Do I want a steel frame?

[lulubel]

Is this too big?

Possibly not, but the front end looks a bit lower than I'm used to, and the gearing's way too high for the hills around here, so I'd have to reuse my whole drive train and convert it to a 9-sp triple to work with my tiagra shifters, which isn't really the point of buying a complete bike!

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

http://villiers-velo.co.uk/

he once gave me a quote of £325 (IIRC) for a custom built frame, kinda regret not getting it.

 

[lulubel]

have a read of this and then make your own mind up.

basically it says that there can't be any perceptible difference in comfort between the different frame materials.

Yes, I appreciate this. But the point for me isn't just the ride quality. It's becoming a lot more about the ethos of a steel frame - the whole idea that steel is the thing to have if you want a bike that will last years and years. It's really distressed me that my broken bike is seen as a throw-away item. (The mechanic at the bike shop took one look at the frame and shook his head.) I want something that can be repaired if it gets broken, not something that's just disposed of and replaced with a newer, shinier version. This probably makes me weird in most cycling circles nowadays, but there you go!

 

[Crackle]

......
Am I missing something?

No you're not. I looked at the geometry and thought it might be wrong but it's always worth a double check. The Thorn is, in many ways, slightly old school, with a longer reach.

Reach is obviously key and on a smaller frame, frame angles are probably a number of compromises to do with reach, handling and clearances, with a nod to a sportier ride or a more stable ride, in which chainstay length, wheelbase and rake/trail are all going to play a part. Sometimes it's as well to step back, trust the designers and read the description.

This thread peaked my curiosity but after a whole bunch of googling I can't find anything other than what has been suggested in a steel frame. MacB said it earlier, short of a custom build, for which Hewitt and Roberts amongst others, spring to mind, I'm struggling to think of anything with the right dimensions. Roberts built Josie Dew's bike and she isn't tall.

The Condor, Surly and the Specialized, RecordAce linked to are pretty much all that's come out, oh and that Jamis. The Specialized you can't get in this country, which may not be an issue for you, there was a thread about it a long time ago (do a search on here). Spacycles are selling the Pacer frame by the way.

I know you said steel and I know I said it before but if you can't find anything that suits, Kinesis frames are well thought of. Of course there are a lot more ali frames than steel so it won't be the only one. Beyond that, I agree with MacB, it's summary and decision time, unless someone can find another to throw in, personally, I can't.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Yes, I appreciate this. But the point for me isn't just the ride quality. It's becoming a lot more about the ethos of a steel frame - the whole idea that steel is the thing to have if you want a bike that will last years and years. It's really distressed me that my broken bike is seen as a throw-away item. (The mechanic at the bike shop took one look at the frame and shook his head.) I want something that can be repaired if it gets broken, not something that's just disposed of and replaced with a newer, shinier version. This probably makes me weird in most cycling circles nowadays, but there you go!

no weirder than me, that's why i have a steel pompino, a steel brompton and steel forks on an over engineered touche frame i got cheap and why i ride mostly fixed these days.

 

[lulubel]

he once gave me a quote of £325 (IIRC) for a custom built frame, kinda regret not getting it.

How long ago was that? That seems an astonishingly low quote.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

about 14 months i think. i sent him an email and he replied dead quick, mind you, raw materials might have gone up since then, most things have.


edit: that was for the voyager frame i think.

 

[lulubel]

about 14 months i think. i sent him an email and he replied dead quick, mind you, raw materials might have gone up since then, most things have.

Significantly, I should think, on the raw materials. But it's definitely worth asking.

 

[Rohloff_Brompton_Rider]

Significantly, I should think, on the raw materials. But it's definitely worth asking.

yeah i agree defo worth asking. i might be miles out as i'm going from memory, but i seem to remember a full bike was just over £1200. he did used to have some prices on his website.

some brompton riders had bikes 'pimped' by him and spoke very highly of his workmanship.

 

[lulubel]

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.

Mmm .... the thing that's concerning me now is that I might find it fiddly getting my gears to work with the cross check frame. And I don't need anything to be fiddly when I'm learning by the method of "take off old frame, put on new frame in exactly the same way and hope it works".

I also only really have room for one bike in the apartment, so it has to be the right one. (The MTB is currently living in the communal garage, and I know the only reason it's stayed there as long as it has is because it's cheap and undesirable.) I am concerned the cross check won't be fast enough for me on the roads - not that I've ever averaged more than 16mph on a ride - but that's a lot to do with the wheels, isn't it? So, I could have lightweight, fast wheels with skinny tyres for on-road, and heavier wheels with wider tyres for off-road. Would that work?

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.

I flew blind when I bought my first road bike. I listened to the advice from 2 different lbs (couldn't get a test ride because they had nothing anywhere near my size) and then ignored it all, and ordered a different bike in a different frame size to the one they both recommended. I don't know if I was just lucky or if "trusting my gut instinct" is something that works for me. Anyway, the £7-800 included wheels, so it's more like £5-600 for the frame, so unless Paul Villiers is still making custom frames for very low prices, I think it's still out of my price range.

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.

I've never been into proper off-roading. The only time the MTB has done anything a low geared hybrid couldn't handle was two winters ago when we had months of solid rain, and it still got bogged down in the mud in places!

