Dawes Galaxy or Orbit Silver Medal 286?
Dave H. Griffiths
Hi, I'm looking at buying a touring bike for about six hundred quid and
the choice seems to be between a Dawes Galaxy or an Orbit Silver Medal
286. Does anyone have any opinions as to which is the best buy?
Thanks,
Dave
Garry Lee
Know nothing about Orbit but Dawes Galaxies are great. My missus and
several of my friends have them.
Simon Ward
In article <4uemhn$l...@nuacht.iol.ie>, Garry Lee <gl...@iol.ie> wrote:
>Know nothing about Orbit but Dawes Galaxies are great. My missus and
>several of my friends have them.
FWIW, I've seen a few rather negative comments about the Orbit bikes,
although whether they're justified or not, I couldn't rightly say.
Simon
Dr Douglas de Lacey
Having looked at the CTC reviews for the past several years, I have just
taken delivery of a Raleigh Royal to replace a written-off Dawes (only a
Horizon, though). All the reviews suggested that the Raleigh performs
better when heavily laden (I *always* seem to be heavily laden)-: and
that's my immediate impression. Is there a reason why these are the only
two options you are considering?
Douglas de Lacey.
> Thanks,
>
> Dave
Rachel McKay
The company that makes Orbit (tourers/"leisure") and Sirius (competition) bikes
have a fairly widely known reputation for poor workmanship and quality control. I
have come across several of both brands of bikes over the years and my opinion of
them is very low.
If you really must buy one of these then pay particular attention to:
brazing quality around the lugs (often spattered, incomplete and not filed down),
lug alignment (sometimes not put on straight)
frame alignment (front wheel follows back wheel exactly; the tubes aligned
with each other correctly)
drop-out alignment (wheel runs central in forks and rear triangle)
paint finish (patchy, runs, orange-peel, etc.)
Now, only the last is cosmetic (but even this isn't really acceptable) while the
others will render the bike anything from "dead" feeling to downright dangerous.
I would never buy nor recommend anyone else to buy a bike from this factory. I've
seen too many poor examples (and yet to see a good one).
Mail me for more info, if you want.
OK, so I've got three bikes from Chas Roberts and I'd always go to him first
(especially as I need them custom-built for my funny girly body). But, if I had to
choose between the Dawes and the Orbit, I'd always go for the Dawes. If you are
looking for a serious tourer, though, then I'd have a good look at Roberts as
well.
--
---- ___
Rachel McKay (rac...@lnhdent.agw.bt.co.uk) Software Engineer, BT \_____\ )
Although I work for BT, the opinions expressed here are my own. /\ /\
/ \ / \
Chas Roberts: 653 Low-Profile, 531c Audax, 525 Training /__ _\/ \
P.G. Hobbis
I agree with what several others have said - I looked at some Orbits but
didn't like the look of some of the finishing round lugs etc. I've just
ordered a Galaxy and I'm picking it up on Monday. Yippee!
Pete.
Tom Barrance
In article <4udpsm$a...@louie.disney.com>,
dh...@ajax.wda.disney.com (Dave H. Griffiths) wrote:
>Hi, I'm looking at buying a touring bike for about six hundred quid and
>the choice seems to be between a Dawes Galaxy or an Orbit Silver Medal
>286. Does anyone have any opinions as to which is the best buy?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Dave
Orbit's build quality (particularly frame alignment) has been criticised in
every review I've read of their bikes.
How about the Raleigh Royal, which shares the same highly-regarded frame as
the Raleigh Randonneur, but is considerably cheaper? I know someone who is
very pleased with hers and does a lot of Audax riding on it.
Tom
Dave H. Griffiths
In article <320B17...@cam.ac.uk> Dr Douglas de Lacey <de...@cam.ac.uk>
writes:
> Having looked at the CTC reviews for the past several years, I have just
> taken delivery of a Raleigh Royal to replace a written-off Dawes (only a
> Horizon, though). All the reviews suggested that the Raleigh performs
> better when heavily laden (I *always* seem to be heavily laden)-: and
> that's my immediate impression. Is there a reason why these are the only
> two options you are considering?
Being stuck in the States at the moment, I only have a single copy of
"Cycling Today". Didn't see any mention of the Raleigh. I bought a Raleigh
Royal twelve years ago and cycled to Istanbul on it. But then I changed
most of the gears and stuff - it didn't have a very big range of gear
ratios back then. The Raleigh is still knocking around in a friend's
garage back in the UK but I want to buy something shiny and new and ready
to ride.
In article <4ufd1r$7...@pheidippides.axion.bt.co.uk> Rachel McKay
<rac...@lnhdent.agw.bt.co.uk> writes:
> I would never buy nor recommend anyone else to buy a bike
> from this factory. I've seen too many poor examples (and
> yet to see a good one).
