Club Tour vs Audax Mk3

[peter jenkins]

Fellow Thornophiles,

I have a Club Tour about 7 years old which has served me well in touring and commuting roles, but I am finding it a wee bit heavy and (dare I say it?) unresponsive when riding Audax events.
I am toying with the idea of buying an Audax Mk3 frame and (carbon) fork and transferring most of the running gear from the Club Tour to the new frame.  I think this should be perfectly feasible, although I will need caliper brakes and perhaps a different length stem, but I'm looking for a second opinion before I commit. Third, fourth and more opinions are also welcomed.

I live in a part of Australia where Mk 3's are scarce so I am hoping someone out there in Thornland has both bikes and is able to provide an unbiased opinion. Also, anyone with more mechanical nous than me might point out any flaws in my plan......

Regards to all,

Peter Jenkins

[Danneaux]

Peter,

A careful look at both current Thorn brochures (Club Tour and Audax Mk 3) and a review of historical online reviews for the two bikes online reveal no impediments to your plan insofar as I can see.

Going this route -- swapping frames and reusing the majority of the parts -- is a financially smart way to go. You should also save on shipping costs and import duties, thanks to importing only a frame and not an entire bike.

The one thing I will note is your "Jenkins-engineered" bike likely won't be as light overall as the lightest Thorn-offered option, thanks to the heavier Club Tour parts you'll be swapping over. If the parts and frame sizes were comparable to the factory-lightest Audax Mk 3, I'd think you could save as much as 5-6lbs/2.3-2.7kg over a heavier-spec Club Tour depending on whether you went with the steel or carbon fork. Instead, I would guess you might save somewhere in the neighborhood of 3.5-4.25lbs/1.6-1.9kg, but that is an estimate based on spec sheets and not all reviews were for comparable frame sizes. The biggest difference you'll likely notice will be due to the different frame geometries.

The only fly in the ointment I can see might be a greater tendency toward toe/fender overlap on the Audax. I do see Andy Blance made cautionary note of this in the Audax brochure (red box warning, top-right of page 3 in the PDF brochure)...

Whilst having significantly more clearance than a “racing”bicycle, the Audax Mk3 has less clearance than many traditional touring bikes. Mk3 owners should expect to wear “proper SPD type shoes”, or “traditional cycling shoes, with steel toe clips and straps”. Either type must be set to allow clearance, when riding a Mk3. Failure to cycle with appropriate footware, could lead to contact between the rider’s shoe and mudguard...which could precipitate loss of control.

In contrast, Andy says this about the issue wrt the Club Tour (upper-right, page 4 of the Club Tour PDF brochure)...

Persons with exceptionally large feet, for their height, may have to use “proper cycling shoes” and/or restrict tyre width, to avoid toe overlap.

I probably should point out the obvious...
Of course, you'll lose overall load capacity and front carrier capability (in the event you go with the carbon fork), but that is likely not an issue for your intended primary use -- Audax. The Audax Mk3 also allows for only two water bottles instead of three, and tire clearances are tighter as one would expect (Club Tour up to 700x40, Audax Mk3 up to 700x28 in Thorn's option list).

Unless I needed the money immediately to fund the new frame, I would be inclined to keep my old frame for a bit to see if I was truly happy with the swap. By waiting just a bit to sell the old Club Tour, you would have a fallback option in the event the new frame doesn't meet your expectations (I have a hunch it will and all will be fine). You also have the option to build-up the old frame again at some point in future, or swap the Club Tour parts back onto it as you upgrade the Audax if you wish. After some time with the Audax, you may still find yourself wishing for a relatively lightweight touring bike and you would have a good platform for that again in the Club Tour.

I wish I could tell you I had experience with just this swap, but I don't. I have done much the same thing between a number of other bikes, and except for keeping in mind differences in component dimensions (i.e. rear drop spacing, headset/steerer diameter and type [threaded/threadless], and brake type/reach), all should be smooth sailing. There is an additional advantage in that all the components you'll be swapping are proven and familiar; all you'll really need to adjust to is the new frame, and that can be an advantage when using a new bike in Audax/rando riding.

