The slow demise of level top tubes??

[cinelli]

Essentially every pro road team now uses sloping top tubes. Trek (Discovery) is one of the few exceptions. Even our Serotta-sponsored Kodak/Sierra Nevada team is "sloped". Will level top tubes soon become a "Custom Only" option for the affluent bicycle buyer? :confused:

[jdoiv]

it on the low stack height of threadless headsets and the death of quill stems.

Long live threaded headsets and quill stems! :beer:

[BarryG]

the low stack height of threadless headsets and the death of quill stems
yup, that's exactly why the new bike here is sloped

[Fixed]

I don't know anything about cross But I do carry my bike on my shoulder a lot so I think there will Always be classic frames around.Like the jerk said they (compact) look like girls bikes i.m.h.o. Cheers :beer:

[saab2000]

Like everything else, there is a place for sloping top tubes in this world. I have considered a couple degrees of downward slope on my next bike. Probably not, but I would consider it. Nothing extreme, mind you, but a couple degrees.

Some people sort of need sloping top tubes, otherwise they would be riding with those godawful extreme stems that Nitto produces.

As much as I would like to see every racing style bike with a saddle/handlebar drop like that of Cipollini, it ain't gonna happen.

I don't know how to post links, but there was a picture of Cadel Evans in cyclingnews. His Ridley has a sloping top tube and does not allow him to get his stem low enough. He had what looked like a custom FSA stem with some significant drop.

Sloping top tubes are ugly in my opinion, but they can be functional.

[SoCalSteve]

have a long torso and short legs. A custom sloping top tube is the perfect solution for these people.

It's not a one size, one design fits all world....so, why not go with the flow?

And, speaking of which, there are still "normal" geometry charts on bike mfgs sites...I don't think its going away too quickly.

Just one man's opinion.

Steve

[eddief]

that consumers have a choice, but to see the degree to which they have taken over is disconcerting. Just check our own Serotta website and nearly every photo is a sloped cookie cutter image of the last. I guess it just leaves more room for the boutiques to stay in bus. making frames of individual classy good old fashioned beauty. Think I'll hang onto my quills and my DA headsets too.

[cpg]

It's not due to the reduced headset stacks. It's due to the current fashion of sizing frames smaller which renders way more exposed seat posts than say 20 years ago. This leads to the need to do something to get the bars up in the region where it should be and would be if the frame was just sized bigger. The whole sloping thing is due to the popularity of mtb's where sloping makes more sense. Does anyone remember when mtb's ruled the bike industry in terms of sales? It did and that's where many cylclists cut their teeth. That sloping top tube with lots of exposed seat post look became their norm and it "made sense" to them in the road bike arena. Now I'm not calling this wrong or right. Slopers are here to stay, at least for a while.

Curt

[Lifelover]

Functionally does it make any difference?

Can a sloping and a straight be made for the same size rider and have the same ride qualities?

Scratch the questions. I just fouind the "Serotta sloping TT" thread. I'm have not been all through it yet but I assume it will cover my questions

[KevinK]

I think it has as much to do with the extreme length of exposed seatpost that is the fashion now-a-days as anything. In my time (as I slip my dentures back onto my shriveled gums) four inches, or one fist worth of seatpost was visually perfect. That amount of seatpost allowed one to use a level quill stem extended only slightly from the threaded headset. Seatpost were generally 200mm or less in length, and even then we would shorten them to save weight. Now that "racers" are showing 6, 8 10 or more inches of post, stems need to have added rise (as opposed to being parallel to the ground), or a sloping toptube to disguise the over-long headtube. The 350mm+ seatpost is an abomination, and can be blamed for sloping TTs, rising stems, extended headtubes, stacked spacers, and perhaps even the demise of downtube shifters.

Kevin, a geezer at 51.

[Russ]

....Like the jerk said they (compact) look like girls bikes i.m.h.o. Cheers :beer:

IMO this statement sounds a bit too chauvinistic.... Besides, I see a lot of "girls" riding with "boys bikes", i.e. level TT's. So what does this make them? Last time I called a woman "girl" is when I did not speak English well.

How about mountain bikes? Are those girls bikes? I'd like to see how a mountain bike with a level TT will look like; a cross bike with fat tires I guess...

When I came back to riding in 2002, I had the same idea; I disliked sloped TTs with a passion. Today, I think the looks depends on the eye of the beholder and the type of bike. I have three flavors of bikes: level (CSI), Semi-slope (Ottrott) and Sloped (legend). I think level TTs look a bit dated on some bikes, just like down tube shifters and exposed, over-the-bars brakes cables look.... However, I don't think there is anything wrong with that look. It's just that it does not look well on every bike.

One thing is for sure, I do hate to see a bunch of HT spacers in the front of my bike more than I'd like to see a sloping TT. But without sloping the TT, there is no way in heck I could keep my handlebars where they should go without spacers... My CSI has about 2.5 cm worth the spacers, but I have managed to make it look good (for me).

Now, I have seen some crazy geometries with a sloping TT AND a buch of spacers. That surely is really ugly, I think.

Conclusion, what jdoiv said: "the low stack height of threadless headsets [started the slow] death of quill stems [and the birth of sloped TTs on road bikes]..."

[Climb01742]

each to his/her own.

[93legendti]

each to his/her own.

Smartest thing posted here in a long time! :)

[Dr. Doofus]

sloping tube are cool, depending on how/why they are used to solve the fit "problem."

doof had to just about reach through the phone and wring richard schwinn's neck, saying "I'm not riding a 60 c-t frame with a 110 stem in a race!" Richard is a cool, cool guy and his company is what the industry needs, but the governing philosophy behind the slope on gunnars is to "size up" and get the bars higher, with a shorter stem. Of course, their frames work just fine as race rigs if you "size down" and set up the bike like batmobile-sloper*.

the slope look is cool when its used well (empty tautology pt. 3245): it looks good on race bikes, making 'em look longer and lower, which gets the chicks, and it looks good on short TT tall HT bikes, when one realizes that this was a simple solution to that particular rider's fit problems.

sometimes it just looks ugly.

its all hopelessly relative and arbitrary

but Fixed would look cool on a cool new Gunnar sloping fixed.

[Serotta PETE]

Functionally does it make any difference?

Can a sloping and a straight be made for the same size rider and have the same ride qualities?

