WhyFi

It was within a year of being released, but I bought it as a Canon refurb, probably one of the first available.

Bah Humbug

And here I wish I could get a 5D4...

gettingold

So here's a picture of the only damage on the bike - the brake lever. In a nice production touch, the bike is leaning on my new walker.

MauiKai

Glad to hear you are ok and the bike is too.
Ride safe peeps

TakingMyTime

Glad to hear you're ok (relatively speaking). Heal fast and good luck.

SethAZ 

Wow, for going down hard like that the bike got away pretty well. I notice you're still riding those Kenda tires that it came with. I kid you not, when I swapped out those 28mm Kendas with their heavy butyl tubes and put in the extralight version of the Compass 32mm tires with Vitorria latex tubes, the bike actually got 7 ounces lighter. Those Kendas were really stiff, heavy, and dead-feeling to me. The Compass tires are way, way nicer. A Conti GP 4000 28mm would be way better too.

gettingold

Thanks. I will definitely have time to make that switch over the winter. Going 32 mm sounds pretty interesting. If I'm not careful, it will be a fatbike before too long.

SethAZ 

This is my very first set of Compass tires. I'll have to see how long they last, whether or how often I get flats, etc. I was turned on to them after reading Jan Heine's Bicycle Quarterly articles. Now that you're laid up for a few weeks, if you haven't already seen those articles I'd highly recommend you look them up. Jan Heine runs Compass Bicycles and has those tires made for him by Panaracer.

I'd always thought that the 35 or 38mm tires out there were these thick, heavy, lifeless commuter tires, like the ones I had on my hardtail mountain bike when I started cycling again at 350 lbs. There was a world of difference between those 38mm commuter tires and something like a 25mm Conti GP 4000. As wide becomes (rightly, IMO) the next big thing, it's my hope that very nice, relatively high performance 32-38mm tires will come out from more and more manufacturers. Continental's Grand Prix 4-Season is already out in 32mm, but the GP 4000 isn't. I'm less familiar with the other major manufacturers' offerings, but it seems everyone's just getting to the point of having 28mm versions of their better tires out. 32mm just hasn't really happened yet, at least not to the same extent as 25 and 28mm.

I actually bought a set of 28mm GP4000 with the intent to put them on the Lynskey when it showed up. I've been riding one of those on my Trek for a couple of months. It was a nice upgrade from the 25mm, but the 28mm just barely fit between the chainstays (less than 1mm of space around it), and the largest my fork would support was the 25mm. I'll tell you right now the Compass 32mm extralight version is far superior to the 28/25mm GP4000 combo I was riding on my Trek. It's not subtle.

The Compass tires are mucho expensivo, which is a drawback. I paid something like $76 each for them, but I was really curious, and had to know. So far I think they're worth it, but I'm still only like 65 miles in on them. I'll hold my final judgment until I've worn out a set and actually know how they did, how durable they were, etc. It does tell you something, though, that going from the stock 28mm Kenda tires/tubes that came with the Lynskey to these Compass 32s cut 7 ounces from the bike. That's like 200 grams of rolling mass gone. And the Compass use an extremely supple casing, in contrast to the thick, stiff, anti-supple casing of the Kenda. It's night and day. I haven't tried the Conti GP 4000 28s on the Lynskey yet. I'm currently building a new wheelset for this bike, and when I get them done I'll move the Compass tires over to those wheels, and put the GP 4000 28s on my current wheels as a backup. I'll try them out then and see how the compare to the Compass. I do like that the GP 4000s can usually be had for like $40-45 on sale somewhere.

topslop1

Dang son.

turkey9186

Glad you are okay and the bike was not seriously injured.
Keep an eye on the head injury. It took a few weeks before the headaches and vertigo set in after my accident.
I have my cracked helmet hanging near my bikes to remind me how important it is to wear one, all the time.

gettingold

Thanks. I have a follow up with a neuro surgeon in a month.

garciawork

Will 32's clear the fork? I have a couple year old R150 disc, which is the older geo both it and the R250 had, with 28mm max in the back, and just shy of 28 up front with the Enve fork. When I saw what they were bumping the clearance to on the 260, I couldn't figure out which fork they would be using, as the one they specced on the R150 I have is pretty much the same clearance-wise as the Enve. Did they use a different fork or redesign the old one?

gettingold

Yes, the R 260 can clearly handle 32 mms. The website says that now. I think it might handle a little wider. SethAZ has already been riding them. There is a thread for road ti bikes with 28 and 32 mm tires.

bruce19

Good grief! Just for a little encouragement....on July 24th 2013 I crashed and broke my neck. Had C1 & C2 fused. Back on the rail trail in November. Hang in there. Listen to the docs. You will be OK. Best wishes out to you.

