sch

6 months of experience: We decided to order one in May, and after 4-5weeks of
back and forth questions the final frame size was set in mid June and checks
written. This is a double male team weighing about 375-380 with bike and water
bottles etc. The pilot ran into a biking GF the previous year, and when things
seemed to be going well he bought a Burley for cerca $1700. GF departed a few
months later and I volunteered to stoke and we put 1700 miles on the Burley over
the next 6 months. Burley runs about 45#. Tandemania ensued hence the
Macchiato. Co-Motion indicated they were cutting metal early in August and the
bike was shipped ~ 8/20 with first ride on 8/23/07. As I commented in Sept. it
is a very noticeable difference from the Burley in acceleration and hill climbing
especially. Macchiato weight is about 29#. FSA has been slow to put their
Carbon SLK megaexo tandem kits together so it was shipped with Gossamers.
I would think the SLK would be lighter but Tandemgeek suggests they are not.
The SLK tandems are apparently now available so we expect to get the promised
replacements 'soon'. Neither of us is enamored of the switch in triples from
52(54 on ours)-42-30 that has been standard to the 53-39-30 on 10spd triples
now standard to save the manufacturers the cost of extra tooling for triple cranks.
This leads to some shifting problems unappreciated initially.

The weight was a bit of a surprise, and I suspect 24# would require an extra $2-3k
in carbon/Ti bits to achieve. We specified a rear disk, which adds 9-12oz over a
caliper as previous experience showed alarming heating in the rear rim after heavy
braking down the hill approaching my house on the Burley. The factory weight is
sans pedals and bottle cages. The weight of 29# includes pedals and cages.
The only carbon on ours is the front fork (Alpha Q) and the seat posts. They shipped
a drop bar for the stoker when we wanted a cowhorn, but this was swapped out in
assembly. I like the flattened segments on the stoker bar, much nicer than the
round bar on the Burley and sized for my shoulders as well. I sometimes wish the angle
of the flat were a bit steeper and the stoker extension a bit longer but overall the
stoker compartment is nicer than the Burley, which is really short (2" shorter than the M).
We supplied our own saddles.

The wheels are Rolf, and we are definitely at the high end in weight (at 375#) for the Rolf wheels,
but they have held up ok thus far. We are upto 1600mi over the past 6mo, not bad
considering I work rotating shifts 7 days/week though only 15-17d/mo but typically 2.5
out of 4 weekends/mo are working so coordinating ride schedules can be a challenge.

The tires were Michelin Pro 2 and are marvelous. They are nominal 25mm but actual width
is 27.5mm so the front wheel has to be thumped to mount/dismount throught the calipers.
Don't plan to get 28mm tires if you have caliper brakes. There is also only about 6mm
between the stoker seat tube and the tire tread with these. Unless you negotiate with
Co-Mo, forget fenders. The rear triangle is a bit odd too so mounting a rack on the rear
will take some extra hardware to clear a flange above the mounting holes.
The Michelins grip the road very well and the pilot has become greatly enamored of them
and switched his Scott to the same in 23mm (which measure 23mm).

Pilot impressions: the M is twitchier than the Burley, less weight up front, and the bike
tends to under steer if I recall his description correctly. It is more stable in a tight turn,
and handles much closer to his Scott CR1 than the Burley, which had to be muscled a
bit by comparison. The twitchiness is most apparent when the pilot rides no handed for
some reason and wobbles more. Stoker is very careful not to move when pilot goes
no hands. Standing for hills results in a noticeable jump that the Burley did not have.
The Macchiato has a bit of up and down flex on bumps in the pilot compartment that
the Burley did not have. The stoker does not notice this at all and feels the bike to be
quite solid. Pilot weighs in the 190-200 range depending on season and is essentially
in the middle of the frame. Pilot does not feel this detracts from the M. Neither of us
has noted any side to side flex or flex under high torque, the M is stiff enough in normal
riding. We do not notice the absence of the lateral.

The brakes work very well. Front caliper is DA, disk is CoMo standard BB7 with 203mm disk.
We have not noticed any disk warpage. Pilot is satisfied with brake feel.

