Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 105
  1. #26
    Senior Member Ridefreemc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Western Florida
    My Bikes
    2013 Velo Orange Campeur, 2011 Mezzo D9, 2004 Marin Mount Vision Pro
    Posts
    983
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    [QUOTE=john hawrylak;16217369]
    Quote Originally Posted by Homeyba View Post
    This may be a silly question but, why would anyone bother with something that wasn't manufactured correctly ..."

    Homeyba has a good point. However, the crown race seat on the steerer can be faced (metal removed) to accept an ISO crown race (smaller inner diameter) using a standard Park tool. The head tube ends can be reamed (enlarged) to accept the larger diameter ISO cups again using a standard Park tool. The cost is minimal, less than $75 at a knowledgeable bike shop, so modifying the existing frame is reasonable.
    I cannot find it again on their website, but I thought that I read that Boulder Cycles faces the steerer and fixes the problem before they release the bike (sorry for starting you down this path without complete info, but I hope you find what I was referring to):

    http://www.renehersebicycles.com/Soma%20bikes.htm

    EDIT - Here it is - http://www.renehersestore.com/servle...donneur/Detail

    "Also - there is discussion about the fork's crown race diamter. When you purchase the frame from us we machine down the crown race so it is the typical 26.4 seat diameter."
    Last edited by Ridefreemc; 11-05-13 at 07:30 AM.
    On the move!
    2013 Velo Orange Campeur, 2012 Mezzo D9, 2004 Marin Mount Vision Pro

  2. #27
    babylon by bike Standalone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    New Haven, CT, USA
    My Bikes
    Road, Cargo, Tandem, Etc.
    Posts
    2,768
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ThermionicScott View Post
    Maybe I'm too much of a DIYer, but I don't see what the big deal is about the headset -- they freely admit the goof on their website, and suitable parts are available and cheap.
    I agree-- they're open and clear about the issue. Imagine car manufacturers being this honest about issues with their builds. Yeah, right. Great looking frame; I'm looking forward to pictures of builds.
    The bicycle, the bicycle surely, should always be the vehicle of novelists and poets. Christopher Morley

  3. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am a GR owner and one of the first (possibly *the* first) to receive a frame from the batch in question.

    It was purchased through Boulder Bikes/Rene Herse. I did the frame prep and build myself with the exception of machining down the crown race seat, a job I left to Mike Kone & Co at BB/RH. I installed a Chris King 2Nut headset (the CC GripNut headset is not designed for cable hangers, the 2Nut is) and have 150 miles on it so far but would probably go with the Miche headset if I could do it over again.

    It's a beautiful handling bike, with clean welds, and light tubing (my 61cm in the photo below weighed in at 25.5 lbs, without the water bottles and bag). The ride is more reminiscent of my 80's Trek 560ex than my Atlantis, yet it is at least as comfortable to ride. At least as far as I can remember, both other bikes have been collecting dust since the GR arrived.

    http://t.co/kutE7HbsBR
    Last edited by dgerton; 11-05-13 at 11:08 PM.

  4. #29
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Your frame is clearly one of the larger sizes. Would you do me a favor and measure the length of the rear brake bridge and let me know if the fenders have good side clearance? I have a strong suspicion that my 49.5cm frame is really only supposed to run up to 32mm tires for everything to fit properly.

  5. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    Your frame is clearly one of the larger sizes. Would you do me a favor and measure the length of the rear brake bridge and let me know if the fenders have good side clearance? I have a strong suspicion that my 49.5cm frame is really only supposed to run up to 32mm tires for everything to fit properly.
    If you mean the seat stay bridge where the fender mounts, the caliper measures 45.5 mm from inside-left to inside-right just underneath the bridge. The 50mm Berthoud fender has a 2.5mm gap on either side between it and the seat stay. That is with only a leather washer at the seat stay bridge mount, no spacer -- there would be more left-right clearance if I put a spacer there. It has Grand Bois Extra Leger tires and there is loads of tire clearance, approximately 20mm (I wanted to ride it a while before trimming the fender line down).

    If you mean the brake bosses, they are 80mm apart.

