# Lugged CX bike?



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Hey guys,

So I searched and couldn't find anything on this, I hope the answer to this isn't as obvious as it probably is...

Anyway, I'm looking to start building frames. And I'd like to start off with a CX frame, because I want a CX bike. It seems like lugs are easier than anything else, so I was wondering if anyone has made a lugged CX bike, and how they modified it or what not.

Thanks a bunch,
Adam


----------



## 3wfab (Aug 1, 2010)

No mods mods needed.


----------



## mchimonas (Dec 19, 2008)

*CX are fun to build and not too difficult to design*

Generally the lug angles are the same for road bikes as for CX bikes. Most BB shells for road bikes come with a seat tube-chain stay angle between 61 and 63 degrees. Anything in this range will be fine for CX but 62 or 63 will give you a slightly higher BB. Cut your chainstays a little longer than you would for a road bike; this will give the bike a "more relaxed feel" (longer wheel base) and will allow more clearance between the chainstays for wider tires. Find chainstays that are ovalized at the section that corresponds to the rear wheel (or ovalize round ones yourself). You will need a slightly longer fork than a typical road fork for a slacker head angle (around 72 degrees is a good target). If you are using standard 73/60 degree front triangle lug set, your top tube should slope upward 1 or 2 degrees to give you a head angle around 72 degrees. If you are using slant six lugs 79/60 degrees, the top tube will slope around 7 or 8 degrees. If you want a more aggressive 73 degree head angle, the top tube will be parallel to the ground with 73/60 lugs, and the top tube will slope 6 degrees for slant six (79/60) lugs.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Cool, thanks! I think I probably need to research more. I'll let you all know how it goes though.


----------



## giant_kyle (May 26, 2007)

on an aside...I just bought those speed kings from chainlove for $12 a tire. how do you like em?


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

3wfab said:


> No mods mods needed.


Can I ask what lugs you used?
I've found some on Nova that seem like they might be decent but I'm wondering what worked well for you. 
Thanks.


----------



## mchimonas (Dec 19, 2008)

Five considerations in regards to lugs for a CX bike:

1. will you use a fork with a 1" or 1 1/8" steerer? Easier to find lugs for 1" fork but 1" forkes themselves are harder to find. For 1" fork, you will need "standard size" or "OS (oversize)" tubing (using Nova terminology here), and head tube must have a diameter of 31.7 (or 31.8)mm. If you want to use a 1 1/8" steerer on your fork, you need either OS or "double OS" tubing and lugs with a 36mm head tube. (you can gather from the above that OS tubes/lugs come with either 31.8mm or 36mm head tubes. Standard always come with 31.8mm, and double OS with 36mm).

2. Do you want a "classic geometry" in which the top tube is parrallel to the ground, or a top tube that slopes upward. If you want a sloping top tube, the only lug set that will work (that nova has) is their slant six, which I think takes OS tubes with a 36mm headtube. As far as I can tell, every other lug set at nova is for a classic geometry. (Note, by themselves, classic versus sloping top tube has little effect on how the bike handles as they do not effect head angle--all other things being equal).

3. Tire clearance: you will need chainstays that are ovalized adjacent to the rear wheel for greater tire clearance. Bottom brackets for standard size usually take round 22.2mm chainstays, which are easier to insert (less shaping of stays or gridning of sockets). If you go with this option, you will need either round-oval-road stays or round stays that you ovalize yourself by squashing in a vise. OS and double OS bottom bracket shells usually have chainstay sockets for ovalized stays. The problem with this is usually the stays usually fit poorly into the sockets, requiring reshaping (squashing of the stays or grinding of the sockets)

4. stiffness of frame. Standard size, less stiff << OS more stiff << double OS stiffest (stiffness is a bit over rated in my opinion.

