Kirk Terraplane Ride Report

[PaulE]

A few weeks back I posted some pictures of my Kirk Terraplane in the custom image gallery here:

Image Gallery

While I am hardly qualified in this area, here is my ride report to follow it up:

In a word, the ride is SUHHWEET. All the superlatives and glowing words you've read in other ride reports and impressions apply to this bike. On smooth roads the ride is sublime. On rough roads the bumps are felt, but not harsh at all. The handling is also fantastic. This bike is stable and corners and descends as if it's on rails.

My other reference points are my 2001 CSI and my 2003 Legend, which are both 60cm x 60cm. Those bikes are great too, but the Kirk feels different. Compared to the CSI and the Legend, the Kirk has chainstays that are about 1/2 inch shorter and the Kirk's wheelbase at approximately 40 inches is about an inch shorter than both the CSI and the Legend. Although the Kirk's chainstays and wheelbase are shorter, to me it feels more stable than my other two bikes.

All of my bikes have 32 spoke wheels with either Open Pro or Velocity Aerohead rims. All three bikes also have Thomson Elite seatposts and Salsa Road Pro handlebars. On my CSI and Legend I have always used Vittoria Open Corsas but I put a set of Continental Attack and Force tires on the Kirk. The other difference between the bikes is that the CSI and Legend have Terry Ti Liberator saddles, while the Kirk has a Fizik Aliante with Ti rails. I like the Aliante and my Christmas list includes Aliantes for the CSI and Legend.

So far I've put 150 miles on the Kirk. I don't know how much my perceptions are affected by new bike syndrome with the Kirk, or how much, if any, of my perception is due to the differences in saddles or tires. The Terraplane stays look sharp, but I also can't tell you what impact they have on how this bike rides. I'm sure the stunning beauty of this frame and fork and its lugs and paintwork are also subliminally affecting my perceptions. But hey, like a good bottle of wine or a fine meal, I know what I like without knowing everything that went into it and what makes it so good to me. I can say for sure that this bike is a keeper for me.

For those who may be able to interpret, here are the details of the frame and fork per Dave Kirk:

It is built with a blend of Reynolds tubing. The main tubes are Reynolds 725 while the stays are special 653 that Dave has made for him by Reynolds. The fork is built using a Cinelli semi-sloping crown and Reynolds blades.

Seat tube – 61.5cm c-c
Seat angle – 72.5 degrees
Top tube – 60.5cm Top tube slope – 0 degrees
Head angle – 73.5 degrees
Fork rake – 4.0cm
Trail – 5.9cm
Bottom bracket drop – 7.25cm
Chainstay length – 41.0cm
Head tube - 19.9cm

[Pete Serotta]

sounds sweet......Bob must also be getting the fever..

[jimcav]

Originally Posted by PaulE

Trail – 5.9cm

many consider 56 neutral, so a 59 would tend toward feeling stable, but then i have no idea wht your csi and legend have for trail.

i think the most surprising thing to me on the terraplane was how well i climb on it. it is heavier and not geared compact, but i can climb on it as well as my other, lighter bikes.

jim

[Ahneida Ride]

Is this Dave's Bike ( was Dave bike I should say .... )

[paczki]

I briefly tried to sell my Terraplane (which I had bought from a Forum member) because it's a bit small. I lowered the handlebars and put on a setback post and now it fits a lot better. And I'm so glad I did. The bike is just so smooth, and the stays are fantastic on descents without any penalty (as far as I can tell) on climbs. Kirk rules.

[RudAwkning]

Originally Posted by jimcav

many consider 56 neutral, so a 59 would tend toward feeling stable, but then i have no idea wht your csi and legend have for trail.

i think the most surprising thing to me on the terraplane was how well i climb on it. it is heavier and not geared compact, but i can climb on it as well as my other, lighter bikes.

jim

I've found the exact same thing. My Kirk, all built up, is 4 pounds heavier than my Waterford R33. But the ride and fit are so dialed that I don't feel the weight.

There's something magical about my Kirk. When I'm on it, I'm not compelled to "crush it", but I still manage to hold my own.

59mm trail on mine too. Super stable. Even at 45+ mph, I can't get that thing to shimmy.

[Sandy]

Originally Posted by RudAwkning

I've found the exact same thing. My Kirk, all built up, is 4 pounds heavier than my Waterford R33. But the ride and fit are so dialed that I don't feel the weight.

There's something magical about my Kirk. When I'm on it, I'm not compelled to "crush it", but I still manage to hold my own.

59mm trail on mine too. Super stable. Even at 45+ mph, I can't get that thing to shimmy.

I know that the Waterford R33 is a light steel bike, but I can't understand how a Kirk could possibly be 4 pounds heavier. Assuming the same wheels, components, tires,..., Where does the 4 pound frame come from? Dave builds with steel forks and steel stems if you want, but 4 pounds is a great deal of weight.


Solid Steel Sandy

[14max]

*

[RudAwkning]

Originally Posted by Sandy

I know that the Waterford R33 is a light steel bike, but I can't understand how a Kirk could possibly be 4 pounds heavier. Assuming the same wheels, components, tires,..., Where does the 4 pound frame come from? Dave builds with steel forks and steel stems if you want, but 4 pounds is a great deal of weight.


