|attn LFR: frame fit thing||weiwentg|
May 19, 2002 1:56 PM
|this is how my frame fit question got (I hope) resolved. Tom Teasdale designed this...
TrueTemper verus HT OXRC tubing--$460(frame only, one color, no fork)
Fork-everest investment cast crown, 1" threadless, curve bladed. +$120=$580
I think I'm going for it - only 30 bucks more than the Trek XO1. is this a totally stupid idea? mind you the top tube slopes 16.6 degrees.
|frame fit thing||buffalosorrow|
May 20, 2002 6:52 AM
|I would ask Tom what his thoughts on a 26" wheeled frame would be, even myself riding a 50cm 700c cross frame had given strong thoughts towards a 26" tyre cross frame. You can find 26x1" slicks and continental cross county 1.5"?|
May 20, 2002 7:35 AM
|but thought better of it. I can't afford another wheelset right now. plus wheelset compatibility would be a plus - I have a spare 700c wheelset.|
May 20, 2002 10:37 AM
|The price and fit are right, and at this point it sounds like you don't have my option to go Italian chi-chi high end :-). Perhaps my only reservation would be do you have enough room in the main triangle to shoulder it? If not, you'll be stuck with carrying "briefcase" fashion (arm over top tube, right hand holding down tube by bottom bracket) which will suck for clearance on steep run-ups, stairs, etc...
I agree with sticking to 700c wheels if you can btw. Jen Dial (elite 'crosser, former teammate of mine) tried to talk me into buying one of her custom IF 650c rigs. She swears by 650c, but I did some research and they are an absolute PITA to find 'cross tires and tubes for. 26" wouldn't be much better since you are hard pressed to find anything in the 30-35mm range (read: clearance) that you can run at higher pressures for speed, with a decent 'cross type tread. My .02.
May 20, 2002 11:02 AM
|welllll....... I'm small enough that I can shoulder my TCR. not comfortably, but I can shoulder it. this bike has roughly the same triangle size, I think.
just hope this works...
May 20, 2002 1:04 PM
|I'd have to agree with LFR, the top tube slopes a lot. If you are planning to race this I wouldn't imagine being able to make a really clean dismount to run. You might be small but it's all relative to your height. You have to bend down a lot more and pick the bike up higher every time you carry it. If you consider this 25 lbs over 4 hurdle sets every lap in a cross race that could be 50 times you do it, it's never that much fun.
Of course, if you don't race it's no problem. But why is is so sloped? You seem to have lots of standover room.
May 20, 2002 3:01 PM
|I have 0.8 inches of standover. is that a lot?|
May 20, 2002 5:47 PM
|no, it's not a lot. I see this is at the mid-point on the TT. That would be the minimum you should have there. You'll have plenty of room if you need to dismount put your feet down, unless you lean over the front of the bike in which case you might have trouble. That's why he made it slope so much I suppose. The standover would have preference over the carrying room on a frame if you couldn't have both or use 650cc wheels.|
|allright, some dangerous advice||lonefrontranger|
May 21, 2002 6:13 AM
|I always was the devil's advocate anyway...
How do you measure your inseam to determine standover? In stocking feet with a ruler, standing next to a wall, right?
Okay, here's a controversial idea... Do you actually RIDE in your stocking feet? Or did you actually measure your physical standover IN MTB SHOES (which add at least 1cm of blocky sole to the equation) on any given frame.
Yeah, yeah, I know... I'm a girl so by default I don't have as much at stake ;-) But it seems to me that 1) standover on a 'cross bike is a highly overrated measurement unless you're going to do some kind of crazy gonzo trail-riding that you should more sensibly leave to the MTB. The goal of a good 'crosser isn't to bail out onto the top tube but to DISMOUNT properly and efficiently, leaving the family jewels safely intact. 2) you may not be giving yourself enough credit for standover if you haven't actually figured the shoes into the mix.
