# New Touring Bike, 26" Wheels?



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

*54cm Surly LHT for a 6' Rider*

I want to build a new touring bike this winter and I'm thinking of starting with a 54cm Surly Long Haul Trucker, mainly because it takes 26" wheels. I've compared the 54cm LHT dimensions to my current road bike and I can get what appears to be a very good touring fit with it.

What's the down side, if any?

P.S. My inseam is 87.5cm and I ride with a saddle ht. of 77cm. I could easily fit on a 56cm or even a 58cm touring frame with 700c wheels.


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

What is with the mixing of Centimeters and Inches?!? My brain is going to explode making the conversions; now is it 2.54 to 1 or 1 to 2.54???? Argggggggggggggggg.

BTW I can't think of any real downside to a 559mm tire (aka 26" MTB) on a touring bike. You would lose some performance unloaded on smooth pave but the rims will usually take a 25mm (1") tire (or is it tyre?) if you want some fast riding.

If you want to drop some buckage the Atlantis by Rivendell is some sweet stuff. Nothing wrong with the LHT either.


----------



## FrontRanger (May 19, 2004)

I am in a similar spot. Can you tell me your reasons for wanting 26" wheels?


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

The main reason I want 26" wheels is commonality. My wife rides a 26" wheel touring bike, and it's nice to have to carrry only one size of spare parts. Other reasons: 26" wheels are also reputed to be stronger and more readily available worldwide. For equivalent quality they may be cheaper. Panniers and racks ride a little lower and 26" wheels feel more stable to me on a heavily loaded bike. Interestingly, the 54cm LHT has a longer wheelbase than the 56 cm LHT frame. 

CRR may be higher, but rolling resistance and speed don't make much difference when you're lugging 75# of gear on a 35# bike.

Actually, what I'd like to hear is reasons why people would choose a 700c wheel for touring. My last half dozen long tours have been on 26" wheels, on a highly modified mtn bike frame and I can't complain about the wheel size.


----------



## mhinman (Mar 27, 2004)

Smaller wheels on a small frame can often times eliminate front wheel overlap (Where your toes touch the front wheel).


----------



## MB1 (Jan 27, 2004)

The real neat thing about 26" wheels is how well they work with Brooks Saddles! ;-)


----------



## bsdc (Feb 15, 2002)

StillRiding said:


> The main reason I want 26" wheels is commonality. My wife rides a 26" wheel touring bike, and it's nice to have to carrry only one size of spare parts. Other reasons: 26" wheels are also reputed to be stronger and more readily available worldwide. For equivalent quality they may be cheaper. Panniers and racks ride a little lower and 26" wheels feel more stable to me on a heavily loaded bike. Interestingly, the 54cm LHT has a longer wheelbase than the 56 cm LHT frame.
> 
> CRR may be higher, but rolling resistance and speed don't make much difference when you're lugging 75# of gear on a 35# bike.
> 
> Actually, what I'd like to hear is reasons why people would choose a 700c wheel for touring. My last half dozen long tours have been on 26" wheels, on a highly modified mtn bike frame and I can't complain about the wheel size.


One of the newest things in mountain biking is 29" wheels which are equivalent to 700c. The benefits to bigger wheels include smoother rolling due to the shallower angle of contact with obstacles and more stablility due to the increased centrifugal force of larger wheels. Mountain bikers are bashing these wheels around without much concern for durability. 

I just recently got a 29er mountain bike and I can say the difference is rather dramatic when compaired to my old 26" mountain bike. For me, I wouldn't give much thought to 26" touring wheels. I'd stick with 700c.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 20, 2007)

StillRiding- Sorry I can`t offer any more to what you were looking for than what`s already in the thread, but I`m wondering about your wife`s 26" touring bike. Is it a factory frame? If so, what model? I`m half looking for a steel 26" road frame for reasons of cross-compatibility with the rest of the bikes in the household and the only ones I`ve found (though I haven`t yet done an exhaustive search) were the Atlantis, which is out of my range, and the LHT, which intrigues me but I don`t know how I`d like the stretched limo aspect. Is your wife`s bike more of a sport geometry any chance?


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

The deed is done. My 54cm Surly LHT frame arrived yesterday. Here's how it compares to my road bike that fits me very well. One interesting point. The seat tube length on the 54cm LHT is actually 57 cm from center of BB to top of seat tube. The first jpg is my road bike, the second is the LHT, the third is the overlay with identical saddle to BB position. There is enough steerer tube on the Surly so that I could get the bars level with the saddle if I wanted, but I prefer the drop shown, or maybe even more.


