# Let's Make a Frame, eh!...Geo ONLY



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

alright, for ricks lets make a frame thread (hopefuly youve read that thread before this one)

this thread is for posting geometry only...we will vote on what we want as more suggestions come in.



rtw said:


> WE will decide the final geometry of this bike


keep that in mind, and as wiht the original thread keep it calm, keep an open mind. because no one wants an argument here, the other thread is probably the only thread in mtbr history with 116 different opinions, and no arguments. Keep up the good work:thumbsup:

Now for my vote,

21" effective TT
15" chainstays all the way in
about a 40 or 41 inch wheelbase.
13" BB height
12.5" seat tube
70 degree head tube angle
70 degree seat tube angle

and again, a great way to see how your bike will look:

http://www.bikeforest.com/CAD/bikeCAD.html


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

71 degree HA
73 degree ST
15."as short as possible with 26's chainstays"
21'' Top tube
13'' Seat tube.
A relatively short wheelbase, 40 inches maybe?


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Here's my bikeCAD. Complete with 32:16 singlespeed, dj saddle, my above geometry(15,8'' chainstays), and an 80mm fork(100mm looked exactly the same in the program to me). Paintscheme too! I tried to lower the space between the downtube and top tube at the heat tube, but could not find it in the proggy, but i'd make it so they touch and have a gusset there.


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

snaky69 said:


> Here's my bikeCAD. Complete with 32:16 singlespeed, dj saddle, my above geometry(15,8'' chainstays), and an 80mm fork(100mm looked exactly the same in the program to me). Paintscheme too! I tried to lower the space between the downtube and top tube at the heat tube, but could not find it in the proggy, but i'd make it so they touch and have a gusset there.


It get's better every day. This is the true meaning of giving the customer what he/she wants.
I think everyone that views this thread is learning.... this frame gets a necklace.
RTW.


----------



## trevorh (Jul 31, 2006)

props to you rick, this is a great idea.


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

rickthewelder said:


> It get's better every day. This is the true meaning of giving the customer what he/she wants.
> I think everyone that views this thread is learning.... this frame gets a necklace.
> RTW.


rick, i have not heard your input on geo, post up what you'd like to see, cause your opinion is just as important as ours


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

i think the line of the tt should go straight to the axle
i the specs should be way different than anything out there because this is gonna be a pretty revalutionary bike, a needs to explore new relms


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

aggiebiker said:


> i think the line of the tt should go straight to the axle
> i the specs should be way different than anything out there because this is gonna be a pretty revalutionary bike, a needs to explore new relms


hmm, personally i think the major exploring should be left to the companies with millions of dollars, not to one man...it should be different, but it should e reasonable. and work for the uran/park "relm"

there is no need ofr it to be drastically different, but with one minor adjustment, such as a bent seat tube (giant acid kinda deal) will tell everyody that this frame is a little different, or maybe just a super killer paint job, but lets not play with drastic geometry just yet, unless you can prove that it will be benificial for park of urban riding.

just my .02


----------



## bedheadben (Jan 30, 2006)

Cool idea! Good for you for doing this!


----------



## derfernerf (Jun 25, 2006)

not to totally throw off the subject but rick if you get this can you clear some of your messages i need to PM you about welding


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

i wasnnt thinkin it should be too drastic just diferent


----------



## Raghavan (Aug 14, 2005)

I built one like snaky's. It's a bit different but similar.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Bump, more people need to chime in if we're to ever decide.


----------



## Raghavan (Aug 14, 2005)

Here's mine:








Like i said, similar to snakys, but a lot is different.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Raghavan said:


> Here's mine:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Could you please put up your sizes and angles?


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

snaky69 said:


> Could you please put up your sizes and angles?


That seattube angle looks funky ...... also doesnt look too comfortable if you land on it


----------



## Epschoenly (Jan 25, 2006)

No kidding....I just wanted to put it out there that we need to boil this down to 3 or 4 setups soo so we can vote, and keep in mind the 26''/100mm decision in all your geometric endeavours.


