On Thursday, March 9, 2017 at 12:59:50 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote: > > On 03/09/2017 03:32 PM, Brewster Fong wrote: > > > > On Thursday, March 9, 2017 at 11:16:59 AM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote: >> >> >> >> On 03/09/2017 01:05 PM, Brewster Fong wrote: >> >> >> >> On Wednesday, March 8, 2017 at 9:29:31 PM UTC-8, Bill M. wrote: >>> >>> On Wednesday, March 8, 2017 at 2:14:48 PM UTC-8, Steve Palincsar wrote: >>> >>> On 03/08/2017 04:21 PM, Brewster Fong wrote: >>>> >>>> For my next bike, I'm planning on going etap "wireless" with mid-cage >>>> RD. I want to run 11-32 in the rear with a sub-compact double like a 46x30 >>>> or 46x28. Since I don't "tour" or carry a load, a 30x32 or 28x32 should >>>> be >>>> more than enough to get me up the hills around here! Of course, YMMV! >>>> Good >>>> Luck! >>>> >>>> You can help that luck by making sure your frame has a round seat tube >>>> and uses a clamp on front derailleur. Which pretty much means a titanium >>>> frame. >>>> >>> >>> Or a Calfee. Which, come to think of it, Brewster already owns. >>> >> >> Haha, my secret is out! Actually, I'm thinking of getting one of these >> really lightweight carbon bikes to see what all the fuss is about. I see my >> buddies with these 14-15lb bikes with e-shifting and they're loving it! I >> mean, take a look at the latest Trek Emonda. With not really stupid light >> parts, you can get a 10.25lb bike that supposedly has a weight limit of >> 275lb?! Yow! I doubt there are many here who are that heavy, but if so, >> there it is! >> >> >> The Calfee may have a round seat tube, but I'm pretty sure none of the >> Trek "Anagram" bikes do. >> >> >> >> >> I do agree that a round seat tube with a clamp on FD is ideal. However, >> my 90-ish Litespeed Classic ti bike has a braze-on FD hanger tab and I have >> my FD mounted at the lowest point for my 48/34 crankset. >> >> >> And some braze on mounting tabs have their slots configured to allow >> smaller than 50T big rings. Many these days do not. It is a limiting >> factor you need to be aware of. >> > > Agree. At last year's NAHBS, I got into it with Mark DiNucci, one of > the premier builders at the show! When I heard he was showing, I really > wanted to check out his frames. He didn't disappoint as he had 2 or 3 of > the cleanest bikes/frames on display: > > > <https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/kPQOrqCuwckm-exlTPpGukQhPT-sKfoTZB_RlC-uxvwKLAaamIisH6ft8t0Bjl49fX7zTMHrklzcRgtDrO8ZIAkLPq8Js6lb0VJXDqHjRC4k0b_F4mkGEQT9tjuTF-B0SmtrQmzg2RqmdX8IXFQ-5HstJR4KB_mIeUnXlGvD4DNZnCl5CFMi-gHo4bqdMpyhYJ6e6PgCuKFM5DWqc0H_qOYIW2tuRRBMZcs8-IyBwJPPYhGKQMJx7ChgQppYt2hwXDRXLTeRrjHl8zD4UFLGj1etwmZA33TqV9snOzwwOj_t4bkGPMdI3VIKJOl1PFX6NTBj3R7eVv_-FN7nogmJjetxeD_suXSxEAFLUEU_r4WlG9zEPWafiRzgUkrT_fvV_uKGHxJ8LgDkDWS0UnTffrWKg4SeBBB_N2TXyTCgWDGE9pEISQlQ5yeH62F7OuUGcYMczifibKHBSQSq9HrkMnteji2zoxBUKfO5TNOu31w_ka8xCG4tyTDGCUgUv7DU2-XfXoPaioReLpq7U7FRfU75-_HH3Xvv9CsNJ-MUVA3m2ZQN0RyfhwiLMzmHKc1kcXtJP_onFZPr-rVEnsOTTIuxAShfxX2k-afUggK6ad4jDgk0I2hFn9InubSN7UXK61DzGOxO6xb5dKEBI7BteGqvpXNlsKGr6EODLnOzAg=w605-h905-no> > > <https://c1.staticflickr.com/2/1450/24998049119_709088d918_z.jpg> > > <https://c1.staticflickr.com/2/1566/25247415832_af6f9b9c23_k.jpg> > > Beautiful work especially the long thin lugs that just flow into the > frame. Gorgeous! But one question I had for him was whether I could get a > frameset without the FD hanger tab. He blew up! He asked why? I told him I > wanted to be able to adjust the FD to work with whatever crank I got. He > then went on about how they design the frame with the crank in mind and how > the hanger tab would be properly place! Since he got animated, I let it > go. But later thought, I should have asked what happens if someone decides > to change their crank? Let's say you are young "racer" type and want to > use a crank with 53/39 chainrings. Later, you get older and slower and want > more gearing so you go to 50/34 or 48/34. Will that new crank if the FD > hanger tab? Let's say it does. Then a few years later, you want to go even > smaller like a 44/30 or 44/28?! Will that tab still allow the FD to work > with this new smaller gearing?! > > I guess if I ever get the money for a DiNucci, that is one of the > questions I'll be asking! Good Luck! > >
> > Going from the now omnipresent 35/50 to 39/53 is within the capabilities > of the common hanger tab you find on many (most?) carbon road bikes these > days. The problem is going smaller than 50. There may well be some, my > experience with modern carbon road bikes is very limited, but the ones I've > looked at have not. > I bet most FD hanger tabs will allow a crank to go from 53/39 to something with a 48/34 or maybe and this is a stretch 46/34 combo. > > As for future compatibility with other cranks and chain ring combinations, > I'm guessing that's not an important consideration for bike designers these > days. Getting older & slower? You'll probably need to raise your bars a > bit too, and good luck with that if they cut your steerer so as to not > leave any extra for future needs. You need those changes? Get a new > bike. > Well, some mfrs are trying to address that. It isn't very "racy" looking, but there are riser stems available for just that scenario: http://www.interlocracing.com/stems/satin-stem-318mm Available in both 31.8mm and 26.0mm, these 35 and 17 degree rise stems should be able to get those bars up nice and high! If you need higher, then your bike is too small! Good Luck! -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
