Forum menu
Brant, might be worth issuing some measurements so people can check how high any sticky-outy things are on their forks are before they purchase and find a lock out knob on their forks smacks the downtube. Those of us with frames already can just measure the current clearance but those building a new bike might find out after they have cut their steerer.
Going back to the thicker crown race - surely if using a 4 or 5 inch travel fork you won't really be messing stuff up too much with an extra 5-10mm on your crown race as you are still within the A-C of a 6" fork.
Brant, you didn't answer my question regarding this headset. If there isn't a gap between the internal lip and the aluminium insert inside the headset, then I can't see how you could easily remove the new headset because there's nothing to get a vice to grip.
Having to put the existing one in a vice isn't exactly easy, especially if you don't want to trash the finish of the headset.
Maybe you could take that one out of the bike in the picture and tell me how easy a job it was?
Thanks.
How much does the headset lower the front end/steepen the sea angle?
**** all by my calculations! 😀
Brant, you didn't answer my question regarding this headset. If there isn't a gap between the internal lip and the aluminium insert inside the headset, then I can't see how you could easily remove the new headset because there's nothing to get a vice to grip.Having to put the existing one in a vice isn't exactly easy, especially if you don't want to trash the finish of the headset.
Maybe you could take that one out of the bike in the picture and tell me how easy a job it was?
Thanks.
This is part of the testing process.
Going back to the thicker crown race - surely if using a 4 or 5 inch travel fork you won't really be messing stuff up too much with an extra 5-10mm on your crown race as you are still within the A-C of a 6" fork.
Yes, you are, but surely for a given length of fork keeping the front end as low as possible is generally a good thing.
Brant, might be worth issuing some measurements so people can check how high any sticky-outy things are on their forks are before they purchase and find a lock out knob on their forks smacks the downtube. Those of us with frames already can just measure the current clearance but those building a new bike might find out after they have cut their steerer.
This is part of the testing process.
How much does the headset lower the front end/steepen the sea angle?**** all by my calculations!
Before and after would have been better, but Jon was excited 🙂
This is part of the testing process.
larrythelathe
wills works do one for the ftm carbon?
Brant do you have any thoughts on this please?
The FTM would appear to have an unfashionably steep h/a at the moment for the front and rear travel?
Brant, you didn't answer my question regarding this headset. If there isn't a gap between the internal lip and the aluminium insert inside the headset, then I can't see how you could easily remove the new headset because there's nothing to get a vice to grip.Having to put the existing one in a vice isn't exactly easy, especially if you don't want to trash the finish of the headset.
Maybe you could take that one out of the bike in the picture and tell me how easy a job it was?
Good news - The Workscomponent headset comes out with a "rocket tool".
FFS!
Just bought a 456c and I get the impression that they should employ some proper design engineers from the other posts on here.
"this is all part of the testing" understandable but seem to sense an undercurrent of ( here's something else we can flog before it's finished developed)
maybe the designers would benefit from some basic engineering training
Good news!
Hey whilst Brants answering
Any near plans for a Fatbike frame ?- (February came and went 🙂
FFS!
Just bought a 456c and I get the impression that they should employ some proper design engineers from the other posts on here.
"this is all part of the testing" understandable but seem to sense an undercurrent of ( here's something else we can flog before it's finished developed)
maybe the designers would benefit from some basic engineering training
DINO - "this is all part of the testing" OF THE NEW HEADSET WE ARE LOOKING TO RELEASE. We have two, unanodised samples right now. We are TESTING them. We are doing this openly. The headsets are made by works components, we will be ordering a batch with custom etching/etc and holding stock.
Any near plans for a Fatbike frame ?- (February came and went
There are two samples in the office. We are getting components to assemble.
<<pads feet like an excited kitten>>
Thanks
Yes, you are, but surely for a given length of fork keeping the front end as low as possible is generally a good thing.