Thanks for the warning. Orbital was of interest partly because they're
based in Sheffield and that's where I'll be staying when I first get back.
> If you are looking for a serious tourer, though, then
> I'd have a good look at Roberts as well.
No mention of him in my magazine. Custom-built - sounds expensive, is it?
Dave
Simon Ward
In article <AE3135A2...@mairtom.demon.co.uk>,
Tom Barrance <t...@mairtom.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <4udpsm$a...@louie.disney.com>,
>dh...@ajax.wda.disney.com (Dave H. Griffiths) wrote:
[ snip ]
>How about the Raleigh Royal, which shares the same highly-regarded frame as
>the Raleigh Randonneur, but is considerably cheaper? I know someone who is
>very pleased with hers and does a lot of Audax riding on it.
For what it's worth:
- If you have about 800 quid to spend, get a Raleigh Randonneur - in my
opinion, it's the canine's genitals as far as `off the peg' touring
bikes are concerned. Avoid the Super Galaxy - the '96 model isn't much
cop, IMO (why, oh WHY did Dawes fit Compact Drive?!)
- If you can't fork out (argh!) the money for a Randonneur, then the Royal
is a safe bet - shares the same frame as the Randonneur, as Tom says, but
has lower spec components, *or* get a Galaxy. I don't think there's a lot
of difference in the price (both bikes are about 600 pounds). It's horses
for courses, really. I just happened to prefer the Galaxy.
- What about alternatives? A Mercian (very good bikes, so I'm told) or a
Claud Butler (the Dalesman got favourable reviews) or one of the Thorn
range of bikes made by St.John Street Cycles (their Audax bikes are well
smart)
Just my brass washers worth,
Simon
Joe Boswell
In article <4ufd1r$7...@pheidippides.axion.bt.co.uk>, Rachel McKay
<rac...@lnhdent.agw.bt.co.uk> writes
>
>OK, so I've got three bikes from Chas Roberts and I'd always go to him first
>(especially as I need them custom-built for my funny girly body). But, if I had
>to
>well.
>
used to use an old Raleigh Royale for touring, but that is now my
hack/commuter bike. My sister has a Dawes Galaxy and is very pleased
with it, though she has not given it much serious use yet. Don't know
anything about Orbit.
--
*Joe* "If I cannot be free - I'll be cheap."
(PGP Version 2.6.3i public key available on request.)
Julie Benton
>
> Know nothing about Orbit but Dawes Galaxies are great. My missus and
> several of my friends have them.
>
just gone. The Black 1996 model. Its is brilliant, comfy ride/fast and
good up hills (Cat & Fiddle pub derbyshire). We covered over 200 miles
in 4 days.
Best bikes ever in my opinion.
Julie
Paul Smee
In article <4ug0bi$e...@infoserv.aber.ac.uk>, Simon Ward <s...@aber.ac.uk> wrote:
>- If you have about 800 quid to spend, get a Raleigh Randonneur - in my
> opinion, it's the canine's genitals as far as `off the peg' touring
> bikes are concerned. Avoid the Super Galaxy - the '96 model isn't much
> cop, IMO (why, oh WHY did Dawes fit Compact Drive?!)
They did it because it's what you can get. In order to stick with
traditional sized rings on the Randonneur, Raleigh have had to use
cranks and rings from Sugino. There might be some difficulty finding
spares for those (if/when you need them) in the UK at least. The
companies simply chose opposite sides of the tradeoff between general
availability, and traditional gearing.
Tom Barrance
In article <DvzMv...@fsa.bris.ac.uk>,
cc...@sun.cse.bris.ac.uk (Paul Smee) wrote:
>They did it because it's what you can get.
I suspect it's more to do with marketing 'Deore LX throughout' and because
it's cheaper and requires less thought to fit a complete groupset. Sugino
chainsets are readily available by mail order in the UK, and they take
standard MTB rings.
I don't think there's any excuse for building a bike with inappropriate
components (other examples of Dawes' approach - in previous years at least
- include brake and lever combinations that don't work properly and
ridiculous black anodised rims), particularly at the price you pay for a
Super Galaxy.
Tom
Paul Smee
In article <AE34B09E...@mairtom.demon.co.uk>,
Tom Barrance <t...@mairtom.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <DvzMv...@fsa.bris.ac.uk>,
>cc...@sun.cse.bris.ac.uk (Paul Smee) wrote:
>>They did it because it's what you can get.
>
>chainsets are readily available by mail order in the UK, and they take
>standard MTB rings.
Umm, but increasingly, 'standard MTB rings' mean 'microdrive'. It
feels to me that the choice actually boils down to 'microdrive now', or
'microdrive in a couple years when the chainrings need replacing'.