Solid Steel Sandy

My R33 tips the scales at 16.6 lbs with cages and pedals. Haven't grammed it out, but rolling with a full Dura Ace gruppo (including new DA pedals and DA BB with ceramic bearings), Alpha Q CS10 fork, Campy ti seatpost, Nitto TR83 ti stem, Nitto 184 STI bar, Chris King ti headset, 10mm ti spacer, Rolf Elan RS wheels, ti bolt on skewers, King ti cages, Arione saddle, Nokon brake housing, Michelin Supercomp HD tires, Michelin UL 48mm tubes......I think that makes up a whole bike. Frame is compact geo with 8 degree slope. Full S3 True Temper tubeset.

Check here for the build on the Kirk:
http://forums.thepaceline.net/showthread.php?t=34819

the only change I've made is getting rid of the Nokon shift cable (shifts better with stock SIS housing I've found) and swapping out the tires with Panacer Extreme Duros. Guessing the weight is coming from the wheels and all steel front end (stem and fork). The Kirk is also WAAAAY more rigid. Being filleted, non sloped geo, terraplaned, and having beefier tubes might account for some of the weight.

Again, the weight doesn't phase me a bit. I may rebuild the wheels onto Aeroheads instead of Fusions with some lighter spokes. Maybe radial the front. Might just buy a set of silver Rolf Vigors as alternates. Dunno, but I can feel the wheel weight in immediate "sprint" accerleration. Not a bad thing. Just feels different, which is what I like between my bikes

I can only imagine how the Kirk would climb with a carbon gruppo. Too bad I'm too much of a curmudgeon to go plastic

[dannyg1]

Though it's veen said about a thousand times in the other thread, Oh MY, is that bike gorgeous(!).

Danny

[PaulE]

Originally Posted by Ahneida Ride

Is this Dave's Bike ( was Dave bike I should say .... )

Once it went on Ebay I knew that it had to be mine for only a few FRN's.

[jimcav]

Originally Posted by Sandy

I know that the Waterford R33 is a light steel bike, but I can't understand how a Kirk could possibly be 4 pounds heavier. Assuming the same wheels, components, tires,..., Where does the 4 pound frame come from? Dave builds with steel forks and steel stems if you want, but 4 pounds is a great deal of weight.


Solid Steel Sandy

i think the r33 and vanilla s3 I have are w/n a few grams of each other. my r33 sadly is sram rival, but my kirk and vanilla are currently the same build except for the obvious fork being steel on the kirk (alpha sub q on the vanilla, ouzo pro on the r33)carbon record cranks vs UT chorus cranks, ritchey 4-axis stem vs kcnc wing scandium, and e90 bars vs 220gram alloy, thomson elite vs use alien post--otherwise same record group, tires, eurus, etc--so i can weigh them and compare. but s3 tubing is light stuff, and sloping vs horizontal.

jim

[RudAwkning]

Originally Posted by jimcav

i think the r33 and vanilla s3 I have are w/n a few grams of each other. my r33 sadly is sram rival, but my kirk and vanilla are currently the same build except for the obvious fork being steel on the kirk (alpha sub q on the vanilla, ouzo pro on the r33)carbon record cranks vs UT chorus cranks, ritchey 4-axis stem vs kcnc wing scandium, and e90 bars vs 220gram alloy, thomson elite vs use alien post--otherwise same record group, tires, eurus, etc--so i can weigh them and compare. but s3 tubing is light stuff, and sloping vs horizontal.

jim

Used a digital scale. 16.6 for the Waterford. 20.4 for the Kirk.

The gruppo on the Kirk is an all aluminum Campy rig (+ that modified dual pivot rear brake and that heavy med cage rear d....that thing is beefy!) vs the DA rig. Nitto T type steel cages vs King Ti cages. Wheelset is definitely over a pound heavier. Steel fork vs Alpha Q CS10. Panaracers vs. Hi Lite Supercomps. Steel stem vs. Nitto ti stem. Heavy @ss IRD 11-28 cassette vs. Dura Ace, Campy Centaur seatpost vs. Campy ti seatpost, DA pedals vs. Ultegra pedals, etc. I think the only thing that might be lighter on the Kirk is the 3ttt Morphe bar vs. the Nitto 184 STI.

That's probably 2 lbs alone for fork and wheels + all the other bits.

And then there's the frame. The Waterford, with its 8 degree slope/41cm stays/7cm bb drop, weighs 3lbs (maybe under?) in a 52cm. The Kirk has a lot more metal, with the Terraplane, brazing, tubeset and 8cm bb drop.

I think it all ads up (to two beautiful and completely different bikes).

Again, not complaining. It's the way I built her up. Compnonent weight on the Kirk was not an issue. Heavy metal baby!

[Ahneida Ride]

Originally Posted by 14max

Yep, this frameset was Dave's personal ride from what I understand. I watched the auction with envy. I'm glad it went to a good home...

I held that bike in my very hands at the Serotta open house back in June.

What a frame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Roadbike61]

May I ask why the HT is sooooo long??