SSCX Only!

the chain just barely clears the chainstay even with 39x17, so no way it would with 11-28 cassette with 1x10.

Chainstay is elevated when it should be at most on the same level as the axle. This is because those dropouts are designed to work with rolhoff and not derailleur gears.

return of the winter. Meh. No proper rides in near future so changed to flats for commuting.

Quoted for new page -- that setup is sweet!

hmm, I got no clue about these low-trail-geos, but is that low trail to compensate for large contact patch of the 45mm(?) tyres? I wonder would that ride well with 25mm on the road. Got 59mm on 33mm tyres on my orlowski.

Not really, as road bike also have similar trail as your and run 23mm tyres.

Currently I'm getting a custom low trail bike build that'll be suitable for both touring and CX, the headtube will be massive, so someone on here who usually run 56-58cm TT can borrow my low trail bike with a 130-140mm stem to see how it is.

I just rethinked my pursuit scrambler and started thinking about having a custom frame made by Mielec:

super short top tube, because of me having short arms (t-rex issue)
60cm CC ST, 54cm CC TT, 700x35 cyclocross tyres, AMP F1 forks (instead of the standard forks in the image)

www.bikecad.ca/1394991095223

the forks already exist in my parts bin: the 28" version of these AMP F1, shortened to 700x35 tyre size:

What do you think?

Why don't you just buy a hybride or a 29er?

or my GT ;)

I want something super-compact and super-short, but nonetheless suspension and 700x35 tyres.

(and I need a slightly negative sloping top tube because of my very personal taste)

not sure what to think, it is your bike and very specific to what you need so I can't really comment on it as not the sort of thing I would want.

why the insistence on those forks? Never ridden a pair but I'm guessing they're heavy and perform pretty terribly compared to a modern suspension fork. If you're after more comfort I'd ensure you have clearance for 1.8"-2" tyres and use a rigid fork.

have you ever cyclocrossed? do not understand the pursuit top tube.

as outlined before, this bike will not be used for cyclocross purposes, but in the city

j.dennis: because I love their unique concept

btw, technically they are still superior to all modern suspension forks in their response characteristics,
due to the true parallelogram construction

Is that what goes through your head when you hit tree roots?

jetski, do it.
saw this one at my school a few years ago and loved it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/736040/ostro.jpg

as outlined before, this bike will not be used for cyclocross purposes, but in the city

but this is the cyclocross thread

by the way, another big advantage of AMP forks is that the forks move towards up and forwards when they compress, not just straight up like normal suspension forks.

because of that you can build more compact/tighter suspension frames as there is no problem with the tyre colliding with the downtube.

where are you going to ride this bike?

I find it quite hard to comprehend why someone would like to have really heavy fork on their city bike for no practical reason.

also, isnt there interference with the suspension parts of the fork and the downtube?

also, isnt there interference with the suspension parts of the fork and the downtube?

.

by the way, another big advantage of AMP forks is that the forks move towards up and forwards when they compress, not just straight up like normal suspension forks.
because of that you can build more compact/tighter suspension frames as there is no problem with the tyre colliding with the downtube.

where are you going to ride this bike?

I find it quite hard to comprehend why someone would like to have really heavy fork on their city bike for no practical reason.

90% city (rough city = berlin, i.e. lots of cobble stone, roads of **very **varying quality, high kerbstones), 10% woods (tiergarten - yes it's a park, but not a british nice smooth garden-like park, more like actual woods)

I dont mean the tyre but the fork itself.

I dont mean the tyre but the fork itself.

nope, it's actually a more compact design than one would think

A bigger tyres with wide rims set at a lower pressure would make a bigger difference, especially with a normal fork that'll shave off 1kg easily.

Having said that, it is your bike, and if you want to go for that Paris-Roubaix look, go for it.

I just rethinked my pursuit scrambler and started thinking about having a custom frame made by Mielec:

super short top tube, because of me having short arms (t-rex issue)
60cm CC ST, 54cm CC TT, 700x35 cyclocross tyres, AMP F1 forks (instead of the standard forks in the image)

www.bikecad.ca/1394991095223

the forks already exist in my parts bin: the 28" version of these AMP F1, shortened to 700x35 tyre size:

What do you think?

I think you have not a fucking clue.

The forks move up and back when they compress. Not forward. They have crappy bushings and wobble. They have a falling compression ratio. Historically a fun fork. But hardly functional.

With a wheelbase that short and steep headtube you're going to feel like you're falling over the front wheel.

Anyway I'm not going to get any further involved an an armchair frame building debate, but this is just ridiculous.