I've put together what I think could be a special touring rig for a potential customer from OZ arriving in May for a cross country trip. Yesterday was a great day to get out and put some initial break-in miles on "Sonia." Been trolling the touring section for awhile and hoping to glean some nuggets of wisdom from those that have ridden the mile, and can provide some feedback on the curvy red crank forward creation.
Still needs bar tape, SKS fenders, rear disc adapters for rear rack, rear rack, kickstand, brass solo Incredibell. Current weight as shown is 28.8lbs, and hoping to keep it around 35lbs before panniers, lighting etc.
Yes, I wish there were more factory braze-on for H20 carrying capacity, but this bike out of box was not designed specifically for touring. The comfortable ergo's, flat foot stops and torque that can be tapped while remaining seated and even engaging the upper body I believe makes it a natural choice for touring. Your feedback will reach the factory's ears, as this geometry gets some traction
Some customers are starting to put on some significant touring miles even on the lighter more road oriented Zenetik frames:
Here is Grant Pederson and Randy Schillter of RANS chatting it up over the longer and lower Fusion geometry design. I am hoping to capture some of the Rivendell flavor, but with this new geometry and a nod to modern componentry:
Last edited by Stradavarius; 04-07-08 at 11:44 PM.
Regards,
~Nanda Holz
Petaluma, CA
925.301.7043 www.spincyclz.com
onyourleft at spincyclz dot com
...our service revolves around you
There are no eyelets in the standard stock 1 1/8" alloy disc/canti-stud fork. Somewhere I've seen racks that use these studs, or mount without them, and another more purpose built fork would certainly be an option.
Steve in OR found one front pannier setup that worked:
We'll be at Sea Otter this year with a full compliment of these crank forwards bike available in the demo area.
Regards,
~Nanda Holz
Petaluma, CA
925.301.7043 www.spincyclz.com
onyourleft at spincyclz dot com
...our service revolves around you
Imagine taking the traditional road bike riding position, and rotating it back 15-20 degrees. This allows the seat pan width to increase, because your thighs no longer have to travel directly downward around the nose of a traditional skinny saddle, and the increased real estate has been a boon to a number of riders discovering this geometry. The rotated body position also reduces wrist and shoulder fatigue, neck strain and offers a more upright riding position (only compromising a slightly less aero profile).
While climbing a long grade or singletrack rather then using energy to stand and mash on the pedals, locking your arms and shoulder and engaging your upper body into the pedal stroke produces power on demand. The geometry allows you to stand up when desired, and the lower CG and seating position let you get your feet down at starts and stops. The standard frame can accomodate most riders ranging from 5'3" - 6'3" depending on your in-seam measurement. There is also a no cost short frame option where 1.5" of seat tube are machined off for even shorter folks.
Here is the designer testing out a different handle bar configuration helps demonstrate the crank forward concept.
With a chain that long do you have to pay constant attention to big rings as dropping down on the rear would have that chain slapping against the stay.
How low is the BB?
Can you pedal through corners?
On a windy prairie day I don't think there is any way I could get out of the wind on it.
Would my torso act like a sail?
I'd have to try riding one - just looking at it makes me think of a chopper. And cringe. A chopper is probably the last motorcycle you'd ever want to try doing distance on. Trust me on this.
Doesn't that riding position put too much pressure on the butt? And the lower back?
Syke
"No wonder we keep testing positive in their bicycle races. Everyone looks like they're full of testosterone when they're surrounded by Frenchmen." ---Argus Hamilton
With a chain that long do you have to pay constant attention to big rings as dropping down on the rear would have that chain slapping against the stay.
People ride Xtracycles and Big Dummies with equally long chains and don't experience any serious problems. I had a recumbent with a 10'+ long chain and no idlers along the length of the chain - that worked fine as well.
I'm pretty happy with my existing touring bikes, but if someone was selling those RANS CF bikes around here I'd definitely take one out for a test ride....
I think I looked at it too long,my back hurts.Does it come with a seat belt,looks like you would fall off of it at a stop without putting your feet down.
Would like to test ride one,to see what it rides like.
Everything should be as simple as possible...But not more so.---Albert Einstein
I guess I would need to ride one before guessing what the designer has in mind.
To me, it looks like a cruiser. Nothing wrong with that, but I don't think I would want to tour on a cruiser.
The way my present bike is designed it shares the riders weight over the seat, bars and pedals. The way my ZX-11 Ninja also does. This design looks to place all the weight on the seat as the pedals are forward. I don't know how you could just raise your butt an inch (like when you cross train tracks ect) to let your legs be the shocks. You would have to completely stand up.
The CG looks waaay back. With loaded rear panniers I bet it would be the wheelie king of the new millenium.
Looks really solid. Disc brakes are a personal thing and a topic of hot debate. Cable actuated would be my choice if I were going to go disc on a tour.
I may have opted for 36 spoked wheels (I'm 235 lbs so take that with a grain of salt).
The only other thing is that I personally don't like the shape of Shimano aero levers but that's not really a big deal especially since on that bar the hands won't be hitting the hoods in the same way anyway.
Frame looks funky but as long as it works for ya. I'd be interested in riding it around just to see what it feels like.
2009 Bike Friday Season Tikit (commuting folder)
2007 Rivendell Atlantis (touring, general riding, errand runner, stuff hauler)
2007 IRO Mark V (SS)
2006 Rockhopper Comp Disc (Icebike)
With a chain that long do you have to pay constant attention to big rings as dropping down on the rear would have that chain slapping against the stay.
