Yeeeeaahhhh... thats the ticket

Sloping top tubes rule.

I think that's nonsense. There's a lot more to ride quality than frame material. Fit/geometry/tires have more to do with ride smoothness than frame material. I have an alloy synapse thats a far superior ride than my steel rush hour. Its lighter, stiffer in the bb, accelerates faster, and smoother than any off the peg steel fg bikes i've ridden.

Doesn't the synapse cost like twice as much as the rush hour? Anyway, I think what what elTwitcho meant to say was "a frame that weighs as much as steel but doesn't have the hipster cachet of being 20 years old and slightly rusty"

As for the question at hand, the only guess I have is that the city editions gave the impression that Specialized was marketing directly to fashion-conscious affluent urbanites, whereas the whole fixed-gear trend is supposed to be about being raw, authentic, and edgy. Combined with the fact that the bike does look like a fixed-gear version of their popular mainstream road bikes...

If they really wanted a hot product, they should start making mid-80s steel Allez road frames with track ends.

That framebuilder is.. not accepting new work right now.

Absolutely. However you can say with a fair degree of accuracy that just about every entry level aluminum bike is going to ride fairly similarly and that just about every entry level chromo bike is going to ride fairly similar between models as well. Generally speaking, an entry level aluminum bike is going to ride very harsh because you don't start seeing huge variances in construction or tubing profiles until you start looking at more expensive frames.

Yeah only not. Grow up kiddo.

Not necessarily true. I got a sweet deal on an NYCBikes cityfixed frame last month, alloy ssfg frame. It's geo is closer to a road frame than a steep track frame. Built it up with the parts off the Rush Hour and a full carbon Profile Design BRC fork. So, everything (wheels, tires, cranks, saddle, bars, etc) is the same except frame and fork. And to be honest, the alloy frame rides much smoother than the Rush Hour. I kept my fit numbers the same(reach/drop) and the more relaxed geometry made a big difference in ride quality.

You really, honestly think the commercial success or failure of the Langster is a referendum on the ride properties of aluminum? Specialized is used to selling bikes to folks who care about bottom bracket stiffness and other things that actually affect the ride quality. They totally missed the boat on the Langster because their target market does not care how it rides- they want a cool bike and the Langster isn't cool. That's why I see 10 rusty conversions every day and 0 langsters.

Grow up, kiddo.

Why, are they dead? (Seriously I'm curious who made those frames)

I really like the Seattle Langster FWIW. Take off the coffee cup holder, and you have a great townie.

That's good. Act immature and insult someone using the tired hipster cliche, get called on it, then pretend just repeating what I said back to me is like a comeback. Right on dude


lukewall - Like I said it's a generalization and a low production frame like the one you mentioned doesn't necessarily have to fit that generalization for it to be applicable in the majority of cases. There are just about no entry level aluminum frames that are all that popular in the community. Not the Canondale Capo (although the Canondale Track IS), not the Felt Curbside (although the real track bikes they offer are well regarded), not the langster (although the S-Works track langster is well regarded), and not the Giant fixed bikes. The only aluminum bikes that are popular in the fixed community are the ultra light track bikes like I mentioned (or those meant to look like track bikes like LEADER). If I'm wrong, give me an example of a production aluminum entry level frame that actually is universally well regarded.

Depends on who you ask. Among fixie kids, of course you won't find many that like the langster or many of the entry level AL frames out on the market. Aside from the capo, the rest of those frames are exactly what fixie kids don't want: sloping top tubes, road geo, aluminum, cable stops. They spout off stuff like "steel is real" and act like all they want to ride are "real track bikes" when they have no idea about how geo and fit affect ride quality or why track geo would be "better" on the street. I hate to break it to them but track geo isn't any better for urban riding than road geo or a full rigid MTB. They're into aesthetics and bikes like the Langster don't make the cut, it has nothing to do with performance.

So you have people riding around on the street in what amounts to FG TT bikes, then posting on BF about how they have too much weight on their hands but they want to ride steep angled bikes on the street. They can't even get their bike fit worked out so they're in a comfortable posture to put out a lot of mileage and make an informed decision about the ride characteristics of a frame. Should I take their opinion seriously when it comes to the performance characteristics of a bike?

You're getting way way way off tangent here. It doesn't matter whether the prevailing opinion is one you should take seriously. The question isn't whether you or I think a certain bike is or is not suited to street riding. The question is "why does it seem like a majority of people do not like the langster?" which I think I answered.

My personal preference is for practical geometry in steel such as an IRO or the bike I do actually ride (MASI) but that's not what we're discussing here. Your assessment that people only want steel bikes in "real track" geometry is fairly off IMO as well given the popularity of frames like the Surly Steamroller, Kona Paddywagon (sloping top tube interestingly enough, but not disliked like the langster...), IRO Mark V, MASI fixed and the like. Those bikes get fairly positive reception among the fixed community and IMO the difference comes down to material.

Put simply, for someone looking at buying a Mark V what incentive do they have for buying an equivalent frame in aluminum if it isn't going to be super light (ie, basically the langster)? It's less crash and dent resistant and the ride is harsher, I (and I suspect a lot of other people) don't really see the benefit. Most people get an aluminum frame for reasons of lightness, extreme stiffness (perceived or actual) or a certain aesthetic. The langster offers none of these.

And don't take this the wrong way, it's not that the langster is a bad bike. It's just that personally I think an equivalent bike made of steel is a much more attractive choice if you aren't going to be trying to make an ultra stiff ultra light aluminum ride.

