Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-28-12, 02:27 PM   #1
Barrettscv 
Have bike, will travel
Thread Starter
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
Bikes: Colnago Nuova Mexico, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Gavia, Schwinn Paramount, Motobecane Grand Record, Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Origin8 monstercross, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
700x23 to 650bx32, will this work or will the stability and handling suffer?

I have a 1978 Trek TX900. It's ideal except for two issues. The bike will take a 700x28 tire, but a 700x32 will not fit. The stand-over height is tight (I can stand-over the bike, but have almost zero safety factor).

I'll need to install a wider tire on this bike for some gravel road events in 2013. I have a modern Cyclocross bike with 700x32, but one of the events I'm considering requires a vintage bike. I like the 700x32 size for gravel roads and for my everyday cycling.

A 650b conversion will allow me to fit a 32mm wide tire like the Grand Bois Cypress 650B, see: http://www.compasscycle.com/tires_gb_650_32.html .

However, I'm concerned that the smaller diameter tire will change the trail of the fork and create a less stable ride? The fork rake is 4.5cm according to the Trek Catalog. What rake would be ideal to preserve the Trail?
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 12-28-12 at 02:32 PM.
Barrettscv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 02:39 PM   #2
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 18,766
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 207 Post(s)
Measure radius , of the 2 wheels, with tires mounted, ...

All I can offer , is the concept of pneumatic trail, by having a fatter footprint on the road surface
the steering should not feel as Light.

recycling a link someone else just posted, elsewhere, here.
http://www.bikeman.com/bikeman-blogs...sion-guidlines

Last edited by fietsbob; 12-28-12 at 02:44 PM.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 02:46 PM   #3
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 28,776
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
The geometry change is the least of your problems. Getting the current already long reach brakes to align with the smaller rims will probably be impossible and you will have to replace them with even longer reach brakes.
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 02:47 PM   #4
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 13,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
I figure a trail of 58cm with the 700x28s, and 53cm with the 650x32Bs. You probably won't even notice.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 02:56 PM   #5
Barrettscv 
Have bike, will travel
Thread Starter
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
Bikes: Colnago Nuova Mexico, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Gavia, Schwinn Paramount, Motobecane Grand Record, Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Origin8 monstercross, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
I figure a trail of 58cm with the 700x28s, and 53cm with the 650x32Bs. You probably won't even notice.
Thanks'. As a follow-up, will the reduced trail improve or reduce stability? Does the handling change? That rake would be best to restore the original geometry?
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.
Barrettscv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 03:14 PM   #6
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 13,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrettscv View Post
Thanks'. As a follow-up, will the reduced trail improve or reduce stability? Does the handling change? That rake would be best to restore the original geometry?
The steering would be ever-so-slightly "lighter" -- I don't think it would be perceptibly less stable. You could restore the original trail by going to a fork with 40mm of rake, but it would definitely not be worth it for so little a change. 650x38B tires (like the Soma B-line) would make up half of the difference and be better on gravel if you haven't already purchased the tires.

Here's my go-to trail calculator: http://www.yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 03:29 PM   #7
Barrettscv 
Have bike, will travel
Thread Starter
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
Bikes: Colnago Nuova Mexico, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Gavia, Schwinn Paramount, Motobecane Grand Record, Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Origin8 monstercross, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
The steering would be ever-so-slightly "lighter" -- I don't think it would be perceptibly less stable. You could restore the original trail by going to a fork with 40mm of rake, but it would definitely not be worth it for so little a change. 650x38B tires (like the Soma B-line) would make up half of the difference and be better on gravel if you haven't already purchased the tires.

Here's my go-to trail calculator: http://www.yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php
Good to know. If I needed, the Surly Steamroller and Soma Classic Curve fork have a 38mm rake. Do you know of a chart or calculator that provides tire diameter data?
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 12-28-12 at 03:36 PM.
Barrettscv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 03:33 PM   #8
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 18,766
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 207 Post(s)
People seem to want low trail with 650B Bikes with Porteur racks on front carrying stuff..
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 03:38 PM   #9
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 13,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
I just work out the diameters by hand, since the tire's height above the bead is roughly the same as its width. A couple mm more if there's a thick tread.

So 32x650B is 32+32+584=648mm, 38x650B is 38+38+384=660mm, 700x23C is 23+23+622=668... well isn't that convenient.

