View Full Version : DebW in the 21st century?
I've begun talking to Peter Mooney at Belmont Wheelworks about a custom frame and how to build it up. Peter builds classic lugged steel frames and has an excellent reputation. Denise G.'s touring bike was built by him. I'm interested in an S&S coupled light touring design. I want something I can travel with and tour on with enough versatility for fast road riding and unpaved rail trails. I want racks front and rear, but would probably pull a trailer for loads more than 20-25 lb. Below are some of the issues that I'm thinking about. I welcome comments, suggestions, and your related experiences. I'm really trying to abandon my old prejudices and have an open mind regarding the innovations in the bike industry in the last 30 years. I have a fitting appointment on Sunday, and, whenever it gets warm enough around here, can go test ride some bikes with STI and Ergo and bar-end shifters.
1) geometry - Peter's advice is to design the bike for the way you use it most often, which would lead me to more of a sport geometry than a touring geometry. OTOH, I want the option for touring and expect to have this frame for 20-30 years (if i live that long), so well into retirement. My work hours are already starting to shrink due to funding issues. How much I tour will to a large extend depend on how much I backpack instead.
2) wheel size - Peter looked at me and immediately started talking about 650 wheels because of my size (5' 7" with 32" inseam, ie. short torso and arms). I was talking 650 wheels because of travel case constraints. He will recommend 650 vs 700 after sizing me. He says I could run both 650s for go-fast riding and 26" for touring just by moving the brake pads a bit. What about 700s with short-reach brakes and 26" with cantis? Probably 32mm wide tires at max due to frame size constraints.
3) gears - Definitely a triple. Peter was talking only Shimano and Campy which are only available with a 30T inner chainring, and thus maybe a Shimano mtb cassette of 34T or Campy 29T. There are other options. How low of a gear do I really need? Worst case will be riding with my friend and taking a turn pulling her 2 kids in the trailer (60 lb and going up). For camping I'd probably have 30 lb.
4) racks - Tubus racks were recommended. I like with the Cosmos rear with Nova front in stainless steel or the mid-weight Vega rear and Ergo front.
5) wheels - I was told "Nobody builds wheels any more. Factory wheels are stronger. Straight-pull spokes almost never need truing." I listened politely and looked at a Mavic wheel. BUT I LIKE TO BUILD WHEELS. And I've saved SK's hand-built wheel specs.
Veronica
01-27-2007, 09:38 AM
My Rambouillet I think fits the bill of what you want to do with your new bike.
It's suitable for fast road riding, with the right tires and wheels it can go off road, and I used it to pull a trailer last year in Nova Scotia. So geometry wise I think you can get all the things you want in a custom.
Gearing - why switch from your friction shifters? Maybe go to bar ends. We went up one hill in Nova Scotia that I could barely get up with the trailer (70 ish pounds) and I have a a 24 inner chain ring and a 27 in the rear. I guess if you're never going to haul the kids anywhere hilly. :)
Wheels - I'd never go off road with the Mavic Ksyriums I have. But my first ride with my hand builts we went wandering off on a new fire trail.
Good luck and happy planning!
V.
Thanks, V. I appreciate the pounds vs gear ratio. Hard to figure that out until you do it. My only touring experience was in my 20s when I'd swap a 14-24 for a 14-28, swap the rear derailleur, add a few chain links, attach the paniers, and tour for a weekend on a 45-52 double.
I think the fat-tire touring/off-road 26" wheels will definitely be hand built. The 650 or 700c road wheels could go either way.
I am a fan of friction shifters. But this is a good chance to try the newer options before I make a decision. I would feel better with an 8- or 9-speed chain than a 10-speed. The bike shop wants to push the new stuff - probably because it's in stock.
BleeckerSt_Girl
01-27-2007, 11:26 AM
Deb, you sound like you have long legs and very short torso/arm reach. Be aware of getting a "larger" frame because of your legs/standover height, and then having reach problems because of the top tube length on a large frame. Might be a bigger problem for you especially if you choose 700 wheels (which require a longer bike to avoid toe overlap. Because of your shorter reach, you might wind up having to get a really short stem in order to feel balanced. Keep the proportion between standover frame size and top tube reach in mind when planning your bike, because your proportions are quite different than a typical man your same height.
Deb, you sound like you have long legs and very short torso/arm reach. Be aware of getting a "larger" frame because of your legs/standover height, and then having reach problems because of the top tube length on a large frame. Might be a bigger problem for you especially if you choose 700 wheels (which require a longer bike to avoid toe overlap. Because of your shorter reach, you might wind up having to get a really short stem in order to feel balanced. Keep the proportion between standover frame size and top tube reach in mind when planning your bike, because your proportions are quite different than a typical man your same height.
That's why I'm going custom.
Triskeliongirl
01-27-2007, 03:15 PM
1) Geometry: You know I did something similar recently and indeed went with a sport vs touring geometry, but not racing, and am very happy with it. I think unless you plan to carry very heavy loads its fine, and I have no problem with rear rack clearance. But, I am very glad that I went with front AND rear racks. As long as your load is balanced, the sport geometry is fine. I say this also cuz you'll find a true touring geometry sluggish on a fast road ride.
2) Wheel Size: Thats interesting to see your stats. I am even shorter than you, only 5'4" but my inseam is 31.5", so I have a super short torso. Given that your torso is a lot longer than mine, I think 700c wheels should be fine (and that is what you currently use, right?). While it is true that 650 wheels pack better than 700s, here is the problem. 650C wheels, are only available in widths up to 28c (the terry tellus, a nice tire by the way), although there are good options in racing widths like 23c. You could go 650b, but then the skinniest you can go is 34c. So if you want to be able to use tires in the 23c-32c range, you are better off with 700c. That is one of the reasons I used the 700/24" combo on my bike, instead of 2 650s, wanted to use tires from 23-32c wide (which are also available for 24"). You can pack 700c wheels in an s/s case, but you have to deflate them.
3) gears - I built my bike with a 50/34 front and 11/34 rear for a range of 26-119 gear inches. But for loaded touring you may want to go as low as 19". I love the simplicity of my double, but if you are gonna go with a triple, I think you are better off with one of the touring triples (I think sugino makes one, I can ask a friend who just built a custom waterford adventure bike, I think he used one of those) and a road casette than a mountain. I like my set-up, but it is a compromise for simplicity and has bigger gaps between gears but if I were gonna go with a triple, I'd go for a touring triple.
4) racks - I hear Tubus racks are excellent.
5) wheels - "I was told "Nobody builds wheels any more. " That isn't true. I always use human built wheels. Again, I will ask my friend for what he chose for his waterford, I know he put a lot of thought into it.
