Custom build

"Brendo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I remeasured last night. Last time I posted I said I had a 93cm inseam,
it's actually 97cm, and I'm 195cm tall. I've been looking at various 'frame
guides' and most of them recommend 63-65cm c-c frames. It seems I may need
to go custom. (Or rather I just think I'd like to)

Two part question.

1)Anybody had a road frome built in or around Perth?

2) Would sending measurements to a builder on the dark side of the
continent, as opposed to actually being at the workshop, give just as good
a result.

I'm still looking at spending around $2k, inclusive of fork and getting
all the bits transfered from the 60cm frame I have (mostly Ultegra/105
bits).

Cheers

Brendo

Brendo,

Might not be much good to you as I am in Melbourne but I am going to be
selling my Cecil Walker roadie soon......it's an 853 Reynolds frame that I
think is about 63cm or so (I am also 195cm). The frame is about 7 years old
but I had it resprayed about 18 months ago and it looks really schmick. It
currently has a 9spd Chorus groupset on it but it is pretty worn and
although it works fine, it could do with replacing. Let me know if you
might be interested and I will go out and measure all the relevant
dimensions for you (I need to do this anyway to put it on ebay)....here is a
picture of it - unlike the photo the bike is now clean:

http://img64.imageshack.us/my.php?image=imgp1267tl4.jpg

Let me know if you would like some more info.

Gags

You may need to up your budget a bit if you are looking at custom. I wouldn't hesitate to look at builders interstate though. I went to Warwick of Thylacine Cycles for my custom steel hardtail frame, and while it is nice to be able to chat face to face many of his customers are not just interstate but overseas. He's about you're height, so he'll understand the trouble you're having finding a stock frame too.

My frame hasn't arrived yet so I can't comment on it but I've been very happy with him through the building process. The feedback on MTBR is positive too: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=220368 .

"Brendo" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I remeasured last night. Last time I posted I said I had a 93cm inseam,
it's actually 97cm, and I'm 195cm tall. I've been looking at various 'frame
guides' and most of them recommend 63-65cm c-c frames. It seems I may need
to go custom. (Or rather I just think I'd like to)

Two part question.

1)Anybody had a road frome built in or around Perth?

2) Would sending measurements to a builder on the dark side of the
continent, as opposed to actually being at the workshop, give just as good
a result.

I'm still looking at spending around $2k, inclusive of fork and getting
all the bits transfered from the 60cm frame I have (mostly Ultegra/105
bits).

Rivendell (www.rivbike.com) have off the shelf frames in sizes up to 68cm.
But they're decidedly not "racing" frames, if that's what you're after. And
the shipping to Australia can be a bit expensive.

Nick

SomeGuy said:

You may need to up your budget a bit if you are looking at custom. I wouldn't hesitate to look at builders interstate though. I went to Warwick of Thylacine Cycles for my custom steel hardtail frame, and while it is nice to be able to chat face to face many of his customers are not just interstate but overseas. He's about you're height, so he'll understand the trouble you're having finding a stock frame too.

My frame hasn't arrived yet so I can't comment on it but I've been very happy with him through the building process. The feedback on MTBR is positive too: forums.mtbr.comshowthread.phpOpen ↗ .

customs start at around $900-$1000.... add a good carbon fork and you should be well under $1500 ..... not all bike shop made bikes are customs...., many are still stock dimensions, like the Cecil Walker mentioned , even though it was was most likely a Paconi built frame, ,... biggest variable in your cost will be your tubeset...and whether you see an advantage having super light ( exy) or moving up the scale to not so light...(not so exy)

More importanly, if your fit was done by someone who actually is a bike fit specialist then you have a good head start to getting a custom and actually having it close to right for you...if it was done by some one who even looked crosseyed at a piece of string,.....start again...I'd even try and get a low cost flt , take a break and fly east or get the boss to fund you on a junket trip to the dark side and fly to Syd or Melb and see either Steve Hogg in Sydney at Pedal Pushers in Randwick or John Kennedy at Cyclefit in Black Rock Melbourne.... Hogg uses Baum and Teschner mainly so they will be on the exy side...but Kennedy uses Wigan at Paconi to build to his spec ( not Walkers specs- which are quite different)... or at least call them and discuss..both do no obligation over the phone and could direct you....you could even get your flt, the frame and fork for under 2K if you pick the right tubeset...

rooman said:

SomeGuy said:

You may need to up your budget a bit if you are looking at custom. I
wouldn't hesitate to look at builders interstate though. I went to
Warwick of Thylacine Cycles for my custom steel hardtail frame, and
while it is nice to be able to chat face to face many of his customers
are not just interstate but overseas. He's about you're height, so
he'll understand the trouble you're having finding a stock frame too.

