| |
Main
Date: 22 Sep 2007 23:45:28
From: Sparky
Subject: Compact Frame sizing
|
I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
$1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
--
I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
You can download it at http://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo
|
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 21:06:47
From: rdclark
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 25, 1:13 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca > wrote:
> A fork that can't rust on my commuter? On my *all weather* commuter?
Every bike I've ever had has been in more than one crash. The
likelihood of some sort of crash is IMO fairly high, sooner or later,
for a daily urban bike commuter. Since even many CF fork manufacturers
hedge on the subject of whether a CF fork should be replaced after a
crash, this is a degree of uncertainty I'm not willing to accept on a
commuter. I have steel forks on all my bikes. There's no rust. because
the only exposed metal is in places that are greased.
Then there's the whole fender- and rack-mount issue.
r
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2007 09:11:08
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
In article <1190779607.307424.316260@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com >,
rdclark <rdclark2@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 25, 1:13 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
[CF forks]
> > A fork that can't rust on my commuter? On my *all weather* commuter?
> Then there's the whole fender- and rack-mount issue.
Sorry, I should have addressed this in my last post. Aside from the fact
that fender/rack-mounts are hardly excluded by the design of a CF fork,
the sport of cyclocross offers plenty of all-rounder CF forks that have
(removable) canti posts and fender/rack mounts. I did a 5-second search
(googled "carbon touring fork") and found a CF-bodied CX fork with
mid-mounts (!) on eBay.
Here's an assembled tourer with the same features:
http://www.veloeuropa.com/products/framesets/rando_photos.html
As it happens, the Nashbar fork on my Nashbar X-framed CX bike has no
mid-mounts, but does have a disc brake mount. Fender mount? But of
course.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2007 09:00:26
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
In article <1190779607.307424.316260@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com >,
rdclark <rdclark2@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 25, 1:13 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
>
> > A fork that can't rust on my commuter? On my *all weather* commuter?
>
> Every bike I've ever had has been in more than one crash. The
> likelihood of some sort of crash is IMO fairly high, sooner or later,
> for a daily urban bike commuter. Since even many CF fork manufacturers
> hedge on the subject of whether a CF fork should be replaced after a
> crash, this is a degree of uncertainty I'm not willing to accept on a
> commuter. I have steel forks on all my bikes. There's no rust. because
> the only exposed metal is in places that are greased.
>
> Then there's the whole fender- and rack-mount issue.
I have more forks with rust on them than I have forks that I have
crashed. I've had one noteworthy MVA in six years of commuting (not
counting a ludicrous incident in which I did a low-speed berf into the
back of a car, doing no damage to bicycle or car). The one incident
didn't write off the steel fork, though the frame did need realignment.
Of course, I usually get my commuters at garage sales or from other
people's trash piles, so they sometimes come pre-rusted.
Seriously though, I'd say that while there are lots of decent pro/con
arguments to CF forks on commuter bikes, crashing should be a rare
enough event (and at-fault crashing so much more so) that I'm not going
to pick my commuter bike fork for its crashworthiness.
Rust, on the other hand, that I'm sure I'll be dealing with.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 15:30:43
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 24, 6:13 pm, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, Ozark Bicycle
>
>
>
> <bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 24, 3:04 pm, rdclark <rdcla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
>
> > > > In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
>
> > > > SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Sparky wrote:
> > > > >> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
> > > > >> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
> > > > >> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
> > > > >> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
> > > > >> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
> > > > >> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
> > > > >> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
> > > > > I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
> > > > > coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
> > > > > usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
> > > > > and it's down to $836 versus $700.
> > > > > In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
> > > > > $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
> > > > > bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
> > > > > difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
> > > > > road bicycle.
>
> > > > At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
> > > > rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
> > > > also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
>
> > > Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
> > > commuter?
>
> > ISTM that a CF fork is right up there with low spoke-count wheels on
> > the list of things you *don't want* on a commuter.
>
> > (Hey, if you buy a Trek Portland, you can get both stupid things for
> > one high price.) ;-)
>
> Don't forget the mono cock frame!
"Family newsgroup", buddy.......
|
| |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 01:41:00
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 24, 8:13 pm, Dennis Ferguson <dcfergu...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> On 2007-09-24, smokeystrodt...@gmail.com <smokeystrodt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Dennis, how do you like your Gunnar Sport? I'm considering purchasing
> > one in the future.
