# looking at used tandems, need advice



## 4&20-9er (Apr 26, 2006)

View attachment burley.pdf


View attachment cd3.pdf


I am looking for a used tandem for me and the missus to use as a family truckster kinda deal. We recently had a baby, so the plan is to add a trailer for weekend trips, rail trails, camping trips (not hardcore backcountry, but dirt roads, etc.) and also around town (Minneapolis--we've got a pretty great trail system) I've put on lots (100s) of miles in lots of places I shouldn't have with a loaded Burley Nomad trailer, so I am pretty familiar with the pros and cons of the trailer system. But I want to not have to yo yo back and forth, with one of us loaded, the other not. We are both car free for the last ten years, so we don't want to run out and buy a car just to haul around the new guy. And I love bike camping, just riding out of town on a rail trail can get you to lots of great places.

So, i have found a Cannondale and a Burley both for around 800 bucks. I have considered dropping up to 15 on a nice, more modern cdale with shock, disc mounts, etc, but I have lots of nice shifter and brake bits that would probably make either of these not too bad, and those nice cannondales just keep slipping through my fingers. In my experience I should get a mountain bike not a road bike or tourer as I tend to be unstoppably attracted to dirt.

I have read both glowing and growling reviews of the softride, but I have a feeling the stoker would appreciate it. It's the 180-200 lb rated model, so safe there.

Hopefully, the photos will come through here, but the cdale seems to be a late 90s, and the burley is a 2000 w/ softride beam. I am going to check both out in person as soon as I manage to not work for a day.

Any wisdom out there in the mtbr world? Do it, don't do it, get this or get that or wait a bit for the perfect frame to come along? Can I get by with good rim brakes? '03 avid black box type?

Lastly, would I be really crazy to throw on a Karate Monkey fork and a tough 29er front wheel? Doesn't seem like it would mess up the angles much as it is such a long pivot, and would give me a little more bump compliance without using a hardcore tandem suspension fork. I could also add a disc to the front that way at least. Would the KM fork be able to handle a tandem load, it doesn't seem under engineered or light. . . I'm 170-180#, she's 150ish.

Thanks for your time.


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

Hands down go for a Cannodale tandem. It is more versatile than the Burley and will handle better. You can go road or off-road with it reasonably well in it's stock form.
Putting the KM fork and a 29" wheel on front of either will slacken the already slack head angles and slow the steering down. It will feel floppy at slow speeds. Don't know how much difference that will make on paths and stuff, but if you go off-road you'll feel it.
Be sure to use large enough brakes for a tandem, 203mm is the specified size per the brake companies, except for Magura's hydraulic rears, which go 190mm.
Good luck and welcome to the world of long freak bikes! You won't soon stop grinning.


----------



## 4&20-9er (Apr 26, 2006)

Thanks for your thoughts bignut. You got any opinions on the Fisher Geminis? Found one in decent shape and nearby. 

Ideally I agree that I should get a cdale, but finding the right one is, well, it's gonna take patience I guess.


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

Gemini's seemed to be decent frames. The geometry is a bit old-school, but for a starter, it should do well. 
If it's a choice between that and a Softride, I'd go with the Gemini (or C'dale, or Fandango). That softride elicits a lot of love/hate responses, mostly hate. I think that's why they went away.


----------



## Speedub.Nate (Dec 31, 2003)

BigNut said:


> That softride elicits a lot of love/hate responses, mostly hate. I think that's why they went away.


Anybody been following the "Living with the S*** Bike" column in the back of BIKE magazine over the past few months? I've never ridden one, but the column has been hillarious. All kinds of affectionate names for the Softride suspension (my favorite: "riding the whale d**k"). Supposedly some nausea-inducing side-to-side wag under certain conditions. I imagine this could be bad for a stoker.


----------



## winbert (Sep 22, 2005)

+1 for a used C'dale, and for getting a tandem in general. After looking forever, in 2003 I finally scored a _barely_ used 2002 MT800 w/ Moto suspension fork for $1500 shipped. Woohoo! :thumbsup:

I've had the same thought about a rigid 29er front end (sounds perfect for your type of riding), although I ride mostly singletrack on mine (and race occasionally) for which the susp fork is really nice. I have the same concern about slackening the steering (the Moto fork already does that somewhat). Although the KM 29er fork has a relatively short axle-to-crown (468mm?), I believe there are non-suspension-corrected 29er forks out there with a shorter A-C to minimize the problem (although the larger wheel will automatically raise the front end by 1.5"). Also, I believe a 29er front wheel will fit in some 26" forks with adequate A-C's (disc brake req'd, obviously). I'd search the 29er/96er (I know, 69er seems to be the prefered term, but I've always like "96er" since the 2*9*" wheel is in front, e.g. comes first ) forums for discussions of rigid forks & A-C length...

Good luck!
winbert

p.s. Once the little one is ~3 yrs old you can slap on a child stoker kit (initially w/ backrest & seatbelt for peace of mind) - life doesn't get much better ...


