Tour Easy head angle

Discussion in 'Recumbent bicycles' started by Guy Bouchard, Mar 6, 2004.

  1. Guy Bouchard

    Guy Bouchard Guest

    Hi.

    I am building a Tour Easy Replica. I'd like to know what is
    the head tube angle of Large Tour Easy bicycle with 406mm
    front wheel.

    Thanks!

    Guy
     
    Tags:


  2. PaPa

    PaPa New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dangerously close to 59.5 degrees. Nearly anything between 57 and 62 will be suitable, providing the proper amount of trail in implemented. Good luck
     
  3. Mark Stonich

    Mark Stonich Guest

    Guy Bouchard <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Hi.
    >
    > I am building a Tour Easy Replica. I'd like to know what
    > is the head tube angle of Large Tour Easy bicycle with
    > 406mm front wheel.

    Too steep, leaving you with the choice of a too much tiller,
    or a seat back angle too steep for long range confort. The
    best TE clones use a shallower angle.
     
  4. PaPa

    PaPa New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0

    I agree Mark, however, it is not necessarily true for all builders if an exact clone is what the rider is after. And, some of us have unusually short legs which allows a 60+ head tube angles without excessive tiller (mine is 7"). Additionally, I don't care for the slow steering response associated with 50-ish head tube angles - not to mention the increased turning radius and degraded low speed handling. BTW, my seat back angle is 20+ degrees.
     
  5. PaPa

    PaPa New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    I lied.. after checking, my SB angle is 30+ degrees (from vertical), not 20, as stated above.
     
  6. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

    PaPa wrote:

    > I lied.. after checking, my SB angle is 30+ degrees (from
    > vertical), not 20, as stated above.

    Recumbent seatback angles are usually measured from
    horizontal.

    Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)
     
  7. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

    PaPa wrote:

    > Guy Bouchard wrote:
    > > Hi. I am building a Tour Easy Replica. I'd like to
    > > know what is the head tube angle of Large Tour Easy
    > > bicycle with 406mm front wheel. Thanks! Guy
    >
    > Dangerously close to 59.5 degrees....

    At exactly 59.5 degrees, the bike will explode when
    ridden. ;)

    Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)
     
  8. Guy Bouchard

    Guy Bouchard Guest

    PaPa a écrit :
    > Guy Bouchard wrote:
    > > Hi. I am building a Tour Easy Replica. I'd like to
    > > know what is the head tube angle of Large Tour Easy
    > > bicycle with 406mm front wheel. Thanks! Guy
    >
    >
    >
    > Dangerously close to 59.5 degrees. Nearly anything between
    > 57 and 62 will be suitable, providing the proper amount of
    > trail in implemented. Good luck
    >
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    >
    Thanks a lot!

    Guy
     
  9. PaPa

    PaPa New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    Nice try Mr. S.... LOL
     
  10. Guy Bouchard

    Guy Bouchard Guest

    Mark Stonich a écrit :
    > Guy Bouchard <[email protected]> wrote in
    > message news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >>Hi.
    >>
    >>I am building a Tour Easy Replica. I'd like to know what
    >>is the head tube angle of Large Tour Easy bicycle with
    >>406mm front wheel.
    >
    >
    > Too steep, leaving you with the choice of a too much
    > tiller, or a seat back angle too steep for long range
    > confort. The best TE clones use a shallower angle.
    Thanks Mark.

    By the way, your last custom bent is really nice. I think
    you are on something. Commercial plan?

    I really miss new monthly report on mnhpva.org . We are
    far from Minnesota but those report make us feel like we
    are friends.

    Guy
     
  11. Mark Stonich

    Mark Stonich Guest

    PaPa <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > I agree Mark, however, it is not necessarily true for all
    > builders if an exact clone is what the rider is after.

    Why would anyone want an exact clone, when it's simple to
    improve on the design. Everyone I know who has built more
    than one clone moved the BB up and forward, and used a
    shallower head angle and less trail on the 2nd one.

    > And, some of us have unusually short legs which allows a
    > 60+ head tube angles without excessive tiller (mine is
    > 7"). Additionally, I don't care for the slow steering
    > response associated with 50-ish head tube angles - not to
    > mention the increased turning radius and degraded low
    > speed handling.

    It's true that shallower head angles mean that the contact
    patch will turn slightly less for a given rotation of the
    steerer tube. However, if the shallower head angle is used
    to reduce excessive tiller, you get more angular movement at
    the contact patch for a given amount of hand movement.
    Therefore steering will actually be quicker.