The water bottle on the rear of the pilot seat tube is a bit of a reach for the stoker, but no
worse than the rear WB on the lateral on the Burley. I put a tall WB in that cage, as I could
barely reach a short one. Distaff stokers might be unable to reach the WB.

The large chain stay and 'vintage' triple (54-42-30) on a 10spd means the FD is a bit of a
problem. There is a lower limit that is unusual, as it was set up the bottom of the FD cage
actually scraped the mylar chain protection tape off the chain stay, so we raised it 1-2mm.
The chain is tossed off the 54t sprocket periodically in upshifts and fiddling hasn't changed
this. About one in 4 or 5 upshifts results in chain fall off and the stoker has become adept
at reaching down to put the chain back on. I no longer wear my blue shorts on the tandem,
black shorts only. We became accustomed to a 12-25 on the Burley and use a SRAM 11-26
10spd cassette on the Macchiatto, as we really like the close ratios, and the 54-11 means
we can spin out at 42mph on gentle hills, though aerobic considerations dictate speeds in
the 35-37mph range more usually. We have been told 10spd FD are optimized for 53-39-30
and will not work as well with 52(54)-42-30. CoMO, Jack Goertz and FSA have all had this
opinion. We would really like to have a 54-44-30 but apparently this will never be. Do not
think we are motors, at a combined age of 126, we are but shadows of our former selves
and the muscle recovery is slow after effort. We can bounce around a 5 hr century, but
haven't gone below 5hrs yet. The racer wannabes drop us like rocks but are happy to sit
in at 24mph for as long as we will pull them or until the next long hill.

Interim opinion: we are quite pleased with the bike, but probably could have done just as
well with a highend Periscope, and gotten a bike that would adjust to a lot wider range of
riders for $3k less and 4-5# more weight. I suspect the pilot would not be as pleased with
such as it would not be as optimized for him. Pilot is ~76" stoker is 66". Other than the
occasional FD problems the bike has been trouble free, and NO NOISES. The Burley seemed
to delight in throwing out a new noise every few weeks to be tracked down and exorcised.
The Burley has a problem eccentric also. The M has a noticeable clunk in down shifting the cassette,
probably frame amplification of the shift noise when the chain seats. On 3-4 occasions when
shifting into the 30t ring, the chain would not seat on the CW but spin freely above it necessitating
a dismount and fiddling. It has never derailed to the inside ever (another Burley trick). This stopped
in October and has not recurred. One other note, the tubing is thin..... I may post a photo sometime.

Prior photos set: https://picasaweb.google.com/sch1943/Macchiato

TandemGeek

Nice write up.. thanks for taking the time to share the impressions.

Edit: I've rechecked with my source on the crank weights between the Gossamers and SL-K models: 1,818 grams for the Gossamer MegaExo and 1,904 grams for the SL-K MegaExo. Our daVinci cranks with FSA rings, Middleburn self-extractors, Phil Wood Ti / Proprietary Ti BB's & alloy cups are somewhere around 1,650 grams as best as I can recall. If you used standard chomoly BB's and stainless steel cups vs. the Ti models and alloy cups the daVinci's are then on par with the Gossamer cranks at around 1,800 grams. Middleburn's cranks which also use a splined interface for the timing rings vs. spiders and conventional rings are also very light, but not quite as light as the daVinci cranks.

Regarding FD shifting, our '98 Erickson uses 54/44/32t chain rings on 110 BCD daVinci cranks with a Campy Racing T triple FD and 108mm rear BB axle for a 46mm chain line. It shifts nicely but, yes, the chain will occasionally overshift the big ring more so than it did when we ran 113mm spindles with something closer to a 49mm chain line. It's also been set-up with 54/42/28 and 30 over the years with 113mm, 111mm, and 108mm rear spindles and all of those combinations worked just fine as well. No systemic chain problems. Our '02 Erickson had 113mm spindles with the same 110 BCD daVinci cranks and Racing T FD: no problems whatsoever. The new tandem is running the 130 BCD version of daVinci's cranks with FSA's 53/42/30t rings mated to a 111mm Phil Wood BB for a chainline of about 53mm given a little off-set, with shifting coming from an older model Campy Record triple FD. The shifting is as crisp as can be. I'm not sure I understand the issue that FSA and Jack are referring to unless it's germane to Shimano components and their somewhat chunky-shifting front derailleur configuration.

