650B Elephant National Forest Explorer

S & S couplings are amazing I really would recomend you get them. Brilliant being able to take your bike as normal luggage, taking it on buses, tubes with ease.

They are ace, though tbh I've only used mine on the Eurostar - the luggage weight penalty on planes gets it charged pretty much the same as a normal bike box.

I've never been charged using them, can get the bike in hard case with all tools, packing etc plus a small amount of clothes weighing 20kg, so OK for easyjet. I managed to go lightweight touring round iceland and carried everything I needed in that case and my hand luggage

plus import tax most likely

I think you could take a plane over to get it, ride it around a bit (Tour Divide) and then take it back with you and claim you brought it all along.
And it still might come out lower than import tax/VAT.

The luggage weight penalty on planes gets it charged pretty much the same as a normal bike box.

Exactly why I'm not bothered, plus it's free on certain flight like Virgin Atlantic.

Can someone explain to me in simple terms why this bike has so much weight attached to the steering end and nothing at all over the back?

Because the rider isn't pictured.

luggage weight is on the steering, and high up... doesn't that make it harder to steer / balance?
I used to have a basket which was a pain when it had a big load, and started to ruin my headset.
how will it handle in comparison to front and rear panniers and a lighter bar bag?

I'm thinking of getting a different touring set-up and wondered what this massive bar bag rando thing was all about.

Ed will be here shortly to elaborate, but the bike is designed to handle better with the front load. long rake/short trail geometry.
It's an old french thing, now adopted by some of the American rando nerds too.

French engineered anything >>>>>

Panniers on the rear aren't great if you have to push the bike so roughtstuff tourers try and avoid it.

Still doesn't explain why you put the weight so high up when you could have a low-rider front rack.

#brokenrecord #shouldprobablytryitbeforeIknockit

Ed will be here shortly to elaborate, but the bike is designed to handle better with the front load. long rake/short trail geometry.
It's an old french thing, now adopted by some of the American rando nerds too.

Very much this.

Trail = distance between axle and headtube;

Track bike typically have 65mm trail, quite a high trail for high speed stability but feel crap at low speed (ever wonder why people like putting higher pressure tyres on their track bike on the road? now you know).

Road bike typically have 57mm trail, not as high as a track, but still give you a nimble ride with a bit of stability, this is the de facto choice of trail.

Rando bike have a much lower trail, around 35mm, they're much quicker than road bike and can feel extremely nimble at high speed without a front load.

Add a front load, it slower the steering, but enough to make it more like a road bike but with the additional benefit of being able to micro-correct your steering more while cornering (hence handle better).

Jan Heine wrote it well in his blog about the discovery of the front-end geometries;

Then I started riding an old Alex Singer randonneur bike (see above) once in a while. The Singer surprised me: “Tricky” corners suddenly were less difficult. When I noticed a pothole too late, and thought that I would not be able to steer around it, I braced myself for the impact. To my surprise, the bike responded quickly enough to avoid the pothole. When I got tired, the Singer was easier to keep on a straight line – in fact, I could ride on the white painted “fog line” for miles with little concentration (see photo at the top of the post). Riding no-hands at moderate speeds was easier, too. This confused me: The Singer had “quicker,” more precise steering, yet it was more stable.

When I switched back to my normal bike after a single ride on the Singer, I found myself running wide in corners. I hit potholes that I thought I would miss. And the bike sometimes weaved unexpectedly when I was getting tired. Both bikes had a similar positions, both had handlebar bags, but something was different. To my surprise, the bike I rode all the time felt less intuitive than the new-to-me Singer.

That is when we started measuring geometries. We realized that the Singer’s geometry was anything but the “relaxed” geometry we had expected. The bike had a steep head angle and less trail than was common at the time.

Still doesn't explain why you put the weight so high up when you could have a low-rider front rack.

Because it make little difference, otherwise courier with big fuck-off Grobag would be falling arse over pierced tits all over London.

