# Friday show & tease: new project



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

I started the metal work on a new project this week. Too early to talk details but I had to post a sneak peek.


----------



## Live Wire (Aug 27, 2007)

??????
A Slingshot type frame with those little tubes instead of the cable?
But why does it look like it was taken half way through a destructive test?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Live Wire said:


> ??????
> A Slingshot type frame with those little tubes instead of the cable?
> But why does it look like it was taken half way through a destructive test?


Probably because of the selective sand blasting, filing, wire brushing and touch up brazing. I have only been brazing for a few months.


----------



## coconinocycles (Sep 23, 2006)

oh ****. shiggy's building bikes. you guys ain't seen nuthin' yet. i don't know what it's gonna be, but it's gonna be outside the box! rock on, don! steve.:thumbsup:


----------



## Live Wire (Aug 27, 2007)

Yo Shig,
I wasn't bagging on your brazing, the pic really does look like there is a huge fold starting on the lower half of the dt/boom tube/whatever that part is.
So, was I close with my first guess?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

coconinocycles said:


> oh ****. shiggy's building bikes. you guys ain't seen nuthin' yet. i don't know what it's gonna be, but it's gonna be outside the box! rock on, don! steve.:thumbsup:


Welcome to mtbr, Steve.

After working out a few more things I will have this design in the bag!


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Live Wire said:


> Yo Shig,
> I wasn't bagging on your brazing, the pic really does look like there is a huge fold starting on the lower half of the dt/boom tube/whatever that part is.
> So, was I close with my first guess?


Nope. Just the lighting and flux/heat residue from rebrazing the bottom of the joint. Using a gas flux system. Everything is intact.

Slingshots are part of the design influence. No TT hinge and it is a hardtail.


----------



## gabe (Mar 25, 2004)

I can see where your going with this.......very innovative. :thumbsup: It's gonna be interesting to how it rides.................:skep:


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

This is the first thing that came to mind:

http://www.phatcycles.com/Xrated/xc1.htm


----------



## ~martini~ (Dec 20, 2003)

Me too, but in a more contemporary trail bike geometry, set up purpose-like for drops of course! Can't wait to see what you come up with shiggy!


----------



## DeeEight (Jan 13, 2004)

Looks like a Mantis Valkyrie crossed with a Grove X-frame.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

A couple more pics. Except for cleanup the front end is finished.
















Can not show the rest as of yet.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

The name of this bike should be: "The Swinger"


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

Kind of reminds me of this bike, only upside down:










Or maybe this one:









I sure hope there's a custom fender that bolts into the back side of the water bottle bosses in the works!


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

Don Don Don, 

Do you even have a license to operate a torch?  Actually thats looking pretty interesting. I know a guy that raced for Slingshot back in the early 90's and he had no trouble winning. I got some tires you can put on it that will be here next week (according to DHL). You going 26 or 29?


----------



## j e SS e (Dec 24, 2007)

Double down tube? That's different. Can't wait to see the rest of it. :thumbsup:


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

Shiggy, that contraption is looking pretty sweet so far! :thumbsup:


----------



## Hack On Wheels (Apr 29, 2006)

Indeed, that is looking awesome! I can't wait to see the finished product.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Treybiker said:


> Don Don Don,
> 
> Do you even have a license to operate a torch?  Actually thats looking pretty interesting. I know a guy that raced for Slingshot back in the early 90's and he had no trouble winning. I got some tires you can put on it that will be here next week (according to DHL). You going 26 or 29?


I have a Slingshot 29er. Nice riding bike.

This one is a 29er. I have plans to build a matching 26" wheel version, too.

Looking forward to the tires.