6) brakes- I would go with cantis. I used the shimano 550s that work good with sti/ergo levers. The problem with long reach side pulls is that you lose mechanical advantage with the long arms, and I think its still hard to fit fenders under them, or get the wheels out without deflation, but I may be wrong on this point.
emily_in_nc
01-27-2007, 03:19 PM
Hey DebW,
Just a data point on gearing....I toured with four panniers in upstate NY in fall of 2004 on my Bike Friday. I wasn't super heavily loaded since I'm so small (DH carried the heavy stuff!), so my load was mostly clothing, plus the weight of front/rear racks and Arkel panniers and front bag, some food, camera, etc. We toured in a very hilly area around the Finger Lakes. I needed every gear I have -- a 30" front ring and a 34T rear (XT derailleur). With the Bike Friday's 20" wheels, I believe that was something like a 19" gear. I am not a super strong hill climber by any means, but I had trained well for the tour and was in very good shape (for me) at the time, or so I thought! By about the fourth day, a couple of steep hills had me in my lowest of granny gears. There were even two hills near the end of our longest day (nearly 80 miles) that I had to walk part of even with my ultra-low gearing, because I was spent -- just needed to use different muscles for awhile.
So....with the load you're talking about, I'd definitely recommend mountain gearing in the rear. I'd also probably go with Shimano just because they are by far more common/popular than Campy, so easier to find parts and shops that can help you on the way, if disaster strikes. Don't get me wrong, I love Campy (have Chorus on my Aegis Swift), but not for a touring bike, just for practical reasons. I also went with bar-end shifting for the same reason when I had my Friday built and was very happy with my choice, despite initial skepticism. I went with 9-speed.
Have a blast building your custom bike!
Emily
2) Wheel Size: Thats interesting to see your stats. I am even shorter than you, only 5'4" but my inseam is 31.5", so I have a super short torso. Given that your torso is a lot longer than mine, I think 700c wheels should be fine (and that is what you currently use, right?). While it is true that 650 wheels pack better than 700s, here is the problem. 650C wheels, are only available in widths up to 28c (the terry tellus, a nice tire by the way), although there are good options in racing widths like 23c. You could go 650b, but then the skinniest you can go is 34c. So if you want to be able to use tires in the 23c-32c range, you are better off with 700c. That is one of the reasons I used the 700/24" combo on my bike, instead of 2 650s, wanted to use tires from 23-32c wide (which are also available for 24"). You can pack 700c wheels in an s/s case, but you have to deflate them.
That must be why the builder recommended BOTH 650s and 26" wheels. Plus I could put a mountain cassette on the touring wheels and something narrower on the 650s. I've always ridden 700c but if I don't place my cleats carefully I get toe clip overlap (size 41 shoes). I've never had a professional fitting, so I'm anxious to see what I learn tomorow.
Triskeliongirl
01-27-2007, 04:13 PM
That must be why the builder recommended BOTH 650s and 26" wheels. Plus I could put a mountain cassette on the touring wheels and something narrower on the 650s. I've always ridden 700c but if I don't place my cleats carefully I get toe clip overlap (size 41 shoes). I've never had a professional fitting, so I'm anxious to see what I learn tomorow.
Oh I get it, he could build it so it could use either a 650b or 650c wheelset, so you could keep one set for touring and one for fast riding. That's a very cool idea, I thought you had to choose one or ther other (cuz at least with cantis won't adjusting the brakes be a pita everytime you change your wheelset. I guess it would be easier with sidepulls). I kind of do that now anyway, that is for convenience I have a lighter wheelset that I keep 23c tires on and a sturdier one (more spokes) that I keep 32c tires on even though they are both 700c/24" sets. If I were to have gone custom, I would have really explored the 650 options better, but none of the stock frames with 650 wheels fit me since I need such a slack seat tube angle (I have a really long thigh so need a max STA of 73 deg, hard to find in smaller frame sizes). I found a link to the site where my friend shows the parts he used to build his waterford: http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=84156
Another thing to watch for on smaller framed bikes is room to get your rack on. I find it is much easier to mount a rear rack on my bike with cantis than side pull brakes, so I strongly recommend going with cantis unless that will make the two wheelset thing too impractical, cuz that is a cool idea.
One more thought, I like your idea of keeping different casettes on each wheelset to. Do know with my XT rear derailleur, I notice no difference in shifting even a road casette (12-27) than with an ultegra rear derailleur, so while some things I read made me nervous about it, it was just fine (maybe its only an issue for very narrow racing casettes).
Do know one advantage of shimano 9 spd is that you can mix and match road and mountain parts, so I have road stuff in front and mountain in back. I am very happy with sti shifters and mountain gearing. I agree with Emily that on a bike like a friday where the wheelbase is quite short bar end shifting can work better, but I really like sti. You'll notice on my friend's waterford he chose bar ends so he could use a brake lever that is similar in feel to the campy levers on his other bikes.
BleeckerSt_Girl
01-27-2007, 04:15 PM
You could go 650b, but then the skinniest you can go is 34c. So if you want to be able to use tires in the 23c-32c range, you are better off with 700c.
I'm confused. What about these thinner 650B tires listed by Rivendell?:
http://www.rivbike.com/tires/models
Triskeliongirl
01-27-2007, 04:29 PM
I'm confused. What about these thinner 650B tires listed by Rivendell?:
http://www.rivbike.com/tires/models
Then I am mistaken. I thought that based on the smallest tire that harris sells which is 34c, but my point is the same, even 30c is still a very wide tire and if she wants to be able to also use the bike for fast road riding, she will want to be able to use tires in the 23-25c width range. But, her idea of building it to accomdoate both 650b and 650c wheels is an excellent solution.
Triskeliongirl
01-27-2007, 04:45 PM
more random thoughts on gearing. i ran some numbers through sheldon's caluclator. the lowest gear you can get with a 30 x 34 and 26" wheels is 23". I don't think that is low enough for loaded touring or pulling a trailer with kids, unless you are on flat terrain. A standard road triple has a low ring of 30, but the suginos go lower. You'll have to be careful to not be undergeared at the high end, but I would explore what is available in the sugino sets.
Looks like you can put a Sugino 24, 26, or 28T granny ring on any standard road triple with 74 mm bolt circle. No shift ramps to worry about on a granny.