5. easiest frame to build would probably be standard size lugs, round chainstays (you can ovalize the section that needs to be ovalized), socketed articulated dropouts; lugs where the TT-HT angle = TT-ST angle = 73 degrees, and DT-ST angle = HT-DT angle = 60 degrees. This set up requires less reshaping of lugs and tubes. Drawback is the frame is not very stiff, only takes a 1" steerer, and has a classic geometery.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Sweet, Thats a bunch of great info.

I think #1 was my biggest concern, finding lugs that work with a 1 1/8'' steer tube.

This is my first frame so easy is probably the way to go. I'm fine with the "classic geometry" I'm sort of planning on having this bike for long road/gravel rides anyway, although less stiff is a little bit of a concern. Not the end of the world though.

Thanks for the help.

Adam


----------



## mchimonas (Dec 19, 2008)

Well if you want a 1 1/8", standard size lugs are out. That leaves OS and double OS which is stiffer. 
FOr lug set, might I suggest:

NEW PRODUCT LUGS SLANT SIX OS ROAD NOVA 36MM HT FOR SLOPED TOPTUBE :: NEW PRODUCTS !** :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.

or

LUGS OS ROAD NOVA 36MM HT EXTended TOP :: LUGS :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.

for BB shell:

Nova Investment Cast OVERSIZED ROAD BB :: STEEL LUGGED SHELLS :: BOTTOM BRACKETS :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.

they claim that this shell will fit ovalized chainstays easier, though I am not sure if this is true. This BB shell has a 62 degree ST-CS angle (better for CX) which will give you slightly higher BB than 61 degrees.

You will need a OS tubeset with a 36mm head tube.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Cool. Thanks for being so helpful.
That made a lot of things easier.

-Adam


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

This season I started with riding a vintage CX frame with standard size columbus SL tubing, 1" top tube and fork steer tube, 1-1/8" ST and DT. I bought a OS dedaccaia tubeset (COM 12.5) and everst lugs from Nova and built up as new CX bike. I like standard horizontal TT geometry (better looking, easier to shoulder) but wanted the front end as high as possible so I tweaked the lugs a bit and got the top tube to slope upward 2°, almost too sublte to discern the upward slope visually but it helps with the geometry I wanted. I wouldnt go all the way to building a 6° slope top tube for a CX bike. This was my first full frame build and it went smooth. Main triangle tubes are single oversize .8/.5 wall thickness and used an 1-1/8" fork and oval seatstays. The bottom bracket was standard road geometry and it took a bit of massaging of the chainstays and BB lugs and fairly long chainstays to get good tire/mud clearance. 
I finished the bike just in time for my last race of the season and got to race it as my first test ride. It turned out even better than I expected and performed great. Lighter, stiffer and more resonsive than my standard deminsioned tube steel frame. I weigh over 200lbs and so really appreciated the responsive feel of the OS tubing but yet it was by no means a harsh, dead ride.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110245208849091527987/Bikes?authuser=0&feat=directlink

Nova's monthly special package deals (tubes + lugs + BB) are a great bargin for getting started. MONTHLY SPECIALS** :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc. 
Most any of the "road bike" tube + lugs are fine for a CX bike. This months standard size Nova CrMo special would be great cheap package for a first frame IF you wanted a 1" fork size. They have a columbus Zona OS special that would make a awesome CX bike but I am hesitant to recommend the more expensive, thinner, tougher tubes for a first time build. (Maybe buy them both, practice with the standard CrMo tubeset first and then build a killer frame from the Zona tubes). Last option they have this month is a Nova CrMo double OS special which would be good first option if you want a really stiff frame. If you are not in a hurry, you might also just wait a month or two until they offer a single OS CrMo tube+lug special again. (specials change beginning of each month and the flavors regularly rotate).


----------



## cataño (Sep 7, 2009)

I would suggest ordering a pair of Richard Sachs' custom drawn Columbus chainstays if you're thinking of doing a lugged CX frame. The s-bend isn't quite as severe as you'd get with a std mtb s-bend, and the oval end is sized to fit a lugged shell. I believe it's essentially the same tube as the Zona Cyber CX S-bend, but with a differently-shaped oval end. I believe they're $50/pair shipped.

