Grolby, woudn't "reluctance" to turn have more to do with the head tube angle than the BB drop? How do the head tube angles on your Ridley and other bikes you mention compare?

I think that chainstay length figures into that too, with a relatively longer one contributing toward stability.

yeah there are way too many variables at play here for me to attribute any handling differences solely to the bb height.

I do think a high BB affects tip in, making it harder to tip in. For a few years Cannondale offered certain mountain bikes in two radically different BB height configurations, I want to say 10" and 12" high, the latter to make riding logs/etc easier (late 80s so no suspension yet). I had a 12" high one or whatever was taller. I could tell immediately when I was on a taller BB version or a shorter one. The difference was pronounced/exaggerated for sure, but I wasn't keen on the tall BB.

I find a short stay helps in out of the saddle, doesn't seem noticeable anywhere else. This going from 40.5 to 39 cm on the same frame, and switching between frames with 40.5 and 39 cm which have otherwise identical specs (top tube, head tube, etc). For a couple years my orange bike had a 40.5 cm stay, I got the black one with 39, then sent back the orange to be adjusted to 39 cm. No difference in the saddle, massive difference when sprinting out of the saddle. Cornering no diff.

Front center seems less significant also. My very long bike handles fine in corners.

Wheelbase - my orange bike was 102 or 103 cm, and now my bikes are about 100.5 cm. Normally a bike my height would be 97ish. No big deal.

How is your wheelbase 102 or 103 when you have such a small bike and short stays? What kind of headtube angle do you have on that?

I was wondering that too. Mine are 58s except for the Look 585 which is a 61 but measures the same as my other bikes, and the wheelbases are right at 100.

Probably closer to 103 is with the long stays i.e. 40.5 cm, although I can't say definitively because the rear triangle was replaced in order to shorten the stays to "as short as possible". Currently both my bikes are 101.5 cm (I just went and measured both the black and red bikes), give or take a couple mm. One has 39.0 cm stays, the other 39.3 cm stays ("as short as possible").

73 deg HT angle, 43mm rake, so totally normal.

56.5 top tube jutting out of a seat tube that's at a 75.5 deg angle. Effective top tube height is about 48 cm, meaning for a 48 cm c-c frame (*edit I think that might be an exaggeration in that the frame is smaller... c-c is 40 cm, c-t is probably 44-46 cm). This means the top tube starts out forward and low, at least compared to, say, a 60 cm frame, because the vertical start point of the rear of the top tube is closer to the BB center. On a taller frame it would be pushed back a bit due to the much longer seat tube sloping away from the BB center, and usually at a slacker angle than 75.5.

I stripped another dang pinch bolt on my stages crank arm with my torque wrench. Does anyone know if titanium bolts are less soft? Would it somehow throw off my power numbers if I'm using them with a stages? I've gone through like 6 of these now and they're all soft as heck.

Careful CDR, you might find yourself doing too well again. Downgrading from a 2 for the second time is probably going to take more than a smile.

Ehhh, I wouldn't necessarily think so. I tend to think of head tube angle as having more to with how sensitive the front end is to input, but not necessarily with how readily the bike wants to lean into a turn. A steeper HTA can allow you to change lines quickly, but I tend to think the ability to get around a fast corner smoothly has more to do with rake and, potentially, BB drop. But I'm not certain about anything. For evidence though, the head angle on the Ridley is 72 degrees, vs 71.5 on the Ritchey. According to what you're saying, the Ridley should turn better. But it doesn't. Or, maybe it turns fine at low speed, but leaning through a corner with it just feels ugh compared to the Ritchey, which is a little more balanced - decent at low speeds, quite good at mediumish cyclocross speeds, not so great at high speed descending vs my road bike.

I'm comparing two bikes with equal chainstay length, and basically identical wheelbases. I'm a little skeptical about the influence of wheelbase on stability, but that's partly because I don't think "stability" is well-defined in discussions of bike geometry. The conventional wisdom is slower steering is better for high speed descending, so a slacker head tube angle should make for a better-descending bicycle. In my experience though, I prefer a road bike or other fast-steering bike downhill to a cyclocross bike, for example, even though it's technically less stable. If a lower BB does make a bike easier/faster to steer, and I think it does, it means that the bike is less stable. Yet it's commonly held that a low BB makes for a better descending bike. Why? "Stability." Huh.

