longjuly

What do u, guys, think about fuji track? Is it any better/worse than bianchi pista? I heard that it's easier to convert fuji into freewheel.

roscoenyc57

fuji track is drilled for a rear brake. bianchi pista is not. you may want front and back brakes if you are running freewheel

vindicator

The pista comes with a flip-flop hub, fixed-free. I don't think it gets easier than that.

fixedstep

the hub is fixed/fixed

longjuly

that's exactly what i was talking about

longjuly

that's exactly what i was talking about. thanx

Mercier666

Thanks for confusing all of us...Anyways, the pista is a great bike, however if you're looking for a freewheel the fuji would be much easier. Mainly because of the brake situation.

vindicator

I just checked the Pista standing behing my t.v. and it's indeed fixed-free. If you think I'm wrong you can come and check it out for yourself.

53-11_alltheway

I'll add this as well:

Fuji is road geometry (slack seat tube angle, longer chainstays, centerline of wheelbase is more to the rear)

Pista is track geometry (steeper seat tube angle, shorter chainstys, centerline of wheelbase is more forward)

If you want to ride with deep drops and more forward definitely get the Pista. Trying to ride in a forward position on road geometry via straight clamp seatpost and seat pushed all the way forward (I've done this) is recipe for unloading your rear wheel. Forward center of gravity on a bike not designed for it is dangerous (fixed more so due to braking issues)

I think this is why you see a lot of bullhorns on road conversions. Deep drops are not going to work well with too much seat setback (hip angle closes too much). You really need Pista geometry to make this work well.

Neither one is better, just different.

woof

Fuji's have flip-flop hubs as well.

legalize_it

yes, the pista does have steeper angles than the fuji, but i would hardly say that it has track geometry. the difference between my "real" track bike and my friends pista is night and day.

Paul And Pista

Older pistas are fixed-free, newer - I believe starting 2004, but definitely as of 2005 - are fixed-fixed.

53-11_alltheway

What********** (disagreeing about the track geometry statement)

https://www.bianchiusa.com/569.html

It has steep angles and short chainstays (383mm). You don't get more track than that.

You can say your more expensive track frame/bike is better for other reasons, but it's not because this bike doesn't have real track geometry.

There are obviously better bikes than the Pista, but really it doesn't seem like a bad bike for the money.

I like Sugino RD on the Pista more than the Truvativ crank on the fuji. They are both modified road cranks, but the Sugino just looks better.

Another good reason to like the Pista over the Fuji.

vindicator

Well I guess I must be special cause my '05 comes fixed-free. I would much rather not be special though, I would much rather have fixed-fixed and run something a little easier for off days.

53-11_alltheway

https://www.spectrum-cycles.com/613.htm (explains track geometry)

All it boils down to is position on the bike. This is simple and basic to understand except by people who know nothing of geometry (ie, Pista sucks cuz it's popular and just want to bash Pista because they are ignorant little b1tches)

Road geometry is more upright. Why? Because Road races are endurance events and having weight on your hands is tiring.

Track geometry is forward and more aerodynamic . It doesn't matter that you have more weight on your hands because you are not going to be racing that long.

The forward seat on Track geometry facilitates lower handlebars with deep drops. This has to do with the hip angle. I can explain this too if necessary.

Hopefully others will chime in as well.

P.S. I'm getting you a link on how road geometry works. It explains center of gravity, etc and why seats are positioned where they are on bikes for endurance events. https://www.sheldonbrown.com/kops.html

EnLaCalle

yeah, i deleted my post because i didn't think it belonged in this thread, and i didn't want to make anyone feel bad because i singled out a couple of members whose opinions about technical issues I respect WAY more than others...

For those interested, I also remembered a post by Jose R. a while back where he talked about how the fork rake on the Pista was what was stopping it from being a little more "track" in it's geometry and that if you replaced the fork with one that had a different rake, the bike would be more responsive.

celephaiz

So i have a question, if track geometry is about position, what is the difference between a steep stem and a steep top tube with a more right or obtuse stem angle (making say, an equivalent body position)? Is it a stiffness of the frame thing?