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

Epschoenly said:


> No kidding....I just wanted to put it out there that we need to boil this down to 3 or 4 setups soo so we can vote, and keep in mind the 26''/100mm decision in all your geometric endeavours.


If you guys really want to design a bike the right way you need to start thinking about the #'s not just what parts or going to be used .

Sure everyone wants a 100-mm fork ? O.K. what axle to crown measurement are you going to use from what 100-mm fork >? almost every form on the market with the same amount of travel will have different axle to crown measurements .. this is what determines you HA and B/B height after the frame has been built up ?

26" wheels O.K. what tires are you going to use from and back ? this will also make a big difference in what the angles will end up being once the bike has been built up ?

The Bike C.A.D. drawings look good , but keep in mind Bike C.A.D. isn't 100% accurate there are many different variables you can change that bike C.A.D. doesn't have call out's for and there #'s dont always add up I have found inconsistansistancies in their soft wear before so be warned !


----------



## Cru Jones (Aug 10, 2006)

Here's my thoughts on the geometry again from the other thread. I'm glad some of you like this. I think it looks pretty sweet myself. Now, if I could only get somebody to build this bad boy... hint, hint 

I like the idea of having the top tube in-line with the seat stay... it just looks super clean. But, in order to get a low stand-over, I moved the seat stay intersection with the chain stay farther forward. To get back that lost strength, you could mount the dropouts on the bottom of the chain stay and insert a bracket to reinforce that angle. I also made the seat tube angle quite a bit steeper than most have recommended (75). This allows the back wheel to really be tucked for a super short chain stay and I think it would allow a better seat position for pinching the seat with your knees in the air (wouldn't have to lean back as far). I also made it fairly long, cuz I'm tall. Just my thoughts. This is a great idea! Hope it turns out well! :thumbsup:


----------



## psyber_0ptix (May 18, 2006)

that rear triangle doesnt look too, strong mounting in the middle like that


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

Evil4bc said:


> If you guys really want to design a bike the right way you need to start thinking about the #'s not just what parts or going to be used .
> 
> Sure everyone wants a 100-mm fork ? O.K. what axle to crown measurement are you going to use from what 100-mm fork >? almost every form on the market with the same amount of travel will have different axle to crown measurements .. this is what determines you HA and B/B height after the frame has been built up ?
> 
> ...


Hi Brad,
Actually if you read both of these threads completely you'll see that all of your points have been mentioned. I weld for a guy that taught me to set a frame jig up so you know what you get before the final build. He and his company have built a few thousand frames, real good ones.
Every point you mentioned is valid, and when we have a final list, then I run the numbers and maybe have to make some changes. Right now the people are speaking, riders. There are some impressive suggestion's happening. Thats exactly what I wanted. We are going to innovate bro. This frame ain't for money.
I am going to show with photo's, every step possible in the fabrication of this frame.
I've never wanted to build anything as much as I do this bike, and I've built a bunch of different things in 30 + years. 
I hope you don't take this post wrong, I appreciate everyone that comes here. You and I don't know each other well, but I think we know each other well enough to know we both speak our minds, and when we need to we can.
Hang with us, you will be surprised what a '' mere '' welder can do. I appreciate your input, honest.
Peace,
Rick.


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

Cru Jones said:


> Here's my thoughts on the geometry again from the other thread. I'm glad some of you like this. I think it looks pretty sweet myself. Now, if I could only get somebody to build this bad boy... hint, hint
> 
> I like the idea of having the top tube in-line with the seat stay... it just looks super clean. But, in order to get a low stand-over, I moved the seat stay intersection with the chain stay farther forward. To get back that lost strength, you could mount the dropouts on the bottom of the chain stay and insert a bracket to reinforce that angle. I also made the seat tube angle quite a bit steeper than most have recommended (75). This allows the back wheel to really be tucked for a super short chain stay and I think it would allow a better seat position for pinching the seat with your knees in the air (wouldn't have to lean back as far). I also made it fairly long, cuz I'm tall. Just my thoughts. This is a great idea! Hope it turns out well! :thumbsup:


I f'n love it, " for pinching the seat with your knees in the air ( would'nt have to lean back as far )
You are my kind of rider Cru.
You would love my Uzzi !
R.


