Bob Flemming said:My question here is: how 'steady' are the shorter wheel base machines?
Mine is as steady as the bike (frame) it started out as - a bottom of the line CroMo GT. I've put a
few pictures up here:
jimprice.dsl.pipex.comjimprice.dsl.pipex.comOpen ↗
By way of a little explanation, the second pic is showing how the seat folds to make it easier to
get on the thing. This was my preferred solution to having the steerer tube fold or underseat
steering. The third pic is a closeup of the welding. As I knew this was not going to be a
professional job, I tried to design in as much strength as possible using the materials available.
It ain't pretty, but it works, and its so far only cost £89.
Quoted message said:My inclination is towards a 'tourer type' machine, as this is my 'type' of cycling, but I would
also like the option to 'give it what I could' in terms of speed. When I look at designs, I feel
more drawn to the type that has the front wheel 'underneath' the legs as opposed to the front
wheel 'leading' the bike, which is more the 'racer' type design, eh?
Legs Larry would be your man for expertise on that, but low and leant back a lot seem to be the
racer type characteristics, along with fairings for aerodynamics.
Quoted message said:2. Drive. What's the difference between front-wheel-drive and rear- wheel-drive. Just looking at
the basic design of a bent, all models of which have a common similarity in that rider is
'essentially' in a lying position as opposed to a 'butt-supported' position - this meaning that
the chainset is invariably in a frontal position on the bike, so why is not more common to make
bents 'front wheel drive' as opposed to rear wheel drive? What's the advantage of having rear
wheel drive with a chain stretching 6 feet to the drive wheel at he rear, when it could just
stretch 2 feet to the front?
For me, the choice was made for the reason that I didn't like the idea of the FWD drive choice
between either having the pedals move with the steering, or twisting the chain with the steering.
Both of those seemed problematic just thinking about them, and more likely to be a failure when it
came to building them. I have seen one front wheel drive design which was very simle to build, but I
also remember the builders comments about it being like a bull to ride. I chose short wheelbase and
over seat steering again for ease of construction, given what I started out with.
Quoted message said:3. Welding. I would envisage building this from older bike frames. It would appear that a mig
welder is the cheapest welder to buy, but I'm, getting mixed reports<reading Goog;e> about the
suitability of using mig welders for bike frames.
I'm only just learning welding myself, so take the rest of this with a pinch of salt:
I used gas MIG on mine. The problem, I believe, is that MIG welding has a tendency to get things too
hot for thin bike tubes. I used a "gas pipe" old bike for the boom tubes and welded to the head tube
on the original bike chassis, so both tubes were thick in comparison to a quality bike. Also, my
mates mate who _actually_ did the welding did it in short bursts rather than one long go, to try and
prevent too much heat buildup. This was after the "do you want it to look good or be as strong as
possible for a bodge job" conversation.
Quoted message said:As far as I can see, gas assisted migs are better than 'wire flux' welders, giving a much cleaner
and easier weld at the end of the day.
By 'wire flux' do you mean the traditional arc welder with a rod, or a non-gas MIG? I've only got a
borrowed arc welder, and it seems a lot more difficult than any kind of modern auto-feed welder.
Quoted message said:Is this true for bike frames? I cannot see using a welder for anything other than bike frame
tubing at the moment, so would a cheapo gasless mig be ok - providing I master the technique of
welding of course???
I really have to leave worthwhile comment on that to the experts, and say that I am going to have a
go with my arc welder on some junk frames, just to see what happens.
Quoted message said:I'm only concerned about the strength of the weld, the beauty of the thing I can forsake just
now...for the times being anyway :-)
Me too on that one.
Quoted message said:The cheapo gasless welders claim a maximum mild steel weld to be 3-4mm....bascially ok for
bikes, yeah?
Its not the maximum I would worry about, its the minimum they'll do which is more in the range of
the sort of size tubing bike come in. A bottom bracket or a head tube would be about the thickest
tube on a bike, and I don't think I have seen any steel 4mm ones.
Quoted message said:I'm really into this idea at the moment. Crazy it may be, and therapy I may need, but I'd still
appreciate any experience on these three points.
I found it very theraputic, as there were lots of problems to solve. Mine is still a work in
progress. I'm sure I could come up with a tidier job on the handlebars, and the seat was only really
a bodge job to test out the riding position. I would like to change to under seat steering, to get
the size of the thing down a bit, but that is waiting for inspiration and cheap bits to turn up. On
the crazy side of things, its a lot less crazy than the toeclips on a unicycle experiment.
Jim Price