Tandem Cycling - List of Framebuilders that use 1-1/4" steerers?

As I get more into trying to tune up the performance of my tandem equipment-wise, I am also researching our next frameset... after having experienced how much better having a lower 1-1/4" bearing on a single (Look 595) is for technical crits, mountain descents, etc. (anything where you are throwing the bike into a corner hard), I am in disbelief that Santana is the only manufacturer to use a larger size...

I think the biggest weakness of the bike I am on now (Tsunami) is the high speed cornering stability... and I am talking about the stiffness of the front end as it twists and bends, not handling related to rake/geometry. It seems 1-1/4" or even 1-1/2" steerers or at least bearing seats would be a no brainer for tandems, at least performance tandems (I'll take the extra frontal area in exchange for the rigidity)...

Can the Co-Motion or Ruegamer framesets be ordered with the larger size to use the Reynolds 1-1/4" carbon tandem specific fork? Any other manufacturers I should be looking at? Or it isn't a big deal and just use an Alpha Q 1-1/8"?

FWIW, I don't like Santana despite the beefier front end... seems too recreational cyclist oriented (performance tandems with a 11-34 and triple???) and I right now the 160mm spacing is something I would not want, even if I got past my perception of the brand. I'm not knocking Santana by the way, just saying I don't think it is for me.

Thanks in advance for any input.

Can the Co-Motion or Ruegamer framesets be ordered with the larger size to use the Reynolds 1-1/4" carbon tandem specific fork? Any other manufacturers I should be looking at? Or it isn't a big deal and just use an Alpha Q 1-1/8"?

You might as well have a 1" steerer / headset if you're considering the Alpha Q X2 fork... which is the lightest and least stiffest fork of the current tandem fork offerings. If what you're looking for is more front end stability and want a carbon fork go with a Wound-Up or a Reynolds Ouzo Pro Tandem (which also comes in a 1.125" version). I say this as someone who's personal tandems have all been fitted with the Alpha Q X2 forks. Of course at 285 lbs combined team weight, we don't exactly overpower the fork or any other part of the tandem; however, none-the-less you can feel the difference when you jump on a well-designed performance tandem with a Wound-Up fork.

My recommendation would be that, before deciding current tandem designers have missed the boat on frame specs, go test ride a Co-Motion... any Co-Motion upright, e.g., Primera, Speedster/Supremo, Roadster/Robusta. Even a Burley Rivazza Race will give you a better idea of how a well-thought out and well-executed tandem can perform.

Anyway, in answer to your headset question, you may find part of it in this post: http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=6479418&postcount=2

I know very little about Rue Sports' Uberlight tandems beyond the principle's work history at Calfee before hanging out his own shingle and I'm fairly confident Co-Motion would not embrace the idea of integrating a 1.25" head tube. However, Greg Peek at Longbikes has indicated to me that he is looking to re-invigorate the upright tandem side of his business and Greg does exceptional work and dabbled with the 1.25" headsets a bit early on.

Have ridden over 30 brands/models of tandems and personally don't see a real need for 1 1/4 or larger headsets. Ridden steel, alu, ti and c/f tandems; go ride some other quality tandems and compare them to your Tsunami.
However, if you really want 1 1/4" there may be a custom builder (besides 'tana) to do your bidding.
More $$$ will get you what you want

I think the biggest weakness of the bike I am on now (Tsunami) is the high speed cornering stability... and I am talking about the stiffness of the front end as it twists and bends, not handling related to rake/geometry. It seems 1-1/4" or even 1-1/2" steerers or at least bearing seats would be a no brainer for tandems, at least performance tandems (I'll take the extra frontal area in exchange for the rigidity)...

.
.
(performance tandems with a 11-34 and triple???).

.
.



As for your first comment. I have a 90 Santana Arriva frame (steel) with a 1" Steerer and steel fork. We have bombed some very technical descents and the bike feels very stable. Maybe it's your wheelset that's flexy?

As for the 11-34 and triple comment. I take it you don't ride in the hills very much (or your idea of a hill is not the same as ours). We are a 295 lb team (so not too heavy), are pretty good climbers (passing single riders on climbs on a regular basis), and we use a triple (53/42/30) with an 11-32 and are glad to have the range.

I hate to be critical of posts in this forum. There are just to many factors that make a bike stiff or not stiff.
1 1/4" head tube itself is not anything special. I actually think it is more of one of those gimmicks the cycling industry falls into every so often.

I understand most people think the 1-1/8 is sufficient (otherwise we wouldn’t be using them). I also understand a well done 1-1/8 will be much better than a mediocre 1-1/4. But despite what little I know of Santana, the gist of what they have on their website about larger diameter steerer tubes is correct.