Stock lugs will definitely work, but can be a headache if you want to make the frame backwards/forwards-compatible w/ a carbon fork, all of which tend to be 395mm axle-crown and either 45 or 47mm rake. The main lugs will work, but the BB cluster can be a pain; you might consider fillet brazing that part if the geometry isn't working out. Obviously, the further you get from m-o-r sizing, the more troubles you'll run into.

EDIT to add: If you do wind up going w/ a fillet brazed BB shell, I'd also recommend using one of the lugless shells with chainstay sockets from joe b or ceeway. They'll definitely make your life easier if you're new to building.


----------



## bigwaves_us (Mar 15, 2008)

cataño said:


> I would suggest ordering a pair of Richard Sachs' custom drawn Columbus chainstays if you're thinking of doing a lugged CX frame. The s-bend isn't quite as severe as you'd get with a std mtb s-bend, and the oval end is sized to fit a lugged shell. I believe it's essentially the same tube as the Zona Cyber CX S-bend, but with a differently-shaped oval end. I believe they're $50/pair shipped.
> 
> Stock lugs will definitely work, but can be a headache if you want to make the frame backwards/forwards-compatible w/ a carbon fork, all of which tend to be 395mm axle-crown and either 45 or 47mm rake. The main lugs will work, but the BB cluster can be a pain; you might consider fillet brazing that part if the geometry isn't working out. Obviously, the further you get from m-o-r sizing, the more troubles you'll run into.
> 
> EDIT to add: If you do wind up going w/ a fillet brazed BB shell, I'd also recommend using one of the lugless shells with chainstay sockets from joe b or ceeway. They'll definitely make your life easier if you're new to building.


I think the waiting list for Richard is over 5 years right now. They are great CX frames.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Hey, so I ordered some tubes and lugs and a whole bunch of other little things I'll need! 
All very exciting.

However, I soon realized that I know pretty much nothing about geometry. I designed what I think I want the bike to be in bikeCAD, based off of some commercial CX frames, and that gave me some numbers to work with, but i'm still not exactly sure what that means. For example, how does my chainstay length or Effective top tube length translate to how and where I cut my mitres ect.

I checked out the FAQs, but couldn't really find any solid resource. Can you guys point me in the right direction? 
Thanks!


----------



## Busdriver1959 (Jul 1, 2011)

I draw mine in full scale on a drafting table so I'm not too familiar with bikecad. If I remember correctly, the free version doesn't give all the info you really need. If that's true and the free version is what you used, you might need to invest in the paid version or some drafting supplies.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

Free bikecad will not produce tube mitre templates, you need the paid version to get those. Alternately, rattlecad will print templates for free or just take your tube deminsions and angles and input them into the online mitre program at Nova;
Miter Your Tubes with Tube Notcher ! :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

adarn said:


> Hey, so I ordered some tubes and lugs and a whole bunch of other little things I'll need!
> All very exciting.
> 
> However, I soon realized that I know pretty much nothing about geometry. I designed what I think I want the bike to be in bikeCAD, based off of some commercial CX frames, and that gave me some numbers to work with, but i'm still not exactly sure what that means. For example, how does my chainstay length or Effective top tube length translate to how and where I cut my mitres ect.
> ...


Can you post a link to your bikecad file, then we can view it and evaluate geometry. (or just list the critical measurements and angles.
What lug/tubeset did you source. This months specials from NOVA include their 8/5/8 OS tubeset and lugs, good starter package. 
DECEMBER 2011 SPECIAL NOVA OS ROAD TUBESET with 8/5/8 TT AND DT :: ROAD TUBESETS :: NOVA :: STEEL TUBESETS :: TUBE SETS :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

GrayJay said:


> Can you post a link to your bikecad file, then we can view it and evaluate geometry. (or just list the critical measurements and angles.
> What lug/tubeset did you source. This months specials from NOVA include their 8/5/8 OS tubeset and lugs, good starter package.
> DECEMBER 2011 SPECIAL NOVA OS ROAD TUBESET with 8/5/8 TT AND DT :: ROAD TUBESETS :: NOVA :: STEEL TUBESETS :: TUBE SETS :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.