I had my fitting for the custom Peter Mooney frame today. The new frame will take 700c wheels. It didn't take Peter long to realize that. My current frame is actually quite a good fit. The only things he did to it were lower the saddle (which I had recently raised) and raise the handlebars (they were already at their max but he put them 3/4" higher) so saddle and hbars were about equal. Then he put me on the adjustable frame-fitting trainer and ended up shortening my top tube a little bit. Also tried 4 different saddles and I ended up preferring a Butterfly. I didn't like the handlebar with a straight section below the levers. Tentative decisions on components are a 12-34 cassette and XTR rear derailleur, Ultegra triple 30-39-52 crankset and FD, barcon shifters, long reach caliper brakes (not canti). I can replace the 30t chainring with a 24 or 26 later if I need to. I wil undoubtedly use a narrower-range cassette when I don't need those wide gears. I'll be building myself a set of touring wheels with Ultegra hubs, 36h rear, 32h front. Tubus Vega rear rack and Ergo front. Even decided on some small lug cut-outs and picked a color (metalic silvery-blue to blend in with the S&S couplers). I'll get a detailed component list in about a week.
The places where Peter's opinion differed from mine were on the wheels (he recommended factory build wheels, but I wanted to build my own and have some of me in the bike). I asked about White Industries hubs, and he thinks they are overpriced. He doesn't like front racks and the wheelbase will get stretched a bit to include one. He prefers STI shifters and dis-recommended downtubes since they are not made any more. He doesn't like canti brakes, and I'm not a big fan of them either - they are harder to adjust and need cable hangers. I think Ultegra or Campy cranks with outboard bearings are a better choice than Sugino. If removing cranks is required to pack the bike in the S&S case, removing Sugino cranks from a square-tapered bb spindle would be a lot of work (builds strong muscles and sore hands).
Maybe just for sentimental reasons, I'll put my sewup wheels with the the 33 year old Campy hubs on the new bike long enough to transfer some of their "essense". I'd need to space the rear hub out some more and put on a 7 or 8 speed freewheel.
Triskeliongirl
01-28-2007, 06:56 PM
SO, the plan is forming! You must be so excited. Listen to his advice, but you know a lot about this too so don't be afraid to trust your intuition. In the end, its your bike. That is great he thinks you can use 700c wheels, it will give you a lot more flexiblity. The only thing I think you might want to reconsider are the bar cons vs sti shifters. Sti is just so easy to shift since your hands are already on the hoods. I don't think I would like having to move to the drops everytime I wanted to make a shift. Maybe it would help if he had a bike in the shop you could test ride with sti. If you have small hands you may want the ones (ultegra level) with shims designed for smaller hands. I am also curious if he said you can fit fenders and 32c tires with the long reach side pull brakes. I think if its a sport frame its just easier to design it for long reach side pulls. When I had my frame retrofit, I noticed there wasn't a lot of room in there for cantis, so my frame builder had a special device he built to mount cantis inside a smaller than ideal space, although it its custom maybe they do have a lot of flexiblity. I had to either use cantis or move the bridge, and I worried moving the bridge would weaken the frame, and I already owned a set of cantis, so I went that route and have no regrets.
p.s. if you have any questions on the specs of the waterford my friend built he said you can send him an email (his address was in the email I sent you last night).
Veronica
01-28-2007, 07:04 PM
The only thing I think you might want to reconsider are the bar cons vs sti shifters. Sti is just so easy to shift since your hands are already on the hoods. I don't think I would like having to move to the drops everytime I wanted to make a shift.
It just becomes automatic. I don't even really think about shifting. You just do it. It doesn't take that long either to move your hand.
V.
Triskeliongirl
01-28-2007, 07:25 PM
I am also curious why you can't use front racks. I have no problem on my frame and it is sport not touring geometry with a longer wheelbase. All I am worried about is that you are being talked out of some of the great advice you gave me when I built my bike, such as having eyelets for a front rack and canti bosses installed. I am not saying to not trust your builder, but I am curiuos about the reasons behind some of his recomendations.
What I wrote in the first paragraph is what I'm getting even though it disagrees with his recommendation. I am getting a front rack. I'm hand-building my own wheels. I'm not getting STIs even though he prefers them. I'm not doing cantis partly because of his recommendation and partly because I don't like adjusting them (and I've adjusted thousands of center-pull brakes). I've heard conflicting things about them (much better than V-brakes, worse than V-brakes, best brakes for touring). If he had recommended them I would have gone for cantis, but it would have been on the basis of recommendations and not personal experience.
emily_in_nc
01-29-2007, 06:13 AM
DebW,
I think you'll be fine with the things you've spec'd out. As I mentioned, I have bar-end shifters and love them. I too was used to STI before I tried bar-cons and initially resisted my salesperson at Bike Friday when he suggested them, since bar-cons were an unknown to me. But after just a couple of rides I loved them and agree with V that shifting with them becomes second nature. I especially love that they are friction in the front, unlike with STI. I can trim my front chainring so much more easily! I was always having trouble with that with STI. It's also much, much easer shifting to the big ring than with STI, which was always difficult for my left hand to do (hand strength issue) when it got tired -- that was the same for STI or Campy shifting.
I have V-brakes on my Friday and also have a front rack, and my bike is not long wheelbase (to the contrary!) nor does it have hardly any fork rake (the fork is small and straight), but it works, somehow -- I'm not as knowledgeable as you and Triskeliongirl on the technical reasons, I just know what works for me.
I also have a mix of mountain (XT in back) and road (Ultegra in front) components, which also works great.
The color you picked also sounds wonderful. Exciting!
Emily
DeniseGoldberg
01-29-2007, 06:27 AM
What I wrote in the first paragraph is what I'm getting even though it disagrees with his recommendation. I am getting a front rack.
What I find really interesting is that I don't remember Peter recommending not getting a front rack when he built my bike. I wonder if his view of racks has changed, or if it's because I was configuring a bike for loaded touring as opposed to his recommendation to you of "sport" touring (whatever that is).
Congrats on the bike order - I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
--- Denise
Triskeliongirl
01-29-2007, 06:47 AM
What I wrote in the first paragraph is what I'm getting even though it disagrees with his recommendation. ....
Ahh, thanks for the clarification! It sounds like you will have a wonderful bike! Yeh I do see the advantages of side pull brakes, I was torn myself. I also really see the advantage of going custom, which I think is the most important decision you made. If I had it to do over I would probably have done that too, but we all learn about this stuff as we go.
Triskeliongirl
01-29-2007, 07:18 AM
... or if it's because I was configuring a bike for loaded touring as opposed to his recommendation to you of "sport" touring (whatever that is)....
Loaded touring means a bike optimized for self-supported touring, including camping gear, etc. Sport touring means you can still tour, but with lighter loads, i.e. no camping gear. The reason to go sport tour rather than loaded tour is if you want to use the bike to do both fast road rides and light touring. A loaded tourer will be very stable with a heavy load, but then it will feel sluggish on a fast road ride. A sport tourer is a good all around bike, but will be less stable if very heavily loaded down, although I like this style bike and find that as long as I pay attention to balance my load it is just fine.
I AGREE DEB IS GOING TO HAVE ONE SWEET BIKE!!!
