Moisture

After a brief hiatus, the story of the condensed water vapors return. While I was gone, I learned that the body shop bent the frame on my Norco while ripping out the seatpost.

So, I bought this-



Got my 190mm crankset in the mail the same day-



Buying the correct size crank arms (about 21.5% of your pubic bone height) was the best decision I ever made with concern to long term cycling. The spin is so natural, very easy to adapt your cadence as you go, and the response to sudden hard input is phenomenal. I've tried arms from 165-175mm before and they would always just spin up to an optimal cadence very quickly and motivate me not to push harder than that. This is why the biopace rings and toe cages were so beneficial for my cadence. 15mm may not seem like much but now I fully understand the importance of having a full range of motion with your spin.

As for the bike itself, it may not seem much different in design to my old Norco, but the double-butted chromoly in the main triangle is certainly considerably stiffer than what I was used to but the hi tensile used in the fork and rear of the frame is still of excellent quality - You feel almost everything over the bumps - just some compliance.

this could be because the bike is clearly in really good shape sitting away in a garage or basement somewhere with relatively little use. It has some nice upgrades on it like a really solid rear Damco rim.

The brakes have been upgraded to Tektro M315's. Im really enjoying the easy adjustability and significantly improved stopping power. These type of centre pulls still have a little bit of flex to the calipers, which is tremendously helpful for avoiding tire lock during hot corner entries.

The frame's geomtery has changed slightly compared to the Norco. The resr chainstays are 5mm shorter at 430mm, the headtube is a bit steeper and fork rake has been dialed down somewhat. It contributes to better cornering response which certainly ers toward the side of sport touring stability. My bottom bracket height is about 275mm which is enough pedal clearance as long as im careful and lift up an inside crank of I have to. This bike has very high potential both in a straight line and around the bends.

if you're still reading this, you might be wondering about the drop bars. I prefer bars closer to shoulder width (50cm) these bars are about 42cm. I ride mostly in the hoods and I am really enjoying the otherwise appreciable increase in efficiency, although someone of my size will obviously have a bit more trouble getting super low. I still have to ride with the bars above the saddle, but as I've been losing weight over the last couple months I've been able to go more aggressive witu the riding position and much faster. With 34/50t front and 13-28 six speed rear, im reasonably well equipped for tackling most hills in my area. After anything past a mild sloping downhill, im almost out of gearing with 50/13. Hill climbing is wear the cranks have been most helpful. 28t in the rear certainly isn't enough for any serious hill while riding loaded, but otherwise doable. Just 15mm in crank arm length has changed the gearing considerably and brought it much closer inline with what I need to maximize efficiency.

All in all, I can't help but wonder what a higher end vintage with full chromoly and campy groupset or something more modern with maybe a titanium frame would feel like. I thought the Norco was good until trying out a merely mid-range nishiki at best.

Moisture

@tallbikeman

rgvg

Can I ask what city you are in? If you are in Vancouver I have a beat up 23" frame I'm not doing anything with.

HTupolev

The frame may or may not be stiffer, but this would result from the geometry and tubing profiles, not from the type of steel. Chromoly steel is not intrinsically any stiffer than hi-ten steel.

Steel frames actually sometimes get less stiff as you go to higher-end models, because often they'll be using similar outer diameters for the tubing, but thinner tubing walls.

I'd strongly disagree. Flex results in poorer feedback, which makes it harder to brake optimally.

People who need fine braking control always work to reduce flex from their braking systems.
Part of why mountain bikers use hydraulic disc brakes is that the hydraulic fluid is compressionless, resulting in extremely stiff actuation on the entire path from the lever body to the brake pad. When air bubbles get into the hydraulic lines, which adds flex to the system because air is compressible, they bleed their brake system to restore its stiffness.
A lot of effort goes into minimizing flex on cable-actuated rim brakes as well. For example, cheap brake cable housing tends to just use steel coil for its structure, which is a little springy; high-quality brake cable housing often incorporates longitudinal wires similar to those used on shift cable housing, to reduce flex in the system by making the housing compressionless.

Really? The tall guys I ride with don't seem to have any trouble using aggressive positions.

billytwosheds 

Can't say that I've ever seen a 190mm crankset in the flesh. But if the fit is good, go with it. Can I ask what your typical trouser/pants inseam measure?

I imagine you'd want to be careful with the ground clearance as well.

​​​​Bikes that are enjoyable to ride can be found in a range of tiers and classes

Similarly a high end bike that is out of your fit range or in poor condition will be less fun.

Thanks for sharing.

dedhed

Is the stem beyond the minimum insertion line?

mstateglfr 

I enjoyed the drought this past month.

Moisture

Yes, well within. I can go much higher if i wanted to.

Moisture

my pants inseam is around 87 or 88cm.

I got used to avoiding pedal strikes even when using 165mm arms on my old norco with the same bb height. Got a nasty surprise once when turning like i used to on my mountain bike. Since that point, going up to 175mm and then eventually 190mm on the same bb height has been totally fine. Being always subconscious about it will teach you how much you can safely lean through a turn while pedalling before you gotta start timing your pedal lifts before a turn.

The fit is absolutely perfect, and the power output is seriously fantastic I think I'm reasonably within limits of what this frame is capable of, both in straight line and around spirited turns.


Yes, well within. I can go much higher if i wanted to.

Moisture

As I will continue losing weight ill definitely work on continuing to lower the stem until I can get it about level with the seat.

In honesty, with this sort of riding position, I think I'm best off with some sort of hybrid flat bar commuter bike.