>
> I can recommend it. It is the bike I commute on in California so, these
> days, it gets more mileage than my other bicycles.
>
> I do have a list of tiny things I wish were different on the bike:
>
> - The pump peg is too fat, and too low on the headtube, to be useful
> for the frame-fit pumps I have.
>
> - Fenders fit best on a bike with standard reach calipers if the
> brake pads are close to the bottom of the slot. On my Gunnar
> they are about half way up, which makes it a bit tight under there.
Dopey! I didn't notice that the last time I checked one out. It's off
my personal wanna list then, unless you can sincerely get a 28mm tire
and a 35mm mudguard in there at the same time.
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 21:11:32
From: Dennis Ferguson
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On 2007-09-25, landotter <landotter@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 24, 8:13 pm, Dennis Ferguson <dcfergu...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>> - Fenders fit best on a bike with standard reach calipers if the
>> brake pads are close to the bottom of the slot. On my Gunnar
>> they are about half way up, which makes it a bit tight under there.
>
> Dopey! I didn't notice that the last time I checked one out. It's off
> my personal wanna list then, unless you can sincerely get a 28mm tire
> and a 35mm mudguard in there at the same time.
I usually use Michelin 25mm tires, but Conti 28mm tires from my other
bike (1mm taller) do fit under 35mm SKS mudguards, just barely. I suspect
Planet Bike mudguards might not work since they seem to need a bit more
space under the brakes than SKS.
The extra 3 or 4 mm space you get with other frames certainly makes
everything less fiddly. It might not be necessary to qualify what fits
by brand.
Dennis Ferguson
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 16:28:17
From:
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 24, 1:39 pm, Dennis Ferguson <dcfergu...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> On 2007-09-23, landotter <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 23, 10:45 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >> Sparky wrote:
> >> > I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
> >> > the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
> >> > $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
> >> > are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
> >> > a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
> >> > MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
> >> > be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
>
> >> Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
> >> a compact frame is a very bad idea.
>
> > [drivelsnip]
>
> > That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
> > using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
> > comfortable height.
>
> You could eliminate spacers if the compact frame had a longer headtube
> than a flat top with the same top tube length (measured horizontally),
> but with most compacts I think you'd need to buy a custom geometry
> to get that. For the compact frames I looked at when I bought my
> last bike, when I picked the compact frame size with the top tube length
> I prefer I found the head tube was almost exact the same length as my
> other bikes, with few exceptions (the Trek Pilot might have been one).
> The one I bought (a Gunnar Sport) has the same stem angle and number
> of spacers as my horizontal top tube bikes, and the same cockpit length,
> it just has more seat post showing.
>
> > You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
> > bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
> > frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
>
> Certainly if you are willing to ride a bike with a longer top tube
> you'll be able to get by with fewer spacers, but this is equally true
> whether the top tube slopes or not. To reduce the stack of spacers
> you would need a longer head tube relative to the horizontal top tube
> length, and the standard geometries of the sloping tube bikes I've
> looked at mostly don't provide this.
>
> Personally I don't care much about the slope of the top tube, nor
> the height of the stack of spacers (except that the latter is limited
> if the steerer isn't steel). I just don't think that the standard
> geometry of most sloping top tube bikes is designed to achieve want
> you want.
>
> Dennis Ferguson- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dennis, how do you like your Gunnar Sport? I'm considering purchasing
one in the future.
Smokey
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 01:13:29
From: Dennis Ferguson
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On 2007-09-24, smokeystrodtman@gmail.com <smokeystrodtman@gmail.com > wrote:
> Dennis, how do you like your Gunnar Sport? I'm considering purchasing
> one in the future.
I can recommend it. It is the bike I commute on in California so, these
days, it gets more mileage than my other bicycles.
I do have a list of tiny things I wish were different on the bike:
- The pump peg is too fat, and too low on the headtube, to be useful
for the frame-fit pumps I have.
- Fenders fit best on a bike with standard reach calipers if the
brake pads are close to the bottom of the slot. On my Gunnar
they are about half way up, which makes it a bit tight under there.
- There's only one eyelet on each rear dropout, which means if you
mount both a rack and a fender it is hard to do it in a way which
lets you remove either without effecting the other (this is probably
only a problem of my own making; I have both, but I like to
remove them if I won't be needing them).
- I wish the hole in the chainstay bridge was threaded.
