cdotbois

I paid a lady 200 off CL. I would have liked 150, but she was a charmer, and also, it was her late husband's bicycle, so I went with it. Bikes around here go for a premium anyway. The tires and bar tape are original, and the frame overall is pretty clean. A little rust in the seat tube and a few regular nicks here and there, but that's all. She said he didn't ride it much. It was his replacement after his other bike got stolen, and it just wasn't the same. What do you think? Is this frame going to hold up for decent touring? I don't know much about Bridgestone, but I'm about to do a search...


I'm a super contender









With those I adore...and a power strip.

ilikebikes

I dont know much about the brand but it does look like a very nice bike

bigbossman 

That's a clean, well made bike. You'd be hard pressed to find a decent touring bike in that condition for less than $200 - unless you got lucky at Goodwill or something.

cyclotoine

it doesn't look like a loaded touring bike to me. While it does have cantilevers and braze ons, I think it is a fast tourer designed for a a few small bags and a short trip, maybe a few days or Inn to Inn type of randonneuring. I could be wrong, very nice bike though!

cdotbois

It doesn't feel as sturdy as my Univega, but I haven't really ridden the bike much yet. Too rainy, no fenders. Triple butted sounds good, but I don't know where 4130 falls as far as strength. If it's not too strong, I'm bound to find out.

Bridgestone Catalog T-500

JunkYardBike

It's plenty sturdy, but I think cyclotoine is right. Look at the frame geometry table. The T-500 has slightly shorter chainstays than the T-700, at 43.5 cm vs. 44.5. If you carry large rear panniers, this could cause heel strike if you have large feet. However, if you load your gear 60/40 (front/rear) you might be able to get away with it. But that brings up another issue. The T-500 does have double eyelets front and rear, like the 700, but no mid-fork braze-on. Nice to have for front lowrider racks, but not necessary, as there are u-bolts available.

Other differences: the 700 has 3 water bottle braze-ons vs. 2 on the 500, 700 has a chromoly fork vs. high-tensile on the 500, 700 has lower gearing for loaded touring vs. the road triple gearing on the 500.
However, both have a 40 spoke rear wheel, which can bear a heavy load.

I think it would make a fine touring machine.

cdotbois

I didn't notice the 40 spoke wheel. That's good to know. Same with the shorter chainstays, I'll have to mount up my panniers and see. I think I'll be fine with bolt ons for an extra water bottle and front rack. I thought it a little unusual to have the second bottle mount on the underside of the downtube instead of the seat tube. I always regarded that in my head as the third place to put a water bottle. Of course, maybe they thought that through, because I can put my pump there now if I want instead.

Thanks for the closer look of things.