    As for increased turning radius and degraded low speed
    handling, the increased radius is simply because a bike with
    a shallow head angle usually has one because the rider is
    far back from the front wheel, and lower than on a bike
    where proper reach and tiller can be achieved with a steeper
    angle. The angle itself has little to do with it, if the
    trail is kept to a minimum.

    If for some silly reason you do have significant trail,
    shallower head angles will lead to more wheelflop.

    The biggest issue for low speed maneuverability is how
    confident the rider is in his ability to balance the bike.
    The big issues there are CoG location, steering ergonomics,
    and reducing wheelflop.

    >BTW, my seat back angle is 20+ (Oops, 30) degrees.

    Not many people are going to find optimum comfort at 30
    degrees (Measured from Vertical?)
     
  12. Tom Blum

    Tom Blum Guest

    Mark Stonich states: "Everyone I know who has built more
    than one clone moved
    > the BB up and forward, and used a shallower head angle and
    > less trail on the 2nd one."

    Case in point, my latest is in progress and can be viewed at
    www.gate.net/~teblum follow the links to LWB Mark II.

    It seems to be morphing into a hybrid rans V2/Tour Easy.

    Miles of Smiles Tom
     
  13. PaPa

    PaPa New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
    According to you then, Craig Calfree went to a lot of work for nothing on his new creation.
     
  14. Mark Stonich

    Mark Stonich Guest

    PaPa <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Mark Stonich wrote:
    > > It's true that shallower head angles mean that the
    > > contact patch will turn slightly less for a given
    > > rotation of the steerer tube. However, if the
    > > shallower head angle is used to reduce excessive
    > > tiller, you get more angular movement at the contact
    > > patch for a given amount of hand movement. Therefore
    > > steering will actually be quicker.
    >
    > According to you then, Craig Calfree went to a lot of work
    > for nothing on his new creation.

    ???????
     
  15. Tom Sherman

    Tom Sherman Guest

    Mark Stonich wrote:

    > PaPa <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:<[email protected]>...
    >
    >>Mark Stonich wrote:
    >> > It's true that shallower head angles mean that the
    >> > contact patch will turn slightly less for a given
    >> > rotation of the steerer tube. However, if the
    >> > shallower head angle is used to reduce excessive
    >> > tiller, you get more angular movement at the contact
    >> > patch for a given amount of hand movement. Therefore
    >> > steering will actually be quicker.
    >>
    >>According to you then, Craig Calfree went to a lot of work
    >>for nothing on his new creation.
    >
    >
    > ???????

    Calfee comes out against shallow head tube angles for LWB
    recumbents on their website.
    <http://www.calfeedesign.com/stiletto.shtml>,
    <http://www.calfeedesign.com/recumbent_faq.shtml>.

    Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)
     
  16. Guy Bouchard

    Guy Bouchard Guest

    Mark Stonich a écrit :
    > PaPa <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >
    >>I agree Mark, however, it is not necessarily true for all
    >>builders if an exact clone is what the rider is after.
    >
    >
    > Why would anyone want an exact clone, when it's simple to
    > improve on the design. Everyone I know who has built more
    > than one clone moved the BB up and forward, and used a
    > shallower head angle and less trail on the 2nd one.
    >
    >

    I am doing it too. The head angle will be shallower. BB
    is a bit higher but not by much. Seat will be lower by
    a few inch.

    Guy
     
  17. Mark Stonich

    Mark Stonich Guest

    Tom Sherman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
    > Mark Stonich wrote:
    > > ???????
    >
    > Calfee comes out against shallow head tube angles for LWB
    > recumbents on their website.
    > <http://www.calfeedesign.com/stiletto.shtml>,
    > <http://www.calfeedesign.com/recumbent_faq.shtml>.
    >
    > Tom Sherman - Quad Cities (Illinois Side)

    Hilarious. Oh well, I guess back when I built my first 'bent
    I had a pretty fuzzy understanding of how they worked too.
    It's obvious from the 1st two items in the FAQ, and the bike
    itself, that he still has a lot to learn.

    BTW If anyone wants to get into an argument, I'm much too
    busy to busy to discuss all of the things I think are wrong
    with his bike or FAQ.

    BTW2 The remote steering, steep head angle and steep
    seatback would make sense, IF IT WAS GOING TO BE FITTED INTO
    A GOLD RUSH TYPE SHELL.
     
  18. PaPa

    PaPa New Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    68
    Likes Received:
    0
     
Loading...
Loading...