Vintage Expedition vs. AHH and Atlantis

[Kevin Lindsey]

Greetings.
I'm in the process of building up a 1983 Specialized Expedition (which is a really lovely bike).  From a distance, the frame looks to have more or less the same geometry as the AHH or, possibly, the Atlantis.  Does anyone have experience with the vintage Expeditions such that he or she could compare its ride to one of the Rivs?
Thanks,
Kevin Lindsey
Alexandria, VA

[Garth]

Check out the actual specs from this website http://crankbased.blogspot.com/2015/01/1983-specialized-expedition.html.

Just compare them to an Atlantis . I believe the Expedition ran 700c wheels for all sizes. My experience with any bike with a high BB compared to my Bomba wiith a low one is like night and day.

[Bill M.]

I have a sister to your Expedition, an '84 Miyata 1000.  I'm the original owner.  AFAIK Miyata built the Expedition's for Spec.  The geo differs just a bit, mostly in the steeper ST angle of the Spec.  The actual geo of my Miyata is very close to that of an AHH in the same size.  I have not ridden the AHH, but I am sure the Miyata is MUCH stiffer.  I was told BITD that the DT was 1.2 mm / 1.0 mm / 1.2 mm with the other tubes in proportion.  Not 'planing' territory by any means.  It rides a bit like a brick unloaded, but gets pleasantly more lively with a rear load.  

Bill

Stockton, CA

[Ryan Fleming]

Those Miyatas were and still are excellent touring bikes and very well- made. I saw a couple of them when I rode with a touring club in the 80's. Nice bikes as were the early Specialized Expeditions. Touring Cannondales ( I owned one T700, I think) were great for loaded touring too I think perhaps the 80's were a golden age for touring bikes. On another thread we've talked about run what you brung , but a purpose-built touring bike is really  a pleasure

[Dan]

Kevin, I have an '83 Expedition (65cm) that has 73.5/73.5 angles and a surprisingly lively ride. Moreso than the 60cm HIllborne I owned briefly. However, with a rear load my Expedition sways quite noticeably when you're pedaling hard. Moving the load amidships and upfront makes it behave much better. Not sure if some of this is due to the large frame, but that's my experience anyway.  I use the bike primarily for commuting and I love it; it feels fast and comfortable.

Dan

[Kevin Lindsey]

Thanks for the info - I'm really looking forward to finishing the Expedition and taking it out.  Already 90% built up, it feels very light (at least, compared to my Hunqapillar, which is a tank by anyone's definition), and it's not clear how much I can load it without affecting the handling too much.  Guess I'll find out shortly.
Have a great weekend,
Kevin

[Kevin Lindsey]

I'm also concerned about the frame size.  I bought this one 'cause the price was really, really good and the frame was in excellent shape.  It's a 60cm, and for most bikes I ride something in the 54-55cm range (my PBH is 87.5 or so).  However, Riv recommends a 59 or 61cm AHH for my PBH, so I'm hoping that this Expedition will fit somehow. 
Kevin

[Steve Palincsar]

On 03/03/2017 03:39 PM, Kevin Lindsey wrote:
> Thanks for the info - I'm really looking forward to finishing the
> Expedition and taking it out. Already 90% built up, it feels very
> light (at least, compared to my Hunqapillar, which is a tank by
> anyone's definition), and it's not clear how much I can load it
> without affecting the handling too much. Guess I'll find out shortly.

You ought to be able to load that thing up like a 49-er's pack mule,
because the Specialized Expedition was the premier loaded touring bike
in its day, as I recall.

[sameness]

I have a 1986 Specialized Expedition, a 1986 Miyata 1000, and am building up a new A. Homer Hilsen as we speak!

I can compare geometries if that is helpful, and should be able to compare and contrast ride qualities shortly.

Jeff Hagedorn
Los Angeles, CA USA

[Mark in Beacon]

With an 87.5, in most cases that would put your SH around 76, 77cm, which would be fine for 60cm, even non-sloping. 54-55 would generally be way small for that PBH, even for a racer. Maybe part of the discrepancy is you are measuring center to center 55cm, which would be more like 56-57 center to top, depending on the tubing. That would make more sense. Rivendells are measured center to top.

[Kevin Lindsey]

You have an Expedition and a Miyata and an AHH?  I'm envious.

I have the geometries for all of them, but am curious as to the ride differences.  If you would, please let us know what you find when you finish your AHH build, i.e. does it handle like an Expedition and, if not, where do you see the difference?

Many thanks,

Kevin

[Kevin Lindsey]

Like so much in bikes, it all depends.  My Hunq is a 54, per Rivendell's recommendation, and I find that to be just about correct, although that might reflect the fact that the Hunq has a downward sloping top tube.  My Moots Vamoots (a great bike) is a 57.5, and fits like the proverbial glove, as does my 58cm Bleriot, and the Riv website recommends a 59-61 AHH for my PBH. 

Bikes are a mystery.

Kevin

[Phil]

Kevin, I too hope that frame fits. I have an '83 Expedition I dearly love and have put many fully-loaded miles on it over the past decade. I have a PBH of around 80 and typically ride a 53-54 cm frame. My Expedition is a 54 and with 700 x 35 Paselas it's got the tallest top tube from the ground of any bike I own. It's probably too tall but I'm not willing to part with it.