That's actually exactly what I got. With a 36mm HT and I think it was the Nova lugset that went along with that.

Here is the bikecad file, thanks for looking at it. Let me know what you think.
http://www.bikecad.ca/1323191717006

Really I was just trying to copy the Surly Cross check to keep things simple. I'm intending to use the bike for everything from really long road/gravel rides to light trail usage and even some touring trips.



GrayJay said:


> Free bikecad will not produce tube mitre templates, you need the paid version to get those. Alternately, rattlecad will print templates for free or just take your tube deminsions and angles and input them into the online mitre program at Nova;
> Miter Your Tubes with Tube Notcher ! :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.


I've seen tube notcher, I'm guessing thats what I'll use. I think I need to figure out what miters and stuff to use first though haha.

Thanks for the advice everyone.

Adam


----------



## Busdriver1959 (Jul 1, 2011)

The link to the Bikecad file doesn't include any numbers. Does the program give you dimensions that aren't included in the link? I've seen the output from the paid version. It includes the miter to miter measurements. Without them, either from a computer program like Bikecad or a good drawing, it will be difficult to place your miter templates correctly. As I'm sure you know, just a little miss with the miters will cause a big change in the frame's geometry. You asked how the effective top tube length translates to cutting your miters. It doesn't, unless you are very very good at math. That's why I suggested the paid version or a drawing.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

Your file has the TT sloping -2.5° (sloping upward toward the seat like a funny bike). THe TT should be level or slightly slope the other way, upward toward the head tube for a bit more standover clearance and a high stem position so there is not excessive drop between the saddle and bars. I built with the same NOVA lugs and was able to get about 1° of forward slope on the TT by slightly bending the lug tangs and positioning the top tube for max available slope from the otherwise level lugs.

https://picasaweb.google.com/110245208849091527987/Bikes?authuser=0&feat=directlink# 
Other consideration is that your fork is really short for a CX bike, the axel to crown measurement should be more like 395mm-400mm for large tires and generous mud clearance above. What kind of brakes do you intend to use? (Cantilevers/V-brakes tolerate the clearance fine, sidepulls would need to be really long.) Unless you are planning bike around a 375mm fork that you already have, change the A-C measurement, it has a big impact on how the frame angles and BB drop are achieved.

You have your frame angles as 73/73 in the bikecad file, chosscheck shows as 72/72.5. Note that without even fiddling with the lugs, you can get 72/72 and a +1° forward slope on the TT if you just roatate the entire frame 1° (and then adjust the fork length and BB drop accordingly).

make a few changes to the file and let me know...


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

Busdriver1959 said:


> The link to the Bikecad file doesn't include any numbers. Does the program give you dimensions that aren't included in the link? I've seen the output from the paid version. It includes the miter to miter measurements. Without them, either from a computer program like Bikecad or a good drawing, it will be difficult to place your miter templates correctly. As I'm sure you know, just a little miss with the miters will cause a big change in the frame's geometry. You asked how the effective top tube length translates to cutting your miters. It doesn't, unless you are very very good at math. That's why I suggested the paid version or a drawing.


Once you have the file open for online viewing, click on the frame and fork toolbar icons at top to pull up the angles & measurements.

If you know the angle and C-C length needed, go ahead and mitre one end, test fit and measure / fit at the other end to determine position for the 2nd mitre cut to achieve desired C-C length. YOu can always start with the tubes rough mitre length a tiny bit long and then sneak up on it to shorten the tube to exact length needed to get to the C-C measurement.


----------



## Live Wire (Aug 27, 2007)

How are you going to measure your angles to make sure they are right? 
The paper templates will get you close, but you shouldn't rely on them only.


----------



## Blaster1200 (Feb 20, 2004)

Live Wire said:


> How are you going to measure your angles to make sure they are right?
> The paper templates will get you close, but you shouldn't rely on them only.


