Double top tubes
#1
Beer >> Sanity
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Double top tubes
I'm looking for a not too expensive lugged steel frame to build into a "fast" commuter bike. I thought I narrowed it down to the Soma Stanyan, but I just saw they also have something called a san marcos that looks pretty nice too.
One thing I don't get is the double top tube on the larger sizes. Seems to be something Rivendell bikes does but plenty of other makers of larger frame sizes don't do this and even the Soma Stanyan doesn't. It says it's to "restore the triangulation lose with the tall top tube" but I don't see any loss of triangulation in other "tall" bikes. What are they talking about?
One a more general note, any thoughts on which of these would make a good commuter bike for 30 mile RT rides with just a rear rack and maybe 20lbs or less of "stuff" to haul? I will put on a drop bar and compact crank with probably an Apex 11-32 rear cassette. I will most likely get a 60cm (Stanyan) or 59cm (San Marcos). Geometry on the Stanyan seems more agressive with the short HT but not sure I care about that.
Thanks.
One thing I don't get is the double top tube on the larger sizes. Seems to be something Rivendell bikes does but plenty of other makers of larger frame sizes don't do this and even the Soma Stanyan doesn't. It says it's to "restore the triangulation lose with the tall top tube" but I don't see any loss of triangulation in other "tall" bikes. What are they talking about?
One a more general note, any thoughts on which of these would make a good commuter bike for 30 mile RT rides with just a rear rack and maybe 20lbs or less of "stuff" to haul? I will put on a drop bar and compact crank with probably an Apex 11-32 rear cassette. I will most likely get a 60cm (Stanyan) or 59cm (San Marcos). Geometry on the Stanyan seems more agressive with the short HT but not sure I care about that.
Thanks.
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Sesame Street
Posts: 266
Bikes: Swobo Folsom, Diamond Back Master TG, Mongoose Alta, Huffy Daisy Tandem
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Your two choices are certainly very nice frames and they fit the bill of being both lugged steel and capable of commuting. I personally have no experience with either of those two frames, but I do have a fair amount of experience with older lugged frames that have proved quite suitable for commuting. I would personally suggest checking out the used options in your area, a great many deals are to be had out there on used road bikes of the lesser known or smaller makes that are nonetheless top-notch bikes when built up properly. My suggestion of seeking used bikes comes from my having been raised thrifty, my current status as a student, and my love for pre-owned things that have already developed a "personality" of their own. However, if you prefer more modern options I can offer little beyond Soma's and Rivendell's options. You may also consider looking into Velo Orange Rando frame which is also lugged steel and suitable for you needs. Good luck!
Cheers
lverhagen
Cheers
lverhagen
#3
Banned
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Northern California
Posts: 5,804
Bikes: Raleigh Grand Prix, Giant Innova, Nishiki Sebring, Trek 7.5FX
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I love the San Marcos and the Stanyan. In particular, I love the lugged chromoly frames. The lugged crown of the Stanyan is absolutely an exquisite delight to behold. I can personally imagine the installation of chrome chain stay covers as well as possibly chrome-colored; handlebars, stem, crankset, and pedals.
- SOMA has really over done it with these beautiful frames!
PS.
I don't quite understand the double top tubes for the larger San Marcos frames though...Seems just a bit quaint!
- SOMA has really over done it with these beautiful frames!
PS.
I don't quite understand the double top tubes for the larger San Marcos frames though...Seems just a bit quaint!
Last edited by SlimRider; 09-11-11 at 11:57 PM.
#4
Senior Member
The headtube on the San Marco is 200+mm on the 59 and 63cm frames which are much longer than those on the Stanyan.
Maybe this helps a bit. The line beyond the head tube for the upper top tube is 2/7th the length of the upper top tube. Given the distance from the upper top tube to the down tube, the forward triangle is more like a trapezoid instead.