----------



## FrontRanger (May 19, 2004)

Looks good. But we need some actual photos to drool over.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

Pictures coming soon, but in the mean time some discussion about the frame . This thread could legitimately be kicked to "Components and Wrenching" but I'm posting here because I think it may be helpful to those primarily interested in touring with a LHT.

The Frame: The 54cm LHT is a *BIG* 54cm frame. Stand over height with 1.6" tires is 80cm. That's almost the same as a Trek 520 23" (58.5cm) frame which has an 80.5cm standover. I wouldn't recommend the 54cm LHT for anyone with an inseam much less than 83cm. As I pointed out before, the LHT seat tube is actually 57cm center to top. Other critical dimensions are also on the large size for a 54cm frame, eg. 18.2cm head tube and 55.5cm virtual top tube. If you normally ride a 56 or 58cm 700c frame and want to try something with 26" wheels, this frame will probably work for you. Is this what Surly had in mind? If so, good idea. 

Paint finish on the frame is nice but nothing special. Functional is best to describe it. I could do without the decals, but they can always be removed. The welds are good, the threads are clean, and all the faces appear true. The dropouts are square and centered. All in all a good solid frame. Nice touches include front forks that are thru drilled for pannier racks (think Tubus Duo), double fork eyelets front and rear, braze-ons for a pump peg and spoke holders (probably useless for those of us who own tape) and a bridge for a rear cantilever brake stop. There's plenty of clearance for huge tires and fenders. The frame comes standard with a nice seatpost clamp. Don't make the mistake I did and buy one. I now have a spare if someone needs it. CAUTION: the screw that holds the derailleur guides to the bottom of the bottom bracket extends well into the shell and may interfere with some bottom brackets, in particular the Tange 68-113 square taper. I had to grind a little off the tip of the screw.

Next: Drivetrain components...lots of questions.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

*Photo of the Real Thing!*

I've finished putting parts together to the point where the bike can be ridden. As assembled now, there's 3cm of bar drop and the reach is about 2cm less than my road bike which is set up with 9cm of bar drop. The fit feels pretty good for long range touring. I could get the bars about level by flipping the stem, or I could remove a few spacers and get the same bar position with the stem flipped. For now, I've elected not to cut the steerer and go with the setup you see. My impression after my first ride is that the bike is very smooth and stable and that I should be able to crank out some big touring miles on it. The 54cm Surly can definitely be made to fit a 6ft tall rider. Maybe I'll try a three day trip next weekend if I get the remainder of the parts together in time. Here's a components list for what you see now:

Cranks: Sugino XD600 48-36-26
BB: Tange 113mm x 68
Pedals: Shimano PD-M540 which came off my old touring bike
Chain: SRAM PC 971
Cassette: SRAM PG-950 11-32...I'd really like a 12-30 but couldn't find one cheap.
Rear Derailleur: Shimano RD-M751 on closeout from Universal
Front Derailleur: Shimano FD-3304 Sora...works fine with the STI shifters/Sugino Crankset
Seatpost: Ritchey Comp 400mm, which is way too long
Clamp: Surly, came with the frame
Saddle: Fizik Rondine, a nice new touring saddle
Headset: Cane Creek S1
Wheels: Deore XT 36 hole hubs laced to Mavic 721 rims...BOMBPROOF
Tires: Continental Sport Contact slicks, 26x1.6" on sale at Bike Tires Direct
Stem: An old Forte 100mm oversize I had in my junk box
Bars: Deda Magic, used from eBay for $6.00 plus shipping
Shifters: Shimano 105 9-speed, used from eBay for $115
Cables/housing: Jagwire Pro
Brakes: Avid Shorty 4
Bar tape: Profile Gel Shock
Bottles and cages: generic from the LBS

Still to go: fenders, lights, racks, kickstand


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 20, 2007)

Looks nice. And the chainrings?


----------



## Sixty Fiver (Jul 7, 2007)

The LHT just gets more and more appealing looking every time I see one.

I have a touring bike that came with factory equipped with 26 inch wheels... back in 1955.










The headtube and seattube angles appear to be very similar between the bikes (mine are 71 and 73 degrees) and can say this really makes for a comfortable long haul bike.