So true! Even with the best marker setup, one extra swipe of the file can translate into a 1 degree change in angle. I don't really know how critical this is with lugs, but for fillet brazing or TIG welding, it makes a big difference.

Also, buying tubes before having your drawing may be a bad idea. How can you buy tubes before you know how long the tubes need to be and where the butts need to be?


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Hey guys, thanks for looking at this and everything.

GrayJay, Thanks for looking at those things, I knew it seemed really off.
I lost the other file I was working with and whipped this one up very hastily.

I changed the ST/HT angles to 72. For some reason I thought the lugs came at 73 degrees.

How does this one look?

Thanks again, Adam.

http://www.bikecad.ca/1323209349176


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

Much better. 
THink of the lugs as offering 73° +/- 1° depending on how you position the tube in the socket and how much you are willing to bend the lug. Also, they only produce 73° to verticle if the TT is 0° horizontal, sloping the TT can effectivly change the ST/HT angles a bit too so long as you dont care that the TT is not exactly horizontal (1° off is barely preceptible).

Your current design looks to have about 67mm of fork trail. 
Bicycle Trail Calculator | yojimg.net
That is on the upper end of the trail measurement that you might want for a CX bike and is likely higher than optimal for extensive pavement use. If you will do any loaded touring, definitly bring the trail down a bit as the steering becomes heavier with additional load on the front end. Great explanation of for trail here; Spectrum Cycles | Geometry
If you are building the fork yourself or re-using a steel fork, consider a bit more rake for less trail. If you are stuck with 44mm rake of an existing fork, adjust the headtube angle a bit steeper to get the trail where you want it.

Your c-c seattube measurement is a bit shorter than the TT which is fine if you have short legs/ long torso or if you want a fairly aggressive long and low riding position more suited to road riding. For offroad/CX riding, increasing the headtube height (and thus also the seattube) up a bit will help get the handlebars higher (without a goofy tall stack of spacers) for a more comfortable and stable offroad position but this comes at the expense of standover height if you leave the TT angle constant.

Looks good otherwise, the chainstay length and the BB drop definitly within the range of acceptable for suggested use.

What do you plan to use for jig/alignment, torches, braze, flux etc?


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Cool.

Thanks a bunch, that sounds like really solid advice. 

I was planning on using a 44mm rake fork, but now that I see that, it seems like I might want to use something with a bit more. I was going to use a carbon fork. I have the option of a 44, 45 or 48mm rake fork. 48 looks like it would give me a trail of 63, which still seems pretty high, no? I could always try and build one out of steel though, or just get one from Walt. 

I was thinking about make the seat tube a little longer, like 5 mm or so, I do usually ride my frames a tad smaller though as I do like an aggressive riding position.

My main reason for building a lugged frame was that I've heard you can get away without a jig, so I probably wasn't going to use one unless its something very simple. I don't really have a whole lot of metal working tools, haha, not that many tools at all to be honest. 

I was going to borrow a torch from a friend and for I was looking at using brass for the joints and silver for all the braze ons (Melts lower? less chance of hurting the tubes maybe?)

I'm just about to hop into finals week here at school, so I won't be getting that into it for another week or so, but this advice is great. Thanks for all of the help.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

63mm trail is probably an average measurement for production CX bikes, they mostly seem to range to within +/- 5mm of there. If you have a preference for more road or especially touring use, shoot for closer to neutral 56mm trail, in which case you may then need to steepen the HTA a bit if you are working with a fork you cannot rake further.