----------



## psyber_0ptix (May 18, 2006)

chainstay was supposed to be 15 3/4" but i guess it rounds up. 80mm fork

and now that i look at it, bottom bracket is rather high


----------



## Cru Jones (Aug 10, 2006)

psyber_0ptix said:


> that rear triangle doesnt look too, strong mounting in the middle like that


Yeah, that's why I said you could put a bracket on top of the chain stay that kind of "fills in" the corner between the chain and seat stay. And the dropouts would probably have to go on the bottom of the chain stay. That should work, but I'm no engineer... or, wait, yes I am. 

Or, we could just move that intersection farther back, closer to normal, if we don't want to get too Rad. :thumbsup:


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

psyber_0ptix said:


> that rear triangle doesnt look too, strong mounting in the middle like that


Ya know, that pic does'nt show the dropouts (horizontal ones ), they would take up a good portion of that space that looks like just tube, and with a round tube instead of a square one, he just might be on to something.
I'm gonna fvck around with that.
I'll post pic's.
RTW.


----------



## Cru Jones (Aug 10, 2006)

I like Psyb's, too. Wheeee, it looks fun.


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

Cru Jones said:


> Yeah, that's why I said you could put a bracket on top of the chain stay that kind of "fills in" the corner between the chain and seat stay. And the dropouts would probably have to go on the bottom of the chain stay. That should work, but I'm no engineer... or, wait, yes I am.
> 
> Or, we could just move that intersection farther back, closer to normal, if we don't want to get too Rad. :thumbsup:


Here is a pic of my camo frame, from underneath on the seat stays. I shortened the rearend of that frame 1 1/8 '', and here is a big part why I was able to go that short and not weaken it structurally.
Ya run the 1'' tube over a table saw, making a line 1/8 wide down the middle, and fill it in with piece of 1/8 X 7/8 flat bar, then ya pulse it back together. It kinda makes it like I beam.
Maybe the trail CRU is looking for ?


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

Cru Jones said:


> Yeah, that's why I said you could put a bracket on top of the chain stay that kind of "fills in" the corner between the chain and seat stay. And the dropouts would probably have to go on the bottom of the chain stay. That should work, but I'm no engineer... or, wait, yes I am.
> 
> Or, we could just move that intersection farther back, closer to normal, if we don't want to get too Rad. :thumbsup:


Like this ? Crude and not to scale, but the seed is planted.........


----------



## derfernerf (Jun 25, 2006)

nice rick...love the welds in the drawing


----------



## Raghavan (Aug 14, 2005)

Evil4bc said:


> That seattube angle looks funky ...... also doesnt look too comfortable if you land on it


how so?


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

Raghavan said:


> how so?


Angled forward past the center line of the B/B sorta like this ... / 
Your seattube keep your body centered over your bike and your weight distubuted between the two wheels , make the settube more forward or "steep" 72+ then your body is going to ride more in the front triangle , this is good for full suspension bikes wear your body needs to be centered over the front triangle to keep your weight distrubuted over the suspension .

On a jumping or urban bike it helps to have a slacker seat tube angle 72- this way your body will ride more tward the rear of the bike makeing it easier to get the front wheel off the ground ect. ( B/B height to ground helps here a bit too ) 
A slacker seat tube angle will also make your front triangle seem longer wile seated and put your seat further back the higher it goes , this keeping it out of the way when riding up right also giving you more room to move around without getting a seat up the  well you get the idea .


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

rickthewelder said:


> Hi Brad,
> Actually if you read both of these threads completely you'll see that all of your points have been mentioned. I weld for a guy that taught me to set a frame jig up so you know what you get before the final build. He and his company have built a few thousand frames, real good ones.
> Every point you mentioned is valid, and when we have a final list, then I run the numbers and maybe have to make some changes. Right now the people are speaking, riders. There are some impressive suggestion's happening. Thats exactly what I wanted. We are going to innovate bro. This frame ain't for money.
> I am going to show with photo's, every step possible in the fabrication of this frame.
> ...


