Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Bicycle Mechanics
Reload this Page >

Overly harsh new bike

Bicycle Mechanics Broken bottom bracket? Tacoed wheel? If you're having problems with your bicycle, or just need help fixing a flat, drop in here for the latest on bicycle mechanics & bicycle maintenance.

Overly harsh new bike

Old 06-12-19, 07:55 AM
  #26  
u235
Senior Member
 
u235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 908
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 318 Post(s)
Liked 21 Times in 18 Posts
How far and time wise are you riding this bike compared to your old one? The longer the ride and the more you are lugging around might be a factor along with possibly some fit or dimension differences may be playing a bigger role in your "comfort" than maybe a frame/fork stiffness. Tires can change things drastically.

Last edited by u235; 06-12-19 at 07:58 AM.
u235 is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 08:49 AM
  #27  
WizardOfBoz
Generally bewildered
 
WizardOfBoz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Eastern PA, USA
Posts: 1,868

Bikes: 2014 Trek Domane 6.9, 1999 LeMond Zurich, 1978 Schwinn Superior

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Liked 27 Times in 23 Posts
Originally Posted by NeoY2k View Post
But the bike actually felt harsher with the 90mm stem than with the 110mm stem...
If that observation is real (I find stuff like that hard to judge), one might say that the 90mm has less length to absorb shock, but typically those stems are stiffer than heck. Suspect (as have others) that the fork is really, really stiff. Looking at it, its wide (that is, stiff) down to the dropouts. Be interesting to know if the stiffness abated if you threw a new more flexible fork into the frame.

Tire inflation and construction, and wheel construction (are you using 2 cross in front? - I can't recall) all play a role in shock absorption, but I can't believe that all those folks hyping their CF handlebars and CF forks as "shock absorbing", and the people buying them and reporting positively, are completely wrong.

If you're married to the fork, that shock absorbing stem that wgscott pointed out looks cool.

Last edited by WizardOfBoz; 06-13-19 at 11:28 AM.
WizardOfBoz is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 09:10 AM
  #28  
wgscott
Occam's Rotor
 
wgscott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: The Timbers of Fennario (CL77)
Posts: 4,901

Bikes: Steel

Mentioned: 61 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2366 Post(s)
Liked 211 Times in 130 Posts
I can feel differences between my two steel-framed road bikes, even with very compliant tires. Also, I have never found any of my aluminum-framed bikes to be comfortable. I suspect that, with a 54 frame, it might just be too stiff. (One was a Cannondale, who were a bit notorious for stiff frames.) The one carbon bike I tried for a day, Lauf, complete with the leaf-spring fork, was brutally stiff and unforgiving on the same trails that my steel frame CX Enve fork bike is comfortable on.

There are so many variables it is almost impossible to generalize.
wgscott is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 12:35 PM
  #29  
u235
Senior Member
 
u235's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 908
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 318 Post(s)
Liked 21 Times in 18 Posts
I can find comfort on my very rigid AL bike on miles and days of various gravel and terrain even with racks and bags with the right tire. The wrong tire setup can be brutal on the same bike. We are talking about on road here asphalt and chipseal. I mean how can a 10-20mm stem difference be a big factor in comfort and feel (not talking about fit mind you) compared to say a 25mm tire vs a 38 tire at 30 PSI lower pressure? I find that very hard to fathom. This seems to me more of a angles and different position being uncomfortable or different more than the raw vibration/harmonic related harshness.