Phil Roberts

Chandler, AZ

[Garth]

  Phil, It's the very shallow BB drop that those frames have. 2.8cm vs. 8cm. on most 700c riv models that raises the stand over so much. Even 2 cm. feels like alot to me so 5+ even moreso, that's mtb like.  I had never ridden a bike with such a low BB as my Bomba so now when I ride a higher BB bike it feels rather odd, like I am "on top" of the bike rather than "centered within" the bike with a very low BB.

[Dave Johnston]

Does the Expedition have standard Diameter tubing (1" top tube, 1 1/8" downtube). I would think that would make a huge difference in the flexiness / livelyness of the frame even if it had a fairly thick wall.

-Dave

[Kevin Lindsey]

Hmm.  That's interesting.  I recently passed up an opportunity to buy a 56cm Expedition frame (this after I'd already purchased my 60cm one), and lost much sleep thinking that I should dump the 60 and go for what I had assumed was my perfect size of 56.  However, if your 54 fits your 80 PBH, then I'm starting to think that 56 would have been too small for me, and maybe I did well with the 60.  

Regardless, it's a really beautiful frame.  I wouldn't go so far as to say that aesthetics trumps comfort, but there are times when I would rather ride a lovely bike that almost fits than I would an ugly one that does.

Kevin

On Saturday, March 4, 2017 at 12:21:52 PM UTC-5, Phil wrote:

[Nathan Mattia]

Hello Posters!
I am currently struggling (2+ years later) with the same question as the OP here.

I’m looking at an AHH and it’s looking at me and I’m wondering if there could be a love connection, BUT I already have an 83 Expedition set up like I would a Hilsen, and I’m wondering how alike they would be.

Wgats the BB height on a 57 cm Hilsen?

[in Dallas nick]

I'm no help on comparing but can share that my 60cm 1983 Specialized Expedition proved to be a very worth tour bike loaded up with 'too much' gear,

right around 70 lbs worth for 2 different month long tours of around 700 miles each.

One was across Nevada in the summer on Hwy 50 and the other from just south of Denver across Wyoming to Yellowstone.

The Expedition proved to be perform remarkably well.

I'm not sure what more I could of asked of touring bike. No complaints at all.

I did customize my Expedition a tad and had

a modern XT drive train on it  with 22 low in front and 34 in back to get me up all those mountain passes with a heavy load.

I have very fond memories of those tours.

I did a write up on cyclofiend site  years ago about the mods of my Expedition.

I miss that bike.

As I have aged fatter tires up to a 42 or 44 wide with fenders would help smooth out rough roads if I sought another touring capable bike to tour again. A Homer would accommodate,  right?

I also had a 1986 Miyata 1000 for around 2 years, another terrific bike but never toured on it.

I thought it rode great unloaded.

I did ride my good friends recently acquired Homer a short distance , what a stunner!

Fun thread to bring up good memories.

Perhaps I should plan another and make new 'old guy' tour memories.

Paul in Dallas

[Drw]

I briefly had an 84 expedition and older Sam hillborne at the same time. Not an AHH, but I believe Grant said there are no functional differences in the two, especially when they were both sidepull.
Anyway. I thought the expedition and hillborne were really similar. Hillborne was a 2 top tube model and felt marginally stiffer. I think the 2 biggest things I remember are that it was easier to get the bars where I wanted them on the Sam, and tire clearance was greatly increased.
On my expedition I could fit 36’s and much less with fenders. On the Sam, I could get 50’s in with Paul racers. To me that made a big difference, especially how comfortably it handled trails.

[James Warren]

The tire clearance issue is huge if there’s a chance you’ll tires that side (like above 40.)

With its ability to take Big Ben 50’s, even under sidepull brakes, and knobby Cazadero 42’s, I have used my Hillborne as a mountain bike. I feel like that bike doubles as uncompromised road and uncompromised mountain bike, which is a slightly different thing in my mind than all-rounder or hybrid.

If you don’t care about tires that large, then I can’t advise you, because I’ve never pedaled an Expedition. I can only say that Hillbornes and AHH’s both are versatile and efficient bikes that I really enjoy riding. (I have both, the former with Albatross, the latter with drops.)

-Jimmy W

Sent from my iPhone

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/9de5727d-a059-4093-8c52-37153f1a1b43%40googlegroups.com.

[Nick Ybarra]

First, I'll say "ditto" to everything Drw said. 

I owned an 84 expedition before purchasing my current canti-sam with double top tube.  I used the expedition as a commuter for a while before taking it on a tour from Edmonton to Missoula.  It performed fine fully loaded, but I found it a little noodly on the climbs and squirrely on the descents.  Not too bad, but noticeable.  Also, I am by no means a Clyde at 6'0", 135lbs.  My Sam is noticeably stiffer, and I much prefer how it rides with a load:  stable, predictable, smooth.  

[Nathan Mattia]

Thanks, Nick. That’s good information. I honestly can’t imagine a bike being more stable than my Expedition. It rides like an 80s DeVille. Classy and solid. No phantom shifts, etc. But then, I’ve never taken it on a loaded tour yet.
Still, I think there may well be a Sam or a Homer in my future.

Here are some pics of the Expedition before and after I began to Riv it up.


https://www.flickr.com/photos/182771520@N04/albums/72157709763915627