My frame hasn't arrived yet so I can't comment on it but I've been very
happy with him through the building process. The feedback on MTBR is
positive too: http://forums.mtbr.com/showthread.php?t=220368 .customs start at around $900-$1000.... add a good carbon fork and you

should be well under $1500 ..... not all bike shop made bikes are
customs...., many are still stock dimensions, like the Cecil Walker
mentioned , even though it was was most likely a Paconi built frame,
,... biggest variable in your cost will be your tubeset...and whether
you see an advantage having super light ( exy) or moving up the scale
to not so light...(not so exy)

More importanly, if your fit was done by someone who actually is a bike
fit specialist then you have a good head start to getting a custom and
actually having it close to right for you...if it was done by some one
who even looked crosseyed at a piece of string,.....start again...I'd
even try and get a low cost flt , take a break and fly east or get the
boss to fund you on a junket trip to the dark side and fly to Syd or
Melb and see either Steve Hogg in Sydney at Pedal Pushers in Randwick
or John Kennedy at Cyclefit in Black Rock Melbourne.... Hogg uses Baum
and Teschner mainly so they will be on the exy side...but Kennedy uses
Wigan at Paconi to build to his spec ( not Walkers specs- which are
quite different)... or at least call them and discuss..both do no
obligation over the phone and could direct you....you could even get
your flt, the frame and fork for under 2K if you pick the right
tubeset...

And the tubesets seem to be the major difference. Given that I
don't ride much over 100km a week, I doubt whether I could tell
the difference between the different steel grades. (I think steel
will be the metal of choice).

A few I have seen have come in around the 2k mark for frame and
fork, Armalite (www.armalitecycles.com.au in Perth, too)and
another called Pave (www.pavebikes.com in Margaret River). I also
looked at Thylacine Cycles, they look schmick, but are a bit
above budget for even the base steel model ($2500 plus fork). I
am sure that they are worth the money, but you can only get what
you can afford.

Brendo

Brendo said:

And the tubesets seem to be the major difference. Given that I
don't ride much over 100km a week, I doubt whether I could tell
the difference between the different steel grades. (I think steel
will be the metal of choice).

A few I have seen have come in around the 2k mark for frame and
fork, Armalite (www.armalitecycles.com.au in Perth, too)and
another called Pave (www.pavebikes.com in Margaret River). I also
looked at Thylacine Cycles, they look schmick, but are a bit
above budget for even the base steel model ($2500 plus fork). I
am sure that they are worth the money, but you can only get what
you can afford.

Brendo

why not call a few makers over east and offer to fax or email them your specs and discuss your needs and tubeset to fit the budget...some of the steel tubesets are great, some make good farm gates... certainly shop around....Alum is a fine tubeset as well and could be a lighter lower cost option...a Columbus Zonal ridden 200-300 plus klms a week should give you a good 10 years of joy without metal "memory" hassles and you should get change for frame and fork...I know Kennedy (and possibly Hogg too) ships a lot of frames overseas, so a parcel to the coast of sun, wine and surf, shouldnt be hard.

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

a Columbus Zonal ridden 200-300 plus klms a week
should give you a good 10 years of joy without metal "memory" hassles

'metal "memory" hassles'?

--
Shane Stanley

Shane Stanley said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

a Columbus Zonal ridden 200-300 plus klms a week
should give you a good 10 years of joy without metal "memory" hassles

'metal "memory" hassles'?

--
Shane Stanley

my very lay expression about Alum as I see it, but its not a "memory metal" in the chemical and metallurgist's sense, so consider it....."stress cycles to failure" if you wish.... Alum bike tubesets show fewer cycles to failure than steel bike tubesets of same dimension... AFAIAA.... my understanding is...equiv dimension steel lasts longer than alum...just likely to be heavier

the suggestion, which I believe is the common view (correct me if you think it's not) of riders, frame makers etc.... is that alum tubeset may be cheaper (some) and it may be lighter (most) , and is less rigid, and it doesn't last as long given the same stresses over time, as the steel tubeset..

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

my very lay expression about Alum as I see it, but its not a "memory
metal" in the chemical and metallurgist's sense, so consider
it....."stress cycles to failure" if you wish.... Alum bike tubesets
show fewer cycles to failure than steel bike tubesets of same
dimension

Who builds them to the same dimensions?

Quoted message said:

the suggestion, which I believe is the common view (correct me if you
think it's not) of riders, frame makers etc.... is that alum tubeset
may be cheaper (some) and it may be lighter (most) , and is less rigid,
and it doesn't last as long given the same stresses over time, as the
steel tubeset..

