Now that's what I call a new take on geometry....

[novocaine]

just looking at the green 410 above and all I can think is there would be nothing left of the back of the seat tube up hear, it would be worn down by the thick mud and gravel picked up while riding and probably clog up quicker than even a retrobike with a top-swing mount front mech and stay brace. There would certainly be no paint left on the bike there.

have you seen the price of it, you don't ride it in the wet and mud, it'll get dirty.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Yeah just over a grand* for the frame and you don't even get a e-motor on it.

But have you noticed how they have ridden another bike around the damp woodland and then stuck them on a clean bike

*not actaully expensive in terms of the price of a retobikes frame bitd, especially if you compared inflation based prices.

 

[novocaine]

I thought Maxxis tyres came pre-worn these days.

 

[d8mok]

Surely that will climb and pedal terribly with that Seat tube angle.

 

[2manyoranges]

D8mok - i agree re the 410 - looks like a very slack actual seat angle - Transition has led the way in really steepening them, to very good effect. Perhaps shows that all parameters still up for well-grounded refinement…

 

[mk one]

Yes i have wondered about the higher bb's on bigger wheeled bikes, wether the bike feels top heavy so to speak or it feels ok due to being in proportion with the rest of the bike. I have never ridden a big wheeled bike but i have one which had a high bb (cove hummer) and it felt unstable in some situations.

 

[clubby]

Yes i have wondered about the higher bb's on bigger wheeled bikes, wether the bike feels top heavy so to speak or it feels ok due to being in proportion with the rest of the bike. I have never ridden a big wheeled bike but i have one which had a high bb (cove hummer) and it felt unstable in some situations.

To some extent it doesn’t matter as the bb drop is usually bigger on 29ers. By that I mean the bottom bracket is further below the level of the axles than on a retrobike, so even though the actual bb is higher, the riders weight is further below the bikes c.o.g and is more stable.

 

[mk one]

To some extent it doesn’t matter as the bb drop is usually bigger on 29ers. By that I mean the bottom bracket is further below the level of the axles than on a retrobike, so even though the actual bb is higher, the riders weight is further below the bikes c.o.g and is more stable.

Thanks, yes thats what i was trying to get at, the relation with the bb and axles compared to a 26 bike.

 

[FluffyChicken]

Thanks, yes thats what i was trying to get at, the relation with the bb and axles compared to a 26 bike.

Just remember a bike pivots around the tyre contact patch with the ground and not the axles.

 

[clubby]

Just remember a bike pivots around the tyre contact patch with the ground and not the axles.

When the bike is stationary maybe but on the move it’s more complicated. In motion the wheels of the bike give it most of its stability. Bigger wheels have a greater gyroscopic stability (related to diameter squared) so where the rider weight sits in relation to this is important.


No single geometry number can be used to figure out how a bike will ride, but can useful for comparison.