Comments on: The New 2016 Salsa Marrakesh Touring Bike

By: Alee | CyclingAbout.com

Alee | CyclingAbout.com — Sat, 21 Jan 2017 22:19:00 +0000

In reply to Zoe Neal.

I’d suggest that you’d be compromising too much by trying to ride a smaller-sized Marrakesh Flatbar. This is because the “reach” of the flatbar in the smallest size is STILL 25mm longer than the largest Marrakesh Dropbar. Your best option is to get the Dropbar frame powdercoated in a colour of your choice!

If you did use the flatbar frame, you’d experience a very short headtube length, meaning the handlebars may not get high enough in relation to your saddle height. More importantly though, you’d probably find the seat tube angle too steep for your femur length.

By: Zoe Neal

Zoe Neal — Fri, 20 Jan 2017 22:34:00 +0000

“that means you won’t need to go up a size (or two) if you wanted to use flat bars on a bike designed for drop bars” So I can’t stand the color of the drop bar bike but dig the color of the flat bar option; I want a drop bar setup. So If I get the size Medium (I would normally get the Large) and put a short stem on it then what am I compromising?

By: Alee | CyclingAbout.com

Alee | CyclingAbout.com — Thu, 30 Jun 2016 22:24:00 +0000

In reply to Manuel. That's great news, Manuel! I'm glad you're loving the Marrakesh. Just wait til you load it up. :)

By: Manuel

Manuel — Thu, 30 Jun 2016 18:17:00 +0000

I started with your guide, went to my LBS’s, and rode the ones I could find. The Kona, Trek, and Surly were all fine. Then I got on the Marrakesh, and I realized how good a bike could feel. I had to swap stems because I was between sizes, and I added Knard tires to help with my riding on dirt. I also went with wider bars than stock because I’m pretty broad shouldered. What an awesome bike. It’s stable but responsive and does tremendously well on rough surfaces, even single track. I haven’t ridden her fully loaded yet, but so far I’m riding the dream.

By: Alee | CyclingAbout.com

Alee | CyclingAbout.com — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 22:39:00 +0000

In reply to Scott.

Hi Scott. Realistically, you can tour both the Vaya and the Marrakesh on paved road tours very well. After all, the Vaya was Salsa’s original long distance touring bike! It’s the Vaya’s gearing that will potentially hold you back – the lowest gear is 26 gear inches compared to 21 gear inches on the Marrakesh. That is a gear or two that you may need if you’re carrying a decent amount of gear on a cross-continent tour, heck I use low gears like that sometimes when I’m carrying nothing. That said, there are ways to reduce the gearing on the Vaya using aftermarket parts: https://www.cyclingabout.com/wider-gear-range-road-shifters-gears-for-easier-hill-climbing/ I hope this helps! Alee

By: Scott

Scott — Tue, 12 Apr 2016 17:45:00 +0000

What do you mean when you say the vaya is ‘compromised for long-distance touring’? I’m considering a 2015 Vaya 2 because it has a good stack/reach for me, and I’m looking for a bike that can handle both weekend trips and multi-month journeys (all on paved roads). What downsides could the Vaya present on a cross-continent tour?

By: Alee | CyclingAbout.com

Alee | CyclingAbout.com — Thu, 24 Sep 2015 01:10:00 +0000

In reply to Erik Sandhu. The only disadvantage in my eyes is the location of the eyelets at the rear dropouts. They are up really high, meaning you'll need to use Salsa's own aluminium rack. You'll possibly have a hard time fitting fenders too.

By: Erik Sandhu

Erik Sandhu — Tue, 22 Sep 2015 20:33:00 +0000

Been looking for an “entry-level” road touring bike and this new Salsa looks to check just about every box on the list of nice-to-have features! Have been leaning toward a Surly LHT (disc version) for some time and was also interested in the Novara Randonee. This Salsa looks to have addressed nearly all of the disadvantages to the LHT including brakes, saddle, even the kickstand issue! It does not have the long history of the Surly, but coming from a related company I am guessing Salsa has learned a lot from what Surly has done in the touring category.

By: Alee | CyclingAbout.com

Alee | CyclingAbout.com — Mon, 07 Sep 2015 21:35:00 +0000

In reply to Mark Tindale.

It’s not about using 29×2.0 tyres all the time, but rather about options and versatility. Of course a Trans-Continental trip is best suited to narrower tyres, but if you want to do some rough off-road touring, you have this! No mountain bikes required…

By: Mark Tindale

Mark Tindale — Mon, 07 Sep 2015 06:13:00 +0000

2 inch 29er tyres didn’t exist not too long ago. People have been cycle touring for goodness-knows how long. Therefore, I have a hard time agreeing that a 2 inch tyre is “much more touring”. Most people, most of the time, will be better off on 28-35 mm tyres. You can go a lot of places on 35 mm in particular. For the average trans-continental trip, using 2 inch tyres will add up a couple of weeks to the travel time, and time is money. That said, the biggest advantage of this tourer is the flat bar version, which would allow you to use mountain gearing without needing to fiddle with bar-end shifters.