I actually went to the shop with the intention of buying a bike with
a Soma frame, but the Gunnar was on sale and it looked so pretty
that I let the salesperson up-sell me.
Dennis Ferguson
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 23:13:53
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, Ozark Bicycle
<bicycleatel...@ozarkbicycleservice.com > wrote:
> On Sep 24, 3:04 pm, rdclark <rdcla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
>
> > > In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
>
> > > SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > > > Sparky wrote:
> > > >> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
> > > >> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
> > > >> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
> > > >> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
> > > >> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
> > > >> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
> > > >> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
> > > > I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
> > > > coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
> > > > usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
> > > > and it's down to $836 versus $700.
> > > > In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
> > > > $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
> > > > bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
> > > > difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
> > > > road bicycle.
>
> > > At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
> > > rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
> > > also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
>
> > Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
> > commuter?
>
> ISTM that a CF fork is right up there with low spoke-count wheels on
> the list of things you *don't want* on a commuter.
>
> (Hey, if you buy a Trek Portland, you can get both stupid things for
> one high price.) ;-)
Don't forget the mono cock frame!
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 13:09:57
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 24, 3:04 pm, rdclark <rdcla...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
>
> > SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > > Sparky wrote:
> > >> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
> > >> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
> > >> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
> > >> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
> > >> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
> > >> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
> > >> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
> > > I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
> > > coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
> > > usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
> > > and it's down to $836 versus $700.
> > > In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
> > > $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
> > > bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
> > > difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
> > > road bicycle.
>
> > At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
> > rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
> > also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
>
> Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
> commuter?
>
ISTM that a CF fork is right up there with low spoke-count wheels on
the list of things you *don't want* on a commuter.
(Hey, if you buy a Trek Portland, you can get both stupid things for
one high price.) ;-)
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 13:04:20
From: rdclark
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com > wrote:
> In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
>
>
>
>
>
> SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > Sparky wrote:
> >> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
> >> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
> >> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
> >> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
> >> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
> >> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
> >> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
> > I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
> > coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
> > usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
> > and it's down to $836 versus $700.
> > In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
> > $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
> > bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
> > difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
> > road bicycle.
>
> At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
> rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
> also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
commuter?
r
|
| | |
Date: 25 Sep 2007 05:13:49
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
In article <1190664260.972470.191900@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
rdclark <rdclark2@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
> > In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > > Sparky wrote:
> > >> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
> > >> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
> > >> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
> > >> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
> > >> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
> > >> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
> > >> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
> > > I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
> > > coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
> > > usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
> > > and it's down to $836 versus $700.
> > > In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
> > > $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
> > > bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
> > > difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
> > > road bicycle.
> >
> > At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
> > rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
> > also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
>
> Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
> commuter?
A fork that can't rust on my commuter? On my *all weather* commuter?
Sold,
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 23:15:59
From: Kevin
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> In article <1190664260.972470.191900@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> rdclark <rdclark2@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
>>> In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>>> Sparky wrote:
>>>>> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
>>>>> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
>>>>> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
>>>>> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
>>>>> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
>>>>> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
>>>>> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
>>>> I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
>>>> coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
>>>> usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
>>>> and it's down to $836 versus $700.
>>>> In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
>>>> $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
>>>> bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
>>>> difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
>>>> road bicycle.
>>> At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
>>> rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
>>> also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
>> Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
>> commuter?
>
> A fork that can't rust on my commuter? On my *all weather* commuter?
>
> Sold,
>
That was my idea. No rust.
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2007 09:14:24
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
In article <13fh9t0tajhus4e@corp.supernews.com >,
Kevin <notme@notmyemail.com > wrote:
> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > In article <1190664260.972470.191900@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
> > rdclark <rdclark2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sep 24, 12:08 am, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
> >>> In article <46f6eb05$0$27198$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> >>>> Sparky wrote:
> >>>>> It's not my first road bike. My first one was run over by a pickup
> >>>>> truck when it hit me. I was young and stupid, and riding on the
> >>>>> wrong side of the road. The driver was looking to his left as he
> >>>>> pulled out of a parking lot and made a right turn and ran me down.
> >>>>> Scary, I had to hold onto the bumper and grill as he dragged me and
> >>>>> the bike into the street. Thank goodness lots of people were honking
> >>>>> their horns, as he was an oblivious SOB.
