A question of lugged frame aesthetics - sloping vs level top tube?

[eBAUMANN]

This stems from my own mixed feelings about sloping tt's...assuming a completely modern build (like the white bike below), which do you guys prefer?


https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7350/14083659662_ab322e51f5_z.jpg

http://cycleexifcom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/llewellyn-cadenzia-1.jpg

[8aaron8]

I really couldn't stand the look of sloped TT's about a year ago but they have really grown on me, so much so that I believe I will build myself one in the near future:) To me, they definitely look more the part when equipped with modern components.

[toastedbread]

I'm not totally against sloping TTs, but I'm much more fond of the level TT look.

[Cicli]

Level. More classic. Silver group. Alloy wheelset.

Sloped. More modern. Carbon group set. Deeper profile wheelset.

[MattTuck]

If you have the flexibility to do do it, go with a flat top tube. I went sloped just to get a little more seat tube exposed.

I'm fine with either, but I do think the level top tube looks better. But bikes aren't meant to be looked at, they're meant to be ridden.

[m_sasso]

If I was going to purchase a horse I would not settle for a pony!

Level TT!

[tigoat]

I would use a canted top tube only as required. If you are tall enough and don't need it then why bother with it. I have both and like them both.

[eBAUMANN]

I really couldn't stand the look of sloped TT's about a year ago but they have really grown on me, so much so that I believe I will build myself one in the near future:) To me, they definitely look more the part when equipped with modern components.

exactly why im asking haha

thinking of building myself a roadie for this summer (got a big trip planned) and im totally conflicted...because while i am solidly into level tt's, i think the slope gives the frame a more "modern" look...particularly for larger size frames.

[eBAUMANN]

I would use a canted top tube only as required. If you are tall enough and don't need it then why bother with it. I have both and like them both.

i guess the idea behind any "compact" frame is that it's lighter and stiffer due to less material and a smaller front triangle. not sure if this was ever actually proven but it sure makes sense in theory.

[8aaron8]

The sloping TT design definitely makes frames more compact, which helps take care of too much spring in a larger frame. It's a tough call and is ultimately your decision of course.

[MattTuck]

i guess the idea behind any "compact" frame is that it's lighter and stiffer due to less material and a smaller front triangle. not sure if this was ever actually proven but it sure makes sense in theory.

Here's my uninformed view on that. It is 100% marketing.

Ok, maybe two frames of the exact same tubing, one being level and one being sloping, you'd get an incremental weight savings... I'm not sure you'd get anything significant in stiffness (atleast very little in pedaling efficiency, that has more to do with the chain stays)...


But your choice of tubing and geometry would have a lot more to do with stiffness than a sloping top tube.

[8aaron8]

Here's my uninformed view on that. It is 100% marketing.

Ok, maybe two frames of the exact same tubing, one being level and one being sloping, you'd get an incremental weight savings... I'm not sure you'd get anything significant in stiffness (atleast very little in pedaling efficiency, that has more to do with the chain stays)...


But your choice of tubing and geometry would have a lot more to do with stiffness than a sloping top tube.

I would say that there must exist a small probably indecipherable amount of stiffness added based on the smaller triangles, but would agree that yes geometry and tubing choice plays a much larger role.

[bikingshearer]

I prefer the look of a level top tube. I am a big guy (6'3", 270lbs) and I ride old lugged steel almost exclusively.

Having said that, I did recently buy a Ritchey Break-Away for travelling, and the look of it has grown on me. So now I am have a preference for level top tubes instead of insisting on them.

[parris]

It depends on how much slope to the t.t. . My JKS has a slight slope and to my eye looks like it'll age well.

[Ralph]

I don't normally pay much attention how a bike looks....other than look to see if it has good parts. And if it looks well maintained.

[eBAUMANN]

Here's my uninformed view on that. It is 100% marketing.

Ok, maybe two frames of the exact same tubing, one being level and one being sloping, you'd get an incremental weight savings... I'm not sure you'd get anything significant in stiffness (atleast very little in pedaling efficiency, that has more to do with the chain stays)...


