But I can blog while the Bean stuffs his face with food. What a pig. I have taken to calling him Rygel.
This is Sam's frame. Sam lives about a mile from us in SLC and he was looking for something that fit and handled a bit better than his old Vassago. So we sat down and came up with a semi-short chainstay bike with some curves (some functional, some just for fun) that should put a big grin on his face whenever our trails dry out.
 |
| Artsy Fence Pic |
-29" wheels, duh.
-69.5 degree head tube angle, 66.3cm front center.
-74 degree seat tube angle, so he can run a setback post for a little extra give.
-30 cm/11.8" BB height, on the low side for carving turns on the Bobsled.
-42cm chainstays (41.5cm effective), built for XX1 (ie no front derailleur).
-For a tapered steerer 100mm Fox.
-Paragon sliders in case of need for SS use.
-Frame weight is around 2100g, so 4.6#, give or take.
Note that, assuming you don't count the BB shell and the head tube, this frame has only _1_ straight tube on it. Whew. That's a lot of bends. I'm gonna have huge arms from rolling tubes in my bender!
 |
| Not-Artsy Garage Door Pic |
2 comments:
So quite a while ago (20 yrs or so), Mrazek frames were eye catching with their curved top tubes. My buddy had one and swore they were the worse riding bikes ever. Any studies or thoughts on power transfer on curved top tubes vs straight?
The toptube does almost nothing in terms of affecting how the bike rides.
I also had a Mrazek and it sucked, but I don't think the toptube was the problem.
Post a Comment