Triskeliongirl
01-29-2007, 07:21 AM
I just had another thought. Maybe he didn't want to configure it with front racks, cuz then he thought you would try to carry too much weight if you filled both front and rear bags to max capacity. But, I remember you advised me to get a front rack so I could better balance my load, but not necessearially make it very heavy.
Peter and I talked about that at length. In his experience, front panniers make the bike less stable and make cornering more awkward. In my experience, they make it more stable and improve cornering (vs a load on the rear only). And since I stated that I'd pull a trailer for loads more than 20-25 lb, he found it odd that I might put 5 lb in each of 4 pannier bags. With a trailer, we could stick to a more sport geometry and not have to extend the wheelbase, making the bike more suitable for fast rides. Peter said that he will have to change the geometry to accommodate a front rack. I don't understand if foot clearance is the problem or just stability. I've only used high-mounted front racks, and now only low-rider racks are available.
Now that I know my current bike fits me quite well, and that the new bike will be very similar in terms of fit, I'm even more inclined to have the new bike lean towards the touring side. The current bike has a fairly short wheelbase and is more suited to agressive riding, so as long as I can keep it going, the new bike doesn't have to do everything.
Triskeliongirl
01-29-2007, 10:43 AM
Hey Deb, it sounds like you may just need to give yourself a bit of time to work through these issues. I know it took me a while to figure out exactly what I wanted my travel bike to do. In the beginning I too leaned towards it being sportier (i.e. carbon fork) but in the end decided that being able to carry stuff in both front and back pannier bags, even if not a lot was important to me. I also like the idea of versatility. Yes a trailer is a fine option, but the trailer itself weighs a lot, so if it were me I would still want to be able use pannier bags for touring. I am not sure how sporty the original geometry is that he proposed. I hope he understands that you are not racing. Does your frame builder really 'get' what you want this bike to do? I know a lot of very traditional framebuilders still think in terms of a loaded touring bike or sport bike, but can't appreciate that sometimes we want a bike that is good for sport riding and light touring. The framebuilder I worked with Bilenky, seemed to get it. In fact, he offers a bike called the tourlite (and the fork he made me is his tourlite fork, which comes with rack mounts) which is designed precisely for this application. Maybe you could compare the geometry of that bike to the bike your frame builder is proposing to build you. Or maybe that is what your builder is offering you by suggesting that he lengthen the wheelbase if you want front racks.
Triskeliongirl
01-29-2007, 10:47 AM
I don't understand if foot clearance is the problem or just stability. I've only used high-mounted front racks, and now only low-rider racks are available.
I think it is only stability, cuz think about it, if your foot can clear the front tire, and the panier bag is forward of that, it will clear too. But I think that either he was designing you a pretty aggresive bike in the beginning, or assuming that you wanted to carry a hefty load on the front. Has he given you any specs on the proposed geometry?
emily_in_nc
01-29-2007, 05:17 PM
Peter and I talked about that at length. In his experience, front panniers make the bike less stable and make cornering more awkward. In my experience, they make it more stable and improve cornering (vs a load on the rear only).
I totally agree! My DH and I did a two-day "shakedown" tour in preparation for a longer credit-card tour on our Bike Fridays back in 2004. I used only rear panniers on the shakedown tour, and the bike handled poorly. I decided to put a front rack and front panniers on for the nine-day tour, and I got smaller panniers for the rear so that my load was very well balanced between front and rear, and like you, I didn't carry that much of a load overall -- I'd say I was carrying about 20 lbs in all four panniers (total) + the weight of panniers, racks, and a front bag, so maybe 30 lbs. total extra weight on my bike. It handled beautifully! Sure, it was a little slower to get up to speed, but other than that, I never even knew I had the panniers on it. I definitely disagree with Peter on this one. In fact, in the bike touring research I did before our tour, I read many experienced tourists who said that if they only took two panniers, it would be the front two, and none on the rear at all!
Stick to your guns for sure!
Emily
Now Peter is rethinking wheel size after I told him how close to toe clip overlap I am on my current bike. My shoes are 41 and I get overlap by moving my cleats back a few millimeters. He's also saying sub-73 seat angle but I don't have the full specs yet.
BleeckerSt_Girl
01-30-2007, 07:17 AM
Deb,
at 5'7" and 32" inseam, I'm trrying to understand why you would need wheels smaller than 700 to avoid toeoverlap.
I'm 5'5", inseam 30", shoe size 9. On my Rivendell 54cm w/700 wheels, I seldom if ever get toe overlap- it's just not a problem.
Is the issue for you because your top tube is going to be shortened to accomodate your "women's reach"? Is it because this is going to be a WSD?
Triskeliongirl
01-30-2007, 07:38 AM
Now Peter is rethinking wheel size after I told him how close to toe clip overlap I am on my current bike. My shoes are 41 and I get overlap by moving my cleats back a few millimeters. He's also saying sub-73 seat angle but I don't have the full specs yet.
Aaah, I like the sub-73 STA, that is one terrific reason to go custom. I really have to struggle to find seat posts laid back enough to get set up properly even on my 73 STA bikes. From what you are saying lately, maybe having him favor a touring geometry is what you want, but to not use super heavy tubes like for camping style self supported loaded touring. I do think the long reach side pulls will be much easier to adjust with diff. sized wheelsets than cantis, but I still love the braking power of my cantis, and the ease of mounting a rear rack. Will you go 26" as in mountain bike size or 650B for your touring wheelset? I looked up his website, and saw he lists bikes as road and touring, at least in his 'stock' frames, but not in between, and his 'road' frames seem to be road racing, so maybe that was the source of the problem with the front rack. Another advantage of 650 wheels is that you will have more room for a carradice bag if you want. Mine just fits with the 700c wheel in back, but barely. Again, while I LOVE my travel, and LOVE what I paid for it, if I had it to do over (i.e. using what I learned from doing it, and of course weren't as concerned about educating 2 kids) I would do exactly what you are doing, gone custom, and tried for a sub73 STA and 650 wheels. But if you are going to have it accept 26" wheels, do you want the option of going wider than 32c or to use both wide tires and mud guards? If so you may need to rethink the brakes. I would get him to confirm that you can use BOTH mudguards and 32c tires with long reach side pulls. Maybe it depends on exactly where he puts your bridge. What fun you must be having designing this bike!
Triskeliongirl
01-30-2007, 07:43 AM
Deb,
at 5'7" and 32" inseam, I'm trrying to understand why you would need wheels smaller than 700 to avoid toeoverlap.
I'm 5'5", inseam 30", shoe size 9. On my Rivendell 54cm w/700 wheels, I seldom if ever get toe overlap- it's just not a problem.
Is the issue for you because your top tube is going to be shortened to accomodate your "women's reach"? Is it because this is going to be a WSD?