But your choice of tubing and geometry would have a lot more to do with stiffness than a sloping top tube.

Well I dunno if its ALL marketing...it theoretically makes perfect sense that a smaller triangle would have less lateral flex at the bb given the same geometry and materials. How much stiffer? Who knows. But I would say it should (in theory) be as resistant if not more resistant to deflection compared to a level tt'd frame.

[rpm]

I like the aesthetics of frames where the slope of the stem matches the slope of the top tube. For level top tubes that usually means a level stem.

[choke]

From Tom Kellogg's site...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.http://www.spectrum-cycles.com/geometry.php

[FlashUNC]

Level. Compact only in non lugged applications.

[christian]

Yeah, LTTFL, homes. (Level top tubes for life.) It ain't a mountain bike.

My Colnago plastic-bike has a sloping top tube. I cry about it sometimes, but happycampyer gave me a solid deal on it, so...

[DHallerman]

Visually?
Lugged frames?
Most definitely need level top tubes.

With welded or fillet-brazed frames, though, a sloping top tube can look good.

And maybe it's the bike, and not the tube, but my only main road bike with a sloping top tube -- a Burley Fox Hollow -- always feels more agile for cornering. I feel the extra space between me and the top tube gives me greater comfort, and I can lean more when I corner, and therefore corner faster.

Dave, who in general used to think lugged frames looked best but with his Ritchey Road Classic and his wife's Kirk both fillet-brazed he's increasing loving that smooth look connecting tubes

[SPOKE]

For aroad bike I don't like more than 4 degrees of slope on my bikes.

[Ozrider]

Big size bikes look better with a slight slope on the Tat, otherwise you have the rear triangle looking pretty weird in my opinion.

[OtayBW]

For me: level....period.
BTW, that red one is one spectacular sumbeatch!

[summilux]

Level toptube for sure. AND stem parallel to the toptube (at least for me).

[seanile]

unless the DT is massive and the TT shaped somewhat, im partial to level. also depends on the components somewhat...until i surf through a neo-retro thread, then im reassured.

[David Kirk]

I heard someone say recently that "3° is the new level."

dave

[blessthismess]

Another vote for level top tubes. Nothing particularly against sloping but if you are asking me to chose then I'd choose level every time.

[Black Dog]

After the level option in the survey there was one too many choices. I have both, but for a lugged bike level is it.

[thwart]

I consider myself level-headed.

And of course, level-tubed as well. ;)

[kasak]

In person I think the sloping TT has a little something going for it. Maybe the ovalized tube look has grown on me and I can't quite separate it from with the sloped look. I don't know why exactly but I'm surprised about how much I don't like it here. I do like the flat TT in the photos though. Perhaps it is just be more photogenic?





.... maybe I need a red bike?

[Ryun]

Lugged level with a -17 stem.


That red one with a level tt and 6 degree stem just looks wrong.

I think tig with a slight slope looks great when the stem matches.

Ryun

[Ken Robb]

Level or "levelish" is my choice. My Rivendell Rambouillet has a 2 degree slope that I only notice when it is next to a bike with a truly level top tube.

As far as weight-savings from compact frames: how much is there when one accounts for the added weight of the required longer seat post?

[pitonpat]

Boys bike: level
Girls bike: sloped



* tongue firmly in cheek*

[Tony T]

Well, you could always get both :)

[Cicli]

Boys bike: level
Girls bike: sloped



* tongue firmly in cheek*

Mixtes are cool.

[Llewellyn]

If I really, really, really had to choose - I'd probably go level TT, but I've grown to like the sloped TT on my Llewellyn. Mine is a combo of the two pictures - the frame in the top photo with the paint job from the second :banana:

But when you're riding one of Dazza's creations, it's so sublime that you don't even think about whether the TT is sloped or level.

[Satellite]

Moots told me they went to the Compact strictly to fit more folks without having to go the custom route. Fit the person to the top tube and less worry about stand over height.

Stiffer and weighs less, I doubt it very seriously.