Scratch the questions. I just fouind the "Serotta sloping TT" thread. I'm have not been all through it yet but I assume it will cover my questions


Yes!. I have had both in a 57cm (effective DT) and 56CM (effective tt)

They ride the same. PETE

[BarryG]

it looks good on short TT tall HT bikes, when one realizes that this was a simple solution to that particular rider's fit problems.

sometimes it just looks ugly.
Yes, yes! Gratifying not to hear everyone saying that ALL sloped tt bikes are fugly. :p

[Len J]

sloping is caused by (IMO in no particular order)

1.) Economics, some MFG want to make fewer frame sizes fit more people.
2.) The move from threaded to threadless stems. Spacers are not as attractive as an old quill stem (even with an effort to get the bars up).
3.) Pros riding smaller frames due to shallower bars and more riding on upturned hoods.
4.) Odd body sizes.
5.) The perception (sold by the marketers) that sloping is lighter/stiffer.

Me, I like flat TT's, yet I have a 2 degree sloping on three of my bikes in order to get the bars where I want them with no/low spacers and no riser stem......the slope is hardly noticible.

To each their own.

Len

[William]

Bill Boston's take on it.... (http://www.billbostoncycles.com/top_tube_height.htm)




William

[William]

JB's take on things..... (http://yarchive.net/bike/filigree_lugs.html)



William

[Fixed]

IMO this statement sounds a bit too chauvinistic.... Besides, I see a lot of "girls" riding with "boys bikes", i.e. level TT's. So what does this make them? Last time I called a woman "girl" is when I did not speak English well.

How about mountain bikes? Are those girls bikes? I'd like to see how a mountain bike with a level TT will look like; a cross bike with fat tires I guess...

When I came back to riding in 2002, I had the same idea; I disliked sloped TTs with a passion. Today, I think the looks depends on the eye of the beholder and the type of bike. I have three flavors of bikes: level (CSI), Semi-slope (Ottrott) and Sloped (legend). I think level TTs look a bit dated on some bikes, just like down tube shifters and exposed, over-the-bars brakes cables look.... However, I don't think there anything wrong with that look. It's just that it does not look well on every bike.

One thing is for sure, I do hate to see a bunch of HT spacers in the front of my bike more than I'd like to see a sloping TT. But without sloping the TT, there is no way in heck I could keep my handlebars where they should go without spacers... My CSI has about 2.5 cm worth the spacers, but I have managed to make it look good (for me).

Now, I have seen some crazy geometries with a sloping TT AND a buch of spacers. That surely is really ugly, I think.

Conclusion, what jdoiv said: "the low stack height of threadless headsets [started the slow] death of quill stems [and the birth of sloped TTs on road bikes]..."sorry Bro, I didn't mean to hurt your feelins.I just like the old stuff.if it ain't broken don't FIX it. Cheers :beer:

[davids]

each to his/her own.
Absolutely not!

;)

[dbrk]

If bikes weren't nowadays fit so small there would be far less "need" for compact designs (cpg has this totally right) though I think in certain extreme cases where the legs are short and the torso long, the compact gives more options for raising the bars (if that's what is wanted). Just this past weekend a fellow came over who looked me right in the eye at about 5'10". But my PBH is about 85cm and I can easily stand over a 60cm frame while his PBH was 78cm (those are pretty short legs for a guy 5'10ish!!) and there is no way he'll stand easy over more than a 56cm but really 54ish is about right. However, most 54s are going to put the bars really much lower than he'd like to be but with a slew of spacers and a riser stem. So if he had a frame with 2d of slope we could get him a bit higher and avoid the look of the compact. But all that has NOTHING to do with the original question and the proliferation of compact frames.

Serotta's website pictures of its models aren't solving fitting problems, they are offering fashion advice. The choice of showing the frames in compact designs is entirely driven by current fashions as are the bikes of the pro peleton. That Trek (and I say Bless them!! in this respect) has resisted the compact is likewise a fashion statement, just one that I prefer. The question raised at the outset was about why we are seeing nearly all compacts, right? As I recall the first reply was the real answer. Sure, there are rare fit solutions that invite a compact or sloping design but they are indeed pretty rare in comparison to the solutions that can easily be found without resorting to 5-6d or more of slope. It's fashion, the impact of mtn bike design (not a good thing, imho), and a whole lotta' rationale without nearly as much smart solution. If you like compacts that's all fine with me (I happen not to, so what?) but the vast majority of designs and excellent fits, even on taller front end randonneur bikes, do not require them. Fashion is the "real" reason.

out of fashion but always lookin' for style,

dbrk

[Fixed]

Dbrk Bro your pretty hip .have you guys seen sept.in the T.D.F.calendar the Badger and Joop going at it in 79 the bikes are so cool not alot of seatpost in those days. you just get bars with more drop i.m.h.o. cheers :beer:

[Wayne77]

This is veers OT but.. Barring an abnormally short inseam, it is easy to get the bars up where one might want them without resorting to extreme TT slopes, rocketship stems, lots of spacers, and massive HT extensions (assuming a custom frame):

1-2 deg of slope to the TT (barely noticeable from a level TT): +1-2 cm

-6 deg stem instead of -10 (still looks more or less like a level stem): +1cm

External headset (vs. internal): + 2 cm's

8cm bb drop instead of 7cm (lowers the saddle): +1cm

Bars with slightly less "ramp" down to the hoods: +1-2cm

My point is that when someone can only adjust one or two elements (off the rack) or chosses to adjust only one or two in a custom design process, extremes are required for those who don't like a lot of saddle to bar drop (steeply sloping tt's, tons o' spacers, funky high rise stems, etc). But subtle adjustments to all can easily bring the bars up 5-7 cms if needed - and the bike retains an aesthetically pleasing look to boot! :cool:

-Someone also sugggested 10 layers of bartape to me once. That might afftect handling a tad though.. :rolleyes:

[Climb01742]

Fashion is the "real" reason.

which could also be said, i believe, for a number of lug designs. and in both cases, if "fashion" can add to the variety of what's available, neat.

[fiamme red]

which could also be said, i believe, for a number of lug designs.Lugs are fashionable? That's news to me! How many new lugged bikes do you see in races, or on club or century rides?

[Serpico]

I got a sloped because I have a short inseam for my height. 6'1"-6'2" (I should probably measure myself soon) and I wear 30" pants. I have a 33 1/4 cycling inseam.