Definitly give it a try! lugged frames can be built without a dedicated jig. I finished my first full frame this year and used the flat machined steel surface of a large heavy table saw for layout. I used shims and v-blocks supporting the tubes to setup the main triangle in flat plane parallel to table surface. Once I got each of the tube lengths and angle where I wanted it, I drilled and pinned it to secure and then could pickup and braze. For setting-up and holding alignement of the chainstays while brazing to the BB, you can use a very simple jig arrangement like the one shown in this thread; http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/bb-widing-extending-752566.html#post8659335

If you are working with regular 4130 CrMo, brazing the entire frame with bronze is fine, the extra expense of silver is probably not really justified unless you are working with an expensive super-thin heat treated tubeset (which would be a poor tubeset choice for a first frame). Just practice, practice, practive brazing on scrap frame tubing before you start on your real bike. Order some good high quality bronze and flux know to workwell for bikes, junk rod and flux you find at home depot or even at most local industrial welding suppliers is really not suitable and will just leave you frustrated and ruin the materials.

Other than a torch, vernier calipers to measure, protractor for angles, good hacksaw and a wide assortment of sharp files in different shapes and sizes, there really is little other expesive tooling you MUST have provided you can get a bike shop face & chase the BB threads and face & ream the headtube once you are done.

Definitly download and read through; 
The NEW Paterek Manual

and http://bhovey.com/Masi/Scans/Talbot/index.htm


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Sweet. Thanks again.

I'll definitely post my progress up here and let y'all know how it's going.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Hey, so I've ben doing some more work on the bike.

Looking at my angles, it looks like the HT-DT angle is 67 degrees and the DT-BB angle is 66 degrees.

Am I going to be able to bend my lugs that much? the BB shell has a 60 degree socket.


----------



## Live Wire (Aug 27, 2007)

You shouldn't have to. Based on that last Bike Cad link, all of your angles should be within one degree of typical road lug angles. Your dt/ht angle can't be 67 degrees, it should be very close to 60.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

adarn said:


> Hey, so I've ben doing some more work on the bike.
> 
> Looking at my angles, it looks like the HT-DT angle is 67 degrees and the DT-BB angle is 66 degrees.
> 
> Am I going to be able to bend my lugs that much? the BB shell has a 60 degree socket.


That sounds like a lot of re-working of the lug angles, I would guess that they probably only should be altered by around 3°. When I built my CX frame with NOVA lugs, the downtube fit at the BB was a really loose fit. Test fit the tubes into the lugs and measure angles, see how much wiggle room they have from the 60° spec. If you need to alter frame geometry to make the DT lug angles work, you might consider some combination of steeper seattube angle, shorter fork A-C length and/or higher bottom bracket.


----------



## Forged1 (Dec 8, 2011)

GrayJay said:


> Free bikecad will not produce tube mitre templates, you need the paid version to get those. Alternately, rattlecad will print templates for free or just take your tube deminsions and angles and input them into the online mitre program at Nova;
> Miter Your Tubes with Tube Notcher ! :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.


How did you like the rattlecad program? was it easy to use? I am not too computer saavy and could not get it to work for me, any advice? Thanks -Matt


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

Are you having problems getting the program installed and running or problems entering a bike? You cant beat the price but working in rattlecad is not immediately easy & odvious, takes a bit of practice to figure out where to enter deminsions and how to change the variables to arrive at the geometry you want. Once you get the knack, it does work quite well, great free alternative for an occasional hobby framebuilder.


----------



## Forged1 (Dec 8, 2011)

I am having problems getting it installed, any advice on this? THanks GrayJay


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

Forged1 said:


> I am having problems getting it installed, any advice on this? THanks GrayJay


Do you have tcl/tk installed on your computer?


----------



## Forged1 (Dec 8, 2011)

No , and I am not even sure what that is, I'm a blacksmith learning computers ......can I heat and hammer it in?


----------



## dr.welby (Jan 6, 2004)

Forged1 said:


> No , and I am not even sure what that is, I'm a blacksmith learning computers ......can I heat and hammer it in?


Tcl/tk is a toolkit for building computer programs, kind of like an Erector set. So like an Erector set gives you beams and pulleys and gears, Tcl/tl gives you windows and menus and dialogs and other stuff every computer program needs.

Rattlecad was built using parts of the Tcl toolkit, so in order for it to run you have to install it first. If you go to the link above, you can download the appropriate tcl/tk installer for your operating system and once it's installed Rattlecad should run.


