View Full Version : Spectrum Frame of Month
Just in case you haven't seen this, see this: http://www.spectrum-cycles.com/51.htm
The time, precision, care, and effort that goes into making a bicycle this beautiful, correct, and elegant is nothing short of Herculean. Trust me, I have been party to such details and it's just painstaking and filled with a real love of the work. This frame confirms my ****ensonian view that this is the best and worst of times: the best for work like this and for others, like Mike Barry who is at the height of his powers and Ernest Csuka who is still going strong, and the worst for, well, about 99% of industry trends. (Call me cynical, I suppose, but I am also happy just to see people riding biycles at all, so I take any of that back that encourages any cycling at all...). Kudos to Tom and Jeff for actually caring.
I am about to receive Mike Barry's restoration of a 1965 Rene Herse and short of the derailleurs and drivetrain being oldschool, this bike and the Spectrum are close kin indeed.
dbrk
Just a note to say that Forum's _internal editor_ put those asterisks in my citation of Charles D. Is John Ashcroft reading our words? We are apparently not mature and discreet enough to edit and express ourselves with self-imposed civility. Amazing. I was censured by the machine. I can't say that I find that particularly endearing and itself a sad commentary on where we apparently find ourselves.
dbrk
e-RICHIE
10-09-2004, 07:31 AM
this frame is beyond stunning.
i doubt that many can discern the amount of work
and skill it takes to make something this beautiful
and seemless. alan is a very lucky guy.
e-RICHIE
ps
:cool: :cool: :cool:
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
;) ;) ;)
arrange disorder
Johny
10-09-2004, 07:57 AM
alan is a very lucky guy.
Why do I have this strange feeling that alan is actually dnovo?
:confused::confused:
:confused::confused:
:confused::confused:
:confused::confused:
Climb01742
10-09-2004, 08:49 AM
This frame confirms my ****ensonian view that this is the best and worst of times
dbrk
douglas, you potty mouth! a post of mine once also lost the four letter nickname for both richard and an anatomical member. the filter can't seem to recognize context. or the first amendment. its an understandable filter, i suppose, but still sad. :crap:
e-RICHIE
10-09-2004, 08:53 AM
Climb-issimo & dbrk-issimo,
The way to do it is to type in the asterisks
in your preview post and then it shorts out
the filter and produces the text you desired
in the first place. You gotta have faith!
e-******
Serotta PETE
10-09-2004, 03:29 PM
What a great looking frame. On reading the details it really shows the time and effort that went into determining what yu wanted, designing, and then building. Please post a picture when built up. Thanks for sharing. Pete
Matt Barkley
10-09-2004, 07:16 PM
This is by far one of the most interesting and ****tiful framesets with custom accessories I have seen.... ever. Those racks are worth the time and effoert in my opinion. We are so lucky to have craftsmen and artisans who are willing to build such awesome machines for us' customers. Thanks Tom! And thanks Douglas for the post with link.
- Matt ****ley
vaxn8r
10-09-2004, 09:05 PM
DBRK, question for you. First of all let me say I am a huge fan of Tom Kellogg and his great work. But what gives with this trend to HT's which are about 4-6 cm over the TT? Wouldn't it be reasonable to also spec a larger ST, raising the TT and getting rid of that huge chimney? If standover is such a premium, which I really doubt, as the frames I've seen with this design also have about 13cm of seat post showing, then go ahead and make a compact. Aesthetically this just bugs me and I simply can't come up with a good reason for this design trend.
Talk about industry trends...this is one I just don't understand.
BTW, Serotta is a prime offender of the HT "chimney".
Vaxn8rPal,
You mention a peeve so pet of mine that I feel it nearly insulting to mention it because of its ubiquity. I could not agree more: why build the bikes with the chimmey headtubes when you could just build a bigger bike? I think part of it comes from the influence, if not the reality, of threadless steerers stealing away stack height. You will notice that my new Luigino was designed large enough to avoid any headtube extension. Another beautiful example of skipping on the chimmey look is the remarkable Curt Goodrich frame that Dr Cotcamp recently posted.