And yeah, I like low-trail, based on my limited experience with it. You might have to pay a little more attention, but it's less "work" to steer. I would be very happy with 53mm of trail, especially for long, tiring rides.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 06:35 PM   #10
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 28,776
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fietsbob View Post
People seem to want low trail with 650B Bikes with Porteur racks on front carrying stuff..
Did you really mean "low trail" or low rake? The two run counter to each other. Again to the OP, have you addressed the brake reach problem?
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 07:51 PM   #11
Barrettscv 
Have bike, will travel
Thread Starter
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
Bikes: Colnago Nuova Mexico, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Gavia, Schwinn Paramount, Motobecane Grand Record, Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Origin8 monstercross, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider View Post
...have you addressed the brake reach problem?
This is not the issue, but to reply to your question;

73mm reach Tektro R559 Brakes

http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/brsr559allen.htm
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 12-28-12 at 08:13 PM.
Barrettscv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 08:26 PM   #12
oldbobcat
Senior Member
 
oldbobcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Bikes: '79 Gios, '80 Masi, '06 Felt, early '60s Frejus
Posts: 2,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
The steering would be ever-so-slightly "lighter" -- I don't think it would be perceptibly less stable. You could restore the original trail by going to a fork with 40mm of rake, but it would definitely not be worth it for so little a change. 650x38B tires (like the Soma B-line) would make up half of the difference and be better on gravel if you haven't already purchased the tires.

Here's my go-to trail calculator: http://www.yojimg.net/bike/web_tools/trailcalc.php
Nice post. I might add that less trail is quite desirable for bad roads. The front wheel is diverted less by loose, soft, or fluid surfaces.
oldbobcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 08:31 PM   #13
FastJake
Constant tinkerer
 
FastJake's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Bikes:
Posts: 7,574
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
+1 As far as handling, measure the overall height of the tires mounted on rims. The rim diameter alone is meaningless, it's the overall height of the tire that matters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrettscv View Post
This is not the issue, but to reply to your question;

73mm reach Tektro R559 Brakes

http://www.rivbike.com/product-p/brsr559allen.htm
Yikes... I haven't used these but I would not expect much in the way of braking. I would get some canti studs brazed on if you intend to keep the bike this way for a while. Or just run the caliper in the back and get a fork with canti studs for the front.
FastJake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 08:53 PM   #14
Barrettscv 
Have bike, will travel
Thread Starter
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
Bikes: Colnago Nuova Mexico, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Gavia, Schwinn Paramount, Motobecane Grand Record, Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Origin8 monstercross, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastJake View Post
+1 As far as handling, measure the overall height of the tires mounted on rims. The rim diameter alone is meaningless, it's the overall height of the tire that matters.



Yikes... I haven't used these but I would not expect much in the way of braking. I would get some canti studs brazed on if you intend to keep the bike this way for a while. Or just run the caliper in the back and get a fork with canti studs for the front.
I hope we can keep this on topic. Discussing any changes in stability after the conversion based on changes in geometry is the topic.
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.
Barrettscv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 10:13 PM   #15
HillRider 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Bikes: '''96 Litespeed Catalyst, '05 Litespeed Firenze, '06 Litespeed Tuscany, '12 Surly Pacer, All are 3x8,9 or 10. It is hilly around here!
Posts: 28,776
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrettscv View Post
I hope we can keep this on topic. Discussing any changes in stability after the conversion based on changes in geometry is the topic.
True, but in so many of these wheel size conversion threads the problem of brake reach is overlooked until it bites the owner. The OP has taken this into account so we can go back to the original question.

Quote:
I might add that less trail is quite desirable for bad roads. The front wheel is diverted less by loose, soft, or fluid surfaces.
Are you sure you have this right? Low trail gives highly responsive, more "nervous" handling so the bike turns eagerly but it's straight line stability is poor. Greater trail is slower to react and gives greater straight line stability and it's what you want on rough, uneven roads. I believe you are confusing rake and trail.
HillRider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-28-12, 10:40 PM   #16
oldbobcat
Senior Member
 
oldbobcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Bikes: '79 Gios, '80 Masi, '06 Felt, early '60s Frejus
Posts: 2,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by HillRider View Post

Are you sure you have this right? Low trail gives highly responsive, more "nervous" handling so the bike turns eagerly but it's straight line stability is poor. Greater trail is slower to react and gives greater straight line stability and it's what you want on rough, uneven roads. I believe you are confusing rake and trail.
I am absolutely positive of this. You don't want stability on these surfaces, you want the ability to lightly steer through or over them with minimal force. Short trail feels like floating over this stuff. Long trail digs in.

