Dawes Galaxy

hyperblue8

I imagine this is a stupid question but alas, I do not know my bikes.

I recently bought an old 80's Dawes Galaxy to try out some light touring on, upon arrival though it appears to simply just be a standard road bike. From what I understand a tourer should have a chainstay length of 45cm or more which it has, the tyres however seem very thin for a tourer 25c although I don't know if wider could be fitted. My main issue though is that it does not have eyelets for racks which is the one thing I really needed it to have.

I bought it off ebay, I have contacted the seller who keeps repeating that the galaxy is dawes touring range and from what I can see online that appears to be true... So why is it built like a racing bike? How can it be a part of their touring range with no features of a touring bike?



David

lesfirth

As I see it ,its up to you to know what you are bidding for. If you need rack mounts and you can not see them on the Ebay listing ask before you bid. There is no fixed specification that makes a bike a tourer,a racing bike or standard road bike ( to use your terminology). IMHO that bike with its mudguard mounts was never a racing bike.
The seller seems more tolerant than I would be.

sungod

it's a touring bike

the picture you posted isn't ideal, but it certainly looks like it has eyelets on the fork and stays

like these...

https://www.evanscycles.com/coffeestop/ ... le-touring

hyperblue8

lesfirth wrote:

As I see it ,its up to you to know what you are bidding for. If you need rack mounts and you can not see them on the Ebay listing ask before you bid. There is no fixed specification that makes a bike a tourer,a racing bike or standard road bike ( to use your terminology). IMHO that bike with its mudguard mounts was never a racing bike.
The seller seems more tolerant than I would be.

A little harsh haha but Interesting, I always feel it's the duty of the seller to accurately describe the item, so as you know what you are bidding for, they did state on the listing that the bike is suitable for long distance touring, I think that really suggests it can at least take a rack and is built suitably for it. Of course if there is no "fixed specification" for a tourer then I guess it's a matter of personal opinion. You may be right that I should have asked!

hyperblue8

sungod wrote:

it's a touring bike

the picture you posted isn't ideal, but it certainly looks like it has eyelets on the fork and stays

like these...

https://www.evanscycles.com/coffeestop/ ... le-touring

No, just mudgard ones unfortunately. Guess I'll just have to take a backpack and get one of those bags that hangs of the straight bar

rolf_f

sungod wrote:

it's a touring bike

the picture you posted isn't ideal, but it certainly looks like it has eyelets on the fork and stays

like these...

https://www.evanscycles.com/coffeestop/ ... le-touring

It has eyelets at the dropouts but there should be ones half way up the forks plus between the bridges on the seat stays. It's quite an old bike though - from about mid eighties they used cantilever brakes, triple rings and wider (forget how wide) rear dropouts. This looks to me like it has been resprayed and possibly had some of the braze on's removed at the same time. Repainting of course makes it much harder to identify what it originally was though the brake adjuster bridge looks very Galaxy to me.

If it is only for light touring then a rack can be fitted - Tubus, amongst others, supply brackets to direct mount their racks to the seat stays. They work nicely.

sungod

Rolf F wrote:

sungod wrote:

it's a touring bike

the picture you posted isn't ideal, but it certainly looks like it has eyelets on the fork and stays

like these...

https://www.evanscycles.com/coffeestop/ ... le-touring

It has eyelets at the dropouts but there should be ones half way up the forks plus between the bridges on the seat stays. It's quite an old bike though - from about mid eighties they used cantilever brakes, triple rings and wider (forget how wide) rear dropouts. This looks to me like it has been resprayed and possibly had some of the braze on's removed at the same time. Repainting of course makes it much harder to identify what it originally was though the brake adjuster bridge looks very Galaxy to me.

If it is only for light touring then a rack can be fitted - Tubus, amongst others, supply brackets to direct mount their racks to the seat stays. They work nicely.

ahhh, if someone's had them ground off you can probably get something that'd clamp to the stays at least

sjs have lots of this sort of thing...

https://www.sjscycles.co.uk/rack-spares/

priory

I would expect a galaxy to have rack eyes on the seat stays, and the stays look rather delicate for a tourer , but i suppose it might be more rigid than it looks.
I have a 1979 peugeot audax style bike that looked exactly the same until I fitted brifters. I have done a few miles with full panniers on the back to get from plane to hotel , but mine is too flexible to actually tour loaded like that . tortec ultralight with p-clips .

http://www.wigglestatic.com/product-med ... &h=430&a=7

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Tortec-Bike-C ... Sw9NdXuQVS

I did leave the rack on for several years and had a rack pack or lightly loaded pannier for day rides and commuting and that was fine. It has been a great bike and still is. I kept the rack on because it stopped speed wobble , but when i got new wheels that went away and I have used aa lighter seat-post pack since.

I would not bother upgrading the down tube shifters because when you need to change the cassette and chain you can switch the right lever to friction and use whatever cassette is cheap and available.

priory

I am a bit quiet so have been browsing pics of old galaxies and it seems they did not have rack-eyes in the drops or seat stays 35years ago; and the stays do look slender like yours.