I definitely like the traditional look of the level top tube. Armstrong and I don't agree too often but when he was asked about Compact Geometry he is quoted as saying, "I don't ride a girls bike" (or something like that).

Go level or go home.

I like lugged over tig welded steel too. Although the Indy Fab Mavic limited edition bike was amazing.

http://ifbikesblog.blogspot.com/2014/07/125-ans.html

Level and lugged,

Satellite

[milkbaby]

For me, lugged steel looks best with a level top tube. Anything else -- be it lugged carbon, titanium, fillet brazed steel -- sloping or horizontal is fine by me.

[soulspinner]

I heard someone say recently that "3° is the new level."

dave

and you get it in the work stand quickly yet don't notice it riding, even as a rider next to it on the fly. where is the like button?

[toastedbread]

Lugged level with a -17 stem.

This SO much, for looks it's hard to beat a -17 stem.

[merlincustom1]

Level, -17, tubes round period full stop.

[eBAUMANN]

personally, as right as a -17 looks on a level top tube frame, it kinda bothers me on a sloping top tube frame...the lines are just wrong somehow...hard to put a finger on it.

for example:

http://m2.i.pbase.com/o6/40/394640/1/84872162.WElNjEnV.2007SerottaAttack04_0268_70901.j pg

[whatwolf]

I also somewhat recently started liking sloping top tubes. In some cases it gives the bike a better, meaner "stance."

That said I don't have a definite preference one way or the other... whatever works for the rider and the rest of the geo.

Or, just whatever:

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4081/4796893436_12d420b77c.jpg

:banana:

[SlowPokePete]

Preference is for level, but as others have said, sloping has gained appeal to me.

Just not too much of a slope seems to work for my eyes.

SPP

[GParkes]

I am the proud owner of the assymetrical lugged frame Dave Kirk posted pics of (build pics soon to come). That has a -1.5 degree slope, subtle look, and not intended for any reason but different than my mates. My fillet brazed bike is -6, and that is to race on. For the record, Dave's comments to me were essentially that any stiffness a frame has would come from chain stays, DT, ST diameters, wall thickness, not length of ST.

[oldpotatoe]

Compact is(or should be IMHO) reserved for those riders who need a certain standover coupled with a certain head tube length...on some frames it just isn't possible, without a sloping toptube, to 'get there'.

On all others, I think horizontal is the way to go. Stiffness, weight savings, blah, is the thing of bike marketeers. 'One size fits more people' also, as Giant foisted when they first did a sloping top tube bike, and the resulting S-XL, 4 sizes, sizing. Same for some monocouque frame makers as more than 4 molds cost a lot of $$.

So, for me, make mine level with mamma earth, thanks.

[saab2000]

My Zanconato has a slight slope and it looks great. Generally I'm a fan of level top tubes but you absolutely don't notice it when you're riding and I think the slight slope on the Zank is a bit of a trademark. It's very subtle.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3665/14128401359_2b9a886e7f_o.jpg

[oldpotatoe]

My Zanconato has a slight slope and it looks great. Generally I'm a fan of level top tubes but you absolutely don't notice it when you're riding and I think the slight slope on the Zank is a bit of a trademark. It's very subtle.

https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3665/14128401359_2b9a886e7f_o.jpg

Nice bike, nice frame but is the seatpost above the limit line? I know those are 250mm in length but...

[JAllen]

I'm more of a fan of a level top tube. The classic elegance is just so appealing. I have seen the occasional sloped (trends to be subtle) that does strike my fancy.

[bluesea]

Horizontal. I don't think I'll ever have a bike that suits me aesthetically as my Atlanta.


https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5473/9041745735_7456f08b51_z.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/eLZiZR)IMG_0663 (https://flic.kr/p/eLZiZR) by pigmode (https://www.flickr.com/people/74222011@N03/), on Flickr

[saab2000]

Nice bike, nice frame but is the seatpost above the limit line? I know those are 250mm in length but...

It's about 1 cm from the limit. Close...

