Current Projects chat and miscellany

that will turn out nice!

^^ Are those butchered STI levers on it?

Changed the bars for Spotterbars® (can we say that for OS compacts too ?)
Changed the Centaur 10s cassette for a Record
New pedals
New cabling

No - they are SRAM s500 brake levers

To be honest though, I think they are factory butchered, there are massive gaping holes on the underside of the levers where the gear shifters are supposed to be

^^ Are those butchered STI levers on it?

Steeper head tube angle = Faster steering
More rake = Faster steering

Whereas,

Slack head tube = Slow and steady steering
Less rake = Slow and steady steering

I'm still not convinced by all this. If you're tightening the HT you're moving the wheel axles closer but if you make the forks have more rake you're moving them out again? How can that achieve the same characteristics then?

I've always been in the mind set that tight HTs, small rakes, short wheelbase and short stems makes a bike twitchy. This mindset was formed in the world of bmx though, where it seems there is no such thing as an industry standard

Noob question, I never actually installed a 1'1/8" headset, only 1" headsets, how do you install them? I'm confused, i always thought you just press them in but it seems you need a huge tool, maybe i'm better off going to my lbs? just rather do it at home if possible, can some one clear that up for me? Thanks.

It's for my steamroller by the way, no idea if that makes a difference.

The huge tool would be a headset press - you can just press them in but i normally use a block of 2x4 and a rubber mallet

you just need to make sure the headset cups go in straight and fit flush

And that's assuming you meant 1 1/8" threadless

No - they are SRAM s500 brake levers

To be honest though, I think they are factory butchered, there are massive gaping holes on the underside of the levers where the gear shifters are supposed to be

Quite normal, only the Campagnolo Record singlespeed levers managed to fill in the gaping holes.

The rubber hood still have cut out for the shifter thought.

Quite normal, only the Campagnolo Record singlespeed levers managed to fill in the gaping holes.

The rubber hood still have cut out for the shifter thought.

Any recommendations for a smaller lever? Not convinced by the SRAM - would prefer something that doesn't feel so long

Quite normal, only the Campagnolo Record singlespeed levers managed to fill in the gaping holes.

The rubber hood still have cut out for the shifter thought.

The $30 Tektro RL520 are not butchered, have a strong spring that prevent rattling when using a dummy lever, and can be found in black or silver. I don't understand why everyone insists on getting Campagnolo or SRAM and not these (or the Cane Creek SRC-5C ones which I didn't try).

Shimano's singlespeed levers are very nice, the R400 a bit flexy, haven't tried the R600 which I assumed should be less flexy.

Having said that, it's quite a personal choice, the Shimano and Campag levers are reasonably small.

The $30 Tektro RL520 are not butchered, have a strong spring that prevent rattling when using a dummy lever, and can be found in black or silver. I don't understand why everyone insists on getting Campagnolo or SRAM and not these (or the Can Creek ones).[/IMG]

I'm talking about butchered levers specifically rather than those stand-alone singlespeed one, the obvious answer to why people go for those expensive levers is that the shape and feel are great, especially the SRAM, unfortunately I too found the SRAM to feel quite bulky despite having a great levers shape.

I got Campagnolo Record singlespeed levers simply because they were really comfortable, luckily got them second hand, however given that Campagnolo are easy to service, you can get a cheap Xenon set second hand and removed the shifting part.

The shape and feel of the Tektro is also great. And I have Records hoods on the road bike (the Look on this page above) so I can compare.

The $30 Tektro RL520 are not butchered, have a strong spring that prevent rattling when using a dummy lever, and can be found in black or silver. I don't understand why everyone insists on getting Campagnolo or SRAM and not these (or the Cane Creek SRC-5C ones which I didn't try).

I tried the Tektro levers but found the hoods quite hard, when using for any length of time my palms would start to tingle. SRAM's are softer but massive in the hand....

could be anything, too much pressure on the handlebar, saddle not tilted horizontally (or nosed up a bit) etc.

used to get really bad tingle on my palm, quick adjustment on saddle removed it.

used to get really bad tingle on my palm, a few extra spacers removed it.

could'nt resist

I now have a set of the SRAMs; I found the Tektro/Cane Creeks had too much of a valley for me. I still need to install, but the shape seems much more what I'm looking for. (Thanks to _tester for the suggestion)

^^ It's not the head tube or rake per se, it's mostly about the trail that results from the combination of those factors.

