typevii

Small world.
I too am in Vancouver and bought my KHS 747 last year. Mine also came with DA17 rims.
I have changed a few parts on mine to bring down the weight and set it up for myself. Narrower bars and a shorter stem, lighter wheels, different fork and a few other changes. Never going to be a featherweight with that massive frame and cranks but it is now just over 9Kg.
The long cranks are great, I find it hard now to ride the 'tiny' normal cranks on my other bikes.
Overall I think the KHS 747 is great deal. I bought mine unseen and untried but I was pretty sure it would fit and I really wanted to try longer cranks. It just makes so much more sense.

bigfred 

Welcome to the board. Good to have more proportional crank users around here.

typevii

Here we are, a couple of pictures of my 747, in case anyone is interested. You can see from the pictures some of the changes I have made. The Enve steerer is uncut and 350mm.

H.S.Clydesdale

Thread is a bit old, but this thread comes up in a google search for the 747. I know because I read it several times in deciding if I should get one. I did finally pull the trigger and would like to confirm that the bike is amazing. Here is a pic of mine (nothing surprising, looks like all the others, except for my Selle Anatomica saddle)


FYI, I am 6'7", but all torso. My inseem and arm lenth are more comenserate with someone about 6'5", 37" biking inseem (36" for pants), and I think my wingspan is about 6'6".

First Impressions:
- Saddle: The stock saddle was worthless to me. I think it is the standard KHS saddle fitted to all their bikes, and therefore in no way large enough for a clyde. My sitbone separation is 143mm, (I think) and were not supported by the stock saddle. Not much of a problem since I was planning to use the broken in Selle Anatomica anyhow.
-/+ Weight: The Selle is a bit heavier than the stock saddle, but with it on, the bike weighs 25 pounds. That is still 10 pounds less than my previous bike, and as other reviewers have noted, there seems to be plenty of room for weight savings in other bits. The stock seatpost is heavier than expected, same for the stem and wheels. Though the wheels are not heaver per se, I just know they can be lightened substantially if one is willing to pay a lot.
+ Cranks: I was already familiar with 200mm cranks having put a pair on my previous bike (IRD super long cranks). The crankset on this bike is phenomenal, I'll leave it at that.
+ Shimano 105: I am coming from an internal gear, so this is taking some getting used to, but surprisingly sharp and smooth. I am not a huge fan of the compact crankset.
- Wheels: Mine came with the DA-17 rims as well. They seem fine. The hubs are the real letdown in the wheel department, defenetly the first on the list of upgrades. There not bad, but I dont think they will age well and have seen much better.
? Tires: I have no idea. I have read some bad reviews of these Kendas, but at least at the outset, they seem fine. I was skeptical, my previous bike had 32c @ 100 psi, so I thought 26c @ 125 psi would ride harshly. On the contrary, I think the ride is smoother on the KHS. This is probably due to a number of factors, but suffice it say, I am currently very happy with the tires.
+++ Geometry: This is the point. My previous bikes were all old, from the 80s, because you can find older frames in the 66cm range. But, in becoming the full fledged bike geek, I started reading about geometry, and realized that the frames I had been riding were crazy. They had 71 degree seat angles, and 75 degree head tubes. This was done simply to keep the wheelbase as close to 1000mm as possible. (1060mm in most cases). The KHS 747 is the only size 64+cm, non custom bike I know of that has a 72 degree headtube angle --the standard angle on most standard size road bikes. In any case, I was shocked what a difference this made. In the first few minutes on the bike, I immidietly got off and inspected the headset. I thought it was too tight because the steering was so stable (more effort was required to turn the wheel). Having comfirmed the headset was fine, this is a major shock to me that this is how a bike is supposed to steer. Much like when I first tried 200mm cranks, I now have to relearn how to ride a bike. I have learn how to take corners with stable steering.
+ Handelbars: 46cm. Its very comfortable. Previously was on 44cm and thought that was fine. 46cm is better.
+ Brakes : The tektros are good.
+/- seatpost: As I said, it is heavier than I expected. But, it is also plenty long enough for me. I'll bet a lot of guys who get this bike have the post set too high. I found, when I added the 200mm cranks to my old bike, I had to lower the seat a lot, more than just the additional 25mm of reach at the bottom of the crank. The longer cranks allow you to sort of crawl into the bike, rather than sit on top. Either that, or I had my saddle too high with the 175mm cranks. In any case, the seatpost is fine for length, I am 1 cm above the min. insertion mark, and considering lowering it more. Another strange thing about the geometry/seatpost/cranks combination is that I have a big 3-4" saddle to handelbar drop, and it feels great. On previous bikes, 2" drop was about as much as I could take, on this, I dont know why, its just VERY comfortable. As has been said by others, its pretty clear I have never had a bike that actually fit before.
+ Speed: It is faster (than my old clunker anyhow). I got to work 2mph faster than any other previous commute, 13mph to 15mph, (mostly uphill). And that is on the first day with a lot of time spent figureing out how to shift an STI shifter. Once I get acostomed to this thing, I'd expect another 1mph or so.

