Fantastic response Bill--a model of clarity, thoroughness, and thoughtfulness. I have no stake in this debate; just thought your response was a good one. As for me, I really have no idea of the chainstay lengths on my Terraferma, my Jones, my LHT, or Salsa Spearfish, nor own my now sold Hunqapillar. That does not mean they're not important numbers, but they operate as part of an overall design not as elements in themselves. In reading your reply I am reminded of the generic, near meaningless language repeated over and over again in mtn bike reviews, i.e. the newest issue of Dirt Rag I just read last night, whereby the reviewers repeat the same key phrases, sometimes in different order or whatever, to describe the ride of various bikes.
Anyway. Now I have stop procrastinating and finish grading! Have a good weekend all. Christian On Friday, September 19, 2014 3:00:09 PM UTC-4, Bill Lindsay wrote: > > Hi Evan > > I would not claim to have made any conclusions for myself on this topic. > I haven't gone out of my way to set up two identical bikes where the only > difference is chainstay length and ride them extensively. Grant, Keven and > Jan all have done exactly that experiment, and all three of them agree that > they can't tell the difference. Peter Weigle was Jan's co-experimenter, > and he also agreed that he couldn't tell the difference. I think their > conclusions hold water because they approached it scientifically: Vary > exactly one thing and see if there is a difference. I learned the > prevailing opinion with plausibility arguments. You know how they go. The > first time you interact with bikes on the sales floor of the bike shop, the > guy tells you: "That's a touring model. It's heavy, slow, comfortable and > stable. It has long chainstays and slack angles". For the next bike the > guy says "That's a racing model. It's light fast, nimble, and you can feel > the road. It has short chainstays and steep angles". I'm summarizing, but > you know what I mean. From that, you get the plausibility argument that > long chainstays must yield stability and short chainstays must yield > sportiness at least in part. > > Certainly there are expert builders who have bought into that plausibility > argument. You and I both have seen frame builders wanting to push it on > the racy side with ultra short chainstays, split or dimpled or curved seat > tubes to make them shorter. There was the absolute prevalence of Campy > 1010 dropouts that ostensibly allow you to adjust the handling of your > bike. Forward for a racy short wheelbase. Back for a stable touring > wheelbase. But despite the fact that everybody had adjustible horizontal > dropouts through the 60s 70s 80s, I've never met a rider who said he > actually used them to adjust the feel of his bike. I've played with them > on my bikes, and I've never felt any difference. > > Now for sure there's some point where you notice. Extreme case, I feel > the long wheelbase on my tandem. It feels long. It definitely corners > like my rear wheel is way behind me. But even then, I still feel like it > is the front end geometry that determines how it enters a turn. The > handling is not something I call "less sporty" or "more stable" due to the > fact the rear wheel is multiple feet further back. I feel the wheelbase > difference for sure. > > Extracycles are another extreme. I've never ridden one. Maybe there's an > extracycle user who can chime in and say what they think. > > So, to your question: If it doesn't matter, then why do builders spec > different chainstay lengths for different applications? I think that's > your question. Clearly I don't know, and clearly not everybody thinks they > don't matter. I think you gave three Grant examples: XO-1 --> Betty --> > Cheviut for a reason. I think Grant would tell you he's learned a lot in > the last 21 years. I think he'd also tell you the constraints on his > Bridgestone designs were myriad. The XO-1 eventually became the Atlantis > via the All-Rounder and the Atlantis has longer stays than the XO-1 ever > did. Most builders do build their bikes to sell, and so there is some > level of going with what the customer wants. Most builders also will buy > the materials available to them and that's not unlimited. I don't think > you can buy 56cm chainstays from the tubing vendor. I don't know how > Rivendell got them for the Appaloosa. > > I think short chainstays is "normal". I think builders will grow them if > they think they need to grow them for the bike they are designing. I've > had a few situations in my cycling life where I've said "dang, I wish I had > a little more room here. I wish my chainstays were longer". I've never > run into the situation where I said "dang, I have too much room here and my > bike handles badly. I wish my chainstays were shorter". > > These are only ideas and opinions. I'm not trying to insult anyone who > holds the majority opinion. I don't have the answers or the conclusions. > I think it's an incredibly interesting topic, and I enjoy discussing it. > I think Rivendell is taking an enormous business risk by making these > "weird looking" bikes. I fear the majority of people will dismiss them for > being weird looking and will assume they ride a particular way. > > On Friday, September 19, 2014 11:06:23 AM UTC-7, Evan wrote: >> >> Hi Bill, >> >> If chainstay length doesn't matter/makes no difference in ride >> quality--such as making a bike more or less stable, or lively, or able to >> climb well--then why bother to make a bike (such as Cheviot) with long >> chainstays and another bike (such as Yves) with medium chainstays and >> another bike (such as X0-1) with shortish chainstays? I'm not expecting you >> to speak for Grant or Jan or Keven or anything; just curious to hear your >> own take on this topic. I'd be surprised if a long chainstay's only real >> benefit is to obviate heel strike with panniers in place. >> >> Thanks, >> Evan E. >> SF, CA >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
