Cycles In Motion 650b Randonneur

Looks great.

Is the triple triangle purely for aesthetics or was it needed to get the correct chain stay length / seat tube angle? always wondered.

It’s mainly to look in proportion.

It make the 53cm top tube look longer than it is, and the frame smaller than it is.

This is also why the cantilever brake cable is at an awkward angle due to the seat stay being lowered than usual otherwise had the seat stay met at the seat clamp, the cable would be parallel to the seat stay.

The other reason is simply that it make the bike look a little more unique on top of the custom made fork crown (will need to take photos of that).

The q-factor with the 113mm bottom bracket is 142mm with decent clearance between crank and chainstay.

Why not adopt the elegant GT cable routing method?

1 Attachment

It might be more appropriate to say that's the Routens style.

That simply make it more complicated.

Last thing I want in an audax with a puncture in the shivering cold.

1 degree steeper seat tube made a difference (1 degree = approx 1cm forward)

1 Attachment

You could always rock that Nitto s66. Should look fun

Hah, useful to know, would be useful before selling the Steamroller!

Leaving the bike at work for the time being so I can go through it, add stuff, cloth tape, etc.

It made the Oak look less in proportion.

1 Attachment

Both are proper lovely Ed. Neither are bikes I could see myself needing but clearly very well thought out details. Only, why 31.8 seatpost on the Cycles in Motion? Must be very stiff especially with a Thomson no?

Also id on the bars used? Assuming theyre the same for both bikes. Looks neoclassic but in what I assume is 26.0

31.8mm is an odd choice but I did tell the builder to choose what tubing he feel is best.

Do bear in mind that the bike is a lightweight steel bike with clearance for 42mm tyres, seatpost make almost fuck all difference unless the bike is incredibly stiff with high pressure tyres.

TL:DR; right tyres sizes and pressure make a bigger difference than seatpost stiffness/diameter.

As for bar, they are the Grand Bois/Compass Mae shape with a huge 105mm reach.

seatpost make almost fuck all difference

Hmm any data to back this up? Just playing devils advocate really as everything I've seen from @MechaMorgan about this suggests something like seatposts making up to 20psi of difference. Curious really as I have a 27.2 inline thomson on my incredibly stiff OS Zona cross bike

I had the Genesis Volare with the same seat post, a lots more post showing but it was quite stiff and a carbon post would make a significant difference on that bike (running 28mm tyres).

I believe that modern stiff bike need a lots of component that reduced vibration considerably such as a carbon bar and seatpost, maybe those futureshock steerer, that rear rubber suspension from the Trek Domane etc. To make up for the higher pressure narrower tyres.

But when you go for a much wider tyres, standard stem, bar, seatpost etc. won.t provide a noticeable difference, or any.

Your cross bike is a cross bike, where you’re probably running 35psi for cross, highly doubt a carbon post will provide addditional comfort that’s noticeable to you on top of this.

Different materials will respond to different 'frequency' vibrations I reckon

So you built a bike around a saddle?

Built and finished, providing photographic proof...

Still quicker than DBAD.

Both fantastic bikes. Two of my favourites from the forum.

So you built a bike around a saddle?

Yup, what would you do? Build it around a brakes?

Tbf its a custom bike. The frame has been built around the saddle, brakes, hubs, tyres, bars, levers, cranks etc

That is true, especially as the braze on hanger is brazed low enough for running a 46t chainring (unlike the Oak that can’t be set lower than 48t).

Wish more manufacturers did this.
Proportions look great on this, though we're gonna need some scoblebrick evidence soon.

Are there any disadvantages to a band-on FD - more of a pain to set up? I've always shied away from braze-ons for just this reason.

Are there any disadvantages to a band-on FD.

In theory, braze-on are stiffer, however having said that there is no reason why a band-on won't work equally as well, I'd says a band-on is better allowing a greater flexibility in chainring sizes.

I originally asked for band-on, but decided to just go for braze on, because it's just nicer and tidier.

Have you gone even thinner on the tyres on the new one, or is that a trick of the light? Also what happened to your VBC crank on the Oak?