The bicycle frame... the most important part on a cycle tour. Cyclists often have a special relationship with their bike, which is not based on rational reasons.

In my personal opinion, a well built classic steel frame (chrome moly) is more durable than a frame built of aluminium. Aluminium frames tend to be more fragile to hits. Such a break in the frame can mostly not be repared anymore. Frames made of steel are far less delicate in this matter, but have to be looked after otherwise, so as not to rost.

The often heard criteria, that a frame built of steel can be repared by any 'village-smith' does not quite count for me. Todays steel frames often require an at least as experenced welder as for an aluminium frame. On the other side have I already meet cyclists in south america, that have found a mechanic that was able to repair their alu frame.

The two frame look very different. What are the differences?

• Mounting parts for racks and (many) bottles. On my bike, I manage to fit two 1-liter bottles and one 1½-liter pet-bottle INSIDE the frame and the fuel bottle below the frame.
• 26" wheeles. The wheeles are by far the weakest parts on the bike. 26" wheeles are simply stronger. Meanwhile there are mountain bikes all around the world. Spare tyres and tubes should be easy to find anywhere.
• Rather long wheelbase. This is especially important for rides with heavy baggage. The bike rides smoother and does not start lurching when reaching higher speed. Additionally there is plenty of space for the legs, so that they don't touch the panniers.
• Uprighter position for cycling. This is of course personal taste. But on week or month long tours often more comfortable.
• Watch, that at least 1.9" tyres can be used!

• 26" wheeles, as above.
• Very durable frame, because of smaller size.
• Often no mounting parts for racks. Whith some tinkering a good solution can mostly be found.
• Because of the short wheelbase it is often difficult to place the panniers so that the legs don't touch them. Also the riding behaviour at higher speed and with heavy load is less smooth.
• Mostly cheaper, because it's a mass product.

There are already quite some touring bikes on the market with suspension forks or even 'full suspension' versions. Even lowrider (rack for the front wheel) for suspension forks are available.

For mountain biking I would never give away my full suspension bike anymore. But suspension on a touring bike...?

As for today, I know of no suspension fork (not even thingking of a rear wheel suspension system) that would possibly survive a multiple month ride mostly on unpaved roads with 30kg of bagagge. Furthermore am I not able to repair a suspension by myself.

So, for me it is a clear NO, for suspension systems on touring bikes.

Often I see touring bikes with a complite lighting system. Why? On all my tours I have never been cycling in the dark. Furthermore a lighting system is most likley the first thing to break down. For passing a dark tunnel the headlights do a good job too.