touring road bike

In article <[email hidden]>,

Callistus Valerius said:

I've noticed that the trek 520 touring bike, has a much
longer wheelbase. On a steep descent, what kind of an
effect does a long wheelbase have?

Jobst is going to tell you it's a good thing. Since he
has photographic evidence that he can out-corner just
about anyone in this newsgroup, I'd trust the big guy on
this point.

Among local Cat 5s, I corner pretty good, but I cheat by
using really short cranks,
--
Ryan Cousineau, [email hidden]
sfu.cawiredcolaOpen ↗ President, Fabrizio
Mazzoleni Fan Club

Callistus Valerius said:

I've noticed that the trek 520 touring bike, has a much
longer wheelbase. On a steep descent, what kind of an
effect does a long wheelbase have?

A long wheelbase makes descending smooth and stable. My
Klein Navigator feels like a banked airplane in the corners.
--
terry morse Palo Alto, CA bike.terrymorse.combike.terrymorse.comOpen ↗

Callistus Valerius said:

I've noticed that the trek 520 touring bike, has a much
longer wheelbase. On a steep descent, what kind of an
effect does a long wheelbase have?

How much is "much longer", a couple of centimeters?

I suspect the difference isn't enough to be perceived.
(That is unless you're the kind of guy that can feel all
sorts of shock absorbing qualities in curved chainstays,
etc, etc, etc.)

Richard Ney said:

Callistus Valerius said:

I've noticed that the trek 520 touring bike, has a much
longer wheelbase. On a steep descent, what kind of an
effect does a long wheelbase have?

How much is "much longer", a couple of centimeters?

I suspect the difference isn't enough to be perceived.
(That is unless you're the kind of guy that can feel all
sorts of shock absorbing qualities in curved chainstays,
etc, etc, etc.)

Frame geometry definately does make a perceivable difference
to a bikes handling. My tourer has a longer wheelbase and
feels much more comfortable on long Alpine descents than my
road irons. Speeds are similar but the tourer feels slower.
Not purely down to wheel base I know but the wheelbase
affects the overall geometry anyway.

MSeries said:

Richard Ney wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Callistus Valerius said:

I've noticed that the trek 520 touring bike, has a much
longer wheelbase. On a steep descent, what kind of an
effect does a long wheelbase have?

How much is "much longer", a couple of centimeters?

"Racing" bikes these days have 40-41cm chainstays, "touring"
bikes 44-46cm. So ~5cm.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I suspect the difference isn't enough to be perceived.
(That is unless you're the kind of guy that can feel all
sorts of shock absorbing qualities in curved chainstays,
etc, etc, etc.)

Flexibity has nothing to do with it.

Quoted message said:

Frame geometry definately does make a perceivable
difference to a bikes handling. My tourer has a longer
wheelbase and feels much more comfortable on long Alpine
descents than my road irons. Speeds are similar but the
tourer feels slower. Not purely down to wheel base I know
but the wheelbase affects the overall geometry anyway.

Touring bikes usually have slacker head angles and matching
fork offset for more stability, especially when carrying
heavy loads. A slack head angle also lengthens wheelbase.
The longer chainstays are not just for a longer wheelbase,
but for heel clearance with panniers.

Most riders would probably be more comfortable on a
"touring" frame than the ridiculously short, steep-angled
"racing" frames which are commonplace. If nothing else,
they'd feel more confident on descents. "Racing" frames are
what's fashionable, though.

Matt O.

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

Quoted message said:

I've noticed that the trek 520 touring bike, has a much
longer wheelbase. On a steep descent, what kind of an
effect does a long wheelbase have?

Dear Cal,

It crosses the finish line sooner because the front wheel is
further forward?

More seriously, a longer wheelbase typically gives a
smoother ride because the rear axle (which rises the full
height of every bump) is further behind the rider. Think of
the front wheel contact patch as a hinge, with the back
rising and falling at the rear axle. The rider is closer to
the front pivot and therefore moves less.