----------



## coconinocycles (Sep 23, 2006)

ok........i gotta voice my concerns.......the slingshot has a spring and a cable which have a damn near unlimited amount of ductility and elongation.......i'm not sure if the double dt tubes have sufficient profile/yeild strengh and tensile strength to resist handlebar and bb twist, not to mention the impact and splay from the rider load......i'm not trying flame you, but i like shiggy quite alot and wanna keep him around.....and these are valid design perameters for any bike...........just askin'.  :thumbsup:  steve.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

coconinocycles said:


> ok........i gotta voice my concerns.......the slingshot has a spring and a cable which have a damn near unlimited amount of ductility and elongation.......i'm not sure if the double dt tubes have sufficient profile/yeild strengh and tensile strength to resist handlebar and bb twist, not to mention the impact and splay from the rider load......i'm not trying flame you, but i like shiggy quite alot and wanna keep him around.....and these are valid design perameters for any bike...........just askin'.  :thumbsup:  steve.


No worries, Steve. There is no TT hinge in this design. I have run the design by the powers-that-be at work and they consider it to be over-built. The 2" mono-tube is strong and stiff especially after ovalizing. The ST is 1.375 .049 and pierces the mono-tube.


----------



## gabe (Mar 25, 2004)

shiggy said:


> The 2" mono-tube is strong and stiff especially after ovalizing.


We've been using the 2" mono tubes on our side car bikes for the main boom that conects the third wheel to the frame and is is VERY stout..........I would be surprised if that frame doesn't seem a little flexy though........but you go boy!


----------



## crank1979 (Feb 3, 2006)

Muddy rides should be interesting! Looks very interesting though. Can't wait to see the finished frame and hear how it rides. :thumbsup:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

[email protected] said:


> Muddy rides should be interesting!


How so?


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

You're passing up an opportunity to run your cables inside your downtubes. That'd reduce some visual clutter and let people focus on the features you're building. Cable housing will never lay down in the beautiful arc you're able to achieve with the tubing. (Sorry, it's my $400K design education coming through).

And if you can't run the 3rd cable on/in the boom tube, just add a 3rd downtube for that extra cable ; P


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

D.F.L. said:


> Sorry, it's my $400K design education coming through


Please, we'll have no talk of design here, Steve.

Or physics.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Dang, it sounds like you folks already see where this frame is going but I`m still lost until some pics from further along show up. To me, it still looks like a stylized freeway overpass with onramps and offramps. Guess I just have to be patient and keep checking for updates.


----------



## crank1979 (Feb 3, 2006)

shiggy said:


> How so?


It'll all spit up between the tubes onto the bottle. Hopefully the top tube will stop it from hitting you.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

[email protected] said:


> It'll all spit up between the tubes onto the bottle. Hopefully the top tube will stop it from hitting you.


I believe this was purpose built for that reason. Shig likes to eat the mud as he rides so he can better relate to what the tire is "going through". It's how he becomes one with the tire. :arf:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Powder coated it last night. A nice deep navy blue.

The rear end.









Head on.









3/4 side.


----------



## rkj__ (Feb 29, 2004)

Now that's different Shiggy!


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

I gotta say, I like the routing and bottle bosses on the 'down tubes'. It looks neet.

Let us know how much bb swing you get.


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

What dia/wall you use for the seat tube?

Speaking of seat tubes, I was sorta excited to see the 29er trimbles produced; E-stays make a lot of sense in wagon-wheel format. Too bad... maybe I'll just make one myself...

Nice job, Shiggy. I hope they ride great.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

D.F.L. said:


> What dia/wall you use for the seat tube?
> 
> Speaking of seat tubes, I was sorta excited to see the 29er trimbles produced; E-stays make a lot of sense in wagon-wheel format. Too bad... maybe I'll just make one myself...
> 
> Nice job, Shiggy. I hope they ride great.


Seat tube is 1.375" .049

I like the reflections on this under the mono tube shot.


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

Notice how he doesn't quite trust us to see the BB junction... Where's the love?

If you look really close...

I figured it out!


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

D.F.L. said:


> Notice how he doesn't quite trust us to see the BB junction... Where's the love?
> 
> If you look really close...
> 
> I figured it out!


What have you figured out?


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

Wow, that really turned out nice. :thumbsup: The alignment looks really good from what I can see. With the angle of those dropouts, you might be able to run the frame SS. Did you choose that style for that reason?



shiggy said:


> Powder coated it last night. A nice deep navy blue.
> 
> The rear end.
> 
> ...


