Whoops, didn't see this before the reply went through. Yes, chainstays aren't the whole story. Front end geometry is a big deal for sure but in turns above 20mph where the wheel is deflected less I think the other elements of the geometry start to make themselves known. Not scientific, just a certain feeling I get,
Well, here'll be an interesting experiment. I'm currently building up a 43cm Black Mtn. Monstercross. As you can see from bikeinsights here <https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geometries[]=5bb29e327581960016665a33&geometries[]=5a1e39d43db1cb0014c51ab4&builds[]=&builds[]=> it has 43cm stays, 17mm higher bottom bracket, but a pretty similar front-end geometry with slightly higher trail. I'll be migrating the wheelset from my Roadini so it'll be as neutral a comparison as one can really get without making a whole new frame. On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 3:36:08 PM UTC-6, Patrick Moore wrote: > > Matt: First, this is a question, not a contradiction > > I don't doubt that significantly lengthening chainstays affects ride, but > do a couple of cm in the stays affect steering as much as you say? I ask > because I've had several (6 -- I keep updating this number; at least 6 ) > bikes with 44-45 cm stays, and many others with 42-43 cm stays, and at > least as far as my memories go, I don't recall that all the longer stayed > bikes were slower to turn than all of the shorter stayed bikes; or that all > the shorter stayed bikes were faster than all the etc etc. In fact, some of > the longer stayed bikes turned more quickly -- "felt more nimble" -- while > at least 1 of the short-stayed bikes (and, come to think of it, this one > may have had 40 or 39 cm stays -- old Schwinn Tempon; could cram a 25mm > tire in there only after taking a gentle hammer to the st bridge) handled > very sweetly; better, or at least more to my taste, than 2 of those with > 44/45 stays, and some with 42 cm stays handled more sedately than others > with the longer stays. > > Comparing all of these bikes in memory (well, not entirely in memory, > since I still have 2 of the 44/45s), their handling is all over the place, > so cs length is apparently not a sole determining factor in overall > handling experience. Other factors in my own experience are wheel diameter, > head angle, wheel weight, and tire width. > > Funny: I owned a first edition Sam Hill, and that did indeed exhibit the > "swoopy" feel that someone else described, but IMO, too much so, in that, > while it "carved a turn" so very nicely, once it was in the turn, it was > hard to adjust your line -- a quality that I did not like, as exhibited on > that bike. OTOH, one reason I didn't like the Herse was that it *didn't* > "carve a turn" as much as I like; it felt vague in turns. My 2 remaining > custom Roads give me, at least, exactly the balance between "natural" turn > in and "ease of adjustment." My first custom Road was *very slightly* too > twitchy. All these Roads use light, small 24" to 25" diameter wheels (559 > or 571, 24 3/4" with the 559 X 28 Elk Passes). > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 12:25 PM Matt Dreher <99m...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > >> I finally concluded that the chainstays on my 61 Roadini are just a hair >> too long at 46cm. I'm not opposed to longer chainstays, it's just that it >> would be nice if there were a Rivendell option other than the Roadeo that >> had slightly more traditional road geometry. If they had capped it at 44cm >> for the large sizes or specced horizontal dropouts to allow a bit of >> adjustability I probably wouldn't have a real issue with it. >> >> I don't buy the line that wheelbase doesn't affect handling >> significantly. I have an 90s road bike with 41cm stays that's exhausting to >> spend a long while on. The handling feels significantly more confident to >> me on that bike. I know that you can take the same lines but taking the >> same line on the long-stayed bike requires a good bit more lean than the >> other. It makes me a lot more hesitant to take corners as quickly on loose >> surfaces. Of course once you've lost traction it's easier to control and >> recover from skids with long chainstays but I'd rather not lose traction in >> the first place, you know? >> >> As someone who adjusts their bars below the saddle I'm also not really >> representative of the typical Rivendell rider, though. I suppose that at >> this point complaining about no shorter-chainstay'd Rivendells is like >> complaining that Cervelo doesn't have a steel option any more. Both >> companies once had the option for it but the type of riders they're >> intended for necessarily led them away from that. >> >> -- >> 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-owne...@googlegroups.com <javascript:>. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/dff29408-57da-4688-b22a-46425cc1d3b1%40googlegroups.com >> >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/dff29408-57da-4688-b22a-46425cc1d3b1%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > > > -- > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Patrick Moore > Alburquerque, Nuevo Mexico, Etats Unis d'Amerique, Orbis Terrarum > > > > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/0f4ad072-f48d-4ecb-ac65-11e48502c643%40googlegroups.com.