>I don't think there's any excuse for building a bike with inappropriate
>components (other examples of Dawes' approach - in previous years at least
>- include brake and lever combinations that don't work properly and
>ridiculous black anodised rims), particularly at the price you pay for a
>Super Galaxy.
You can tar pretty much everyone with this brush, though. Ann's
Randonneur came with a brake and lever combination which didn't work
properly - and, to top it off, the brake levers had been mis-set such
that not only could she not get a grip on them, but the huge-handed
mechanic in the bike shop couldn't either. She had to replace her
levers within days of taking delivery, to get acceptable braking -
actually, to get any braking at all. The first ride, when she
discovered this need, was, needless to say, exciting. Raleigh were
yelled at.
Far as gearing goes, it's not totally clear that microdrive is
'inappropriate' - though there is a lot of personal taste involved. If
you plan on doing a lot of heavily-loaded touring (which is, after all,
what both the Randonneur and the Super Galaxy are designed for) then
the lower gearing could be an advantage. If you tour more lightly,
then probably not (but then you might want to consider a lighter
tourer, something like a Thorn Audax bike).
The concurrent change to 8-speed rear with a smallest 11-tooth sprocket
means that the Dawes with microdrive has a top gear roughly comparable
to the Dawes (and Raleigh) of two years ago, which had larger rings,
but a 7-speed hub starting from 12-tooth. (The new gearing, 42/11,
gives a top gear of 103 inches; the old gearing, 46/12, gives 103.5
inches. Five pounds more or less pressure in the tyres would make more
difference than that.)
Not to say that I'm a fan of microdrive - bloody newfangled marketing
gimmick - or of Shimano - their stranglehold on the market pisses me
off, as does their continual introduction of totally incompatible
stuff, requiring totally new sets of tools. But the microdrive concept
isn't as absolutely evil as it is sometimes made out to be.
(I suspect everyone in here already knows, but I'm a Dawes fan - I ride
a Super Galaxy. Ann rides a Randonneur. My feeling is that both are
nice bikes. Ours are both a couple years old, and so are traditionally
- and identically - geared; 12-28 rear, 26/36/46 front, as originally
supplied. If I could get the parts, I'd probably change the front to
22/38/48, though. Higher top end, and a *real* granny. :-)
The Raleigh generally has slightly better 'non-group' bits - saddle,
racks, that sort of thing - and with the prices being identical is
probably a better buy than the Super Galaxy. However, to confuse
things, it is often possible to negotiate a discount on the Dawes, and
as the price difference grows the best-buy becomes less clear.
James D Annan
> The company that makes Orbit (tourers/"leisure") and Sirius (competition) bikes
> have a fairly widely known reputation for poor workmanship and quality control. I
> have come across several of both brands of bikes over the years and my opinion of
> them is very low.
>
I've seen two reviews of Orbits in which the bike was fitted with the
wrong fork! You'd think they would be extra careful with review bikes.
Recently we found a display tent full of Orbit bikes (at Tandemania). One of
them happened to be just the right size for my wife, so she went off for a brief test ride. It turned out to be briefer than she had intended since as soon as
she stood on the pedals, one of them fell off! "Mr Orbit" himself was there so
it wasn't even the fault of some lackey...he simply hadn't screwed it in.
It's a shame that the quality control is so bad, since they have lots of interesting ideas (bikes designed for women, a well-designed trailer,
several models of tourer etc).
James
James D Annan
In article F...@fsa.bris.ac.uk, cc...@sun.cse.bris.ac.uk (Paul Smee) writes:
> They did it because it's what you can get. In order to stick with
> traditional sized rings on the Randonneur, Raleigh have had to use
> cranks and rings from Sugino. There might be some difficulty finding
> spares for those (if/when you need them) in the UK at least. The
> companies simply chose opposite sides of the tradeoff between general
> availability, and traditional gearing.
Difficulty getting spares for standard non-compact drive MTB size rings?
Not likely, for a long long time....
James
Paul Smee
In article <4upujj$1...@kwuz.nerc-keyworth.ac.uk>,
James D Annan <jd...@unixa.nerc-keyworth.ac.uk> wrote:
>Difficulty getting spares for standard non-compact drive MTB size rings?
>
>Not likely, for a long long time....
Ummm. Maybe. It's not that long, though, since I'd have said things
like that (i.e. like what you said) about fullsize Stronglight and TA
touring rings. And, given Shimano's stranglehold on the new bike
market, people buying MTBs now are going to be getting microdrive, and
so to be looking for microdrive spares when they need them. That's
gonna make life tough for the non-micro folk.
(On the other hand, obviously if I was any good at predicting things
like this, I'd be rich and famous, and especially not working here for
my crust. :-)
Another angle on this whole gearing discussion has occured to me,
though. A couple years ago, both Dawes and Raleigh were using 26/36/46
front, and 12-28 7-speed rear, on the bikes under discussion. That
gave a low gear of 25 inches, and a high of 103.5 inches. That's what
Ann and I have at present.
