#31
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Oh, I love my T5....since you mentioned it.
|
#33
|
|||
|
|||
So here's a question I have: why the super slack head tube and45 rake in the 54 cm size? Comes out to over 64 mm of trail, which is decidedly non-racey, in my experience. A quick glance at most road bike builders shows head tube angles are usually 73 or 73.5 in the 54cm size,and if the head tube is slack, there's usually some effort to lower trail via a high rake fork.
So...why the high trail? Any reason it's preferable on a full gas race bike? In my own limited experience, I've loved bikes with 73ish headtubes and grew to dislike the slow steering of the one I had with a slack head tube. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
Coworker had an early one that cracked at the bottom bracket. This guy is really skinny. He inquired about a warranty replacement and they told him to pound sand. I've seen some up close, and the paint is really sloppy. I wouldn't personally. But that's just my experience. Plenty of people seem happy with them I guess.
|
#35
|
|||
|
|||
Seriously, what is so cool about a Belgian-inspired design concept?
Question or, um, thought experiment. Let's say a Cat4 on your club team (of 200), took all the young racers in your club to his new team, and then used his skill set as an Ad Guy to create a brand. And then, let's say, this brand began to sell bikes which he "designed." Would you buy one of his $2500 frames over a Giant, Cannondale, Colnago, Specialized, Pinarello, just cos, ya know, he's a cool dude? I mean what else is there to say about these bikes?
http://www.usacycling.org/results/?compid=59115 Last edited by beeatnik; 11-27-2014 at 02:13 AM. |
#36
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#37
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
|
#38
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I'm far from the most knowledgeable person about the backgrounds of designers and builders, but it seems to me that people make their way in the industry in a variety of ways. The real proof is whether people like the bikes. Some people clearly do like Rittes and the company has been growing from the start, so they are doing something right. We have enough legit information about them to know that it's more than just good paint. For the record, I've never ridden one and unless my back and hips become more limber with age, I won't -- HT is too short for me. But with the reports I've had from people I race and train with, I would be open to it if the frame fit. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
I train enough to be a good 4, an OK 3, or a piss-poor 1/2 Oh, and even better! I've started my own 'bike brand' based on open mold frames w paint jobs on em M Last edited by Gummee; 11-27-2014 at 09:00 AM. |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Anyway, he left LaGrange and turned an irreverent kit into a team because he felt that LaGrange did not devote enough resources to Masters and Cat3-5 riders. Last edited by beeatnik; 11-27-2014 at 04:34 PM. |
#41
|
||||
|
||||
He must have a very accomdating LA to downgrade from 3 to 4.
|
#42
|
||||
|
||||
Quote:
2. Toe over lap. 3. Cheaper to only spec 1 fork -- IIRC only 3T makes a tapered fork with more than 43mm of rake. 4. Someone is going to say "wheel flop" This isn't limited to the Ritte frames. Focus' Izalco has something like 68mm trail (53 TT) When Hampsten first offered the Maglia Rosa with an Enve tapered fork it had a trail of 65mm or so (~53mm TT IIRC). Now they offer the smaller sizes with a 3T tapered fork -- bringing it into the 59mm range (about neutral). Framebuilders, lemme know if I'm wrong.
__________________
IG: elysianbikeco |
|
|