Rick that was more a reply to the entire thread in general .. not directed toward anyone in general . 
This being said YOU and JS know this stuff from your years of experience building everything under the sun .

I have faith that this bike will be very cool and in a way has spurred a new type of involvement on MTBR a thread that no only informs and educates all involved but in the end will help one very lucky MTBR reader and contributer !!

I was jsut chiming in with my experience with bike forest's CAD program there are too many inconsistencies when designing and building a frame that are un-accounted for in their software and I'm not enough of a computer geek to explain them all online and come out sounding intelligent , I'm sure with your watchful eye your not going to let anything too crazy happen 

RTW .. this is a major undertaking on your part and I applaud you , I wish I could be more help but I'm busy building my own secret project for the show next month .


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

my pic has all the info on it, i altered it a bit from my original vote

heres what we do form now on, post a bike cad, or geometry for a bike (preferly bike cad with all necicary info on the image)

then cast votes for which one, ill make another thread (sorry mods) for trhe best bike cad/geo picture with erverybod who contributed one on wensday, so post it before than

Rick, i hate to feel im taking the lead here, so if you have a problem by he way im "conducting" this please tell me


----------



## sittingduck (Apr 26, 2005)

15.75 chainstays
22" Top tube
12" or slightly lower BB (80MM fork)
71 degree head angle
Short head tube
These are the most critical aspects, IMO. A fairly short seat tube, and good strong construction, and you will have a winner.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

The amount of bb drop and the fact that the seat is almost rubbing on the tire on free rider's build is the only thing that makes me kinda nervous about his numbers.


----------



## Raghavan (Aug 14, 2005)

Evil4bc said:


> Angled forward past the center line of the B/B sorta like this ... /
> Your seattube keep your body centered over your bike and your weight distubuted between the two wheels , make the settube more forward or "steep" 72+ then your body is going to ride more in the front triangle , this is good for full suspension bikes wear your body needs to be centered over the front triangle to keep your weight distrubuted over the suspension .
> 
> On a jumping or urban bike it helps to have a slacker seat tube angle 72- this way your body will ride more tward the rear of the bike makeing it easier to get the front wheel off the ground ect. ( B/B height to ground helps here a bit too )
> A slacker seat tube angle will also make your front triangle seem longer wile seated and put your seat further back the higher it goes , this keeping it out of the way when riding up right also giving you more room to move around without getting a seat up the  well you get the idea .


I see. I'll have to change that. Thanks for the info.


----------



## Cru Jones (Aug 10, 2006)

rickthewelder said:


> Like this ? Crude and not to scale, but the seed is planted.........


Actually, Rick, that might be better than what I was thinking. I found a pic of an old Zeronine BMX with the dropouts on the bottom. This is what I was thinking, plus some sort of bracket on top for the seat stay/chain stay corner. But, your idea might be better (stronger), especially with aluminum.










Also crude and not to scale...


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

snaky69 said:


> The amount of bb drop and the fact that the seat is almost rubbing on the tire on free rider's build is the only thing that makes me kinda nervous about his numbers.


ill fix that, 1 minute


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Just pointing it out, else it looks hot.


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

free rider said:


> my pic has all the info on it, i altered it a bit from my original vote
> 
> heres what we do form now on, post a bike cad, or geometry for a bike (preferly bike cad with all necicary info on the image)
> 
> ...


None at all, F/R.
And I vote that is the winning paint job, save the free rider part........
Oldschool Welding goes there


----------



## trevorh (Jul 31, 2006)

mmm Im likin' cru jones's creation there.


----------



## dirtyharry (Jun 27, 2006)

How do you make a picture like that? I've got a frame idea I want to post! This thing's got insanely low standover. The seat tube is only 200 mm long. I posted a few more specs in the let's make a frame, eh? topic.


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

sorry, forgot i had to go to work...heres the updated bike, feel free to tell me what needs to be done


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Looks much better now  I don't think I have much to say on it.


----------



## Cru Jones (Aug 10, 2006)

free rider said:


> sorry, forgot i had to go to work...heres the updated bike, feel free to tell me what needs to be done


Free Rider, what's up with the forks? It looks like they are 100 mm, but they look compressed, or the wheel is all up in the travel space. That will change some of the geometry quite a bit.