JonnyV

I thoroughly enjoyed your maiden voyage post. I'm building up a 2017 R250 Disc frame and am really curious about the ride. The 2nd ride report though...dude I'm glad you're alright. It's good the bikes ok too. Take your time, listen to the docs. Ride safe when you come back.

SethAZ 

I can't speak for the R150. The R250 (which I originally ordered) used Lynskey's Pro Carbon #5 road bike fork (speaking of the disc brake version, not sure about the rim brake version), which they claim supports 28mm tires. I don't know what it will really handle, but that's what they claim. The R260 (which I changed my order to before the 250 shipped) ships with the Lynskey Pro Carbon Gravel fork, which officially supports 45mm tires. If you look at the photos I posted of how the 32mm Compass tire fits in that fork, there is simply tons and tons of space around and above that tire.

You can't extrapolate back from what the R260 will support to what other models will support, because they shipped with different forks. I know that the major changes from the 2017 R250 to the 2018 R260 were wider chainstays for larger tires in the rear, better integration with Di2 (I don't know what specifically is better about it, but that's what they said), and that it ships with the gravel fork instead of the road fork.

SethAZ 

Can't speak to the R250 specifically, but the R260 I have (the update to the R250 design for 2018) rides really smoothly. It's hard to describe how much more solid and smooth the ride is on my R260 than it was on my Trek 2300. My Trek was running a 28mm Conti GP4000 on the rear and a GP4000 25mm on the front, which are already known for a smoother ride compared to the 23mm tires, and yet the 32mm Compass tires on my R260 just blows away the ride I got from the Trek.

I can't compare the R260 ride with any other model, like Trek Domani or anything like that, since I didn't ride anything else recently. I ordered the Lynskey because I'm a heavy rider, wanted a tough bike, and with a geo that I would be comfortable on for long-distance rides. It delivers. Did a 62-mile ride this morning and by the end of that the only thing that wasn't comfortable was my legs, because they were tired. On the Trek 2300 my butt would have been really tired of sitting in the saddle for so long, my hands would have been fatigued from all the jostling and vibration and whatnot, plus my legs would have been tired. The R260 is just a much smoother ride. I can't say what percentage of the improvement comes from the titanium frame and what comes from the 32mm Compass tires. I'm sure they're both a big part of it. Bottom line, though, is that the Lynskey could actually run those 32mm tires (it could run much larger ones too) and my Trek was absolute just barely getting by with the 28mm Conti in the rear and the 25mm Conti up front. In fact, in the rear the 28mm GP4K had less than 1mm of clearance from the chainstays, which isn't really enough. I rode them anyway because they helped subdue some of the vibration. The Lynskey blows it away in this regard.

garciawork

Hmm, not sure I understand the logic of using the gravel fork on that bike... Doesn't that tweak the front end height with a higher axle to crown? It looked like they didn't change anything between the 250 and 260 aside from chainstay length, so that would cause issues, to me at least. Enve does have a newer disk fork with the same axle to crown as the Lynskey #5 that'll clear 32's, but man that sucker is expensive.

SethAZ 

First I need to point out that Lynskey's web page on the R260 is factually in error. It lists the road fork in the specifications for the R260, but that is a mistake from them simply copying and pasting the R250 description into the new R260 description and then changing whatever was different. It does in fact ship with the gravel fork.