How low is the BB?
Can you pedal through corners?
On a windy prairie day I don't think there is any way I could get out of the wind on it.
Would my torso act like a sail?
What do ride now ricohman. Unless your on an aero bar, or a recumbent, chances are your torso is acting like a sail. You can use aero bars on the Crankforward to maintain a really low drag ratio without compromising comfort.
I find that the wind is more tolerable than on an "ordinary" bicycle. If the wind hits the chest on an "ordinary" bicycle it pushes the crotch onto the nose of the saddle. Also the Crankforward puts the COG lower so it performs better in a crosswind.
The BB height is the same as most mountain bikes at 9 and a third inches with 2.1 tires on. I have found that pedaling through corners is easy as is coasting in deep ruts. The dead spot is much higher on the Crankforward, and that helps me.
What do ride now ricohman. Unless your on an aero bar, or a recumbent, chances are your torso is acting like a sail. You can use aero bars on the Crankforward to maintain a really low drag ratio without compromising comfort.
I find that the wind is more tolerable than on an "ordinary" bicycle. If the wind hits the chest on an "ordinary" bicycle it pushes the crotch onto the nose of the saddle. Also the Crankforward puts the COG lower so it performs better in a crosswind.
The BB height is the same as most mountain bikes at 9 and a third inches with 2.1 tires on. I have found that pedaling through corners is easy as is coasting in deep ruts. The dead spot is much higher on the Crankforward, and that helps me.
I have no aero bars on any of my bikes.
But I do happen to live in the windiest place on earth (the Saskatchewan prairies) so I have a lot of experience when it comes to pushing headwind all day/all week.
On my MTB, in a typical prairie wind, I find myself wishing I was on anything that didn't have that style of riding position.
And like I said, I would have to ride one of these before I could properly give any opinions.
The OP wanted critique, and I don't figure I was being too harsh.
You can use aero bars on the Crankforward to maintain a really low drag ratio without compromising comfort.
I would like to try one to see how it was, but based on the position it looks like you would be in I would question that... My thighs bumping my ribs is what limits how low I can get on a "regular" drop bar bike. It sure looks like they would bump a bit sooner on a crank forward design. It also seems like if tucked you would be folded in the middle tight enough to make breathing a bit restricted.
Originally Posted by Luser
Also the Crankforward puts the COG lower so it performs better in a crosswind.
CoG might be lower, but the ability to shift weight looks like it would also be reduced. In addition it looks like it would be hard to get your butt off the seat to let your legs act as shock absorbers, and forget about bunny hopping over a pot hole or raised joint on a bridge unless you planned ahead and were standing.
If I get a chance to ride one I will just to see, but I expect to be more underwhelmed than I was when I tried a recumbent.
Definitely cool looking. But it seems to me like you lose the pedaling power of a road bike but you don't get the comfort of a recumbent, so where is the advantage? I almost think you would lose pedalling power over a recumbant because you don't have back support behind you.
I was thinking the same thing when I first purchased the aero bars, because I have long legs as well. But it works, probably because I'm pushing out more than on an "ordinary" bike. I find my breathing to be least restricted on the aero bars. I haven't heard of many other people trying the aero bars so my info is a little restricted to my own experience.
I find that I can shift my weight on the seat for a variety experiance, but I don't stand up as much as I used to. The Crankforward design puts my head up in a more natural position when I'm in the flatbar hand position, this allows me to see obstacles easier. I end up steering around obstacles even though it's possible to bunny hop the CF.
@slabshaft
I don't see the loss of pedalling power for I've owned many racing geometry bikes. Could you explain.
The Crankforward has many advantages over the recumbent. It can be used in more versatile settings such as mountainbiking or rough dirt roads and in traffic. For me, it's more comfortable than a recumbent on the road because my butt absorbs all the road vibrations that get sent to my stomach on a recumbent. It's a personal preference thing so if your not with it, more for me.
i really don't understand the traction point. that is the last bike you'd ever want to ride off road, short of a full-blown 'bent, and traction (especially braking and accelerating) doesn't much matter on road, especially when you've got loaded panniers.
The comment about knees...
Assume that the frame geometry and ergonomics are favorable to tour on this build... but why the 175mm cranks? Tourists and 'bent riders seem to indicate that shorter crank lengths are better because it reduces forces on the knee.
i'm only saying this now as I approach 60 years... and wish I hadn't pushed even 170mm cranks for so many touring miles. OK, I can get new knees I guess, but if I had to do it again...
69 Raleigh Sports, '73 Atala Record, '82 Stan Pike with my name on the BB (yeah!)
Traction is gained by putting weight on the rear wheel, is it not. How could there be traction issues if there is more weight on the rear tire. I know many people with a pickup truck who fill the bed with sandbags so they will have more traction. The same thinking applies to the CF. If you properly distribute weight to the rear wheel there is much more traction.
I have improved my acceleration with the Crankforward because I can pull on the handlebar to gain extra torque. There is no need to stand up on the pedals because you can use the upper body and gravity while sitting in the seat.
If I haven't tested the design against the trek fuel ex5, the SPECIALized fsr xcpro, and the SPECIALIZED stumpjumper only to find the Dynamik wins hands down, I'ld be in skeptical crowd. Properly set up, none of my riding buddies can keep up.
Nanda will you be racing in the SOC, or will you be too busy at the booth and such. I'ld really like to hear about you and Randy Schlitter going at it.
View Profile
View Forum Posts
Visit Homepage
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Fueled by Boh
I guess, but if I had to do it again...