I'm really enjoying the performance of the drop bars, but I'm going to eventually convert back to flat bars because I found some riser bars which are exactly my shoulder width. These drop bars are too narrow for me. I was looking around for some wider gravel/touring drop bars but they flare our only at the drops. Im mostly in the hoods.

Germany_chris

There's a lot of debate on crank length on the internet that you might want to read, it really isn't just a math formula.

If you're willing to spend the money Zinn has all the long crank lengths you'll ever want his site would be my first and last stop.

Mr. 66

If you like it that's all that matters, your front derailleur is a tad high.

You brought your last crapper bike to a body shop? I hope they compensated you for the damages, I guess that 50 cents would cover.

Moisture

Yes youre right. Ive done some research on the matter and concluded that proportion to your inseam is only a rough outline.

Zinn is exactly where I bought this crankset from.

In the future, id figure out a way to buy directly from the manufacturer Driveline. They have both a mountain (M210) and road (R210) crankset which can be ordered custom in practically any size you can think of.

https://www.driveline.com.tw/product/15/45
https://www.driveline.com.tw/product/14/48

My set also came with the outboard style bearings where the crank arms sit on a spindle that slides through the entire. Its a very smooth design.

My norco used plain gauge tubing so I guess that would make up for the different. The tubing looks the same when compared visually however.

Theres only so much you can do to totally stop caliper flex. Most of that flex will be coming from the brake pads themselves. Stiff brake pads won't work well particularly in wet or muddy conditions.

Its a matter of compromise. Using my super stiff and super strong avid rim brakes with koolstop pads on the mountain bike works well, but I didn't have much feel through the levers when stopping fast. Jt could have something to do with the length and ergonomics of the lever as well.

I have some extra muscle as well as fat on my body. Once I'm in the drops, my knees are pretty much hitting my chest. I'm sure that a very slender person can get lower than the saddle up front regardless of their height.

Germany_chris

Outboard bearing cranks invariably increase Q, that agrees with some and doesn't with others.

Moisture

Sorry, what do you mean by q?

Germany_chris

The distance in-between pedal interface or crank width. Narrow Q or tread width is generally easier on the knees and ankles as well as more efficient but again you're body has play in proper Q for now you need to play with fit and restoring then worry about the rest

BillyD

Be nice.

BillyD

Be nice.

HTupolev

It depends on the actual gauges. "Straight gauge versus double butted" does not explain the difference by itself, and in many cases, a low-end straight-gauge tube will be stiffer than a high-end double-butted tube of the same diameter that gets used in the same use case. This is because the double-butted tube doesn't necessarily need to be thicker than the plain-gauge tube at the ends, but it can get away with using less material in the middle.

Yes, but that's different from saying that flex is good.


What are you basing this off of? Brake pads aren't very compressible, and they generally have too long of a profile to flex much from the shear forces.

mstateglfr 

I thought it was a creative response that played off his first sentence, but noted either way.

Moisture

I understand, thank you for the explanation. With the outboard bearing design, the crankset sits "inside" the bearing. Dont know if you can see in the photo here:



I dont like it when the arms sit too close to the bb shell either. It makes me more prone to rub my feet against the crank arms. Could be because of the shoes.

I'm still getting an improved chainline even compared to my previous setup where I used as short of a bb spindle as possible. Most stock bottom brackets come with the crank arms already sitting a few millimetres outside of the bb shell.

I see, so in that case I use this would be primarily a factor of how the tubing is butted. I was imagining that the quality of the tubing was the main difference here, but youre saying its not. I dont imagine there is much difference between different types of chromoly though.

So if you were able to effectively engineer brakes with zero flex whatsoever, im imagining that this would be the most effective braking solution, and that you'd want to focus more on the design/shape of the levers themselves if you're aiming to achieve better brake lever feel and modulation.

Moisture

Seems like there would need to be a tradeoff in this regard, because avoiding the use of outboard bearings would require a wider bb shell if you wish to fit good quality bearings into there anyways. I think its well worth the trade off due to the design of the bearings +spindle alone, not including the fact I am now using the right size crank arms.

More pics:


Mr. 66

I will Lower the F.D a little today, thanks for pointing this out.

HTupolev

It can sort of be, but mostly indirectly. Different steel alloys have almost zero difference in stiffness; if you build a tube really cheaply, and you build a second tube with the same butting profile but out of extremely high-end steel, the two tubes will have almost exactly the same stiffness.

If you use stronger steel, then you can use thinner tubing walls without this resulting in undue risk of crumpling or denting. If you can use thinner walls, then you can increase the tubing diameter without increasing weight. Tube stiffness increases very aggressively with tube diameter, so doing this can give you a stiffer tube without adding weight.

You'd still be concerned with some other things, like mechanical advantage. But yes, the human interface - the shape and feel and positioning of the levers - is extremely important.

icemilkcoffee 

The Tri-A was Nishiki's top of the line steel framed bike. Tange #1 tubing. This is a very nice bike. A big step up from your Norco.

The 190mm crank is not doing you any favors if you ever want to lower your stem and handlebars and get into a more aero position. And your handlebar width is supposed to line up, not with your outside shoulder width, but with your shoulders' forward protruding bones. Nobody makes a 50cm wide drop bar.

There are good reasons why hardly anyone ever made a 190mm crank and absolutely nobody ever made a 50cm drop bar. Are you that much of an outlier body-wise, to require these odd sized components?

Germany_chris

Actually more than a couple companies may 50+ cm bars and again crank length is one of those very personal things and is not directly correlated to "aero"