REI had 26×1.8 Michelin City tires at 25% off $28. I was worried about my decade-old tires, particularly the fact that at only 1.4 inches, rim damage seemed fairly likely on a tour. I nabbed the last two tires.

I noticed that one of the tires was missing the cardboard product tag, and that it had some writing inside the tire. I didn’t think much of it, and neither did the cashier.

When I got home, I went straight to work. First, I had to figure out the rotation direction. On these tires, it’s embossed right on the reflective stripe, so it’s quite hard to see. I finally found the embossed arrow and, just as I set the tire down, something caught my eye:

There was the faintest of lines in the sidewall…

With a bit of flex, things got scary fast:

Not only was the tire ply visible, it was cut clean through along at least three parallel lines!

So remember: always very carefully inspect tires before purchasing them. High speed blowouts are not fun.

Dempster Highway to the Arctic, Vancouver to Inuvik is an interesting photo journal by David Cambon.

I need a touring bike, and I’m on a budget. My old Barracuda AM2, aluminum-framed mountain bike frame is tapped for rear pannier mounts, so perhaps a conversion is in order.

As I quickly found out, there’s a lot more to fitting drop bars and a rigid fork onto a mountain frame than I had expected. Hopefully, this will help clear things up for the next person who tries.

Forks

There’s no point in having that crummy Manitou Pro X suspension fork soaking up all my energy if I’m just touring. Besides, there are no provisions for mounting a rack. A rigid fork is in order.

Since this is going onto a mountain bike frame which was designed for a suspension fork (typically around 80mm of additional height), a “suspension corrected” fork is required.

Notes:

• The Nashbar fork does not seem to be suspension-corrected.
• Notice that the Salsa and Surly model numbers seem similar? That’s because they’re owned by the same parent company, Quality Bicycle Products.
• To my knowledge, the only difference between a fender eyelet/braze-on and a rack eyelet is which side of the fork it’s on. According to everything I’ve read, there’s absolutely no reason you can’t support a rack with a “fender” eyelet.

Shifters

As much as I would love to have Ultegra 9-speed STI shifters like on my Cannondale road bike, I don’t have $300 to spare (also, they aren’t compatible with V-Brakes, see below). Instead, I will use bar-end shifters, which are cheap and rugged.

Two Shimano bar-end shifters are currently available: the Ultegra 8-speed shifter, and the Dura-Ace 9-speed shifter. The indexing of the 8-speed shifter is incompatible with 9- and 10-speed derailleurs. However, friction-shifting (non-indexed) mode can be used regardless of the shifter/derailleur combination.

Regarding Dura-Ace compatibility, with 8-speed and older setups, Dura-Ace shifters were only compatible with Dura-Ace derailleurs (the pull length was unique). With 9-speed and 10-speed, however, Dura-Ace shifters work with any 9/10-speed Shimano derailleurs.

	SL-BS77	Dura-Ace 9 speed – works with any 9-speed derailleur
	SL-BS78	Dura-Ace 10 speed – works with any 9/10-speed derailleur
	SL-BS64	8-Speed Ultegra Bar End Shifter – works with any 8-speed derailleur or, in friction mode, any 9/10-speed derailleur

Brakes

Brake levers come in two types: standard pull and long pull. Standard pull levers are for use with classic cantilever brakes. Long pull levers are for use with direct-pull (“V-Brake”) brakes.

Normal road levers (such as all Shimano STI integrated brake/shifters) are standard pull and require a pulley system such as a QBP Travel Agent, or a World Class V-Daptor in order to work with V-Brakes.

Additionally, while mountain bike brake levers have a built-in cable adjuster, road bikes do not. So, a ‘noodle’ with a built-in cable adjuster will be required, as shown in the Dia Compe 287V photo below.

There are a few road-style brake levers which can be used directly directly with V-Brake style brakes, no adaptation required:

	Dia Compe 287-V (discontinued)
	Cane Creek Drop V (formerly SCR-5V?)
	Tektro RL520 (Tektro is said to be the same company as Cane Creek, but the levers seem to be half the price of the Cane Creeks…)

Bars

It seems that just about any handlebars will do. Salsa and FSA Omega seem to be popular choices, as listed below. Cyclocross people seem to recommend going about 2cm wider than your usual road bar. Since I’m most interested in touring, I’ll probably go with the same width as my road bikes.

	Salsa Moto Ace Bell Lap Anatomic ($34) 26mm x 42cm/44cm/46cm, 82mm reach, 144mm drop, 282g (2007 model listed at 261g)
	FSA Omega 31.8mm x 40cm/42cm/44cm, 80mm reach, 125mm drop, 300g

The FSA Omega comes standard on all of Co-Motion’s touring singles, which leads me to believe it’s a quality item in spite of its low price.

