Originally Posted by
Kaben
The brand S1NEO caught my eye - seems like a lot of bike for the money and has Francois Pervis name attached to the design.
Anyway, look at the attached geometry table. How can their XL frame have such an impossibly short reach? Am I missing something? It doesn’t look like the bike has a bayonet fork so shouldn’t be an offset stem or anything.
Im new to interpreting geometry tables so I might be misunderstanding this but does this bike really have a super short reach?
My guess is it's going to be in the seat tube and head tube angles for the Sineo - most track frames are 74 deg seat tube, head tube angle depends on the size of the bike a bit. The Sineo has a 75 degree seat tube, and there is a rule of thumb that one degree change in STA or HTA equals one centimetre of reach, so that would (artificially) add to the reach number listed. Also, with a slacker seat tube angle, as the saddle goes up, compared to a bike with a steeper STA, your saddle gets further away from the bars by comparison so that helps lengthen the bike too - they are things that don't really show up on the frame's dimension drawings.
I'm not sure how the head tube angle influences things, perhaps someone more astute with maths could fill that one in.
I have an older Ridley Oval, which is really weird geo wise. I'm 182cm, and the bike has a 54cm top tube, 170mm head tube, and the highest standover of any of my bikes (normally 57-58cm) BUT the bike has a crazy steep head tube, and a 75.5 degree seat tube - with a set back post, it has the same saddle to handlebar distance as my other bikes. I do have a fair bit of seat post out, which puts me further back and increases the effective reach.
My weight is balanced when I'm riding, and because of the weird angles the wheelbase is nice and tight, but the reach number for that frame is about 389 , whereas the reach for my other bikes is comfortably over 410. If I'd measured the bike before I bought it, instead of just test riding it, I might have gone down a different path, especially since I also have a 140mm stem and Nitto B123s on there, and it is *nearly* long enough.
I am looking around for a new bike (who isn't right?) and I would much rather be on a more standard geometry bike, partly for a bit more adjustability, but partly for a more sensible standover and shorter head tube. Its been a good bike so far, really it's been good enough for me to wring myself out in the middle of the pack which is about the limits to my racing, but that's my 2 cents. I have no idea why they designed the bike the way they did.