Modern Vespa

I know there are many prior and current bike riders here. Doing a quick search brings up a bunch of posts from the past - even one that I started 15 years ago! I've been biking quite a bit for exercise the past 7-8 years but have actually been riding since I was 4.5 years old. Thinking of doing some bigger rides next season - couple hundred miles over a few days. I'm looking to add a touring bike to my stable and the one that's at the top of the list is the Surly Disk Trucker. Really hate that name but the bike checks many boxes though the drivetrain components aren't the best. Those can easily be upgraded if they don't work out. Anyone have a Surly? Are they as bulletproof as I've been hearing about? If you have another brand/model I should look at let me know. My main ride right now is an aluminum Giant Cypress DX comfort bike. It's approaching 14,000 mostly trouble free miles but I'm thinking a steel frame might be better. I really want a bike with 36 spike wheels that can handle extra weight- not from just me but added weight.
Thoughts?

Bob

If it helps, I like the green color. But why not the Big Easy?

The Big Easy would be best for city dwellers or delivery people in my opinion. The Disc Trucker seems to be a favorite of the touring crowd since they can hold a ton of weight and have many points built in to attach things. I'm looking for something that can easily handle roads and light gravel/crushed stone.

I do like the green too but every video I see they're black...

I am a huge fan of early 90's rigid mountain bikes. No better climber in my humble opinion.

It's all about geometry as far as I am concerned but it has to be the right geometry for you. In other words how tall you are may affect what frame geometry works for you.

In my case at 5'-9" the smallest size MB-3 is the optimum tourer because of the seat height to handlebar relationship for ergonomics and the smallest Q factor.

I remember reading at the time that the MB-3 with the Suntour group was the narrowest Q factor. While it may be less costly than the Shimano components again Q factor and geometry for height is a hard combination to beat for distance.

Q factor is how narrow of a gap between your feet when they are on the pedals. The narrower they are the more athletic and therefore efficient the "ergonomics" is the way I understand it.

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/bridgestone/1990/pages/bridgestone-1990-07.htm

This bike as it shows up on the link is an extremely sturdy frame. I have pushed it past it limits on occasion and can personally attest to it's durability. It is easy enough to have any mounts you may need added but I believe it comes stock with front and rear for paniers.

That being said I am sure that the Surly company can make you a frame that is perfect for you but if you happen to fit a classic Bridgestone frame... and you have that built into a touring bike with that classic geometry, then I think you would really have something a touring bike that actually handles.

I am certain that Surly or other custom builders can make something equivalent or better but if you are between 5'-7" and 5'-11" and fit the Bridgestone frame I think this is the optimum tourer properly fitted.

There are quite a few Sheldon Brown articles to check out if you want to do a deep dive.

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/bridgestone/1992/1992.pdf

I remember when the first Kawasaki two stroke triples came out. My Uncle had a 1972 H-1 I got to put quite a few miles on. Seat of the pants experience concurs with what I have read about how those early kawasaki's in that they changed the classic geometry of the earlier triumphs and that it just didn't work. The solution ended up being suspension, travel, and then dialing in spring rate and damping but nevertheless that classic geometry for road handling stayed constant.

If a 26" diameter (or whatever custom wheelset will fit the frame) works for you a classic Bridgestone frame touring build would be a really nice bike. This would make an excellent handling road bike laden or not.

I wanted a trucker about 20 years ago when I was interested in the fully loaded touring thing, until I found out how much they weigh. They are ideal for riding the length of South America or from India to Europe. I ended up with a cyclocross bike, which did loaded tours as well as 100 mile fun rides.

The equivalent these days is a gravel bike. The bike packing fad means there are plenty of options for sticking things that used to go on panniers and racks to all parts of the bike. As long as its got cage mounts on the forks and

Here's my Kona Rove set up for an overnighter staying in a lodge (credit card touring) with just a big seatbag, and then two weeks of camping/motelling (didn't even need rear panniers). It also manages training rides on the local path, and is my go to for all day and night rides now too, mainly because I can easily carry 3+ litres of water on it. Plus it's got a dynamo hub for lights and USB charging. Big 50mm tyres are nice and comfy too. Gearing could be lower for the trails but fine on main roads.

My wife has one of the original rim-brake Truckers, and we've used it for various multi-day tours.

We're the same size, so we can swap to each others bikes.

I absolutely hate it. If you're not fully loaded ( and I mean loaded -- many, many tens of pounds of gear ) it rides like a brick. When you are fully loaded, it rides... exactly the same way. Which is fine when you have a ton of gear, but there are very few situations in which that's necessary.

+1 on the gravel bike. Configurations and end use covers a wide spectrum. Very versatile. And fun.

This is interesting. My current bike has a suspension fork- not the highest quality but works perfectly. I had serious cervical spine issues about 10 years ago so ride comfort is extremely important to me. When I bought my current main bike everyone in the world tried to talk me out of getting a suspension fork. They said it would hinder the bikes performance hence causing me to not ride it and that the "new" solid forks offer similar riding characteristics. I still don't believe that but haven't tried anything "new" with a solid fork. I see many examples of Disk Truckers being set up to have a more upright riding position but if that would become a jarring ride that would be a deal breaker.

Bob

If you've logged 14k in the saddle on your current bike, have you considered a custom option?

Sure, a lot can be done with a proper fitting on a stock bike, but why not build one to spec?

Suspension forks trade a certain amount of comfort for energy losses, so you end up having to expend more energy to achieve the same thing as a rigid fork.

That being said, the increasing popularity of wide ( and super wide ) tires over the last few years, along with improvements in the design of tires, can provide an extremely cushy ride on a rigid frame, without the inherent suspension losses.

Nonetheless, even with the widest, most compliant tires we can fit on her frame, set to an appropriate pressure for her weight and gear, it still feels terrible compared to any of our other bikes, of which we have 5 between us. The frame is just so, so incredibly stiff.

I would absolutely take it on a transcontinental tour, since the frame could probably be run over by a tank and survive. But for anything less there are many other better options out there.

The big selling point of the Truckers when they came out was that true touring frames were almost non-existent by the early 2000s, so a new one was embraced by one and all no matter its flaws. And they were relatively cheap for what you got. But that was about it.

Yep, exactly.

My go-to bike now is a 650B frame that I had customized with additional braze-ons for dynamo light wiring/a front pannier rack/my size/etc. Then I added my own components like a rear hub that could be disassembled by the side of the road to easily replace broken spokes and so on. The frame cost something like $1800 in 2014, but it will probably last the rest of my life.

Since I'm at the beginning of this search and the fact that there's about 6 inches of snow outside, everyone's comments are very helpful. I just checked the mileage on the Giant and it's at 14,279 after 6+ years of riding. I'm beginning to wonder if I truly need a steel frame. My bike is dead silent and has a solid feel but I only ride it on the road. There's a couple bumpy sections that I try to avoid but it seems to handle it okay when I ride that way. I'm running 38 mm tires - 700c rims with the back having 36 spokes. The new Giant Cypress has 45 mm tires but a different gear set-up than I'm used to. I might pursue setting one of those up for more bike path type riding. The "joy" of winter will afford me time to figure things out.

p.s. I do have a steel mountain bike that I had converted to be somewhat comfortable that I ride in the winter but not in snow and ice. It's a Gary Fisher Hoo-Koo-E-Koo. Yep, another lovely name for a bike...