Lisa, its not just your height and inseam, reach is also dicated by BOTH the length of your arms/torso and the length of your femur. The length of the femur dictates how far back your saddle is relative to the bottom bracket. Long femured people (like me) sit very far back, further lengthening our reach, so then we need a shorter top tube to reach the handlebars. Then arm and torso length also effects reach. Toe clip happens when the top tube gets too short to accodomodate a 700c wheel. Some manufacturers fix this by slackening the head tube angle, but then the handling becomes sluggish, which is why some of us need bikes with smaller front wheels. Other manufacturers fool women into thinking they are buying a bike with a short reach by reporting a short top tube, but then steeping up the seat tube so much that they can never get set up properly on the bike. You are lucky 700c wheels work well for you body, makes life much easier!
KnottedYet
01-30-2007, 08:23 AM
Thank you for explaining that, Trisk! Very cool. I feel pretty lucky now that I have such a long torso and long arms, and now I understand why pretty standard bike geometries seem to fit me fine even though I've got such long femurs! (it's the torso and arms)
Thanks!:D
From what you are saying lately, maybe having him favor a touring geometry is what you want, but to not use super heavy tubes like for camping style self supported loaded touring.
Yes, I think that is a good description. But not sure if the tubes need to be somewhat heavier because the wheelbase is stretched. I'll have to ask.
Will you go 26" as in mountain bike size or 650B for your touring wheelset?
I'll do 26" MTB rims and 32mm tires for the touring wheels so I can manage unpaved rail trails.
I looked up his website, and saw he lists bikes as road and touring, at least in his 'stock' frames, but not in between, and his 'road' frames seem to be road racing, so maybe that was the source of the problem with the front rack.
Since most of his frames are custom, I guess the categories are somewhat arbitrary. His bias is to "build it for the way you will use it most". He's built too many touring bikes for people who ultimately seldom tour.
But if you are going to have it accept 26" wheels, do you want the option of going wider than 32c or to use both wide tires and mud guards? If so you may need to rethink the brakes. I would get him to confirm that you can use BOTH mudguards and 32c tires with long reach side pulls. Maybe it depends on exactly where he puts your bridge. What fun you must be having designing this bike!
I originally asked for fender brackets, and he thought 32 was the widest tire he could design for. Later I said that fenders weren't so important if it compromised something else. We'll see what he comes up with.
Triskeliongirl
01-30-2007, 09:44 AM
I went through a similar thing with fenders. On the phone he thought he could make it accomodate 32c tires and fenders, but when he saw my frame the bridge got in the way. So, I sat down and compared my terry 'sport bike' (isis) to my terry 'touring bike' (classic) by looking at them and the biggest difference I noticed was not that the geometry in terms of frame angles and tube lengths, but the distance between the 2 seat stays and the 2 fork blades was wider on the touring bike, and the bridges were set higher, to allow clearance for wider tires and fenders. What I am now starting to wonder, is if that is also a big part of the 'touring geometry' that is just not obvious from looking at a geometry table. I sacrificed fenders cuz I don't use them where I live and I worried about moving the bridge, but if I were building from scratch like you, I might rethink it. Maybe what will help is to start imagining what you will do with this bike when you retire. Do you anticipate wanting to tour in a place where it does rain, and having mudguards would be helpful. This will be your only 'travel bike' so what will do it with it when you travel? Do you want to land somewhere and go for a fast club ride, or tour? You have your old bike for fast riding, so if you were thinking you just wanted the new one to do fast riding at home and tour when traveling, then maybe you do want a full blown tourer. Another thing I will warn you, is that while I thought I would use my new S/S coupled bike for traveling and commuting, I realized locking it is a major hassle (requires a front skewer lock avail from peter white AND 2 other locks), so keeping your old bike for everyday use and the new bike for touring and travel may help you narrow down your choices. BUT, if you go the touring route don't let him overbuild it. Be honest with him on the rider plus luggage weights you want it to support, and stress you still want to keep it as light but functional as possible.
BleeckerSt_Girl
01-30-2007, 12:41 PM
You are lucky 700c wheels work well for you body, makes life much easier!
Well, I wouldn't say my bike is a perfect fit though- I do have reach issues, becuase it's a man's bike and i have a typical woman's measurements. I had to put a REALLY short stem- shorter than I'd have wanted- to make the reach comfortable. Now the steering is less steady than I'd like.
That's one reason I am reading this thread with interest- I want to understand all this women's custom fit stuff better. Thanks for expalining some of those things to me- lots of good info!
Triskeliongirl
01-30-2007, 12:55 PM
Well, I wouldn't say my bike is a perfect fit though- I do have reach issues, becuase it's a man's bike and i have a typical woman's measurements. I had to put a REALLY short stem- shorter than I'd have wanted- to make the reach comfortable. Now the steering is less steady than I'd like.
That's one reason I am reading this thread with interest- I want to understand all this women's custom fit stuff better. Thanks for expalining some of those things to me- lots of good info!
Yeh, I remembered that but didn't want to say anything since there isn't much you can do about it now. That is the *other* solution, use a short stem, but as you can see that can create handling issues. BUT, you seemed to be really happy with it until we brought it up. I had a short stem on a bike once and it was OK but I had trouble climbing out of the saddle. It was only when I went to a longer stem that I found out how much better that is. But too long can also have problems. Its all about balance on the bike. That is why I think Deb is so smart to be going custom. Often it doesn't cost anymore than buying a high end bike, and if you have confidence in your builder's ability to fit women, it can really be the best option. The trick is finding the right builder! The main reason I didn't go custom was that I didn't have anyone local that I trusted to do it right. Just the fact that Deb's builder suggested 650c wheels makes me trust that he gets it.
BleeckerSt_Girl
01-30-2007, 01:08 PM
My first 3 months were with the way long 9cm stem and I could not get comfortable with the long reach. Switched to a 5cm stem which felt instantly WAY better and seemed just fine. It certainly solved the problem at the time.
However, after another 5 months of riding on this short stem, I think my core muscles have strengthened and I've become a better and stronger rider. So now I'm starting to bump up against the limitations of the shorter stem whereas before it was simply a matter of being far more comfortable and I wasn't pushing myself or the bike so much.
My next step is to try a compromise- switch to a 7cm stem and perhaps my stronger core muscles now will help me feel ok with the reach increase. I feel almost now like I could USE an extra cm or two in the "cockpit"- odd how our needs might change as we get stronger. It's a subtle thing though, and my bike is still quite comfortable for me as it is now, so I'll swap the stem for a 7 the next time I might bring it in for some work or a tuneup.
Nothing like first hand experience to help one figure all this stuff out! ;)
Another thing I will warn you, is that while I thought I would use my new S/S coupled bike for traveling and commuting, I realized locking it is a major hassle (requires a front skewer lock avail from peter white AND 2 other locks), so keeping your old bike for everyday use and the new bike for touring and travel may help you narrow down your choices.
