Litespeed Veneto

Anyone have any feedback on the Litespeed Veneto. It is supposed to be a more "relaxed" bike given
its longer head tube and sloping top tube. Would a fit but inexperienced rider who is not very
aggressive go for a frame like that or would it be better to stay with a more traditional road bike?

 

"Lloyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Anyone have any feedback on the Litespeed Veneto. It is supposed to be a more "relaxed" bike
> given its longer head tube and sloping top tube. Would a fit but inexperienced rider who is not
> very aggressive go for a frame like that or would it be better to stay with a more traditional
> road bike?

In a way the Veneto allows for a tradtional fit, where most Litespeeds have a modern "racing fit"
where the bar is below the seat level by 2 or more inches. Look at old racing pics from the 50s/60s,
bar and seat are near level, the sloping top tube and long head tube compenstate for the lack of
vertical adjustment in threadless headsets. (I know about hi rise stems, they are just ugly to me)

For some shameless commerce from the non-racing bike universe.....

http://www.rivbike.com/html/bikes_romulus_3.html

Much closer to Faustos bike than any current Litespeed, even the gearing.

 

"Lloyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> Anyone have any feedback on the Litespeed Veneto. It is supposed to be a more "relaxed" bike
> given its longer head tube and sloping top tube. Would a fit but inexperienced rider who is not
> very aggressive go for a frame like that or would it be better to stay with a more traditional
> road bike?

i don't have any experience with the litespeed veneto (wish my budget would let me!), but it looks
like a very practical bike for a recreational rider. my bike became a LOT more comfortable when i
changed stems and moved the handlebar up closer and level with the seat. i've tried the more "laid
down" bikes and admire the people who can comfortably ride them, but they don't work for me. you
might check roadbikereview.com and see if anyone there has input on one. smokey

 

[email protected] (Scott Goldsmith) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> "Lloyd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> > Anyone have any feedback on the Litespeed Veneto. It is supposed to be a more "relaxed" bike
> > given its longer head tube and sloping top tube. Would a fit but inexperienced rider who is not
> > very aggressive go for a frame like that or would it be better to stay with a more traditional
> > road bike?
>
> In a way the Veneto allows for a tradtional fit, where most Litespeeds have a modern "racing fit"
> where the bar is below the seat level by 2 or more inches. Look at old racing pics from the
> 50s/60s, bar and seat are near level, the sloping top tube and long head tube compenstate for the
> lack of vertical adjustment in threadless headsets. (I know about hi rise stems, they are just
> ugly to me)
>
> For some shameless commerce from the non-racing bike universe.....
>
> http://www.rivbike.com/html/bikes_romulus_3.html

i love rivendell bikes, but they are also beyond my budget right now. i do have a set of their
noodle bars on my lemond and they are very comfortable, especially if you do a lot of riding on the
hoods. another thing i like on the romulus are the bar end shifters and
110/74 crankset with lower gearing. i've tried STI, and it does have it's good points, but it's
still more comfortable for me to grip the narrower plain brake hoods. i'm sure STI would be
the best way to go for racing. 53/39 cranksets are great for riders that are in shape and have
good climbing skills, but a 110/74 provides a lot more gearing choices for the recreational
rider. smokey
>
> Much closer to Faustos bike than any current Litespeed, even the gearing.