There always are, but when you have two bicycles with broadly similar geometry, except one has a front-end that should promote faster steering yet is harder to lean into corners and the only other notable difference is BB height, well... that says something. I've ridden a lot of bikes. The Ridley is the only one with such a high BB, outside of mountain bikes, and it definitely feels unique.

Yes! This is what I'm getting at - the bike doesn't want to tip over as easily. It's relatively easy to dodge a pothole or a stick, for example, but hitting the apex of a corner with confidence is different.

One thread this discussion went down on Facebook was the idea that the differences in BB drop are small, therefore how could it really matter that much? I don't know, of course. But I do know that 3 mm difference in my saddle height is the difference in being able to ride thousands of miles with no problem or developing a knee problem within a few days. Seemingly small differences can be really important.

I am now talking myself out of the idea that descending gravel roads at high speed on the Ridley would be fine. Maybe I can get used to it, but it really is tricky to get it to lean, and the Ritchey is easier. My main concern is traction. I probably just need bigger tires.

What the means for a high BB crit bike, though, I'm not sure. Flat cornering in a crit vs descending a mountain aren't 100% the same.

Is titanium less soft than stainless steel? Definitely not.

2 teammies got the Treks with the iso speed coupler thingies. Both big beefy sprinters, experienced crit guys. Thumbs up all around.

I'm getting confused by the double negatives.
Ti is softer than stainless steel. And I think we are asking about stiffness/hardness, not strength.

modulus of elasticity relative values
ti alloy ~ 120
SS ~190
Carbon Fibre ~ 180

Anybody have experience with 1.25" and 2" hitch racks?

My wife's current car has a 1.25" hitch, and we have a Yakima Hold Up 2 rack. But, after a little over 7 years, it's showing its age. So, we should probably consider getting her a new rack.

The new car we are getting her can do a 1.25" or 2" tow hitch. I'm wondering if a 2" hitch is measurable more secure for the rack or does it not matter much.

doesn't matter for a bike rack. 2" hitches can accept 1.25" with a sleeve, though. Can't go the other way around so a 2" is a little more flexible.

Yes, I was saying Ti bolts are easier to strip than standard stainless steel, not harder.

The 1Up multiple bike racks (2-4 bikes) require a 2" hitch -- my buddy got a 2" receiver for that reason alone.

You can carry two bikes on a 1.25" 1up hitch, you buy the single bike version with the 1-bike add-on. Works great on my wife's vehicle which had dealer-installed 1.25" hitch. Class 1 hitch is plenty strong enough for carrying a couple bikes. I actually like this better than the 2-bike rack because it's less bulky when only carrying one bike.

Fair enough .. you can't expand that setup beyond 2 bikes though right?

I think that's correct, never really looked into it since two bikes is all I need to carry.

my bike is 'ticking'. this kind of **** drives me insane.

i sold my spare bike on friday and the very next day it started on my main bike when i was riding with ygduf. at first we thought it might be the seatpost, but by the end of the ride it was making noise out of the saddle as well. i took off the seatpost anyway and cleaned it, but no luck. it seems to 'tick' every pedal stroke when the left pedal is at the bottom of the stroke (or right is at the top, i guess). i've checked/tightened my cleats, checked to see if the crank was hitting the front derailleur, checked the headset (it still ticks if im riding without hands) and QRs. it doesnt seem to be power or cadence related (though high torque situations make it louder usually, but high power fast cadence sprinting down a hill and it made no noise at all).

really hoping its like a bearing in the BB or something, i really really really dont want it to be related to the pedals because i have vectors and removing them is out of the question unless im absolutely positive it cant be anything else. i spent a day painstaking calibrating them 1.5 years ago and havent had to touch them since, but i'll probably buy a new power meter (SRM or DZero) before dealing with that again.

Does the bike make the noise if you ride it with the seatpost removed? Sometimes they tick against the seat tube under power. I've seen that happen with an old steel bike before, anyway.

I had a similar issue with my bike earlier this year. Out of blue, got a ticking sound that got worse when standing. Went through everything and ultimately found the cause to be my front quick release. No clue why since I had it on the bike for quite a long time before that. Swapped in another one from a different set of wheels and all was quiet.

just went and tried without the seatpost (it was actually really difficult to ride without the seat! felt so unbalanced and almost died unclipping) - still ticks without the seatpost. i guess that rules it out.

just tried switching out both front and rear skewers with another brand - no luck

thank you for including you edit reason in the proper form.

my next suggestion is to ride with different wheels, or did you do that already?