----------



## rcnute (Dec 21, 2004)

Looks super. My (blue) LHT gets in next week! Going to take the parts off my Bianchi Grizzly.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

*Ready for a Shakedown Cruise*

Here's my LHT fully loaded and ready for a three day shakedown tour tomorrow. I gave it a 25 mile warmup today and everything stayed bolted together. It handles very nicely loaded. The Tubus Duo front rack lets the panniers ride almost 4" lower than my old setup. One note: a stay mounted kickstand won't work on a fully rigged LHT. It either interferes with the rack mount or the spoke holder.


----------



## FatTireFred (Jan 31, 2005)

reminds me of those Cinelli racing rats bikes from a few years back... pretty cool


----------



## FrontRanger (May 19, 2004)

I love it. Just looking at that pic makes me want to load up and head out.


----------



## tarwheel2 (Jul 7, 2005)

I am very confused about the geometry of Surly bikes. You say that your 54 frame has a 182 mm head tube, and I confirmed that at the Surly website. However, their next larger frame (56) has a headtube that is only 152 mm, and the 58 has a 171 mm head tube, according to their website. Why would larger frames have shorter head tubes? The short head tubes on many Surly frames is one reason why I have never seriously considered them. I generally ride a size 57 frame, so I had always looked at their 56-58 frames when researching Surlys -- and I never realized that the smaller frames actually have longer head tubes. Truly baffling.

Nice looking bike, BTW. Looks like a great setup for touring or commuting.


----------



## FatTireFred (Jan 31, 2005)

tarwheel2 said:


> I am very confused about the geometry of Surly bikes. You say that your 54 frame has a 182 mm head tube, and I confirmed that at the Surly website. However, their next larger frame (56) has a headtube that is only 152 mm, and the 58 has a 171 mm head tube, according to their website. Why would larger frames have shorter head tubes? The short head tubes on many Surly frames is one reason why I have never seriously considered them. I generally ride a size 57 frame, so I had always looked at their 56-58 frames when researching Surlys -- and I never realized that the smaller frames actually have longer head tubes. Truly baffling.
> 
> Nice looking bike, BTW. Looks like a great setup for touring or commuting.




not really baffling... then 56 and bigger use 700c wheels


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

FatTireFred said:


> not really baffling... then 56 and bigger use 700c wheels


The fork on the 26" wheel 54cm and smaller frames is 276mm while the fork on the 56cm and larger 700c frames is 290mm.

When wheel radius, headtube length and uncut steerer are added in, the 54cm LHT gives the same maximum potential bar height as the 56cm LHT. The only significant differences for sizing purposes are a 1.5cm longer equivalent top tube on the 56cm and about 2cm more standover height. The top tube difference can be overcome with a longer stem, and we can all use more standover height. Another plus for the 54 is a longer wheelbase.


----------



## nbrennan (Feb 19, 2007)

I'm considering a LHT, but "my size"-54cm- comes with 26" wheels. Any thoughts on how the bike fits compared to other bikes with the same size, or how the 26" wheels handle? I understand the practicality of 26" wheels, but I can't get over the feeling that they may feel slower than 700c wheels.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

nbrennan said:


> I'm considering a LHT, but "my size"-54cm- comes with 26" wheels. Any thoughts on how the bike fits compared to other bikes with the same size, or how the 26" wheels handle? I understand the practicality of 26" wheels, but I can't get over the feeling that they may feel slower than 700c wheels.


When you're loaded up for touring, the difference in speed between 26" and 700c wheels is inconsequential. What the 26" wheels do give you is more reliability, better availability, the ability to use much larger and better riding tires, and a little less cost. Consider yourself lucky that you're the right size to ride a 54cm LHT. 

I've now got close to 500 miles on my LHT, and I wouldn't want it with anything but the 26" wheels. You should be aware that the 54cm LHT is a BIG 54cm bike. The head tube is 18.2 cm, and the virtual top tube is 55.5 cm. Make sure that you don't need anything smaller. I'd say the 54cm LHT is good for persons between about 5'9 and 6' tall.


----------



## nbrennan (Feb 19, 2007)

I have a long torso for a person of my height, and I like the idea of being able to easily have my handlebars above my saddle. I didn't know it had a 55.5 tt though. I currently ride a 53.5cm lemond.


----------



## rcnute (Dec 21, 2004)

I'm 5'8" with an 84 cm inseam. I got a 52 cm LHT and it fits very well. I run a 100 mm Nitto stem with the bars below saddle height. I think the slack angles take a little length off of the relatively long top tubes.


----------