 

[lulubel]

Question about gears re: Surly LHT (non disc version)

Correct me anywhere I'm wrong here:

Since 26" wheels are smaller than 700c, they need to turn more times to cover the same distance. This means that using exactly the same gearing and tyre depth on both wheel sizes would feel like having smaller gears on the 26". (You'd have to turn the pedals more times to cover the same distance.) This could be compensated for by using bigger chainrings. With the right size chainrings, you could make a 26" wheel bike feel exactly the same as a 700c wheel bike as far as the gearing is concerned, which means you could go just as fast.

Can you get 26" wheels that take skinny, road tyres?

With big chainrings and a wide-range cassette, could you make the LHT into a very flexible bike that will behave like a relaxed road bike, tourer, or handle some easy (hybid type) off-road depending on what wheels and tyres you used on it?

I know this is heading in yet another new direction!

ETA: I know it wouldn't be as "sharp" as a road bike in bendy bits because of the longer wheelbase, but I'm not exactly brave in the corners, so I don't think that would be an issue.

 

[RedRider]

Well, this has been an educational thread to follow. The knowledge/experience that resides on this forum is staggering sometimes.

 

[lulubel]

Well, this has been an educational thread to follow. The knowledge/experience that resides on this forum is staggering sometimes.

It's amazing, isn't it? The good thing is, I always know where to come if I've got a question that's even vaguely cycling related.

 

[Crackle]

Question about gears re: Surly LHT (non disc version)

Correct me anywhere I'm wrong here:

Since 26" wheels are smaller than 700c, they need to turn more times to cover the same distance. This means that using exactly the same gearing and tyre depth on both wheel sizes would feel like having smaller gears on the 26". (You'd have to turn the pedals more times to cover the same distance.) This could be compensated for by using bigger chainrings. With the right size chainrings, you could make a 26" wheel bike feel exactly the same as a 700c wheel bike as far as the gearing is concerned, which means you could go just as fast.

Can you get 26" wheels that take skinny, road tyres?

With big chainrings and a wide-range cassette, could you make the LHT into a very flexible bike that will behave like a relaxed road bike, tourer, or handle some easy (hybid type) off-road depending on what wheels and tyres you used on it?

I know this is heading in yet another new direction!

ETA: I know it wouldn't be as "sharp" as a road bike in bendy bits because of the longer wheelbase, but I'm not exactly brave in the corners, so I don't think that would be an issue.

Make yourself a gear chart which shows you things in gear inches according to wheel and tyre size. You will then see from this which gears you commonly use in your current set up and what the equivalent would be with a different wheel size: All good fun this. I have one you can use as a starter for 10 if I can pm it. Essentially what you say is correct though, with an addendum that 26" wheels won't 'feel' the same as 700c.

In your example above you'd of course need to keep the wheels the same size, otherwise the brakes wouldn't reach and I would probably keep the wheelset the same and change the tyres, though you could have a lighter road set and heavier touring set.

And I know I've said it already but that would be quite a big departure from your previous bike.

 

[MacB]

The gearing comparisons are easy to work out I started using Sheldons calculator but then downloaded a spreadhseet from the CTC site. What I don't have is any experience of comparing 26" to 700c for road use.

There seems to be two schools of thought(with maybe a 3rd creeping in) around framebuilding, those that do 700c through the range and those that only do 700c above a certain size. The third one is the 650B wheelsize which is apparently have a resurgence, but I have no experience of those at all. Focusing on the main 2 sizes then the argument goes that below a certain size fitting in a 700c wheel involves too many design compromises. Therefore a better bike can be made at the smaller sizes using 26" wheels. There is also a belief that it tends to be the big manufacturers that stick to 700c throughout and that it is more of a cost saving/convenience thing than being to do with ride quality.

I would add the qualifier that those building 26" below a certain size tend to be building for versatility and robustness. Their more road going machines may well be 700c throughout. A good example being the Xcheck v the LHT and the LHT also has all sizes available in 26", lending weight to the touring/robust idea.

It's a toughie, the Xcheck is a solid frame and I could manage a 16mph average over 20 miles on it, complete build weighed in at about 35lbs then you add me and panniers. I've also done a couple of rides over 100 miles on it without any problems, though the extra weight of the total bike got noticeable later on. But there's a lot of me and it was a 60cm frame, would it be a harsher ride for someone lighter, are the smaller frames using tubesets/design that allow for smaller riders? Plonk 16stone of me on a big steel frame and that frame is likely to behave in a compliant manner I'm mentioning this because, unless you plan on touring, I reckon the Xcheck or the Pacer are a better bet than the LHT, it also ensures your kit is transferable.

By the way though I thought it worth mentioning the Xcheck dropouts I wouldn't class it as a deal breaker. When I said I wouldn't buy one to go with derailleurs that's based on the knowledge that I have the choice of far more frames than you do. For derailleurs I'd go with a Salsa Vaya(and I did) which is basically a Xcheck with vertical dropouts, compact geometry and disc brakes. But again this goes to smaller wheels in the smaller sizes. The Xcheck dropouts have little bolts in them which you set and, for derailleurs, don't need to touch again. Then when you put the wheel back in you just need to make sure the axle butts up to the bolts on both sides before you tighten the QR.