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


Go Back   > >

Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) Looking to lose that spare tire? Ideal weight 200+? Frustrated being a large cyclist in a sport geared for the ultra-light? Learn about the bikes and parts that can take the abuse of a heavier cyclist, how to keep your body going while losing the weight, and get support from others who've been successful.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 12-18-11, 05:23 PM   #1
side_FX
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Will a Trek 1.1 crumble underneath 250 pounds of clyde?

I am seriously considering a closeout 2011 1.1 due to the less than $600 price tag. I know it is the bare bones base model but I am somehow drawn to it. The 23mm tires scare me a bit. Does anyone know if 28s will fit? I'm guessing 25s would. Any other clydes riding one? I thought of posting on the road cycling thread but I am sure they would flame the dirt cheap price as being worthless. I don't do Craigslist and I don't do online, so why not this one?
side_FX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-11, 06:03 PM   #2
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My honest opinion, I think it maybe a bit too flimsy for you. I'm same wieght and I popped my first alum fram (Lemond same design). $1000 but since Trek has a lifetime warranty for original owners, they upgraded the frame replacement free of charge to a partial carbon Lemond Chambery (2100 bike). Then that popped at the alum section. SO then they upgraded it to a full carbon Madone.

Reason I went witha mrg tha had a lifetime warranty. Each frame popped after 13,000 miles and 3 years but I don't worry cause Trek takes care of those customers that follow the rules.


first bike




replacement



current frame and fork
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-11, 06:21 PM   #3
LarDasse74
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Grid Reference, SK
Bikes: I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
Posts: 3,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
my father in law received (used) a trek 1000 (older brother of the 1.1, same impeccable Taiwanese quality) and rode it for thousands and thousands of kms without a single problem. He was about 250 lbs, but he usually have racks, fenders, and at least 20 lbs of stuff carried with him. The frame is now in my back yard waiting for a suitable project to bring it back into service.

If you think there is some terrain for which you might want a tire larger than 25mm, just about any modern road bike should be crossed off your list, including the 1.1. However, if you are riding on paved roads 100% of the time, 25mm will be fine. I weigh between 240 and 270 (depending on year) and I have never had trouble with 23mm or 25mm tires.
LarDasse74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-11, 06:41 PM   #4
Homeyba
Senior Member
 
Homeyba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Central Coast, California
Bikes: Colnago C-50, Calfee Dragonfly Tandem, Specialized Allez Pro, Peugeot Competition Light
Posts: 3,370
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Heck, Trek offers a free replacement. How can you go wrong? You could end up with a Madone just like Beanz!

As far as the tires go, I'd use them till you wear them out. 23's will work just fine. I run them on my tandem occasionally. Replace them with 25's when they wear out.
Homeyba is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-18-11, 07:58 PM   #5
boy scout 161
Senior Member
 
boy scout 161's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western KS
Bikes: '10 Trek 1.1, '11 Specialized Tricross Sport, '12 Gravity G29 SS
Posts: 96
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have a 2010 1.1 and rode it when I was 250 without any problem. I am not a mountain goat like Beanz, so I never put that kind of lateral stress on the frame. YMMV.

Last edited by boy scout 161; 12-18-11 at 08:02 PM.
boy scout 161 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-11, 04:46 AM   #6
JoeMetal
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bloomington, IN
Bikes: Trek 2.3 w/ full SRAM Red; Surly LHT
Posts: 388
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I had a 2008 1.2 and was about 270 at the time. After 1500 miles, I had no problems whatsoever, not even a broken spoke. I ride pretty carefully though and avoid potholes and the like.
JoeMetal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-11, 06:25 AM   #7
jethro56 
Watching and waiting.
 