I'm not much for spacers nor for head tube extensions and think that both can be avoided. The only bikes that look "right" to me with tall, tall headtubes are modern Pegorettis but that's likely because they seem to have been thought that way from the outset, I dunno.
to each his own, no?
dbrk
vaxn8r
10-09-2004, 09:56 PM
Well, I'm not totally opposed to some spacers. I guess if you could transpose images of two bikes, one with a bike with a quill stem and a bike with a threadless and the dimensions are close ( TT/HT/bar height/etc.), spacers or no, it just looks more proportionally correct to me.
Honestly, bikes with threadless stems and no spacers of any kind, almost look funny to me. Maybe because you just never see it. By the same token, quill stems that stick out 10 cm from the HT look odd too. I understand why some do it, but what I'm opposed to is when you could have a classically proportioned frame and for whatever reason, just throw an oversized HT on a frame. Makes the HT look too big or the frame look too small.
You are right though...to each his /her own.
coylifut
10-10-2004, 12:37 AM
i was looking at the Pegoretti geometries and some picks and noticed they have a very big head tube (a little bigger than my Spectrum with the same size top-tube), but a small chimney that doesn't detract from the overall look of the bike. My Spectrum, has a slightly smaller head tube, but a slightly larger chimney compared to the Pegoretti. Tom, seems to like as small as a triangle as he can make. I gave Tom complete artistic freedom when designing my bike; however, I was very specific as how I wanted the bike to ride. I'm not what you would call an early adopter and going compact with a head-tube extension was a big stretch for me, but I thought, I'm paying this guy to build this bike I think I'll just get out of the way and let him build it. Fast forward a year later and the only time I think about the head tube extension is when I'm drooling over Pegorettis or someone mentions em in a post. I'd post a picture, but I don't know how and I'd have to clean my bike.
Climb01742
10-10-2004, 09:32 AM
if you've seen a pegoretti built for a very tall rider, you'll see something interesting...that even with a tall headtube, dario has the TT intersect it quite low on the HT, keeping the main triangle as small, and stiff, as possible. his longer HT gain their stiffness from being stout, in and of themselves. or at least this is how it was explained to me. if it was an accurate explanation, its an interesting different take on building larger frames. i ain't no genius, but it always struck me as odd that larger frames, powered by larger riders, had such large main triangles. it looks, to my untrained eye anyway, that a long HT anchored at its extremities by a TT and a DT would flex more than if the TT intersected it lower...as dario does. is my understanding accurate?
if you've seen a pegoretti built for a very tall rider, you'll see something interesting...that even with a tall headtube, dario has the TT intersect it quite low on the HT, keeping the main triangle as small, and stiff, as possible. his longer HT gain their stiffness from being stout, in and of themselves. or at least this is how it was explained to me. if it was an accurate explanation, its an interesting different take on building larger frames. i ain't no genius, but it always struck me as odd that larger frames, powered by larger riders, had such large main triangles. it looks, to my untrained eye anyway, that a long HT anchored at its extremities by a TT and a DT would flex more than if the TT intersected it lower...as dario does. is my understanding accurate?
Actually anchoring the ends of a lever (tube) would be better because then there's nothing cantilevered (hanging out in space) to flex. With that said it doesn't matter on head tubes.
That Spectrum kicks some serious booty. I can't wait to see photos of the complete bike. Rumor has it that this or some other rando Spectrum will be on display at the Cirque. Well done Jeff Druser.
Needs Help
10-11-2004, 03:02 PM
Actually anchoring the ends of a lever (tube) would be better because then there's nothing cantilevered (hanging out in space) to flex. With that said it doesn't matter on head tubes.
I agree. When part of the head tube projects outside of the 'triangle' it provides leverage. If the frame were clamped in a vise, which would be easier: trying to break the frame by attempting to flex a 1cm head tube extension, or grabbing ahold of a 6 ft. long head tube extension and yarding away?
BigMac
10-12-2004, 08:42 PM
Thank you Douglas for providing the link for this incredible masterpiece. Thank you to Tom and Jeff for pushing the envelope of custom frame building. A simply superb demonstration of frame building merging with artistic style and remarkable design. The basic frame itself was an obvious labor of considerable effort and skill witnessed by the beautiful lugwork including the 'old world' gently relieved/tapered lugpoints, a quentisential sign of craftsmanship, imo. Then one admires the variety of fine details including lighting ground post under DT and the unusual integrated fender fittings. Just try counting how many internal ss tubes he has fed for wiring and internal derailleur cables. A grand effort gentlemen.
Ride on! :banana: :banana: :banana:
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.