As for chasing those grams, I think y'all started off at a distinct disadvantage in that you're a fairly large team by the looks of your photos and, well, a larger frame means more material so the frame size added a few grams to their notional comparison weight model. Also, as you note, those components do add up fast... just as the costs associated with pursuing the lightweight ones can sometimes be... but not always. For example, the Alpha Q posts on your Co-Mo are probably about 120 grams heavier than a pair of Thomson Masterpiece posts which would cost about twice as much as the Alpha Q's. However, daVinci cranks as noted above when mated with the higher-end BBs cost about the same as the FSA SL-K. Of course, that makes the Gossamer's the price performer as they're almost 1/2 the cost of the hi-zoot stuff.

Therefore, relative to comparison weights, based on what you've described if you back out the pedals and water bottle cages (1# easy given the Looks up front) and the disc + slightly heavier seatposts (another 1#) you've got a 27#, Large-size tandem. Your saddles don't look to be the most svelte in the world -- neither is mine -- so there's probably another .25# of savings to be had there, which gives you a sub-27lb tandem. A custom-made, simple fixed chromoly stoker stem would also save another .25# easy and for not a lot of money. As already mentioned, daVinci's & high-end BBs cost about the same as what you'll pay for the SL-K's and, well, that's another .5 lbs. So, all-in-all, that's nothing to sneeze at if the bike is stiff enough and otherwise meets all of your other expectations.

Hermes

Excellent report and thank you for taking the time and sharing. A couple of questions...

Do you know the frame weight?

What is the size of the frame?

If it is custom, did the manufacturer modify the frame set for the team weight?

TandemGeek

Pending sch's reply, here's a link to a thread at Hobbes from a while back that may have some data you'd find of interest: https://search.bikelist.org/getmsg.as...10705.0184.eml

To the best of my knowledge, all of the Macchiatto's start off life as custom, built-to-order frames...

Hermes

Thanks for the info.

dvs cycles

You said you had trouble getting the front wheel through the front brake with 28's. I have the D/A front brake as well and have had no problems. You do need to open them up with the lever on the side though.

cornucopia72

We have 25's and they are very tight... 28's would not fit.

sch

Back home again, to follow up on the tires: the point was that the "25mm" Michelin Pro 2
actually measure 27.5mm wide, an unusual discrepancy. So a nominal 28 that actually
measured 28mm would fit with a thump on the tire to mount/dismount through the brake
pads spread wide, anything wider would have to be deflated, so 32 would not work with
calipers on the front, and likely skim the FD clamp on the stoker seat tube in the rear.
Clearance with the Pro 2 25 is about 5/32" between the tread and clamp.
Size of the frame is roughly 23.5/19. We have no idea as to frame weight, it came partly
assembled and it will be a long time before we strip it down.
The retrospectoscope suggests that for several reasons we are at the top end
of team weight for the bike and tires, but have not noticed a problem with this
so far. It is definitely a performance ride.

zzzwillzzz

the michelin 25s are larger than the continentals and avocet 28s i have, although i haven't measured other than by looking

dvs cycles

Measured my tires. GP-4000x 25 on my tandem measure 26mm.
23's on my single with Ksyriums are 23mm.
The tandem wheels are 5mm wider so I imagine that would make the tire profile wider?
So if I had my 28's still on the tandem they would be wider than 28mm also.
Even with the 28's I never had any problem with wheel removal. I don't keep my brake so tight as some might.
I prefer it to modulate some before full braking.

merlinextraligh

I'm getting the impression the Macchiato really is a speciality item that's not necessarily best suited for everybody.

I learned a couple of interesting things talking to Co-Motion.

One, there are team weights and sizes they won't build it for. Thus if you're pushing the upper end of their recommended weight range, and particualry if it will be a larger frame, depending on your intended use, Co-Motion may decline the order.

Two, at a team weight of 350, and in a 22/19 size, they steered us away from the Macchiato, and to a Robusta. This might have in part been influenced by the fact that I said I wanted the bike to be torsionally stiff, and that we planned to race it.