Secondly I think you make a good point. I have noticed significantly more wheel flop at low speeds on my bike than, say, my Trek 2300 has. I would expect something like that if they slackened the head tube angle without also increasing the fork rake to keep the trail within a more neutral range. My problem is that I have no prior experience with such "comfort" or "endurance" designs to know whether a more neutral trail is even desired or expected, or whether they intentionally trade off low-speed stability for the ability to ride like it's on a rail on fast descents and the like. I got up to around 41 mph yesterday on a certain descent, and the bike really was confidence inspiring, even as I forced my "big boy" physique down into perhaps an overly aggressive "escape velocity tuck."

gettingold

They use the gravel fork on the disc.

garciawork

That is precisely what I was curious about. I had an R230 year ago, which was about as perfect of a geometry as I have ridden, and have an R150 disc now, and I have never noticed wheel flop. Bummer that they didn't tweak the geometry to handle the gravel fork... but with the added clearance, maybe they were expecting people to get a little braver with gravel, and as a result the extra stability at speed was seen as desirable.

https://enve.com/products/road-disc-fork/

^ That is the Enve fork that roughly lines up with Lynskey's Carbon #5. Expensive! But I think that would have the bike handling as the initial geometry design was intended, while still clearing 32's. I would also imagine that they are planning a redesign of the #5 fork on their end, 28c clearance for a disc bike doesn't make a lot of sense long term with the trends these days.

matt92037

+1 on the Enve fork. I could see the gravel fork not being ideal on the R260 as The extra A2C measurement will chopper out the front end a bit. Same thing happens on MTBs when you try to throw a 160mm travel fork on a bike designed for a 120mm fork.

I would try to see if you could work 20% off the Enve fork (in 43mm rake) during the BF sales and see if Lynskey would refund you the $ for the GR fork as part of their 100% satisfaction guarantee.

My Pro5 fork comfortably fits tires that measure out to 30mm but will not fit much larger.

gettingold

So what is wheel flop? I have felt nothing weird at all with that gravel fork but I only weigh 142.

matt92037

Not sure how to describe the sensation of wheel flop but I will try.

When moving at slower speeds (like going up hill) and you provide minor steering input to the left let’s say, the wheel will feel like it wants to continue to flop/fall to the left.

SethAZ 

Wheel flop is really easy to show on a bike that's not moving at all. Just hold the bike upright by the seat or something. A bike with lots of wheel flop will want to turn the handlebar sharply to one side if you lean the bike just a tiny bit, and if you pay attention, you can actually see the front end drop a little. All bikes with any non-90 degree head tube angle and non-zero trail can do this, but bikes with excessive trail will do this really easily.

I can hold my Trek upright by the seat and lean it from side to side a little without a strong tendency for the wheel to flop over to that side, because the friction of the tire rubbing on the floor or street roughly counteracts the forces trying to flop it over. The R260 will do it very, very easily.

Another way to see it is to see (carefully) how slowly you can ride the bike without hands. At low speeds a bike with excessive trail will be very hard to ride without hands because the wheel naturally wants to flop over towards whichever side it happens to be leaning at any given moment.

As long as you've got your hands on the handlebar and the combination of handlebar width and stem length and such makes for a good stable control this isn't that big of a deal. But it's certainly there, and at lower speeds it can be annoying. I'll do a little more research and put some more miles on the bike to see how I like it, and then decide whether I want to reach out to Lynskey and see what they say. I'm really, really liking the bike so far.

Here's some numbers, though:
Lynskey Pro Road Carbon #5 fork is the one they shipped with the R250. It has an axle to crown length of 368mm.
Lynskey Pro Gr fork is the one they're shipping with the R260. It has an axle to crown length of 395mm. That's 27mm more height for the bottom of the steerer tube to the ground just due to the gravel fork.
The Enve fork that garciawork linked to has an axle to crown height of 370mm, and rake of 43mm, which isn't exactly the same as the Lynskey #5 road fork, but very close. The difference from those two to the Lynskey gravel fork is much greater.

They could have repositioned the head tube slightly (a little higher on the bike) to avoid the taller fork slackening the head tube angle, but I'm betting that they didn't do that. So the R260 will be less stable at slower speeds than the R250 was.

They might just say it's a tradeoff for the massive advantages of being able to run really nice, wide tires on the bike. And so far those advantages are very clear to me: my 32mm Compass tires are massively nicer to ride on than the 25mm and 28mm Conti tires I have on my Trek. The thing is, if they were going to swap forks like this to gain a nicer ride, they really should have tweaked the head tube upwards a little to keep the trail the same. The tradeoff wasn't really necessary, but they did it sort of by default by changing one thing without changing other things to factor it in. That bums me out a little.