View Single Post
Old 02-08-23, 06:09 AM
  #24  
SJX426 
Senior Member
 
SJX426's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 9,579

Bikes: '65 Frejus TDF, '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '89 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8

Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1609 Post(s)
Liked 2,216 Times in 1,103 Posts
On the other hand, how many chains are linked together to span from the front chain rings to the back?

My stoker doesn't give me FD info either. I have learned to look when it is questionable.

I think it would not be hard to swap the cranks, depending on compatibility between the spindles.in terms of length.
@bulgie - Please comment on the "down tube" that spans the head tube to the rear DO. It looks to me like it would provide significant stiffness compared to not having one or even like the Peugeot where it terminates at the rear BB. I have a Burley Duet which is the same design as the one shown above.
1994 Burley Duet in the raw on Flickr
P1010345 on Flickr
P1010350 on Flickr
P1010016 on Flickr

The boom tube is quite large being open at the rear allowing for cables to exit to the Atom and RD.
P1010048 on Flickr

Burleys design look very cost effective but how good is it compared to other designs? Interesting mix of tig and brazing on the frame. The one thing I don't like is the rear BB design which is nearly unserviceable without special tools. The upside is that it shouldn't need servicing very often.
P1010047 on Flickr

The tubes at the front BB do not have openings, allowing for water collection.
P1010046 by Patrick Boulden, on Flickr
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.

Last edited by SJX426; 02-08-23 at 06:16 AM.
SJX426 is offline