Maybe this helps a bit. The line beyond the head tube for the upper top tube is 2/7th the length of the upper top tube. Given the distance from the upper top tube to the down tube, the forward triangle is more like a trapezoid instead.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 446
Bikes: 1996 LeMond Yellow Jersey, 2013 Soma Saga, 1980 Zebrakenko Wind, 1980 Nishiki Ultimate
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
From what I know, the extra tube is there to protect against frame flex (and sometimes break) for taller frames and riders.
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: England
Posts: 12,948
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
It's an old fashioned solution to stiffening large frames back from when the only tubing was standard 1" diameter. It also allows a large frame to be built in a lugged fashion.
If you are looking for a particular style, its an OK solution. If you want the optimum design, it will have to be in welded, oversized tubing.
An oversized head-tube using a modern standard size will be stiffer and require less support in the large sizes.
If you are looking for a particular style, its an OK solution. If you want the optimum design, it will have to be in welded, oversized tubing.
An oversized head-tube using a modern standard size will be stiffer and require less support in the large sizes.
#7
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Liked 3,693 Times
in
2,515 Posts
I think they would have put in a double top tube on the smaller frames if it would have fit. It's just for style points
#8
Beer >> Sanity
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Thanks for the feedback. I guess it's just a Rivendell thing. Personally, I don't care for it as it makes a large bike just that much heavier. The 60cm Stanyan doesn't have the double tube while the 59 San Marcos does. Maybe it's the really tall HT on the SM. I'm leaning toward the Stanyan mostly on look and price but that one has an overly short HT. Don't see why they can't do something in the more average range.
I didn't know steel frame tubing came in larger sizes. I thought it was only aluminum that they could do the large oversized but thin walled tubes. Maybe it's just a weight thing. Oversized steel would probably be heavy.
It's an old fashioned solution to stiffening large frames back from when the only tubing was standard 1" diameter. It also allows a large frame to be built in a lugged fashion.
If you are looking for a particular style, its an OK solution. If you want the optimum design, it will have to be in welded, oversized tubing.
An oversized head-tube using a modern standard size will be stiffer and require less support in the large sizes.
If you are looking for a particular style, its an OK solution. If you want the optimum design, it will have to be in welded, oversized tubing.
An oversized head-tube using a modern standard size will be stiffer and require less support in the large sizes.
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times
in
64 Posts
It's an old fashioned solution to stiffening large frames back from when the only tubing was standard 1" diameter. It also allows a large frame to be built in a lugged fashion.
If you are looking for a particular style, its an OK solution. If you want the optimum design, it will have to be in welded, oversized tubing.
An oversized head-tube using a modern standard size will be stiffer and require less support in the large sizes.
If you are looking for a particular style, its an OK solution. If you want the optimum design, it will have to be in welded, oversized tubing.
An oversized head-tube using a modern standard size will be stiffer and require less support in the large sizes.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,200
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 137 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 81 Times
in
64 Posts
Thanks for the feedback. I guess it's just a Rivendell thing. Personally, I don't care for it as it makes a large bike just that much heavier. The 60cm Stanyan doesn't have the double tube while the 59 San Marcos does. Maybe it's the really tall HT on the SM. I'm leaning toward the Stanyan mostly on look and price but that one has an overly short HT. Don't see why they can't do something in the more average range.
I didn't know steel frame tubing came in larger sizes. I thought it was only aluminum that they could do the large oversized but thin walled tubes. Maybe it's just a weight thing. Oversized steel would probably be heavy.
I didn't know steel frame tubing came in larger sizes. I thought it was only aluminum that they could do the large oversized but thin walled tubes. Maybe it's just a weight thing. Oversized steel would probably be heavy.
#11
Beer >> Sanity
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Which is what I would expect. This begs the question, though, is the Stanyan using oversized tubes or is it just a weaker frame because it uses 1" and no double tube? Head tube is 1 and 1/8" but don't about the rest of the frame. At 190 lbs plus gear, I don't want a bike that isn't up to the task (although most steel bikes can take a lot of abuse, I don't want to abuse my bike).