It might be a common view, but the reality is that a frame's lifespan
owes more to its design than the material used. Of course, the design
often reflects the choice of material -- that's why aluminium frames are
designed to avoid fatigue failures (something that's not hard to do).

There's a lot to be said for steel frames, especially the aesthetics
they allow the frame designer. It seems a shame that those who like them
often resort to pseudo-scientific attacks on the alternatives, though.
There are still people around who believe aluminium frames "go soft".

--
Shane Stanley

"rooman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Shane Stanley said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

a Columbus Zonal ridden 200-300 plus klms a week
should give you a good 10 years of joy without metal "memory" hassles

'metal "memory" hassles'?

--
Shane Stanley

my very lay expression about Alum as I see it, but its not a "memory
metal" in the chemical and metallurgist's sense, so consider
it....."stress cycles to failure" if you wish.... Alum bike tubesets
show fewer cycles to failure than steel bike tubesets of same
dimension... AFAIAA.... my understanding is...equiv dimension steel
lasts longer than alum...just likely to be heavier

the suggestion, which I believe is the common view (correct me if you
think it's not) of riders, frame makers etc.... is that alum tubeset
may be cheaper (some) and it may be lighter (most) , and is less rigid,
and it doesn't last as long given the same stresses over time, as the
steel tubeset..

Who on earth would use the same size aluminium and steel tubes?

[QUOTE]

Shane Stanley said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

my very lay expression about Alum as I see it, but its not a "memory
metal" in the chemical and metallurgist's sense, so consider
it....."stress cycles to failure" if you wish.... Alum bike tubesets
show fewer cycles to failure than steel bike tubesets of same
dimension

Who builds them to the same dimensions?

Quoted post said:

Quoted message said:

the suggestion, which I believe is the common view (correct me if you
think it's not) of riders, frame makers etc.... is that alum tubeset
may be cheaper (some) and it may be lighter (most) , and is less rigid,
and it doesn't last as long given the same stresses over time, as the
steel tubeset..

It might be a common view, but the reality is that a frame's lifespan
owes more to its design than the material used. Of course, the design
often reflects the choice of material -- that's why aluminium frames are
designed to avoid fatigue failures (something that's not hard to do).

There's a lot to be said for steel frames, especially the aesthetics
they allow the frame designer. It seems a shame that those who like them
often resort to pseudo-scientific attacks on the alternatives, though.
There are still people around who believe aluminium frames "go soft".

--
Shane Stanley

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

I am
not disagreeing, but I dont accept that alloy will not fail merely
because its beefier( if that's what you mean by design, or are you
suggesting extra cross members in the chainstay and thicker tubeset,
and bottom bracket area ?..........(what are you suggesting?)

Design, as in an engineer calculating what's needed to avoid stress
failures. In some places that amounts to making things "beefier", but
not always.

Quoted message said:

I have a "design" life on my alloy R1 bike of approx 10 years...as a
result of section lengths, tubeset and layout combinations that should
reflect the of the bike mainly as a performance bike in that
time....that's what I was told to expect and if I get more great...

It's certainly possible to design a frame that won't last, although
stating it in terms of years is unfortunate (but understandable) --
hours of use would make more sense.

(Given that you're spreading your time between six, and it appears soon
to be seven, bikes, and that hours in a day are limited, even a
compromised design might last you a lot longer than you think.)

Quoted message said:

but I
also have four steel bikes... R2-aged 2 year2, C1-3years, T1-4 years,
and Classic1-55 years respectively, all going strong and I expect they
will all outlive the alloy framed R1 by decades.

Yes, but you're comparing them to a frame you've just told us is
compromised in terms of lifespan.

Quoted message said:

My preference is for steel first, ( I just like the ride)...

Fine -- enjoy it, and don't go hunting for other justifications.

--
Shane Stanley

On 2007-02-21, Shane Stanley (aka Bruce)
was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

rooman said:

my very lay expression about Alum as I see it, but its not a "memory
metal" in the chemical and metallurgist's sense, so consider
it....."stress cycles to failure" if you wish.... Alum bike tubesets
show fewer cycles to failure than steel bike tubesets of same
dimension

Who builds them to the same dimensions?

Quoted message said:

the suggestion, which I believe is the common view (correct me if you
think it's not) of riders, frame makers etc.... is that alum tubeset
may be cheaper (some) and it may be lighter (most) , and is less rigid,
and it doesn't last as long given the same stresses over time, as the
steel tubeset..

