[CR]Criterium vs. Road Geometry

(Example: Framebuilding:Tubing)

Content-return: allowed
Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 14:11:33 -0400
From: "Grant McLean" <Grant.McLean@SportingLife.ca>
Subject: [CR]Criterium vs. Road Geometry
To: "Classic Rendezvous Mail List (E-mail)" <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>

Hi Angel,

Big deal or not? The answer depends on your preferences, your riding experience, and the kind of riding you plan to do.

I feel small changes in geometry really can have a large impact on the overall ride of the bike. If you have gotten used to, or prefer a low bb and shallow headtube angle combination with a longer front center, you may really dislike a "criterium" geometry. And you may not.

Since you now own the bike, you're going to find out which it is... At least you won't have to slow down for the corners!

Grant McLean Toronto.Ca

[CR]Criterium vs. Road Geometry Angel Garcia wrote:

The 1983 Dave Moulton frame/fork I picked up is a "Pro Criterium" model. Terence Shaw informed that, "... A Moulton criterium frame would have seat and head tube angles increased by a degree (73 to 74 head with fork offset changed to maintain 6cm of trail) a 1/4" higher bottom bracket, shorter wheelbase......". Can some one advise how much these changes would impact road ride handling which is what I do? Big deal or not? Thanks. Long Valley, NJ