What you'll be doing is probably the truest comparison of frame materials and geometry one can imagine, 'cos it is really only the frame that will differ, along with a very few individual components. If you decide to go this route, I for one eagerly anticipate your impressions and ride reports to see just how the frames differ in ride, feel, and handling, and which you prefer both for overall riding and for Audax.

Best regards and best wishes on the project should you decide to pursue it; I think it'll go well!

Dan.

[peter jenkins]

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your encouraging response.

Your comments regarding shipping costs are particularly pertinent as I have an idea that whoever SJS uses to ship their bikes is not the world's cheapest. I have yet to enquire regarding this aspect.

I did try to estimate the weight difference in regard to the various components (XT versus 105, mainly) and gave up, so I am indebted to you for providing a ballpark figure.

As an aside, Andy Blance's rather zealous attitude to toe overlap does excite my curiosity a little. I have a Bianchi SL Megapro that has pretty tight clearances, particularly as it's a smallish (51 cm) frame, and toe overlap is certainly present but I have never had a real issue with it. Although, having said that, I can see it might be a problem on a heavily laden tourer when you're struggling up a 25% incline and tending to zig zag at 6 KPH. On the other hand, the Bianchi is constructed of Aluminium alloy, so Andy would have it recycled into bottle tops if he could. It's not my favourite mount for a 200 KM Audax, though! Far too firm a ride.

OOPS! I've digressed.

I will definitely hang on the the Club Tour frame as you wisely suggest. Apart from anything else I do have a sentimental attachment to it and if I do go ahead with my project it's likely that I will build the Club Tour back up in the fullness of time. And... there's probably not a big market for second hand 517L Club Tour frame/forks 

Thanks again and best regards,

pj

[Danneaux]

Peter digressed...

...Andy Blance's...attitude to toe overlap does excite my curiosity a little. ...I can see it might be a problem on a heavily laden tourer when you're struggling up a 25% incline and tending to zig zag at 6 KPH.

(sorry to redact your comment, Peter, but I think I kept the meaning) You've put your finger on the heart of the toe-overlap issue, Peter. In my experience, its significance as an issue is very much down to...

1) Intended use
2) Riding style
3) Foot size/big toe length(!)/shoes used
4) Fenders/mudguards
5) Crank length
(...and, of course, frame geometry, particularly front-center distance and head tube angle/fork rake)

It is a huge issue for me for the exact-same reasons you cite. I often tour and frequently find myself grinding loaded up very steep hills or negotiating narrow, winding dirt tracks at low speed. I once had a bike with a wicked amount of toe overlap and in such use, the toe clips often wedged solidly against the front fender, locking the front wheel and down I'd go. Some of the hardest low-speed falls I've ever had came this way. I swore at that time I'd never own another bike with toe overlap, and have held true to that self-promise and is a major reason I selected a Thorn. I'm careful to make sure I don't foul a fender stay-end, either.

That said, it is rarely if ever an issue with bikes used in higher-speed pursuits, where steering is done more by leaning than turning. The front wheel simply does not turn enough at speed to snag the rider's foot and so is not a problem and might never be noticed. Use the bike often at low speeds to negotiate goat trails or to make tight turns, and a fouling fall is more likely. It really is a case of horses for courses!

Yes, foot size is a contributor. If one has a really long big toe (I do!), overlap is more likely to be an issue. Why? Many of us (and tradition dictates) center the inner metatarsal head (ball of foot) over the pedal spindle while riding. If you do that and have a long big toe, there's going to be more foot and shoe extending forward of the pedal centerline to snag the front fender and/or tire. My big toe extends 1.5cm past the second toe. If you have Morton's Foot (second toe longer), you'll have more room to work with before it becomes a problem. Similarly, if you're a spinner who wears cycling shoes, you're more likely to center the inner balls of your feet atop the spindle. If you're a low-rpm masher who rides in hiking boots, then more foot will extend forward to cause a problem with the front wheel. Riders who prefer to place their arches dead-center over the pedal spindle are the most likely to have a problem as their foot extends the farthest forward.