Even more seriously, Jobst Brandt explained why longer
wheelbases corner better, brake better, and--oh, yes--
ride smoother:

[Jobst wrote:]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Tandems corner better than most singles under the right
riders until hairpin turns get a tighter radius than
three times the wheelbase.

[Carl whiffled:]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I think that I understand why a long wheelbase tandem
will suffer in extremely tight turns, but why do they
corner better than ordinary bikes elsewhere?

[Jobst explained:]

Quoted message said:

Steering movements make smaller changes in direction than
with a short wheelbase. Taken close to the limit, I think
it apparent that a theoretical wheelbase of a few inches
would steer erratically. Besides, the long wheelbase makes
the road smoother and braking results in less weight
transfer.

All of these advantages sound good downhill, where increased
speed makes things bumpier, turning becomes more important,
and braking gets interesting.

If you were wondering more about the effect on steering
geometry, the angles involved don't change for road bikes.
That is, both wheels maintain the same relationship to the
ground--it's just the slope of the ground that changes.

In contrast, drop a front wheel over the abrupt lip of a
gully at less than walking speed, and the position of the
contact patch changes wildly for a moment or two until the
rear wheel eases over the same lip and re-joins the front
wheel on the same slope.

The angle of gravity, of course, changes from the steering
geometry's point of view, but the angle on normal paved
roads isn't enough to be noticed.

Again, at extremely low speeds on much steeper trials-type
slopes, an effect is noticeable--it can take an effort to
straighten a sharply turning front wheel again because
you're working against the weight of the bicycle or
motorcycle. But the need to muscle the handlebars occurs
only in situations similar to dropping off the tailgate of a
pickup truck and turning to one side to avoid a car parked
behind it while the rear wheel is just easing over the edge
of the tailgate.

With luck, more experienced long-wheelbase road bicyclists
will point out any other handling changes on descents.

Roaring Toad Bike

Just about everything in the geometry of a tourer is
designed for stability and comfort. Remember, these
machines are designed for long distances CARRYING a load
(besides the rider).

The term "riding on rails" comes to mind when describing the
downhill experience of my Voyager.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"May you have the wind at your back. And a really low gear
for the hills!"

Chris Zacho ~ "Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

Chris'Z Corner geocities.comczcornerOpen ↗

"Matt O'Toole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

MSeries wrote::

Most riders would probably be more comfortable on a
"touring" frame than the ridiculously short, steep-angled
"racing" frames which are commonplace. If nothing else,
they'd feel more confident on descents. "Racing" frames
are what's fashionable, though.

Matt O.

I'll agree with this. I'm much more vertical on my
touring frame than I was on my Cannondale R300. This
makes me a little less aero, but with my shape, I don't
think it is a factor.

E

On 20 Mar 2004 11:10:22 -0800, [email hidden] (Carl Fogel)

Quoted message said:

All of these advantages sound good downhill, where
increased speed makes things bumpier, turning becomes more
important, and braking gets interesting.

A well-designed long wheelbase bike does indeed handle
better on descents. But no one has mentioned the other
aspect of longer wheelbase, the one that drove Jobst, in
large part, to a long wheel-based bike: ascents. On very
steep ascents there is a tendency for the front wheel to
lift off the ground. On a well designed long wheelbase bike
the center of gravity is more centered, less weight on the
rear wheel, so less tendency for the front wheel to lose
contact with the ground. I have two short wheelbase (one
very short) and two long wheelbase bikes; quite different
handling both uphill and downhill.

- rick

Are 2002 Giant OCR frames considered touring frames?

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

Quoted message said:

"Matt O'Toole" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

MSeries wrote::

Most riders would probably be more comfortable on a
"touring" frame than

the

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ridiculously short, steep-angled "racing" frames which
are commonplace.

If

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

nothing else, they'd feel more confident on descents.
"Racing" frames

are

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

what's fashionable, though.

Matt O.

I'll agree with this. I'm much more vertical on my
touring frame than I was on my Cannondale R300. This
makes me a little less aero, but with my shape, I don't
think it is a factor.

E