Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 16 of 16
  1. #1
    Gears? CliftonGK1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    My Bikes
    '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2009 Spesh Singlecross, 2011 RM Flow1
    Posts
    11,316
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    IRO Rob Roy (compatible with XXL riders?)

    I'm looking to build up a new commuter, and I want to go singlespeed. One of the two frames that I'm interested in is the IRO Rob Roy. What concerns me about the IRO are the curved tubes for the rear triangle. I understand that they're curved to offer some dampening when it comes to road vibration, but could that be a structural weakness when combined with my weight (260 pounds) and the extra frame stress of me standing and hammering a 48/17 gear up a 3/4 mile hill for my daily commute?
    I just have horrible visions of the rear triangle collapsing under my bulk, and ending up with a butt full of tire as I'm mid-way up the hill one morning.
    "I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
    - Mandi M.

  2. #2
    Senior Member 4SEVEN3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Greensboro NC
    My Bikes
    Trek 4300 converted into SS, Mongoose Cannan Elite, GT Pro Carbon
    Posts
    551
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Do they have a warranty on thrie frames???
    How about Surley......??
    Maybe a cyclocross frame would be a little closer to what your wanting, but honestly I dont think your going to have a problem, after all when ya start riding the weight will become less and less!
    John
    GT-R Pro Carbon
    Mongoose Cannan Elite
    Trek 4300 Single Speed Conversion
    1968 Raleigh Sport (made in England, 3spd, steel!!!!)

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Valley Forge: Birthplace of Freedom
    Posts
    456
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    "and the extra frame stress of me standing and hammering"

    Once I stood and hammered my road bike as a car was cresting a small hill towards me. I tore the rear wheel out of the stays! It was a little exciting to say the least!

    Steve

  4. #4
    Senior Member 4SEVEN3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Greensboro NC
    My Bikes
    Trek 4300 converted into SS, Mongoose Cannan Elite, GT Pro Carbon
    Posts
    551
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stevel610
    "and the extra frame stress of me standing and hammering"

    Once I stood and hammered my road bike as a car was cresting a small hill towards me. I tore the rear wheel out of the stays! It was a little exciting to say the least!

    Steve
    That shouldnt happen on a dedicated singlespeed frame beacuse the track style drop-outs face rearward. Problem with that is if the whel nuts are not tightend the wheel can slide forward, loosen the chain and maybe make it come off the sprockets. Not likely, but possible I suppose?

    I still think youll be fine!
    John
    GT-R Pro Carbon
    Mongoose Cannan Elite
    Trek 4300 Single Speed Conversion
    1968 Raleigh Sport (made in England, 3spd, steel!!!!)

  5. #5
    Senior Member MrCjolsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Davis CA
    My Bikes
    Surly Cross-Check, '85 Giant road bike (unrecogizable fixed-gear conversion
    Posts
    3,954
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's not the frame, it's the wheels that matter. Any bike that lets you fit wider wheels and tires is good for the gravitationally enhanced rider. Since the Rob Roy is a cross bike, then it's fine.

  6. #6
    Gears? CliftonGK1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    My Bikes
    '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2009 Spesh Singlecross, 2011 RM Flow1
    Posts
    11,316
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ChainRing
    Do they have a warranty on thrie frames???
    How about Surley......??
    Maybe a cyclocross frame would be a little closer to what your wanting, but honestly I dont think your going to have a problem, after all when ya start riding the weight will become less and less!
    The Cross-Check is the other frame I've been looking at for my build. I like the geometry on both, but for a SS/FG I like the track ends on the IRO better than the horizontal drops on the Surly.
    As for the weight becoming less and less, that's not going to happen. This is a new commuter to replace the one that I've been riding for 16 years. My weight is a product of my height (6'6") and my previous powerlifting obsession. Maybe I'll drop back down to 245 or so, but that's about as low as I'll get without digging away at some muscle mass.

    Quote Originally Posted by MrCjolsen
    It's not the frame, it's the wheels that matter. Any bike that lets you fit wider wheels and tires is good for the gravitationally enhanced rider.
    I'm having my guy at the LBS build me a set of 36h 3-cross Deep V's laced to Phil KISS-Off hubs. The wheels should hold up to any Sasquatch abuse I can throw at them.
    "I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
    - Mandi M.

