RoadBikeReview.com'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 )


I need a new pet project - should I build this up?(12 posts)

I need a new pet project - should I build this up?Fez
May 7, 2003 6:36 AM
http://www.specialized.com/SBCBkModel.jsp?san=03SWorksE5WCRoadFrameset&bl=top&my=2003

Is this frame beautiful or is it too presumptuous for the ordinary man to ride (excessive use of world championship colors)?

The stock Specialized E5 complete bike is red and the Mario edition is black and white zebra; neither of which I was crazy about. But the World Championship Frameset kind of caught my eye.

And anyone ride this frame and want to comment on how she rides?

Red:
http://www.specialized.com/SBCBkModel.jsp?san=03SWorksE5Road&bl=top&my=2003

Zebra:

http://www.specialized.com/SBCBkModel.jsp?san=03SWorksE5Frameset&bl=top&my=2003
Fondriest for me...C-40
May 7, 2003 7:57 AM
Haven't owned a second road bike for several years. Couldn't resist the deal on this Fondriest, reduced from $1400 to $800, including a carbon steerer fork and sealed cartridge bearing headset.

http://www.fondriest-usa.com/frameset.php?frame=madonna

Got a red 51cm frame yesterday. Pretty nice frame for the money. Wanted to try compact geometry. The short head tube length will require at least a 1cm steering tube spacer. If that doesn't do it, the stem gets flipped.

Won't complete the build until I move to Denver.
Correct size?Fez
May 7, 2003 8:27 AM
Looked at the frame geometries. What made you choose 51 over 54?
TT and HT...C-40
May 7, 2003 8:50 AM
Currently riding a 74 STA with 54cm TT, 150mm headtube (with headset) and 100mm stem.

The 51 will fit me like a compact frame is intended. An additional 5cm of seatpost will be exposed. The total seat tube length is 5cm less than my 54cm Colnago. The 51cm will allow me to use a 110-120 stem, with it's effective 52.5cm TT (compared to my Colnago). I haven't installed the headset yet, but I think the total HT length will be slightly less than the advertised 140mm (maybe 137mm).

The larger size would have placed the bars higher than I need and the stem length would be less than 100mm. Not a good choice. Maybe OK for someone wanting a "touring" setup.
TT and HT...Fez
May 7, 2003 9:20 AM
You wrote:

"The 51 will fit me like a compact frame is intended."

I don't think there is any generally accepted standard of what defines compact, other than the sloping top tube. Some brands have steeper slope than others.

In theory, I don't think one has to size down when getting a compact. In reality, because of the fewer available sizes, sizing down may occur frequently.

In this specific case, there was a 2cm difference in between TOP tubes (taking into consideration seat tube angle, which is identical).

As a Colnago rider, that should have come as a shock, since Colnago makes nominal sizes in 1cm increments and the top tube difference is usually less that in between each incremental size.
the definition of compact...C-40
May 7, 2003 10:24 AM
Click on the geometry icon on the Fondriest main page and it explains that they make frames with 5cm of slope and 2cm of slope. The Madonna di Campiglio has 5cm of slope. Makes perfect sense to select the frame with a ST length that is 5cm smaller than what I ride now. I did not down-size with my frame selection. The TT length selection also makes perfect sense. Much rather ride a 110 stem than a 90.

The TT lengths make sense to me. Five frame sizes cover a large size range. There must be some large increments in the dimensions. On some brands, what does not make sense is offering a 53cm frame with a 74 STA and a 55cm with a 73 STA that have the same effective top tube length. This seems to be quite common.
clarificationFez
May 7, 2003 12:18 PM
The 53 and 55 you cite in your hypothetical example yields the same effective top tube length. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a company that does this.

If we use Litespeed, Lemond, or some other major brands as a practical example, there is a small (often less than 1cm) difference in effective top tube. However the other major differences between the 53 and 55 would be standover and headtube length, among other things.

You say you would rather ride a 110 stem than a 90. Why settle for either of the 2? It would be nice if they made an intermediary frame size so you could run a 100. With that would come a little taller headtube than the smaller size. The smaller size frame might put you dangerously close to spacer and riser stem territory :P
nonsense...C-40
May 7, 2003 1:27 PM
You haven't analyzed many geometry charts. Take Litespeed for instance. A 53cm with a 54cm TT length has an effctive TT length that is only 3mm less that a 55cm with a 73 STA and 55.5cm TT. About as close to the same as you can get. Why make a frame significantly taller, but hardly any longer?

Why ride a 110mm stem? It's exactly in the middle of the most common 90-130 range. I've used a 110 on almost every frame I've owned for the last 15 years. Using a 100 or a 120 is not better worse. I've used all three lengths while experimenting with saddle position on my C-40.

If you want the widest range of saddle adjustment, riding a 110 makes perfect sense.
if we use your example...Fez
May 7, 2003 1:47 PM
I have seen plenty of geometry charts. Sure the charts are important, but so is riding the bike.

The Litespeed 53 and 55 are similar in terms of reach. But like I said, the standover heigh and headtube length are different, which is reason enough to produce the different sizes.

And the front center dimension is only the same provided the 53 uses a 45mm rake fork and the 55 uses a 40mm rake fork. The head angles are the same. So absent the stock spec'd forks, the frames will have different front center dimensions if the specific fork rake dimension is disregarded.

So actually, the 53 and 55 frames are very different, despite the nearly identical top tube figures.

The important thing is that the rider takes all these into account when selecting a particular frame size.
the definition of compact...C-40
May 7, 2003 1:05 PM
Click on the geometry icon on the Fondriest main page and it explains that they make frames with 5cm of slope and 2cm of slope. The Madonna di Campiglio has 5cm of slope. Makes perfect sense to select the frame with a ST length that is 5cm smaller than what I ride now. I did not down-size with my frame selection. The TT length selection also makes perfect sense. Much rather ride a 110 stem than a 90.

The TT lengths make sense to me. Five frame sizes cover a large size range. There must be some large increments in the dimensions. On some brands, what does not make sense is offering a 53cm frame with a 74 STA and a 55cm with a 73 STA that have the same effective top tube length. This seems to be quite common.
Expected ride characteristics???CaliforniaDreaming
May 7, 2003 1:26 PM
How do you expect the Fondriest to ride? I've been watching the frame also. Seems like a great frame for the price point. I've never ridden a Fondriest. Do you have any experiences with the company's geometries?

Thanks.
haven't a clue...C-40
May 7, 2003 6:54 PM
Since the frame was bargain priced, I decided to try it, even though I've warned other lightweight riders to avoid aluminum. The tubes are certainly substantial looking, so I don't expect an overly cushy ride. When you weigh 135, even a C-40 isn't cushy.

Fondriest doesn't list their head tube angle. Several Italian companies follow this philosophy. The rest of the geometry is pretty standard stuff. They have a very thorough chart on their website, which includes the head tube length that many companies don't bother to list.

The slope of the top tube is not as large as advertised. As best I can tell, it's a lot closer to a 3.5 slope than 5cm. Makes sense, since the ST is 5cm shorter than my horizontal TT frame, and the head tube is 1.5cm shorter.