What constitutes light touring?

[shane]

Funny to read so many definitions of " light" .....

I've travelled light with 20kg of baggage plus 30kg of water and food, light as possible with 25kg of baggage with 8kg fuel and 15kg of food, also light with 10kg of baggage plus room for a sandwich and my own weight has fluctuated 10kg in that time.....


I suspect so long as your bike still rides well and doesn't wobble too much you'll be just fine .

[TimP]

For me light weight touring is non-camping. It can be saddle bag only, saddle bag and handlebar bag, rear panniers or even rear panniers plus handlebar bag for me. Depends on where I am riding (climate, season and need for spares)

Heavy weight touring used to be front and rear panniers, bar bag, saddle bag plus whatever is left over on the rack. Camping gear, cooking gear, the works.

In all cases it was the same bike though and the same size 24mm section tyres on the same 700C wheels (Mavic E2 rims that I have been using for over 35 years!) I don't believe it is necessary to go for fat tyres and so on as long as you keep a bit of an eye on the road - and I've been on some really bad roads with full touring kit too. I found the most important aspect was getting the gearing right, otherwise it becomes very hard work in the mountains.

[Tasker]

What weight of cycle touring kit means I should buy a tourer rather than an audax bike?
Should my own weight be taken into account?
Also does being "vertically challenged" and having a smaller, less flexy frame make a difference?

Yeah - but is this really a 'cycling' question?

Suggesting this because I also got all hung up on weight/ bike and no doubt everything else the op has forgotten or didn't feel brave enough to mention. Then I just got so angry with myself going into overdrive every evening, seeking every site I could find for 'Touring tips'. In the end I went with the mindset that if I collapsed after twenty miles and dumped all my stuff in a ditch then at least I could tell myself I'd tried.

I was so angry with myself that my self doubt was stopping me from doing something I so wanted to do and I just decided to do it. The moment I made my mind up I never considered the weight of it all.

Just go. Been there. If possible don't tell any one until you come back.The only thing that's too heavy is your own self doubt.

[531colin]

What weight of cycle touring kit means I should buy a tourer rather than an audax bike?
Should my own weight be taken into account?
Also does being "vertically challenged" and having a smaller, less flexy frame make a difference?

My set up is 2 front panniers, on the rear, of about 15L, my list Iis a bit shorter than al_yrpal's. 2 dry bags 8L and 5L with sleeping bag and camp mat on top of the rack and my 2kg tent strapped to the handlebars. Or I can throw the whole lot in 2 Super C rears.
The frames I was looking at are the Spa Audax or Tourer.

Is this a dilemma of whether to purchase one or other of the 2 bikes mentioned?
If so, it might be solved by visiting the shop (with your luggage) and test riding the bikes......generally Spa keep "testers" of all the bikes, although I can't be certain that (for example) every size of Audax bike will have a carrier fitted.
But if it is a bike purchase question, there are other considerations.......an "Audax" bike and a "tourer" are already variations on a theme, and you could say they are more similar than different.....If you already have a "road" bike, then its almost a duplication to buy an Audax, you might need to go to a tourer to get a measurable difference. The bigger tyres on a tourer mean you can do a bit of off-road where the clearances of dual pivot brakes on an audax limit this......and have you thought about a rough-stuff tourer?
Note also that the smallest size Spa Audax has steel forks in order to avoid toe overlap, making it even more similar to the tourers, and the smallest size tourer has 26" wheels for the same reason. When designing the frames, I decided to change the tube diameters with size for the tourers, but not for the Audax bikes....on the face of it, this is illogical, but my reasons were that people coming from a "road" background would be used to the frame stiffness varying with size (light riders and over-engineered frames) but the touring bikes were liable to see big loads, and the big frames need to steer right when loaded up.

[Tasker]

No,no,no!

Please, please, don't mess him/or yourselves around any more with this nonsense thread.

Just say/tell him...

Listen mate, just load up and go.

[beardy]

The OP shows no signs of having the problems that you are attributing to them.

The bags have been chosen, they look to me as if they have no doubts or problems about getting on a bike and going. They are just asking the perfectly reasonable question of when they go is it better to be on a tourer or an Audax bike. There is no reason to assume making this choice puts the journey itself in doubt.

[jamesgilbert]

Agreed, there wouldn't be many threads on this forum if everyone had to just "load up and go" without asking any questions

[pwa]

I have a tourer and an audax bike (Spa titanium) and when I go touring in Provence this summer (including Ventoux) I will be taking the slower but more stable tourer because I think the load I will be carrying will make the audax too twitchy. But I will be camping, so I will probably take 4 panniers (not possible with the audax). I think the audax would be the nicer bike to ride with loads of up to about 10kg, but much more than that would steer me towards the tourer.

[531colin]

I have a tourer and an audax bike (Spa titanium) and when I go touring in Provence this summer (including Ventoux) I will be taking the slower but more stable tourer because I think the load I will be carrying will make the audax too twitchy. But I will be camping, so I will probably take 4 panniers (not possible with the audax). I think the audax would be the nicer bike to ride with loads of up to about 10kg, but much more than that would steer me towards the tourer.

As above, Spa's tourer and audax are more similar than different. If you had bought the steel forks to go with the Spa Audax, then you could take front panniers as there are fittings for low-riders. ,,,,,and the steering geometry of Spa's Audax is 72 deg head, 45mm offset, which is exactly the same as Surly's "famously stable" Long Haul trucker. .....it may even be the same as your tourer?
Where most "Audax" bikes are limited is tyre size; there isn't room under dual pivot sidepulls for more than a 28mm tyre with mudguard clearance, and this is to me a big disadvantage unless you want to restrict yourself to good tarmac, and be constantly vigilant for stones, etc. Chainstays are shorter on the Audax, but many of the (Spa) bikes share the same diameter frame tubes.
But again, where is the point in having a Tourer, and an Audax bike with front pannier mountings? They are almost the same thing, apart from tyre size.....

[ferdinand]

Heres my list about 8kg for light B&B or CC touring and an additional 6.5kg when camping. I like to have a change of clothing to wash and something decent to go down the pub.

Weight ist by Al, on Flickr

Al

"Painting stuff" ? !

Love it. You came back home and the bike was suddenly a different.colour...

Mine includes "dancing stuff" usually.

Ferdinand