2013 Kona Jake and Rove
08-17-12 | 04:09 PM
#27
Papaya King
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,640
Likes: 2
From: Columbus, Ohio (Grandview area)
Bikes: 2009 Felt X City D, 1985 (?) Trek 400, 1995 (?) Specialized Rockhopper, 1995 Trek 850
08-17-12 | 04:22 PM
#28
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,103
Likes: 4,737
From: Beaverton, OR
Bikes: Yes
It's virtually indistinguishable. As such, I love it.
Comparing the 53cm 2013 Jake geometry to the geometry of my 54cm 2008 Major Jake (and I believe the geometry is the same between all the Jakes through 2010):
-the effective top tube length is 1mm shorter on the new Jake (550 vs 551)
-the head tube angle is one degree slacker on the new Jake (71 vs 72)
-the fork is six millimeter longer on the new Jake (398 vs 392)
-the chainstays are 10mm shorter on the new Jake (425 vs 435)
I can't feel any difference. As far as fit goes, the stack and reach are both within a millimeter between these two bikes.
Comparing the 53cm 2013 Jake geometry to the geometry of my 54cm 2008 Major Jake (and I believe the geometry is the same between all the Jakes through 2010):
-the effective top tube length is 1mm shorter on the new Jake (550 vs 551)
-the head tube angle is one degree slacker on the new Jake (71 vs 72)
-the fork is six millimeter longer on the new Jake (398 vs 392)
-the chainstays are 10mm shorter on the new Jake (425 vs 435)
I can't feel any difference. As far as fit goes, the stack and reach are both within a millimeter between these two bikes.
__________________
My Bikes
My Bikes
08-17-12 | 06:55 PM
#29
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 557
Likes: 4
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Fiveflat
Track Cycling: Velodrome Racing and Training Area
6
03-25-14 01:51 AM
recumbenttoad
General Cycling Discussion
13
08-30-12 08:49 PM