    I'm curious whether your measurements differ. I wouldn't expect that but I'm no expert. Call or email Rene Herse/Boulder Bikes if you have a question. Get it straight from the horses mouth. (I think Mike has all of the measurements in his head.)

  6. #31
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dgerton View Post
    If you mean the seat stay bridge where the fender mounts, the caliper measures 45.5 mm from inside-left to inside-right just underneath the bridge.
    Aha! I knew it. My bridge measure 35mm. These people need to list specific changes made to accommodate the small frame sizes and show separate photos of those frames. That's the last time I order a production frame. If I purchase one, I'll do it if and only if I can find a built-up bike in that size.

    Edit: And thanks for checking.
    Edit 2: Well I can't figure out how to do strikethrough with this editor. Disregard most of this. I was wrong.
    Last edited by carfart; 11-07-13 at 09:03 PM. Reason: Added detail.

  7. #32
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    Aha! I knew it. My bridge measure 35mm. These people need to list specific changes made to accommodate the small frame sizes and show separate photos of those frames. That's the last time I order a production frame. If I purchase one, I'll do it if and only if I can find a built-up bike in that size.

    Edit: And thanks for checking.
    You're more than welcome.

    But don't overlook my frame's 20mm clearance. That's HUGE! (Photo included this time.) I'll be trimming it this weekend.

    The frame size disparity is also huge, so this is like comparing apples and oranges. A call to BB/RH is in order if you want your question answered.

    IMG_0001.jpg

    [Edit: Excuse the mess.]

  8. #33
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That looks like good vertical clearance to me, but I'm also used to making room for the VO fender stay bolts.

  9. #34
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    That looks like good vertical clearance to me, but I'm also used to making room for the VO fender stay bolts.
    This had those round-head bolts that are nearly flat. The Berthoud fenders came lots of good hardware when purchased from Boulder Bikes. (Sorry I keep plugging them.) I posted some close-ups of the unadulterated mounts on my blog last night.

    I find when there is this much of a gap, things like ironwood seed pods are getting unnecessarily pulled into the fenders where they would be more safely (and quietly) rejected with less tire clearance. But I'm getting off topic.

  10. #35
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was wrong. I went back with a tape measure, and realized that I'd originally measured the top length of the bridge, so our spacing does appear to be the same. Furthermore, the real width of VO Zeppelin fenders is 55mm. If I were to use 50mm Berthoud, which I cannot afford, I would be able to mount everything where it's supposed to be. In my defense 50mm is not a common size--Edit: that will fit correctly with 42mm tires. When I tried to mount the Zeppelins I encountered something I'd never run into before, crappy rear seat stay spacing.

    The first image is what I'm used to. The next two are the Grand Randonneur.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by carfart; 11-06-13 at 06:14 PM.

  11. #36
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    I was wrong. I went back with a tape measure, and realized that I'd originally measured the top length of the bridge, so our spacing does appear to be the same. Furthermore, the real width of VO Zeppelin fenders is 55mm. If I were to use 50mm Berthoud, which I cannot afford, I would be able to mount everything where it's supposed to be. In my defense 50mm is not a common size--Edit: that will fit correctly with 42mm tires. When I tried to mount the Zeppelins I encountered something I'd never run into before, crappy rear seat stay spacing.

    The first image is what I'm used to. The next two are the Grand Randonneur.
    The bend above the bridge is more pronounced than mind. I didn't even notice that bend until I saw yours. The other difference is your frame doesn't have the integrated brake cable stop.

    I could be wrong, but I thought the zeps were 52mm in 650b. Did you measure them? Either way, that photo jives with the measurements I took. 2.5mm gap on either side of my 50mm fenders = 55mm = your fender. And clearance under the bridge to the tire looks just like mine.

    You should be able to gently curve the sides of the fenders in a couple of millimeters around the seatstays. There is more side clearance than head clearance because the arc of the tire is pulling in towards the center there. I've seen this done with metal fenders, and cut away too -- the 60mm SKS I have came cut away from the factory.

    As Mike Kone mentioned on the Boulder Bike site, the Berthoud 50mm fender doesn't have as much wrap as other fenders, so it works well with fatter tires than would normally fit under a 50mm fender.

