Upgrading a Raleigh Activator into modern commuter

mickydcork

Hi boardsies.
I need a bike for commuting.
I have a question about upgrading an old Raleigh Activator that I have (sorry I know nothing about upgrading bikes).

My question is simply would it be possible? And cost effective? Or a waste of time and effort? It seems to have a good steel frame and the geometry looks like it would work.

I think it has 26" wheels which I'd like to change to something bigger (700c or 29ers?) with thinner Road tyres.

I'd like to change the front suss fork to a standard steel fork.

Would it be possible to change the shifters and derailleurs? And also upgrade the v-caliper brakes, which look dodgy.

Finally I'd like to put a rack on it.

Any advice would be most welcome?

beauf

Cheaper just to buy a better bike. I converted my old MTB. Not sure it was worth it.

Eamonnator

So really, you want to keep the frame, stem, bars, crankset, derailleurs, seat post and saddle.
You will probably have a problem fitting 700(29in) wheels in the frame.
You will need forks, wheels, tyres, tubes, shifters, brake levers, brake callipers, brake and gear cables(outer and inner)
Far better off, in my opinion, getting a new bike.

HivemindXX

My advice would be to do the minimum until you prove to yourself that you are actually going to commute by bike.

If the bike has eyelets for a rack, which I think it does, just buy one. You can always transfer that to any new bike. If it doesn't then you can get a rack that clamps on to the seat post. These don't hold as much weight but should be fine for commuting purposes.

The easiest upgrade to make your MTB in to a commuter is to get slick tyres for it. You can get something like a Schwalbe Marathon in 26". Tyres are consumable so it's not like you are wasting any money provided you wear them down significantly before you change bikes, if you ever do. As another person said, it's very unlikely (very, very unlikely) that you can change the wheels out for a bigger size.

The suspension fork isn't something I would want for commuting but it doesn't really use up that much energy. If you can lock it out then do that. Otherwise just live with it until you see how happy you are commuting. It's relatively easy to change forks so you can swap the fork for a rigid one (which I did on my hybrid) or just change bikes completely.

mickydcork

HivemindXX wrote: »

My advice would be to do the minimum until you prove to yourself that you are actually going to commute by bike.

If the bike has eyelets for a rack, which I think it does, just buy one. You can always transfer that to any new bike. If it doesn't then you can get a rack that clamps on to the seat post. These don't hold as much weight but should be fine for commuting purposes.

The easiest upgrade to make your MTB in to a commuter is to get slick tyres for it. You can get something like a Schwalbe Marathon in 26". Tyres are consumable so it's not like you are wasting any money provided you wear them down significantly before you change bikes, if you ever do. As another person said, it's very unlikely (very, very unlikely) that you can change the wheels out for a bigger size.

The suspension fork isn't something I would want for commuting but it doesn't really use up that much energy. If you can lock it out then do that. Otherwise just live with it until you see how happy you are commuting. It's relatively easy to change forks so you can swap the fork for a rigid one (which I did on my hybrid) or just change bikes completely.

Thanks for this advice.

I probably should have told my full story - I'm definitely committed to commuting. In fact I've commuted by bike every day for the last 5 years. My bike is a Trek 1.2 (great bike btw).

The reasons for the bike change are that I feel I need a rack for work (as I'm carrying more gear recently). The Trek 1.2 does not have eyelets for a rack. Also in September I'm going to be dropping my 4 year old to playschool by bike the odd morning, so I need a bike frame that can take a child seat. The Trek 1.2 seems too light weight for a bike seat.

I'm really tempted to upgrade the Trek 1.2 to something like a steel framed cyclocross bike, maybe a Genesis Croix de Fer 10?

But then I thought maybe upgrading the old mountain bike would be a cost effective way of getting a steel framed commuter bike, but according to many of you on here, it may not be cost effective at all!

magicbastarder

i suspect that whatever your options with changing wheel size on the front when you're changing the forks, the rear triangle - and brake mounts - are built for 26" and little you can do will change that.

beauf

After all the upgrades you'll still have an old bike. Just a more expensive one. If you like the old bike or are attached to it that's different. Or if you dont like throwing stuff out.