Three, a number of people within Co-Motion have chosen the Robusta over the Macchiato.

I'm sure the Macchiato is a great bike. However, I think a number of teams, particularly larger riders, may be happier with a Robusta. (at least I tell myself that when I regret not getting a 24 lb. tandem.)

TandemGeek

Exactly...

Even with a lighter team the Macchiatto that we and others rode with last fall visibly exhibited some torsional frame deflection that you just don't see on most newer tandems that use a lateral tube.... and this was not a large frame. On the bright side, the team was incredibly strong (A Team, perhaps Elite & Sandbagging) and it didn't appear to diminish their performance or enjoyment of the tandem one iota.

Our tandem with its couplers seems to have what feels like a little whippy-ness to it that has taken a bit of getting used to. I'd expected this to be the case so it's not really a surprise and, to be frank, it's still more laterally stiff than one of the other steel tandems we owned in the past with a 27.5" stoker compartment that weighed nearly 40lbs. We'll be riding our Erickson again for the first time since December this weekend just to get re-baselined on how different the two bikes handle. Mind you, our tandem uses a longer than normal (30") stoker compartment, which does make for a more challenging design. However, Debbie absolutely raves about the ride qualities that she's experiencing on the tandem and that WAS the target audience / desired outcome. Again, this weekend should bear out some of the differences since the two tandems -- our steel Erickson (31.5" stoker compartment) and the new tandem -- will be set up with the same wheels, same riding positions (thank you Fitstik) and ridden back-to-back over the same routes.

Eyes wide open folks: Try to do what you can to avoid getting tunnel vision on one aspect of a given tandem brand, model, design, or feature. Be candid about your size, weight, requirements, expectations and the like with builders and push for objective and qualified current owner feedback.

Enthusiasm and vanity will often times go a long way towards making something seem better than it really is... particularly when something cost a fortune and is assumed to be better: cars, boats, motorcycles, bicycles, etc. all fall into this trap. Some of the most coveted car brands have the worst reliability... and when it comes to the exotic, high performance models you can forget about comfort. They're built to go fast and take skill to drive. Again, keep your eyes wide open and understand what's essential and what's nice to have. Sometimes they're in conflict.

Just some thoughts.

ftsoft

I was initially disappointed in the 53/39/30 on our Speedster. We ran a 56/48/30 on our ancient tandem and I thought the gearing would be too low (we are not that strong either with a combined age of 126). However, I've gotten pretty comfy with the gearing after about 1000 miles and probably wouldn't change it at this point.

Frank

tandem_dude

Our Macchiato is due to ship from Co-Motion the beginning of March. I will add our thoughts as well after we get some miles on it. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the Robusta we had previously. Merlinextralight, unfortunately this will not really help you as we are a light team (~230 lbs).

merlinextraligh

If we were sub 300lbs, I would have definitely got the Macchiato.

alwaysbikn

Well.....my buddie and I did the Hemet Double Century last Saturday on my Machiatto...
Here is what we thought of it's ride:
Rides very smooth for a stiff aluminum bike.....smoother than the old Santana and C'dale tandems we have.
Handles like no other.....no single could keep up with us on the twisty decents.
And last but not least.....it climbs great....we did not get passed on any of the climbs....sorry to the 2 people we passed walking thier Trek Madone's up the 18% percent part on Sage road.....we realy weren't in the big ring like my stoker said.
We weren't the fastes bike out there but over all the bike rode and handled great....we were the only tandem though and only one single rider was able to stay with us for the entire 200 miles....Great job Daunte'....see you at the Grand Tour Triple....I will be on the Machiatto again.

barry.cohen

We are trying to figure out whether a Robusta or a Macchiato is right for us. With $8000 on the line and no practical way to test either (no one in Chicago has either of these in stock), any info I can get from owners of either of these will have to be the main basis for a decision. The lighter weight of the Macchiato is intriguing. However, I have heard of a few nits that concern me:
-torsional rigidity and frame flex
-tendency to understeer
-stoker heel interference with chainstay
-shifting issues
-stoker access to water bottles
These issues were raised by people who remain happy with the bike. Did you experience any of these potential problems? How did you deal with them? Any other comments/guidance is appreciated.
We are a fit, serious recreational tandem team, both in our 60s.