  12. #37
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I believe that fender specs must refer to the internal width, but I've only actually measured the one. I've dented fenders before to get them to fit a fork, but I don't like leaving them with the sides contacting the frame, going further would probably reduce the tire clearance too much, and that messes up the fender line. Since forcing a fit is kludgey I'm just going to wait and buy some of the Berthoud fenders when there's room in my budget.

    I was hoping they'd leave the hanger on that size and should have sized up instead of down to be on the safe side. I don't know why I didn't attempt to verify with an email, because I've never been very happy with losing that feature while paying the same price. At least in this case there's a substitute instead of expecting people to buy a seat bolt hanger. I'm not thrilled with any of those. Whatever is taking priority when frame designers drop the hanger I wonder if I'd rather have a hanger with a useful barrel adjuster instead.

  13. #38
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    I believe that fender specs must refer to the internal width...

    I don't think there is an ISO for that. The Berthoud are 50mm on the outside. I remember reading an article about that with nice pictures but can't find it in my usual places.

    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    ...but I don't like leaving them with the sides contacting the frame, going further would probably reduce the tire clearance too much, and that messes up the fender line. Since forcing a fit is kludgey I'm just going to wait and buy some of the Berthoud fenders when there's room in my budget.
    A piece of old inner tube for a gasket works for a temporarily, if ugly, solution. I like my temporary fixes to be ugly otherwise they become permanent.

    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    I was hoping they'd leave the hanger on that size and should have sized up instead of down to be on the safe side. I don't know why I didn't attempt to verify with an email, because I've never been very happy with losing that feature while paying the same price.
    True. But you get a lighter, more laterally stiff vertically compliant bike for the same price as tall people. We pay big bucks for that.

  14. #39
    Senior Member Road Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    My Bikes
    Terraferma 650b, Mondonico SL and ELOS, Masi Gran Criterium, Trek 610, Breezer Liberty, Georgena Terry Classic
    Posts
    11,097
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey, it's been a while! Any of you make more progress on your frames?

  15. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Orange County, California
    Posts
    229
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Just a little more on the subject of questionable manufacturing. I was looking at buying a Double Cross frame (canti brake bosses, no disc), but Soma seems to have problems with that model, too:

    Some frames will not have seat collars due to a specification change. We cannot tell you what you will get. Just wait until you receive your frame and purchase a 30.0mm/29.8mm collar if you need to.

    I looked at a parts site I buy stuff from, and they don't have any 29.8mm seat collars. Sure, its a small difference, but I don't want to risk dealing with a slipping seatpost every time I go out for a ride.
    Are we having fun yet?

  16. #41
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Manufacturers constantly make spec changes. Sometimes it's for reasons of standards, or safety/reliability, or customer feedback, or to accommodate availability of components, etc. With complete bikes, you never hear about these changes because the components are changed to match.

    But building a bike from the frame is different from buying a complete bike. I want to know these things when building a bike. It seems counterproductive to chide the manufacturer for providing information on spec changes.

    In late 2012, I took delivery of a frame from a reputable builder. That frame cost 5x that of the Soma. It had several changes that weren't publicized and I did not like/want. I much prefer Soma's approach to letting the customer know in advance.

    wrt the headset, I switched to the Miche and it was a significant improvement on stability. Go pin/roller bearings with this bike.

  17. #42
    Senior Member DIMcyclist's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Trying to avoid more red ones...
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hey All!

    I was a little late finding this thread (stumbled across it by accident, really; I usually post in C&V), but I thought I'd add this little update, FYI, re: 27.0 threaded roller-bearing headsets & the Grand Ranonneur JIS forks...

    V.O. currently offers a 27.0 'Rinko' threaded & sealed HS (that looks pretty durned sexy, I might add), and I just snagged a 27.0 version of Tange's 'Seiki' threaded & sealed headset on ePay; stylistically very similar to Chris King's 'TwoNut,' or FSA's Duron X headsets.

    So, they DO exist in the wild; but like Yeti (or better- snow leopards- since Yeti don't actually exist), they're very, very hard to find.

    Hope this helps...

