RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 7

(Example: Events:Cirque du Cyclisme:2002)

From: "devotion finesse" <devotion_finesse@hotmail.com>
To: Andrew R Stewart <onetenth@earthlink.net>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 7
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 19:24:05 -0500
In-Reply-To: <425BBF8CE569427E8F78026CE177B090@AndrewRStewaPC>
References: <MONKEYFOODDCZx4FR0r0000004b@monkeyfood.nt.phred.org>


I recently came across a Nuovo Record equipped bike badged "Cyclery North" locked up to a fence here in Brooklyn. A nice royal blue color with red and cream decals...Only upon closer inspection, it had "Pogliaghi" stamped ont o the stay caps and "PSM" on the seat lug cluster. Yes, I went into all su rrounding business. Yes, I found the owner. No, he would not sell me the b ike.

Matthew Bowne leaving no stone unturned in Brooklyn, New York.

----------------------------------------
> From: onetenth@earthlink.net
> To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
> Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 19:11:25 -0500
> Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 7
>
> Ken- The primary reason the seat tube has any angle is to allow the rider a
> certain amount of seat set back (behind a vertical line running through t he
> bb center). This set back establishes the pedal/knee relationship. Common
> frame design thought has the seat tube angle varying with thigh length.
> Longer thighs "need" more set back equaling a shallower angle.
>
> Another reason why smaller bikes often have a steeper angle (besides the
> thigh length being short) is to lessen toe clip overlap when short top tu be
> lengths are used. (This goal is also why some small frames have slack hea d
> angles, pushing the axle further away from the crank).
>
> There is a lot of marketing influence and inertia of tradition in making
> these design choices. In the ideal custom world the rider's dimensions an d
> needs drive the choices.
>
> An example of how it can be done is in the story of when I was working fo r
> Cyclery North in Chicago (1985). We were a frame building shop. The
> boss/designer would do the fit and design then hand off the actual build
> work to Tommy (or I). The boss based all his designs on a 60* angle betwe en
> the down tube and the head tube (lower head angle). To make the more
> important frame dimensions work Tommy and I had to "fudge" this 60* spec.
> When I asked the boss about this he said "All the good handling bikes I'v e
> ridden use 60*". Sure if you're 5'10" and want no fender clearance!
>
> Lastly why should the length of the stays or size of wheels change how th e
> body needs to be positioned? I have four self built frames that share the
> main triangle dimensions but differ in the rest, as their use ranges from
> fixed gear track, through Sunday light, commuting to loaded touring.
>
> Andy Stewart
> Raleigh, NC
>
>>
>> Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:48:50 -0500
>> From: "Kenneth Freeman"
>> To: "'Emily O'Brien'" ,
>>
>> Subject: RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 61, Issue 103
>> Message-ID:
>> In-Reply-To:
>> References:
>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii"
>> MIME-Version: 1.0
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> Precedence: list
>> Message: 2
>>
>> 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 m y
>> '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 toda y
>> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________ Helping your favorite cause is as easy as instant messaging. You IM, we g ive. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/Home/?source=text_hotmail_join