Geometry Difference between Messenger and Kilo TT...
Hey all, I'm planning a purchase soon, and am currently torn between two bikes. Initially I wanted the messenger, as it comes with two brakes and is the same price as the Kilo TT, but after some thought, and watching some track racing, I realized I might actually want to race at some point, and the supposedly more "track" geometry of the Kilo TT brought me to that bike.
A post on another thread provoked some deeper thought, and I'd like other opinions:
Originally Posted by K_phomma
"The windsor is a road geo
Kilo is a track geo"
Most people on this forum (mis)judge the handling of a bike by how "steep" and "tight" it looks, but looks can be decieving.
Assuming the provided geometry charts for these bikes are correct, the Hour and Kilo TT frames have very similar geometry. See for yourself. The headtube angle of the Kilo TT ranges from 72-73.5 degrees. Thats hardly "track". The larger sizes of the Hour have a 75 degree HT angle, so if steep headtube angles are "track geo", the largest Hour frames are the most "track geo".
The fork rake (offset) for the Hour is not provided, so its hard to judge exactly how this bikes handles. However the Kilo TT fork has 40mm of rake for all but the smallest size. Thats not much rake for a road-like geometry frame, and I suspect they did it to make the bike look tighter. But this combo of frame and fork is actually going to result in more trail than is typical for either a road bike or a track bike, thus giving the Kilo TT more sluggish handling than even most road bikes. LOL. Track-bike indeed.
From How Do People Feel About Windsor Hour???
Is there much of a difference in geometry?
Does the geometry make that much difference in the real world?