RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 61, Issue 103


Example: Production Builders:Frejus

From: "Kenneth Freeman" <ken4bikes@att.net>
To: "'Emily O'Brien'" <emilyonwheels@emilysdomain.org>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <20080131043603.21000.qmail@server291.com>
Subject: RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 61, Issue 103
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:48:50 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20080131043603.21000.qmail@server291.com>
Thread-Index: AchlRnhFV8xnLwqASS23TJuTOh9p/QAW0GMg


Thinking about frame angles: I have two Italian or Italian style frames of the early '80s, with the same steep seat tube angle. My 1980 Masi and my '82 or '83 Mondonico are both 52/53 cm frames with 75 degree seat tube angles.

Is this a convention of the times? Is it a convention that is held today in performance bikes? Is it just luck?

The other dimensions, chainstay, top tube, front center, and head angle , are rather different.

Ken Freeman Ann Arbor, MI USA

-----Original Message----- From: classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org [mailto:classicrendezvous-bounces@bikelist.org] On Behalf Of Emily O'Brien Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 11:36 PM To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org; classicrendezvous@bikelist.org Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 61, Issue 103


> I'd factor in huge improvements in road surfaces. I've had guys
> INSIST my PX-10 is a "touring" geometry and not racing! That shows
> you how angles, top tube lengths and fork rakes have changed as road
> surfaces have improved. How many modern cyclists even know why racing
> cyclists wore goggles up to about the mid 1950s?

Another difference is how pro races work, and how the format has changed. Stages of the Tour de France have gotten shorter, but they've also gotten faster. When it started, support wasn't allowed at all; now those guys don't even take a piss without help. They don't have to ride for nearly as long at a stretch, but they have to go a lot faster.
> When you look at old bikes, you begin to realize that much of the
> technology changed because riding styles changed, and on the other
> hand, riding styles changed because technology changed.

Those are the things I'm curious about; after all, it's always a two way street. It does make me speculate about how the geometry or ride styles from different periods might suit different riders or body types in different ways. Seat tube angles, for example, will vary partly with the usage, partly with style over time, but partly with the biomechanics of an individual rider's leg and the requirements of what they're doing.

I'm not so much interested in any one period in particular; just whatever periods people care to talk about.

Emily O'Brien
Medford, MA