you say the darndest things

ride it like you like it. f*ck those who hate someone because they're not scared to modify their bike to make it more fun to ride.

I think you're confusing riding with looking it. Don't worry it's a mistake often made by your ilk.

Get a super laidback 1920s Chater Lea and put a 650 on the front - brings the angles back to normal, including the headtube. Would make the vintage forum guys angry.

your welcome! i don't care about any technicality putting a 650 fork/wheel may cause, i can adapt to it! it looks bad ass and thats all i care...

So do missing teeth.

best advice here..

i want to do it for all the reason you say and more.. especially the making the vintage guys angry.. do you think they would be mad if i wore, say, neon turquoise fur chaps while riding said wonder bike? cuz it would only make me happy..

i ride a 650c up front will no ill effects no bb strikes and i loves it. bike handles great turns on a dime no pedal strikes looks awesome to

if you want to do it go for it. make your self happy,


but one important note. i run a 650c in the rear to

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2337/...0ce094.jpg?v=0

I ride 650c front and back because my frame was designed for it.

ditto, what kinda rims and hubs do you have?

Front hub is phil, rear is american classic track hub, rims are the up-and-coming superstars known as "velocity deep-v".

Keep an eye on those rims, they're gonna blow up.

screw it just run a 27 incher in the back !

i have a just order a mavic open pro for the rear, and i have a deep v i just got for the front


i am debating getting a 18h deep v for the front, but it m ight be a good way to die

I stripped the bike today and clearcoated it and got it set up, there is still some work to be done, but it was together enough to notice that pedal strike should not be a problem... hopefully it will be finished tomorrow. Looking forward to seeing how it rides. A coworker had a 650 wheel and fork that he is letting me experiment with and if it works out I'm going to buy it from him, if not he may use it to make a bike polo bike or something. He said he was thinking of welding another fork to it and jamming it in some 1970s CIOCC frame he stumbled upon... last I talked to him he was cutting off the rear triangle so he could weld some BMX **** on there, it will be uber.

that sounds interesting I want pictures when this is all said and done

650 in the back eww!

heheheh nice one.

as regards your op, as long as the bike wasn't extremely steep with the 700c fork and wheel the additional degree or two of rake and consequent shorter trail is simply going to make the bike more squirrely. but only as much as, say, a bianchi pista is in comparison to an iro, a track bike to a roadbike; the sky is not going to fall, and you are not going to die. if the bike was a particularly steep angled track bike to begin with it might be more problematic, but if so then you can always put the 700c equipment back on — genius!

i think some of the more reactionary members on this charming little forum sometimes forget that experiments such as this are how some of the great leaps forward in cycling once came about. i'm sure the likes of dutret and his laughable acolytes would have ridiculed greg lemond for the coke-can shims, and if i put a picture of obree's bike in the jackass thread right now half a dozen penguins would trip over each other to deride it.

i know your particular experiment is not moving cycling anywhere particular, but dutret shrilly shrieking "no! you must NOT DO IT!" reminds me of the worst pedantry and tiny-mindedness of the UCI. do it and be damned!

a degree or two of rake??? Lets assume that was a typo and you have at least a general idea what you're talking about. It's not a degree or two it's about 5 degrees(up to 8 or 9 if it had a high clearance fork). That would be the difference between an iro and a bike that is steeper than anything available or a cruiser/mtb and a steep track bike.

tiny mindedness of the UCI? Really now how exactly is the uci tiny minded? Whether or not you agree, trying to make records meaningful across generations hardly counts as tiny minded. Also I think if you actually read my posting you would find I'm a big fan of innovative ideas, hacking things together and progress. The key is that it's guided by some knowledge of what works, and a desire to make something work better(or at least cheaper). Some ****up switching his bike to 650 front cause he thought his friends set up that way doesn't fit in any of those categories. Even if it can be switched back a moron who would would consider it is probably too stupid to realize that it doesn't work and it's just a waste of money and time.

come on dutret where's your sense of adventure?

regarding the angle, i'd like to see some kind of model for this. i find 5° somewhat difficult to believe: you may be perfectly correct but i would like to see some kind of corroboration.

regarding keeping records consistent across the generations, fine, but progress marches on with or without, so unless you're proposing something akin to njs-type orthodoxy, innovations are going to happen, be they unusual riding positions or aerodynamic framesets made of space-age materials.

regarding being guided by some knowledge of what works, the op said he wanted to try this based on a friend's bike set up the same way that he had enjoyed. i would say that qualifies as sufficient basis for experimentation.

and really the constant "moron" andf "******bag" and all the other insults in your posts subtract in a huge way from their value. it's just so unpleasant to read.

it's really simple trig. given a normal wheelbase and hub-crown distance each centimeter you drop the front is about a degree.

None of that really justifies calling it small minded. There are plenty of records with no restrictions and plenty with varying levels of restriction. Once you start drawing a line why not try to make the record at least somewhat about cycling ability rather then technological innovation. Is anything other then an HPV record meaningless? **** why even require the HP part just make it land speed?

Anyone who thinks that angles in the high 70's work well and are comfortable clearly lacks the knowledge to come of with reasonable aspects of a bike to experiment with. The fact is that most peoples sense of what rides well is easily overcome by their sense of what looks cool.

i keep reading this as "ride it like you f*ck it"

^dyslexia's a *****, eh? BTW, wtf has retem been?

Sorry, you just shut down this forum.

Personally, i like to see people try new things w/their bikes. I see 650s up front everywhere so its nothing new. The OP's only mistake was asking the forum for their general opinion on it... making him an easy mark for ridicule by the forum veteran "big wigs" like dutret. Its like throwing chum into the water. Some people on here are desperate for posts like his - and a chance to show their track bike authority.

650 barspins for the win.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1097/...e6607548ff.jpg