Anyone have experience of Rourke Cycles frame building?

[sojournermike]

 Frames that are a little flexible in the main triangle and have very stiff chainstays are much, much nicer to ride.

So maybe a 631 main triangle and 853 chain/seat stays would work well? Assuming non-oversized tubing and medium sizing (I'm 5' 8" / 74Kg).

In terms of stiffness I don’t think 853 is any different to 631 for a given tune size and thickness, but as it’s stronger the builder can choose larger tubing and thinner walls for a stiffer lighter frame. FWIW, I’ve got a Genesis Volare in 853 that rides very nicely in a stiff ‘crit racer’ type of way, but that has a production custom tube set with ovalised top tube etc. It manages a very nice blend of feeling efficient at delivering power (well mine anyway), steering quickly and precisely and still being stable when descending or riding longer corners. The overall sense of of solidity.

Of course, that will tell you nothing about a custom frame in the same material;)

[Robh]

OT but I noticed Robh's Shand Stoater has no chainstay bridge. Don't know if that's in any way size-specific but he wasn't complaining about it.

Indeed. I can't recall if Steven ever told me why he builds them like that. Possibly something to do with the fact that the intended to be multi-purpose and/or because it's designed with fat tyres in mind.

[mzjo]

OS tubing in frames of medium size may suit those who regularly push out over 1kW but for the rest of us the usual result is that the frame is too stiff.

At one time there was a fashion for omitting the chainstay brace, and using oversized tubes. [ I had a frame built for me around this time, and had to have an argument before they would build it in standard gauge tubes. It turned up without the chainstay brace despite the fact that we had discussed this point at length, I wanted it, and it was clearly marked on the dwg. I rejected the frame out of hand....]    These frames without chainstay braces were (unless built with one of a few special BB shells) mostly pretty rotten frames; they felt dead to ride and the stays flexed more than they should have.

 Frames that are a little flexible in the main triangle and have very stiff chainstays are much, much nicer to ride.

cheers

My 1990 vintage Gitane frame has no chainstay bridge. It is a mass-production entry level racing frame. Christian (who gave it to me) said that he picked it up direct from the factory at Machecoul (cheaper that way) and that it wasn't one of his better buys (but he lent it to a lad who is now Elite and who regularly breaks carbon frames; he never managed to break it!). I have always thought it was for crit racing and that the absence of the bridge was to help with wheel changes with semi-horizontal rear ends (it also has quite a hich bb but close brake clearances). I actually like it as a fixed/ss frame but it is only entry level - Cromor main triangle and whatever was in the scrap bin for the rest - ok for light touring, I would guess less satisfactory for racing (and a far cry from 853).

[Oxford_Guy]

BTW just to be clearer, I don't want an ultra stiff "crit-racer" frame, it's for Sportives and club rides etc., so needs to be comfortable over quite long distances, but I do want it stiff enough in the places where you want stiffness e.g. bottom bracket area

[giropaul]

OT but I noticed Robh's Shand Stoater has no chainstay bridge. Don't know if that's in any way size-specific but he wasn't complaining about it.

Indeed. I can't recall if Steven ever told me why he builds them like that. Possibly something to do with the fact that the intended to be multi-purpose and/or because it's designed with fat tyres in mind.

I’ve had ( and still have a few) Merckx steel frames. All use a cast bottom bracket, and have no chainstay bridge. I guess that the thinking was that one would be unnecessary given the nature of the bracket. All I can say is that they were the best handling and “ feeling” frames I have ridden.

[Cudzoziemiec]

The omission of the chainstay bridge struck me as odd in the Stoater because, unlike mzjo's Gitane or (presumably) a Merckx frame, it's for touring not racing and so a bridge is rather useful to fix a mudguard to.

[Paul H]

Well the build I have planned is quite a traditional retro one...