#12
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Miami, FL
Posts: 1,230
Bikes: 2007 Giant Cypress DX, Windsor Tourist 2011
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 24 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I hate the way double top tubes look. I would prefer that they build the frame out of stronger material, or make the top tube of a greater circumference. Of course this is just my preference.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: PNW - Victoria, BC
Posts: 1,486
Bikes: 2002 Litespeed Vortex - 2007 Trek Madone 5.9 - 2004 Redline Conquest Pro - Specialized S-Works Festina Team Model - 93 Cannondale M 800 Beast of the East
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I'm not a big fan of the look of double top tube frames either, but it's purpose is definitely to reduce frame flex, while maintaing the same tube diameter. This issue can be addressed other ways via larger diameter tubes or sloping top tubes. My guess is that some manufacturers utilize this method as a point of style, giving a nod to "old school" technique. The Pashley Guv'nor uses the same technique. For me, I'd try to make the smaller frame work and address the sizing issue with a longer seatpost (with setback if necessary) and a longer stem.
#14
afraid of whales
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 4,306
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
If you're not carrying 50lbs of cargo it's hard to imagine the double top tube being useful. It's not going to break, it will flex more. If 90% of the time you're carrying less than 20lbs, I'd go with the Stanyan.
#15
12mph+ commuter
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Oak Park, IL
Posts: 863
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Looks like the perfect place to store a frame pump without it getting in the way of bottle cages or other gadgets. Just sayin'
#16
incazzare.
It used to serve a function, but now it's really just a style thing. I have a Kilo OS, which is fun (mine's mostly not stock). If you like it, you like it. If you don't, you don't.
__________________
1964 JRJ (Bob Jackson), 1973 Wes Mason, 1974 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1986 Schwinn High Sierra, 2000ish Colian (Colin Laing), 2011 Dick Chafe, 2013 Velo Orange Pass Hunter
1964 JRJ (Bob Jackson), 1973 Wes Mason, 1974 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1986 Schwinn High Sierra, 2000ish Colian (Colin Laing), 2011 Dick Chafe, 2013 Velo Orange Pass Hunter
#17
Banned
My Touring frame put 2 tubes side by side, took care of the rear rack-load flexing the top tube .. the 2 tubes .75" .o49 wall also functioned as chainstays and seatstays.
I see Trek has a single speed the 2 tubes are the seat-stays , then miter into the head tube
they gusset the seat tube, and add a bottle opener, in the back
My build, a collaboration, kept them parallel, passed by
attached to the side of the head tube then got gusseted there behind the head tube.
frame fit tire pump sits between the toptubes..
I cut down a 'church key" added it to the side of the left seat tube.
I see Trek has a single speed the 2 tubes are the seat-stays , then miter into the head tube
they gusset the seat tube, and add a bottle opener, in the back
My build, a collaboration, kept them parallel, passed by
attached to the side of the head tube then got gusseted there behind the head tube.
frame fit tire pump sits between the toptubes..
I cut down a 'church key" added it to the side of the left seat tube.
Last edited by fietsbob; 09-12-11 at 06:50 PM.
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 523
Bikes: 2012 Motobecane (BikesDirect) Immortal Force; 2011 (?) Civia Bryant Gates Carbon Belt Drive (upgraded to Alfine 11 and Gates CenterTrack)
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm not a big fan of the look of double top tube frames either, but it's purpose is definitely to reduce frame flex, while maintaing the same tube diameter. This issue can be addressed other ways via larger diameter tubes or sloping top tubes. My guess is that some manufacturers utilize this method as a point of style, giving a nod to "old school" technique. The Pashley Guv'nor uses the same technique. For me, I'd try to make the smaller frame work and address the sizing issue with a longer seatpost (with setback if necessary) and a longer stem.
Mike
#19
Beer >> Sanity
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
My Touring frame put 2 tubes side by side, took care of the rear rack-load flexing the top tube .. the 2 tubes .75" .o49 wall also functioned as chainstays and seatstays.
