Purple People Eater!

^^^ That is quite a nice looking bike. I would consider one those frames in the OP if I had the funds.

gross

Was he from brataslavchecsvia?

If you're talking about Bobby Lea, his bike definitely said "Fuji," but it looked like a Cervelo to me.

The more I look at the 721TR the more I'm liking it but this frame just looks dumb. It's like the seat tube was made larger just so it could have the wheel cutout. When it gets to the top and it's just a normal seatpost coming out the top of it, it looks stupid and pointless.

At least the 721TR has a normal seat tube.

Welds look perfect (for what it is) to me. These frames are mass produced as cheaply as possible so proper welding technique dictates that you use a bit more filler to account for any irregularities due to haste. This ensures a strong durable weld. While it would be nice if every frame had Moots-type quality welds, the added labor would really jack up the price. The leader frame is a great frame because you get a strong-reasonably high quality frame for little money with the only concession being the superficial neatness of the welds.

If this frame suited my needs it would be at the top of a list with other, more expensive frames. Unfortunately, it doesn't have the features I require.

What's the geo difference between the 721tr and the 720tr?

So are there any pictures of these built up? The proportions look a little funky with the fat downtube and skinny everything else, but maybe they wont look so bad on a complete bike

the 720 had a fat aero downtube and skinny everything else, the 721 has a fat tt and dt ... as well as no braze-ons, more regular and substantial track ends, and looks like it could be a bit more steep, but i can't tell. the 721 lacks the weird tensioner screws, the rear brake cable stops, the rear rack mounts, and has the new ghosted logos. overall i think it's a huge aesthetic improvement... if slightly less practical and nothing else.

both are drilled for rear brakes, you can see in the pictures. i think the big challenge will be finding a fork that fits flush with the headtube. if the leader forks fit flush it will look like a bike twice its price... and i think with nice components it will feel and perform the same.

and the 735 has the cutout because it's more aero, not just because it looks cool.

I might be dumb an ignorant but I love the look of that bike up there.

according to the ebay auctions for both frames, none.
735
721

Leader doesn't get to decide what kind of seatpost their customers install on their frames. Blame the guy who built that up for choosing purple anodization over a more appropriate post.

what's an EFFECTIVE seat tube angle? i know the effective top tube length but since when does the seat tube have an effective measurement?

An effective seat tube angle would be needed if the seat tube doesn't continue in a straight line away from the bottom bracket up through the seat post. If this is the case, neither the angle of the seat post, nor the angle of the seat tube coming out of the bottom bracket would be the effective seat tube angle. I could look at a picture to see if that's the case but I'm feeling rather tired and lazy.

well i guess the seattube is a little far forward of the bb. it makes sense now.

my guess would be, they did it that way due to the "aero" seat tube design. The seat tube connects to the BB at the forward section of the seat tube. The seat stays connect back in the "aero" trailing edge. Normally this may be a difference of mm's but on this bike it may an inch or more off center. I may be wrong though.

I got a Leader 721TR off ebay. Ill build one up as soon as i get the frame.

So I just wanted to post this in here, but I bought a 721tr and built it up. Everything is great when it comes to the quality of the welds and metal for sure, but I do have an issue that Leader seems to want to pass off as "normal".


The spacing of the rear triangle basically leaves me 1/4-3/8" of adjustment in the dropouts before I make contact between the seat tube and the tire. I'm running a 700x23c which is not overly large for a street tire IMO.

Leader claims that it's normal, and that the space there is for a chain tensioner? (my lbs doesn't know of any tensioners that would go in front of the axle, but says that since he doesn't use them ever, he might just not know of it)

My problem w/ THAT is that even w/ a tubular track wheel and a 17c tire, it still wouldn't be able to utilize the entire dropout, which makes no sense to me.


Here's a picture that might help you understand what I'm talking about. Currently I can't get a hold of Leader on the phone to figure out what type of tensioner I can use, which is slightly inconvenient.

looks like a classic case of Leader's ****ty frame design.
search the form for other examples.

The inaccessible chain tensioners (that the guy you talked to was referring to) were classic. Think Paul's adjusters that don't exit the dropout on the other side. So that you can only adjust chain tension when the wheel wasn't installed.

That's kind of an odd issue. You should talk to Brian from Leader about it. Maybe they messed up the first batch or something.

btw it's fork ends, not dropouts.

The chain tensioner design on the 735 is really stupid, but it seems more like an afterthought than anything else. Possibility is that they came about for use on their time trail frames (which use the same fork end plate design) to set the wheel's distance from the seat tube, not to maintain chain tension (they're using derailers after all).

It was given conveyed to me... By IGOR (the recent king of bike thieves)

That welds that look like a strip of toothpaste are bad.
Welds that look like neat and even braids are nice and proper.

These are nice welds (taken from Carl Strong's site)

yea that makes no sense. it's slammed onto the seattube without being slammed into the dropout. eek!

Well I called and spoke to a "Sal" at Leader.


He had this to say:

1. the bike is designed for track, and to be used with smaller tires
2. that the rear triangle geometry and the "dropout" (or fork end, w/e) is designed that way ON PURPOSE
3. that they are designed to be used with chain tensioners that go before or after the axle/nut, so that's why the dropout (or fork end) is so long...
**this was in response to me saying, "why is it that the frame is designed to not use the entire dropout?**

I would like LeaderUSA to come on and take a look at this thread and my picture and post an explanation for all of us in case what I am saying is wrong from misinterpretation and/or misinformation