Even if we don't go with mine, I still like the top tube in-line with seat tube. Like Psyb's, Snake's, or Free Ride's first one.


----------



## Epschoenly (Jan 25, 2006)

I second that emotion, Cru is mucho correcto. I think that generally anyone who is gonna "CAD" something should just aim to get as little a seat tube as possible for a really low seat.


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

free rider said:


> sorry, forgot i had to go to work...heres the updated bike, feel free to tell me what needs to be done


Looks good ... most buildable / useable design posted yet ! :thumbsup:

My vote goes for this design , it shows the FR put some time and real thought into his #'s ( but that's jsut my 2cents )


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

Cru Jones said:


> Free Rider, what's up with the forks? It looks like they are 100 mm, but they look compressed, or the wheel is all up in the travel space. That will change some of the geometry quite a bit.
> 
> Even if we don't go with mine, I still like the top tube in-line with seat tube. Like Psyb's, Snake's, or Free Ride's first one.


haha, maybe i should have checked these over, but im still fidiling with some numbers, ill fix that and probably have a better one for tommorow.

thanks for the comments, feel free to ad on any more suggestion, or point out mistakes

and if we are going to vote for geometry tommorow (as planned) then you guys need to get your votes in

right now elegible people (i am only counting ones from this thread) are:

free rider
snaky69
raghaven
crujones
psyber-optics
sittingduck

come one people, give a suggestion, or these will be all. remember this is the most important part of the bike, and your first chance (maybe) do design a bike


----------



## psyber_0ptix (May 18, 2006)

i think that the frame looks real good. looks liek it would be comfortable to ride. maybe just a tiny change on either the seat tube, or bottom bracket height.

11.5 bb or a 9 - 9.5" seat tube (probably requiring a slightly steepre seat tube angle) . but other than that chain stay looks great, nice and short 

is that a 100mm fork?

just for some reason (maybe its just me) the seat position seems a bit high in relation to the handlebars.... i dunno how to explain it (not at all XCish, but high?). ~just~ to clear the tire since it has such short stays?

my eyes are bad and i dont know enough about bikes  just a thought


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

psyber_0ptix said:


> i think that the frame looks real good. looks liek it would be comfortable to ride. maybe just a tiny change on either the seat tube, or bottom bracket height.
> 
> 11.5 bb or a 9 - 9.5" seat tube (probably requiring a slightly steepre seat tube angle) . but other than that chain stay looks great, nice and short
> 
> ...


 its because the fork is so low, if you look the wheel is in the space where the fork compresses, i will fix that, and it will change a couple of angle, as well as raise the handle bars so you wont be sitting so hunched over


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

on freeriders design, isay the seat tube shoule be shorted down an inch or so
and btw i would post up a CAD but the program wont work for me
crap i cant even insert a smilie


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

Evil4bc said:


> Looks good ... most buildable / useable design posted yet ! :thumbsup:
> 
> My vote goes for this design , it shows the FR put some time and real thought into his #'s ( but that's jsut my 2cents )


Good to see you could take some time from your '' secret project '' to give your 2 cents.:thumbsup: 
FR is only 15, imagine that.
Thanks again.
RTW.


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

aggiebiker said:


> on freeriders design, isay the seat tube shoule be shorted down an inch or so
> and btw i would post up a CAD but the program wont work for me
> crap i cant even insert a smilie


Its all good Aggie.
There are a lot of excellent suggestions posted so far. Some CAD, some not.
I'm a sponge bro, soaking it all up.
I messed around on the mill this morning with CRU's drop out thing, and I will say it is lookin' sick. I'll post pic's soon.
We're heading to the same place together.
RTW.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

I'll try and post another design or two tonight.


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

get your designs in, voting thread goes up at 1030 pm...it is now 5


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

My new and improved design.


----------



## dirtyharry (Jun 27, 2006)

Can someone tell me what I use to make one of those pictures?!? I wanna PM rick something!


----------



## R1D3R (Jun 4, 2005)

How do you guys turn the pics off bike forest into postable pics?