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Hey guys, Happy X mas, 
I just got finished with most of the mitering, here's a picture.


----------



## rattleCAD (Feb 24, 2010)

*rattleCAD - Install Issue*

Hi,

If you have downloaded the package from sourceforge.net
sourceforge.net/projects/rattlecad/files/latest/download?source=files

extract the zip file to a directory
e.g.: c:\programs\rattlecad (on Windows) (create it, if it does not exist)

currently (Dec. 2011) there should be a directory:
c:\programs\rattlecad\3.2.67
and some files:
rattleCAD.tcl ... starts via tcl/Tk runtime
rattleCAD.bat ... runs a binary

does this help?

regards, Manfred


----------



## adarn (Aug 11, 2009)

Hey all,

So i've been teaching myself how to braze by watching youtube videos and trying it out, and I feel pretty comfortable digging into my frame now. However, these little red O2 tanks suck! they last like 15 minutes. Does anyone know about how much a big tank runs and how hard they are to get? I can't find any prices on the local welding supply place's website, so I figured I would ask here.

Thanks,
Adam


----------



## hardtailkid (Jan 25, 2010)

This thread has been an awesome resource for my framebuilding project.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

hardtailkid said:


> This thread has been an awesome resource for my framebuilding project.


Couple more lugged MTB threads to check are; 
http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/lugged-frame-fat-bike-747492.htmland
http://forums.mtbr.com/frame-building/frame-1-north-fargo-741958.html

If you start with a 3-piece lugset, keep in mind that you may still need to fillet braze at the bottom bracket in order to get all the angles you need. Too much variability of MTB geometry and size to expect to be able to find a pre-cast part to suite your needs. On the 3 main lugs, pay attention to the the angle of downtube to steertube lug, not all lugsets made for roadbikes will necessarily work well here for a MTB.

Something like llewelyn cadenzia lugset is probably you best bet for a sloping TT MTB with 35mm DT and to fit a 1-1/8" steer tube fork; 
Llewelyn Crescendo Double Oversize Lugs for Sloped Top Tube in Mild Steel :: Llewellyn LUGS :: Llewellyn Frame Parts :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.

For your first frame, stay with some nice thick butted CrMo tubing set (.9/.6) and mild-steel lugs (not SS) for easiest building.


----------



## hardtailkid (Jan 25, 2010)

GrayJay said:


> Couple more lugged MTB threads to check are;
> http://forums.mtbr.com/fat-bikes/lugged-frame-fat-bike-747492.htmland
> http://forums.mtbr.com/frame-building/frame-1-north-fargo-741958.html
> 
> ...


 I think I may actually do a CX build. It wouldn't require any hard to find frame parts, and I don't have one. Perfect commuter if you ask me.


----------



## GrayJay (May 16, 2011)

I built a CX frame as my first bike last year. Still need to get it painted in time for this years CX season. A lugged CX frame likely will be an easier first frame project than a MTB as it is closer in geometry to a conventional road bike. The one caution I would have it that a road lugged bottom bracket may not give you much clearance for wider CX tires, particularly if you ever want to be able to use mostercross size 29er tires. If I were to do it again, I might consider using Novas Everest MTB bottom bracket which had wide 10° angle between the chainstay ports (for bent MTB style chainstays) and a CS to DT angle that would work well with a shallow BB drop often used on CX bikes.
STANDARD MTB BB :: BOTTOM BRACKETS :: Nova Cycles Supply Inc.


----------



## hardtailkid (Jan 25, 2010)

I added up the build cost (components) of a CX bike and decided that I don't want to dish out that kind of money when a.) I am going to be treating myself to a Specialized Venge and b.) I already have most of the components for a track build.


----------



## unterhausen (Sep 28, 2008)

I think Walt should add the following statement to the FAQ:
lugs are no substitute for technique. When you screw up a TIG weld or a fillet, you can see it. This is not so with a lug.


----------