  7. #7
    Senior Member MrCjolsen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Davis CA
    My Bikes
    Surly Cross-Check, '85 Giant road bike (unrecogizable fixed-gear conversion
    Posts
    3,954
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
    The Cross-Check is the other frame I've been looking at for my build. I like the geometry on both, but for a SS/FG I like the track ends on the IRO better than the horizontal drops on the Surly.

    I'm having my guy at the LBS build me a set of 36h 3-cross Deep V's laced to Phil KISS-Off hubs. The wheels should hold up to any Sasquatch abuse I can throw at them.
    I have a Cross-Check. It's a great frame, but I ride it geared so the horzontal drops are fine. My fixie is an old road bike with horzontal drops. Getting the right chain tension is a pain sometimes. Track ends would be nice.

    As far as the wheels, 36h, hand built on a single speed are about as solid as solid can get. One nice thing about singlespeed/fixed gear is that your wheel isn't dished like a geard bike so it can be a lot stronger.

  8. #8
    Senior Member rykoala's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,013
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey there. I spoke with Tony about one of these bicycles for me. I weight 325. He said no problem, with a wheel upgrade. Go for it!

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What concerns me about the IRO are the curved tubes for the rear triangle.
    I wouldn't be concerned at all, the strength loss is negligible. (Go read the framebuilder forums.)

    Besides, it's a 'cross bike. It's designed to face much harsher conditions than a general road bike. Tony's offered it for years, so if he'd had problems, he'd have redesigned them by now.

    One thing about the Deep Vs, when I was building my bike no less than three different mechanics told me to avoid them. They all said they're prone to cracking near the spoke attachments because the rim is so narrow. If you have any problems, go with Velocity Fusions... they're slightly lower profile, so a bit less aero but lighter and just as Clyde-friendly. I have a set that Tony built me that are indestructible.

  10. #10
    Gears? CliftonGK1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    My Bikes
    '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2009 Spesh Singlecross, 2011 RM Flow1
    Posts
    11,316
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by schnee
    I wouldn't be concerned at all, the strength loss is negligible. (Go read the framebuilder forums.)

    Besides, it's a 'cross bike. It's designed to face much harsher conditions than a general road bike. Tony's offered it for years, so if he'd had problems, he'd have redesigned them by now.
    That seems to be the concensus. The main issue (IMO) is that I'm a manufacturing engineer, not a structural engineer. I looked at it and made some off-base assumptions about structural integrity, and should have just trusted that the structural engineers have already worked that out.

    Quote Originally Posted by schnee
    One thing about the Deep Vs, when I was building my bike no less than three different mechanics told me to avoid them. They all said they're prone to cracking near the spoke attachments because the rim is so narrow. If you have any problems, go with Velocity Fusions... they're slightly lower profile, so a bit less aero but lighter and just as Clyde-friendly. I have a set that Tony built me that are indestructible.
    I was looking at the structural profiles (I know, probably a mistake again) and the both the Fusion and Deep V have a 19mm width. The Deep V has a 5mm taller profile than the Fusion. If I were considering a different rim than the Deep V I'd have to go with the Aerohead for the 1mm wider and 11mm lower profile. Is it the height/width ratio that your mechanics have said gives the rim a low integrity at the spoke attachments? Honestly, this is the first that I've heard anything bad about the Deep V's.
    "I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
    - Mandi M.

  11. #11
    Senior Member rykoala's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    2,013
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you want MEGA strong wheels, go for the Velocity DYAD's. That's what I was thinking about using, and its what Tony suggested, when I was considerint a Rob Roy for myself. Nothing says "clydesdale" like "touring rim"

  12. #12
    Get the stick. darkmother's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Toronto, ON
    My Bikes
    12 Y.O. Litespeed MTB, IRO Jamie Roy fixie, Custom Habanero Ti 'Cross, No name SS MTB, Old school lugged steel track bike (soon)
    Posts
    1,544
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
    I'm looking to build up a new commuter, and I want to go singlespeed. One of the two frames that I'm interested in is the IRO Rob Roy. What concerns me about the IRO are the curved tubes for the rear triangle. I understand that they're curved to offer some dampening when it comes to road vibration, but could that be a structural weakness when combined with my weight (260 pounds) and the extra frame stress of me standing and hammering a 48/17 gear up a 3/4 mile hill for my daily commute?
    I just have horrible visions of the rear triangle collapsing under my bulk, and ending up with a butt full of tire as I'm mid-way up the hill one morning.