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

you have to allow whatever it is at the start of the program by clicking allow or always. then you go into file, the expot as image file, then you save it


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

How do you like that one free rider?


----------



## derfernerf (Jun 25, 2006)

heres mine...most people wont like it but i thought ide give my bike a try....cant get all those dementions tho i dont know how...anyone got any ideas to change it i will and post it


----------



## derfernerf (Jun 25, 2006)

BTW: freerider you are one post away from 1500 posts


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

snaky69 said:


> How do you like that one free rider?


its great but, i think it needs to be a little more raked out, and although the bb is only an inch higher than mine, it looke unaturally tall.

and the paint job sucks:eekster:

edit: is everones design in, can we get a head start on voting. please say if you need another minute or so.


----------



## Cru Jones (Aug 10, 2006)

I've got a new one. I tried to make it a combo of everyone's ideas (plus a funky paint job just for fun). I mellowed the seat stay/chain stay intersection and relaxed my original seat tube angle. But, I had to keep the TT inline with the chain stay... cuz it's rad. :thumbsup:


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

aight, look for a new thread where you can vote, i just gotta grab names and it will be up


----------



## dirtyharry (Jun 27, 2006)

*Rick, maybe I've got some buisness for you . . .*

Lately I've been working on a concept frame, and since you're a frame welder, you seemed like the person to talk to.

Three questions:

Will this design be strong?
Will it ride well?
If so, how much would it be for you to possibly build the frame for me in the next year or so, out of Cr-Mo?

PM me for the rest of the info.
BTW, that's supposed to be an 80 mm fork.

Free rider, sorry to clutter up your topic.


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Look trial-ish, might be nice to ride though. I'd hit it.


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

yeah, Cru Jones, I'm really pickin' up what your layin' down with the new rendition!

Hey Rick, just thought I'd throw out the idea and info. I know, we're looking for something not done before, But, I'd forgot until now... I was at one time looking into one of these frames earlier in the season, until I saw the price, and I've always admired their bmx stuff, but check out their new 26" frame. It's the Quamen Emo. 
http://www.quamenbikes.com/urban-main.html
I am really digging the replaceable rear aluminum dropout section, so you can easily (yet expensively) change out geometry (ha, wb, cs length, etc), or run 24 or 26" wheels, or 10mm bolt on, 14mm bolt-on, 10mm thru, 12mm thru axle, or 9mm qr axles, etc... not to mention, the chromo front triangle will be a bit more forgiving feel, but the alu drops will keep it super stiff. Just something else for everyone to take a gander at. haha, and it has the sweeeet straight shooter tt and seatstay lines. 
but, that said, the geometry is a little whacked in my opinion and quite different than what we are all coming up with here on our own, which is good though, of course, we in no way desire to copy any current designs. but it can be good to see the other metal on the market.

It just occured to me, so I thought I'd add it in here in an edit... When taking into account the desired "super steep" head angle, this will probably make it MUCH more difficult to allow for clearance for an X-up or barspin, or the front tire may hit your front foot. That is unless we go for a super long tt length, which may not result in something very flickable. I like 22", but even this may not be enough.... hmmm, just something to think about when working out the final numbers.


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

the headset and seat tube junctions look nice on that emo

haha emo


----------



## rickthewelder (Sep 16, 2005)

BikeSATORI said:


> yeah, Cru Jones, I'm really pickin' up what your layin' down with the new rendition!
> 
> Hey Rick, just thought I'd throw out the idea and info. I know, we're looking for something not done before, But, I'd forgot until now... I was at one time looking into one of these frames earlier in the season, until I saw the price, and I've always admired their bmx stuff, but check out their new 26" frame. It's the Quamen Emo.
> http://www.quamenbikes.com/urban-main.html
> ...


That rear looks like Intense M3 / Uzzi. How much was that frame ?


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

rickthewelder said:


> Good to see you could take some time from your '' secret project '' to give your 2 cents.:thumbsup:
> FR is only 15, imagine that.
> Thanks again.
> RTW.