----------



## crank1979 (Feb 3, 2006)

Looks great.

If there was a way to have that twin downtube continue to become the chain stays and wrap around Yeti ARC style to be the seat stays without being too flexy that would be ultra cool! :thumbsup:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

grawbass said:


> Wow, that really turned out nice. :thumbsup: The alignment looks really good from what I can see. With the angle of those dropouts, you might be able to run the frame SS. Did you choose that style for that reason?


Alignment was nearly dead-on. I used the alignment table to set and check the front end while I was brazing it (ALL tack and finish brazing was done off the table). Used a jig only for setting up the rear end. Ironically, the dropouts were the only thing that needed slight tweaking and even that was not bad. Really pleased as this is the first frame I have built entirely on my own.

No SS option. The dropouts are in a normal vert position with the chainstays slanting. I may have some stay/chain clearance issues. If so I may have to rebuild the back.

Now I need to get the components together.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

[email protected] said:


> Looks great.
> 
> If there was a way to have that twin downtube continue to become the chain stays and wrap around Yeti ARC style to be the seat stays without being too flexy that would be ultra cool! :thumbsup:


I drew up a 700C mtb like that around 1992. Been thinking about actualizing it.


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

shiggy said:


> No SS option. The dropouts are in a normal vert position with the chainstays slanting. I may have some stay/chain clearance issues. If so I may have to rebuild the back.


Nevermind, I just saw the full side pic on the 29" board.  Why did you choose to have the CS/DT juction below the BB?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

grawbass said:


> Nevermind, I just saw the full side pic on the 29" board.  Why did you choose to have the CS/DT juction below the BB?


Mostly tire/crank clearance. I have been playing with the idea for years. Also there is a bit of extra hardware down there that needs some room. The DTs did not have to attach that low.

The side pic is close to the proper attitude: 71/74, 13" BB with the fork at 25% sag.


----------



## 1spd1way (Jun 30, 2006)

*Size?*

Pics maybe throwing me off. Is that made for someone "short-legged?"
The seat tube tire pic makes it look like a small/midget size.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Congratulations, Shiggy. Seems to me that this is your first frame- if so, you really went out on a limb with such a nonstandard design. I still don`t get it though. There`s a pivot at the top of the SS yoke and a short link under the BB with the DTs acting as springs? Like a linked semi-soft tail? Interresting to say the least! Good job.


----------



## teamdicky (Jan 12, 2004)

I already put my uneducated guess in on the 29'er forum, but I think the bike is a folder.
My brain has always thought it would be neat to combine the Ritchey Breakaway ST with something behind the BB (like the new IBIS, I think).

I want a travel bike, but the aesthetics kill me.
Whack


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

teamdicky said:


> I already put my uneducated guess in on the 29'er forum, but I think the bike is a folder.
> My brain has always thought it would be neat to combine the Ritchey Breakaway ST with something behind the BB (like the new IBIS, I think).
> 
> I want a travel bike, but the aesthetics kill me.
> Whack


That is totally a folder! I see the reasoning behind the "downtube stays". It looks like you could tuck a little bit of the wheel between them. I saw the QR on the seatstays and started thinking Ibis Tranny. Nice! :thumbsup:


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

shiggy said:


> What have you figured out?


Apparently, I figured out nuthin' .

I thought you had 2 BB shells stacked to allow you to compensate for 26 or 29 wheels.

Is this one going to accomodate both sizes or are you building two versions?


----------



## dirtdrop (Dec 29, 2003)

I was going to say this looks familiar until I saw the new photo above!


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Treybiker said:


> That is totally a folder! I see the reasoning behind the "downtube stays". It looks like you could tuck a little bit of the wheel between them. I saw the QR on the seatstays and started thinking Ibis Tranny. Nice! :thumbsup:


I can see clearly now, the sky is blue.
I can see all obstacles in my way.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

1spd1way said:


> Pics maybe throwing me off. Is that made for someone "short-legged?"
> The seat tube tire pic makes it look like a small/midget size.


The size is "mine." I am 6'1". It uses a 440mm seat post.


