Tandem Tom

While waiting for the balance of my parts, Rene Herse is extremely slow!!, I made a wooden gauge like the one Alex Wetmore use to offer. Mine is out of cherry! As a woodworker I am use to making precise parts so I thought I would give it a go!
The holder is in process.

smontanaro 

Interesting. Not being familiar with Alex's stuff, can you explain/show how this works?

Tandem Tom

I will post a pic tomorrow. I'm not in the shop.

bulgie 

Alex's description, and a pic of it in use: https://alexwetmore.org/?page_id=1080
Probably obvious but I'll mention it for completeness: it uses a surface plate with the frame held horizontally above the surface. Not useful without a surface plate or alignment table.
Set the height of the vee to something known to be in the centerplane, say the bottom end of the seat tube, then the vee can check the height of other spots, say the head tube. The outer edges can check the dropout spacing and centering.

Alex's design later was made by Hahn Rossman and sold by Rene Herse (with Alex's blessing).
https://www.renehersecycles.com/shop...lignment-tool/
Note there are two versions, with different selections of hub widths. One of them listed as out of stock.

Mark B

smontanaro 

Thanks, Mark. Now I get it. I see 100/120/130/135 and 100/110/135/142 versions. I understand what the 100, 120, 130, and 135 dimensions are for. I assume the 142 is something to do with tandems or fat bikes. I'm puzzled at the lack of a 126, and what's 110 for? Maybe fat bike forks? And maybe my assumption of 120mm only applying to five-speed rear triangles is off as well. I'm so limited in my view of the bike world (basically road bikes from the late 50s to early 80s) that some dimensions which will be immediately obvious to the rest of you just leave me scratching my head.

unterhausen

I designed one for 100 110 120 126 130 135 142 148 150 157 170 177 190 197 spacing, but as you can imagine the laser cutter couldn't cut with enough precision to get all of the steps right
In all seriousness, I decided to go with one that had all the spacings that Alex didn't implement. I think I only need 142 and 148. Maybe I should add 110. Not sure what else I would need.


Sometimes I crack myself up

Cynikal 

142mm is the standard rear spacing for thru axle frames. 110mm is used for a newer MTB standard for front forks called boost spacing. 120mm is the current track standard for rear spacing. I don't know why anyone would build a new frame with a 126 spacing but if they did there are ways to figure that out.

I know I used the term standard several times above and I completely understand the absurdity in the use of that term in the industry but it made the most sense to use.

unterhausen

Most current mtb have 148 "boost" rear spacing. I'm not sure how many gravel bikes have 148 spacing, but 110 is becoming more common on the front, "road boost" Because 15x110 is so much heavier than 12x110

Tandem Tom

Here is a pic of my complete "tool"!