I prefer the look of a level top tube, but only slightly. Only the titus, lspeed ghisallo, and a few other slopes bug me. slight slope is fine, and I just want a bike that fits. My level top tube frame wouldn't fit, it was too big in some areas, and too small in others.

never knew I had a short inseam until I got a road bike and went "***??" when a (should've been) too small frame was actually too big

[Fixed]

Bro we are spoon fed what to eat, how to dress, what to buy ,what to watch, what to think through the media. Some people just march to the beat of a different drummer i.m.h.o. :beer:

[Big Dan]

Bro we are spoon fed what to eat, how to dress, what to buy ,what to watch, what to think through the media. Some people just march to the beat of a different drummer i.m.h.o. :beer:

Keith Moon................. :D


level tt are nice, but I really don't mind a little slope.............. :p

[Ti Designs]

First, y'all are entitled to your opinions, but no bike company produces bikes based on one person's opinion - 'cept for Lance/Trek. Not everybody has the luxury of a custom either. So the bike makers have to look at what's going to fit the largest cross section. Sloped top tubes allow them to do just that. Take Specialized for example, every one of their frames comes with a sticker that explains how they measure their bikes in effective seat and top tube numbers as if they were the same as level top tube bikes. If a customer has shorter legs and a longer torso, you can find the next size up which will have both a taller head tube and longer top tube. Stand-over height isn't because of the slope.

The shift to sloped top tubes reminds me of food shopping (here comes Ed out of left field again...). I go to the supermarket and I look for potato chips. There are all sorts of low fat, reduced fat or baked potato chips, but I'm looking potato chips, the kind made with potatoes and fried in oil. People tell me that fat is bad - people with at least three times my body fat. My point here is that potato chips are shifting to low fat alternatives because most consumers could use to shed a few pounds. The few of us that need the extra fat to maintain our weight are forgotten about. The same thing is happening with bikes. Those of us who need actual drop to the bars are the forgotten few.

When I looked into replacing my Seven I looked at a few stock bikes. The Specialized E5 looked interesting, but the head tube was too tall. Almost every stock bike had the same problem for me. I decided to go with a Serotta, so I sent them the geometry from my Seven (copied from my Peter Mooneys). They called 4 times to make sure I really wanted the top tube sloped down to the front. Yeh, mine slopes the other way - I'm just weird that way!

[GoJavs]

It's marketing for the masses. Doesn't bother me. I know what I like, but I know that my tastes reflect a very distinct (and limited) demographic:

a 35-yr old steel lover i-bobber.... ;)

[Russ]

sorry Bro, I didn't mean to hurt your feelins.I just like the old stuff.if it ain't broken don't FIX it. Cheers :beer:

Fixed.

Don't take this personal... And I understood you. Therefore, no apologies needed. For one, you were quoting the jerk and I think the jerk was quoting Lance A. ;)

In any case, I tried to see your post from a female stand point....

Just remember that there are a few "girls" out there that could kick or arses on a bike! No matter if they are riding sloped or level TTs; therefore my inference.

Cheers!

[vaxn8r]

Thank heaven for Trek....and for Cannondale. Two industry big boys bucking the fasion trends. heh.

[The Spider]

and alot of the European brands for the chance to buy standard or sloping designs.

[Climb01742]

Lugs are fashionable? That's news to me! How many new lugged bikes do you see in races, or on club or century rides?

what i meant was that the shape of some lugs is "artistically" driven. i believe simple lugs and more ornate lugs join tubes equally well. the more ornate lugs are an expression, i believe, of someone's sense of art, style, beauty, fashion, chose whatever word you like. that's cool. as is letting a builder or rider express their sense of "style" by choosing a sloping TT. style isn't an invalid reason to do something. clear?

[Ti Designs]

In any case, I tried to see your post from a female stand point....

Yeh, that's where the marketing department takes over and screws things up. They market the women's bikes base on the common complaint - The reach to the bars is too great. So they bring the bars in and up, thus the sloped top tube. I have no problem with that so far. Then they go and shorten up the top end even more by cranking the seat angle forward. This is pure marketing. They know that there are a percentage of people who will understand fit and want some setback, and there are a percentage of people who base things just on the top tube length. Every geometry chart lists top tube lengeth, so the bike companies are counting on more people purchasing a bike based on that number, and they do.



Just remember that there are a few "girls" out there that could kick or arses on a bike! No matter if they are riding sloped or level TTs;


Yeh, and look as the position of the arse kicking girls on the bike, then look at what's sold to most women. Getting past the bike industry and it's marketing is like a little IQ test for women. They have to figure out which parts to ignore in the whole women's specific design thing. I'm working with a number of fast women (which your mother probably warned you about). More than half of them I've had to get them to switch bikes to be in a workable position. It's never had anything to do with the sloped top tube, it's always seat tube angle and crank length (and sometimes color).

[Fixed]

Keith Moon................. :D


level tt are nice, but I really don't mind a little slope.............. :p
bro elvin jones 's my man sloped is not the same as compact S.M. L. i.m.h.o. cheers :beer:

[Kirk Pacenti]

snipped:

"Yeh, that's where the marketing department takes over and screws things up. They market the women's bikes base on the common complaint - The reach to the bars is too great. So they bring the bars in and up, thus the sloped top tube. I have no problem with that so far. Then they go and shorten up the top end even more by cranking the seat angle forward. This is pure marketing. They know that there are a percentage of people who will understand fit and want some setback, and there are a percentage of people who base things just on the top tube length. Every geometry chart lists top tube lengeth, so the bike companies are counting on more people purchasing a bike based on that number, and they do."


You nailed that one Dave. I agree 110%!

[crossjunkee]

I don't know anything about cross But I do carry my bike on my shoulder a lot so I think there will Always be classic frames around.


Actually, a cross frame is easier to lift if the toptube is lower, basically you don't have to lift the bike as far ovre barriers. Granted you need room for your shoulder to go in there, but it's a fine line. A sloper on a cross frame is much easier to lift.

[don compton]

:no: dear mr. dbrk,
i have really enjoyed your many paragraphs on bicycles. however, i must note that trek has the pilot for sale and offers this model in many different price levels. please note that the pilot is a slopping top tube design.
i have more bikes than i need and can appreciate your incredible knowledge
of the bicycle industry in general and its wonderful history. i really think that the new bikes are better. i still ride steel, however, even the new steel framesets are vastly superior to the lug framesets of the columbus sl and reynolds 531 era. you just can't beat a serotta f2 fork on my c-111, reynolds 725 frame.
sincerely,don compton

[Ti Designs]

bro elvin jones 's my man sloped is not the same as compact S.M. L. i.m.h.o. cheers :beer:

I can't make heads or tails of this as a whole, but somewhere in the middle it says that sloped is not the same as compact. Is there a real difference in definition, or is it one of those marketing buzz word things.

