RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 7

Example: Framebuilding:Paint
From: "devotion finesse" <>
To: Andrew R Stewart <>, <>
Subject: RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 7
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 19:24:05 -0500
In-Reply-To: <425BBF8CE569427E8F78026CE177B090@AndrewRStewaPC>
References: <>

I recently came across a Nuovo Record equipped bike badged "Cyclery North" locked up to a fence here in Brooklyn. A nice royal blue color with red and cream decals...Only upon closer inspection, it had "Pogliaghi" stamped ont o the stay caps and "PSM" on the seat lug cluster. Yes, I went into all su rrounding business. Yes, I found the owner. No, he would not sell me the b ike.

Matthew Bowne leaving no stone unturned in Brooklyn, New York.


> From:

> To:

> Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 19:11:25 -0500

> Subject: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 62, Issue 7


> Ken- The primary reason the seat tube has any angle is to allow the rider

> certain amount of seat set back (behind a vertical line running through t

> bb center). This set back establishes the pedal/knee relationship. Common

> frame design thought has the seat tube angle varying with thigh length.

> Longer thighs "need" more set back equaling a shallower angle.


> Another reason why smaller bikes often have a steeper angle (besides the

> thigh length being short) is to lessen toe clip overlap when short top tu

> lengths are used. (This goal is also why some small frames have slack hea

> angles, pushing the axle further away from the crank).


> There is a lot of marketing influence and inertia of tradition in making

> these design choices. In the ideal custom world the rider's dimensions an

> needs drive the choices.


> An example of how it can be done is in the story of when I was working fo

> Cyclery North in Chicago (1985). We were a frame building shop. The

> boss/designer would do the fit and design then hand off the actual build

> work to Tommy (or I). The boss based all his designs on a 60* angle betwe

> the down tube and the head tube (lower head angle). To make the more

> important frame dimensions work Tommy and I had to "fudge" this 60* spec.

> When I asked the boss about this he said "All the good handling bikes I'v

> ridden use 60*". Sure if you're 5'10" and want no fender clearance!


> Lastly why should the length of the stays or size of wheels change how th

> body needs to be positioned? I have four self built frames that share the

> main triangle dimensions but differ in the rest, as their use ranges from

> fixed gear track, through Sunday light, commuting to loaded touring.


> Andy Stewart

> Raleigh, NC



>> Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2008 08:48:50 -0500

>> From: "Kenneth Freeman"

>> To: "'Emily O'Brien'" ,


>> Subject: RE: [CR]Re: Classicrendezvous Digest, Vol 61, Issue 103

>> Message-ID:

>> In-Reply-To:

>> References:

>> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii"

>> MIME-Version: 1.0

>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

>> Precedence: list

>> Message: 2


>> Thinking about frame angles: I have two Italian or Italian style frames

>> the early '80s, with the same steep seat tube angle. My 1980 Masi and m

>> '82 or '83 Mondonico are both 52/53 cm frames with 75 degree seat tube

>> angles.


>> Is this a convention of the times? Is it a convention that is held toda

>> in

>> performance bikes? Is it just luck?


>> The other dimensions, chainstay, top tube, front center, and head angle

>> are rather different.


>> Ken Freeman

>> Ann Arbor, MI USA