What is a Mixte?
#2
Forum Moderator
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 22,906
Likes: 10,333
From: Kalamazoo
Depends on who you ask. Sheldon said that a "true" mixte has the two top tubes running from the head tube, past the seat tube, and run all the way to the drop outs.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_m.html#mixte
That Schwinn is often called a "Faux Mixte". Doesn't make it a bad bike, just a different interpretation of the Mixte style.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_m.html#mixte
That Schwinn is often called a "Faux Mixte". Doesn't make it a bad bike, just a different interpretation of the Mixte style.
#3
Senior Member


Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 12,564
Likes: 2,739
From: Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada - burrrrr!
Bikes: 1958 Rabeneick 120D, 1968 Legnano Gran Premio, 196? Torpado Professional, 2000 Marinoni Piuma
This is an opinion and in my mind the Mixte must have the double top tube to be called a Mixte. Anything else isn't.
#4
A quick hunt through old threads will show that the general concensus defines the mixte by having the third set of rear stays as both the above examples do. In addition to the two stated styles motobecane using a splitting top tube that in mid span went from a single large diameter tube two two smaller stay before adjoining the seattube.
I won't even try to explain the trevor flying gate.
I won't even try to explain the trevor flying gate.
#5
Depends on who you ask. Sheldon said that a "true" mixte has the two top tubes running from the head tube, past the seat tube, and run all the way to the drop outs.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_m.html#mixte
That Schwinn is often called a "Faux Mixte". Doesn't make it a bad bike, just a different interpretation of the Mixte style.
https://www.sheldonbrown.com/gloss_m.html#mixte
That Schwinn is often called a "Faux Mixte". Doesn't make it a bad bike, just a different interpretation of the Mixte style.
#6
Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 17,196
Likes: 761
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Always a popular discussion.
Do you really need to know? This will just come down again to argument over opinions.
#7
Light Makes Right
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,520
Likes: 0
From: Green Mountain, Colorado
Bikes: Gianni Motta Criterium, Dean Hardtail
I was just thinking back to the discussion a couple months back about compact geometry. People kept crowing about "smaller triangles" being orders of magnitude stiffer. So here's my question. When you have roadies constantly in search of ultimate stiffness and carbon construction bringing the weight of a bike down well under UCI regs - why are modern race bikes not all mixtes? Not only are the triangles WAY smaller than even a compact frame, there's an extra one......
#8
Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 17,196
Likes: 761
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
I was just thinking back to the discussion a couple months back about compact geometry. People kept crowing about "smaller triangles" being orders of magnitude stiffer. So here's my question. When you have roadies constantly in search of ultimate stiffness and carbon construction bringing the weight of a bike down well under UCI regs - why are modern race bikes not all mixtes? Not only are the triangles WAY smaller than even a compact frame, there's an extra one......
#10
Because standard mixtes, with the twin tubes are not stiffer, and really are not even as stiff as a diamond frame. The top tube on a diamond frame, together wth teh down tube, resists the bb twisting with pedal force. The stiffness is proportional to the fourth power of diameter. Each twin tube is about half the diameter of a top tube and hence 1/16 the stiffness. Two of them are 1/8 the stiffness. But you still don't get even that reduced contribution to stiffness because the twin tubes are not TIGged or lugged to the seat post, they're just located with some little links. The "modern" mixte like the Schwinn that was shown has a standard diameter tube attached to the seat tube with either TIG or lugs. That gives you back the stiffness relative to the diamond. And, that dropped down tube gives the front "triangle" a shape that is very similar to MBs and compact road frames. So teh "modern" mixte should be about as good as a compact frame, but the true mixte should not.
It doesn’t take into account that Mixte frames are not only braced between the top tubes, but also braced to the seat tube, but most importantly the top tubes go all the way to the drop outs, where they are tied together by the rear axle.
But to try and infer that Mixte frames are significantly weaker and inherently overly flexible is in my opinion a fallacy. My own riding experience tells me that the Mixte frame I’m riding is no more, or less flexible than the dozens of diamond frames I’ve ridden in my life. Actually the stiffest frame I’ve ridden in some time was a U-frame aluminum bike, with oblong tubing. There was no discernable flex in that frame at all. I wonder why all the new super bikes haven’t adopted that style frame?
#11
Ride heavy metal.
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 2
From: Teenage Wasteland, USA
Bikes: '74 Raleigh LTD-3, '76 Motobecane Grand Jubile, '83 Fuji TSIII (customized commuter), '10 Mercier Kilo WT (fixed obsession), '83 Bianchi Alloro, '92 Bridgestone MB-1 (project), '83 Specialized Expedition (project), '79 Peugeot UO-8 (sold)
#12
I was just thinking back to the discussion a couple months back about compact geometry. People kept crowing about "smaller triangles" being orders of magnitude stiffer. So here's my question. When you have roadies constantly in search of ultimate stiffness and carbon construction bringing the weight of a bike down well under UCI regs - why are modern race bikes not all mixtes? Not only are the triangles WAY smaller than even a compact frame, there's an extra one......
The extra triangle only provides more stiffness to the seat tube, which is irrelevant. And the two-continuous-tubes is really an advantage specific to steel, so moving carbon frame shapes nearer to mixte geometry is really just moving the top tube/seat tube/seat stay junction lower, which some frame builders both advocate and do.
Is there a reason not to go all the way down to a straight mixte-like line, and if so is that reason technical or regulatory? Beats me.
#14
Bianchi Goddess


Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 28,888
Likes: 4,133
From: Shady Pines Retirement Fort Wayne, In
Bikes: Too many to list here check my signature.
IMHO a Mixtie should have the twin "toptubes" that become stays
PDXaero just what is that?
PDXaero just what is that?
__________________
“One morning you wake up, the girl is gone, the bikes are gone, all that's left behind is a pair of old tires and a tube of tubular glue, all squeezed out"
Sugar "Kane" Kowalczyk
“One morning you wake up, the girl is gone, the bikes are gone, all that's left behind is a pair of old tires and a tube of tubular glue, all squeezed out"
Sugar "Kane" Kowalczyk
#15
Senior Member


Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,944
Likes: 853
From: Wilmette, IL
Baines Flying Gate
https://sports.webshots.com/photo/208...55521085SDqfvf
https://sports.webshots.com/photo/208...55521085SDqfvf
#16
If you are looking for "sexy bikes" to resell, than regardless of definition the ones with twin lateral stays have the most caché at the moment.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rgvg
Classic & Vintage
5
10-16-18 09:11 AM
macman58
Classic & Vintage
19
05-08-10 07:54 PM