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

BigNut said:


> Hands down go for a Cannodale tandem. It is more versatile than the Burley and will handle better. You can go road or off-road with it reasonably well in it's stock form.
> 
> Putting the KM fork and a 29" wheel on front of either will slacken the already slack head angles and slow the steering down. It will feel floppy at slow speeds...
> Good luck and welcome to the world of long freak bikes! You won't soon stop grinning.


I have a Surly Instigator Fork that I was considering putting on our MT1000. That would give us disc brake capability, a little more BB height, and I know it's longer than the KM fork. I hate to "disturb" the stock build, though, as it has worked so well for so long (1998). I have to do some geometry on it.

Yes - 1 vote for a 'Dale if you're buying used. :thumbsup: 
It has done road and mountain duty, and baby duty. It even hauls along OK with just me and my 2 yr. old in her baby seat.

I think the larger wheel (the attempted addition of a 29er) would come out all flip-floppy, but I wasn't even going to try that (it _would_ fit in the Instigator).

-F


----------



## xrmattaz (Jan 12, 2004)

Wow, perfect timing. 

We ride a rigid MT800, and I was just this week thinking about going squishier on the front end. A front suspension fork is cost prohibitive to us at the present time, so I'm thinking BIG tire. 

Was considering the Instigator fork, but A-C at 447mm would slacken the front end a bit much, I think. 

Tonite, I remembered the big rubber I used to use on my old Surly 1X1. So I'm thinking I'll throw a 1X1 fork on her, with a disc (currently running Magura hydro rim brake) and a nice fat 2.7" tire. Surly 1X1 A-C is 1/2" longer than the stock Cannondale fork.

BB7 with a big rotor ok?

We currently ride the same rocky rough singletrack on the C'Dale that we do on the single bikes. 

Thoughts?


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

1/2" will do less to the handling than the longer forks, but keep in mind the wheel diameter increases with larger tires and/or rims also. But nothing short of a suspension fork beats a big squishy tire.
Use the 203mm rotors with the Avid and you'll be surprised how good those brakes are.
Good luck!
We ride virtually every trail on tandem that we do on singles (switchbacks not included). Half the fun is the single bike riders following us because they don't think we can do it.


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

Fleas said:


> I have a Surly Instigator Fork that I was considering putting on our MT1000. That would give us disc brake capability, a little more BB height, and I know it's longer than the KM fork. I hate to "disturb" the stock build, though, as it has worked so well for so long (1998). I have to do some geometry on it.
> 
> -F


I thought I posted this... if you see it somewhere else, take it up with dept. of redundancies dept.

I drew up the geometry for switching the Instigator for the Pepperoni (no math involved - I'm more of a visual thinker). The stock set-up is 73 deg HT with 1.8" of trail. The Instigator brings the HT back to 71 deg with [edit: not 3.3" of trail, but] 2.6" of trail, which is less than my 29er. This sounds like decent steering as the 29er is about 3" and handles great.

Any comments on that?

The 1X1 would probably do OK, as it is a bit shorter.

Thanks,
-F


----------



## itsdoable (Jan 6, 2004)

Wow, somehow I missed this thread! I've spent almost no time on a Cannondale tandem, so I can't really compare, but I spent a lot of time as a stoker on a Burley Rock-n-Roll (and somewhat less time as the captain) with a stoker softride beam, like the one shown except it also had a softride stem . The beam was great, the saddle sucked. I had no issues with the beam when stoking, it worked best when you spin. As a captain, I can't say a lot as I never had a "good" stoker... (am I allowed to say that?). I liked the Burley, if the owner had wanted to sell it, I probably would own it now.


----------



## TandemNut (Mar 12, 2004)

Fleas said:


> I thought I posted this... if you see it somewhere else, take it up with dept. of redundancies dept.
> 
> I drew up the geometry for switching the Instigator for the Pepperoni (no math involved - I'm more of a visual thinker). The stock set-up is 73 deg HT with 1.8" of trail. The Instigator brings the HT back to 71 deg with [edit: not 3.3" of trail, but] 2.6" of trail, which is less than my 29er. This sounds like decent steering as the 29er is about 3" and handles great.
> 
> ...


Sounds like it's close enought to give it a shot. You are now officially appointed as Instigator-front-fork/29"-wheel guinea pig for the TMB forum. Congratulations!
Seriously, looking forward to your experiences on this.


----------



## 4&20-9er (Apr 26, 2006)

Hey thanks for all the interesting input. I picked up a 90s Fisher Gemini for 599 locally. It's got new paint and works great so far, just a quick trip for 30 minutes, boy you can pick up some speed. I am sure the fat tire/big tire question is going to come up real soon for me, lots of room for rubber in the stock fork from the looks of it, gonna have to start digging around and see what I can find. Not enough room to jam a 29er in, but I am sure I will try some time soon to swap out the fork. Thoughts of an endomorph dance in my head from time to time.

Really though, the whole thing works great right now so I am hesitant to make too many changes at once. One step at a time, eh? Are there ever enough bike parts; I think not.

I think the first upgrade will be a suspension seatpost for the stoker, gotta keep her smiling. 

Anybody got any trivia, things I need to watch out for with the frame/ebb setup or just random Gemini thoughts? Tips to keep my stoker happy? 