----------



## artymus (Jun 30, 2005)

what diameter seat post fits that seat tube ?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

artymus said:


> what diameter seat post fits that seat tube ?


A powder coated 1.25" (31.8).


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Treybiker said:


> That is totally a folder! I see the reasoning behind the "downtube stays". It looks like you could tuck a little bit of the wheel between them. I saw the QR on the seatstays and started thinking Ibis Tranny. Nice! :thumbsup:


A folder it is.
















This version is too large for an airline case but is perfect for tossing inside the car.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

pretty cool.


----------



## Treybiker (Jan 6, 2004)

You should call it the "Switchblade" (Incorporating a spring action at the pivot that will further confuse rodar y rodar into wandering how it functions within the beam suspension system). :lol:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

D.F.L. said:


> Apparently, I figured out nuthin' .
> 
> I thought you had 2 BB shells stacked to allow you to compensate for 26 or 29 wheels.
> 
> Is this one going to accomodate both sizes or are you building two versions?


I am going to build 2 versions. The only changes will be what is dictated by the wheel size and fixing any functional design issues I find. The 26" wheel frame will have less (zero) BB drop, 1 degree slacker HTA and a taller HT. The fit, BB height, CS length and steering trail will remain the same.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

More pics


----------



## gabe (Mar 25, 2004)

Respect!


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Treybiker said:


> You should call it the "Switchblade" (Incorporating a spring action at the pivot that will further confuse rodar y rodar into wandering how it functions within the beam suspension system). :lol:


Too late on both counts. There was already a Switchblade (Titus?) and I`ll be confused anyway- I was born confused. The name would be fitting though.

Pretty slick design and nice excecution. Good bike.


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

shiggy said:


> More pics


Shiggy, I love the old Shimano QR with the rubber o-ring. :thumbsup:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

grawbass said:


> Shiggy, I love the old Shimano QR with the rubber o-ring. :thumbsup:


Actually, it is a brand new Kalloy QR.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

can you post a very close up of that bb area. just trying to see more.

also, the kalloy QR, are you sourcing that from QBP? I've given up on the DKG/Salsa type. All they do is slip. I would like a seat QR that actually works and I'm thinking that 20 year old tech may in fact be the right tech.


----------



## grawbass (Aug 23, 2004)

shiggy said:


> Actually, it is a brand new Kalloy QR.


Dang, I didn't know they made those.


----------



## All Mountain (Dec 9, 2005)

Very interesting, thanks for sharing this shiggy.

The colour turned out great. Hope your first ride put a big smile on your face.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

pvd said:


> can you post a very close up of that bb area. just trying to see more.
> 
> also, the kalloy QR, are you sourcing that from QBP? I've given up on the DKG/Salsa type. All they do is slip. I would like a seat QR that actually works and I'm thinking that 20 year old tech may in fact be the right tech.


Yes, the Kalloy QRs are available from QBP.

The BB/hinge pics.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Made the seat post/mast today. Powder coated 1.25" .035 with an IRD head bonded in. Set at my normal saddle height in the pic.


----------



## Live Wire (Aug 27, 2007)

shiggy said:


> Made the seat post/mast today. Powder coated 1.25" .035 with an IRD head bonded in. Set at my normal saddle in the pic.
> View attachment 331327


F'n brilliant!:thumbsup: The world's first (as far as I know) folding 29er. Congrats!

Ride report please.


----------



## Schmucker (Aug 23, 2007)

So if the pivot was ahead of the BB it would fold up tighter (sans wheel). Think there is ever any chance a frame (normal size, large, ~24" ETT) could fold to fit for airlines using your method?


----------



## EDDIE JONES (Mar 26, 2005)

shiggy said:


> Made the seat post/mast today. Powder coated 1.25" .035 with an IRD head bonded in. Set at my normal saddle in the pic.
> View attachment 331327


You are truly the man Shiggy, good job:thumbsup:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Schmucker said:


> So if the pivot was ahead of the BB it would fold up tighter (sans wheel). Think there is ever any chance a frame (normal size, large, ~24" ETT) could fold to fit for airlines using your method?