I dunno, you are the bike designer/expert 🙂 From another perspective someone may not want to upgrade forks etc but want the slackness of a longer fork. Not ideal I admit but not unlike people fitting 425 or 475 A-C rigid forks instead of 445mm to mess with angles.
But yes, I do see your point as I have just fitted a 0 deg stem and bars with no rise and just upsweep to loose some grip height. I guess you could also argue that the accidentally short head tube helps you keep the front down as long as you don't mind cutting your steerer or having lots of spacers above the stem. It's a shame forks don't come with replaceable steerers these days.
but surely for a given length of fork keeping the front end as low as possible is generally a good thing.
See, I don't think it is, no. Personally, I don't want a low front end. I've got a 150mm Revelation on mine (Changed since the Vanillas in the pic below, but the steerer is the same length) and I have to use a huge stack of spacers to get the bars where I want them in relation to the saddle. I actually moved the stem UP after I took this pic:
[url= http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5243/5286538046_c22eff455e_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_atkin/5286538046/ ]IMG_0864[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/peter_atkin/ ]PeterPoddy[/url], on Flickr
Now, here's my 853 inbred with the EXACT same forks on as in the pics above. Note the lower spacer count!
(fairly high rise bars too!)
[url= http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2478/3822165957_46f94bc3b5_o.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_atkin/3822165957/ ]iphone_pic[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/peter_atkin/ ]PeterPoddy[/url], on Flickr
I really don't want to be bent over double to reach the bars thanks, although I accept some people do, but it's really not necessary to persure short head tubes as the be-all-and end all of front end design, to the point where it's compromising fork fit. That's just my opinion.... 🙂
Specialized don't seem to think the Pitch needs such a short headtube either.... Steerer on those Lyriks is about 200mm, same as on the 456.....
[url= http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4054/4714061610_c2ffb91797_b.jp g" target="_blank">
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/peter_atkin/4714061610/ ]IMG_7800[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/peter_atkin/ ]PeterPoddy[/url], on Flickr
See, I don't think it is, no. Personally, I don't want a low front end.
I'm sorry - I've used the wrong language.
"Geometrically" it's better to add "Corrected" length to a fork "above" the head tube than below it.
Making a fork longer to slacken a bike is often silly. Making a fork longer to raise your handlebars is stupid.
<<snowbike pics>> - That's only exasperating things 😆
I ran more height/rise initially as I find it gives more confidence (less feeling of going over the front).
The more I ride and get used to the bike the lower I have been going on the front to get rid of the sitting up/chopper feeling.
I have also moved my saddle a bit further forward and tweaked a few other things to get me putting more weight on the fork so I make it work harder and keep the nose down on climbs.
<<snowbike pics>> - That's only exasperating things
Damn, and there was me convinced I didn't need a fatbike. That frame looks interesting.
Anymore you can tell us?
Snowbike frame price is good. Snowbike frame parts are expensive. Going to see what we can do a complete snow bike for.
PeterPoddy - MemberSee, I don't think it is, no. Personally, I don't want a low front end. I've got a 150mm Revelation on mine (Changed since the Vanillas in the pic below, but the steerer is the same length) and I have to use a huge stack of spacers to get the bars where I want them in relation to the saddle.
Or a taller stem tham the low-rise one you have, or higher rise bars. OTOH, someone who wants a low front end can have it. Whereas if it had a taller headtube, the person who wants the low front end has less options and the only difference for you is cosmetic. So it's good for choice.
(I have my C456 set up with no spacers at all under the stem. We are both accomodated by this design)
Offset back end seems a good way to keep prices reasonable, though I'd have thought on-one would be good at getting reasonably priced fat-parts to market?
£200 for 170mm hubs is a joke.
I use a shedload of spacers too, already use high rise bars and stems with a bit of rise, you don't get much rise on a 50mm stem and there aren't many high rise stems about anyway most are 6degrees.
But I get the point about users who want a low front end.
you using a flat bar northwind or riser?
Snowbike frame price is good. Snowbike frame parts are expensive. Going to see what we can do a complete snow bike for.