This is probably the article you're thinking of, that mentions the touring bike characteristics:

http://www.cyclingtips.com.au/2011/02/the-geometry-of-bike-handling/

But it's not because they're used at slower speeds. The lower bottom bracket and longer chainstays improves their high-speed characteristics, not worsens them.

I think there's a popular misconception that track bikes are better handling, or faster handling than road bikes. They're inherently less stable, but within such a range that it doesn't create problems for the rider.

That wasn't the article I was thinking of, but I have read it and it'll do!

It is indeed the smaller a trail is (distance from a imaginary line from in the same angle, and from, the head tube center, to the point directly under the front axle), the faster its front end handling.

But, as you say, the rear end handling (you steer with the back of the bike too!) is also dependent on the BB drop and chain stay length.

More BB drop means we can apply our weight to make a lower center of gravity and use that to control the rear end, like how we hunker down into a corner, it equates to easier and better control of the bike.

Chain stay length seems to go that the longer the stays are, the better the ride quality... yes, I did just say tight rear clearances aren't necessarily better!

They have traditionally used shorter stays because of the stiffness needed that they simply didn't have from the material technologies, but we've advanced a hell of a lot from the 60s - 70s, and having chain stays as short as possible simply isn't needed anymore as we have much better materials, but can also shape the materials in incredibly stiffer shapes with varying sidewall thicknesses.

I'm still not convinced by all this. If you're tightening the HT you're moving the wheel axles closer but if you make the forks have more rake you're moving them out again? How can that achieve the same characteristics then?

I've always been in the mind set that tight HTs, small rakes, short wheelbase and short stems makes a bike twitchy. This mindset was formed in the world of bmx though, where it seems there is no such thing as an industry standard

Wheelbase length does effect things, a long train is very stable at high speeds, but its cornering radius is horrific compared to a sports wheelchair for instance, which can turn on the spot, but I wouldn't want to be in a wheelchair doing a ton down the M4!

So the wheelbase of your frame is a balance between speed stability and agility.

When you're driving, you use larger movements the slower you're going, but if you used that same movement doing a ton down the M4, what's gonna happen?

So, faster bikes actually need to steer slower.

If you measure the actual distance traveled by a short rake fork and that of a longer rake fork, which fork moves the furthest?

Its the longer rake fork that moves the most, not something you want to happen at speed with an already twitchy frame because of its high BB, short wheelbase, and steep head tube angle, which is why track bikes have to have less rake to be stable enough to ride.

Please someone explain it better if I've not got it right or it isn't clear!

I fitted a fork with less rake to the smash and it made the steering twitchier, which I liked.

Due to this practical experiment I will now ignore any other posts on the matter, including the above, which seems like speculation rather than fact.

My opinion, a fast bike would want twitchier steering for sharper manoeuvring in dicey situations. Touring bikes with more rake have more relaxed stable steering due to long hours on the road and load bearing.

Have a look at the link Regal posted, it explains it better than I can, and is written by a frame builder to boot.

And I'm sorry to say TM, but if the two forks had the same axle to crown length, it is impossible for the shorter rake fork to have been twitchier/faster unless it was also more flexible, and that was the flex that made it feel "twitchier".

I've read papers, interviews, and advice from frame builders and other knowledgeable bods and they all agree, less trail = faster handling, and less rake = more trail, not less.

This is another article that explains some of it - http://www.dclxvi.org/chunk/tech/trail/

This is the one I was trying to find though! - http://davesbikeblog.blogspot.co.uk/2007/05/trail-fork-rake-and-little-bit-of.html

Quote from a motorbike site explaining trail characteristics -

Too litte trail:
With negative or too little trail the bike will handle well at low speeds but will easily develop a dangerous wobble at high speed.

Normal Trail:
The trail should be... (motorcycle correct distance) so that the bike handles easily at both high and low speeds.

Too much Trail:
You will have trouble balancing the bike at low speeds and it will handle sluggishly at high speeds.

The huge tool would be a headset press - you can just press them in but i normally use a block of 2x4 and a rubber mallet

you just need to make sure the headset cups go in straight and fit flush

Okay thanks, I think ill just take the frame over to my lbs and let them do it

Yes its 1'1/8" threadless

Personaly think, Twitchy = more control, when your used to it