Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 57 of 57
  1. #51
    hors category TandemGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    7,152
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by dfcas
    Anybody notice the new Calfee tandem prices?Down over a G for the new frame design.

    dan
    Moved to its own thread.

  2. #52
    hors category TandemGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    7,152
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ElRey
    I bought teh Reynolds based on my experiences with their line and the similar geomtery of the Reynolds to teh C'dale it first replaced. As TandemGekk says, they're almost identical. So, since I had a near-new Reynolds when I got the Co Motion, I just swapped it. It's a lot lighter than the WOund Up, and quite simply I hate the way the Wound Up looks (pretty stupid, eh?). The ride may be slightly more stable than the original Co Motion fork in theory, but that is not really noticeable while the clear advantages in ride quality are.
    While not wanting to drag up an old thread for the sake of dragging up an old thread, I do have a follow-up on your Reynolds fork conversion....

    Which fork did you end up with? A caliper brake model or one with brake bosses for cantilevers?

    The reason I ask is, I have been under the impression that Reynolds released the 1.125" version of the caliper brake, 5.5cm Ouzo Pro Tandem fork. I've come to find out since then that Reynolds has still not made that fork model available. It was due out last year, it's been in their on-line catalog for 2 years now, and this year it's in the print version of their '06 catalog but still not in production. Therefore, I'm thinking that the only 1.125" tandem fork they are selling is their beefed up XC carbon fork with canti-lever bosses which comes with 4.5cm of off-set.

  3. #53
    WATERFORD22
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    My Bikes
    Bilenky, Co-Motion, 1969 Paramount, Waterford Adventure Cycle, Waterford rs 22, 1980 Davidson etc.
    Posts
    509
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well I find this a very interesting thread. My observations are not that much based in science as opinion having owned a Santana Visa - and I currently own a Bilenky Signature and a Co Motion Mocha. Our Santana was rock solid in in the steering department - sort of like put it into cruise control and let it go - not responsesive, but steady - no need to do much thinking in the steering department . For my stocker who doesn't like lots of motion in her down hill rides it made her confident enough to go to the next level of a tandeming. She misses that feel as we branched out to other tandems. The Bilenky is much more refined and responsive and takes more work by the team to lean into turns and because of the reponsiveness can have some surprises with wind and road conditions. I really like their over built 531 fork. The Co Motion which we only have 50 miles on rides much more like a single bike- when you lean into a turn it responds immeadiately - we are not yet sure we like this much resposiveness yet and it will take some getting used to. I am enjoying the feel, but my stocker is having some reservations - but like driving a new car we will adjust. Here's funny thought if I picked out a bike to ride a 1000 mile multi-day trip loaded - it would be a toss up (Visa or Bilenky) - serveral day supported Centuries (Bilenky or Co- Motion). Alot of this is just my opinion on how much work I want to do steering a bike.

  4. #54
    hors category TandemGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    7,152
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Just for reference, here again is how some of the 700c road models of major tandem brands stack up in terms of nominal steering trail with a front tire diameter of 687mm and their OEM forks, steel and/or carbon as specified:

    1.65" = Bilenky
    1.65" = KHS
    1.89" = Santana
    1.89" = Burley w/Steel Fork
    1.89" = Trek T1000/2000 w/Steel Fork (Med & Large Size w/73* head tube)
    1.98" = Cannondale CAAD Design w/Steel Fork
    2.01" = Trek T1000/2000 w/Steel Fork (Small Size w/72.5* head tube)
    2.09" = Co-Motion w/Steel Fork
    2.09" = Trek T2000 w/Carbon Fork (Med & Large w/73* head tube)
    2.20" = Burley Race Package w/Carbon Fork
    2.20" = Trek T2000 w/Carbon fork (Small Size w/72.5* head tube)
    2.28" = Co-Motion w/Wound-Up fork

    As noted in an earlier post, a larger diameter tire will increase these trail numbers by a few mm and a smaller diameter tire will therefore decrease them.

    Again, how a bicycle tandem actually "feels" is incredibly subjective and while steering geometry is a major factor, it will not by itself necessarily correlate into how a tandem will "feel". Like tubing where the material itself is not as important as the diameter, butting, wall thickness specified for each tube by the builder, handling is also influenced by multiple factors and, while steering trail is a major factor, the stiffness of the fork, frame, and wheelset as well as tire selection will also influence what a team "feels" when actually riding a tandem under different conditions.

    This continues to underscore why so many of us emphasise the need to test ride as many different tandems as often as possible if you are searching for a new tandem or are just curious to see how different brands and models have been "tuned" by their designers and why you also need to factor how the wheels, tires, and even tire pressure alter that "feeling". As an example, anyone who finds a tandem feels harsh might want to drop 10psi out of the tires and see how it might change that initial impression. Then again, you can ignore all of this stuff and just recognize that the average team will most likely adjust to whatever they buy.
    Last edited by TandemGeek; 11-06-05 at 07:49 AM.

  5. #55
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    154
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Have you had any further thoughts on the Co-Motion after using it for more than the initial 50 miles?
    JayB

  6. #56
    WATERFORD22
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Seattle
    My Bikes
    Bilenky, Co-Motion, 1969 Paramount, Waterford Adventure Cycle, Waterford rs 22, 1980 Davidson etc.
    Posts
    509
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Jay, not yet I am still getting it set up like I want it. I ordered it with the road set up and it it came with cow horns which in my opinion retrospectively were to narrow and then they sent me the arai drum kit which came with a 9 speed durace shift lever and it made know sense to me. I had requested thumb levers, but I didn't read the fine print that Co Motions kits only come with bar ends. I then tried the cow horns with levers that people use on single speeds - I finally gave up and went with 44 road bars in the back. I had Mel send me a long wire kit for a Sigma-long enough but the distance between the magnet and the pickup was still to big to register so it was back to the drawing board for shim to get the two closer. The arai kit had issues with the cable hole which was to tight for the quick release bolt Co-motion sent me - I then had to ream it out to fit and retrue the wheel. It's a good thing I like to fiddle with bikes - I changed seats and added a tubus rear rack. It is almost there - but I need some sunny weather - 14 days of some rain here in Seattle. Oh I forgot I added some Race Face Turbine cranks which used to be std on the Mocha.

    The quality of the bike appear to be excellent - great welds and paint job - very nice components - excellent custimer service . I am excited to ride it and it's almost ready. I have another bike project if the weather doesn't break soon.

  7. #57
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TandemGeek
    ... and if you haven't figured it out yet, steering geometry and frame design are the most controversial subjects in the bicycle sciences.
    Yes, and this is very polite compared to similar discussions in the triathlon community about the effects of frame geometry (very steep) on running speed which follows the bike race!!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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