Last edited by u235; 06-12-19 at 12:54 PM.
u235 is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 02:43 PM
  #30  
ChinookTx
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Gatineau, Quebec
Posts: 250

Bikes: Kona Rove Ti., Motobecane Whipshot Ti

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 87 Post(s)
Liked 39 Times in 31 Posts
+1 for the Shock Stop stem. I have on on both my bikes, and love them. They haven't developed any play so far aside from the initial "softening" after a couple of rides. (The breaking-in of the elastomer inserts). They are expensive so do make sure you have your stem lengths properly determined first!
ChinookTx is offline  
Old 06-12-19, 05:20 PM
  #31  
squirtdad
Senior Member
 
squirtdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose (Willow Glen) Ca
Posts: 6,136

Bikes: 90/91 De Rosa, '84 Team Miyata, '82 nishiski,

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 807 Post(s)
Liked 38 Times in 30 Posts
fwiw

bike Team Miyata 84

rider clyde 265

clincher wheelset, dura ace hubs, 32 h, spokes straight gauge, mavic MA40 rims, Bontrager 25mm tires at 110 psi. harsh harsh ride

tubular wheelset, (wheelsmith build like new) sanshin hubs, butted spokes, Mavic 330 rims (close to MA40 would be GP4...these are a bit lighter) Challenge elite tubular at 130 psi. bike dances, super smooth responsive ride.

the tubulars are a big part, but I thing the wheel is also a big part.....bit lighter rim, spokes may be a bit more supple

ymmv
__________________
Looking for Team Miyata F&F 58cm
squirtdad is offline  
Old 06-13-19, 06:55 PM
  #32  
TiHabanero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 2,275
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 644 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 20 Times in 19 Posts
"the new bike has the exact same stack as the previous one. Reach, with a 90mm stem, is 8mm longer and I felt cramped. I switched to a 110mm stem and compensating with one less spacer, so the reach is 30mm longer than the older bike. While it felt way better on day rides, after the second day on road it felt too long."

With either stem installed the way you have it set up, the saddle height to stem height difference is the same as the old bike?
TiHabanero is offline  
Old 06-18-19, 11:41 AM
  #33  
NeoY2k
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Yep pretty much.
The new bike with 80mm stem +6 and 40mm spacers has 448mm reach and 643mm stack. Previous bike was 440 reach and 643 stack.
But new bike feels shorter, which seems reasonable given it has steeper seat tube. I tried it with a 110mm stem as I felt cramped, and while it is really nice on a day ride, after 3 days on the road it felt too long.

Currently trying a 100mm redshift stem. It does help with vibration. With vibration out of the way, it highlights its geometry funkiness.
With a 75 seat tube angle and 73 head tube angle, it is pretty twitchy at low speeds, and I have the saddle slid rearward to compensate for the seat tube angle.

That seems pretty agressive for loaded touring.
Considering a frame swap to a Genesis Croix de Fer, but felt their ride pretty uninspiring. Though, at least, nothing wrong with their handling or position on the bike.
NeoY2k is offline  
Old 06-18-19, 03:30 PM
  #34  
LesterOfPuppets
cowboy, steel horse, etc
 
LesterOfPuppets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Valley of the Sun.
Posts: 32,499

Bikes: everywhere

Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3898 Post(s)
Liked 61 Times in 46 Posts
These guys claimed 440mm ATC for this P2 fork they used to have.

https://www.tritoncycles.co.uk/frame...sc-fork-p10537
LesterOfPuppets is offline  
Old 06-18-19, 04:14 PM
  #35  
ThermionicScott 
hungry
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 18,514

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 68 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2028 Post(s)
Liked 95 Times in 79 Posts
Are you sure you're not locking your elbows as you ride?

Rather than putting 70 psi into each tire, try 65 in front and 75 in the rear.
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline  
Old 06-19-19, 04:10 AM
  #36  
NeoY2k
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by LesterOfPuppets View Post
These guys claimed 440mm ATC for this P2 fork they used to have.

https://www.tritoncycles.co.uk/frame...sc-fork-p10537
Yep thanks. Kona made tons of P2 forks with differing A2C all bearing the same name.
And no mention of the required A2C on the 2007 geometry charts, though they now state it since circa 2010.
And they never answered my mail asking about it

Though, if the bike is supposed to have 71 head tube angle and it measures around 73,7 I only see a mismatched fork length as a possible culprit...
But then the photos definately don't let you think there is a 465mm fork in that bike... And the top tube would be crazily sloping...

Last edited by NeoY2k; 06-19-19 at 04:54 AM.
NeoY2k is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.