Cable Routing

Normally, the shifter cable exits the front of the bar-end shifter, is concealed under a few wraps of tape, then extends forward along the plane of bottom of the drop-bars, and arcs back around toward the head tube, as in the photo to the right (from Arctic Hawk on BikeForums.net).

It is also possible to fully conceal the shifter cables by taping them against the handlebar, covered by handlebar tape until near the stem. However, on larger frames, this will require a longer than standard shifter cable for the rear. Cable and housing intended for a tandem bicycle will provide the necessary length. Standard derailleur cables are 1700mm in length, while tandem cables are 3000mm.

Also, when running this extra length, be sure to use Shimano (or other high-quality) cable and housing. The extra length and curves will significantly increase resistance if high-quality cable and housing isn’t used. (source)

Terminology

Some weird terminology that came up while researching this conversion.

• Brifter – Integrated brake and shifter, such as Shimano’s STI lineup.
• Bar-con – I have no idea what the origin of this is, but it seems to simply refer to bar-end shifters.

Trailers versus Panniers

Based upon my online research, the trailer versus pannier debate will rage on forever. Panniers have the advantage of not requiring you to worry about a trailer. Trailers have the advantage of reducing your frontal area (and therefore wind drag), and in theory don’t require wheels nor frame as beefy as those needed to haul gear in panniers.

Both panniers and trailers can negatively affect handling. The degree to which they do, and the respective solutions, seem to vary tremendously by usage patterns. Overloading a trailer, particularly while putting most of the weight forward, is sure to cause handling trouble. Similarly, a heavy, low-slung rear pannier can badly disrupt handling.

Ultimately, there is no clear winner on any objective, universal, technical basis. It seems to be a personal decision, based upon one’s intended usage. Therefore, since I really don’t see any reason to own yet another bicycle solely for mid-weight touring, I will be buying a BOB trailer and attaching it to my carbon-framed, triple-chainring roadbike.

Now the question becomes, which trailer to purchase?

The Trailers

BOB makes two trailers, the Ibex and the Yak.

The Ibex offers 3″ of adjustable, damped suspension travel, weighs 3.5 pounds more, is silver instead of black, and costs an extra $70.

Nomenclature

The only difference between the base and the “PLUS” models is the inclusion of the yellow, roll-top BOB bag (“DRY SAK” dry bag). The “28″ versions are for 28″ wheels, 29″ mountain bikes, and 700cc road bikes with full-wrap fenders.

Specifications

This section lists the specifications for each, as reported on the BOB website. All differences are listed in bold.

Ibex:

• MSRP: $369, $399 for PLUS model with “DRY SAK” bag.
• Suspension: 3″, adjustable
• Weight: 17 Lbs (7.7 kgs)
• Capacity: 70 Lbs (32 kgs)
• Wheel: 28 spoke, aluminum rim, cartridge bearings, 16 x 2.125″ tire
• Cargo area: approx 25″ x 16″ x 18″ (64cm x 41cm x 46cm)
• Included: quick release attachment system with spare attachment pin, bungee, flag, fender, reflectors
• Color: gray?

Yak:

• MSRP: $299, $329 for PLUS model with “DRY SAK” bag.
• Suspension: none
• Weight: 13.5 Lbs (6.1 kgs)
• Capacity: 70 Lbs (32 kgs)
• Wheel: 28 spoke, aluminum rim, cartridge bearings, 16 x 1.75″ tire
• Cargo area: approx 25″ x 16″ x 18″ (64cm x 41cm x 46cm)
• Included: quick release attachment system with spare attachment pin, spider bungee, flag, fender, reflectors
• Color: black

Additional Information

This page provides far better photos of the Ibex than does their website. Also — again, unlike the website — it explains exactly how the shock absorber is “adjustable”. You can move the lower mounting point for different leverage, and you can increase the spring preload. Additionally, their Yak page shows exactly how the trailers mount to the bicycle.

Which to Choose?

The Internets

This guy used a BOB Ibex behind a hard-tail mountain bike on the Great Divide Route and has generally very positive things to say about it.

This thread compares the Yak to the Ibex. Several references are made to high-speed weaving and instability with the unsuspended Yak, which is said to be absent from the suspended Ibex, but some also say that this is simply due to improper loading.

My Decision

It sounds like the Ibex may reduce the chance of handling problems, particularly at high speeds. Since the downside is 3.5 pounds, and since I don’t believe that 3.5 pounds of rolling weight will be noticeable, I intend to purchase a BOB Ibex.

I will probably replace the 2.125″ Ibex tire with a 1.75″ slick, since I think rolling resistance is more likely to be felt than the absolute weight difference.

Followup

I bought the BOB Ibex and, sadly, decided that it sucks. I will be returning it next weekend. More details later.