If I had to guess, I would guess that Giant kicked off the compact geometry thing in order to make just 4 sizes to fit the entire range. Thus part of the marketing is the need for fewer sizes. Most makers offer more sizes and actually measure the bikes based on effective level top tubes - that's probably what's known as sloped. If I'm right so far (which would be a first), then you could have a small compact be the same geometry as a small sloped, and people would still argue that the two aren't the same. Because Specialized jumps from 58cm to 62cm, does that mean their XL Allez is compact while the rest of the line-up is sloped? I'm so confused...

This is probably a lot like the balance wheel argument:
Wheel builder: I balance my wheels.
Idiot (me): Without a tire and tube?
Wheel builder: The WHEEL is balanced.
Idiot: but the addition of an unbalanced tire/tube throws that off.
Wheel builder: I sell balanced wheels - they leave here balanced.
Idiot: What good is that if the valve of the tube is just going to throw the balance off?
Wheel builder: The wheel starts off balanced.
Idiot (frustrated): I say tomato...

[Fixed]

I can't make heads or tails of this as a whole, but somewhere in the middle it says that sloped is not the same as compact. Is there a real difference in definition, or is it one of those marketing buzz word things.

If I had to guess, I would guess that Giant kicked off the compact geometry thing in order to make just 4 sizes to fit the entire range. Thus part of the marketing is the need for fewer sizes. Most makers offer more sizes and actually measure the bikes based on effective level top tubes - that's probably what's known as sloped. If I'm right so far (which would be a first), then you could have a small compact be the same geometry as a small sloped, and people would still argue that the two aren't the same. Because Specialized jumps from 58cm to 62cm, does that mean their XL Allez is compact while the rest of the line-up is sloped? I'm so confused...

This is probably a lot like the balance wheel argument:
Wheel builder: I balance my wheels.
Idiot (me): Without a tire and tube?
Wheel builder: The WHEEL is balanced.
Idiot: but the addition of an unbalanced tire/tube throws that off.
Wheel builder: I sell balanced wheels - they leave here balanced.
Idiot: What good is that if the valve of the tube is just going to throw the balance off?
Wheel builder: The wheel starts off balanced.
Idiot (frustrated): I say tomato...
I agree with you I was just trying to make peace.I am old school bro. elvin jones was a drummer with john coltrane :beer: cheers

[BarryG]

Trek (and I say Bless them!! in this respect) has resisted the compact
But Trek's "56" sized Madone with level top tube, isn't even a 56. They're measuring seattube to a point even above c-t, let alone c-c. So essentially you're getting a 54cm c-c seattube and a 56cm toptube. There's no hope of oversizing to get your bars up unless you're all torso/arms. I wouldn't exactly be praising Trek for this stretched out geometry, . . .

[chrisroph]

BICYCLE GEOMETRY | TRAIL & EFFECTS | TRACK SET-UP | TITANIUM RESPONSIVENESS | FRONT END WOBBLE | COMPACT FRAMES
COMPACT FRAMES

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.

[zap]

Snipped.

This is probably a lot like the balance wheel argument:
Wheel builder: I balance my wheels.
Idiot (me): Without a tire and tube?
Wheel builder: The WHEEL is balanced.
Idiot: but the addition of an unbalanced tire/tube throws that off.
Wheel builder: I sell balanced wheels - they leave here balanced.
Idiot: What good is that if the valve of the tube is just going to throw the balance off?
Wheel builder: The wheel starts off balanced.
Idiot (frustrated): I say tomato...



Stop. Your killing me. :D

[Climb01742]

BICYCLE GEOMETRY | TRAIL & EFFECTS | TRACK SET-UP | TITANIUM RESPONSIVENESS | FRONT END WOBBLE | COMPACT FRAMES
COMPACT FRAMES

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.

if a regular old forum member made these statements, i'd bet quite a few traditionalists would challenge the poster to prove it. or that it was all in their imagination. curious to see whether any luggites will challenge TK. my guess is the silence will be deafening. maybe it's all in my imagination but my compact frames do climb very well.

[cpg]

What's a luggite?

Curt

[fiamme red]

What's a luggite?

Curthttp://www.nemeng.com/leica/002e.shtml

Luggite
A small but disproportionately noisy cohort on the Leica User Group mailing list. Typically serial-posting cranky WASPs, who tend to wear their Tiley Hats a few notches too tight.

[flydhest]

contraction of "luddite" and "lug"

[Big Dan]

if a regular old forum member made these statements, i'd bet quite a few traditionalists would challenge the poster to prove it. or that it was all in their imagination. curious to see whether any luggites will challenge TK. my guess is the silence will be deafening. maybe it's all in my imagination but my compact frames do climb very well.

Weight distribution................ :p

Chill out..........with all that anger you can't be ready for the Sachs... :(

[Climb01742]

dan, i'm not angry. i'm bemused. and waiting to hear someone challenge TK's statements. was that a pin dropping i heard?

[Big Dan]

I can see how someone would be inclined to use a compact design.
Personally none of my bikes are slopers, but I would consider a compact or at least a lower TT like Dario does on some of his frames.... :p

[William]

My Bianchi Reparto Course SL was a sloped tuber. It rode just fine. With that said, I still prefer the look of a level framed rig. Not better or worse really, but then what's the incentive to make the move?

It has been said that one of the reasons for the compact/sloped tube design was so some of the Big companies could offer just a few frame sizes to cover a good portion of the Bell curve. Weight savings is another comment that gets thrown out from time to time. The counter argument being that you need a longer seat post so weight savings are slim to none.
Another aspect to consider is shifting more of the cost to the consumer. Seat tubes are shorter so there is likely a small savings per tube set vs traditional seat tubes. Multiply that out over thousands of set's and there is an incentive to go shorter. The consumer then has to make up the difference by purchasing a longer (and sometimes beefier) seat post then they might have with a traditional seat tube set up.

Does this make sense or having I been sitting to close to the model glue again??? :confused:


William ;)

[dirtdigger88]

Climb

I am not sure what you want people to challenge? TK is saying what the bike "felt" like to him- how do you dispute that? I would not doubt that a bike with a 17* slope would "feel" lighter on side to side motion- have you ever seen a bike with a 17* slope- its huge!!!