Barry

sch

Tried to answer yesterday but the work connex times out on 'longer' replies.
Some of this was answered in my first post. Our experience is that the frame
is quite rigid and we do not notice any flex. I can't say what a knowledgeable
observer might see, as Tandemgeek comments on flex he saw in another
team's M when riding behind them. The bike does give the pilot a bit of up-down
bounce at cadences in the 105-115 range which I suspect is a resonance
phenomenon that you can get on any bike, DF singleton, tandem, short and
long wheel base recumbents as some combo of cadence/speed. The stoker
is completely oblivious to this (huh?). It should be noted that this cadence is
above our LT, and rarely sustained for more than 20-30 seconds. Pilot did not
notice this on the steel Burley, but it didn't get into the 40+ mph range much.

WB: I can reach the rear WB easily on the M stoker seat tube. The stoker
forward WB on the bottom of the back side of the pilot seat tube is a stretch
but I can reach it without having to stop pedaling. I use the taller WB in this
location to facilitate reach. 20 oz WB would be out of reach. I suspect the
location of the mount at the bottom of the seat tube is arbitrary and that the
WB mount could be moved up 1-3" which would obviate the problem completely.
This should be discussed with Como ahead of time. I should note that the WBs
on the top of the lateral on the Burley were even worse for the stoker. I could
sort of get the forward WB and pedal, but the rear WB could only be reached
with a stretch at least as bad as the M and I had to stop pedaling to do so.

Heel strike with the 145mm rear wheel width and honking chain stays does occur.
I wear 46 shoes (because the fixed width of most shoes means my 44 size EE wide
needs a 46 to get the width), and use high float pedals so my heels move around
a lot. I like the Speedplay X float, but use high float Frogs occasionally. If your
shoes are 36-40 and pedals are low float heel strike will be much less likely. FWIW
I tap the chainstays about once every 15 miles and have learned to constrain my
wobbly foot in riding the M. First rides were much more frequent heel strikes, not
enough to mark the paint though.

Pilot really likes the handling, feels very comfortable on the bike and the OEM Michelin
Pro2 tires are a marvel. Pilot has a pair on both his singletons and just bought a pair of
Pro3, which we feel will be too narrow for the tandem. As noted it is a bit squirrelier
riding no hands than the Burley. I think this is likely a rotational momentum, light fork
consequence.
Steve

barry.cohen

Many thanks to all who posted here re the Macchiato/Robusta. I can't imagine how I could have otherwise gotten all the info you provided.
Made the move yesterday for a Macchiato. We're currently agonizing over color schemes and the late June delivery.

alwaysbikn

Nice choice!!! Trust me it is worth wait.
Also Co-Motion does some very nice paint jobs.....we went with white mica and silver gohst flames.....looks white until the light hits it just right then the flames realy stand out.....and you know what they say....flames always go faster!! We hit 60.1mph on a serious down hill yesterday acording to the Garmin.
Have fun with your new ride.

brewer45

Congrats on the decision!

I don't mean to rain on the parade, but be sure that you follow the production and delivery schedule carefully. We ordered a Co-Motion Speedster in February. The "ambitious" delivery date was March 15. This got pushed to April 1 as a "worst case scenario." From there it got pushed to April 9th as a "guaranteed ship date." The thing finally shipped on April 16th and arrived at the LBS on the 18th. With any sort of luck, we'll take delivery tomorrow or Tuesday.

We're thrilled to be so close to getting our new ride, but kinda disappointed in the quality/accuracy of communication from Co-Motion and our LBS concerning delivery dates.

Cheers!

tandem_dude

We would have loved to have had such a quick delivery. Because of some dancing around between the LBS and Co-Motion, the process started in November and the new Macchiato wasn't delivered until a little more than a week ago. We're still waiting for them to build it up as the bike was shipped with Shimano instead of Campy. At least both sides are helping make this right for us and our fingers crossed that all the parts come in and that it will be built before next weekend.

zonatandem

Congrats on the Macho Machiatto!