jethro56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mattoon,Ill
Bikes: Trek 7300 Trek Madone 4.5 Surly Cross Check
Posts: 2,024
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Be sure and take it for a testride first.
jethro56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-11, 08:47 AM   #8
ill.clyde
Senior Member
 
ill.clyde's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Green Bay
Bikes: 2012 Kona Jake, 2009 Trek 1.2, 1997 Trek 6700
Posts: 2,060
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
I ride a 2009 1.2 ... started at 300, down to around 265 currently, no problems
ill.clyde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 11:19 AM   #9
side_FX
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 522
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 16 Post(s)
Thanks to everyone for the replies. They've all given me a lot to think about. Of course, everyone says it's ok except for the one guy who backs up his concern with photographic evidence, so I think I am right back where I started. My problem is all the closeout deals are putting some real nice 2011s out there while I have some money to spend. I was thinking road bike, but now the Trek DS line is calling my name. I've thought about the Montare/Utopia's in the past since there are some decent trails around the area and it would keep me off the roads with the crazy metal boxes everywhere. I breings me back to another question I've thought about, do you lose more weight and gain more fitness trying to lug a heavy bike around or by spinning longer on a something feather light? Maybe I just need two bikes?
side_FX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 01:02 PM   #10
DCB0
Banned.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Bikes: CCM Torino 76
Posts: 937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by side_FX View Post
Thanks to everyone for the replies. They've all given me a lot to think about. Of course, everyone says it's ok except for the one guy who backs up his concern with photographic evidence, so I think I am right back where I started. My problem is all the closeout deals are putting some real nice 2011s out there while I have some money to spend. I was thinking road bike, but now the Trek DS line is calling my name. I've thought about the Montare/Utopia's in the past since there are some decent trails around the area and it would keep me off the roads with the crazy metal boxes everywhere. I breings me back to another question I've thought about, do you lose more weight and gain more fitness trying to lug a heavy bike around or by spinning longer on a something feather light? Maybe I just need two bikes?
IMHO, you lose more weight by riding more. You will ride more when riding is more fun, and it is generally more fun with a lighter and higher performance bike.
DCB0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 01:47 PM   #11
kc0yef
Senior Member
 
kc0yef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Olympia WA
Bikes: Bill Stevenson Kawai, 1973 Paramount, Voyageur SP, Nishiki; KOKUSAI & Competition, Bridgestone; RBT RB-T & Kabuki Submariner, Mercian; Campionissimo, TriA, Superlight, , Fuji Touring Series IV, 1969 Gitane TDF
Posts: 1,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
CLYDE
I was 240 and smoked a bunch of aluminum frames in the early nineties so I have only been on steel ever since...
For that money I would buy a lightweight steel frame with short chainstays so when that hill comes up you can mash on it and get up that hill. Then again I can't imagine spending more than $300 for a good used steel frame...
Valite, Tange, Isiwata, Reynolds 531/501, have all served me well in the past 30 years...
Knowing what I do about frame material Aluminum could be a great performer but it is 1/3 as strong as steel so it has to be thicker I have only one Aluminum Bike a TREK 7000 that I have had for 15 years... and my oldest bike is a Raleigh Capri 58cm Reynolds 501 36 spoke and it has never failed me... I run 23s on the front of my racing bike I would not be worried about yours comes with Bontragers(great tire I have them on my mountain bike) and you can go bigger and even add fenders... that just keep them inflated and the spokes tight I would make sure the wheels that come on the bike can handle your weight yours are 32 spoke "bontrager Approved alloy rims" the frame seems to be well received it is a taiwan bike and you could get a used steel trek made in USA for the same money... Happy trails
kc0yef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 05:21 PM   #12
RobertL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Bikes:
Posts: 559
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
You should be fine, from the Trek web site: http://www.trekbikes.com/faq/search.php?q=Weight limit