[eippo1]

Funny thing is that I prefer the looks of a level top tube, but prefer sloped top tubes for the fit I want.

[JasonF]

I love the gentle TT slope on my Spectrum. Gives it a racy and purposeful look.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8647/16723072271_c4a4a27f19_h.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/rtL7Lg)IMG_2999 (https://flic.kr/p/rtL7Lg) by jsfrede (https://www.flickr.com/people/36983056@N02/), on Flickr

[Tony T]

Compact is(or should be IMHO) reserved for those riders who need a certain standover coupled with a certain head tube length...on some frames it just isn't possible, without a sloping toptube, to 'get there'.

Are you referring to "Short People (http://youtu.be/1NvgLkuEtkA)" :)

[Tony]

I miss having a level TT on long descents. It was nice being able to grab the TT
with my knees to take some of the pressure off my hands. Not able to with a aggressive sloping TT

[tv_vt]

My proportions/frame size are similar to the 60-ish cm white bike in the first post. With my handlebar height starting to come up to almost the same height as my seat, I like having a slight slope (2-3%) to the top tube to get a bit more seatpost showing. Not crazy about 7-9% sloped TTs, though.

Also, for a travel bike with S&S couplers, having the rear half of the bike be smaller is helpful in packing, especially in larger sizes.

[jdp211]

It really depends on the frame, for me. With a lugged frame, I absolutely prefer a level TT, but Tig'd or brazed look alright with a light slope.

[vav]

tough call. I'd say level but i'd be a hard choice.

http://i1285.photobucket.com/albums/a583/porterphoto1/DSC_4144_zps0611ffb1.jpg

http://i1242.photobucket.com/albums/gg526/Rbtmcardle/DSC_3969_zpsa716705c.jpg

[fuzzalow]

Level toptube.

In this case of an Eriksen custom I knew Kent spec'ed his toptube slope angle at 2 degrees so I did not insist on zero degrees. I was looking for the modern iteration of roadrace bike Ti so this was a radical as I was going to get!

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-hlhxCeJNM90/U91wAj3OjTI/AAAAAAAAApI/gw3GA9FAJO8/s640/DSC00766.JPG

[Bob Ross]

As far as weight-savings from compact frames: how much is there when one accounts for the added weight of the required longer seat post?

Or, as far as increased stiffness from the smaller triangle of a compact frame, how much of that is usurped by the longer unsupported seatpost flopping around?

[Mark McM]

The top tube should be at what ever angle it needs to be to connect the seat cluster (seat tube/seat stay junction) with the top tube/head tube junction. Raising or lowering these junctions purely to make the top tube level is an unnecessary artifice.

[tedski]

I am more an old fashion guy, level for me :)

[harryschwartzma]

The cool thing about a sloping top tube lugged bike is that the builder will have to find a solution to make the lugs work!

https://c4.staticflickr.com/8/7121/8157747508_69a34f0b24_z.jpg

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8342/8157747868_fde99e30a3_z.jpg

[eBAUMANN]

The cool thing about a sloping top tube lugged bike is that the builder will have to find a solution to make the lugs work!


Well, yes and no. You could do a fillet or just use Llewellyn's gorgeous manorina/crescendo lug sets, which have a built in 6* slope.

http://www.cycle-frames.com/bicycle-frame-tubing/images/P/Mini-6-lug-set-1.jpg

http://www.framebuilderscollective.org/wp-content/uploads/SL6-Family-6.jpg

[bcroslin]

I prefer the look of a sloping TT and yet I've only ever ridden level TT bikes including the Cannondale EVO I'm currently on.

[professerr]

The whole point of lugged for me is the classic aesthetic so only a level top tube will do.

With welded, I suppose some slope is OK simple because I don’t really notice it unless looking at the side of the bike straight on. But at some point, a sloped, straight-tubed bike looks like a dog squatting to take a poo.

[professerr]

The top tube should be at what ever angle it needs to be to connect the seat cluster (seat tube/seat stay junction) with the top tube/head tube junction. Raising or lowering these junctions purely to make the top tube level is an unnecessary artifice.