Not really. The hinge point could be further back and it would still fold well. The issue I have is I should have reversed the "kink" between the hinge and the chainstays. It would have let the rear end fold tighter and provide the drive chain clearance needed. I think I need to rebuild this.

I think any 26" or 29" wheel bike would need to be at least partly disassembled to fit in an airline case (26x26x10"?). Heck, you have to let the air out of the tires just to fit the wheels in.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Schmucker said:


> .......using your method?


More importantly, how does the chain get from the front chainrings to the rear derailleur?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Thylacine said:


> More importantly, how does the chain get from the front chainrings to the rear derailleur?


I have already addressed that a couple of times. I rebuild is in order.


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Shig, it'll save you a lot of grief if you draw up the design before you get out the hacksaw.

For example, you can easily design it so that the rear end folds up 'into' the front triangle, or if you're feeling braver than you already are, you could dispense with the 'downtubes' and just put a mega S&S Coupler into the toptube and achieve easily what you're trying to achieve without a lot of unnecessary 'stuff'.

Not that I would, mind you, or.....um....suggest you do. I'm just saying it's physically possible.

[/getoutofjailfreecard]


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Thylacine said:


> Shig, it'll save you a lot of grief if you draw up the design before you get out the hacksaw.
> 
> For example, you can easily design it so that the rear end folds up 'into' the front triangle, or if you're feeling braver than you already are, you could dispense with the 'downtubes' and just put a mega S&S Coupler into the toptube and achieve easily what you're trying to achieve without a lot of unnecessary 'stuff'.
> 
> ...


Oh, I drew it up long before I cut a single tube. I just forgot about the space the chain needed.

I never intended for this bike to fit in an airline case or to be folded for transport with the rear wheel removed. The later and S&S couplers would defeat the whole purpose of the design. As is I think the rear wheel will contact the fork arch before the hinge hits the DTs.

I wanted a bike that I could carry inside the car rather than on an outside rack. For my trip to Sea Otter last year I removed the roof rack from my '92 Civic and carried the bike inside with both wheels removed. My gas mileage increased ~30% and it was easier to maintain highway speeds. Dealing with the bike was a hassle as it was still bulky in the car and not quick to get ready to ride.

The bf9 is designed to be quickly folded and packed and then unfolded and be rideable in moments.

Remove the front wheel.
Turn the fork/bars around.
Release the rear end, fold under and into the fork, and strap together.
Remove (or just lower) the seat mast.
Place the front wheel on the non-drivetrain side.
Wrap the whole bike in a "burrito" carry bag. 
The chain stays on, all cables are intact.
Reverse the process to prep to ride. The whole thing should take no more than 2-3 minutes with no tools required. It has to be simple, quick and easy so I will be willing to do it before and after every ride. Can not do that with a take-apart design


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

I'd press in a headset, install the bar, stem, and wheel, and sit on the sucker and do the ol' torsional twist test prior to rebuilding anything. 

Maybe it was due to the hinge, but I got to take a spin on the latest Slingshot and it was pretty flexy. Distractingly so under my 185#.


----------



## MMcG (Jul 7, 2003)

shiggy said:


> Oh, I drew it up long before I cut a single tube. I just forgot about the space the chain needed.
> 
> I never intended for this bike to fit in an airline case or to be folded for transport with the rear wheel removed. The later and S&S couplers would defeat the whole purpose of the design. As is I think the rear wheel will contact the fork arch before the hinge hits the DTs.
> 
> I wanted a bike that I could carry inside the car rather than on an outside rack. For my trip to Sea Otter last year I removed the roof rack from my '92 Civic and carried the bike inside with both wheels removed. My gas mileage increased ~30% and it was easier to maintain highway speeds. Dealing with the bike was a hassle as it was still bulky in the car and not quick to get ready to ride.


92 civics aren't big so I can see how the frame and fork and bars and saddle sand wheels was bulkty in side, but how was it not quick to get ready to ride?


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

D.F.L. said:


> I'd press in a headset, install the bar, stem, and wheel, and sit on the sucker and do the ol' torsional twist test prior to rebuilding anything.
> 
> Maybe it was due to the hinge, but I got to take a spin on the latest Slingshot and it was pretty flexy. Distractingly so under my 185#.