Seven (http://www.sevencycles.com/bikes/alta.html)

Look at the bike on the Seven site- this bike or one like it is in their catalog listed as a 15 or 17* slope- most compacts you see are not like this

Besides- if I say that when I ride a compact I "feel" like I am flying. . . how are you or anyone going to dispute that. . . its how I feel. I dont see TK saying this is how it is- only how it felt to him

Jason

[Johny]

How do you challenge TK's feeling like "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."?

You either buy it or you don't...


P.S. TK's arguement would easily make the compact design the biggest advancement for a climbing bike. BTW, this is probably the best climbing bike: http://www.rivendellbicycles.com/images/GloriusSV.jpg

Or we simply remove the top tube to make it feel lighter and faster?

[flydhest]

climb,

what dirt said. Everyone is allowed to have their perceptions of how a bike rides. TK is one of the greatest guys I ever met, but if we ever disagreed on something about bikes, I'd want him to explain it to me every bit as much as I'd expect anyone else to.

That said, how do your compact frames climb well by themselves :D I think it is entirely a matter of how the bike feels . . . until someone can prove to me otherwise.

[Fixed]

bro to each his own. :beer: Cheers

[Climb01742]

sloping TTs are cool if you like 'em. they suck if you don't. seems like the most honest thing you could say, maybe?

[bostondrunk]

Forget all this speculation, etc....

Ionmally, tell us what Max S. thinks about compact frames!!

[OldDog]

I like level TT's and purdy lugs and wonderful paint. That said, isn't it great we have so many choices, from so many production and custom builders, to get exactly what we desire in a frameset? Wasn't too long ago you had too few choices in frame design and construction and custom builders were few.

Times are good for us bikies. :banana:

[sg8357]

Mike Burrows designed the compact, s/m/l/xl frames for
Giant to allow for junior race teams to easily resize bikes for
different riders. The Giant also had a selection of aero section
posts and nifty diagonally split/adjustable quill stem. The diagonal
split let you swap bars w/o retapping. The idea was to have the
team own the bikes and be able to adapt them to riders as cheaply
and easliy as possible. By going to team owned bikes MB hoped
to encourage junior racing, since even poor kids could race.

Scott G.

[cpg]

dan, i'm not angry. i'm bemused. and waiting to hear someone challenge TK's statements. was that a pin dropping i heard?

How do you interpret the silence? Why didn't you ride a sloper up Mt. Washington?

Curt

[Climb01742]

How do you interpret the silence? Why didn't you ride a sloper up Mt. Washington?

Curt

the rather boring answer is, all of my sloping TT frames were built up and had DA 10 on 'em. wanted to use MTB gearing, so that meant DA9, and i wasn't keen on stripping a built up frame. i had the CCKMP naked hanging on a peg (no pun intended.) both slopers and level TTs can both climb brilliantly. and no matter what frame i rode, i would have been just as dopey on MW. the angle of my IQ, unfortunately, slopes downward.

[cpg]

That's a good enough reason for me. It took some big stones to declare your intentions to ride Mt.W to the world and to follow through and then tell us the results. I hope you're proud of yourself. Sure you got your head handed to you but that's what you needed (I'm not saying you deserved it, really) to learn that it was your head that took out of contention for your goal. You will do better next time.

Curt

[Fixed]

Bro I was wonderin what does T.K. ride now? Not asked with any disrespect.Cheers :beer:

[Climb01742]

That's a good enough reason for me. It took some big stones to declare your intentions to ride Mt.W to the world and to follow through and then tell us the results. I hope you're proud of yourself. Sure you got your head handed to you but that's what you needed (I'm not saying you deserved it, really) to learn that it was your head that took out of contention for your goal. You will do better next time.

Curt

thanks, curt. i think that's the nicest thing you've ever said to me in a post. :beer:

[dbrk]

Fashion's best friend in this discussion is impression. Neither of them point to any substantive differences or quantifiable facts. TK impressions of how compacts climb are just that, his impressions which are shared by some and likely not by others. That TK likes compacts demonstrates nothing more than his preferences or impressions. The "challenge" Climb proposes is that because we revere TK for his designs and bicycles over the years that no one would dare raise more of that issue. Personally, I think the compacts are ugly and that the impression of their improved climbing performance does not jibe with my own experience. That doesn't make TK wrong or even me, for that matter! It means we have different fashion tastes and different impressions. There's not much more to it, as I see it.

There is no _particular_ merit to the compact unless it solves a fit problem (and rarely is this necessary) but there are many reasons why the larger bike industry would like it ( and I don't mean TK but rather, say, Giant or Specialized or others, viz., read: saves money, saves money, saves money, as the first three reasons I can think of...). If you _like_ it, then that's fine, that's fashion and if you think it has advantages in ride quality, like climbing, that's fine too, but that's impression ('cause there ain't no facts nor physics to substantiate such a view).

Serotta is showing nothing but slopers right now, not because they are "better" but because they are the fashion. That is that.

dbrk

[Fixed]

There you have it bro no more to be said ,case closed. go ride your bike. cheers :beer:

[andy mac]

i went to a serotta fitter that was highly recommended by several people on this forum. after a frank discussion, eg. there's no chance i'm racing next year's tour, a look at my injury problems - the reason for the custom bike, the measuring, prodding etc, he asked me if i had any prefs for my bike's looks.

i told him do what ever he thinks is best, he's the expert. (i wish some of my clients afforded me the same notion...) my frame came back with a slope. it wasn't a fashion decision. please don't hate me. especially if i pass you.

[flydhest]

andy, how do you come to the conclusion that, simply because someone else picked it, that it isn't a fashion choice?

I don't think that inference follows.

[Climb01742]

even if it was a fashion choice, would that be bad? fashion may be shallow but fun.

[andy mac]

good question. maybe he was influenced by fashion? but he's the bike expert with years of experience. i'm just some yuppie knob who thankfully has the ability to access his expertise.

and frankly, i'd rather ride my bike than date it, so as long as it works well, i'm happy.

cheers all,

andy.

[flydhest]

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with other people riding sloping/compact frames. I ride a 60 or so, and I think in that size they look a bit less elegant, but that's just. I was just wondering how one could conclude that the fitter/salesperson wasn't choosing fashion. After all, they are in sales, first and foremost, they are also part of the larger industry. Given that no harm is done by making it look cool with a sloping TT, there's not a real good reason not to go with it (unless you disagree with the premise that it looks cool).

[Johny]

Didn't UCI initially want to ban compact Giants because they don't look traditional? However, UCI later said the compact design is actually good since manufacturers can make cheaper bikes, which are beneficial to the public and therefore, popularity of the sport.

Fashion or not: today's fashion may become tomorrow's classic.