53-11_alltheway

He talked about that in the Track Cycling forum, but he mentioned it in regards to the Fuji Track Pro ( I think). He has some good info.

Fork rake has to do with the position of the front hub. This affects resposiveness and wheelbase length. It also affects where the center of gravity is on the frame as well.

53-11_alltheway

You can throw any stem you want on any frame, but that doesn't mean the balance of the frame will be right.

The fact of the matter is this: In order for low handlebars with deep Pista/track drops to work well you need to move the seat forward via steep seat tube angle . Now if the frame's center of gravity is not geared towards this you will take too much weight off the rear wheel.

Track frames handle this problem by shorten the chainstays and bringing the rear wheel farther forward. Therefore rear wheel still has adequate weight on it even with forward weight shift.

Notice even with steep seat tube angle the Pista concept (same seat tube angle and chainstay length as regular Pista) below has a cutout in the seat tube to get rear wheel farther forward. [Pista and Pista Concept have same seat tube angle and chainstay length, but the concept has the cutout as a nice touch. Maybe lets you slide wheel a little more forward in drop-out)

mcsurf

I have a Pista, and have ridden the Fuji and the Windsor, and it wouldn't surprise me if they all are the same bike under the paint or chrome. They are all road geometry in terms of riding position, and the only think trackie, other than the dropouts, is the higher crank height which comes in real handy on tight corners if you're riding fixed. The components are serviceable, but just barely. The wheels spin ok but are kind of heavy, the headset feels like it's got sand in it on all of them, and the front sprocket is stamped so silent running is questionable. Having said all that...I'm 195 lbs, I ride my Pista as hard as I can, and nothing has broken yet. For not much more you could get a Surly or IMO and select the components you want. It's all good.

53-11_alltheway

Stop the BS (seriously). Go to the manufacturers websites and look up the geometry instead of generalizing. They are different.

https://www.spectrum-cycles.com/613.htm (this explains track geometry)

53-11_alltheway

I just reread this question. You must be talking about Persuit frames, right?

I don't really know the purpose of those frames. It just seems to me a way to make the headtube lower in the days before really long seatposts became availble.

These days with ultra long posts available (due to popularity of compact frames) I don't think you'd need a Persuit frame. You would just use a custom frame with a long top tube and a short seat/headt tube. The road bike below has a 58.5cm top tube, but only a 54cm seat tube. It doesn't need to have a down sloping top tube because the seatpost is long enough.

Others may know more Persuit frames.

celephaiz

While this is interesting, you answered my question the first time but thanks for both answers

Jose R

The Bianchi Pista and Pista Concept have steep seat and head tube angles which are right for the track. But they both have forks with a rake of 28mm. With HT angles going from 74-75 degrees, this means that the trail goes from 6.8cm to 6.1cm. In either case its slowish. Which is still ok for the track for mass starts and such kind of races, but less than ideal for sprints.

Some people assume that a slow handling bike frame is not "track" because they are used to or are only exposed to sprint track frames with tight geo and very short trail (5.5cm or less) which makes the bike responsive as heck.

If I had a choice in terms of responsiveness for all around track frame I would keep my trail ~6.0cm or less, but above 5.5cm.

That doesn't mean either the Pista or Pista Concept are awful for the track. For me, they wouldn't be ideal for my sized frame. Its always a personal preference.

For the most part, people in general will not notice too much. But, for some of us it might make a world of difference.

The Fuji Track Pro has a road fork: 45mm or 40mm rake. With the HT angle of 74-75degrees, this makes the bike/frame super responsive, with trail under 5.5cm and close to 5.0cm. Too much for my taste.

They are all nice bikes that can and are used on the track, and in some cases (Pista Concept and Track Pro) by elite amateurs.

The Fuji track is more roadish in its HT angle for the smaller sizes and ST angle for the larger sizes. Which is not a negative thing if you have no intention of going to the track.

53-11_alltheway

Originally I said neither is better just different. It's when people make incorrect statements like Pista is road geometry that I'm going to say something.

To me any frame with road geometry (like this non- Pro version of the Fuji Track) I'd have a harder time using track drops with (unless they were higher up)

The only thing I don't understand is trail. I just have to look that up.