> >>>> I'd wait for an REI sale or coupon. They often send out 20% off
> >>>> coupons for one item, and while it excludes most bicycles, it doesn't
> >>>> usually exclude Novara bicycles. Add that to their 5% Visa rebate,
> >>>> and it's down to $836 versus $700.
> >>>> In any case, you said $1000, so that's why I came up with the best
> >>>> $1000 bicycle I could find. Remember, you're going to have this
> >>>> bicycle a long time (hopefully), so you'll forget about a $200
> >>>> difference soon enough. Run like hell away from any compact frame
> >>>> road bicycle.
> >>> At $836, it's not too bad a deal. It's way over priced at the $1099
> >>> rei wants. The front derailleur is shimano 2200, really low end. It
> >>> also comes with a steel fork, and the schwinn has a carbon fiber.
> >> Do you really want a CF fork on a commuter? On an *all weather*
> >> commuter?
> >
> > A fork that can't rust on my commuter? On my *all weather* commuter?
> >
> > Sold,
> >
> That was my idea. No rust.
In fairness, now that I've spent a couple of posts rubbishing others for
not liking this, I have to admit that for most commuter bikes, rust on
the fork legs is just not a big deal. The rust on my rusty forks has all
started where the paint was scratched off, or on the 20 year old forks,
maybe near the drain holes and some chrome pitting or similar.
Unless you ride in an especially corrosion-prone area, you probably
shouldn't use that as a consideration. There's about 20 parts on a bike
that are more likely to be damaged by corrosion than the fork.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 13:03:04
From: rdclark
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 23, 6:40 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com > wrote:
> Run like hell away from any compact frame road bicycle.
If I had followed this advice six years ago, I would have failed to
buy the best-fitting and most comfortable and reliable bike I've ever
owned.
People come in all different shapes, sizes, builds, proportions. The
availability of more different approaches to frame design only
increases the probability that anyone can find the perfect fit.
Some manufacturers may use compact frames as a way to sell less for
more. So condemn those manufacturers, not the design, because other
manufacturers use the same approach to make better-fitting road bikes
available to people who once had to accept more uncomfortable
compromises.
r
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 20:23:44
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 23, 10:56 am, landotter <landot...@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 23, 10:45 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sparky wrote:
> > > I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
> > > the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
> > > $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
> > > are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
> > > a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
> > > MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
> > > be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
>
> > Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
> > a compact frame is a very bad idea.
>
> [drivelsnip]
>
> That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
> using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
> comfortable height.
Agreed. For someone who wants a high(er) handlebar position, a sloping
TT makes a whole lot of sense.
>
> You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
> bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
> frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 20:20:58
From: Ozark Bicycle
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 23, 1:18 pm, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com > wrote:
> landotter wrote:
> > That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
> > using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
> > comfortable height.
>
> > You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
> > bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
> > frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
>
> There _is_ a tendency for shops toe sell frames that are too small.
>
> It has nothing to do with looks.
>
> You need to understand the inherent disadvantages in the compact frame
> geometry for the vast majority of riders that are of "normal" proportions.
Please regal us with all the details, oh Wise One!
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 18:45:57
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 23, 1:31 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com > wrote:
> In article <46f689c0$0$27216$742ec...@news.sonic.net>
>
> SMS<scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
> > Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most
> > riders, a compact frame is a very bad idea.
>
> The Schwinn Super Sport DBX is the bike I am most interested in, and
> it happens to have a compact frame. I have no religious affiliation to
> them one way or the other.
>
> > Disc brakes are rare on road bikes, as they really are unnecessary,
> > even in rain, but if you've got your heart set on disc brakes on a
> > road bike look at the Novara Element,
> > "http://www.rei.com/product/744808#"
> > With the REI dividend it'd be under $1000. Get an REI Visa card
> > first, and save another 5%. Or wait for a sale, as often REI has
> > 15-20% off on Novara bicycles (no dividend but the 5% for the Visa
> > card still applies on sale items).
> > If the size isn't right, REI gives you no trouble on exchanges,
> > something that is not the case at most other bicycle retailers.
>
> That one is also in my sights. It looks like a great bike. However, I
> am looking at scoring a new Schwinn DBX for about $700, which is a few
> hundred less than the Element.
That's a fair enough price I guess. Considering the no-name wheel
components, it certainly isn't worth the retail 1300 bucks.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 15:56:45
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 23, 10:45 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com > wrote:
> Sparky wrote:
> > I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
> > the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
> > $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
> > are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
> > a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
> > MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
> > be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
>
> Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
> a compact frame is a very bad idea.
