| |
Main
Date: 15 May 2007 09:39:30
From: Callistus Valerius
Subject: LeMond bikes
|
It seems on odd combination to have steel, with carbon
http://2006.lemondbikes.com/2006_bikes/buenos_aires.shtml#
I wonder how that feels, as compared to the usual carbon, aluminum setup.
LeMond geometry seems to alway have the steeper head tube (59 size) 74, and
the slacker seat (72.5). Having never rode a LeMond, what are the plus's
and minus's to that kind of geometry?
|
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 08:03:24
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: LeMond bikes
|
>
> They probably fit people who are built like Greg LeMond better than others. Me,
> I've got relatively short thighs and would need a set forward seatpost to ride
> it.
maybe fit the accounting dept: moving one tube back lengthens the
frame, shortens the other tubes. allows slop in the head tube uh
glueing spec.
but yagotta wonder if the couch potato spreads or enforces
theorectical presence thru sheer weight like walmort as 'plush' a
artful play on words like 'compliance'
pass the chain lube!
me? i'm gonna drag the laundry off to 109 on the rear rack.
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 10:53:17
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: LeMond bikes
|
On Tue, 15 May 2007 09:39:30 GMT, "Callistus Valerius" <jazzyboss@hotmail.com >
wrote:
>It seems on odd combination to have steel, with carbon
>http://2006.lemondbikes.com/2006_bikes/buenos_aires.shtml#
>I wonder how that feels, as compared to the usual carbon, aluminum setup.
>
>LeMond geometry seems to alway have the steeper head tube (59 size) 74, and
>the slacker seat (72.5). Having never rode a LeMond, what are the plus's
>and minus's to that kind of geometry?
They probably fit people who are built like Greg LeMond better than others. Me,
I've got relatively short thighs and would need a set forward seatpost to ride
it.
Ron
Ron
Effect pedal demo's up at http://www.soundclick.com/ronsonicpedalry
|
| | |
Date: 15 May 2007 08:33:50
From: Tom Nakashima
Subject: Re: LeMond bikes
|
>> Having never rode a LeMond, what are the plus's
>>and minus's to that kind of geometry?
>
My seat-tube angle is 72.5 with a slightly longer rear stay,
overall wheelbase and long rake on the fork. I enjoy the stability
and relaxed seating position. Sort of the early Roland Della Santa
geometry fames he used to make for G. LeMond.
For me, on long rides the relaxed geometry is a blessing.
http://home.comcast.net/~tomnak/P4280535.JPG
-tom
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 07:05:28
From: datakoll@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: LeMond bikes
|
interesting. and discussed. racing(?) design continues moving away
from riding around potholes to riding over potholes: run out of riders
entranced by squiggling all day long? over squiggle? need an
advertising ploy-plush-to sell excess carbon? in a car, a bit of plush
allows the fringe area from smooth to pothole to widen a wee bit
without sacrificing absolute squiggle thus you go faster faster caws
faster faster needs a wee margin for ooohh i screwed up that one good
and continue on to the next micro second ( so claimed) mistake.
trek is made by bontrager owned by rupert murdoch or dow corning who
glue Lemond stickers on generic bike frames, right?
For a super road test satire go to Bicycling Magazine's news letter: 5
thumbs up!!
|
| |
Date: 15 May 2007 08:08:07
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: LeMond bikes
|
On Tue, 15 May 2007 09:39:30 GMT, "Callistus Valerius"
<jazzyboss@hotmail.com > wrote:
>It seems on odd combination to have steel, with carbon
>http://2006.lemondbikes.com/2006_bikes/buenos_aires.shtml#
>I wonder how that feels, as compared to the usual carbon, aluminum setup.
>
>LeMond geometry seems to alway have the steeper head tube (59 size) 74, and
>the slacker seat (72.5). Having never rode a LeMond, what are the plus's
>and minus's to that kind of geometry?
I don't know, but my LeMond Zurich is a great frame -- very stable but
easy to turn, ride no-handed, etc
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
|
|