Lugs are an unnecessary artifice too!

But, anyway, what then is the proper angle of the seat tubes, and where should they intersect the seat tube to form the seat cluster?

In this regard, I notice a lot of sloped frames that appear to have been designed to have the top tube intersect the head tube at a right angle, which then sets the slope and location where it connects with the seat cluster. This always looks off to me, the graceless right angle looking all stiff and uncomfortable.

[mhespenheide]

To my eye, lugs=level, or very minimal slope (2-3 degrees at most).

I like the look of sloping top tubes, though; I just think of them as belonging to welded frames.

I keep toying with the idea of a custom Curtlo or Carver with a strongly-sloping top tube with the intent to add one of the intentionally-flexy carbon seatposts like the Niner or Canyon. Stiff frame, lower center of gravity to the frame, a little bump-eating suspension over the rough stuff.

[Waldo]

This stems from my own mixed feelings about sloping tt's...assuming a completely modern build (like the white bike below), which do you guys prefer?


https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7350/14083659662_ab322e51f5_z.jpg

http://cycleexifcom.c.presscdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/llewellyn-cadenzia-1.jpg

s--t, man, both.

My Dazza is slightly sloping, but I'll take Peter's fixie with the horizontal tt anytime.

[harryschwartzma]

Well, yes and no. You could do a fillet or just use Llewellyn's gorgeous manorina/crescendo lug sets, which have a built in 6* slope.

Fair enough. The slope on my bike is 8 degrees. It was a hard won 2 degrees that Jaime initially didn't want to do. Coming from a nineties mtn bike aesthetic, I've always been a fan of how sloped top tubes look - but I definitely think it's a generational thing,especially considering how dead set Jamie was against any slope beyond 6 degrees which he considered fairly radical.

And those Bi-Lam lugs are pretty, pretty good...

[old fat man]

M lugged Zank had the 6 degree sloped top tube lugs. I wouldn't go beyond 6 degrees for any bike if you can avoid it. ATMA 4-6 degrees is the sweet spot.

Also, level top tubes on small bikes that then necessitate short seatpost exposure look terrible ATMA.

[nesteel]

Level top tubes just looks right on a lugged frame.

[mg2ride]

Sloping for me!

[R3awak3n]

I normal prefer level TT on lugged bikes but on btw those 2 I prefer the slipped tube, looks fantastic (they both do though)

[atanz]

my Look 585 is lugged carbon with a sloped tt. looks great. and its easier to pack for travel!

[bironi]

All us old farts love level tts. Maybe the sloped tts would look better on a steep descent.

[Candyman]

I'm a retrogrouch; level for me.

[pdmtong]

All us old farts love level tts. Maybe the sloped tts would look better on a steep descent.

I bet as a group those who rode more "seriously" in the 70s 80s with DT shifters mostly love level.

Of course I had a "road bike" (= FREEDOM for a kid with no car), but I came back to cycling via mtb and spent all those years on dirt and windsurfing.

Admittedly I had to come around to the beauty of a level TT and -17d quill, but I have indeed come around to appreciate the lines, the heritage.....

That said, I also like lugged frames using llewelyn slant 6

Pick one?
If modern bits (non-silver, ergo, carbon wheels) - sloped.
If classic bits then level.

[Peter B]

I bet as a group those who rode more "seriously" in the 70s 80s with DT shifters mostly love level.

Of course I had a "road bike" (= FREEDOM for a kid with no car), but I came back to cycling via mtb and spent all those years on dirt and windsurfing.

Admittedly I had to come around to the beauty of a level TT and -17d quill, but I have indeed come around to appreciate the lines, the heritage.....

That said, I also like lugged frames using llewelyn slant 6

Pick one?
If modern bits (non-silver, ergo, carbon wheels) - sloped.
If classic bits then level.

I like both.

[alancw3]

for several years after sloping tts make they debut i didn't care for them. now i think they look much sportier and love them. not to mention the better climbing ability.

[Gabuyo]

Lugged frames need level top tubes, and thin tubesets.