What is "stage race geometry"?

[1centaur]

Maybe we should have a contest to name that type of geometry using something other than a potential use (which I guess means "century geometry" is out as well).

I'll start: Slack-'n-low (SNL).

Crit geometry can be SNQ (steep-'n-quick).

[stevep]

i was there when merlin developed the RSR ( road/stage race) designation for a new model.

they hoped to imply that it would edge toward more comfort and more stability for a dedicated recreational rider.

this rider ( like many here ) would admit no desire to race but they would like high performance.
hence stage race. fast but not quick handling.

the most hilarious thing about this frame is that i built one of the earliest models ( wishbone rear stay module to cut manufacturing cost ).
i built it w/ 23c michelin tires and they hit both sides on the chainstays...

funny phone call..
" hey, can someone go down to the shop and try to put a wheel into one of these frames and call me back..."

return call- 10 minutes.
" we designed it around 20c tires but we will adjust future production to accomodate 23c...'

get out the shovel.
lucky that first frame was free man...was used by a lot of racers and still is though so they got something right i guess.

[merckx]

Originally Posted by stevep

i was there when merlin developed the RSR ( road/stage race) designation for a new model.

they hoped to imply that it would edge toward more comfort and more stability for a dedicated recreational rider.

this rider ( like many here ) would admit no desire to race but they would like high performance.
hence stage race. fast but not quick handling.

the most hilarious thing about this frame is that i built one of the earliest models ( wishbone rear stay module to cut manufacturing cost ).
i built it w/ 23c michelin tires and they hit both sides on the chainstays...

funny phone call..
" hey, can someone go down to the shop and try to put a wheel into one of these frames and call me back..."

return call- 10 minutes.
" we designed it around 20c tires but we will adjust future production to accomodate 23c...'

get out the shovel.
lucky that first frame was free man...was used by a lot of racers and still is though so they got something right i guess.

Wasn't this frame also made from CP Ti?........to keep costs down. Lightspeed at the time was kicking Merlin's arse at that pricepoint with the Catalyst iirc.

[stevep]

Originally Posted by merckx

Wasn't this frame also made from CP Ti?........to keep costs down. Lightspeed at the time was kicking Merlin's arse at that pricepoint with the Catalyst iirc.

no, it was their regular alloy 3.25 ti but the thought was the rear triangles were pre built and uniform throughout the sizes. simpler.
they could never make stuff to compete w/ litespeed. their costs were much higher and their qc was better.

the original frame i spoke about was raced for 2 yrs by tim johnson, 2 years by paul mccormack, 1 yr by someone else and now its still being raced...so they held together ok.

[e-RICHIE]

Originally Posted by stevep

no, it was their regular alloy 3.25 ti but the thought was the rear triangles were pre built and uniform throughout the sizes. simpler.
they could never make stuff to compete w/ litespeed. their costs were much higher and their qc was better.

the original frame i spoke about was raced for 2 yrs by tim johnson, 2 years by paul mccormack, 1 yr by someone else and now its still being raced...so they held together ok.

this is an example of Puccipedia atmo.

[Fixed]

one man quick handling bike is anothers responsive bike .


cheers imho

[merckx]

Originally Posted by stevep

no, it was their regular alloy 3.25 ti but the thought was the rear triangles were pre built and uniform throughout the sizes. simpler.
they could never make stuff to compete w/ litespeed. their costs were much higher and their qc was better.

the original frame i spoke about was raced for 2 yrs by tim johnson, 2 years by paul mccormack, 1 yr by someone else and now its still being raced...so they held together ok.

Agreed that qc at Merlin was in a different zipp code from Litespeed.

[merckx]

The biggest marketing joke was the introduction of the "triathalon" bike in the early '80's. Many companies came up with a triathalon model to market to the emerging sport of triathalon. These machines were simply basement level road bikes that had the word "triathalon" somewhere on the top tube. A ton were sold.