I see Trek has a single speed the 2 tubes are the seat-stays , then miter into the head tube
they gusset the seat tube, and add a bottle opener, in the back
My build, a collaboration, kept them parallel, passed by
attached to the side of the head tube then got gusseted there behind the head tube.
frame fit tire pump sits between the toptubes..
I cut down a 'church key" added it to the side of the left seat tube.
I see Trek has a single speed the 2 tubes are the seat-stays , then miter into the head tube
they gusset the seat tube, and add a bottle opener, in the back
My build, a collaboration, kept them parallel, passed by
attached to the side of the head tube then got gusseted there behind the head tube.
frame fit tire pump sits between the toptubes..
I cut down a 'church key" added it to the side of the left seat tube.
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mansfield, Texas
Posts: 115
Bikes: Soma Stanya Build, Trek build, Miyata 312, Miyata 710, Nashbar Toure MT, Giant hybrid
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...el-Frame/page2
Personally I dislike the double top tube design. I think it's ugly.
The Soma Stanyan frame and fork is a beautiful piece of work if you like beautiful black paint and chrome lugs like I do. Judge for yourself from the photos. Regarding the short head tube, as I said in the thread, I don't see any problem functionally. Maybe an aesthetics argument could be made.
#22
Beer >> Sanity
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,449
Bikes: 2014 Evo DA2, 2010 Caad9-4, 2011 Synapse-4, 2013 CaadX-disc
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
We discussed this head tube issue for the Stanyan on the C & V forum a little. There you will find pictures of my Stanyan build.
https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...el-Frame/page2
Personally I dislike the double top tube design. I think it's ugly.
The Soma Stanyan frame and fork is a beautiful piece of work if you like beautiful black paint and chrome lugs like I do. Judge for yourself from the photos. Regarding the short head tube, as I said in the thread, I don't see any problem functionally. Maybe an aesthetics argument could be made.
https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...el-Frame/page2
Personally I dislike the double top tube design. I think it's ugly.
The Soma Stanyan frame and fork is a beautiful piece of work if you like beautiful black paint and chrome lugs like I do. Judge for yourself from the photos. Regarding the short head tube, as I said in the thread, I don't see any problem functionally. Maybe an aesthetics argument could be made.
I'd be curious to know some of the build specs too - especially brakes and headset.
#23
Bicycle Lifestyle
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Pacific Grove, Ca
Posts: 1,737
Bikes: Neil Pryde Diablo, VeloVie Vitesse400, Hunter29er, Surly Big Dummy
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I'll toss this one in.
I use it for everything. from commuting, to touring. to last year's attempt at the Tour Divide.
Double Top Tubes.
I use it for everything. from commuting, to touring. to last year's attempt at the Tour Divide.
Double Top Tubes.
#24
afraid of whales
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Front Range, CO
Posts: 4,306
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 347 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times
in
5 Posts
Seat tube length isn't my critical dimension, I am more interested in effective top tube length, reach and stack. At 6"-3", a 58cm frame with level top tube might be too short on the stack and reach. What is the ett length of your caad? What is the seat tube angle compared of your CAD? Is the top tube level on a caad?
#25
Banned
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Northern California
Posts: 5,804
Bikes: Raleigh Grand Prix, Giant Innova, Nishiki Sebring, Trek 7.5FX
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I generally don't think of Cruisers as Double Top Tubes, but they are! They really are!!!
That's interesting how I've never quite viewed them in the same manner, before.
However, actually the typical Cruiser, is the original Double-Top-Tube.
Ha!... It's really the progenitor of the San Marcos!
Thank you for this!
- Slim
PS.
Funny, I've always liked the Cruiser-type bicycles!
However, the larger Double-Top-Tubes, like the San Marcos appear to be rather odd-looking...
Last edited by SlimRider; 09-13-11 at 05:45 AM.