Novice Question: Serotta Sloping TTs

[Samster]

I've been looking at the latest Serotta catalog (making my wife nervous) and _everything_ has a sloping TT. I know they will do level TT if you ask for it.

But why the shift in focus? And do you like it?

Regrets if this topic's already been hammered to death.

--sam

[christian]

But why the shift in focus? And do you like it?



Fashion. No.

Best regards,
- Christian

[Fixed]

Fashion. No.

Best regards,
- Christian
bro I agree .cheers :beer:

[Argos]

Yeah, there is sloped, and then there is Semi-sloped and then there is Level. I like Level, too, but I have a short inseam so some of my bikes have a semi-slope. This is when it's 2-4 degrees, not a full on 6. Moreso, bikes have been made semi-sloped for years in the 48-52cm range. I like level, but ride what I ride, and like what I ride. An intentional 6 degrees though, that's a bit much. I'm surprised that even more Traditional models, like the CDA or Colorado III are not at least pictured with the level TT to show the cutomer the look.
Personally, I do not like the HT extension on a level bike, but put it on a Sloped or Semi-sloped and it looks like a Trek Pilot.

[tch]

More accurately, I would think that it reflects a design response for riders who are looking for less saddle-to-bar drop for any given size. With a sloping frame, you can bring bars up while retaining reasonable standover and minimizing the head tube chimmey effect. Many folks who buy Serottas are more high-end recreational/enthusiast riders than flat-out racers who want low handlebars, and I bet Serotta builds a fair number of sloping frames to accomodate customers' preferred fits.

As you point out, they will build any way you want, aesthetically-speaking (level or sloping top tube), so it may just be a way of announcing their prediliction.

[znfdl]

When I got fit for my new Spectrum Ti, I was given the choice of a flat or a sloping TT. Tom told me the advantages of a sloping top tube, and maybe he can chime in, so that I will not bastardize why I went with a sloping TT.

[lnomalley]

i Love sloping tt's and for both practical and aesthetic reasons...

on the pratical side:
i can slide off the saddle and jam my crotch on the tt/under the saddle to get a more aggressive tuck on a descent. which is a great way to move up with out pedaling in a race (dont try this at home unless you know what you are doing).

i love it because it lowers the contact point of the seat stays into the seat tube, giving the rear triangle a more relaxed angle and hence a little more suppleness (no figures on this and varing amounts of agreement from different builders. look art the rear triangle as a truss and play around with the angles of the seat stays),

i love it because it gives me room to toss the bike around (which happens in aggressive situations like fighting to jump in agap in a turn, or going sh*t house in a sprint),

every sloping frame i've ever had has felt like it is more responsive out of the saddle when i climb (i can't explain this but tom kellogg wrote about a similar sensation too,

i like having a stiff front triangle on the frame and a lot of seat post... and i find that the seatpost can soften the ride a twinge (subtle)....

i find that the sloping frame allows you to not have to use too much head tube extension.. it makes a slightly longer headtube look more proportionate (because the whole threadless thing has dropped the front end a bunch).
and then finally... i think it looks contemporary.

all of this subjective, but i swear by it (luddites claiming it is all a byproduct of wanting to manufacture less sizes are both right and wrong, its all context.. all of mine are custom anyway).

ok, flame away.

[bostondrunk]

ahhh....yes.....the lovely sensation of jamming ones nuts onto the top tube for aerodynamics.....i'm with ya there....

[coylifut]

i love sloping tt's and i LOVE them for both practical and aesthetic reasons.

on the pratical side:
i can slide off the saddle and jam my crotch on the tt/under the saddle to get a more aggressive tuck on a descent. which is a great way to move up with out pedaling in a race (dont try this at home unless you know what you are doing).

i love it because it lowers the contact point of the seat stays into the seat tube, giving the rear triangle a more relaxed angle and hence a little more suppleness (no figures on this and varing amounts of agreement from different builders),

i love it because it gives me room to toss the bike around (which happens in aggressive situations like fighting to jump in agap in a turn, or going **** house in a sprint),

every sloping frame i've ever had has felt like it is more responsive out of the saddle when i climb (i can't explain this but tom kellogg wrote about a similar sensation too,

i like having a stiff front triangle on the frame and a lot of seat post... and i find that the seatpost can soften the ride a twinge (subtle)....

i find that the sloping frame allows you to not have to use too much head tube extension.. it makes a slightly longer headtube look more proportionate (because the whole threadless thing has dropped the front end a bunch).
and then finally... i think it looks contemporary.

all of this subjective, but i swear by it (luddites claiming it is all a byproduct of wanting to manufacture less sizes are both right and wrong, its all context.. all of mine are custom anyway).

ok, flame away.

I'm a convert as well. I love my sloping top tubed Spectrum. I don't stand around looking at it much. I just ride it.

[Ziggurat]

When I got fit for my new Spectrum Ti, I was given the choice of a flat or a sloping TT. Tom told me the advantages of a sloping top tube, and maybe he can chime in, so that I will not bastardize why I went with a sloping TT.

thanks for the tip, I just found this

Tom Kellogg: Compact Frames (http://spectrum-cycles.com/616.htm)

"Compact frames are developing a sizable following in the cycling community. As a compact frame owner myself, I appreciate the nimble liveliness afforded by the design. Like all bicycles, the handling characteristics of compacts starts with the geometry so let's take a look.