[lnomalley]

in the real world and looking at the big picture of bicycle design a "normal" flat top tube is as arbitrary a design decision as a sloping one (sloping tubes have been around for a looooooooooooong time. you can find old sepia toned photographs with guys on sloping bikes with their waxed mustaches blowin' in the wind. there is no right answer. the beauty of today's market place is that you can just get what you want and not worry about what everybody else has.

my aesthetics are for me.. and i sure dont want your aesthitcs imposed on my bike... even though sloping is sexier!!!!!!

[dbrk]

I love people who know what they like, have passion and conviction in their opinions, and aren't too worried if someone disagrees. It's a world without room for real diversity that scares me (not just disappoints). Of course, there is nothing at stake here with bikes, bike fashion, or personal preference but it strikes me as a good thing that we don't have to conform or all have the same thing...

Now, that said, is it any wonder that a Serotta fitter left to make decisions about sloping or level-top tubes chooses the former given the simple fact that Serotta's present fashion statement (pretty obvious: they are all slopers!) is sloper-esque. One might treat one's fitter like one's tailor and allow him or her that privilege to make such decisions. I have done that and would under only very, very limited circumstances: it allll depends who the builder and designer is...but to each their own. A world without differences is a sad state of affairs.

dbrk

[vaxn8r]

Girl's bikes!


Heh.

[chrisroph]

Fixed--I think TK rides a sloper.

I made my pista vanilla a sloper because Sacha asked me if I would mind. I said no, fine, cool, have at it. I want the builder to have a bunch of input in the bike he is building. The vanilla is beautiful, flawless, a work of art, a great riding machine. Everybody needs a vanilla, you can just sit around and look at it if you don't feel like riding it.

Also, I built my new spectrum ti as a sloper bc I know TK thinks slopers have some advantages, notably the climbing out of the saddle thing. I think he's correct; I can feel a difference. The weight difference is probably almost offset by the longer seatpost. And, all in all, it is a brilliant bike, probably my best all around bike, maybe even a bit more favored than my spectrum steel non-sloper which I have been riding lately. Its a cliche but true with the spectrums--TK makes a bike that is both very smooth and compliant in absorbing road shock and very solid and stiff in sprinting and putting the power down. I think his chain stays have something to do with it. The ti has Tom's relatively new 1" chainstays, which taper and are butted. They are massive. Also, they are quite round in cross section. The bike has a unique ride, smooth and really stiff and snappy. My old steel spectrum also has massive roundish chain stays. On the steel bike, they are ishiwata which I believe TK had custom drawn.

Most of my bikes are non-slopers. I don't have a preference. The biggest advantage to the non-slopers is that when you are hanging around waiting to strat your ride, you can turn the bike sideways and sit on the top tube. This is harder to do with the slopers. Aesthetically, I don't have a preference although I know some of you do.

[andy mac]

Ok I am willing to take aesthetic advice from anyone providing you don’t:

1. drive a mini-van
2. drive any American car made in the last 20 years
3. wear Teva’s and socks
4. own a pair of pleated pants
5. wear white tennis shoes with jeans
6. think formal wear is a golf shirt

anything I missed??

[Fixed]

I love people who know what they like, have passion and conviction in their opinions, and aren't too worried if someone disagrees. It's a world without room for real diversity that scares me (not just disappoints). Of course, there is nothing at stake here with bikes, bike fashion, or personal preference but it strikes me as a good thing that we don't have to conform or all have the same thing...

Now, that said, is it any wonder that a Serotta fitter left to make decisions about sloping or level-top tubes chooses the former given the simple fact that Serotta's present fashion statement (pretty obvious: they are all slopers!) is sloper-esque. One might treat one's fitter like one's tailor and allow him or her that privilege to make such decisions. I have done that and would under only very, very limited circumstances: it allll depends who the builder and designer is...but to each their own. A world without differences is a sad state of affairs.

dbrk bro I once went to a hair cutter and told her to do what she wanted I came out with a pink and blue afro . Cheers
:beer:

[GoJavs]

Funny thing about fashion is that some of us get a kick out of going anti-fashion. My latest project is refinishing a John Howard frameset. I'm having it re-done by Dennis Kilfoy up the road here in Florida. Is there anything fashionable about that? Nope! Yet, I feel pretty hip. How does that work?

[QUOTE=dbrk]Fashion's best friend in this discussion is impression. Neither of them point to any substantive differences or quantifiable facts....

[Fixed]

Funny thing about fashion is that some of us get a kick out of going anti-fashion. My latest project is refinishing a John Howard frameset. I'm having it re-done by Dennis Kilfoy up the road here in Florida. Is there anything fashionable about that? Nope! Yet, I feel pretty hip. How does that work?

[QUOTE=dbrk]Fashion's best friend in this discussion is impression. Neither of them point to any substantive differences or quantifiable facts....
bro fashion and style are not the same thing and you are hip dude,Cheers :beer:

[GoJavs]

I appreciate that, fixed. :banana:

[The Spider]

Gojavs,

after you've overhauled your John Howard, do you mind coming down here and fixing our's up as well? :)

(John Howard is the prime minister of Australia, he's also the kid you used to beat up in elementry/primary school - no one we know voted for him!)

[Xyzzy]

Essentially every pro road team now uses sloping top tubes. Trek (Discovery) is one of the few exceptions. Even our Serotta-sponsored Kodak/Sierra Nevada team is "sloped". Will level top tubes soon become a "Custom Only" option for the affluent bicycle buyer? :confused:.

[zap]

It's the new sexual revolution.





Gone wrong.

[Jeff N.]

Ugly is as ugly does. Guess it gets you in touch with yo' feminine side.... Jeff N.

[Climb01742]

different strokes, i reckon. i dig slopers.

[1centaur]

Kinda makes you wonder - if bikes are getting sloped TTs in order to stiffen the front triangle, and it took the advance of carbon fiber to get a long seat tube that was stiff enough without the support of a level TT, then maybe the logical extension is to reduce the rear triangle further and slope the TT as much as possible without making water bottles impossible to use. If side-pull bottle cages become the norm, both triangles could get a LOT smaller. ISPs only hasten this potential.

[93legendti]

different strokes, i reckon. i dig slopers.
I agree with you (and TK). I have bikes with 7 degrees of slope, 1.1 degree of slope and no slope. I like them all. They are all bikes.

[Elefantino]

I agree with you (and TK). I have bikes with 7 degrees of slope, 1.1 degree of slope and no slope. I like them all. They are all bikes.