Enough first impressions, now a few bits of info I could not find on the interwebs, but would like put into the record:
1) I do think 28c tires will fit. The 26c tires seem to have plenty of clearence. Though, I wont know for sure until I fit a pair. The main problem will be tire height, not width, as the brakes are 1.0cm or less from the top of the tire.
2) The wheelbase is 1080mm.
3) I bought mine directly from Zinn at bigandtallbike.com. They tend to have them in stock, whereas the LBS KHS dealer would have had to order it. Point is, I think you can get them quicker if you order directly from Zinn.

Long story short. If your tall, considering this bike, and you can afford it, I think you should get it. For no other reason than to see what proper geometry feels like. I was also considering large gunnars or the soma es. Ignoring the fact that the bottom brackets on those are really too low for 200mm cranks, they still have the steep headtube/slack seatubes, (though not to the same extent as the old frames from the 80s).

Thats probably enough droning on for now. Hopefully this information will help someone else out there considering the bike.

typevii

So just for the record, as tire sizes looks to be a common question:-
28mm tires do fit.
I have 28mm Continental Grand Prix 4 Seasons on my DA17 wheels and they fit just fine.

kingsqueak

Thanks to all for the info on this thread, very helpful. 6'5" with a 37 bike inseam here, more leg than reach, but this bike looks like it might fit well should i decide to add a roadie to the collection vs doing custom build.

jim8288

So I have a question that pertains to this thread. What if you just bought a 26" mtb frame, like say the Surly 1x1, and slapped some 700c wheels and some IRD super long cranks on it? I'm looking at their geometries and the xl 1x1 and the khs 747 are strikingly similar, except for a shallow head tube angle on the 1x1, but that's only 1 degree off. People are putting tires as big as 700x50 on the 1x1. I guess the main draw back would be that your bike would look pretty kludge, and you would probably need massive amounts of steerer tube sticking out the top, but that's a small price to pay in my opinion.

The reason I ask is that I commute 50-70 miles a week, and want to upgrade my 80 dollar Schwinn world sport. However, I do find myself on gravel/dirt and even single track sometimes, and 28mm tires with no fenders just isn't going to work. Also, once the snow hits I outfit my mtb for commuting and I'd kinda like to get away from that. Is it worth the hassle of larger cranks for this kind of use?

kingsqueak

I sort of did that with my Ogre XXL build. The issue became bars too low so I run a steerer extender on top of the uncut steerer now. By the time I had the seat up, the bars were 4" below the saddle height.

jim8288

Ya, in my limited experience there isn't too much you can do about getting getting your handle bars up high enough without it looking a little goofy. What about the cranks on the ogre though? The reason I wanted to do the 26" was for the higher bottom bracket with the larger diameter wheels. Did you have 200mm cranks on the ogre? Was pedal strike an issue at all?

bigfred 

I don't know enough about the 1X1 to know whether 700c wheels are going to fit well. But, even with its raised bottom bracket, I suspect the major issue will be head tube/steering tube length and lack of stack height. Chances are that if you warrant extra long cranks, you'll also warrant at least 620mm of stack height. Probably more.

jim8288

Well yes, I am just shy of 6'5", although I don't know exactly what my stack should but with longer cranks my stack height should be smaller, so an XL frame should theoretically fit better (i.e. less steering tube needed than if I were fitted to this frame stock). Second, if I'm calculating the stack correctly it's about 590 on a 1x1 at the top of the head tube, that means your 620 number is only 30mm away. What I really wanted to point out was that things like frame angles, bb drop, chain stay length, and top tube length are actually really similar between these two bikes. My main reason for looking into this is that I'm poor and am looking for something pretty easy to get a hold of cheaply; 26" mtb frame with oodles of clearance, 100 bucks for some cranks, and then scrounging up the other spare parts won't be all too difficult. Are there other bikes with a really high BB's that I should be looking at?

bigfred 

If you haven't already, check out my proportional crank ghetto build thread. With an exceptionally affordable frame, a lot of used parts, auction hunting and careful internet shopping that project ended up totalling approx. $1,500usd. I could have squeezed it a little lower. But, not tons. For that sum you're very close to the purchase of a new 747. If you're looking at starting with a new frame (the 1X1) I suspect the total would creep quite a bit higher.