I have a Slingshot 29er. If you do "the ol' torsional twist test" in the shop it moves a lot. Not an issue at all on the trail.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

MMcG said:


> 92 civics aren't big so I can see how the frame and fork and bars and saddle sand wheels was bulkty in side, but how was it not quick to get ready to ride?


The tangle of wheels, pedals. bar and frame plus the loose chain. Usually a mess and the more gear in the car the worse it is.


----------



## D.F.L. (Jan 3, 2004)

shiggy said:


> I have a Slingshot 29er. If you do "the ol' torsional twist test" in the shop it moves a lot. Not an issue at all on the trail.


I rode it, too. Not stiff enough for me. Quick motion at the bar gave me a little too much twisting and not quite enough turning. Maybe our styles are different.

That said, I'm picky about torsional stiffness.

.


----------



## aosty (Jan 7, 2004)

shiggy said:


> For my trip to Sea Otter last year I removed the roof rack from my '92 Civic and carried the bike inside with both wheels removed. My gas mileage increased ~30% and it was easier to maintain highway speeds.


In previous years, I thought you were intentionally driving like a puss! :lol:

Nice job thinking outside of the box, especially on your first frame, as someone else mentioned. :thumbsup:


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

shiggy said:


> ...The issue I have is I should have reversed the "kink" between the hinge and the chainstays. It would have let the rear end fold tighter and provide the drive chain clearance needed. I think I need to rebuild this...


Confirmed. No clearance for the chain. :bluefrown: Have to rebuild it. Live and learn. Do not have to do a total remake though. May be as simple as flipping over the chainstays and yoke.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

aosty said:


> In previous years, I thought you were intentionally driving like a puss! :lol:
> 
> Nice job thinking outside of the box, especially on your first frame, as someone else mentioned. :thumbsup:


When you have a low-power car you can drive it flat-out and nobody notices!


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

Shiggy,

Honestly mate, spend more time in design.

I don't want to appear discouraging - far from it - in fact, I would like to encourage you to spend more time in the design phase to iron out all those issues you're facing, and look at ways to achieve what you want to achieve that won't require you to get into a cycle of -

1) Have idea
2) Do sketch
3) Run into shop and fab something
4) Go 'doh' you've missed something simple
5) Repeat ad infinitum.

Bikes really aren't that difficult. They're not the Space Shuttle - they're only 8 tubes joined together - but you really are creating a lot of work for yourself that while may be fun in the short term, in the log term you'll find yourself with a shed full of stuff that's completely useless and find yourself wondering how many hours you could've saved if you'd only spent more time in the design phase.

Good luck with v2!


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Thylacine said:


> Shiggy,
> 
> Honestly mate, spend more time in design.
> 
> ...


No amount of pre-build design work would have prevented this error. It was just not something I was thinking of. Now that I have seen it I will not make the same mistake again.

A shedfull of useless stuff? Nope, the errors go in the recycle barrel. In any case I find the process as or more rewarding as the final product. If I did not I would not be doing it in the first place. Also you can never figure out all the processes required on paper. At some point you must realize the frame to see where you can improve it. I made a couple of versions of the hinge assembly weeks before the frame was started to check the swing and chainring clearance. That part worked out well. If I had attached the stays...well, I learned something the hard way, but I learned.


----------



## pvd (Jan 4, 2006)

shiggy said:


> Confirmed. No clearance for the chain. :bluefrown: Have to rebuild it. Live and learn.


Shiggs, when I'm doing something new, I do put a LOT of time in designing, but I also do fit up when tacking to confirm everything is kosher. Then, after brazons, I rattlecan (no primer) the bike and set it up to ride it for a week. This gives me the opportunity to make some changes or move brazeons to new postitions before it goes to paint while being able to easily remove the junk paint. This saves a lot of trouble, cash, and time.

As long as you learn from this, then it was a good thing.


