|Sloping Toptube - is the headtube really taller?||Fez|
Sep 3, 2003 8:29 AM
|I'm asking a real general question here:
Shouldn't a sloping toptube slope so the place where the toptube intersects the headtube actually be higher than conventional geometry? The result would be a taller headtube.
My general observation is that the toptube is no higher where it hits the headtube. Therefore all the slope is the result of the lower seattube/toptube intersection.
I notice that the effective headtubes aren't much higher for sloping frames, after you adjust for the internal headset design (vs. conventional).
If sloping geo used the center of the toptube as a seesaw, the headtubes would be taller and the standover would be increased. Instead, all I notice is the lower standover.
Anybody have more insight on this?
|re: Sloping Toptube - is the headtube really taller?||Nessism|
Sep 3, 2003 8:45 AM
|I think most designers have left head tube length alone and just dropped the top tube attachment point to the seat tube. The only advantage to raising the head tube would be to reduce the number of spacers needed on the steerer.
Sep 3, 2003 9:00 AM
|re: Sloping Toptube - is the headtube really taller?||MR_GRUMPY|
Sep 3, 2003 9:49 AM
|The only manufacturer that I know that has larger headtubes on their sloping frames, is Gunnar. Because of that, I was able to build my bike up without using any spacers with a -6 deg. stem.|
|the new Lemonds||laffeaux|
Sep 3, 2003 11:30 AM
|For 2004 Lemond has increased the headtube length above the top tube.|| |