I looked at the IRD cranks, after the fact. Keep in mind they don't include rings or a bottom bracket. Unless you have spares lying around.

If you're interested in the proportional crank idea but are uncertain about it. I first recommend that you take the route of taping an appropriate sized styrofoam block to the bottom of your pedal or shoe to evaluate if you could test ride the long cranks on your existing frame. If you're not an aggressive cornerer, chances are reasonable that you could. If you knock the foam blocks off and are rightlfully concerned about grounding out on corners then, you'll need a frame. In my case I didn't want to pop for a custom frame and waited years before chancing upon the frame I know have.

If you're looking for a frame for use with 700c wheels, rather than attempting to adapt an mtb, I would looke at European style cyclocross frames. The euro style frames tend to have a higher BB bracket and steeper geometries than their American counterparts. I have been considering this exact route as a path toward a road going, disc braked, bike. Ridley would be my first consideration, because not only do they tend toward the european geometry, but, they also happen to make reasonably tall frames and they can usually be gotten as a frameset.

jim8288

Thanks for the info! That thread you made is great, 1500 is altogether out of my budget though. I'm unfortunately more in the 500-700 range, if I'm going to build up a new bike. Unfortunately you don't have many options with new components at that price range. I'll probably just buy the IRD cranks and throw them on my bike as is and try not to pedal through very many corners. If I like it, than I can worry about frames and builds. Thanks again!

H.S.Clydesdale

yup, thats what I did with the IRD cranks prior to getting the 747, because I was also not rich.



It worked well enough. I taught myself not to pedal through corners and I think I only had 2-3 pedal strikes, all at very low speed. It helps to have the clipless pedals. I am glad I did this, because it was fun to go to the 747 having already trained my legs to use to longer cranks. It is an entirely different muscle set. The first time I went out on 200mm cranks I almost puked. My heart was in decent shape, but the muscles used had never been asked to do so much, and I overexerted them without knowing it.

If its any consolation, I was also under budget pressure and built the bike you see in this post. It ended up costing something like 700. I didn't keep track of spending, but was constantly adding this or that to keep the thing together and comfortable. In the end, it is NOTHING like the 747. It is slow, heavy, unreliable, uncomfortable and noisy. (of course, before I got the 747 I would have described it otherwise). I think its best, rather than to put effort into a build, to put the effort into finding/making the extra money it would take to get the 747.

brons2

I didn't pay that much for the 2 used customs that I bought from other tall guys. I'm 6'7" and have a 38" inseam. With the pics that other people posted, I frankly don't think the KHS747 is big enough for me. Sure, I could probably get the post out far enough, but I am not at all about having my handlebars that far below my saddle. Not to mention that the 200mm cranks sound like sore knees to me. I would take them off and put some 180s on if I owned one.

bigfred 

Do you know the TT and stack measurements of your current frames? That would determine pretty quickly whether a 747 might fit you or not. You'll notice that in both the photos on this page the pictured 747's actually have their stems angled down. That's reasonably rare for guys our size and speaks volumes about the stack height on the frame and how much more room there would be to adjust the bars upwards.

I continue to be amazed by people like yourself who continue to poopoo an idea that might benefit them as being unadvantageous without actually first trying it. Through all the reading I did before heading down the proportional crank route the vast majority of riders reported positive outcomes. There was one neutral and one negative report that I can recall. All the others fell in the like to really like to love 'em categories.

But, oh well. You're already convinced that neither the frame nor the cranks it was designed for will fit or work for you. So further comment is most likely pointless.

kingsqueak

I went with 180's on the ogre. I can't compare to anything due to lack of experience. Pedal strike hasn't been an issue but my riding conditions are casual. With the steerer extended the handling is a bit twitchier though and I'm still sorting out the bars and positioning. I just ordered some larger Nitto bars to try. Getting closer to settled but it has been annoying going through parts in the process.

H.S.Clydesdale

I was concerned about bar height as well, and can confirm that it is not an issue. I think I could have the bars even lower if anything. I think you have to trust Zinn on this one. He is a tall guy who has spent years thinking about the best bar height.

38" inseem is pushing it though. The bike is only advertised to go up to 6'6". It might be a bit small, but thats still closer to your optimum fit than you'll find on any other off the shelf bike.

Dont worry about the 200mm cranks hurting the knees either, unless you have knee problems already. Zinn calculates 210 cranks for me (37' inseam), so yours would be even longer. After getting used to the 200mm cranks, I can see how another 10mm might be nice. Considering that, the 200mm cranks are then going to be shorter, high cadence spinner cranks for you as it is. It is very unlikely they will be too large.