[drivelsnip]
That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
comfortable height.
You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
|
| | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 18:39:46
From: Dennis Ferguson
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On 2007-09-23, landotter <landotter@gmail.com > wrote:
> On Sep 23, 10:45 am, SMS <scharf.ste...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> Sparky wrote:
>> > I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
>> > the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
>> > $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
>> > are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
>> > a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
>> > MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
>> > be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
>>
>> Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
>> a compact frame is a very bad idea.
>
> [drivelsnip]
>
> That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
> using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
> comfortable height.
You could eliminate spacers if the compact frame had a longer headtube
than a flat top with the same top tube length (measured horizontally),
but with most compacts I think you'd need to buy a custom geometry
to get that. For the compact frames I looked at when I bought my
last bike, when I picked the compact frame size with the top tube length
I prefer I found the head tube was almost exact the same length as my
other bikes, with few exceptions (the Trek Pilot might have been one).
The one I bought (a Gunnar Sport) has the same stem angle and number
of spacers as my horizontal top tube bikes, and the same cockpit length,
it just has more seat post showing.
> You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
> bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
> frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
Certainly if you are willing to ride a bike with a longer top tube
you'll be able to get by with fewer spacers, but this is equally true
whether the top tube slopes or not. To reduce the stack of spacers
you would need a longer head tube relative to the horizontal top tube
length, and the standard geometries of the sloping tube bikes I've
looked at mostly don't provide this.
Personally I don't care much about the slope of the top tube, nor
the height of the stack of spacers (except that the latter is limited
if the steerer isn't steel). I just don't think that the standard
geometry of most sloping top tube bikes is designed to achieve want
you want.
Dennis Ferguson
|
| | |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 11:18:00
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
landotter wrote:
> That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
> using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
> comfortable height.
>
> You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
> bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
> frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
>
There _is_ a tendency for shops toe sell frames that are too small.
It has nothing to do with looks.
You need to understand the inherent disadvantages in the compact frame
geometry for the vast majority of riders that are of "normal" proportions.
Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than standard
geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive. Don't fall for
it! There are still a sufficient number of non-compact frames available,
so you don't have to do whatever the bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
For $1000, you don't have to compromise with a compact frame.
|
| | | |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 15:32:15
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than standard
> geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive. Don't fall for
> it! There are still a sufficient number of non-compact frames available,
> so you don't have to do whatever the bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
We need to differentiate between "compact" frames, which might allow a
manufacturer to cut back on the number of sizes, and "sloping top tube"
bikes, which do little more (good or bad) than allow someone with
shorter-than-normal legs to fit a given-sized bike (if that person simply
chose a smaller size, the issue would be the top tube becoming too short).
Beyond that, it's style points.
If you look at what Trek did with the '08 Madone lineup, they essentially
doubled the number if size options when they went to a sloping top tube.
Almost every model they make is available with either a standard head tube
height (as used on all prior Madones and every other Trek "racing" bike
they've made since 1992), which is called the "Pro" fit, or the exact same
frame (by exact, I mean every single dimension, angles, chainstay length,
everything) with a 3cm taller head tube, called the "Performance" fit.
Not one size (50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62cm for men's) was dropped, and in
fact they added a 64cm in some models.
Other manufacturers may or may not have done something similar. My point is
that, just because it has a sloping top tube and someone decides to call it
a "compact" frame, has nothing to do with limiting sizing options. Could
even be the opposite.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com > wrote in message
news:46f6ad85$0$27174$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> landotter wrote:
>
>> That's bullshit. Just ride a properly sized compact and you can avoid
>> using a bunch of spacers or stupid stem dohicky to get the bars at a
>> comfortable height.
>>
>> You might think a flat top looks better--but please, stop with the
>> bullshit to back up your "faith". The problem is that people buy
>> frames too small, whether it be sloping top tube or not.
>>
>
> There _is_ a tendency for shops toe sell frames that are too small.
>
> It has nothing to do with looks.
>
> You need to understand the inherent disadvantages in the compact frame
> geometry for the vast majority of riders that are of "normal" proportions.
>
> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than standard
> geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive. Don't fall for
> it! There are still a sufficient number of non-compact frames available,
> so you don't have to do whatever the bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
>
> For $1000, you don't have to compromise with a compact frame.
|
| | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 03:00:20
From: Mike Kruger
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
>> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than
>> standard geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive.
