that neither therear shock nor the suspension fork had any problems. The LHT isbetter than all of these.[I also posted this on mtbr, and the thread there also includes aphoto of my LHT in one of its modes. http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=451468]"My reply:
"PJC,
Great post - we share a very similar view about the Fargo and the LHT. If you lived in the same town as me I'd buy you a beer!
We do diverge slightly on a couple issues so I'll touch on those:
I don't fit a 54cm LHT. I tried one and I can get the saddle bars and pedals in the right spot, but I feel like my weight is too far forward on the bike and I hate how it feels when I climb out of the saddle. Having looked around at the alternatives I think the options for a bigger rider that I'd consider are:
Thorn Sherpa: although I tried and sold mine I'd be willing to try a larger size. After riding a 54cm and 56cm LHT I think I really like the feel of a longer wheelbase bike with more length in front of the BB. Although the Sherpa is more $$$ than the LHT it's nicer in many ways: fittings, paint, tubing, etc... The sloping TT is nice if you'll be riding off pavement. Having said that I would have happily ridden a 54cm LHT if I had like how it fit me.
Thorn Raven Tour: This is a nicer touring bike than the Sherpa, but you have to use it with a Rohloff. I'm not a Rohloff cult member, but I have one on my Big Dummy and I'm slowly changing my mind about using on a long distance touring bike. I'm not completely there yet, but I'm now more open to it than before. Here is why:
- risk of Rohloff failure quite low [based on a # of units in service vs. reported problems], how low is up for debate and this is the make or break issue
- Rohloff is nearly weather proof. Having used it for some heinously muddy touring in the Yukon my shifting was perfect the whole time and the drivetrain needed zero attention
- Rohloff drivetrain nearly immune to damage while riding or during transport [buses, planes, taxis]. I can see ways to break it, but they are much less likely than wrecking a derailleur setup
- 32 spoke rear wheel w/ Rohloff is as strong a dished 40H wheel. So you have a strong rear wheel and 32H MTB rims are very common. Finding a 36H or 40H MTB rim would be much harder
- shifting a heavy touring bike while stopped is nice, if you need to start on an uphill
- chainring, cog and chain can be flipped when worn and you get another 100% of the mileage out of them, they will also last a lot longer in the first place
- if you break your Rohloff shifter or cable the hub can still be used and gears changed with an 8mm wrench until you can sort out the issue.
Having said all that I won't argue your cons about the Rohloff - I've made the same points myself. Part of the reason I got a Rohloff is to get some personal experience so I can come to a conclusion on the issue. From what I know and what I have experienced I think it comes down to one question: "How likely is a serious Rohloff problem?" I'm starting to appreciate the positive aspects of the Rohloff much better and I can see how you can avoid quite a few problems that a derailleur setup might face, but you won't get support or spares for a Rohloff on tour - you'll have to wait for FEDEX to deliver a part. Consider though that you won't get decent touring tires or a decent 26" rear wheel for a fully loaded touring bike from anywhere, but FEDEX either. You'll get a crappy wheel or tire or derailleur, but only something that will let you limp to the next big city where you can order replacements. I think most of the Rohloff failures you can come up with will have the same result - you'll be able to limp to the next big city and order spares.
Thorn could solve some of this dilemma by offering their Rohloff bikes with a derailleur hanger. That way you'd have an option to run a derailleur if you really needed to and it wouldn't cost much or wreck the design of their bikes.
I've thought about getting an older steel MTB frame and building it up, but given the cost of the parts I'd use I'd prefer to spend the $$$ on a dedicated touring frame like a Thorn that has all the nice details taken care of. My assessment of the theft risk is low so I don't mind investing in a nice bike. Admittedly I'm a bike snob and would value the experience of riding the nicer frame.
I've looked at Koga Miyatas and they don't do anything for me on a lot of levels - although they are undoubtedly fine touring bikes. The Atlantis is a nice bike, but I don't care for lugs or a fancy paint job and at $1600 for a frame I'd get an S&S equipped Thorn Raven Nomad S&S first.
As a LHT owner I think it's hard to beat the LHT and I wish Surly would offer a 26" wheeled Expedition touring bike for larger riders in the same vein. The Big Dummy is certainly an option, but its length and weight might be deal breakers for some folks. I'm also loving the straight bladed stiff fork less and less for touring as it sends all the vibration straight to the bars.
Unfortunately 29ers are the hot ticket right now and companies all want to jump on that band wagon - 26" wheeled bikes seem to be considered boring.
safe riding,
Vik"