    Edit- I just contacted Soma about this (since I'd love to have one the 27.0 threaded forks), and asked if they planned on selling any of them as an aftermarket part, to which they replied: yes, they are, but most likely in a 1" threadless version.
    Last edited by DIMcyclist; 02-11-14 at 11:15 PM. Reason: Updated information.
    Trek 820 (650b), Trek 930, Fuji League, Bridgestone RB-2, Bridgestone XO-3, Soma Smoothie ES, LeMond Buenos Aires, Torelli Corsa Strada

  18. #43
    Senior Member DIMcyclist's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Trying to avoid more red ones...
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by carfart View Post
    I was wrong. I went back with a tape measure, and realized that I'd originally measured the top length of the bridge, so our spacing does appear to be the same. Furthermore, the real width of VO Zeppelin fenders is 55mm. If I were to use 50mm Berthoud, which I cannot afford, I would be able to mount everything where it's supposed to be. In my defense 50mm is not a common size--Edit: that will fit correctly with 42mm tires. When I tried to mount the Zeppelins I encountered something I'd never run into before, crappy rear seat stay spacing.

    The first image is what I'm used to. The next two are the Grand Randonneur.
    Have you checked any of the Tanaka fenders? Quality is similar to Honjo @ a price comparable to VO Zeps; granted, they aren't beveled or fluted, but they do come in 45mm, for 650b wheels.
    Trek 820 (650b), Trek 930, Fuji League, Bridgestone RB-2, Bridgestone XO-3, Soma Smoothie ES, LeMond Buenos Aires, Torelli Corsa Strada

  19. #44
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DIMcyclist View Post
    Have you checked any of the Tanaka fenders? Quality is similar to Honjo @ a price comparable to VO Zeps; granted, they aren't beveled or fluted, but they do come in 45mm, for 650b wheels.
    I found a set of the 50mm Berthoud fenders for $67 at Ben's Cycle. I definitely wouldn't try to fit them over 42mm tires, but they'll just fit 38mm with some tight spots. Of course, the closer you try to make the fit, the harder it becomes to get everything lined up. I decided to spend my cycling budget this year on a custom frame from Tom Teasdale with clearance for up to 58mm fenders. That'll probably allow me to also fit knobby 650b tires without fenders if I desired. I don't know when it'll be ready, but I'll post some photos when it's finished and built up.

  20. #45
    Senior Member DIMcyclist's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Portland, OR
    My Bikes
    Trying to avoid more red ones...
    Posts
    515
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's certainly a stunning way to deal with a clearance issue; Teesdale builds a sweet frame- congrats!

    Fwiw, the 45mm Tanaka fenders proved an ideal solution for the clearance issues I encountered in my current restoration project; but then, I'll only be running 34mm road tires.
    Trek 820 (650b), Trek 930, Fuji League, Bridgestone RB-2, Bridgestone XO-3, Soma Smoothie ES, LeMond Buenos Aires, Torelli Corsa Strada

  21. #46
    Ding! Bandera's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    1,586
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    In the latest (Vol 12 #3 ) issue of "Bicycle Quarterly" the Soma Grand Randonneur is tested w/ these statements:

    "Those who were around the in 1980s remember Tange Prestige as one of the best tubesets ever made......However the Japanese Tange operation closed in the late 1990s and the Soma's Taiwanese tubing appears to share only the name and sticker with the revered Tange Prestige of old...... "If you don't know this, you may expect the ride quality of a superlight, thin wall tubeset, and you may be disappointed."

    BQ should have noted the Grand Randonneur is not a "Full Prestige" frameset as the fork is Tange Infinity (stays too?).
    "The Soma's fork blades are quite stiff, but at least the bumps didn't unsettle the bike."

    "The Soma Grand Randonneur performs better the harder you push it."
    -BQ Vol.12 #3

    They are a tough audience, damning w/ faint praise the "budget" $500 Soma frameset and gushing over the $3K frameset MAP S&P in the same issue. Magazines need something to write about & I find BQ's quirky frame of reference & hands-on testing interesting and fair enough.

    I must agree that the Soma GR is one ugly puppy w/ the "dropped top tube" but handsome is not a primary requirement for me in a $500 frameset.

    Any feedback from owners putting on the miles, particularly in the early season Brevets?

