's Forum Archives - General

Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )

Fred Calfee?(17 posts)

Fred Calfee?MXL02
Aug 16, 2002 6:50 AM
So after all the discussion about threadless steerer spacers and handlebar height, what do you think about this Calfee...too Fred or would you ride it?
no, I wouldn't ride itcyclopathic
Aug 16, 2002 6:53 AM
it's too big 8-P
get over ittarwheel
Aug 16, 2002 7:02 AM
Doesn't bother me. Unless manufacturers go back to making bikes with threaded forks and stems, spacers and riser stems are here to stay. Not everyone can ride with their bars 6" below the saddle
Aug 16, 2002 8:22 AM
OK- my two bikes have the seat and handlebars at exactly the same position (height from floor/position relative to each other), but they look very different.

Bike A: has a seatpost collar, makes it appear less seat post is exposed than bike B, which has an integrated collar that is almost flush with the top of the top tube.

Bike A: has a quill stem- no rise, looks "normal"- bars are in exactly the same position as the threadless on bike B (sharper head tube angle, an inch of spacers, and a slight rise).

My point is, both bikes have the same net result, but very different aesthetics.

I love it how not only do people here judge WHAT people ride, but how their bikes are set up... you really want to go Fred, flip your bars upside down!
what's wrong with it? I have no problems with rise stems (nm)ColnagoFE
Aug 16, 2002 7:04 AM
For the record...MXL02
Aug 16, 2002 7:16 AM
I think it is gorgeous, in fact, it is the background on my computer. I just think all the BS about how low your handlebars are gets a little old...and unless you are Lance or Mario, probably doesn't matter.
For the record...tarwheel
Aug 16, 2002 7:54 AM
What turned my thinking around on the aesthetics of riser stems is looking at bikes on the web site. Their frames are beautiful and look great with riser stems, spacers, etc.
For the record...MXL02
Aug 16, 2002 8:06 AM
Yeah...I posted this as a tongue in cheek poke at all the roadie snobs out there...this bike is, IMHO, a work of art.
not sure I like the Calfee "trusses"ColnagoFE
Aug 16, 2002 9:31 AM
I prefer the lugwork of the C-40, but Calfee is right up there on my list of dream bikes to buy when i turn 40 and have a midlife crisis. cheaper than a red porsche.
not sure I like the Calfee "trusses"MXL02
Aug 16, 2002 9:41 AM
Yeah, I admit they kind of bug me too, but since I aready own a Colnago(MXL), I've been toying with getting a Calfee or Parlee as my CF frame. Both are actually cheaper than the C40, as well.
cheaper unless you add tons of optionsColnagoFE
Aug 16, 2002 1:53 PM
The custom paint is what another $500? They seem to nickle and dime you for some of the stuff that could add up after a while.
For the record...harry hall
Aug 17, 2002 6:07 AM
I'm a steel fan and hobbyist steel frame builder, but Calfees have always appealed to me aesthetically--there is a nice, elegant look to the webs and the ti dropouts. A Trekkie friend talked about "that looks like a bike for a Cardassian (?)" They're also the only carbon bike with a custom geometry option.
No, sell that ugly thing, I'll give ya $1500 for it :-) nmrwbadley
Aug 16, 2002 7:21 AM
re: Fred Calfee?paulw
Aug 16, 2002 7:23 AM
That's set up almost exactly like my Seven Alaris. Fred? I don't know and I don't care. It's comfortable. When you're 6'1" with a 36" inseam, the bike is going to look goofy no matter what.

One other thing, in a structure like a stem holding handlebars, the lightest and strongest way to do it is a straight piece. That means flipping the stem is the way to go.
re: Fred Calfee?maximum15
Aug 16, 2002 8:55 AM
I have been debating switching to threadless on my Trek, but have decided I really like the look of a good, clean quill stem better. Yesterday I rode the mtn bike to work for a change and noticed something on the way in. The angle of the stem on it (threadless) is 90 degrees to the straight forks. This looks good to me. But a stem that is not 90 degrees to the fork looks bad to me and I think that is why I don't like a lot (not all) of the road bikes I see with threadless. Not knocking the bike, I just think if you are threadless, the angle should be 90 degrees to the forks. My 2 cents.
re: Fred Calfee?mja
Aug 16, 2002 9:04 AM
That resembles so closely my current setup -- o.k., so I don't have a Calfee! But, seriously, look at the lines of a bike: The seatpost extends the line of the seat tube, and the fork extends the line of the head tube. But nothing extends the line of either the down tube, seat stays, or chain stays. So why is it more or less aesthetically pleasing that the stem extends the line of the top tube?
sized too small...C-40
Aug 17, 2002 6:12 AM
The amount of seat post showing indicates that a 2cm larger frame should have been selected.

The saddle is also pushed all the way forward, indicating either a geometry problem or ignorance about using the saddle to to adjust the knee position instead of the reach to the bars.

Overall, the frame size and geometry looks poorly suited to the rider.