Later-


----------



## winbert (Sep 22, 2005)

Quick thought - Cane Creek Thudbuster LT = Happy Stoker :thumbsup:. Plus, if your stoker cockpit is pretty small, the Thudbuster comes in an XL version that is 450mm long to help you accomodate a taller stoker if necessary...


----------



## xrmattaz (Jan 12, 2004)

BigNut said:


> 1/2" will do less to the handling than the longer forks, but keep in mind the wheel diameter increases with larger tires and/or rims also. But nothing short of a suspension fork beats a big squishy tire.
> Use the 203mm rotors with the Avid and you'll be surprised how good those brakes are.
> Good luck!
> QUOTE]
> ...


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

BigNut said:


> Sounds like it's close enought to give it a shot. You are now officially appointed as Instigator-front-fork/29"-wheel guinea pig for the TMB forum. Congratulations!
> Seriously, looking forward to your experiences on this.


I made the swap yesterday (just the fork, not the wheel) and just rode the street and around the yard.

I think that 71 deg HT angle combined with the trail figure is too much. It is kinda vague when you're on-center, and once you break into a lean the front wheel wants to flop over. It is pretty bad at low speed, but greatly reduced at 17+mph. It was easier to ride solo no-handed with the Pepperoni fork. The Pepperoni is scary light, too (if I had known, I would have been much kinder to my tandem or gotten a new fork altogether). The front bottom bracket came up about 1-3/8". The wheelbase stayed the same.

I will test more this weekend, but my first impression is that it was not an improvement. I think the 1X1 fork is the ticket.

I'm glad 4&20-9er got his bike - sorry if we're going a little off here. Have fun!

-F


----------



## 4&20-9er (Apr 26, 2006)

a little off is why I read these things!

Keep us posted, I'll put up some pics of the ride this weekend.


----------



## winbert (Sep 22, 2005)

*Tandem Rigid Fork*

OK, so the Instigator fork sounds too tall. While the 96er tandem experiment is still intriguing (or a 29er front & 650B rear ), I think I'd still like to try a rigid fork on my tandem even if it's w/ the current 26" wheel. I measured & triple-checked the A-C length of the Moto suspension fork that's currently on my Cannondale: ~432mm unsagged, much shorter than I expected. Even so the front end is still a little flip-floppy, which leads me to believe the frame is not significantly suspension corrected :skep:. So a rigid fork w/ an A-C of ~425mm would seem to be about right (plus is the perfect length for the 96er experiment :thumbsup.

The Surly Big Dummy (1300g, $79) & Salsa Cromoto Disc/Canti (1000g, $83) sound like perfect candidates (prices from Bikeman.com). Both forks are steel, and while the Big Dummy fork is definitely tandem rated, the question is would the Salsa be up to the task (both for durability & not steering like a noodle)? Our tandem team is almost always 300# or less, and besides family rides around town we'd be riding some moderate singletrack on this fork (I'd bust out the Moto fork for anything sick, or if I planned on getting us airborne .

Any insights/opinions would be much appreciated...

Thanks!
winbert


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

winbert said:


> OK, so the Instigator fork sounds too tall. While the 96er tandem experiment is still intriguing (or a 29er front & 650B rear ), I think I'd still like to try a rigid fork on my tandem even if it's w/ the current 26" wheel. I measured & triple-checked the A-C length of the Moto suspension fork that's currently on my Cannondale: ~432mm, much shorter than I expected. Even so the front end is still a little flip-floppy, which leads me to believe the frame is not significantly suspension corrected :skep:. So a rigid fork w/ an A-C of ~425mm would seem to be about right (plus is the perfect length for the 96er experiment :thumbsup.
> 
> The Surly Big Dummy (1300g, $79) & Salsa Cromoto Disc/Canti (1000g, $83) sound like perfect candidates (prices from Bikeman.com). Both forks are steel, and while the Big Dummy fork is definitely tandem rated, the question is would the Salsa be up to the task (both for durability & not steering like a noodle)? Our tandem team is almost always 300# or less, and besides family rides around town we'd be riding some moderate singletrack on this fork (I'd bust out the Moto fork for anything sick, or if I planned on getting us airborne .
> 
> ...


Let me bump up my follow-up post here re: the Instigator on the '98 C'dale:

http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=443709

It may be a good choice for you.

-F


----------



## winbert (Sep 22, 2005)

winbert said:


> Salsa Cromoto Disc/Canti...


According to Salsa, since their fork hasn't been tandem-tested they can't endorse it for that use. :nono:

Makes sense that the Surly Big Dummy fork would be a better choice since it should already be designed for tandem-like loads. While Surly rigid forks aren't particularly compliant under my scrawny arse, I've heard several clydesdales comment that Surly forks provide them with a nice or even plush ride. Thinking of a tandem as the equivalent of a 300 lb rider on a single bike who is unable to loft the front end over obstacles puts a whole new perspective on fork durability .

Time to order ...

Thanks,
winbert


----------



## Cleve Lansteamer (Mar 26, 2005)

I talked to Sov at Surly and he said the big dummy fork is not tandem rated. Only the instigator.


----------

