Solaris has 435mm horizontal (440mm c-c),
Cy come on - why propagate this bollocks "horizontal" chainstay dimension.
Chainstay length is chain stay length.
Chainstays should be measured centre to centre from BB centre to axle centre.
Bike Forum
29er with shortest chainstays - non custom?
-
Posted 6 months ago #
-
Very interesting build there Mick. Not the type of bike I would ride but bravo for the executing an idea and riding the product.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Ok it's currently a prototype
Here are some numbers
Ha 71
SA 71.6
Bb 300
Eff TT 609
Chain stay 417-437 All measured c/cThere is another on the way from china v2 has a few differences chain stays are even shorter 407-427 but this is so I can try a belt drive. At 417
I have been riding this for the last 6 months and it climbs really well and is great on the. Single track downsides are limited ankle clearance and the bb isn't as stiff as I would like but these have been sorted on v2 ( I hope)
Posted 6 months ago # -
Jones is 17.1" - it handles pretty well.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Chainstays should be measured centre to centre from BB centre to axle centre.
So, from a handling pov when you're stood up on the pedals the actual chainstay length, which is what you're on about above, is what matters right? But if you're sat down then the effective (if there is such a thing) chain stay length - based on where your arse is at compared to the rear wheel axle is more important, yes?
So, for a bike where you are out of the saddle more (i.e. a singlespeed) then the actual chainstay would be most important and there is little that can be done about that given the size of wheels and the need for a bottom bracket at a sensible position. Where as for a full susser, where you might (might) be sat down more, there seems to be more opportunity to play about with things, is this right.
(I've been to the pub)
Posted 6 months ago # -
Horizontal is just bollocks to make it sound shorter.
I'm in the bath.
Posted 6 months ago # -
@ Brant - I know you're just winding me up for shits and giggles, but I'm going to bite anyway.
When people are getting their knickers in a twist about chainstay length on 29er (which is only part of the story, I'll agree), they're really talking about rear centre. On a 26" bike the rear centre and c/stay length are virtually identical. That's not the case on 29ers and the horizontal gives a more accurate comparison IMO.
Posted 6 months ago # -
Yes but if everyone is quoting actual chainstay length (as is the norm for the 26" historical reasons stated) and then someone else claims (or insinuates) that theirs are shorter by using a horizontal measurement instead that's the aforementioned bollocks, isn't it?
Posted 6 months ago # -
When you're pulling the bike into a hop or jump the actual chainstay is what matters, it dictates the arc the bb moves around the axle and is fixed. Horizontal is ok for seated pedaling but road bikes don't use it either.
Edit to add- Fair point about comparisons tho. Do we have to show 2 CS measurements now? Ffs )Posted 6 months ago # -
It's not bollocks if you tell people what you're measuring and it's not wrong. It's also more accurate to compare horizontal 29er with regular chainstay measurement on a 26" bike IMO.
Posted 6 months ago # -
It's not bollocks if you tell people what you're measuring
Of course not though jameso made a fair point.
It is bollocks when people fixate on one measurement in isolation and you maybe take advantage of that. Of course, that may not be the intention in this instance...
Posted 6 months ago # -
all this talk of short chainstays reminds me of the good/bad old days of 'we have the shortest chainstays' when big rings over lapped tyres!
like:
weirdly someone pulled up at the lights the other day on a estay star that had been turned in a hack bike.. still cool!
Posted 6 months ago # -
i have enough trouble when some bike geometry is quoted in inches and others in mm,, when designing mine i looked at the "others" to see what people are doing and spent ages converting into mm
i think center to center is easier, but on bikes like 29ers with the bb a long way below the axle height then there can be a big difference between both measurments
while we are bitching i like bb height rather than drop, and i may start quoting HA and SA in radians
Posted 6 months ago # -
Whats the collective noun for bike designers - seems like a little convention going on here
Just for the record - I'm happily riding 15.95" (405.4mm) along the stay and 15.75" (400mm) horizontal. Not exactly a huge difference between the two dimensions.
I think the fixation on certain numbers (rear centre, head angle, fork rake etc) does have more relevence to 29ers where people are trying to get a bike that feels as responsive as a 26er whilst retaining the good bits that can come with larger wheels.
rootes 1 - click on my links on previous page.....
Posted 6 months ago # -
rootes 1 - click on my links on previous page.....
missed those. ace! like you frame and especially your 80/20 jig
Posted 6 months ago # -
On my horizontal Scandal, I have the rear wheel slid as far forward in the drop outs as it will go, the tyres only 5-10mm from the seat tube, but I dont run a front mech so its not a problem.
Posted 6 months ago # -
they're really talking about rear centre.
really? I mean do most people know what they want, or just repeating what they have heard and think they want?Imo keep measurements simple. Bit like when the discussion was about sag and how some like to quote HA when sagged, all pointless and confusing.
Posted 6 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