Of course you know the first time you do an eye-crosser as a result of this discussion, I will deny ever having anything to do with it...
|allright, some dangerous advice||weiwentg|
May 21, 2002 8:29 AM
|it was indeed in bare feet. so, I'll get about 1"+ of standover... ask him to raise the TT a bit?
what exactly is an eye-crosser? does it involve damage to the family jewels?
if it does, you ladies are so lucky ...
anyway, about the Gunnar I mentioned earlier. I was wearing my road shoes, complete with monstrous Speedplay cleats.
|here's what I think||lonefrontranger|
May 21, 2002 9:44 AM
|It sounds like the custom is definitely the only way to go for you in terms of fit and affordability. I would sit down and have a serious, long heart-to-heart with your framebuilder and explain in detail all of the applications you have in mind for this bike, along with the percentage of time you forsee racing, trail riding, beating around in the city, commuting, etc, etc, with it. Who knows, maybe he's never actually SEEN a CX bike being shouldered... it could happen. Personally I'd have him raise the TT as much as possible because of the bending over issues. Even the option of smaller tubing diameter if available (= more compliant ride, which is a good thing for most CX riding) could help with the triangle clearance.
I myself am 5'4" and have a 29.25" inseam (in bare feet) which lets me in at the bare margins of stock. Unfortunately, yes I have to break the bad news: you are "that short" according to the current stock specs as viewed by American framebuilders. My old massage therapist from Cincy is 5'2" (this is a guy we're talking about) and got a great deal and fit with his Bianchi CX bike. Of course buying a Bianchi CX bike entails you can deal with the "any-color-as-long-as-it's-celeste" option.
Were it an option for you to get spendy on an Italian rig, I think you'd be pleasantly suprised at the options offered by Colnago, Bianchi, Tomassini, et. al. - but then their CX rigs (which they all make BTW) are often hard to find on this side of the pond. Plus assuming you can afford them in the first place, most of the Italian builders don't charge much more to do custom; a girlfriend of mine got a custom Torelli CX bike for the same as she'd have paid for the stock frame that didn't quite fit.
|here's what I think||weiwentg|
May 21, 2002 9:11 PM
|asked him what he thought of raising the TT by half an inch.
how did your therapist fit on a Bianchi? the 49cm frame is at least half an inch higher than me even in shoes.
point of interest: I checked the geometery on the Specialized E5 compact. the 48cm frame is a wee bit to tall for me, in shoes. argh. thank heavens for Giant :)
May 22, 2002 6:33 AM
|My LMT's frame is a 46cm Bianchi plain-jane steel frame that he found in '98. It works well for him, but it took him a bit of searching to find it... I know Alan used to make small frames because my first CX bike was a 48cm Alan with Mafac, Suntour and Regina bits that a friend's kid had outgrown, and I recall they said they'd originally bought a 46 which the kid had outgrown by the time they built it up! It was narrow-tube aluminum so it was a bit of a noodle, but it was light.
So... If you were a junior, what would you do? There are a dozen or so Junior 10-14 guys out here and most of them ride sub-49cm frames, and many of them race cross - on 'cross bikes. Most are steel or Al European frames. Europe has a solid history of juniors racing, which is one reason their builders offer more sizes on the low end of the range than their U.S. counterparts. When I lived over in Germany, the local kermessen had 30-40 juniors in their equivalent of the "pee-wee" category (6-10 year olds) at each race. I understand that 'cross races in Belgium, France and Holland have similar turnouts of kids. All the kids I saw racing had nicer bikes than I did, and you could find junior sized serious racing bikes as a stock item in the German LBS. It was amazing to see all those little tiny bikes equipped with Chorus and Record!
Not that any of this helps your situation, but just as an example to illustrate that small frames, most with 700c down to something like 44 or 45cm, do exist if you look hard enough. In your situation, the custom option is probably the least hassle, just make sure you discuss your needs with the builder thoroughly before settling on a design.
May 22, 2002 6:50 PM
|will let you know how it goes. the design is more or less settled; just hunting for parts now.
I suppose if I ever outgrow this frame, I'll relegate it to a touring bike and get myself a custom titanium bike. sorry, ti's my dream material. can't say I'm not tempted by chi-chi high-end Italian :)
perhaps you Americans should eat less ;) (just kidding)
|re: attn LFR: frame fit thing||kilimanjaro|
May 20, 2002 10:39 AM
|Please remind me what are your body meansurements. I am a shorty myself and am considering a custom cross frame as well.
I was thinking about a cutlo because of the bent seat stays.
|re: attn LFR: frame fit thing||weiwentg|
May 20, 2002 10:48 AM
|5'3", 28" inseam.|
|re: Maybe steeper angles.....||jrm|
May 20, 2002 11:23 AM
|Due to the compact design. Like a 73 HT and the same ST.|| |