----------



## Live Wire (Aug 27, 2007)

shiggy said:


> No amount of pre-build design work would have prevented this error. It was just not something I was thinking of. Now that I have seen it I will not make the same mistake again.
> 
> A shedfull of useless stuff? Nope, the errors go in the recycle barrel. In any case I find the process as or more rewarding as the final product. If I did not I would not be doing it in the first place. Also you can never figure out all the processes required on paper. At some point you must realize the frame to see where you can improve it. I made a couple of versions of the hinge assembly weeks before the frame was started to check the swing and chainring clearance. That part worked out well. If I had attached the stays...well, I learned something the hard way, but I learned.


Good attitude Shiggy, your mistakes will teach you more than the successes- well, with the hinged design, at least you only have to do the rear end!


----------



## Thylacine (Feb 29, 2004)

You've kinda countered a really good attitude with a really bad one here Shiggy.

On the one hand you've show a good attitude of learning from your mistakes, and then you've completely negated it by saying that you're happy with being negligent!

Can you imagine a doctor in your position?

"Sorry your dad died. No learning prior to me accidentally leaving that gauze in his abdomen could've prevented his death because _I wasn't thinking about it._"

"We doc, that's okay! You've learned from your mistake and seeing you weren't thinking about it, that's fine!"

Crikey! I hope you don't do this in your professional life!


----------



## coconinocycles (Sep 23, 2006)

*i'm a bit confused......*

so........ does the chain rub the cs? is that what's happening? if so, how about an asym rear cs set-up? then you could just blast the rear and modify it.......but, yeah.....with a design this far out of the norm a pre-paint assembly mighta helped. one of the hardest things with frame design {along with an understanding of human bodytypes} is the compatibility of componentry. i'm glad i wrenched for so long. no worries, v-2.0 will fly! am i gonna see you in portland, shig? garro.


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Shiggy, I think you di an excellent job, especially as your first try by yourself. Live and learn, if you F' it up nobody's dead because of it, you just go again.

It's not "Doctor Science" he's just building a bike, to somewhat context quote what you previously said.


Thylacine said:


> You've kinda countered a really good attitude with a really bad one here Shiggy.
> 
> On the one hand you've show a good attitude of learning from your mistakes, and then you've completely negated it by saying that you're happy with being negligent!
> 
> ...


----------



## plmrman (Aug 1, 2007)

hey nice job. great attitude on your mistakes. it's only time you've wasted, you haven't killed anybody. i think Thylacine might be taking himself a little to seriously comparing frame building to saving someones life. you learn by mistakes and at some point even a doctor killed someone through trial and error. no pre design or planning can't prepare you for all problems. great job.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Thylacine said:


> You've kinda countered a really good attitude with a really bad one here Shiggy.
> 
> On the one hand you've show a good attitude of learning from your mistakes, and then you've completely negated it by saying that you're happy with being negligent!
> 
> ...


Very poor analogy.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

coconinocycles said:


> so........ does the chain rub the cs? is that what's happening? if so, how about an asym rear cs set-up? then you could just blast the rear and modify it.......but, yeah.....with a design this far out of the norm a pre-paint assembly mighta helped. one of the hardest things with frame design {along with an understanding of human bodytypes} is the compatibility of componentry. i'm glad i wrenched for so long. no worries, v-2.0 will fly! am i gonna see you in portland, shig? garro.


Yup. The bottom run of the chain rubs the stay about at the tire. I did think about front derailleur, tire, chainring, crankarm and top run of chain clearance. I will flatten the stay-hinge angle to move the bottom of the stay above the bottom of the small ring. This will also let the frame fold a bit tighter. Should be fairly simple. I may not get to it for a week or so as I have a bike to finish for the show  (in addition to assembling the usual 25 or so bikes). I have be working on fender struts today (no, it is _NOT_ a big buck commuter).

Will be in PDX bright and early Friday. See you there. Is your better half coming?