H.S.Clydesdale

Review update:

Tires - Kenda Kontenders. They are a joke. After 119 miles, the rear tire looks like this:



I have been keeping them right at 120psi, 5psi below the max. And other review sites have complained of bulges on these tires.

frustrating...

kingsqueak

Wow in 114 miles...crazy.

I put Schwalbe Mondials on my Ogre (not good for your bike) and at around 100 miles they could be sold as new heh. Some Schwalbe Marathons or similar roadie tires would last you forever.

H.S.Clydesdale

I am going to get some Vittoria Rubinos from my LBS today. Its just frustrating because this is essentially now an $1800 bike given that you have to immediately turn around buy new tires. These are basically "display only" tires not intended for actual use. I sent a note about this to Zinncycles, where I bought it, but not sure how this will be handled. Tires are not included on the warrantee, but seriously, 100 miles? That is pathetic and does not fit under the umbrella of normal wear, but rather, defective product.

brons2

I agree with you. However, if their remedy were to be sending you another pair of the same tires, I'd polietely decline.

brons2

Well.

Stack heights? I'm a retro grouch. Most of my bikes have threaded stems. Only my Paul Taylor has threadless, and that bike stretches me out pretty far anyway, so I don't need any spacers or much of a stem. It has a 66cm seat tube and 66cm top tube. Not sure what the head tube is.

200mm cranks? Lately I have been riding 175 cranks because the 180s had been making my knees sore. Yes, I feel more efficient with the 180s but for whatever reason I'm getting more knee pain with them. I probably need to go back and control for q-factor, that might one one difference I am not taking into account. But to say that I would like 200s when I've already moved down from 180s, seems contrary to logic for me, speaking only of my own needs. I'm sure that when I was in my early 30s doing double centuries every other weekend that I would have appreciated much longer cranks. At 42, almost 43, I don't love the 180s anymore and I think I wouldn't love the 200s either.

Riding 175s does have one big distinct advantage anyway, you can find them anywhere, and for cheap! The TA Carmina crankset with 180 crank arms on my Riv cost over $500 if you include the cost of the TA bottom bracket. Whereas with 175s there are tons of cost-effective choices in cranksets.

I guess the other thing is that, I am not in the market to buy one of these KHS747 bikes anyway, or any other bike for that matter. I picked up my tandem recently and that's going to be it for a long time. I am glad KHS is doing this though, I think it's great for tall guys that need a bigger bike. I don't see the harm in speculating on whether it fits me or not. I guess with a stem that had a high degree of rise it would be to my preferences.

If I do happen to see a KHS 747 somewhere, I will stop and ask for a test ride. There is a KHS dealer about 4 miles from my house. I will ask them if they have any plans of carrying one in their store stock.

Anyway...carry on....glad you guys like your 747's, I love my bikes too.

bigfred 

Brons2,

Please don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you or anyone else "need" 200mm arms. I am suggesting that extremely tall riders, for whom they might work, not perpetuate the possibly false notion that they're unneccessary, harmful or won't work without having had any first had experience.

I too am 43 and have had my share of knee issues over the years. Crank length is far from the only thing that can cause knee issues. Saddle height, setback, cleat position, hip and saddle alignment can all contribute, as well as the Q-factore you mention and gear selection. If you're riding 2nd hand custom frames that were designed for another you may very well find that one or more of those issues could be addressed to rectify your knee soreness.

You don't have to have a threadless headset to have a stack dimension. All bikes can be measured in the X,Y plane. Or, the headtube measures would suffice. But, I believe you understood the point. The 747 has approximately 250mm of headtube. That gives you almost full use of a 350mm steering tube.

Anyhow. You've already labelled yourself an early Retrogrouch and your bicycle selection would suggest that you're correct in this regard. I would still love to see some photos of what sounds like a pretty cool collection.

donalson

I know this is a slightly older thread... but after some reading the other day trying to figure a solution to my low speed "death wobble" (if I take my hands off I get the wobble... haven't had it high speed yet so don't know there yet)... anyway I came across some interesting reading with Zinn talking about some of the reasons and how it is yet another thing proportional cranks can "fix"... in short because of the angle of seatube on "racing bikes" and short chainstays when you get into the long of leg (i'm about a 36.5" cycling inseam) it puts much of the weight very close to the rear axle... in short zinn was saying that along with lowering the saddle that the longer crank arms will make the saddle have less set-back... this would also allow for a longer ETT as you'd need to move the entire cockpit forward a bit... interesting stuff...

anyway... long store short... all this had me re-looking at the 747, ETT is a bit long for me using standard cranks but spot on for what the zinn fit calculator recommends for me (imagine that?)

also I found out that the flight 747 now comes in two sizes... 64cm and 66cm... the 66cm also comes with 28c tires now.
https://khsbicycles.com/bikes/2014-kh.../flite-747-14/