In designing the our first compact prototype back in mid '98, we wanted to discover what if any the real world differences there would be between traditional and compact frame designs. Our first compact frame (still my favorite frame) was an exact replica of my then current titanium frame in materials and geometry save for the sloping top tube. I designed it with a severe (17 degree) slope to ensure that any differences would be as obvious as possible. We had assumed that the new frame would be somewhat stiffer and lighter. It was lighter (about 4 ounces) but it was not appreciatively stiffer. Although we were able to measure a slight increase in stiffness, it was too slight to feel. The big change came when I stood to accelerate or climb. As I stood up, the bike appeared to loose three pounds. The inertia of the bike as I rocked it back and fourth was reduced so much that I felt as though I was on a twelve-pound bike. Interestingly, when seated, a compact frame feels exactly like a traditional design. The compact design has no effect on handling beyond the increases responsiveness during climbing and accelerating.

When considering a compact frame, take the time to check out the angles, the virtual tube lengths and how these consideration affect handling. If you need some advice give us a call."

[93legendti]

I'm a convert as well. I love my sloping top tubed Spectrum. I don't stand around looking at it much. I just ride it.

I feel the same way about my Strong Compact.

[Samster]

Thanks for the opinions. I go back and forth. My current rides are all flat TT, but I'm curious about the sloping look and was wondering if there was more too it than just the look (I've heard it both ways and can't decipher how much is the geometry, how much is the material, and how much is the psychology.) Certainly, the economics could be better, but it doesn't seem like Serotta really exploits that aspect since everything is made to measure anyway.

In any case, some compacts look great and others look just a little too squished. But like one guy said... it's more important how it feels under foot.

--sam

[jeffg]

though many folks might not like the look. It sets me up for about 6-7cm of bar to saddle drop with only 10 mm of spacers, and does feel (at least to me) a bit livlier than my old horizontal TT frame. Of course, it's much more lively than my CF frame, but that's not fair to compare (and the CF feels great en danseuse).

[Tmogul]

Hey samster,

I'm in the same boat as you. The beauty of custom frames is that such a dilemma can come up. I've been looking at many different frames in the gallery here and of stock bikes on websites to see how different slopes look. The geometry of the bike and size affect alot of how the sloped TT looks on the frame. It looks like anything over 5% starts looking too much like a giant and anything under 3% can look almost like an accident with measurement. So for small to medium frames the 3-5% range looks pretty good. The other thing that complicates matters is that the look depends also on the diameter of the tubes and material used and the paint scheme. You might also think about the amount of stem rise you'll be using and try to roughly match it to the amount of slope.

This pic below doesn't look right to me.

http://www.cyclingnews.com/photos/2005/tech/probikes/?id=jittery_louis_garneau/Race

[jerk]

it's an easy and ugly way to get the handlebars higher without sacrificing stand-over height.

it looks ok on well proportioned bikes but this has more to do with the fact that well proportioned bikes looke fine no matter what. it looks really stupid when mated to a really high handlebar position, a really short top-tube and a really tall head tube with the coup de grace being the 80mm stem.

[92degrees]

it's an easy and ugly way to get the handlebars higher without sacrificing stand-over height.

I'll bite: what's the sophisticated and aesthetically pleasing way to get the bars higher while maintaining stand-over? This is sincere, I struggled with this and don't know the answer.

[jerk]

I'll bite: what's the sophisticated and aesthetically pleasing way to get the bars higher while maintaining stand-over? This is sincere, I struggled with this and don't know the answer.


look at dbrk's tournesol carbon, or any of the bicycles built in that style.

jerk

[92degrees]

look at dbrk's tournesol carbon, or any of the bicycles built in that style.

jerk

Yes, I've drooled over those pictures. I don't understand how that solution would be applied to me (member of the freakish short guy/short leg/long torso tribe). I know we discussed this when I ordered my last bike and sent you the build sheet -- everyone I spoke with shrugged about the 7º slope that the fitter suggested. Is it just that some fits require a good amount of slope?

[BarryG]

look at dbrk's tournesol carbon, or any of the bicycles built in that style.
Please elaborate - Tournesol looks like level toptube, slight HT extension, threadless fork - doesn't seem to add up to elevated bars ??? Perhaps I'm missing something . . .

[christian]

Instead of a 7 degree slope, how about an almost imperceptible two degree slope, a 25mm headtube extension, maybe even a quill stem and a willingness to accept that your soft bits can rest right on the toptube. It's not a mountain bike after all...

- Christian

[eddief]

Of my bikes, the Rambouillet seems best at getting my bars up high and keeping the aesthetics together. This is done with me riding a big frame (60)with very little standover, slightly sloping top tube (2), headtube extension in nice proportion, 10 mm of spacers, and then as much Nitto Techno quill sticking out as I'd like. I think all appropriate for my style of riding and the style Grant intended for the use of the bike.

Steve Rex just about achieved the same excellent aesthetics on my sloping top tube (6) filleted frameset. In the end I think there was a bit too much slope, a bit too much ht extension, and a bit too much spacers due to the threadless fork. We could have nailed this better with less slope, less ht extension above the top tube and maybe a slightly longer headtube.

Kinda fun, and a bit expensive to learn these lessons. But best to learn some lessons before popping for that new carbon Serotta or that perfect, perfect (for me) Tournesol.