----------



## coconinocycles (Sep 23, 2006)

shiggy said:


> Yup. The bottom run of the chain rubs the stay about at the tire. I did think about front derailleur, tire, chainring, crankarm and top run of chain clearance. I will flatten the stay-hinge angle to move the bottom of the stay above the bottom of the small ring. This will also let the frame fold a bit tighter. Should be fairly simple. I may not get to it for a week or so as I have a bike to finish for the show  (in addition to assembling the usual 25 or so bikes). I have be working on fender struts today (no, it is _NOT_ a big buck commuter).
> 
> Will be in PDX bright and early Friday. See you there. Is your better half coming?


well........when i built my ist bike i was thinking "I'M GOING FOR KILLER TIRE CLEARANCE!!!" then when i installed my ritchey 180's they tightened against the cs with authority. sucky. i dimpled the shhitt outta them, and ran it until i destroyed the bike dropping in off a cliff in sedona and made a much nicer one. you will have that! that's why it's called learning. at least you are getting your hands dirty and not letting others discourage you. props for taking on such a out-of-the box design for a first bike! and yes, denise is coming and says "hi". steve.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

coconinocycles said:


> well........when i built my ist bike i was thinking "I'M GOING FOR KILLER TIRE CLEARANCE!!!" then when i installed my ritchey 180's they tightened against the cs with authority. sucky. i dimpled the shhitt outta them, and ran it until i destroyed the bike dropping in off a cliff in sedona and made a much nicer one. you will have that! that's why it's called learning. at least you are getting your hands dirty and not letting others discourage you. props for taking on such a out-of-the box design for a first bike! and yes, denise is coming and says "hi". steve.


Looking forward to seeing you both. Been way too long and way too much has happened.


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

Got the chainstays revised today. Not quite finished, but close. Needed to make a new hinge unit (I call it the "hippo"). Did not reduce tire clearance as much as I thought it might. The real bonus is the frame folds _*MUCH*_ deeper (this was mentioned to me earlier by the _powers-that-be)_.







New







Old


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Fast work Shiggy, guess it was really gnawing at you. Definitely a huge increase in the fold. Just as a sort of FYI, I did pretty much this very same thing to my Niner RIP9 to travel with this summer, except the rear triangle folded all the way into the front and fitted into a 29" wheel box. Guess that Niner's use of the pivot below and a little in front of the BB is a lot like your design and lends itself to easy packing.












shiggy said:


> Got the chainstays revised today. Not quite finished, but close. Needed to make a new hinge unit (I call it the "hippo"). Did not reduce tire clearance as much as I thought it might. The real bonus is the frame folds _*MUCH*_ deeper (this was mentioned to me earlier by the _powers-that-be)_.
> View attachment 332291


----------



## shiggy (Dec 19, 1998)

LyNx said:


> Fast work Shiggy, guess it was really gnawing at you. Definitely a huge increase in the fold. Just as a sort of FYI, I did pretty much this very same thing to my Niner RIP9 to travel with this summer, except the rear triangle folded all the way into the front and fitted into a 29" wheel box. Guess that Niner's use of the pivot below and a little in front of the BB is a lot like your design and lends itself to easy packing.


Except it takes you what, 45 minutes to get the bike rideable? The bf9 will be ready to go in three. Not being shipped though.


----------



## Francis Buxton (Apr 2, 2004)

Shiggy, building a piece of junk is something machinists and tinkerers call "learning curve". I'll bet you $100 you NEVER neglect to consider the lower chainline ever again, simply because of this one time you "wasted" $50 on a junk rear triangle. It will make you a better builder/designer for it.

Besides, you got some good mitering/brazing experience didn't you?

Maybe Warwick could stand to do a little bit of the _fabrication_ side of framebuilding....


----------



## LyNx (Oct 26, 2004)

Hehehe  Yeah. Wish it only took that long, guess if I really wanted to ride I could re-run all the cables, install the fork, stem, bars, in 45 mins. I guess if I wanted to travel with it in a car and didn't have much room I could fold it like that, leave on the HB, stem, fork, front wheel & RD and just hook everything back up in about 10-15 minutes.

Looking forward to seeing the new & improved version in full paint and fully built :thumbsup: Way to go for a first try :thumbsup:



shiggy said:


> Except it takes you what, 45 minutes to get the bike rideable? The bf9 will be ready to go in three. Not being shipped though.


----------