I was approaching this question as an engineer thinking in terms of optimum performance potential rather than acceptable demonstrated performance. That said; the pragmatist in me recognizes that if only a handful of nutters are using 1-1/4, and 1-1/8 options are plentiful and well established, then the 1-1/8 will be the way to go… The headset post by tandem geek is very informative (as usual, thanks TG), though I do not agree with using the motorcycle as an argument to back up 1 1/8 is “good enough” … hmmm lets see what else besides a 125cc moto can I think of that weighs ~400lbs with riders and operates at speeds between 10-50mph, but has much smaller tires, much longer wheelbase, more emphasis on low weight, and no suspension? :p Market forces created the 1 1/8 standard not tandem fork engineers….

I am kidding around and I do really appreciate the replys. Would I be happy if 1-1/4 was the standard? No I would still be the annoying guy asking “why we don’t use 1 1/2 like the downhiller’s cause the front end on my $400 tandem frameset feels wobbly when I throw it into a hard turn at race speeds compared to a $4000 high-end single”. I know a larger steerer tube is not the panacea to all my tandem woes, but I was just curious about options….

It looks like I will stick with my semi-solidified plan of going with the Robusta eventually, as the total package still seems like the best fit for our needs. Ruegamer is probably too rich for my blood, and the Robusta seems like the best bang for the buck.

Oh the 11-34 comment, I didn’t mean to come across like an elitist jerk... you must understand I come from a road racing background where if you need more than a 39/23 to climb to the top of Mt. Washington, you should push yourself away from the dinner table and train harder. We currently live in Charlotte, NC where it is only moderately hilly in the worst spots and have never needed anything below our current 44/25 combo. I have used a 29 cog as a bailout gear (39/29) on my single in Mtn centuries such as Blood Sweat and Gears though and was glad I had it going up the 20% grade of snake mountain (shhh don’t tell anyone). Feel free to make fun of us if you ever see us pushing the tandem up a steep mountain climb because of our cool racing gearing. I will just blame my stoker for not being able to muscle a ridiculously low 39/28 over a tiny hill... that combined with a comment from me related to future food intake and workout intensity should guarantee a high zoot tandem goes up for sale shortly thereafter.

We all have different goals and objectives for tandems… mine is to be able to ride together with my girlfriend without waiting at every intersection and I bring my hammerhead mentality with me to the tandem scene. I hope I don’t come across as if I am belittling other’s cycling values because I am not in anyway, more so poking fun at my own cycling idiosyncrasies in a subtle self deprecating manner.

It looks like I will stick with my semi-solidified plan of going with the Robusta eventually, as the total package still seems like the best fit for our needs. Ruegamer is probably too rich for my blood, and the Robusta seems like the best bang for the buck.

you must understand I come from a road racing background
We all have different goals and objectives for tandems… mine is to be able to ride together with my girlfriend without waiting at every intersection and I bring my hammerhead mentality with me to the tandem scene.

I think you'll be really happy with the Robusta. I've raced on and off most of my life, and currently race Masters 45, and ride a stiff high end CF single bike. We bought our Robusta specifically to do Everest Challenge.

The Robusta handles extremely well, and feels much more like riding a single bike than our Burley tandem. We've had it 3 months, put 2,000 miles on it, ridden it on competitive group rides where we were pushing it in corners to the point of scraping pedals exiting turns(ok you do have to remember the BB is lower than your typical crit bike), and done 50mph plus descents down hills like Hogpen and Brasstown.

The bike is up to handling everything we, and our 340lbs can throw at it. I think you'll like it.

I guess if you are only riding in Charlotte or Mecklenburg County there really are not hills at all, just a few rollers. You need to go west young man and do some rides in Lincolm, Rutherford, McDowell, Burke Caldwell and Yancy Counties to name a few.

I live and ride tandems in Union County and I have yet to encounter a climb in this county that requires use of a granny gear.

In the mountain bike community, a consortium was established around 7 years ago to promote the 1.5" headset. Certainly the mountain bike industry identified advantages of a beefier headset especially for the downhill bikes. 1 or 1 1/8 inch is not the final say in headset sizing.

Personally - I have 1 1/4 as I own a Santana but it had no relevance to my purchasing decision when I purchased my first Santana in 2000.


I actually think it is more of one of those gimmicks the cycling industry falls into every so often.

What is a gimmick and what becomes industry wide acceptance is as much luck as it is licensing and marketing.

While I stand in the 1 1/4 is probably better line I really hate the lack of stem choices for my Santana. And then there is the 29.6 seatpost and stoker stem issue...........

Certainly the mountain bike industry identified advantages of a beefier headset especially for the downhill bikes.