Can someone explain to me in simple terms why this bike has so much weight attached to the steering end and nothing at all over the back?

miro answer your question, because the weight distribution is much more even with a front load, than a rear load when a rider sit on it, climbing became easier because of the additional weight on the front, descending also easier due to having more weight on the front, especially with a low trail geometry making it easier to turn tighter letting the front weight "flop" the wheel.

...yadayada...
Because it make little difference, otherwise courier with big fuck-off Grobag would be falling arse over pierced tits all over London.
...

rep for this

Kinda similar this. At first glance at least. Sorry spam.

Are you downtube, bar end or ergo'ing this one? (shifting)

Campagnolo Ergo, downtube braze on thought, making it a little more flexible if I want a simple 8 speed friction set-up.

This last R Jones is hot, but I'm also wondering why the hell all these bikes don't have front lowriders instead of a big boxy bag.
BTW I also own a 650B low trail rando bike (that I had to draw myself last year) and would never change it against any other geometry. It just handles perfectly front loaded (2 lowriders + front bag resting on a rack).
Good choice here.

This last R Jones is hot, but I'm also wondering why the hell all these bikes don't have front lowriders instead of a big boxy bag.

Thought the same, but realised it could simply be that a handlebar bag is much more conventional for everyday riding.

Got a picture of your rigs? sound like a nice set-up.

I wouldn't use lowriders for commuting either of course. Too wide and I don't need much space everyday.

I don't have proper photos of my bike, just this one while building it, wrong side, before any adjustement and with a cheap front bag :
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/3387/helv.jpg
Trail is not *very *low as it's 40mm, tires are 32mm "Confrerie", light and supple but not as wide as you seem to like ;)
Geometry by myself (maybe some strange choices here ...) and building by a friend who had a workshop 10 years ago.

Campagnolo Ergo, downtube braze on thought, making it a little more flexible if I want a simple 8 speed friction set-up.

You should try the Retroshift levers, they are very good- and it would be perfectly possible to get someone to create a pair for whichever Campag shifter you wanted to use.

^^ that's a lovely looking bike. Especially with the colour-coded racks. Were you tempted to colour match the mudguards?

^ retroshift definitely sound like a good option. I guess the only downside is downtube shifters are prob easier to use when you're in the drops.

You should try the Retroshift levers.

Major issues with that is the cable routing, which can interfere with the bag, as you can see from the raw NFE.

I'm very comfortable with downtube shifter, I guess the distance from bar to drop isn't that great for me, and I shift hella less due to the location rather than constantly clicking up and down (another reason why I got 7 speeds on the Oak - jump between each gear is greater thus less need to change them).

I don't have proper photos of my bike, just this one while building it, wrong side, before any adjustement and with a cheap front bag :
http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/3387/helv.jpg
Trail is not *very *low as it's 40mm, tires are 32mm "Confrerie", light and supple but not as wide as you seem to like ;)

That look great, 40mm trail work well with the narrower tyres, you should try the Grand Bois Cypres that come in 32mm, that was one of my favourite 700c tyres of all.

That look great, 40mm trail work well with the narrower tyres, you should try the Grand Bois Cypres that come in 32mm, that was one of my favourite 700c tyres of all.

Why not, but the price is one good reason to keep up with the Confrerie . They are also lighter (260g vs 310g)...

Where did you order the Hutchinson tyres from? need to replaced the Panaracer on the girlfriend's bike.

I live in France where they are pretty easy to find online.
http://www.xxcycle.fr/pneu-hutchinson-confrerie-des-650b-275-650-b-ts,,fr.php
http://www.routens.com/navig-ttc/388-route/459-roues-et-pneus/550-pneus/676-route/8886-hutchinson-pneu-randonneur-650-32-b-32-584-.html
http://www.cycle-tyres-direct.fr/pneu-hutchinson-confrerie-des-650-202.html
Hutchinson - Pneu Confrérie des 650 - 650x32B: Amazon.fr: Sports et Loisirs

I guess you can have them delivered in the UK but let me know if its not possible (I could buy them and send them to you).