This is the principle behind Gary Fisher's Genesis geometry mountain bikes.
oldbobcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-12, 08:37 AM   #17
southpawboston 
Senior Member
 
southpawboston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Somerville, MA and Catskill Mtns
Bikes:
Posts: 4,008
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As someone who has done several conversions, one thing I can add to the conversation is that any differences in trail resulting from a switch from 700c to 650b wheels are going to be minimal, and even if the change were to be quite large, the difference in ride dynamics is often unpredictable. For example, much of the way a wide, 650B tire affects steering response is dictated by other aspects of the frame geometry and fit. One of these parameters is reach, which affects how much rider weight is placed over the front wheel. Reach also affects steering because of the lever effect of the stem. A longer stem will have more of a lever effect.

To illustrate-- I did one 650B conversion of a road bike made for 27" wheels. My geometric trail dropped from 52mm to 44mm, and I expected the steering to lighten up and for the bike to handle a front load favorably. I found that this was not the case; on the contrary, steering became more sluggish (which I attribute to the 650B tires being fatter and my having a lot of weight over the front wheel-- my back angle is very low on this bike, around 35 degrees when my hands are on the hoods).

In contrast, I converted a road bike from 700c to 650b for my wife, and in the process built it up as an upright townie. As a result, her back angle is much higher and thus places less rider weight over the front wheel than the frame was designed for. I don't know what the final trail figure is, but I know it's higher than my own 650B conversion mentioned above, probably in the 50s. She complained that the steering was too light. This, despite having higher trail than my bike! To remedy the issue, I installed a handlebar basket and encouraged her to keep some weight in it. So she always keeps her purse and accessories in the basket, and that balances out the weight distribution.

Both her bike and mine have the same tires (650x42B Grand Bois Hetres).

I will soon be taking delivery of a purpose-built 650B road bike frame which will replace my 650B conversion, so I will experiment with reconfiguring that conversion into more of an upright city bike to see if that improves the steering response.

So the take-home message is that you can make all the geometric predictions you want, but geometry parameters other than trail are going to factor in to the ride and handling dynamics of switching from narrow 700c wheels to wide 650b wheels. The best thing to do is to try to get ahold of a set of 650B wheels to test-fit before executing a full-blown conversion. A short ride around the block should reveal a lot about how the handling will be affected.
__________________
Velo Lumino - Lighting components and integration solutions for fine hand-built and classically inspired bicycles

Riding the Catskills blog

Flickr

1971 Mercian Olympic | 1972 Jeunet 630 | 1982 Jack Taylor Tour of Britain | 1984 Shogun 1500 650B | 2013 Rawland Stag | 2014 Jeff Lyon L'Avecaise | 2015 Bike Friday Haul-a-Day

Last edited by southpawboston; 12-29-12 at 08:43 AM.
southpawboston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 07:45 AM   #18
dbg 
Si Senior
 
dbg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Naperville, Illinois
Bikes: Too Numerous (not)
Posts: 2,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm interested in this discussions as well. I have rims/hubs/spokes in 650b size waiting on my bench to be built so I can experiment on my two favorite road bikes. Brake reach is less of an issue with my target conversion bikes because 25c is a tight fit on both. I'm finding tire width to be one of my limitations --with 650bx32 looking like a tight fit. I'm also considering bending a higher rake fork to go even lower on trail --just to experiment. And feel in loose gravel is one of my target experiments. I have felt like the steering on my 57mm-trail (other) roadie (even with 32c tires) wants to plow a trough while I'm trying to wrestle it back into balance. I had thought big tires would solve my gravel issues but it didn't seem to make much difference. I want to see what low trail feels like in gravel. (I'm also building a loaded tourer from a 1988 Trek 850 with 62mm trail and am anxious about its ability to handle gravel)

I don't have answers yet but I'm pursuing similar experiments and will post what I discover.
__________________
David Green, Naperville, IL USA "The older I get, the better I used to be" --Lee Trevino
dbg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 11:13 AM   #19
Barrettscv 
Have bike, will travel
Thread Starter
 
Barrettscv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Edwardsville, Illinois
Bikes: Colnago Nuova Mexico, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Pinarello Gavia, Schwinn Paramount, Motobecane Grand Record, Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Origin8 monstercross, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Posts: 10,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
I'm coming to the conclusion that most bikes are not going to make good 650b conversions. The best conversions are 56cm sized and smaller, already have clearance for 700x28, or larger tires. Older frames built around 27inch wheel might have brake reach problems, the reach might be greater than 70mm once a 650b wheel is installed. 700c bikes with cantilever brakes won't work without repostioning the studs. Larger frames just look odd with the smaller wheels.

