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 )


Eddy Merckx Majestic Information?(7 posts)

Eddy Merckx Majestic Information?Fez
Jan 15, 2004 6:56 AM
Anyone have any information on how the bike rides?

Is it unique from "other" Ti bikes? And does the Merckx geometry translate into a different ride?

Its listed as a 2004 model on competitive cyclist, but it is not on the www.eddymerckx.be site. I'd also like to get the headtube, front center and rake dimensions.

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=PRODUCT&PRODUCT.ID=52
My experienceAFred
Jan 15, 2004 7:39 AM
I just traded in a 55cm Litespeed Classic for a 54cm Majestic through River City Bikes, and couldn't be happier. I also own both the Team SC and the Fuga, and find that Merckx Century Geometry fits me best of all non-custom bikes.

The Majestic is basically a Classic built with Merckx geometry. Also, the tubes are slightly different; the Majestic ovals out at the bottom bracket. I find that Majestic is a bit stiffer than the Classic as a result. None of the Merckx models that I know of have curved seatstays. Many other ti bikes have curved or carbon stays, but I do not believe it's necessary on this traditional frame. The Ouzo fork, is as always, excellent.

It's not the lightest bike on the road, or the most responsive. With '04 Chorus and Open Pros, mine comes in over 17 lbs. It's also no slug. IMHO it's a great all-day ride, especially over rough pavement. It's smooth, very comfortable and reliable.

I understand that the Majestic has been dropped from the '04 line, but I had no problem with dealers locating my size. I believe that the Century Geometry chart on the cbike and Merckx sites apply to all non-sloping frames. My Majestic has identical angles to similarly sized other frames listed on the chart. Contact Gita for more details. Good luck.
re: Eddy Merckx Majestic Information?bigdeal
Jan 15, 2004 9:51 AM
Rake is 43

I have one, LOVE IT. The entire downtube is ovalized and the seat tube ovalizes near the bb, very nice. Built by Litespeed but the similarities end there. As a result of loving the geometry I purchased a Team SC, we'll see how that goes as it's being built right now.
re: Eddy Merckx Majestic Information?Overhill
Jan 15, 2004 10:01 AM
Fez, I think you will be happy with a Majestic. I had a 2002 model, and rode it for about a year. I sold it, as it felt slightly small, even as I rode it more. I measure at a 57, c-c, but am usually better off with a 58. My Majestic was a 57. I probably have all the specs for a 57. Let me know if those would help. I bought the Merckx over a Lemond ti and a Lightspeed Tuscany. I thought it had a slightly better ride, and I live in an area of rough roads. So why did I sell? I planned to either buy a carbon [Look] or a larger Majestic. But I started riding my old steel bike and am really enjoying it. I believe that the 2003 Majestic has the same specs as the 2002, except that the BB is 6/4 ti on the 2003. My bike came from Competitive Cycling.
I strongly recommend the bike, based on my experiences with it. Plenty stiff, although I am no powerhouse. Weight was a little over 17, with Campy Record. Handling was nice, and I felt confident with cornering. Good luck.
re: Eddy Merckx Majestic Information?Fez
Jan 15, 2004 11:01 AM
Out on the road, how does "Eddy Merckx Century Geometry" differ from something like Litespeed Vortex or Tuscany geometry? The Merckx chart is somewhat incomplete, but many have said it rides and handles different from Litespeeds.

I'm looking at the equivalent 53-54ish sizes. The seat angles and fork rakes are not that different between the 2 brands. So what other differences could there be? Merckx doesn't publish BB height, chainstay length or front center/wheelbase dimensions.
Merckx Ex vs Vortexboneman
Jan 15, 2004 1:23 PM
I have a Merckx EX in a 51. In the smaller size, I really don't remember the larger sizes, the Merckx 'Century' geometry has more setback than the Litespeed's. The seat tube angle, in equivalent sizes, is slight less steep than the Litespeeds. I also have a Vortex for comparison. As a result the top tube is slightly longer. BB height is lower on the Merckx as well and the front triangle is slightly longer. Handling's different and descending is more stable on my EX than my Vortex. Subtle but different. My Ex is currently in Stateside storage so I don't have the specs. at hand.

However, Gitabikes, their distributor in the States, should be able to give you more detail if you send them an email as I find them quite responsive.
Merckx vs. LSNessism
Jan 15, 2004 11:07 PM
First off you need to know the exact size you are going to need. Litespeed measures center to top while Merckx measures center to center. Assuming you ride a 54 Merckx you are going to need a 55 Litespeed.

This discussion is right up my alley since I have owned both a 54 cm Merckx EX and 55 cm 2001 Litespeed Tuscany. Comparing the geometery between the two, the Litespeed has a slacker seat tube angle; 73 degrees for the LS vs. 73.8 degrees for the Merckx (Merckx specs show angles in degrees, minuets which requires a conversion to change into decimal degrees for compairson). The LS also has a longer top tube; 55.5 cm vs. 54.8 mm.

The Majestic is quite close to LS Tuscany in terms of tube sizes. In fact, I think they share the same down tube which starts out as a 1.5 inch tube and gets ovalized vertically in common LS fashion these days. In terms of BB drop, LS is 7.1 cm vs. 7.3 for the Merckx.

Bottom line is to get the frame that fits you best.

Ed