I didn't think about the locking issue with the S&S couplers. Though it takes a special tool to open the couplers so I doubt that your average thief could steal it easily. When I commute I bring my bike into my office, so that part isn't an issue anyway. But camping on a bike tour I'd want to lock it over night.
That is why I think Deb is so smart to be going custom. Often it doesn't cost anymore than buying a high end bike, and if you have confidence in your builder's ability to fit women, it can really be the best option. The trick is finding the right builder!
Well, the custom frame certainly isn't cheap, and I haven't seen a price yet on the components. But I'm sure it will be worth it to have a perfectly fitting bike tailored to my needs.
Triskeliongirl
01-30-2007, 02:33 PM
These are what my LBS recommended to securely lock the bike. http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/pitlock.asp
While it is true you need a special tool to take the couplers apart, its a tool that any bike thief can easily order online. I may be more sensitive to this after having my bike friday stolen. Now I only leave a bike parked with a NYC kryptonite lock, cuz I realize how easy it is to cut a cable lock. I haven't left Feronia locked anywhere yet, but the LBS guys said if I am going to do it, to purchase the front wheel skewer lock from peter, and then lock the front wheel plus down tube with one NYC long to an immobile object, and the rear wheel plus seat tube with another NYC lock to an immobile object. BUT that means you have to carry 10 lb of locks with you! I will just try to not have to lock my bike, eat in outdoor restaurants, or use a light lock by sit where I can see it, or leave it in a hotel room. I don't camp by bike, but you mentioned camping. If you are going to camp, maybe you do want a full blown loaded touring bike! I am sooo curious to see how your bike turns out. I like your builders attitutude towards women, just recognizing that you need a shallow STA, 650c wheels and a short top tube says a lot. While I think the bikes I have are it for me, I've learned to never say never. Stuff happens, bikes get crashed, bikes get stolen. So, if I do ever do this again I would go custom if I could find the right builder.
Triskeliongirl
01-30-2007, 07:10 PM
My first 3 months were with the way long 9cm stem and I could not get comfortable with the long reach. Switched to a 5cm stem which felt instantly WAY better and seemed just fine. It certainly solved the problem at the time......My next step is to try a compromise- switch to a 7cm stem and perhaps my stronger core muscles now will help me feel ok with the reach increase.
Lisa, a 9 cm stem is not way long, it is an ideal size from a handling perspective. If I were you, rather than buying a 7 cm stem, I would buy a short reach bar (same cost as new stem). The Rivendell iyou have is spec'd with a nitto noodle, which is a great bar (I have it on my bikes) but a long reach bar (I can only get away with it cuz I have a short top tube and 24" front wheel). If you do indeed have the noodle it has a 9 cm reach. SO, if you pair a 9 cm stem with a short reach bar (both the eva bar mimi likes and the salsa poco have a 7 cm reach), the total reach will be the same as pairing your 9 cm reach bar with a 7 cm stem, but the bike will handle better with the longer stem. Of course if you just love the noodle bar you may not like it though. What you'll lose is that extra hand position behind the hoods, but then you may find you can use the tops more instead. While I love my nitto noodle bar, if I bought a bike with the geometry you did I would switch bars.
BleeckerSt_Girl
01-30-2007, 07:13 PM
Triskelion, these are excellent points and I will think about them!
Right now, off early tomorrow morning for a weeklong trip and no TE....see you all in a week or so! :o
anakiwa
02-01-2007, 06:46 AM
Hi Deb-
Just thought I'd mention that I used some the suggestions you made (I posted a couple of months ago) when I ordered my custom road bike (won't be here for a few more months but there's snow outside so I don't care).
I was wanting a compact, but eventually came to realize that I'm just more comfortable having the gearing options of a triple. You suggested dumping the STI shifter for the front derailler and doing a downtube shifter. Ultimately I wound up ordering a STI short reach shifter for the rear brake/derailler and a bar end shifter & standard brake lever for the front brake/derailler. It sounds like this might be an option worth considering for you as well. The STI shifter really is fast and easy for the rear (I have one on my current road bike)- it's the triple where it really seems to make sense to keep the friction shifting option.
Have fun and good luck!
anakiwa, that does seem like a nice option, and I hope it works well for you.
If we get some warm weather in the next month or two, I might go test ride bikes with different shifters before I make my final decision. Barcons are the closest thing currently on the market to the friction downtube shifters I'm used to. I did ride a bike with STI recently for a couple miles, and while the rear did shift nicely, I didn't like the way the lever wobbled back and forth while braking. Besides, I think STI shifters look big and bulbous and ugly. The barcon rear shifter can run in friction or indexed mode, so I won't be locked into only 9 speed cassettes, and the system is field-repairable.
Just found out that my frame is built. It should go to the painter by weeks end.
KnottedYet
04-02-2007, 01:08 PM
Cool!!!!!:D
Look. Look. Here it is. Isn't it gorgeous? My raw frame, about ready for the paint shop. The black strips are electrical tape over the S&S couplers to keep grit out when the frame is cleaned before painting. Now it just needs the braze-ons for the racks, which he is going to do tomorrow. I saw the racks too - very nice, light, stainless steel Tubus racks. oooh. ahhh.
I test road 2 bikes, one with bar end shifters, one with STI. Decided I prefer the bar-ends. Spent about 2 hours with Peter Mooney talking about components. Just about everything is set. He's got rims for my 26 inch wheels but has to order the hubs. And I saw the 26x1.3 tires he recommended and liked them. The frame has plenty of clearance for those tires and fenders too (fender braze-ons are already installed). I'll probably look for 650c rims elsewhere. I've got a Dura Ace 9-speed 28 hole rear hub for the 650s. Felt some Shimano brake levers (not STI) that I liked. I double-checked my paint choice, a metallic blue, and picked silver decals edged with white. The bike should be ready to ride by early May. I may be hyperventilating until then.
roguedog
04-08-2007, 09:54 PM
Wooo hoo.. congrats, Deb! Sounds like it was a nice Easter!
HOw exciting...
KnottedYet
04-09-2007, 05:38 PM
OOOOOOHHHH!!!!!!!! How exciting! How cool!
More pictures?:p
I picked up my wheel parts yesterday for the 26" touring wheelset. Ultegra hubs, 32 hole front, 36 hole rear, Mavic annodized MTB rims. Even brought home the tires, tubes, and rimstrips so I'll be all set to put the wheels on the bike. I'll try to get the front wheel built this week, and save the rear to give Mudmucker the wheelbuilding lesson I've been promising.
roguedog
04-16-2007, 07:53 AM
This is really cool to track how your build is going. It's kinda like one of those old cliffhangers... Can't wait til the next episode :)
Can't wait to see the frame painted!