On mine I replaced the tyres, mudguards, grips, brake cables, tyres, tubes, saddle. Then the gear selector wore out, so then new shifters. That's about half the cost of a new one if not more. Needs a new bottom bracket now.

I think I new aluminium hybrid would have been smarter, lighter and faster.

Eamonnator

Would you think of going for something like like bad boy:

http://www.halfords.ie/cycling/bikes/classic-bikes/voodoo-marasa-hybrid-bike

Seems to tick all your boxes.

mickydcork

Eamonnator wrote: »

Would you think of going for something like like bad boy:

http://www.halfords.ie/cycling/bikes/classic-bikes/voodoo-marasa-hybrid-bike

Seems to tick all your boxes.

Yes.
I'm open to suggestions.
That looks decent and is a good price!

Type 17

Looking at google pics of Raleigh Activators to remind me, I'd say you could try putting Schwalbe City Jet tyres on it (26" size, some puncture protection, takes 6bar/85psi pressure for good rolling resistance, cheaper than Marathon/Marathon Plus), but don't spend any more than that, because I reckon that you will find it too heavy, if you're used to a Trek 1.2.

A new bike like Eamonnator suggests will be lighter, and you will benefit from all of the other advances in technology over the Activator, even at this relatively budget-end price point.
However, you should note that you will need to buy muguards, a rack and better tyres (Marathon or better) for that Halfords bike if it is to any use as a commuter. Also, a bike of that spec will not last very well if you are a dedicated commuter, riding in all weathers and have a commute of more than a few km each way.
Selling the 1.2 and getting a good quality touring/cyclo-cross bike (if you like drop bars) or a good commuter-quality hybrid (if flat bars are ok) would be the best bet. Note that if you're considering a child seat for the top tube, drop bars are out, as you'll get head-butted in the face by the young one...

mickydcork

Type 17 wrote: »

Looking at google pics of Raleigh Activators to remind me, I'd say you could try putting Schwalbe City Jet tyres on it (26" size, some puncture protection, takes 6bar/85psi pressure for good rolling resistance, cheaper than Marathon/Marathon Plus), but don't spend any more than that, because I reckon that you will find it too heavy, if you're used to a Trek 1.2.

A new bike like Eamonnator suggests will be lighter, and you will benefit from all of the other advances in technology over the Activator, even at this relatively budget-end price point.
However, you should note that you will need to buy muguards, a rack and better tyres (Marathon or better) for that Halfords bike if it is to any use as a commuter. Also, a bike of that spec will not last very well if you are a dedicated commuter, riding in all weathers and have a commute of more than a few km each way.
Selling the 1.2 and getting a good quality touring/cyclo-cross bike (if you like drop bars) or a good commuter-quality hybrid (if flat bars are ok) would be the best bet. Note that if you're considering a child seat for the top tube, drop bars are out, as you'll get head-butted in the face by the young one...

Cheers for this advice.

The child bike seat I have is for the seat tube. Although it will only take the child for another year I'd say as it takes up to 40kg max I think. I may have to change to a bike-trailer.

Would a drop-bar cyclocross bike manage this type of child bike seat?

If I was to get a new bike, would there be a big benefit to getting a steel frame?

Type 17

mickydcork wrote: »

Cheers for this advice.

The child bike seat I have is for the seat tube. Although it will only take the child for another year I'd say as it takes up to 40kg max I think. I may have to change to a bike-trailer.

Would a drop-bar cyclocross bike manage this type of child bike seat?

If I was to get a new bike, would there be a big benefit to getting a steel frame?

You could probably fit the seat to the CX bike, but the drop-bar factor means that you'd probably get head-butted in the chin or face by the young one.

It's your choice really - a steel frame is a little heavier, but more comfortable because it is less rigid. If you're touring or riding relatively gently, steel is fine, but if you want to race hard, or have as light a bike as possible (and can't afford carbon), then aluminium is a better choice.
I have two steel bikes, because I got them so long ago there were no alu frames, but I'd be happy to ride one if I got a new(er) bike today.

Brian?

The best option is always a new bike. Always.

Having said that a mate of mine has a child seat on his Trek 1.2. It's not an issue at all.