Yeah, I agree that the material has a lot to do with it. As a road bike rider (Fuji Roubaix) and a FG rider ('80s steel Bianchi conversion), I have to say that the steel frame is much more comfortable than my aluminum/CF mix frame. The steel just offers a softer ride, plain and simple.

When I commented on why I don't like the langster, though, I didn't even consider material. I was judging it from a purely aesthetic point of view and hating on it b/c of the paint jobs and sloping TT. That Felt bike and that Giant bike are both hideous in my opinion as well. The TK3 on the other hand, is beautiful.

And whoever said that it's because "we don't like to see companies being successful" that is just pure garbage. I ride a BIANCHI...perhaps the most successful brand in bikes. Certainly more successful than Felt or Giant or even Specialized, probably, though I'm not sure about the last one. And my other bike is Fuji, another huge company. Point is, the sloping top tube and weird paint jobs are just not tasteful (IMO) and you don't haver to get into a whole laundry list of other reasons in order to explain why people don't like them...

elTwitcho wrote:

>The question is "why does it seem like a majority of people do not like the langster?" which I think I answered. <

I'm not sure that a "majority of people" do not like the Langster. How can this assertion can be backed up? Anecdotal evidence is suspect. I don't think you discuss this issue with your friends who live outside of Toronto, and I haven't seen a scientifically conducted poll on BF on this topic.

>That's why I see 10 rusty conversions every day and 0 langsters.<

Langsters cost a lot of money compared to rusty conversions, so I'd expect to see more rusty bikes than fancy bikes. And are you saying, PunctualAlex, that you spend your ride time looking for Langsters - if not love - you see in Denver?

Then again, I haven't seen a single Ferrari here in Los Angeles today, but I've seen hundreds of lesser cars - how the heck does Ferrari manage to stay in business?

icyclist, do you think that the premise of this thread is a mistake then? I'm not sure what point you're arguing here.

So, why exactly do the majority of people dislike the langster? And by majority of people, I'm sure you're referring to urban fg riders. Is it because of the ride quality of AL is "harsh"? If that's the case, why are people still willing to pay a premium for aluminum track frames like Pista Concepts, Cinelli Vigorellis, TK2s, and frames of the like to ride on the street? It never had anything to do with performance, ride quality, or practical logic; it has always had to do with aesthetics. Fixie sheep are just afraid to be on a bike that the FG community doesn't consider "cool".

And as far as frame material is concerned, I doubt many of the fixie riders that don't put in a lot of miles can tell the difference between a well fitted steel frame/steel fork and an alloy frame/carbon fork of same geometry and components. So for them to choose steel over aluminum has more to do with perception and outside influence than their own experience on the saddle.

From my experience, i put just short of 5000 commuting/training miles on a steel Rush Hour(before converting it to track only status) and just over 500 training miles on a cheap alloy CityFixed frame/full carbon fork and have yet to experience this alloy harshness you're talking about. The ride is about the same on both bikes, a bit less harsh on the hands on the alloy/carbon frame.

>icyclist, do you think that the premise of this thread is a mistake then?<

Yes, mander, I do. There is no objective evidence I've seen that a "majority" of ss/fg riders dislike Langsters. I'll admit that I haven't taken a scientific poll, but if I did, I'd bet a 15mm wrench a majority of people riding single-geared bikes where I live, in Los Angeles, have never even heard of a Langster, much less have an up-or-down opinion about them. And I'll bet that's true world-wide.

On the other hand, I'd also guess that if I could look at the sales figures for Langsters, I'd find enough people in L.A. and around the country purchase them to help keep Specialized in the black.

I'm sure there are lots of people on this forum who think Langsters suck, but I think overall most people have no opinion, they just ride bikes.

Congrats on the Langster. I have had mine now for a year and I really like it. Mine is a bone stock 08 model. I chose it over a San Jose, Pista, Giant Bowery, Redline 925, and the Trek SOHO. Those were basically all the ssfg bikes in stock and available at local shops in my city. I rode them all. All were similarly priced and within my budget.

I could care less about sloping top tubes and such, or who likes it or hates it. I just ride. My other bikes are road bike ssfg conversions. The Langster is light weight, and a comfortable ride. I commute on it. I ride on the weekends. I ride for fitness. What I like most is the fit. This bike just fits me physically better than any bike I've ever owned.

Don't try to understand the Langster loathe, there's more important things in life to worry about.

I wouldn't exactly say I'm "worried", just thought it would be fun to stir the pot. With so many conversions out there it just seems that nice new stuff is so yesterday. No buyer's remorse here. I just wish it would stop raining.

well, you were just pretending that "grow up" is a worthwhile insult in the first place, so whatever.

... what? Have you seen how much money people are spending on conversions these days? I won't even pretend I understand the second sentence.

This pretty much sums it up.

>I won't even pretend I understand the second sentence.<

I only meant that you probably have not made a habit of counting the number of SS/FG bikes you see in in Denver while keeping an eye out for Langsters.

As for the amount of money spent on their, it seems that on BF most people like to brag about how little they spend.

This thread is weird. ^^; There are different options out there because people like different things. No need to bash on other people's preferences, whatever they may be. Nobody is forcing anybody at gunpoint to go buy a certain bike.

I have a Felt Curbside and the wife has a Felt Dispatch. I like the Langsters, too.

Dispatch is a hot looking bike. I want to ride one.