This year, both use 11-28 8-speed rear. The Raleigh, with 26/36/46
front, is now geared from 25 to 113 inches, while the Dawes (22/32/42)
gives 21 to 103 inches. Essentially, Raleigh have opted to use the
wider range to leave the low gear alone and to provide a higher high;
Dawes have left the high gear alone, and provided a lower low.
Matter of personal taste which you prefer. Personally, I could use a
lower low more often than I need a higher high; I only ever spin-out in
high on downhills where I'm already going 'fast enough, thanks'. :-)
So from my very own personal point of view, Dawes made the more
sensible choice. (Even if, as someone suggested, it was an accidental
consequence of taking the easy way out.) Your mileage may vary, since
we've all got our own riding approaches. No problem.
Fred Dinning
I've been all round most of the Scottish western isles on my
Super Galaxy (1980 vintage). She's still going strong.
Regards
Fred Dinning
--
<<RJD>>
Peter Griffiths
cc...@sun.cse.bris.ac.uk (Paul Smee) wrote:
>In article <4ug0bi$e...@infoserv.aber.ac.uk>, Simon Ward <s...@aber.ac.uk> wrote:
>>- If you have about 800 quid to spend, get a Raleigh Randonneur - in my
>> opinion, it's the canine's genitals as far as `off the peg' touring
>> bikes are concerned. Avoid the Super Galaxy - the '96 model isn't much
>> cop, IMO (why, oh WHY did Dawes fit Compact Drive?!)
>
>They did it because it's what you can get. In order to stick with
>traditional sized rings on the Randonneur, Raleigh have had to use
>cranks and rings from Sugino. There might be some difficulty finding
>spares for those (if/when you need them) in the UK at least. The
>companies simply chose opposite sides of the tradeoff between general
>availability, and traditional gearing.
Surely standard 74/110 BCD rings are as common as muck and nearly as
cheap. You may not get all the ramps and pegs and twisty teeth and
gaps and other things with a (tm) after them but, on a tourer, who
cares?
Peter Griffiths
10054...@compuserve.com and 24/42/48@Raleigh Royal
Paul Smee
In article <32124fc8....@hil-news-svc-3.compuserve.com>,
Peter Griffiths <10054...@compuserve.com> wrote:
>Surely standard 74/110 BCD rings are as common as muck and nearly as
>cheap. You may not get all the ramps and pegs and twisty teeth and
>gaps and other things with a (tm) after them but, on a tourer, who
>cares?
Umm, I do? For all that I moan about Shimano, my current transmission
offers me smooth and reliable shifting under a wide range of loads,
chain tension, and 'general conditions'. I'd like to keep that.
Nothing worse than missing a shift while dragging a camping load up a
hill.
(The Huret mechs that I used some years ago - including the legendary
Duo-Par rear shifter - were nearly as good, but I haven't seen them for
years now.)
Mr R M Mantel
>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Ward <s...@aber.ac.uk> writes:
Simon> - If you have about 800 quid to spend, get a Raleigh
Simon> Randonneur - in my opinion, it's the canine's genitals as
Simon> far as `off the peg' touring bikes are concerned. Avoid the
Simon> Super Galaxy - the '96 model isn't much cop, IMO (why, oh
Simon> WHY did Dawes fit Compact Drive?!)
Simon> - If you can't fork out (argh!) the money for a Randonneur,
Simon> then the Royal is a safe bet - shares the same frame as the
Simon> Randonneur, as Tom says, but has lower spec components,
Simon> *or* get a Galaxy. I don't think there's a lot of
Simon> difference in the price (both bikes are about 600
Simon> pounds). It's horses for courses, really. I just happened
Simon> to prefer the Galaxy.
Simon> - What about alternatives? A Mercian (very good bikes, so
Simon> I'm told) or a Claud Butler (the Dalesman got favourable
Simon> reviews) or one of the Thorn range of bikes made by St.John
Simon> Street Cycles (their Audax bikes are well smart)
Indeed, the Dalesman is very nice (especially if you're not a Shimano
fan) and a fair bit cheaper than the super galaxy - but delivery times
are a bit on the long side. The following changes are quite important:
1.) replace inner chainring (32t) by a 30t ring
2.) replace brake blocks with something softer
3.) replace down-tube shifters with ergo-power (optional).
Rolf
--
Rolf Mantel, * ma...@csv.warwick.ac.uk @ ) _ _
Dept. of Mathematics, * r...@maths.warwick.ac.uk /\ * | |_| |
University of Warwick, * _`\ `_(== | |
Coventry CV4 7AL, England * ________________________(_)/_(_)______ | |