Of course, running fenders/mudguards also reduces clearance, and can make the difference between overlap and not. Crank length can do the same.

Just something to keep in mind if one has a marked desire to avoid toe overlap. A fun digression to bring in for discussion, Peter!

Best,

Dan.

[Pavel]

I'd like to chime in because I'm wondering which way to go myself for Audax style riding and training and I'm sitting not fully decided between the Audax and the Club tour (and favoring the Club tour so far ..)

There are several factors working here of course but I believe that the weight is not one of them.  From correspondence I have learned that, given the same frame size, that the weight difference is a miniscule.

  Audax frame – 2.24kg, forks – 1.12kg
  Club Tour frame – 2.4kg, forks – 1.2kg

So it may be that the geometry has much to do with the impressions of the bike and the suitability for the various tasks and there the Audax will likely be a nice change, but I suspect that it will only shine properly if the components are matched to the intended role as well.  You may be stifling the Frame if you simply move the components.  Since I have the Nomad, I want a light bike for spirited riding.  My first concern is comfort and my second is a straight line tendency and that is why I am sitting on the fence.  The audax seems to be what I need - except I wonder if it may not be too lively for my tastes.

If only I could afford airfare to the Shop to find out for certain ... and then be able to afford the frame as well!

[Danneaux]

If only I could afford airfare to the Shop to find out for certain ... and then be able to afford the frame as well!

Pavel,

Given the cost of shipping (my complete Sherpa was perilously close to USD$1,000), I wonder if it might be almost a wash to do just what you propose. If you could get a cheap RT flight or use air miles and then take the bike home as your sole checked luggage...maybe? Looking at my frequent-flyer plan, it is still off-season for rates/miles redemption until May 15. It gets cheaper again about mid-September or so.

I know. I am probably Evil for tempting you, but I'm looking forward to the ride reports!  

Good to have some harder figures on relative weights, Club Tour vs, Audax. I had a terrible time finding comparably sized/spec'd frames to compare, so the best I could manage was the estimate above between extremes. Good job!

Best,

Dan.

[peter jenkins]

Thanks for your input Pavel, and again Dan,

Your point about the small weight difference is a good one. I've looked at a few reviews on the MK3 and found that reported weights vary, even when reviewed at different times by the same magazine. I really wish that weights were available from the good guys at Thorn but I can't find them on any of their literature. I do appreciate that geometry and the characteristics of the steel itself are significant factors, but I'm relying on yet another of Andy's bold statements in the Club Tour brochure: Our Audax bike is a much better fast road bike...it is quicker, sharper, lighter, more comfortable and more exciting. I have to say I like the thought of quicker, lighter and more comfortable.

OTH, I have found the Club Tour to be extremely comfortable, so I'm looking for quicker and lighter, and now, in view of Pavel’s comments, I'm wondering if changing the componentry would be a more viable option than a frame swap.

I think that I can reassure you, Pavel, that the Club Tour wouldn’t be too lively for your tastes if you’re happy with your TSR. To my mind, the TSR is the livelier of the two.

Yours in indecision,

pj

[Relayer]

I really wish that weights were available from the good guys at Thorn but I can't find them on any of their literature.

Oh but they do!  At least for the Audax Mk3, see brochure page 6, quoted weight is 10.9kg.

Interestingly, the most recent review of the Audax Mk 3 (which I strongly suspect is the one currently on sale on the SJSC website) quoted weight is 10.1kg in the magazine, no rack or mudguards present; and 600g still to save with carbon fork.

http://www.bikeradar.com/gear/category/bikes/road/product/review-thorn-cycles-audax-mk3-11-32143

The only magazine review of the Club Tour on Thorn's website has quoted weight of 12.04kg - no pedals.

http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/thornpdf/CP189ClubTourTest_Bike2.pdf

From the above the weight difference isn't so miniscule, which will probably be down to components.  In Thorn's Audax Mk3 brochure the Schwalbe Ultremo tyre options are quoted as "ultra-lightweight" (might need to try a pair of them on my Audax bike sometime).