>> Don't fall for it! There are still a sufficient number of
>> non-compact frames available, so you don't have to do whatever the
>> bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
>
> We need to differentiate between "compact" frames, which might allow a
> manufacturer to cut back on the number of sizes, and "sloping top
> tube" bikes, which do little more (good or bad) than allow someone
> with shorter-than-normal legs to fit a given-sized bike (if that
> person simply chose a smaller size, the issue would be the top tube
> becoming too short). Beyond that, it's style points.
>
> If you look at what Trek did with the '08 Madone lineup, they
> essentially doubled the number if size options when they went to a
> sloping top tube. Almost every model they make is available with
> either a standard head tube height (as used on all prior Madones and
> every other Trek "racing" bike they've made since 1992), which is
> called the "Pro" fit, or the exact same frame (by exact, I mean every
> single dimension, angles, chainstay length, everything) with a 3cm
> taller head tube, called the "Performance" fit.
> Not one size (50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62cm for men's) was dropped,
> and in fact they added a 64cm in some models.
>
> Other manufacturers may or may not have done something similar. My
> point is that, just because it has a sloping top tube and someone
> decides to call it a "compact" frame, has nothing to do with limiting
> sizing options. Could even be the opposite.
>
That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also an
advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss? Inventory
has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike shop, especially
in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes to wait.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 24 Sep 2007 03:47:47
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
In article <8LFJi.200$4V6.128@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net >,
"Mike Kruger" <MikeKr@mouse-potato.com > wrote:
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
> >> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
> >> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than
> >> standard geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive.
> >> Don't fall for it! There are still a sufficient number of
> >> non-compact frames available, so you don't have to do whatever the
> >> bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
> >
> > We need to differentiate between "compact" frames, which might allow a
> > manufacturer to cut back on the number of sizes, and "sloping top
> > tube" bikes, which do little more (good or bad) than allow someone
> > with shorter-than-normal legs to fit a given-sized bike (if that
> > person simply chose a smaller size, the issue would be the top tube
> > becoming too short). Beyond that, it's style points.
> >
> > If you look at what Trek did with the '08 Madone lineup, they
> > essentially doubled the number if size options when they went to a
> > sloping top tube. Almost every model they make is available with
> > either a standard head tube height (as used on all prior Madones and
> > every other Trek "racing" bike they've made since 1992), which is
> > called the "Pro" fit, or the exact same frame (by exact, I mean every
> > single dimension, angles, chainstay length, everything) with a 3cm
> > taller head tube, called the "Performance" fit.
> > Not one size (50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62cm for men's) was dropped,
> > and in fact they added a 64cm in some models.
> >
> > Other manufacturers may or may not have done something similar. My
> > point is that, just because it has a sloping top tube and someone
> > decides to call it a "compact" frame, has nothing to do with limiting
> > sizing options. Could even be the opposite.
> >
> That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also an
> advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
> could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss? Inventory
> has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike shop, especially
> in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes to wait.
Sounds like the best of both worlds to me: the manufacturer offers as
many sizes as anyone could want (short of a custom frame) and compact
sizing (and the concommitant availability of long seatposts and more
stem sizes) allow for smaller frame inventories, if that's what the shop
desires.
For my part, I see compact sizing from the perspective of a used-bike
trader: fewer frame sizes means a greater chance that a given used bike
will fit a given buyer.
--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos
|
| | | | | |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 20:38:01
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
>> Other manufacturers may or may not have done something similar. My
>> point is that, just because it has a sloping top tube and someone
>> decides to call it a "compact" frame, has nothing to do with limiting
>> sizing options. Could even be the opposite.
>>
> That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also
> an advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
> could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss?
> Inventory has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike
> shop, especially in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes
> to wait.
Inventory is unquestionably a nightmare. To cover all the sizes, models &
colors available is simply impossible; a retailer must try to balance the
needs of their own customers with the correct available product. But sizing
is not an area where corners should be cut, at least not if you give more
than lip service to the idea that people come in more variations that small,
medium & large.
