track frame geometry
 

ive heard that track frames have a steeper geometry than the standard road frame but i dont really know what that means. what makes its geometry steeper? ive noticed on a few track bikes that the top tube slants downward going from seat post to the head tube. whats that about? thanx austin

track geometry will also have a less sloping head tube and the forks will have 0 rake to them. it makes the bike very twitchy on the road, but this responsiveness is neccessary to shoot up the walls and manuever, etc. track bikes will typically have very short stays. the bottom bracket is higher as well for clearance issues.

edit: that sloping toptube you are referring to may be a pursuit bike. those will usually run a small fork with a 650c front wheel.

whats the benefit of running smaller front fork and wheel? (forgive me, im new :-) )

Smaller and lower frontal area for improved aerodynamics.

now, i haven't been into this track thing for that long (a year or so), but i've never, ever, ever seen a bike with a 0 rake fork.

a guy here in town builds track frames and forks and all of his track forks are totally straight. in 0 rake i mean they don't slope forward more than the angle of the head tube. i don't mean the fork is perpendicular to the ground or anything. his site is sort of out of date and doesn't have any pictures of his track forks, but it's worth a gander:

http://www.groundupdesigns.com/

0 is sort of a blanket statement though. very little rake...

zero rake, sloping top tube, AND 650c!!

edited so as not to break things.

with a zero rake fork is there more chance of pedal overlap since it seems to bring the front wheel closer to the frame? also how do people ride with pedal overlap? isnt that unsafe?

I have toe overlap on my Kogswell. Not a lot but yea, it can be tricky. You'd have to ride a bike with overlap to understand that whenvever you're turned far enough to hit your toes you can't be going very fast anyway. You just get used to tapping your feet every now and again and you learn how hard you can turn, no big deal really.

If you don't have a huge overlap, you can tip your foot down on the down stroke during a slow, tight turn too.

or you can tip it up.

my bike has quite a bit of overlap, though not as much as i've seen on other frames (*cough*KHS aero track*cough*). it also makes the steering quite twitchy. but i'll never go back to the original fork for that bike. i'm too used to being able to zip through traffic and change lanes pretty much just by shifting my hips to one side or the other. that bike is so dangerously quick.

comparing my track bike to my old road frame fixie, it takes off faster, sprints better, swerves quicker and feels "tight". On the other hand, it's not as comfy on the arms & hands for long trips, it's harder to slow down, and I do sometimes hit my toe on the front tire. It also doesn't soak up as much of the bumps in the road.

frame geometry
 

The term steeper geometry refers to the head tube angle which moves the forks into a more vertical alignment than a standard road or touring frame. The rear triangle is shorter due to the seat tube being a slightly different angle than the other type also. The combination of those factors makes for a quicker handling bike that is an advantage in a velodrome setting. It also makes for a harsher ride, but that is not of concern in the short races that take place on a velodrome.


fixedgearhead

youre confusing the appearance of straight blades with rake. all forks have rake, and the rake in combination with the headtube angle determine the trail (which is the important thing which determines stability). that builder uses straight blades, the rake is still there, but its at the crown vs the taper in the forks as with curved blades.

You're confused Isotope: adding rake gives a bike quicker handling by decreasing trail, and vice versa. A "zero rake" fork actually increases trail compared to a positive rake fork, making the bike more stable. Bikes meant to go very fast inside a motorycle draft (they hit speeds in excess of 130 miles an hour) generally have negative rake forks for even more stability.

Sheldon links to a great article on this of course, I recommend it.

http://www.phred.org/~josh/bike/trail.html

Does anyone know why bikes use rake? Why not slacken the ht angle and have no rake at all?

right on.

extomesm, bikes like that are meant for races where you aren't allowed or able to draft your opponents, such as a pursuit where two people start on opposite sides of a track and the first person to get passed loses; or an hour record where you see how many laps of a track you can do alone in an hour. Basically you sacrifice some ergonomics for aerodynamics. For the same sort of reason, triathlon bikes look really weird---triathletes aren't allowed to draft each other and so they set their bikes up to fight the wind.

Toe overlap doesn't matter on the track because your not going to turn your handlebar that much
edti: damn didn't know i was answering a question from 4 years ago!

holy thread necromancy!

whoa, i didnt catch that. I was hoodwinked!

extomesm is probably an ol' track pro by now

lmao, i ddint' even notice that...holy****.
brought the thread back just to tell isotopesope he was wrong, ****ing awesome.

hahaha yeah, this thread is super old; i was still learning or mistaken i guess. me, for the lose.

Maybe pictures will help?

Note that the track frame has 75° head tube and seat tube angles, whereas the road frame has a more relaxed 72° head tube and seat tube angle. The track frame has shorter chainstays (440 mm vs 460 mm for the road frame), and less fork rake (20 mm vs 35 mm for the road frame) resulting in a shorter wheelbase for the track bike.

The steeper head tube and seat tube angles, shorter chainstays, and reduced fork rake of the track bike make the handling quicker and steering a little less stable than the road bike.

These Nervex frame designs are from the late 1950s, but today's traditional geometry frame designs haven't changed much.

http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d7...meGeometry.jpg

so, what is the 'standard' point that distinguishes track frame geometry.... 75 deg. 74 deg? how steep do they go.. 80?

I'm curious as to what my headtube/seattube angle is, but I don't have a protractor and am too lazy to pull out the makeshift geometry contraptions right now...oh well

i seriously doubt anything is as steep as 80, the downtube would cause interference.
how steep the geometry is depends on what type of track event the the frame is built for. also, it seem that not many frames built recently are steep like the bike of the 80's.

there was a good thread, or atleast a good reply that kind of explained this. pretty sure it 11.4 that posted the reply.

familyman: you're using an old Kogswell fork - the latest version has about 20mm more offset (bend) which lowers the trail and improves handling and has the nice side benefit of reducing and sometime eliminating toe overlap - lots of owners of older models are changing to the new fork - think about it - Matthew

http://www.fixedgeargallery.com/2005...ronPratt-2.jpg

http://velospace.org/files/3rensho_014.jpg

i've seen a handful of keirin frames with supersteep seattubes - i think shants mentioned that the st on his makino was 78 or 79 degrees. but those are anomalies. i don't know why such a near-vert st would be beneficial to somebody - i can't really figure out the body type that that would be good for. but i suppose it exists.

a lot of newer track frames these days aren't being built like the track bikes of old (angles near 75/75), which makes perfect sense. there's a lot more that goes into designing a bike than the steepness of the angles.

the oldness of this thread ammuses me.

i'm impressed (or disappointed) by my memory of knowing exactly where to find those two pictures.

I think combined with asians being generally shorter with maybe shorter thighs than others, and to position themselves over the cranks for maximum power output when in the saddle.

well, they're anomalies, so i don't think relying on the stereotype of short asians really explains a handful of oddly-built bikes in the market.

i recall reading something (i have no idea who wrote it) about one successful rider prefering a very steep seat tube, and his style was mimiced.

personally, i need to be further back in order to spin, and too much weight on the front makes me feel unstable.

but hey, they ride six laps.