Triskeliongirl
04-16-2007, 02:30 PM
Oh Deb, she is georgeous! Maybe she'll be ready to ride during my visit!!! I can't wait to see her all finished off.
Today I put the tires on my new wheels and dropped them off at the bike shop so that they will be there when the frame comes back from the painter's. I was told that the painter promised to ship the frame on Tuesday, so it should be at Belmont Wheelworks on Thursday. If it is, Peter thinks he can have it ready for me by Sunday, one week from today. WHOO HOO!!!
Last Monday night I got to be there while Triskeliongirl packed her S&S coupled bike. Even got to tighten and loosen the couplers. So now I feel comfortable with the couplers and the packing process. Can't wait for the new bike.
I talked to Peter Mooney today. My frame came back from the painter on Friday. We made an tentative appointment for Tuesday at 6 pm to pick up the completed bike. I'll be riding it this week. :D :D :D
KnottedYet
05-13-2007, 02:12 PM
Yay, Deb!!!
Make SURE someone is taking pictures! We need pictures!
Triskeliongirl
05-13-2007, 02:50 PM
WE DEFINITELY WANT PICTURES!!!!!!!!!!! It was so great getting your help with the packing! I should have brought that wrench with me for removing the crank arm, and I know you would have got me over my fears. But, next time I vow to get it in a single suitcase. I just love my steel S/S coupled bike, and I know you are going to love yours too.
I've got it and it rides like silk, with the most stable neutral steering I've ever felt, and a very comfortable cockpit. WOW! Actually made me want to ride freehands in the first 1/8 mile. I took some pictures of it in the living room, but I'll have to wait until tomorrow morning to upload them (sorry for the wait).
Also brought home all the parts for my 650c wheelset, so I should have those ready within the week. The S&S case and a set of fenders are on order.
SadieKate
05-15-2007, 07:46 PM
All these purty new toys . . . .
mimitabby
05-15-2007, 07:57 PM
I've got it and it rides like silk, with the most stable neutral steering I've ever felt, and a very comfortable cockpit. WOW! Actually made me want to ride freehands in the first 1/8 mile. I took some pictures of it in the living room, but I'll have to wait until tomorrow morning to upload them (sorry for the wait).
Also brought home all the parts for my 650c wheelset, so I should have those ready within the week. The S&S case and a set of fenders are on order.
what's with the no pictures? Huh? huh?
no i never said i was patient. and where's MY bike while i'm at it? :(
BleeckerSt_Girl
05-16-2007, 05:04 AM
We want pictures!!!!!!!! :D :D :D :D
Triskeliongirl
05-16-2007, 05:52 AM
Oh Deb, I am so happy that he nailed both the fit and the performance. This says a lot for your builder, and if I ever get over paying for my kids education I will look into getting a bike from your builder. It is not easy to build a bike that fits with neutral steering and no toe clip overlap in a small frame size. I just loved your builders idea of making it compatable with both 26" and 650c wheels. Maybe you can visit me in Woods Hole this summer, and we can do a ride with Wavedancer and I can meet your new bike. ENJOY!
KnottedYet
05-16-2007, 06:56 AM
Wow!! She's beautiful!!
(does she have a name?)
I love the way the couplers look, very classy!
When are you going for a big ride with those racks loaded?
mimitabby
05-16-2007, 07:00 AM
that's beautiful! such nice lugs!
and you look very happy :D
I hope you go down many miles of road on this bike!
Blueberry
05-16-2007, 07:01 AM
She's beautiful! Here's wishing you many happy miles together!
Deb your labor of love looks ready for many adventures. Enjoy.
sgtiger
05-16-2007, 09:12 AM
Gorgeous!!! Where are you taking her first? Well... where ever you take her, I hope you all have lots of fun.:D :cool:
Triskeliongirl
05-16-2007, 11:58 AM
ooooooooooooooooo sooooooooooooooooo preeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeety!
She came out beautifully! ENJOY!!!
roguedog
05-16-2007, 08:18 PM
Ooooooh. Nice. Was just thinking about your bike after I read the thread on Mimi's and BikerZ's bikes.
So..uh.. you just going to keep it in the living room to drool and moon over for awhile? That's what I'm doing with my bikes :) Makes the roomies really happy:p
I finally finished up the 650c wheels and took them for a spin. Dura Ace 9-speed hubs with Ti freehub body, Mavic CXP 33 rims, 28 spoke 2-cross front and rear, Michelin Pro Race tires, 12-23 Ultegra cassette. Here are a few pictures. I'm anxious to see how different the ride is between these wheels and the 26"x1.3" touring tires.
Went to the LBS and picked up my last batch of goodies: the case for airline travel, fenders, and a cyclocomputer. Along with the case, I got the S&S spanner wrench with pedal wrench, 3 anti-compression posts, the S&S security net (http://www.sandsmachine.com/ac_net.htm), 4 axle-protectors, and 2 dropout spanners. Here's a picture of the axle-protectors and the dropout spanners. The first packing is going to take awhile as I'll need to cut the velcro tube covers to size for every piece of frame.
Crankin
06-12-2007, 04:33 AM
Hey Deb, looks great. When do I get to see her in person?
Robyn
I packed the bike in the case for the first time last night. I'm heading to Maryland on a business trip and will stay with a friend and bike with her one evening. If I were driving my own wagon, I would have just put the bike in the car intact, but I'm renting a car because mine needs work. So got to make the first attempt at packing the bike in the case. I had to cut the tube protectors to size for each frame tube. Also cut some fleece material to protect parts like derailleurs and brakes and crankset. Used some velcro one-strap to secure some of the wrappings. Had to remove both derailleurs and the front brake to make it work, though I didn't disconnect any cables other than unscrewing the splitters. The biggest bugaboo to the final fitting was having the handlebars lie flat to the bottom of the case so the front wheel would fit on top low enough to allow the case to close. Here's a photo of the final product. At least I don't have to be worried about the airline handling it roughly, since I'm driving with it this time.
divingbiker
06-12-2007, 05:57 AM
At least I don't have to be worried about the airline handling it roughly, since I'm driving with it this time.
If you were checking the case as baggage on an airplane, is it small enough to be a normal piece of luggage or would you have to pay the oversize bag charge? I've been under the impression that a bike with couplers would fit into a suitcase-sized case. I didn't realize that you'd have to disassemble and reassemble the bike to fit it in the case...not so easy for the non-mechanics among us.
Welcome back to Maryland!
HillSlugger
06-12-2007, 12:26 PM
When you get to unpacking it, could you take a few more pictures so that we can see the different layers and how it all go in?