Giant did try to eliminate a whole lot of sizes by claiming that their
innovative compact design allowed more flexibility for fit. Dealers loved
it, at least initially, because they could stock so much less inventory,
*and* it gave customers the idea that sizing was no more difficult for
buying a road bike than socks. But ultimately market forces (and
intelligence) won out and people recognized that frame "height" was no more
important than effective top tube length ("effective" meaning the distance
forward from the bottom bracket).
People are reasonably adaptable; the need for 1cm frame height increments is
generally recognized as wasteful (added complexity with little benefit). But
3cm increments is probably the limit, with the issue often being that the
reduction on available sizes yields too great a difference in top tube
length.
--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com
"Mike Kruger" <MikeKr@mouse-potato.com > wrote in message
news:8LFJi.200$4V6.128@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net...
> Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
>>> Compact frames are to save the manufacturer money. They've tried to
>>> convince people that they're better (or at least no worse) than
>>> standard geometry frames because there's a big monetary incentive.
>>> Don't fall for it! There are still a sufficient number of
>>> non-compact frames available, so you don't have to do whatever the
>>> bicycle manufacturers want you to do.
>>
>> We need to differentiate between "compact" frames, which might allow a
>> manufacturer to cut back on the number of sizes, and "sloping top
>> tube" bikes, which do little more (good or bad) than allow someone
>> with shorter-than-normal legs to fit a given-sized bike (if that
>> person simply chose a smaller size, the issue would be the top tube
>> becoming too short). Beyond that, it's style points.
>>
>> If you look at what Trek did with the '08 Madone lineup, they
>> essentially doubled the number if size options when they went to a
>> sloping top tube. Almost every model they make is available with
>> either a standard head tube height (as used on all prior Madones and
>> every other Trek "racing" bike they've made since 1992), which is
>> called the "Pro" fit, or the exact same frame (by exact, I mean every
>> single dimension, angles, chainstay length, everything) with a 3cm
>> taller head tube, called the "Performance" fit.
>> Not one size (50, 52, 54, 56, 58, 60, 62cm for men's) was dropped,
>> and in fact they added a 64cm in some models.
>>
>> Other manufacturers may or may not have done something similar. My
>> point is that, just because it has a sloping top tube and someone
>> decides to call it a "compact" frame, has nothing to do with limiting
>> sizing options. Could even be the opposite.
>>
> That's a perspective from the manufacturer side. I thought there was also
> an advantage from the retailer side. If you carried a compact frame model,
> could you "cover the waterfront" more easily with fewer optionss?
> Inventory has bound to be a problem with a small business like a bike
> shop, especially in dealing with taller or shorter people. Nobody likes
> to wait.
>
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 08:45:23
From: SMS
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
Sparky wrote:
> I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
> the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
> $1,000.00. My target right now is the Schwinn Super Sport DBX. There
> are some 2006's still available. My problem is I can't tell if I need
> a small or a medium frame. I'm about 5'7". I have an 18" Yukon Giant
> MTB and I think it's just a touch big. Any idea what frame size would
> be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
Is there some reason you're looking at a compact frame? For most riders,
a compact frame is a very bad idea.
As one major bicycle manufacturer wrote: "there's a disturbing trend
among some bike companies to re-tool their road frames by shortening the
seat tube and slanting the top tube down from the head tube. This new
design "breakthrough," they argue, saves frame weight. And if you take
their claim literally, they're right - a shorter seat tube does make a
bare frame a little lighter. What they don't tell you is that their
complete bicycle actually weighs more than a bike with a conventional
geometry. Why? You have to use longer (and therefore heavier) seatposts
and stems on smaller frames to fit the rider properly, and their added
weight more than off-sets the few grams saved by their sloping top tube
frames."
Disc brakes are rare on road bikes, as they really are unnecessary, even
in rain, but if you've got your heart set on disc brakes on a road bike
look at the Novara Element, "http://www.rei.com/product/744808#"
With the REI dividend it'd be under $1000. Get an REI Visa card first,
and save another 5%. Or wait for a sale, as often REI has 15-20% off on
Novara bicycles (no dividend but the 5% for the Visa card still applies
on sale items).
If the size isn't right, REI gives you no trouble on exchanges,
something that is not the case at most other bicycle retailers.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 00:55:14
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 22, 7:40 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com > wrote:
> In article
> <1190507547.845749.28...@n39g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>landotter
>
> <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 22, 6:45 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
> >> . Any idea what frame size would
> >> be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
> > It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
> > current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched,
> > orjust right.
