Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Framebuilders
Reload this Page >

Touring frame geometry

Notices
Framebuilders Thinking about a custom frame? Lugged vs Fillet Brazed. Different Frame materials? Newvex or Pacenti Lugs? why get a custom Road, Mountain, or Track Frame? Got a question about framebuilding? Lets discuss framebuilding at it's finest.

Touring frame geometry

Old 07-18-10, 03:16 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: England, currently dividing my time between university in Guildford and home just outside Reading
Posts: 1,921

Bikes: Too many to list here!

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 4 Times in 2 Posts
Touring frame geometry

Is a 68 degree headtube angle and a 68 degree seat tube angle (measured from horizontal) about the right geometry for a loaded-touring bike? If not, what would be?
Airburst is offline  
Old 07-18-10, 07:50 PM
  #2  
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 1 Post
That's far from modern typical, which is often 72/72 is probably closer to normal. That said, if you are willing to engineer the fork and stearing, you can go as low as 68 on the head tube and gain longer wheel base and tailor stearing and load handling. The seat tube I tend to build from fundamentals of my postion, and the seat post and saddle conbination that makes sense for my kind of riding. That is normally in the 71-72 range for me.
NoReg is offline  
Old 07-18-10, 08:13 PM
  #3  
Decrepit Member
 
Scooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Santa Rosa, California
Posts: 10,488

Bikes: Waterford 953 RS-22, several Paramounts

Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 634 Post(s)
Liked 71 Times in 59 Posts
Waterford 1900 Touring Geometry

Waterford T-14 Touring Geometry

Waterford ST-22 Sport Touring Geometry

68 seems a bit extreme to me.
__________________
- Stan

my bikes

Science doesn't care what you believe.
Scooper is offline  
Old 07-28-10, 10:15 AM
  #4  
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 43,598

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 197 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7607 Post(s)
Liked 1,358 Times in 864 Posts
Old 80's stump jumpers make decent loaded tourers, they have slack angles,
71/ 68 perhaps 'Repack' bombers was the model, Tom Richey's bikes were the ones Synyard copied.

thing you gain when the seat angle-setback is a lower angle is weight bias, less weight in your arms.

look back at old TdF race bikes they were pretty low angle long chainstay designs, most roads were un paved then.

If the wheel choice is 622 - 35 and rate of travel is your travel priority , adopt a race bike 73 /72 main triangle.

of course Size of frame is another thing, angles is part of getting fit better.

Last edited by fietsbob; 07-28-10 at 10:19 AM.
fietsbob is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
The Golden Boy
Classic & Vintage
22
02-05-18 11:04 AM
matchy99
Touring
23
09-14-15 02:32 AM
thook
Framebuilders
37
12-13-13 02:54 PM
neeb
Framebuilders
6
02-22-13 03:52 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.