While Rourke would build you whatever you ask for (Or their interpretation of it) retro isn't their speciality and if that's what I was looking for I'd be looking elsewhere.
How much variety have you got on a lugged frame?  Tubing diameter and geometry are determined by the lugs and IMO are going to have more impact on the way it rides than anything else. Any competent builder ought to be able to get the sizing right, choose the correct tubeset for the rider and put it together, which only leaves some component choices and how decorative you want it.  If I wanted fancy and a builder who relishes doing that, Woodrup would be top of my list, if that wasn't such a high priority then I'd consider Eddison or Ellis Briggs. 

[Karla]

Why would anyone ever go for a quill stem these days?  They're perfectly serviceable but thread less are just better.

[Hot Flatus]

I'd ask the same about steel frames for all but long-distance pan-continental touring

[Brucey]

threadless stems are 'better'...?   At what, exactly...?

BTW re chainstays and braces; yes a mounting point for a mudguard is a fine and wonderful thing; that was one reason I wanted one. But the change in stiffness is also not insignificant; IIRC the bending stiffness goes as the cube of the width of a beam, and the braced  region of the chainstays behaves somewhat more like  a structure of that total width rather than two stays side by side.  Thus without a brace, the length of the chainstays (from the pov of lateral stiffness) is effectively increased. 

'Big deal' you might say, so the chainstays are an inch or two longer, so what? Well, if you model the chainstays as cantilever bends then quite small changes in length have quite profound effects on stiffness; for example a 20% increase in length will result in over 70% increase in defection at the tip; to recover that requires a chainstay (of the same pattern) that would be +70% heavier.

 Needless to say any bike (eg touring, for mudguards, for fat tyres, or where the tyre isn't basically scraping the paint off the back of the seat tube) is vulnerable to having flexy stays, and in some tubesets the available options are only to beef up the wall thickness of the stays a relatively small amount. In frames that are meant for fat tyres, it can be worse yet; the stays are often crushed to a fraction of their original width to squeeze the tyre and the transmission in, and the frame can easily feel like it has a hinge in it....

cheers

[Oxford_Guy]

Why would anyone ever go for a quill stem these days?  They're perfectly serviceable but thread less are just better.

Because threadless stems are ugly on  a thin tubed retro-style steel road bike with a non-compact frame

[Oxford_Guy]

I'd ask the same about steel frames for all but long-distance pan-continental touring

Because I don't like fat carbon and aluminium tubes on a bike and like the ride feel you get from steel

[Oxford_Guy]

Why would anyone ever go for a quill stem these days?  They're perfectly serviceable but thread less are just better.

Because threadless stems are ugly on  a thin tubed retro-style steel road bike

But I don't mind them on my compact frame Hewitt tourer

[yoav]

I am surprised but I guess it’s a very personal thing. In my time, I have ridden steel bikes by Mercian, Condor, Woodrup, Arthur Caygill, Colnago, Dave Yates* and Shand. All have been, and some still are, a pleasure to ride. All but the Shand are horizontal top tube, lugged brazed frames, the Shand has a sloping top tube and is TIG welded.

* actually built by me on Dave Yates’ framebuilding course.

[Hot Flatus]

I'd ask the same about steel frames for all but long-distance pan-continental touring

Because I don't like fat carbon and aluminium tubes on a bike and like the ride feel you get from steel

Which is all fine. I'm not going to tell you what you should like riding.

I like a nice lively frame that responds in a snap to efforts and doesn't feel like it is absorbing energy. I've had loads of frames, 4 steel, 3 Ti, 5 Alu, at least 7 CF.  They all rode slightly differently especially the CF, in terms of comfort and responsiveness. One of the most fun to ride is a fat-tubed aluminium. I haven't missed any of the steel ones at all. But that's me. I ride in a certain way, for certain distances. I have certain requirements, but not others. My bikes are never subjected to being bashed about which would concern me if I had a CF bike with pencil thin stays.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Well the build I have planned is quite a traditional retro one...