>
> Thanks. that sounds like a useful approach. My current bike has
> straight bars, and I am looking to go to drops. Is there any
> adjustment needed to the virtual top tube length? Drops seem to extend
> the reach. Thanks.
>
I ride the same top tube length on my flat bar city bike and my drop
bar bike, which probably doesn't mean much.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 00:54:21
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 22, 7:34 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com > wrote:
> In article
> <1190506136.695097.123...@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com>landotter
>
> <landot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 22, 6:45 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com> wrote:
> >> I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes
> >> (for the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
> >> $1,000.00.
> > Disc brakes on a road bike are all hype. Put some Kool-Stops on
> > whatever calipers you get and you'll stop just fine. Discs limit
> > yourability to mount fenders and racks which are far more important
> > on a
> > commuter.
>
> I used to commute all year round, and I have slid into the back of a
> car due to water on the rims keeping the brakes from grabbing. the
> reviews I have read have been very positive toward the disc brakes on
> the road bikes. I appreciate your opinion, but I'm not convinced that
> discs are a waste of time.
>
> --
> I'm trying a new usenet client for Mac, Nemo OS X.
> You can download it athttp://www.malcom-mac.com/nemo
Well, you're a Mac user, so I guess you need a bit of a handicap--but
I've been commuting near twenty years rain and dry with caliper
brakes, and they work fine.
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 00:32:27
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 22, 6:45 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com > wrote:
>. Any idea what frame size would
> be best? I don't really have an opportunity to ride one.
>
It's all about reach. Measure your virtual top tube length on your
current bike and adjust for whether you find it cramped, stretched, or
just right.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2007 17:32:00
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: Walmart bike good enough?
|
In article <rcousine-2FCCFD.14520722092007@news.telus.net >,
Ryan Cousineau <rcousine@sfu.ca > writes:
>> "Fine 'n dandy just like sugar candy" is just an old,
>> general-purpose cliche, like "I'm so hungry I could eat an
>> ox," or "There's not enough room in here to swing a cat."
>>
>> I don't condone cruelty to cats, but I wouldn't mind
>> barbecuing an ox. I guess it would have to be marinated
>> somehow. And I'd need some help moving it around.
...
> Tom: you find the ox, I'll provide the barbeque pit.
Remember that scene in Apocolypse Now? Okay, that might've
been a water buffalo who was bled stupid and then had his
head swiftly lopped off.
I have it in mind to marinate the ox with an ad hoc
mixture of (gallons of) terryaki & sherry, and some
select spices & herbs. Maybe toss some hand-picked
field mushrooms into the brew for the last 10 minutes
of marination (to be gently sizzled separately, of
course, for on the side.)
The logistics are overwhelming.
"I'm so hungry I could eat an ox" really means:
"Just kick the horns off & wipe it's ass, and
serve it to me stadt!"
Nevertheless, I'd rather barbecue an ox than shoot
a kevlar bicycle tire with a gub. Tires are mostly
inedible.
I think sweet potato pie should make a good post-ox
dessert. Or baked rice pudding (with raisins.)
cheers,
Tom
--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca
|
| |
Date: 23 Sep 2007 00:08:56
From: landotter
Subject: Re: Compact Frame sizing
|
On Sep 22, 6:45 pm, Sparky <No...@dontemailme.com > wrote:
> I'm looking at getting a road/commuter bike. I want disc brakes (for
> the rain) and drop handlebars. I don't want to spend more than
> $1,000.00.
Disc brakes on a road bike are all hype. Put some Kool-Stops on
whatever calipers you get and you'll stop just fine. Discs limit your
ability to mount fenders and racks which are far more important on a
commuter.
I'd recommended a touring bike like the Jamis Aurora or wannabe
cyclocross bike like the Bianchi Volpe.
Seriously, those disc brakes are more trouble than they're worth on a
road going bike. Linear pull brakes or cantilevers are more than
powerful enough, cheap, and decrease the theft value of your bike. The
reason you see them on so many so-called "commuters" is fashion,
nothing else. They certainly are useful for when you're bombing down a
northwest soggy trail at at 30mph, but I doubt that's what this bike
will see. ;-)
If you're planning on traveling light and your terrain is flat, I
can't recommend a Redline 925 fixed/ single speed bike enough. Nuclear
blast proof, and only $500. Yes I'm biased, as I own one, but it's
insane. I ride it road and trail, through glass, over curbs, and it
begs for more.
|
|
