Lo Pros, Represent

There are ways of making them more comfortable:

Woah, that's ugly

if it wasn't designed to replicate the drop bar position when using bull horns, it isn't a lo-pro.

The fact that the position looks ok with drops on it is the proof that it clearly isn't lo-pro. Bikes have been built with sloping top tubes for at least a century to get normal bars a bit lower without having to use an extended seat post, but they were not lo-pro then and they aren't now.

+100

Woah, that's ugly

Woah, that's timely

Eh yeah sorry, don't be on often, based in Glasgow. My Lo-Pro photo on the way

no problem take your time

My old re-welded Bianchi pursuit.
Do I need to say I sold to a smaller person shorly after I built it ;)
http://velospace.org/node/25435

Portra 160 VC? Nice choice.

Portra 160 VC? Nice choice.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Although I do love a bit of NC too...

Theory swine, or anyone else, any idea what bars are on that bike?
Attached Thumbnails

Yep, they're '3ttt Synthesis Stem and el cheapo chopped risers'. It's on Velospace.org, and that's how the owner describes them

Think I had both NC and VC there, some Provia also.

@11bizztool
It´s a 52t front and a 18t in the back.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Although I do love a bit of NC* more*...

fixed (they're both great)

MINE:

Thanks Theoryswine, much obliged.

what is the technical advantage of a lo pro?

1.
In those days, people thought it might reduce the Cw and/or front surface

2.
TTT and team pursuit were popular disciplines (olympic and WC)
Small front wheel reduced distance to front rider by 1 - 2" or so.
Gazelle combined it with very short chain stays, so the total advantage was approx 5 to 6 cm. Which is ... x3 for a team of 4 riders.

1. 
   Main reason:
   The handlebars allowed for just one position: most aerodynamic "tuck" position.
   Racer was almost not able to shift to a more comfortable but less aerodynamic (top bar or hands on brake levers) position.
   
   

All 1980's theory...

Those are the reasons I give out when people ask about mine, also you presumably get a lighter wheel with a smaller diameter, radially laced front (set of spokes for a wheel is surprisingly heavy). A marginal advantage, but there none the less.

1.
In those days, people thought it might reduce the Cw and/or front surface

2.
TTT and team pursuit were popular disciplines (olympic and WC)
Small front wheel reduced distance to front rider by 1 - 2" or so.
Gazelle combined it with very short chain stays, so the total advantage was approx 5 to 6 cm. Which is ... x3 for a team of 4 riders.

1. 
   Main reason:
   The handlebars allowed for just one position: most aerodynamic "tuck" position.
   Racer was almost not able to shift to a more comfortable but less aerodynamic (top bar or hands on brake levers) position.
   
   

All 1980's theory...

Also your body is more forward than usual, especially with steep seat and head tube meaning more weight on hand (AFAIK).

Also your body is more forward than usual, especially with steep seat and head tube meaning more weight on hand (AFAIK).

Then you know nothing. As originally conceived, the lo-pro did not make any adjustment to the position a rider already had on a drop-bar bike with 2 full-sized wheels. It was simply a rearrangement of the structure to get the 3 contact points in exactly the same place as before by a different route.

Then you know nothing. As originally conceived, the lo-pro did not make any adjustment to the position a rider already had on a drop-bar bike with 2 full-sized wheels. It was simply a rearrangement of the structure to get the 3 contact points in exactly the same place as before by a different route.

burn!

That I got, what about the time trial position where the seat tube is vertical?

That I got, what about the time trial position where the seat tube is vertical?

That's a later development which seems to have transferred from triathlon, and has been seen on drop-bar bikes too, so it's not necessary to go to a lo-pro even to make such radical changes to position. As I pointed out earlier, setting the drop bar very low has also been achieved with a sloping top tube for over a century, and Dave Lloyd experimented with a small front wheel to lower his drop bar before lo-pros arrived on the domestic TT scene.

my current build project taking shape

nice bike... answer my PM

1.
In those days, people thought it might reduce the Cw and/or front surface

2.
TTT and team pursuit were popular disciplines (olympic and WC)
Small front wheel reduced distance to front rider by 1 - 2" or so.
Gazelle combined it with very short chain stays, so the total advantage was approx 5 to 6 cm. Which is ... x3 for a team of 4 riders.

1. 
   Main reason:
   The handlebars allowed for just one position: most aerodynamic "tuck" position.
   Racer was almost not able to shift to a more comfortable but less aerodynamic (top bar or hands on brake levers) position.
   
   

All 1980's theory...

The second one is actually the main reason. They were developed for the team pursuit, I think by the old eastern block countries. It is why initially they had 24inch wheels before evolving to 26inch ones.

Finally all the parts are together. Just need to wait a few weeks until I have the cash to send it off to either Argos or Atlantic Boulevard for paint/chrome (slightly orangey yellow with crome forks and stays up until the end of the rim). And I have a new plain black tub for the front, but I haven't summoned the balls to put that on yet.

Why crosstop levers?

Cos you'd never get down on those drops :)