Is there a weight limit for your bikes? Yes, we do have a weight limit on our bikes and they are as follows: Rider weight limit of 275lb: Road bikes with drop type handlebar Triathlon, time trial or Speed Concept bicycle Cruisers with lar...
Still have questions? Contact Us
RobertL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 08:05 PM   #13
LarDasse74
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Grid Reference, SK
Bikes: I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
Posts: 3,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kc0yef View Post
I was 240 and smoked a bunch of aluminum frames in the early nineties so I have only been on steel ever since...
For that money I would buy a lightweight steel frame with short chainstays so when that hill comes up you can mash on it and get up that hill. Then again I can't imagine spending more than $300 for a good used steel frame...
Valite, Tange, Isiwata, Reynolds 531/501, have all served me well in the past 30 years...
Knowing what I do about frame material Aluminum could be a great performer but it is 1/3 as strong as steel so it has to be thicker I have only one Aluminum Bike a TREK 7000 that I have had for 15 years... and my oldest bike is a Raleigh Capri 58cm Reynolds 501 36 spoke and it has never failed me... I run 23s on the front of my racing bike I would not be worried about yours comes with Bontragers(great tire I have them on my mountain bike) and you can go bigger and even add fenders... that just keep them inflated and the spokes tight I would make sure the wheels that come on the bike can handle your weight yours are 32 spoke "bontrager Approved alloy rims" the frame seems to be well received it is a taiwan bike and you could get a used steel trek made in USA for the same money... Happy trails
Funny - in the early nineties I was abouty 240 and smoked a bunch of steel frames. Aluminum has never let me down.

Also, 1991 aluminum and 2011 aluminum are not the same thing. Improvements in the mass production of aluminum frames over the past 20 years have made aluminum the most common material to make bikes out of, and failures are still low. I haven't seen numbers, but failures might be even lower -aluminum has a higher strength to weight ratio and, all other things being equal, an aluminum frame can be stronger than a steel frame of the same weight.
LarDasse74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 08:41 PM   #14
mechBgon
Senior Member
 
mechBgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Bikes:
Posts: 6,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by side_FX View Post
Thanks to everyone for the replies. They've all given me a lot to think about. Of course, everyone says it's ok except for the one guy who backs up his concern with photographic evidence, so I think I am right back where I started. My problem is all the closeout deals are putting some real nice 2011s out there while I have some money to spend. I was thinking road bike, but now the Trek DS line is calling my name. I've thought about the Montare/Utopia's in the past since there are some decent trails around the area and it would keep me off the roads with the crazy metal boxes everywhere. I breings me back to another question I've thought about, do you lose more weight and gain more fitness trying to lug a heavy bike around or by spinning longer on a something feather light? Maybe I just need two bikes?
The LeMond in the photo isn't a Trek 1.1. And of his string of bikes, the one I'd be concerned about breaking is his Madone, based on my experience working at a Trek dealership. I've never seen a broken 1.1/1.2 so far. Madones, on the other hand...

I'll look tomorrow to see if we have a 2011 1.1 or 1.2. If so, I'll verify about the 700 x 28 clearance. One note of caution, the wheels are not what I'd call fantastic, and at that price point you pretty much have to expect that. If you begin blowing spokes in the rear after 18 months, have a compotent wheelbuilder set you up with a Tiagra 36-hole rear hub, DT Swiss 14-15ga spokes and a strong rim, perhaps a Velocity Dyad if you have no plans to go back to 700 x 23s.
mechBgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 09:01 PM   #15
LarDasse74
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Grid Reference, SK
Bikes: I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
Posts: 3,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechBgon View Post
If you begin blowing spokes in the rear after 18 months, have a compotent wheelbuilder set you up with a Tiagra 36-hole rear hub, DT Swiss 14-15ga spokes and a strong rim
Good point -

frames do not break very often. Wheels and spokes break all the time. If you get a competent wheelbuilder to retension the spokes on your rear wheel after you have ridden it for a few miles they will last much much longer. The spokes need to be stress relieved and highly tensioned to last a long time. You might have to pay someone extra to do this. If the wheels start to get wobbly or rub on the brakes and you bring it in all they will do, likely, is straighten them out and not deal with the overall tension problem that caused them to go out of true.
LarDasse74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 10:32 PM   #16
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mechBgon View Post
The LeMond in the photo isn't a Trek 1.1. .
The point is that the Trek bikes break at the aluminum sections, not the carbon .

and the Trek 1.1 is a far lesser a bike than the Chambery of which broke at the alum section.