This blog covers all the issues very well: http://www.bikeman.com/bikeman-blogs...b-what-and-why

The Soma Stanyan conversion looks good to me: http://somafab.blogspot.com/2012/04/650b-soma.html

and see here: http://www.bikeman.com/bikeman-blogs...soma-speedster

The 650b Velo Orange Polyvalent is looking like a worthwhile investment, it solves all the issues.

http://whbikes.wordpress.com/2010/02...t-650b-part-i/

http://whbikes.wordpress.com/2010/03...-650b-part-ii/
__________________
When I ride my bike I feel free and happy and strong. I'm liberated from the usual nonsense of day to day life. Solid, dependable, silent, my bike is my horse, my fighter jet, my island, my friend. Together we will conquer that hill and thereafter the world.

Last edited by Barrettscv; 12-30-12 at 02:16 PM.
Barrettscv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 11:31 AM   #20
mconlonx 
Nobody
 
mconlonx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 7,086
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 208 Post(s)
If brakes are the last issue you are dealing with, once you're happy with geometry and tire clearance, consider Sturmey Archer drum brake hubs. They have different rear drum hubs for either fw or cass.
__________________
I know next to nothing. I am frequently wrong.
mconlonx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 02:07 PM   #21
dbg 
Si Senior
 
dbg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Naperville, Illinois
Bikes: Too Numerous (not)
Posts: 2,595
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So the other option for trying out low trail would be to turn the fork around backwards.
Wait. That would be super high trail. Never mind.
__________________
David Green, Naperville, IL USA "The older I get, the better I used to be" --Lee Trevino
dbg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 02:26 PM   #22
pierce
S'Cruzer
 
pierce's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: 122W 37N
Bikes: too many
Posts: 2,294
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mconlonx View Post
If brakes are the last issue you are dealing with, once you're happy with geometry and tire clearance, consider Sturmey Archer drum brake hubs. They have different rear drum hubs for either fw or cass.
have you used these? I had the rear S-A freewheel drum on a cruiser for a long long time. they are meant to be aux brakes for tandems, and don't develop enough braking force to really stop a bike fast. even when used with long pull ('v-brake') levers, it was barely adequate. And this was a real S-A hub, made in England.

The solid axle bent on this after many years of use, and was an unobtanium part due to the implosion of S-A, so I brazed on V-brake bosses to this old cruiser frame, and WOW, having real brakes made it a whole different bike.
pierce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 04:17 PM   #23
ThermionicScott 
Gratuitous glib and snark
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Posts: 13,169
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Hmm, don't give up yet. What interests me now is that you say the frame will only take 700x28 tires at present, but that it was a 27"-wheeled bike originally. The tire clearance must have been really tight with those!

I would disagree that larger frames look odd with 650B wheels. Generally, the tires and fender together make up all the space that the old wheels did, and the bike looks no sillier than it did with 27"/700C wheels.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
RUSA #7498

Last edited by ThermionicScott; 12-30-12 at 04:20 PM.
ThermionicScott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 04:37 PM   #24
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 18,766
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 207 Post(s)
Quote:
Did you really mean "low trail" or low rake? The two run counter to each other.
this is true the heavier front load favors low trail achieved with more fork offset.

I have stuff in my Front Panniers on my Bike Friday All the time,
it has a pretty small trail ..
(the difference between the line through the steerer tube axis,
and the perpendicular line thru the front hub center, as laid out on the ground-plane.)

Older MTB Build,
I've been running SA Drum brake hubs for 25 years,
they now are part of my black ice, studded tire shod bike.
because on Ice, the last thing I want is brakes so instantly strong, I break traction.
they modulate smoothly to bring me, reliably, to a stop.
[it has more trail, for straight line stability, I just have a big Brit saddle bag on it..]

FWIW, rest of the set-up.
I have Mustache bars and old Campag road , pre-aero levers, and pretty Beefy cables .

Last edited by fietsbob; 12-30-12 at 04:48 PM.
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-12, 05:15 PM   #25
oldbobcat
Senior Member
 
oldbobcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Bikes: '79 Gios, '80 Masi, '06 Felt, early '60s Frejus
Posts: 2,926
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fietsbob View Post
this is true the heavier front load favors low trail achieved with more fork offset.
But of course. That's one of the reasons touring bikes have more fork rake. And for the slacker head angle, too, of course.
oldbobcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:27 PM.