Good age to start ! ! 
I did my first true frame blueprint in 7th grade drafting class


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

Evil4bc said:


> Good age to start ! !
> I did my first true frame blueprint in 7th grade drafting class


haha...i started messin around with bikeCAD last year. thats as far as ive gotten, i was thinking about building one..but im not sure anymore


----------



## Fooly_CoolyOo (Jan 25, 2005)

*Kane Bikes*

Heres myne.








I basically started with the basic geometry from my chase and modified it for how i'd like it to ride. I steepened the head angle a bit, steepened the seat angle alot, shortened up the chainstays as much as i could, and put fatter tubes on it  . All the tubes have been modified in this model, the top and downtubes are much larger at the head tube than at the bb, and the chain and seat stays are beefed up. I'm a pretty tall guy (6 foot 4 inches) so its a fairly large frame, but i'm totally drooling right now, whoever invented bike cad should get a medal.

edit: BTW, its a 100mm fork..........i like that extra inch


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

nice, yeah, the chase geo is pretty proven as stable, but not my thing I guess. 
not knocking one bit here, but just putting my two cents out there... I don't dig tapered tube diameters.
and I don't believe the 15" cs's with 26" tires is possible.... ? 11.5" bb is too low for 26'ers, but decent for 24's...


----------



## dirtyharry (Jun 27, 2006)

My frame is emo? because of the writing on it? Man, you need to get your classic rock straight! That phrase is from the end of 'The Trial' in the brilliant album by Pink Floyd, entitled 'The Wall'. 

This is my first frame design, and I'm only 13!


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

dirtyharry said:


> My frame is emo? because of the writing on it? Man, you need to get your classic rock straight! That phrase is from the end of 'The Trial' in the brilliant album by Pink Floyd, entitled 'The Wall'.
> 
> This is my first frame design, and I'm only 13!


chill out buddy. I believe the comment was about the QUAMEN EMO, which is a frame that just went into production. the pronunciation "emo" in japanese can mean "potato", or can refer to a person from the countryside, therefore the name of their first 26" frame, where that size bike would be more practical, than compared to in the city or streets....


----------



## Fooly_CoolyOo (Jan 25, 2005)

BikeSATORI.......your right my back tire wouldent fit . A little lenthening and seat tube angle changing fixed that. I've got a whole centimeter to play with . However, i like the 11.5 bb, its only .2 inches lower than my chase. PS my first bike's fork wasn't right, this 100mm fork is correct geo.


----------



## dirtyharry (Jun 27, 2006)

I think I was chilled out, but hey, I may come across like that to some people. 

I guess I didn't understand that guy's post. 

Any feedback on my frame design! And yes, I would run the seat up some more when I hit the dirt jumps, so I can clamp my legs on something if I ever get around to bar spins. Basically the whole idea behind my frame is the ability to pull your bike up really far for extra height and therefore more clearance on jumps, something basically not possible on current DJ bikes, even with the seat jacked down all the way. Atleast, not possible if you've got nuts.


----------



## aggiebiker (Apr 18, 2006)

i was talkin about the quanim not your bike i just thought "emo" was a funny name for a bike


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

aggiebiker said:


> i was talkin about the quanim not your bike i just thought "emo" was a funny name for a bike


haha, it hates the world cause nobody understands it


----------



## snaky69 (Mar 8, 2005)

Please no. So, when do we decide on the geo so we can look at the doability of the design with rick? I wanna see that bike built up and in someone's stable ASAP


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

have patience bro, can't rush the process just to pump out the product...


----------



## Evil4bc (Apr 13, 2004)

BikeSATORI said:


> have patience bro, can't rush the process just to pump out the product...


Oh woulnt that make my life allot easier ...... my favorite quote from when I was 4 "patience is a waste of time "


----------



## BikeSATORI (Mar 20, 2004)

Evil4bc said:


> Oh woulnt that make my life allot easier ...... my favorite quote from when I was 4 "patience is a waste of time "


haha, well you're running a business, makin' a livin', putting money in the bank, pleasin' customers and clients... the members of this forum are just puttin' numbers together to make a bike, that's all...


----------



## free rider (Nov 14, 2005)

so uh....whats going on, havent heard form rtw in days


----------