    The curved stays are a bit of a gimmic, but I doubt they will affect the real world durability of the frame. These type of stays don't actually deflect under loading in any measurable way, regardless of what the website claims. If they did, you'd have fatigue failures, or buckling of the seat stays in very short order, even with lighter riders. I'm going to be building up one of these frames soon, as I think they are a great deal, on a practical frame. I had good experience with, and ~15 000 km on my Jamie Roy before it was stolen.

    Another thing to consider-bikes with cantilever brakes, like the RR require beefier seatstays to provide a strong, rigid mount for the brake pivots. For this reason, they are much heavier and stronger than stays found on 'road frames'.

  13. #13
    Gears? CliftonGK1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    My Bikes
    '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2009 Spesh Singlecross, 2011 RM Flow1
    Posts
    11,316
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rykoala
    If you want MEGA strong wheels, go for the Velocity DYAD's. That's what I was thinking about using, and its what Tony suggested, when I was considerint a Rob Roy for myself. Nothing says "clydesdale" like "touring rim"
    Those are some beefy hoops! Unfortunately I'm a being a pretty pretty princess* about this build, and one of the things I want is powdercoated rims to match the colours I'm building up on the bike.

    *Caution: Picturing CGK1 as a 6'6", 260 pound pretty princess has been known to cause permanent mental damage.
    "I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
    - Mandi M.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,310
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by CliftonGK1
    I was looking at the structural profiles (I know, probably a mistake again) and the both the Fusion and Deep V have a 19mm width. The Deep V has a 5mm taller profile than the Fusion. If I were considering a different rim than the Deep V I'd have to go with the Aerohead for the 1mm wider and 11mm lower profile. Is it the height/width ratio that your mechanics have said gives the rim a low integrity at the spoke attachments? Honestly, this is the first that I've heard anything bad about the Deep V's.
    Sorry, I wasn't posting clearly.

    The rims are narrow at the top, where the 'V' meets the spoke nipples. The rim is actually narrower than the nipple attachment point, so the metal is pretty thin around the spoke attachment points, thinner than less 'aero' rims.

    I was told to avoid them by my two fixed-gear friendly LBSs, as well as Tony at IRO (who built the wheels for me). So, not having owned them, it is hearsay.

    If I were to build again from scratch to be completely clyde-bombproof, knowing what I know now, I'd say 'screw fashion' and build up tandem rims.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    50
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Clifton, did you check out the geometry on the Rob Roy? It's a nice bike and all, but there's no way it'll fit a 6'6" rider. I'm 6'5" and had to rule it out on account of its 57cm top tube.

    It's tough finding frames big enough, I know.

  16. #16
    Gears? CliftonGK1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    My Bikes
    '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2009 Spesh Singlecross, 2011 RM Flow1
    Posts
    11,316
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by theWretched
    Clifton, did you check out the geometry on the Rob Roy? It's a nice bike and all, but there's no way it'll fit a 6'6" rider. I'm 6'5" and had to rule it out on account of its 57cm top tube.

    It's tough finding frames big enough, I know.
    Back in my tri-racing days, I rode a Trek 2100 with a 58.1cm TT. I've got a pretty short torso for being as tall as I am. I'm mostly legs and arms (37 inseam/ 37 sleeve) so I need the taller frames without needing something to stretch me out that much on top.
    I'm planning on putting a slight-rise stem and a pair of 'horns on it as opposed to drops since I only ever ride the flats and hoods on drops anyhow. That should keep me laid out enough that I'm not feeling scrunched up on it.
    However, I will have a fit-check done at the LBS before I buy anything. That way I can give them the geometry for the IRO R/R and have them dial it in on the fit-bike to see how it will feel.
    "I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
    - Mandi M.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •