OP
OP
lulubel
Über Member
- Location
- Malaga, Spain
What don't have disc mounts? The wheels? Sorry, I'm confused now.
Do I want a steel frame?
- Thread starter lulubel
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
What don't have disc mounts? The wheels? Sorry, I'm confused now.
RecordAceFromNew
Swinging Member
- Location
- West London
Sorry when you said LHT disc I didn't realise you were talking about the Disc Trucker. Tyre clearance of the Disc Trucker is the same as the LHT, so still 2.1" for smaller frames.
Since 700c diameter is 622mm while 26" is 559mm, putting a 700c wheel in a 26" frame will cut roughly 31.5mm off tyre capacity of the 2.1", theoretically leaving only 21mm or so for tyre...
OP
OP
lulubel
Über Member
- Location
- Malaga, Spain
Hmm ... would the fact that it obviously has some extra clearance for mudguards allow for wider 700c wheels, though?
Mind you, I think this is all pretty theoretical. For the amount of extra money and faffing around getting the wheels right, I might as well just pay the extra for the Condor frame and use the MTB if I can ever be bothered to go off-road!
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
I can't verify that way round as I did my calcs from a 700c frame to use a 26" wheel. According to Bike Cad a 26x1.95 tyre is 5mm less radius than a 700x28 and the trail number is 2mm less for the 26" wheel. I do know that skinny 700c wheels have been run in 26" MTB frames but everything I've read on that has always been a case of, don't know if it will work until you try it.
It's just something I thought could go in the mix as it was something I discovered as a possible option on my frame after I'd had it made. But it has big 700c clearances as well, I also know that my Karate Monkey can run huge 26" wheels, fatbike style, rather than narrower 29ers. That is officially sanctioned as an option by Surly.
But it may be a moot point having just looked at the specs on the Disc Trucker they clearly differ enough on the 26" version that it wouldn't work well. The 700c one has longer forks and it only starts at a size 56, unless you could combine the 26" frame with the 700c forks.
Sorry Lulubel I didn't mean to sidetrack this as much, by the way what size stem do you currently run?
RecordAceFromNew
Swinging Member
- Location
- West London
+1. Different model tyres don't have the same heights (or even widths) even if their specs are notionally identical so it is always going to be approx.
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
I was looking at the smallest sizes in the Genesis CDF and the Cotic X
http://www.cotic.co.uk/product/bikes/x/weekday/
based on your Trek ETT of 507mm and ST angle of 74.6 then U suspect these are all jumping up too far in the ETT range to be offset by a shorter stem, but you never know.
http://www.cotic.co.uk/product/bikes/x/weekday/
based on your Trek ETT of 507mm and ST angle of 74.6 then U suspect these are all jumping up too far in the ETT range to be offset by a shorter stem, but you never know.
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
Now this is interesting, I was looking at more reasonably priced steel bikes and Jamis sprang to mind. Evans only seem to be stocking the mens version of the Satellite Sport at £475 for a complete bike, here's the manufacturers website for the womens version:-
http://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebikes/road/satellite/12_satellitesportf_geo.html
Now I've just compared the two versions in the size 48 and the specs are identical except for the ST angle and the ETT. The mens version has a 515mm ETT and 74.5 STA and the womens 505mm and 75.5. Which means that, though the mens ETT is 10mm longer those 10mm are all behind the BB centreline. By my reckoning both frames have exactly the same Reach number...or as near as makes no difference.
I haven't ridden one but mooching on the web seems to bring up plenty of good about Jamis quality levels at the pricepoint.
http://www.jamisbikes.com/usa/thebikes/road/satellite/12_satellitesportf_geo.html
Now I've just compared the two versions in the size 48 and the specs are identical except for the ST angle and the ETT. The mens version has a 515mm ETT and 74.5 STA and the womens 505mm and 75.5. Which means that, though the mens ETT is 10mm longer those 10mm are all behind the BB centreline. By my reckoning both frames have exactly the same Reach number...or as near as makes no difference.
I haven't ridden one but mooching on the web seems to bring up plenty of good about Jamis quality levels at the pricepoint.
OP
OP
lulubel
Über Member
- Location
- Malaga, Spain
Only 75mm, with a 7 degree angle.
I've had a look at Cotic and Jamis, and they're not into small frame sizes are they. Cotic have discontinued the 52cm, which seems to leave 54cm as their smallest size, and the smallest size Evans stock in the Jamis is 51cm - they don't stock the 48cm. In any case, I'd need to add at least £100 on the price of the Jamis to get it here because Evans only ship it within the UK (full bikes cost more than they should to ship because the size of the box puts them into volumetric weight). And then I'd have to put my tiagra shifters on it because I'm not so broke that I'd use sora - I really don't get on with sora!
I'm not bothered about spending up to £7-800 now on a good frame and wheels that I can use with my exisiting components until the insurance payment comes through. In fact, it makes a lot of sense to me to get the best frame I can possibly afford because it's the frame that I want to last "forever" and everything else is consumable by comparison. That's why I started looking at framesets rather than complete bikes. It makes more work for me, and it's work that is a bit daunting because I haven't done a great deal other than simple bike maintenance so far. I know I can do it, but it will take me 10 times longer than someone who knows what they're doing.
I keep swinging one way and another here. What I am certain of is that I want to go for steel, and most likely a frameset unless I can find a fantastic deal on a perfect complete bike (which is very unlikely, considering how fussy I am).
Having said yesterday that I'd ruled out the Surly cross check, I'm very tempted to just order the frameset from Wiggle (they have it in stock in the 42cm size) and have a look at it. If I can't make it work for me, I can return it, and all it will have cost me is the return postage, which shouldn't be horrendous because it isn't a complete bike.
Decisions, decisions ....
The Cross Check is going to be quite a different bike to your old one in ride feel. It will feel less zippy and more stable because of its longer wheelbase and chainstays. The Pacer will be nearer to the ride you had, well when I say nearer, it's in relative terms. The Pacer is more like an Audax bike, which in terms of having one bike to ride, a steel one, is what I'd say would suit you, it's just the problem of getting something in the size you need. If you're going Surly though, look at the Pacer.
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
The Xcheck is an excellent frame but I got mine to use with hub gears as it has horizontal dropouts...that's the ones that face forward. I also needed all the frame fittings as it was a commuting bike. Obviously it has the versatility to be used with derailleurs as well but is slightly less simple than just slotting a wheel in and out via vertical dropouts. Whether this matters to you will probably be one of those things you'll only really know by trying it.
If I'd not been planing on hub gears then the Xcheck wouldn't have been my first choice. For your planned useage then the Surly Pacer looks better. But it only has clearance up to 700x28 with guards or 700x32 without and doesn't have rack mounts.
If I'd not been planing on hub gears then the Xcheck wouldn't have been my first choice. For your planned useage then the Surly Pacer looks better. But it only has clearance up to 700x28 with guards or 700x32 without and doesn't have rack mounts.
RecordAceFromNew
Swinging Member
- Location
- West London
OP
OP
lulubel
Über Member
- Location
- Malaga, Spain
I looked at that, but the geometry looked seriously weird to me. The small has a ETT length of 525, which is 18mm longer than I'm used to, but a seat tube of only 375, which is much shorter than I'm used to, so I'd need a lot of seat post sticking out, which would put me higher up and further away relative to the bars (although I appreciate the seat angle of 74 is slightly less than I have at the moment).
The small/medium has a seat tube length that I'm familiar with - at 425, it's about the same as my current one according to that measurement - but the ETT is way too long.
They don't give head tube lengths, which would have been useful for comparison, but the junction of top tube and head tube measurement is slightly lower than my current bike in the small (which combined with the seat post length suggests the bike will be too small for me height wise). It's higher on the small/medium, but that will definitely be too big for me top tube wise.
Am I missing something?
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
Well that's two for the Pacer but probably envisaging it as a longer term frame and it could be a little downmarket for the way you're thinking. A couple of ways of proceeding here:-
1. grab whatever Surly frameset is currently available to build up and ride for the time being. Also to help you refine your thoughts on your future 'steel frame for life' choices
2. spend as much as you can afford on your frameset right now
The first option makes more sense to me, Surly frames resell easily and if you chose the Xcheck you've also got a pretty good allrounder as a backup for the future. It has the capacity and versatility for touring and a reasonable rough stuff tolerance level...it is a cross frame after all. I could envisage a 2 bike stable made up of a road/fast audax and a Xcheck for everything else and ditch the MTB alltogether.
The second option is a temptation but I get the impression you're flying a little blind here, and this would lack the learning curve of owning a Surly first. Plus if you're now talking a £700-800 frameset spend then you're getting within spitting distance of a custom steel or Ti frame. At £1100 you get get a custom Burls Ti with steel forks and a decent headset, maybe £1200 max including shipping. But I wouldn't go down any custom route without refining your needs first. The Thorn Audax is another one that gets great write ups, as Crax mentions.
If it was me I'd buy a cheapish steel allrounder frameset to build up with as much versatile capacity as I wanted. I'd then look to choosing a custom, or OTP, frame for life and offloading the MTB if I was no longer interested in proper offroading.
1. grab whatever Surly frameset is currently available to build up and ride for the time being. Also to help you refine your thoughts on your future 'steel frame for life' choices
2. spend as much as you can afford on your frameset right now
The first option makes more sense to me, Surly frames resell easily and if you chose the Xcheck you've also got a pretty good allrounder as a backup for the future. It has the capacity and versatility for touring and a reasonable rough stuff tolerance level...it is a cross frame after all. I could envisage a 2 bike stable made up of a road/fast audax and a Xcheck for everything else and ditch the MTB alltogether.
The second option is a temptation but I get the impression you're flying a little blind here, and this would lack the learning curve of owning a Surly first. Plus if you're now talking a £700-800 frameset spend then you're getting within spitting distance of a custom steel or Ti frame. At £1100 you get get a custom Burls Ti with steel forks and a decent headset, maybe £1200 max including shipping. But I wouldn't go down any custom route without refining your needs first. The Thorn Audax is another one that gets great write ups, as Crax mentions.
If it was me I'd buy a cheapish steel allrounder frameset to build up with as much versatile capacity as I wanted. I'd then look to choosing a custom, or OTP, frame for life and offloading the MTB if I was no longer interested in proper offroading.
Rohloff_Brompton_Rider
Formerly just_fixed
have a read of this and then make your own mind up.
http://www.fitwerx.com/an-overview-of-material-applications-in-bicycle-frames
basically it says that there can't be any perceptible difference in comfort between the different frame materials. i kinda find myself agreeing with it (but i'm no expert) as i can't tell the difference between my alloy touche and my steel il pompino with regards to road buzz. although my alloy bike has steel forks.
http://www.fitwerx.com/an-overview-of-material-applications-in-bicycle-frames
basically it says that there can't be any perceptible difference in comfort between the different frame materials. i kinda find myself agreeing with it (but i'm no expert) as i can't tell the difference between my alloy touche and my steel il pompino with regards to road buzz. although my alloy bike has steel forks.