    -Bandera
    Last edited by Bandera; 03-21-14 at 03:06 PM.
    '74 Raleigh International - '77 Trek TX900FG - '92 Vitus 979 - '10 Merckx EMX-3- '11 Soma Stanyan

  22. #47
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've ridden a bit more and with different loads. So far the front load handling really sucks compared to my other low trail frame and, well, all of my mid-trail frames too. In order to maintain an easy line with minimal steering then a saddle bag with no weight on the front does the trick. Besides fork trail, there are obviously other important factors that we need to consider when picking out a frame for carrying a loaded handlebar bag. I have no real idea what those would be, but I suppose I could start with head tube angle. The sizes vary by 1 degree, and I wonder if that would really make a big difference. The BQ crowd are probably riding larger frames, and the small sizes that I ride will have slacker head tube angles in order to avoid making the top tube too long. The variations in geometry between sizes are a big reason why I never give ride reviews any serious consideration.
    Last edited by carfart; 03-21-14 at 10:36 PM. Reason: Clarity

  23. #48
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There's this from nooneline.blogspot.com: "The boildown is that head tube angle and fork rake work against each other in order to reach an equilibrium, a sweet spot of trail measurement (60mm, according to Don Walker). Overcompensating one because of a lack of the other is counterproductive: putting a road fork on a track bike with a steep headtube angle will make the handling less stable - the higher-rake fork reduces the trail measurement. A "road" fork doesn't make a bike's handling more stable - it will make it less self-correcting. Putting a low-rake fork in order to tighten up the front end of a bike with a slack head tube, rather than bringing a bike's handling closer to neutral, will push it toward very-high-rake, sluggish handling. Which is fine, if you want a road bike that handles like a cruiser." (http://nooneline.blogspot.com/2009/0...ube-angle.html)

    So I gather that if a frame with a 73 degree head tube angle is stable with 69mm of rake and a front load, then reducing the head tube angle without adding more rake would mess that balance up even though it's still within low trail territory. It seems that each frame has a different low trail sweet spot for the kind of front load that it's meant to handle with not much tolerance for variation on either side of that. I'm mystified about how you'd get it right other than through trial and error. My Polyvalent is fine with 73 degrees, 64mm or rake, and a trail of 36mm. This frame handles very differently with the same trail but 72 degrees and 69mm of rake.

    I'm thinking that early adopters should try to find out if the tested prototypes were built in their size before pulling the trigger. [Added] And that if the designers use the same fork with different head tube angles, one might want to look elsewhere.
    Last edited by carfart; 03-22-14 at 12:18 AM. Reason: Added

  24. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5,881
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Honestly, if I buy a mass-produced frame (especially one from Taiwan, China, etc.) I expect there to be some minor issues like headset specs or fender clearance or whatever. I think it's easy to read about all these miraculous hand-built frames in Bicycle Quarterly and then expect that our $500 TIG'd special from New Guinea is going to have the bridges located in exactly the right place for our personal tire/fender combination. Then we take a step back and realize that, well, the only way to really ensure that is to spend the $5000 that top custom builders are asking to, well, really ensure that.

    IMO SOMA builds a really good budget frame that just isn't going to be exactly what you want, and buyers need to realize that there's going to be some compromise in building that kind of frame up. If you can't deal with those compromises, then start saving. Weigle will be happy to build you exactly what you want...

  25. #50
    Senior Member carfart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    72
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This is probably my final say on the frame. Yes there will be some manufacturing flaws on a first run, but the the Grand Rando suffers significantly from design oversights, the kind that have nothing to do with its cost to produce and everything to do with a designer who doesn't get it and probably hasn't spent much time building up touring and randonneuring bikes with wide tires, fenders, and so on. VO gets it. I haven't had a chance to try out their new Pass Hunter frame, but considering the features, it would have been my first choice last fall if I had a good quality 700c wheelset with dynamo hub. Maybe Cycles Toussaint gets it. I don't know; I'm still waiting for them to respond to the questions I have about their frame. The Velo Routier really went under the radar, and I think most of us who saw the Grand Rando as the budget Randonneuring specific frame we'd been waiting for would have preferred the style and geometry of the Velo Routier which also came out last year.
    Last edited by carfart; 03-22-14 at 02:21 PM.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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