If you were checking the case as baggage on an airplane, is it small enough to be a normal piece of luggage or would you have to pay the oversize bag charge? I've been under the impression that a bike with couplers would fit into a suitcase-sized case. I didn't realize that you'd have to disassemble and reassemble the bike to fit it in the case...not so easy for the non-mechanics among us.
Yes, the case is small enough to avoid an oversized bag charge. My builder doesn't recommend S&S couplers for the non-mechanically inclined. The couplers give you a break-apart frame, not a folding bike. The frame ended up getting almost completely stripped except for the bottom bracket, headset, stem, and rear brake caliper. I'll get some additional pictures of the process to post. Or look at the S&S web site (http://www.sandsmachine.com/#pack) except most of those photos show bare frames and handlebars with no cables.
The bike went back together pretty easily. Except I'm puzzled about aligning the spindle with the Octalink crank. I'm going to call my builder for advice rather than risk damaging the crank.
Yes Robyn, we'll have to get together for a ride sometime soon.
Jo-n-NY
06-13-2007, 06:11 AM
Deb, I guess I missed this thread from January. Your bike is beautiful. What a gorgeous color. I find it completely amazing how it fits in that travel box.
I wish you must luck and enjoyment with your new bike and traveling with it.
~ JoAnn
Triskeliongirl
06-13-2007, 06:31 AM
Deb, I am surprised a frame your size required SO MUCH dissasembly. From what I've read I thought you could get away with less. Do you think if you had more time you could have taken less stuff off, or were you being extra cautious? As an aside, the solution I adopted to minimize disassembly with my S/S bike was to pack it together with my clothes in 2 airline legal suitcases. I put the front half and bars in one case and the rest in another. I put my clothes in plastic bags to avoid grease stains. All I had to remove was the seat post, bars, pedals, and disconnect the couplers (both cable and frame).
Deb, I am surprised a frame your size required SO MUCH dissasembly. From what I've read I thought you could get away with less. Do you think if you had more time you could have taken less stuff off, or were you being extra cautious?
You are probably right. Though it wasn't easy to fit it in the case even with all the disassembly I did. I'll try with less disassembly next time. My builder thought I should have been able to leave at least part of the crank on. But it seemed that my small frame size made the fit harder because part of the rear triangle ended up near the middle of the case where it almost interfered with the front hub. I had to call my builder to get advise on reattaching the crank arms to the Octalink bottom bracket. It would have been MUCH easier if I'd left the left crank arm attached.
mimitabby
06-14-2007, 08:33 AM
a few pages back you wrote that you were anxious to compare the 650 wheel set to what you used to have. what do you think about it now?
a few pages back you wrote that you were anxious to compare the 650 wheel set to what you used to have. what do you think about it now?
I rode the 650c wheelset on a 25 mile club ride here in Maryland last night. Very different feel from the 26" wheels with mtb slicks. With the 26x1.3" tires the bike felt totally stable and bombproof over rough roads at any speed. The ride was never jarring even on major potholes. With the 650c x 23mm tires, the ride is definitely stiffer. I was using Michelin Pro Race 2 tires inflated to about 100 psi, and the tires were not remaining in contact with the road on chipseal at high speed - definitely a less than bombproof feel. Hopefully that will improve if I run at lower pressure. My intention for building 28 spoke 2-cross wheels was that the wheels would soften the ride enough to avoid this. However, I ended up using fairly stiff rims (Mavic CXP-33) with a v-section because a rim like the Open Pro wasn't available in 650c 28 hole. These wheels feel noticeably stiffer than the 700c sewup wheels (non-v rims, 36 hole, 3-cross) on my old bike, but that frame is stiffer and I got jarred badly on potholed. The sewup wheels never felt like they were losing contact with the road at high speed.
To do: (1) Try the Michelin Pro Race tires at lower pressure. (2) Put on a cyclocomputer (just bought a Strada wireless), calibrate both wheelsets, and see if the wheels make much difference in my riding speed. If they don't, then I'll probably ride the 26" wider tires all the time because the ride is more comfortable and more stable and I can commute with weight on the bike (ie. laptop).
mudmucker
08-30-2008, 11:47 AM
geometry - Peter's advice is to design the bike for the way you use it most often, which would lead me to more of a sport geometry than a touring geometry. OTOH, I want the option for touring and expect to have this frame for 20-30 years (if i live that long), so well into retirement.
My Rambouillet I think fits the bill of what you want to do with your new bike.
It's suitable for fast road riding, with the right tires and wheels it can go off road, and I used it to pull a trailer last year in Nova Scotia.
I'm happy with the older steel bike I just revamped for light errands. It is a road bike with mt gearing.
But I'm also playing around with getting a frame, similar for a use that DebW wanted for her custom - with an option for touring, but also with a geometry that can offer some go fast.
What is it in the geometry that you really want to look for, for that kind of use - a more sport geometry than touring geometry, which isn't road geometry?
I've been considering a Surly Long Haul Trucker frame because many people seem to be very happy with them. Would the Surly be too sluggish, if I want some go fast (knowing that of course I would not expect it to perform like my carbon fiber Ruby)?
mudmucker
08-30-2008, 11:49 AM
To do: (1) Try the Michelin Pro Race tires at lower pressure. (2) Put on a cyclocomputer (just bought a Strada wireless), calibrate both wheelsets, and see if the wheels make much difference in my riding speed. If they don't, then I'll probably ride the 26" wider tires all the time because the ride is more comfortable and more stable and I can commute with weight on the bike (ie. laptop).
Deb, did you do this and what did you think?
Blueberry
08-30-2008, 11:59 AM
I've been considering a Surly Long Haul Trucker frame because many people seem to be very happy with them. Would the Surly be too sluggish, if I want some go fast (knowing that of course I would not expect it to perform like my carbon fiber Ruby)?
My feeling is that the Surly will be pretty sluggish. But....folks use and love them on brevets (from what I've been reading). I have a cross check and can firmly say that any sluggishness is the engine, not the bike:cool::cool: But I'm not sure about the wheel size difference. Both my Cross Check and my Trek 520 have 700c wheels. One of the major limitations is that there aren't very many (any?) 26" tires narrower than about 32c.
CA
Deb, did you do this and what did you think?
I do ride the 26x1.3" tires most all the time. I think the difference in average speed between these wheels and the 650x23 is 0.25-0.5 mph, but I haven't put much effort into validating this. My bike has a 39" wheelbase, as opposed to a LHT with a 42" wheelbase. The Surly Cross Check has a 39.9" wheelbase and might be a good choice for touring plus faster rides plus cyclecross. You can even get the Cross Check now with S&S couplers (the Traveler's Check). I think that the longer wheelbase and slacker frame angles of the LHT become more necessary with heavier touring loads. I keep my load under 25 lb, as I told my framebuilder, and his design works great for me.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.