It might be a common view, but the reality is that a frame's lifespan
owes more to its design than the material used. Of course, the design
often reflects the choice of material -- that's why aluminium frames are
designed to avoid fatigue failures (something that's not hard to do).

There's a lot to be said for steel frames, especially the aesthetics
they allow the frame designer. It seems a shame that those who like them
often resort to pseudo-scientific attacks on the alternatives, though.
There are still people around who believe aluminium frames "go soft".

I see a connection between this and aluminium cookware. Aluminium
doesn't cause Alzheimers; it was a claim invented by a steel cookware
maker who saw his sales drop off because of cheaper and better
aluminium. So he came up with a "research" paper that showed
aluminium causes Alzheimers. Within months, there were 5 peer
reviewed papers refuting the claim, but the damage had been done --
people still think, 20 years on, that aluminium cookware causes
alzheimers.

--
TimC
Error in operator: add beer

Shane Stanley said:

us is
compromised .....

(snip)

justifications.

--
Shane Stanley

compromise?...you might think that!......I am not the least bit comprised with the alum frame , it is exactly what I wanted, and represents very good value for money over time....

justifications... dribble.... all in your head !

TimC said:

I see a connection between this and aluminium cookware. Aluminium
doesn't cause Alzheimers; it was a claim invented by a steel cookware
maker who saw his sales drop off because of cheaper and better
aluminium. So he came up with a "research" paper that showed
aluminium causes Alzheimers. Within months, there were 5 peer
reviewed papers refuting the claim, but the damage had been done --
people still think, 20 years on, that aluminium cookware causes
alzheimers.

Does anybody know what causes Alzheimers? Somebody told me once but my mum
used aluminium pots and I don't remember.
If you're going to absorb aluminium, you are more likely to do it from your
deoderant.

Theo

Theo Bekkers said:

If you're going to absorb aluminium, you are more likely to do it from your
deoderant.

Very true. Aluminium, by itself, doesn't cross the blood brain barrier.
For this reason, some argue that aluminium couldn't possibly cause
Alzheimer's disease, since it can't get to the brain in the first place.

However, one of the toxic effects of fluoride is to make that barrier
permeable to aluminium. Fluoride allows the uptake of aluminium into
your brain.

That aluminium is harmful to the brain is well accepted, at least in
animal studies (a collection of references:
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/brain/).

Supposedly one group of researchers tested the aluminium/fluoride link
by administering it to rats intravenously, killing all their "low dose"
group before they ever got to the "high dose" group. They were expecting
small, measurable differences between the groups.

Cycling is fun.

Russ, always on topic.

Russ said:

Theo Bekkers said:

If you're going to absorb aluminium, you are more likely to do it from
your deoderant.

Very true. Aluminium, by itself, doesn't cross the blood brain barrier.
For this reason, some argue that aluminium couldn't possibly cause
Alzheimer's disease, since it can't get to the brain in the first place.

However, one of the toxic effects of fluoride is to make that barrier
permeable to aluminium. Fluoride allows the uptake of aluminium into
your brain.

That aluminium is harmful to the brain is well accepted, at least in
animal studies (a collection of references:
http://www.fluoridealert.org/health/brain/).

Supposedly one group of researchers tested the aluminium/fluoride link
by administering it to rats intravenously, killing all their "low dose"
group before they ever got to the "high dose" group. They were expecting
small, measurable differences between the groups.

Cycling is fun.

Russ, always on topic.

Isn't the dangers of Fluoride something thought up by the bottled water
manufacturers?

And isn't the dangers of aging plastic bottles something thought up by ...

And so on....

Use a wooden spoon in your aluminum pots and it's not a problem.

Friday

Friday said:

Isn't the dangers of Fluoride something thought up by the bottled water
manufacturers?

If only... That it was an enzymatic poison was known decades before its
use on humans.

One might say that the /benefits/ of fluoride was thought up by the
aluminium manufacturers, given that the *chemical waste given off by the
process to make aluminium... is creatively used in tap water :p

It would be nice if it were just FUD; it'd be much more simpler to
believe that.

Quoted message said:

And isn't the dangers of aging plastic bottles something thought up by ...

And so on....

Use a wooden spoon in your aluminum pots and it's not a problem.

Or just use stainless-steel coated aluminium. The steel industry say the
chromium isn't bad for you 🙂 And it probably isn't, based on the best
available evidence.

Russ.

*(also "...in the form of either fluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) or sodium
silicofluoride (Na2SiF6), both of which are obtained from the untreated
waste liquor from cleaning the scrubbers in phosphate fertiliser
manufacturing plants. This source of fluoride contains traces of
arsenic, cadmium and other toxic chemicals..." - Dr Mark Diesendorf -
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3014)