Plus the Lemond Chambery was far stiffer then the flimsy Tourmalet which was about the equiv of the 2.1

Now a Cannondale alum bike like my CAD3 is a different story with it's beefy BB area. Mine is a 98 and no problem but far stiffer and less flaxy than the Trek design.

1998 no problem


Last edited by Mr. Beanz; 12-21-11 at 10:37 PM.
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 11:10 PM   #17
LarDasse74
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Grid Reference, SK
Bikes: I never learned to ride a bike. It is my deepest shame.
Posts: 3,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Beanz View Post
The point is that the Trek bikes break at the aluminum sections, not the carbon .

and the Trek 1.1 is a far lesser a bike than the Chambery of which broke at the alum section.

Plus the Lemond Chambery was far stiffer then the flimsy Tourmalet which was about the equiv of the 2.1

Now a Cannondale alum bike like my CAD3 is a different story with it's beefy BB area. Mine is a 98 and no problem but far stiffer and less flaxy than the Trek design.

1998 no problem

You reasoning is ridiculous. The Lemonds have nothing in common with the Modern Trek bikes. Your blue one was even made in USA, I believe. THe modern 1.1 is probably a Taiwanese bike, but may in fact be Chinese. The alum/carbon frame is also nothing like the Trek 1.1. You have had two completely different failures after 13000 miles with bikes made by a different branch of the Trek company and you think this is a good representative sample to make the case that Trek aluminum is somehow inferior? I suppose the hundreds of thousands of aluminum treks sold and ridden for many trouble free years are a fluke?

You have used the same logic for your conclusion about Cannondales: you have one bike that has not failed therefore all Cannondale aluminum is somehow superior to all Trek aluminum.
LarDasse74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-11, 11:39 PM   #18
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarDasse74 View Post
The Lemonds have nothing in common with the Modern Trek bikes.
My 2005 Tourmalet has nothing in common with modern Treks? You are seriously lacking some knowledge in this department.

Back in 2005, my Lemond was the exact same design (tube shape and size) as the Trek 1500, AND made by the same company, Trek. The alum used on the 1500 was Alpha Aluminum. So today's Trek 2.1 is also made with what.........Alpha aluminum. Now take a look at the 2010 2.1 and the current 1.1 on the Trek site.....same tube shape and design. Riiight, nothing in common!




Quote:
Originally Posted by LarDasse74 View Post
You have used the same logic for your conclusion about Cannondales: you have one bike that has not failed therefore all Cannondale aluminum is somehow superior to all Trek aluminum.
Wow, you lack the ability to understand that a stiff frame with an oversized tubing BB area is better than the flexy small diameter tubing used on Treks?

Not to mention you like to twist words, all Cannondale alum and all Trek alum? Try reading my statement again with your comprehension cap on please.

Last edited by Mr. Beanz; 12-22-11 at 12:11 AM.
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 12:48 AM   #19
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Bikes: 7
Posts: 20,369
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 638 Post(s)
The Hydro-formed aluminum can be shaped in all sorts of ways , whether its
considered to increase the joint strength , or the shape was style choice, I dont
know ..
quite above my pay grade on that..
fietsbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 01:56 AM   #20
mechBgon
Senior Member
 
mechBgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Bikes:
Posts: 6,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Beanz View Post
My 2005 Tourmalet has nothing in common with modern Treks? You are seriously lacking some knowledge in this department.
He's correct, though. "Alpha" aluminum is merely Trek-speak for aluminum with a Trek head badge stuck to the front, and your US-built LeMonds really don't reflect in any way on a Chinese-made Trek 1.1 (from the Giant factory). The 1-series bikes are pretty burly, and they don't have the rear dropouts bolted to the seatstays either. It'll be OK for the OP to get started with, I'm mainly concerned about the rear wheel and making sure he can run 28s.

side_FX, if you decide to get one, you should also keep a sharp eye out for any signs the bottom bracket is rocking in the frame. Based on my experience, they're not always torqued down as well as they should be, and rocking is bad news since it can damage the threads in the frame. If you feel a "clunk" or "thud" from the crank area when pedalling, that's a symptom. You might consider asking the shop if they'd be so kind as to pull the crankarms and check that the BB is firmly torqued down before you set out.