[e-RICHIE]

Originally Posted by merckx

The biggest marketing joke was the introduction of the "triathalon" bike in the early '80's. Many companies came up with a triathalon model to market to the emerging sport of triathalon. These machines were simply basement level road bikes that had the word "triathalon" somewhere on the top tube. A ton were sold.

you never saw head tube pump pegs before tri.
cuzza there was no neutral support atmo.

[Fixed]

Originally Posted by merckx

The biggest marketing joke was the introduction of the "triathalon" bike in the early '80's. Many companies came up with a triathalon model to market to the emerging sport of triathalon. These machines were simply basement level road bikes that had the word "triathalon" somewhere on the top tube. A ton were sold.

bro the san diego tuesday ride in the early 80's i did it and it was full of tri cats and uscf cats they were all better than me . before scott bars
remember john howard he was pretty good
cheers

[merckx]

Originally Posted by e-RICHIE

you never saw head tube pump pegs before tri.
cuzza there was no neutral support atmo.

this is an example of atmopedia atmo.

[soulspinner]

Scotts dont hold up with fat guys on em...

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Chris

Good question. I have played with my position a lot over the years. I am now the slightest bit forward from the center of the rails on a Thomson no set back post. This frustrates me, because I don't like the aesthetic. I have moved forward to get a little more knee over the pedal spindle and I have two Cannondales which have 72.5 degree seat angles which has caused me to have to come a little more forward on the rails compared to previous bikes that were more upright in their seat angles (73 - 73.5). I did a lot of looking at different frames today and it seems that in a 59 or 60, 72.5 is now the norm. I would love to edge the seat back ever so slightly though to get back that element of kewl. Someone please tell me that I should...

Forget about the element of kewl or get a custom frame with a steeper STA (and shorter TT if you want the same frame reach). The STA, as you have discovered, dictates a particular seatpost offset, to produce a given range of saddle setback. About the steepest stock STA in that size range is a 73 degree, which will only move the post forward about 6mm.

I assume you've found the more forward positon preferable? There are a lot of differing opinions about saddle fore/aft position. Some will argue that the knee position relative to the pedal is irrelevant and rider balance over the saddle much more important.

When I owned a 51cm LOOK with a 72.5 STA, I used a no-setback Thomson post to produce the same saddle setback that I got with a 74-74.5 STA and a 20-25mm setback post. The looks of it didn't bother me any. I prefer the steeper STA with the setback post, but fortunately, steeper STAs are the norm on smaller frames. LOOK no longer uses the laid back 72.5 degree STA on their frames. The largest model 585 has a 73 degree STA.

[Chris]

Originally Posted by Dave

Forget about the element of kewl or get a custom frame with a steeper STA (and shorter TT if you want the same frame reach). The STA, as you have discovered, dictates a particular seatpost offset, to produce a given range of saddle setback. About the steepest stock STA in that size range is a 73 degree, which will only move the post forward about 6mm.

I assume you've found the more forward positon preferable? There are a lot of differing opinions about saddle fore/aft position. Some will argue that the knee position relative to the pedal is irrelevant and rider balance over the saddle much more important.

When I owned a 51cm LOOK with a 72.5 STA, I used a no-setback Thomson post to produce the same saddle setback that I got with a 74-74.5 STA and a 20-25mm setback post. The looks of it didn't bother me any. I prefer the steeper STA with the setback post, but fortunately, steeper STAs are the norm on smaller frames. LOOK no longer uses the laid back 72.5 degree STA on their frames. The largest model 585 has a 73 degree STA.

I'm trying to find that sweet spot. I got wrapped up in "the proper position" and moved my seat forward because of that, despite having ridden a little further back for years. It's funny how you do just fine when you don't know any better, but once you hear that you aren't set up according to some mythological construct that is accepted as proper, all of a sudden you need to get that way as quickly as possible, despite the fact that things have been working okay before...

[e-RICHIE]

Originally Posted by Chris

...but once you hear that you aren't set up according to some mythological construct that is accepted as proper, all of a sudden you need to get that way as quickly as possible, despite the fact that things have been working okay before...

the lemond position atmo.
get the rope.