Having said all that Pavel, you could always get a Club Tour with an extra super-lightweight wheelset!  

[Pavel]

Peter, I just wanted to mention that those weights I quoted were from Robin Thorn who had the two large sizes weighed for me.  Pretty amazing service I'd say and it makes me a confident customer to have that kind of possible interaction.

Northern walker at http://northernwalker.wordpress.com/ has both frames and has write ups of his experience with each.  Perhaps that may help a bit.  From what his views are I am now starting to think that the Audax may in fact be better for me.  I weigh 95 kilos and thought that perhaps sitting my portly frame on an light intentions Audax frame may be stretching the design limits.  That helped me think the Club Tour may be the thing.  Now I'm much less convinced and I will not ever be carrying paniers on it, only just a handlebar bag and a Carradice Super-C rack bag, so the weight distribution may make the Audax a better idea as it is designed without having to worry about a massive load on the back.

I wonder then if it follows that with no particular luggage load that the Audax is better balanced front to back, and perhaps  and so in comes the part about it being more comfortable.  I guess it does not have to be overly stiff waiting for a load to cope with? If not ... what would make the Audax more comfy I wonder?

[Danneaux]

Pavel,

Given the figures you received are very accurate (and they must be, derived as they are from actual comparative measurement for comparable sizes -- what fantastic service, indeed! ), then as you say, the weight difference is insignificant. Except for minor tuning of tube gauge/wall thickness and perhaps diameter, then any differences in comfort must be due to geometry...so long as we're talking "frame only".

Don't forget...as a completed bike, the Club Tour accepts far wider tires than does the Audax, so I would think tire choice would make a greater difference in comfort than materials (given the near-comparable weight) and so it must be down to geometry. As a whole bike, any differences in comfort would be due more to tire cross section/profile/inflation that even geometry.

Here's a personal example: My 1980 Centurion Pro Tour is a touring bike that unfortunately was designed with criterium-bike geometry. It carries light-to-reasonable touring loads very competently. I use the word "unfortunate" to describe it because it has always been very fatiguing to ride. It is just bearable with a full load of four panniers and an HB bag, but after riding the thing unladen, I feel as if I've been astride a paint-shaker. I'll get off it after a 200km ride and feel as if I've just been heavily beaten, and -- unusual for me --  can feel it the next morning as well. Compare that to the 1983/84 Centurion Pro Tour 15 with a degree less rake in the head and seat tube and longer stays and a fork with different rake, and there's all the difference in the world. Weight is comparable, and with comparable tires, I can use the newer bike for 400km rides and get off feeling fine with no real aches or pains of any note. At the same time, fitting wider/larger tires to the older bike helped a bitt, but not enough to overcome the uncomfortable geometry. And, with comparable tires and kit, it is still the less comfortable bike of the two and by a wide margin. I should probably get rid of it, but I have become attached, and the thing has a great deal of sentimental value, there's a long story behind it, and it was a specially-made example with exquisite workmanship and finishing. It doesn't help that I am also a soggy sentimentalist and so can't bear to part with it. Looking at the photo below, it is hard to believe two such similar bikes can differ so greatly in ride and comfort.

Given the comparable weights and sizes, then any difference in comfort between the Club Tour and Audax must surely be down to frame geometry and tires. Match the tires used, and it has to be down to geometry (with smaller contributions due to materials: tubing selection/size). That said, I would think the touring frame would have more forgiving, comfort-oriented geometry than the Audax bike, and the Thorn Audax is simply more comfortable than other brands of Audax bikes, thanks to differences in materials and design. (?) I'm thinking aloud here....

All the best,

Dan.