This is a link to what I've always considered the best, objective analysis of the onepointfive standard written in a way that most folks will understand: http://www.mbaction.com/Me2/dirmod.asp?sid=6C606132AD374521BC58D4CBDB82F733&nm=Main+All+Modules&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=1554B604C84B4A5EBD218AA93628A19C

I think you'll be really happy with the Robusta. I've raced on and off most of my life, and currently race Masters 45, and ride a stiff high end CF single bike. We bought our Robusta specifically to do Everest Challenge.

The Robusta handles extremely well, and feels much more like riding a single bike than our Burley tandem. We've had it 3 months, put 2,000 miles on it, ridden it on competitive group rides where we were pushing it in corners to the point of scraping pedals exiting turns(ok you do have to remember the BB is lower than your typical crit bike), and done 50mph plus descents down hills like Hogpen and Brasstown.

The bike is up to handling everything we, and our 340lbs can throw at it. I think you'll like it.
Thanks for the feedback, your reviews of it were what had me looking at it to begin with. We are going to put our money to upgrading the Tsunami and then probably buy a frameset later, but the Robusta is at the top of a short list.

Wow, I looked the Everest Challenge up... that looks brutal on a tandem, at least the descending part. Good luck, and make sure you have disc brakes.:thumb:

I guess if you are only riding in Charlotte or Mecklenburg County there really are not hills at all, just a few rollers. You need to go west young man and do some rides in Lincolm, Rutherford, McDowell, Burke Caldwell and Yancy Counties to name a few.

I live and ride tandems in Union County and I have yet to encounter a climb in this county that requires use of a granny gear.

Yeah, we live in Central Charlotte and venture out in any direction for up to 80 mile loops... I don't care for Union County, at least the northern part, because it is too crowded with SUV driving soccer moms on cell phones that would rather kill you than tap their brakes. I have had so many close calls there... combined with disproportionate # of aggressive drivers, I just prefer to avoid it (though I ride there often anyway on local hammerfests, I don't like risking my stoker's life there). We like riding out to Gaston/York county and back, or doing loops through Cabarrus and Stanley counties and back. I don't like driving somewhere to ride a road bike, but as soon as she gets more stamina we will work up to 120mile loops that will get us to the bigger hills.;) Maybe we will see you out there.

Another point of perspective: I just got myself a Parlee Z4, as I decided that my long-stated "newer bikes are better than my C40, but better enough to justify $$$" was still probably right, but needed to see for myself. Most obvious difference is that the front end goes exactly where you point it! Out of the saddle the C40 now seems squirrely, whereas the Z4 seems much more controllable and accurate. All that said, the C40 goes just as fast downhill I think as flexible steering doesn't alter the physics and your brain quickly reprograms for the flex.

I totally agree with you that a 1.5" steerer would probably improve handling on a fast tandem. However since nobody makes a reasonably lightweight fork in that size, it's academic. There is always the 2010 model range...

My Tsunami has a 1 1/4" headset-are you sure yours isn't? Mine is about 5 yrs old, how old is yours?

My Tsunami has a 1 1/4" headset-are you sure yours isn't? Mine is about 5 yrs old, how old is yours?

Yeah mine is same era... I think I got it in 2003. But I am 100% positive it is 1.125", I just changed the fork to Alpha Q!

I have a Tsunami from www.chucksbikes.com (http://www.chucksbikes.com) a 7005 Al tandem frame which is basically an inexpensive (not cheap;)) Taiwanese frameset, similar if not the same as the 58/52 size on his site now (with different color scheme). Not the Tsunami brand of custom bikes, which maybe you are referring to?

Nope, I got mine from Chuck's too. I bought a 1 1/4" King headset to go with the carbon fork that came with it.

Nope, I got mine from Chuck's too. I bought a 1 1/4" King headset to go with the carbon fork that came with it.

Huh, weird. You are 100% positive the steerer of the fork you are using is 1 1/4"? Is it possible you are using the Devolution headset that has bigger bearings, but for the 1.125" steerer?

I have pics of mine linked in the single sided setup thread... tell me if your paint scheme is the same... notice the frameset I have has a lame "racing" moniker on it... perhaps he had two different framesets at the time?

Mine's different-it's the Ti-boom style frame, and yes it definitely has a 1 1/4" steerer tube with a Chris King standard headset. I remember having to do some looking for it because not many places carry a 1 1/4.

Ah OK... that is interesting that he spec'ed two different sizes... or perhaps that is just what they built (obviously the Ti boom is a totally different frame, maybe built in a entirely different factory, by an entirely different company)... I don't really know how much control he has over the product specs, i.e. maybe he buys what configurations are offered/available at the time rather than providing specs that are then built.