Author Topic: Members' bikes  (Read 2452421 times)

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2175 on: 12 October, 2009, 07:58:44 pm »
Not quite what I had in mind for it ;D

...but it'd be a shame not to take it for a blast around Hamsterley before I butcher it into a tourer.  And that will probably be quite interesting with those crappy cantis.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2176 on: 12 October, 2009, 08:20:52 pm »
That's sacrilegious! I am tempted to buy MSeries Dalesman, stick a pair of Renthals on it and take it down the ramps to make up for it.  :P

Blah

  • Not sure where I'm going
Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2177 on: 12 October, 2009, 08:31:13 pm »
it's appeared on the thread before, but not in my garden..


thanks for letting me buy it, Blah!!  

Looking good Mike!

I thought I kept my Swallow???

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2178 on: 12 October, 2009, 08:38:49 pm »
#makewattsnotwar

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2179 on: 12 October, 2009, 08:41:58 pm »
Well, it's distinctive. ;D
Getting there...

alan

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2180 on: 12 October, 2009, 08:45:37 pm »
I assume that you are long in the leg Pip.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2181 on: 12 October, 2009, 09:26:09 pm »
That's sacrilegious! I am tempted to buy MSeries Dalesman, stick a pair of Renthals on it and take it down the ramps to make up for it.  :P

Well, now you've said it, you must do it...  There's probably enough clearance in that frame ;)

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2182 on: 12 October, 2009, 09:30:53 pm »
Pip. Cut that brake cable

Chris S

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2183 on: 12 October, 2009, 09:53:07 pm »
I'm trying to visualise that lower pedal at its lowest point. Is there much clearance between pedal and road?

I'm not sure I'd like to take a corner at speed if it's fixed gear  :o

Torslanda

  • Professional Gobshite
  • Just a tart for retro kit . . .
    • John's Bikes
Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2184 on: 14 October, 2009, 11:55:32 pm »
It's no good. I'm gonna have to get another Falcon!

Who's got a late 70s/early 80s 'Ernie' lying around? 23 or 23 1/2 inch would do . . . 700c wheels for preference.

Go on. I promise I'll look after it . . .

J
VELOMANCER

Well that's the more blunt way of putting it but as usual he's dead right.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2185 on: 15 October, 2009, 06:20:25 pm »
My new commuter

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2186 on: 15 October, 2009, 08:18:49 pm »
Hartlepool colours too.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2187 on: 15 October, 2009, 11:26:41 pm »
My new commuter


Nice one Martin. I saw these frames and thought they looked nice. Now I've seen one built up - they do look good.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2188 on: 15 October, 2009, 11:38:13 pm »
My new commuter


Looks good, I have been running mine for 300 miles now, great frame for the money.


ed_o_brain

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2189 on: 16 October, 2009, 01:17:30 am »
So what do they ride like?

EDIT: They seem a little long in the top tube for the specified size... would I be looking at a 52 instead of a 54/54 and a shorter stem?

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2190 on: 16 October, 2009, 06:22:42 am »
My Raleigh Pro Race winter fixed on holiday in northern Scotland, Reynolds 501 and rides superbly  :)




Name the place: just above Burghead harbour

 :thumbsup:




Correct! mid August, have friends in New Elgin :)

rdaviesb

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2191 on: 16 October, 2009, 08:42:10 am »
My new commuter


It's another bl**** blue Ribble!

Welcome to the crowd - nice build.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2192 on: 16 October, 2009, 08:58:56 am »

It's another bl**** blue Ribble!

Welcome to the crowd - nice build.

It is, well kind of, made in the same place, and it has track ends. To ed o brain, like those bloody ribbles, it has a longer top tube so pay attention to all measurements not just the seat tue.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2193 on: 16 October, 2009, 09:15:57 am »
So what do they ride like?

EDIT: They seem a little long in the top tube for the specified size... would I be looking at a 52 instead of a 54/54 and a shorter stem?

I am 5 10 and mine is a 54 with a 54.5 top tube, I am running a 110mm stem fits fine.

Also worth remembering that yes it is in way a Ribble winter frame with track ends however the head tube is higher.

Zoidburg

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2194 on: 16 October, 2009, 10:19:17 am »
So what do they ride like?

EDIT: They seem a little long in the top tube for the specified size... would I be looking at a 52 instead of a 54/54 and a shorter stem?

I am 5 10 and mine is a 54 with a 54.5 top tube, I am running a 110mm stem fits fine.

Also worth remembering that yes it is in way a Ribble winter frame with track ends however the head tube is higher.
I would actualy go up a size for myself and I am 5'10 as well, reach wise it looks entirely normal for it's size.

I have tried 54s and my knees are almost touching the bar ends, a spesh langster in a medium was the worst I tried, it was tiny and I felt hunched up.

Rhys W

  • I'm single, bilingual
    • Cardiff Ajax
Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2195 on: 16 October, 2009, 11:13:03 am »
If I was in the market for a winter frame I'd definitely check out the Ribbles as they seem very good VFM. I just looked at the geometry, and to get the right size top tube for me I'd have to get a 46cm. I have 4 road frames within 3-4mm of that top tube length, and they're all 51cm! (I'm talking horizontal top tube, centre-centre here.)

 There's something seriously odd about that geometry if I'd have to get a frame 5cm smaller in seat-tube, and I thought my frames were slightly longer in top-tube than normal for their size.

Zoidburg

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2196 on: 16 October, 2009, 11:26:11 am »

I suspect it may be a "sportive" thing.

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2197 on: 16 October, 2009, 11:45:45 am »
If I was in the market for a winter frame I'd definitely check out the Ribbles as they seem very good VFM. I just looked at the geometry, and to get the right size top tube for me I'd have to get a 46cm. I have 4 road frames within 3-4mm of that top tube length, and they're all 51cm! (I'm talking horizontal top tube, centre-centre here.)

 There's something seriously odd about that geometry if I'd have to get a frame 5cm smaller in seat-tube, and I thought my frames were slightly longer in top-tube than normal for their size.

The Dolan FXE looks like the Ribble winter frame but is different geometry, the ribble frame is odd sizes to me.

The 54cm FXE has a 55tt, 54st, 14ht, 991wb, Angles are 75.0 and 75.0

Terry Dolan

Rhys W

  • I'm single, bilingual
    • Cardiff Ajax
Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2198 on: 16 October, 2009, 12:15:15 pm »
Looking at the Dolan Preffiso (nearest equivalent to my winter frame), the same size c-t seat tube would give me 1.5cm more in the top-tube! Maybe the smaller frame sizes have these quirks exaggerated? It just shows you shouldn't buy a frame without getting the tape measure out and studying the geometry tables.

 I've based my frame-fit experience on a 15-year old Graham Weigh frame, realising it had a longer top-tube than expected which I could stretch out my long torso (for my height) on - 53.5cm on a 51cm (c/c) seat tube. And who built frames for Graham Weigh in the mid 90s? Terry Dolan, apparently!

Re: Members' bikes
« Reply #2199 on: 16 October, 2009, 01:01:57 pm »
Sportive thing?
Dont understand as Planet X claim that their sportive frames have a shorter top tube for comfort? (Ti Sportive for £799 - get 'em while u can!).
Nothing beats a tape measure........