Last edited by mechBgon; 12-22-11 at 02:01 AM.
mechBgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 07:25 AM   #21
jethro56 
Watching and waiting.
 
jethro56's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Mattoon,Ill
Bikes: Trek 7300 Trek Madone 4.5 Surly Cross Check
Posts: 2,024
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
One thing not discussed is whether this is a good deal or just an OK deal. When I was shopping the 2.3 was what I was looking at in Trek's Al Roadbikes. I wanted 105 components though many thought Tiagra was a good groupset. My prejudices would tend to believe that the 2200 groupset won't last as long and the wheels will require more frequent truing. I have 3 bikes and the maintenance per mile is inversely proportional to how much I spent on them. This is an admittedly small sample size and I'm somewhat picky as to having everything work properly. The flip side to this is I feel Trek has a rep to maintain and wouldn't sell a truly bad bike.

So if my preconceived notions are correct the question comes down to your abilities as far as maintenance, the support level of the LBS, how much riding you're going to do and lastly how much of a strain this puts on your finances. I live in a bicycle world were 90% of all bikes are BSO's (bicycle shaped objects). My best friend rides one though I ride more in a week than he does in a year. I'll stick my head out and say that the 1.1 is a 1000 mile a year bike. The 1.2 is a 2000 mile a year bike. The 1.5 and above is a matter of taste and feel as rational thought is not among our strong points.

Last edited by jethro56; 12-22-11 at 07:29 AM.
jethro56 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 08:40 AM   #22
DCB0
Banned.
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Bikes: CCM Torino 76
Posts: 937
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Beanz View Post
My 2005 Tourmalet has nothing in common with modern Treks? You are seriously lacking some knowledge in this department.

Back in 2005, my Lemond was the exact same design (tube shape and size) as the Trek 1500, AND made by the same company, Trek. The alum used on the 1500 was Alpha Aluminum. So today's Trek 2.1 is also made with what.........Alpha aluminum. Now take a look at the 2010 2.1 and the current 1.1 on the Trek site.....same tube shape and design. Riiight, nothing in common!






Wow, you lack the ability to understand that a stiff frame with an oversized tubing BB area is better than the flexy small diameter tubing used on Treks?

Not to mention you like to twist words, all Cannondale alum and all Trek alum? Try reading my statement again with your comprehension cap on please.
The only thing they have in common is the name of the company that distributes them. You seem to not understand modern manufacturing processes in the bicycle industry.

And I re-read your statement and you refer to how 'Cannondale aluminum like my Caad 3' are a 'different story.' Sounds like a generalization comparing one brand to another, and my comprehention hat is on and snug enough to keep my thoughts aligned, thanky uo very much.
DCB0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 09:30 AM   #23
kstephens
Senior Member
 
kstephens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Western Ky
Bikes: Trek 1.5, Surly Long Haul Trucker, Trek
Posts: 347
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You will be fine. I have a trek 1.5 that I started on at 260. I am down to under 225 with over 2000 miles on it and it has had no issues. Trek puts a limit of 275 on frames, and I am willing to bet they have tested it to almost double that weight.
kstephens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 11:49 AM   #24
mechBgon
Senior Member
 
mechBgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Bikes:
Posts: 6,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Beanz View Post
And by the way, PLEASE tell me that stem has a super-long quill, and is safely inserted about 4 inches into that fork's steertube.
mechBgon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-22-11, 12:47 PM   #25
mechBgon
Senior Member
 
mechBgon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Bikes:
Posts: 6,957
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
side_FX, I had a look at the current 1.1 (same frame) and it could probably handle 700 x 28s plus SKS P35 fenders, or most 700 x 32s without fenders. Lots of clearance.
mechBgon 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 07:42 PM.