While Rourke would build you whatever you ask for (Or their interpretation of it) retro isn't their speciality and if that's what I was looking for I'd be looking elsewhere.
How much variety have you got on a lugged frame?  Tubing diameter and geometry are determined by the lugs and IMO are going to have more impact on the way it rides than anything else. Any competent builder ought to be able to get the sizing right, choose the correct tubeset for the rider and put it together, which only leaves some component choices and how decorative you want it.  If I wanted fancy and a builder who relishes doing that, Woodrup would be top of my list, if that wasn't such a high priority then I'd consider Eddison or Ellis Briggs.

If I wanted fancy and a builder who relishes that and I had a lot of money to spend on it, then, having seen his work at Bespoked, I'd speak to Paulus Quiros, who I think is in West Wales (and is actually two people, Paulus and Quiros). But as I'm not really into bikes that look like jewellery (though I can appreciate their beauty, I wouldn't want one myself), I won't.

[Oxford_Guy]

Well the build I have planned is quite a traditional retro one...

While Rourke would build you whatever you ask for (Or their interpretation of it) retro isn't their speciality and if that's what I was looking for I'd be looking elsewhere.
How much variety have you got on a lugged frame?  Tubing diameter and geometry are determined by the lugs and IMO are going to have more impact on the way it rides than anything else. Any competent builder ought to be able to get the sizing right, choose the correct tubeset for the rider and put it together, which only leaves some component choices and how decorative you want it.  If I wanted fancy and a builder who relishes doing that, Woodrup would be top of my list, if that wasn't such a high priority then I'd consider Eddison or Ellis Briggs.

Ellis Briggs went into liquidation, this year, sadly: http://road.cc/content/news/241129-famed-yorkshire-frame-maker-ellis-briggs-enters-liquidation

[Deano]

Ellis Briggs went into liquidation, this year, sadly: http://road.cc/content/news/241129-famed-yorkshire-frame-maker-ellis-briggs-enters-liquidation

That's a shame, they did a great job refurbing my Dave Yates - exactly how I wanted it, and ahead of their predicted timescale. They got all the comms and stuff right. I wonder if the free bottle they chucked in is now a collectors' item?

[Oxford_Guy]

Ellis Briggs went into liquidation, this year, sadly: http://road.cc/content/news/241129-famed-yorkshire-frame-maker-ellis-briggs-enters-liquidation

That's a shame, they did a great job refurbing my Dave Yates - exactly how I wanted it, and ahead of their predicted timescale. They got all the comms and stuff right. I wonder if the free bottle they chucked in is now a collectors' item?

They would have definitely been on my shortlist if they hadn't folded ;-(

[Karla]

I'd ask the same about steel frames for all but long-distance pan-continental touring

*Currently long distance intercontinental touring on an ally frame ...

[Deano]

I'd ask the same about steel frames for all but long-distance pan-continental touring

*Currently long distance intercontinental touring on an ally frame ...

What a daft choice - doesn't aluminium conduct electricity better than steel?

[yoav]

The omission of the chainstay bridge struck me as odd in the Stoater because, unlike mzjo's Gitane or (presumably) a Merckx frame, it's for touring not racing and so a bridge is rather useful to fix a mudguard to.

It’s not a problem as Shand fit a boss on the back of the seat tube down by the bottom bracket that allows the bottom end of the mudguard to be secured with a screw.

[sojournermike]

I'd ask the same about steel frames for all but long-distance pan-continental touring

*Currently long distance intercontinental touring on an ally frame ...

What a daft choice - doesn't aluminium conduct electricity better than steel?

Wouldn’t be surprised if the eddy currents caused by passing through the earth’s magnetic field are slowing him down significantly

[Brucey]

could be why I find myself mostly riding round in circles....

cheers

[rafletcher]

could be why I find myself mostly riding round in circles....

cheers

Is this Brucey’s shortest ever post?