Ditto. Seven and zip. Love 'em both.

[LONE RIDER]

I'm just a guy who rides a Legend Ti and reads the forum frequently. Mostly you guys blast my insights but here goes:
What I see is a top tube that slopes from the head tube "down" to the seat tube. What I mean is there is more seat post exposed than a level TT would normally have. So all of the talk of the threadless forks and spacers suggests that this causes the TT to "rise up" to the head tube from the normal seat tube location. I say its the opposite; the TT "slopes down" to the seat tube.
I will sign off now and listen to your comments.

[atmo]

I'm just a guy who rides a Legend Ti and reads the forum frequently. Mostly you guys blast my insights but here goes:
What I see is a top tube that slopes from the head tube "down" to the seat tube. What I mean is there is more seat post exposed than a level TT would normally have. So all of the talk of the threadless forks and spacers suggests that this causes the TT to "rise up" to the head tube from the normal seat tube location. I say its the opposite; the TT "slopes down" to the seat tube.
I will sign off now and listen to your comments.
a compact design is not the same as a sloper atmo.

[FierteTi52]

Lone Rider,
In my case the Top tube is higher at the head tube and lower at the seat tube compared to a level top tube. Actually the standover and the top tube center is approx. the same height as if I was riding a level top tube. This acheives reasonable standover for my short legs and a taller head tube to raise the bars without too many spacers or a positive rise stem. This works for me, but others riding compacts using long seatposts, with a huge bar drop doesn't make a bit of sense to me.
Jeff

[Wayne77]

a compact design is not the same as a sloper atmo.

As I understand it, a sloper (or whatever you want to call it) raises the top of the HT/height of the bars by starting the slope at or near the ST/TT junction, which requires the HT be taller to meet up with a TT that is angled up more. In this case the bars are higher, but the ST doesn't necessarily get shorter and standover height increases correct?

In contrast, with a compact design (most compact racing frames) the HT length stays the same, with the TT sloping down from the HT to the ST, decreasing ST length, making for a more compact triangle & decreasing standover height.

Also, there are variations, where the slope starts in the middle, slightly increasing HT length and slighlty decreasing ST lenght.

Did I get this right Sensei? (Just trying to make some sense out of this crazy world we live in)

IMO, slopers can look kinda funky (like the front end of a large bike was mated to the rear end of a small bike) but may be required for folks with back problems, and Compact frames look..well, like a modern racing frame, love it or hate it.

[atmo]

IMO, slopers can look kinda funky (like the front end of a large bike was mated to the rear end of a small bike) but may be required for folks with back problems, and Compact frames look..well, like a modern racing frame, love it or hate it.

atmo this is essentially how i see it, and it kinda sorta
started with the early 90s giants and the 3 sizes fits most
approach to inventory control atmo.

[swoop]

they realized.. hey, we sell this many mountain bikes and we have a small, medium, and large. if we can do that off road, why not on road. but how do we market this? hmm.. it's a lighter frame. it's modern.

and then fools like me thought it made sense in ti because it made the frame 'stiffer' because it's a smaller triangle, and then i thought a little seat post looked cooler and before you know it.... i slope because i can. seven degrees!

[Wayne77]

atmo this is essentially how i see it, and it kinda sorta
started with the early 90s giants and the 3 sizes fits most
approach to inventory control atmo.

I wonder how much of that originated with the min wage walmart lackey fitting method: "Ok, Stand over the bike, raise it until it hurts..see how much daylight between the wheels and the ground? - if there's a few inches you're good to go". So a few industry geniuses thought, "lower the TT and shazaam!, we've got a bike that fits everyone!"

Combine that idea with the pricey molds to make monocoque carbon frames and we have a perfect storm...

[Simon Q]

they realized.. hey, we sell this many mountain bikes and we have a small, medium, and large. if we can do that off road, why not on road. but how do we market this? hmm.. it's a lighter frame. it's modern.

and then fools like me thought it made sense in ti because it made the frame 'stiffer' because it's a smaller triangle, and then i thought a little seat post looked cooler and before you know it.... i slope because i can. seven degrees!

I was a level TT kinda guy but I managed with slope of around to make my 62 cm Serotta (with not a huge seat to bar drop) look racey and modern - it makes the large head tube look less obvious and shows a decent amount of seat post but doesn't look squashed at the back end. I had to be convinced but the frame desinger nailed the angle and I am extremely happy with the result.

[William]

Ahhhhhhhhh!!!! I have to have my frames made for me. And, every one in the past, and every one in the future will have level TT's.



You want a sloper, have at it. I won't ever buy one.



William

[Ti Designs]

People claim the frame is stiffer because of the smaller triangles, I have to question that. look at the front triangle in isolation agains twisting forces between the head tube and the seat tube (as in pulling up on the handlebars and pushing down on the same side pedal out of the saddle - full tilt sprint). With a level top tube you have a fairly wide triangle with the torsional weak point at the head tube. The axis of twist will depend on what's holding the ends of the seat and head tubes, and the diameter of the top and down tubes, but for this example let's say it's dead center between the down tube and the top tube. Now start to lower the top tube and see what you get. The front triangle becomes long and skinny and doesn't have the same resistance to twist. In addition, the axis of twist drops down, putting it closer to the rear axle.

This all depends on frame material stiffness, tubing diameters, and the rider's ability/tendency to put that kind of force on the bike.

[Ahneida Ride]

that consumers have a choice, but to see the degree to which they have taken over is disconcerting. Just check our own Serotta website and nearly every photo is a sloped cookie cutter image of the last. I guess it just leaves more room for the boutiques to stay in bus. making frames of individual classy good old fashioned beauty. Think I'll hang onto my quills and my DA headsets too.

Every Picture ..... YUCK !!!!!! Double YUCK ... :butt:
Really bad marketing decision.

[Big Dan]

I agree, it would be nice to see a couple of square Serotta's on the website.
They all look the same with the sloping TT and the collapsed rear end.

imho..... :(

[swoop]

y'all are toptube scrooges. what makes a bike sexy is how it fits the dude riding it.
atmo. that being said... you can have it your way, so what's the problem-issimo? no one is denying anyone the top tube of their choice.
for a smaller dude i think a slope looks right.

aesthetically pleasing bikes are about scale and balance. you can get there a million different ways from this to this. it aint about the slope nor is it not about the slope. it'd about poportions.
atmo.


gimme a sachs in traditional geometry and i'll show you a perfectly porportioned bike (no really, please give me one... i can't spend another cent without being that homeless dude with the nice bikes). but same goes for my elium or the fancypants dutch bike.
so many kinds of perfect. it's too lazy to say something like slopers suck or traditional bikes rule. and so laziness sucks!
a well porportioned bike of any kind rules! actually.. almost all bikes rule.

