Woodlark

This is a really fascinating discussion!

I do have one question for I-Bike though. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you wrote, but I would think that, because there is more backward slant to the seat tube on the RANS, the reach to the handlebars would increase much faster as you raise the seat than it would on the Gruv. Isn't that a bigger change in geometry (or am I showing my ignorance)?

I_Bike

It is interesting!

That was BKXray - a statement which has me curious as well. Maybe he'll return and explain more... I know I can't...

Tom Bombadil

I Bike, thanks for the overlay pics. This illustrates what I have been saying, that the geometries are much closer than what they appear to be from just glancing at the frames and overall bike design. The crank is a bit forward on the RANS, but not nearly as much as one might think. And the handlebars to seat distance is almost identical, given that one can alter the stem angle on the Raleigh to get an even better match than what your graphic shows.

The cranks are actually a little bit closer than what one might imply from the overlay graphic, because the largest front sprocket on the RANS is larger than the small single sprocket on the Gruv 1. That larger sprocket juts out further, giving an impression that the bottom bracket is out further than it is. If you use the Gruv 2 image, it would be a better comparison. It wouldn't make much difference, as the RANS BB is placed forward a bit.

The handlebars in the Gruv 2 image are also down & back a bit, better matchign the RANS pic.

https://www.raleighusa.com/items.asp?deptid=6&itemid=271

Tom Bombadil

OTOH there is the new Trek Pure, which is definitely not as crank-forward as the Raleigh. When I rode both the Pure and the Gruv within minutes of each other, the Gruv had a much stronger "recumbent-like" riding position, wherein the Pure was more of a comfortable cruiser bike.

In riding the different crank forwards, I now realize how much different one can ride than the other, with a difference of about 1" on the bottom bracket position.

Tom Bombadil

Yes, that is a difference. A long-legged person on a Gruv would find the geometry less relaxed / forward than a short-legged person. A short-legged person could get very close to the RANS geometry.

I_Bike

Actually, you'll find the RANS bottom bracket at approx 2 - 3 inches forward of the Gruv, which will have a significant effect on dynamics of the bicycle, especially in the area of the BB and cranks where mm’s have make a noticeable difference. They may appear alike but in terms of engineering there are significantly different.

Tom Bombadil

Well it was hard to find, but eventually I was able to dig up that the RANS Dynamik has a wheelbase of 49.5" vs the Raleigh Gruv's 45.6". That's a fair difference.

scottogo

Discussion on this topic at the Crank Forward Forum:
https://pub23.bravenet.com/forum/1970022224/show/607714

Tom Bombadil

Another set of pics, this time using a RANS Dynamik with its seat set to level, and a Raleigh Gruv 2 with modified seat tube. The Raleigh is a slightly larger scale, which makes the wheelbase look a little wider than it would if they were the same scale.

Tom Bombadil

Another thought on this ... Being a short-legged person (inseam of 28"), the Raleigh seat would be set fairly low for me. This would result in the angle from the seat to the crank being less, and likely very close to the angle on the Dynamik.

If the angle is essentially the same, and the distance from the seat to the crank is the same (which it would have to be for my feet to reach the pedals), then the RANS crank would not be 2" forward of the Gruv's from my seating position. As the RANS seat is adjusted down, it would also move forward, bringing me closer to the crank. I think it would end up with the crank being in almost the same position with either bike.

However as I don't know what that angle would be on the Gruv, and I have not been able to find the seat tube angle for the Dynamik, it is rather hard to be conclusive.

I agree that for a longer-legged rider, the RANS crank could be positioned up to 2"-3" forward of the Gruv. As their seat to crank angle on the Gruv would be steeper than for me.

It would be fun to have them side by side and configured for me, so that I could take some measurements.

I_Bike

My last $.02. You can speculate until the end of time, but until you actually ride the bike you will not be able to understand the difference - which is significant.

Good luck on finding the bike that suits you!

Tom Bombadil

Oh, I may not even buy a crank forward. I'm just exploring them. I'll probably buy a recumbent. I'd like to check out a RANS crank forward, but none of the RANS dealers near me stock them. Two used to, but dropped them due to lack of sales.

Of course, Raleigh has discontinued the Gruv due to lack of sales too.

I just might pick up a Gruv at a closeout, as a fool-around bike, one that my wife might ride from time to time. Right now I have an option to buy a brand new 24-spd Gruv 2 for $309. But as I've already passed on the deal for a week now, I guess I'm not that interested in it.

I_Bike

Those two shops, would they be Budget and Momentum? Just Curious...

A note on the bent. As I said earlier, I went from a bent to the Crank Forword. I bought my bent in the late 90's and rode it long and hard. Then in 2005 I rented a Gruv and did a thirty mile jaunt when I visited my daughter. A nice bike but definitely an around-town bike. Then in May 2006 I rode a Crank Forward and file in love with the bike – it was that much better than the Gruv and I found I preferred it over my bent. My bent is long gone, I sold it. Why? I found the RANS to be very “bike like” in a traditional sense, in handling and climbing. Though I liked the comfort of a bent, I was never pleased with how it handled the riding position, and climbing. For me, the RANS brought back the fun to riding with a comfort that is more than acceptable.

No real point to all this other than letting you know how I ended up a CF freak…

Tom Bombadil

One was Budget. Can't remember the name of the other one, off hand. I'm about to go to Florida in a couple of days and just checked with two RANS dealers in the area where I'll be, and neither of them carry RANS CF bikes either, although they do carry Electra and Cannondale CFs. That makes a grand total of 5 RANS dealers (all authorized RANS dealers that I found on RANS site) that I've checked so far, with 2 previously carrying the CFs and 3 having never carried them. These are pretty hard cookies to find.

If I were interested in a climber, I would probably be more interested in the RANS CF bikes. But as about 95% of my riding is on flat rail trails, climbing capability is not even a factor on my list. That said, when I took a test ride on a Gruv I did ride up a long incline and I could not believe how easy it was. I could barely tell I was going uphill, except that I was moving more slowly.

atombikes

Seems to me it would be pretty easy to print out the picture linked above of the Dynamik and take a simple protractor to it to determine head tube/down tube/seat tube angles? As long as the picture is taken directly from the side, it should be VERY close to the real numbers.

michelsal

the handlebars on the Townie are really weird angle.

VegasTriker

Zombie Thread Alert
Maybe this is appropriate since Halloween is tomorrow! A kind note to the author of the latest addition: It's nice to start a new thread when you come across one that is this old' Much of the information in the previous 40 posts are probably seriously out-of-date. This one is 14 years old and all of it was from January 2007. Lots of readers only realize how old it is after they have waded through the entire post.
I looked up the thread starter (Tom Bombadil) as he lives in a small town in Wisconsin I knew well in the past and I remembered his name. He hasn't visited the site in many years.