Its the cost of parts that has always put me off in the past. If the frame could run 29er wheels when not in fat mode it would be quite attractive. My Swift tends to sink on the beach, even with massive tyres on it and I end up looking even more stupid than usual 😥
oh and as it's already come up has anyone tried removing a smoothie mixer headset lower cup from a c456? I spotted the lip thing ooh about 30 seconds after fitting.
Or a taller stem tham the low-rise one you have, or higher rise bars. OTOH, someone who wants a low front end can have it. Whereas if it had a taller headtube, the person who wants the low front end has less options and the only difference for you is cosmetic. So it's good for choice.(I have my C456 set up with no spacers at all under the stem. We are both accomodated by this design)
Oh yes, agreed for sure. But my point is that persuing the 'short head tube' mantra so far has compromised fork fit, which is good for neither of us! 🙂
5mm on the head tube would probably cure it, 10mm would for sure, as would an external top race. But for you, wanting a low front end, an external top race would make more of a negative difference thean 5-10mm on the head tube! 🙂
PeterPoddy - I was going to say the same as Northwind although your original point about finding it difficult to fit some tapered forks obviously still stands.
I'd also say that looking at your bikes, you seem to choose very small frames and build them up tall. Presumably you like a short top tube, but have you tried a larger frame with a shorter stem?
Brant - I have absolutely no requirement for a fat/snow bike whatsoever, yet I still find myself looking in all the threads 🙂 All bikes are cool. An accessibly priced (and already built) one sounds like a great idea!
All together Now !
This is part of the testing process.
When it dont fit.
This is part of the testing process.
when i cant remove it from the head tube
This is part of the testing process.
when my headtube is oval
This is part of the testing process.
When my chainstay hits the crankset.
This is part of the testing process.
if all else fails Im just a designer
someone else designed this it wasnt me.
😛
I'd also say that looking at your bikes, you seem to choose very small frames and build them up tall. Presumably you like a short top tube, but have you tried a larger frame with a shorter stem?
I'm 5'8" 30in inside leg. Bang in the middle of the sizing of a 16in On One frame. A larger frame would be too big for me. I actually like a fairly roomy top tube, and honestly I don't think I could find a better fitting bike than my Inbred. The 456 is a similar fit save for the lower front end. I run an 80mm stem on the inbred, 70mm on the 456, slightly shorter as befits the character and usage of the bike.
You'll also see I use inline seatposts, with the saddle roughly in the middle of the rails, as I like to be more over the front wheel than nthe rear. I do stand up quite a lot too, and chuck the bike around beneath me. I'm not bothered about hill climbing speed, and I've never liked low front ends since I first tried riser bars in about 1993.... 🙂
EDIT
I think I see what you're saying. The Pitch is a bit of an optical illusion in that pic, becasue of the exaggerated TT drop, and it's length and slackness!
While I'm biased (having 3 OO bikes in the shed) its great to see designers come out on an open forum like this to share thoughts and ideas. How often do you get that opportunity? Keep up the great work Brant. You can only please some of the people some of the time..
EDIT:
I think I see what you're saying. The Pitch is a bit of an optical illusion in that pic, becasue of the exaggerated TT drop, and it's length and slackness!
Yep, you're possibly right. The measurements you gave sound bob-on.
PeterPoddy - MemberOh yes, agreed for sure. But my point is that persuing the 'short head tube' mantra so far has compromised fork fit, which is good for neither of us!
Aye, with the taper problem. Could have been got round with a different shaped headtube as well as more height I guess. TBH I wish they'd gone fullfat 1.5, it's the best of all the unstandards apart from looking a bit stupid.
cynic-al - the guy on mtbr - that made the Klein- 'Fat pony' sourced a longer scooter(?) axle.
Why can't we cut and stretch a regular hub - thinking of old hope pace bullseye flange-tube-flange hubs?
I reckon you could even bond a spacer tube over many cut normal hubs.