[manet]

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/easterncaster/image68.jpg




http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e61/easterncaster/IMG_1897-1.jpg

[davids]

Sloping or level top tubes don't effect my opinion of a bike - I like and dislike bikes with either. Not a decisive factor for me...

swoop, whose Love is this? Thumbs up on the seatpost, thumbs down on the stem.

[manet]

...

swoop, whose Love is this? Thumbs up on the seatpost, thumbs down on the stem.

that bra + panty set has got it going on

[davids]

that bra + panty set has got it going on
I usta be all thumbs, atmo.

[Lifelover]

Sloping or level top tubes don't effect my opinion of a bike - I like and dislike bikes with either. Not a decisive factor for me...




You picked the perfect example of this!

As built, this Love does nothing for me. IMHO it looks "pieced" together. Exactly as if I had built it.

Redone I could see it as a all time favorite.

We like what we like

[swoop]

ah, the only bike i can speak to in my post is mine. the seven...
i can't stop perving on it.

[93legendti]

Sloping or level top tubes don't effect my opinion of a bike - I like and dislike bikes with either. Not a decisive factor for me...

Yup, my best riding bikes are slopers: Strong 6/4 Ti, Fierte Ti and Ottrott ST (I wasn't crazy about my compact CDA).

Tom Kellogg says it best:"...The compact design has no effect on handling beyond the increases responsiveness during climbing and accelerating..."

http://spectrum-cycles.com/616.htm

[Fixed]

bro imho there are two kinds of bikes good and not so good
but even not so good bikes are better than no bike
cheers

[93legendti]

bro imho there are two kinds of bikes good and not so good
but even not so good bikes are better than no bike
cheers

Sig worthy.

[Serotta_Andrew]

A picture for the level tt fans

[marle]

A picture for the level tt fans

+1

[William]

A picture for the level tt fans

SAH-HA-WEET!!! :cool:


Cept for that Campy stuff. :p ;)



William

[Serpico]

...

Cept for that Campy stuff. :p ;)

...

looks like scram

[William]

looks like scram

Aaaa, what do I know? I'm a registered Shimaniac. :banana:





William ;)

[Serotta_Andrew]

looks like scram


Simply White!!!!!!! with Sram

[crossjunkee]

Very nice, minus that seatpost!

[fiamme red]

A picture for the level tt fansVery nice!

[swoop]

schwing.

[stevep]

andrew,
you give me that bike and i will ride it for free..
looks very cool.

[swoop]

Forget all this speculation, etc....

Ionmally, tell us what Max S. thinks about compact frames!!

ask max yourself... i haven't seen him around in ages. his principa... i can't remember if it sloped or not. the thing is... you like what you like, i like what i like..generalizations like this are mp.

[swoop]

saying something exists because it is fashion is to trivialze it out of your own discomfort. everything on a bike is fashion. just because you long for a previous fashion instead of a more current one doesn't make it any less fashion. it' s just old fashion. some guys like old fashion bikes.

who says that the level tt wasn't fashion? because head tube lengths and bb drop have changed steadily... as has the back end of a bike.
all the retro dudes prefer bikes that were a fashion as well. one fashion is no more than the other.

a bike from the 80's is of a fashion compared to one from the 50's. a level tt bike from today has more in common with a sloping frame that a level tt bike from the 30's!!!!!!!!!!!

it's all fashion.

[mosca]

Simply White!!!!!!! with Sram
Looks hot! Needs these:

[Grant McLean]

saying something exists because itis fashion is to trivialze it out of your own discomfort. everything on a bike is fashion. just because you long for a previous fashion instead of a more current one doesn't make it any less fashion. it' s just old fashion. some guys like old fashion bikes.

who says that the level tt wasn't fashion? because head tube lengths and bb drop have changed steadily...
all the retro dudes refer bike to bikes that were fashion as well. one fashion is no more than the other.

a bike from the 80's is a fashion compared to one from the 50's. a level tt bike from today has more in common with a sloping frame that a level tt bike from the 30's!!!!!!!!!!!

it's all fashion.

Sure, but there is good design, and bad design. Some design solutions are
complete, and they "work". Others are unresolved, and are a mess.

g

[Ti Designs]

.

[swoop]

and there are bikes that are set up well and bikes that aren't. a quick stroll through the picutre gallery confirms.

[atmo]

Campagnolo = Putney Swope
Shimano = Putney Slope

[Serpico]

.

[Big Dan]

What do retro dudes know anyways......??

:confused:

[Serotta_Andrew]

andrew,
you give me that bike and i will ride it for free..
looks very cool.

OH MY!!!! REALLY !!! You will really ride a free bike. I know you Steve, how much is this going to cost me!!!!

[sevencyclist]

it on the low stack height of threadless headsets and the death of quill stems.

Long live threaded headsets and quill stems! :beer:

I see that more of the slope is created by the absolute drop at seatcluster areas than the absolute rise of the headtube.

I am not sure whether it's the front end that's causing the sloping. I thought it was the desire of manufacturers to have a lower weight frame as bragging right, so they shorten the seattube and seat stays to reduce weight, thus creating the sloping top tube. While the overall weight of bike might not vary given the longer post needed, but the frame maker can claim low weight for their frame.

[merckx]

A picture for the level tt fans

However, put the seat pin and wheels in the rubbish. Replace with a Mavic 330 sp, and Record Pave hoops stuck with All Weathers. Then, ride it around Flanders for a month. Don't change the tape for at least 6 months, and then snap a pic. Should be perfect!

[AgilisMerlin]

Aaaa, what do I know? I'm a registered Shimaniac. :banana:





William ;)


Me 2.



AmerliN

[Ahneida Ride]

Every Picture ..... YUCK !!!!!! Double YUCK ... :butt:
Really bad marketing decision.


I reiterate ....... Very poor Marketing decision.

If was a newbie in the market and saw only Serotta slopers, Well ....

Anyone listening ?

[Simon Q]

Check out Trek's proto from these thumbs. If you can't beat them?

http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/?pg=pelopics/pelopics07/pelopics-jan07

[RABikes2]

Aaaa, what do I know? I'm a registered Shimaniac. :banana:
William ;)
+1
I'm with ya Cuz. :D