# Ordered another frame... drop bar 29er build



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

I'm embarking on another little project here... decided it would be really cool to have matching 29ers... one for the trail, one for the street. Same frame, same color, same size....one with drops, fat slicks, and a rigid fork, and the other trail ready. 

Performance Access frame and Soul Cycles Dillinger fork are in the mail. The plan is to rob almost everything from the Nashbike, which will be reincarnated as a singlespeed after a nice vacation hanging from a hook in the shop.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Sounds good to me. What exactly does "trail ready" entail in Special Ed`s opinion?


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Trail ready means you can ride it on moderately technical singletrack for 4+ hours with a grin on your face. (which I did last friday, by the way...4 day weekend )

I want this one to be road century friendly, but more plush than the nashbike.

Here's the 'trail ready' one:









I'm picturing that with a rigid black fork, drops, slicks, and mechanical discs. Planning on using the drivetrain from the nashbike...if the 50 tooth will clear the chainstay. No front derailleur, road double up front, 8 speed out back. This will be at least the 5th bike for my 199? 8 speed deore trigger shifter. I'll have to bend it again to mount it on my oversize road bars.


----------



## CoastieTX (Oct 12, 2007)

Just our of curiosity, will this drop bar 29er be your new commuter rig? If so, what made you decide to go this route instead of using the cyclocross Nashbike?


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

CB, you dog! When my wife worked for the school district (at year round schools, mostly), my family called her Vacation Girl  I was envious of her and now I`m envious of you.

Okay, so geared (mostly) and front suspension with flatbar. 50t ring on a 29? Wow. I took the big ol 42 off my 26in mtb because the only thing I ever used it for was wearing out high rocks.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Coastie, yes the plan is for this to be the new full time commuter. I built the Nashbike as the full time commuter, and it's been awesome. No complaints, but I"ve been riding it for 3 years and I'm wanting to mix up the herd a little. I looked into just swapping some parts on the Nashbike, but I really wanted to run big, fat slicks...and fenders are a must for my winters. You can't cram more than a 1.75" or so on the Nashbike and still have any room for fenders (I've done 700x38's...could maybe pull off 40's). 
With the clearance of the Access frame, I'm planning on 2.35 Big Apples and fenders. 

Rodar, this Friday is my last day of work  Then it's 10 weeks off and nothing to do but build bikes in my basement. It's going to be hard to finish though, because I have to go to the lake so often... 
The 50t is manageable on the commute...There are a couple tough hills, but it's good for me. And I always kept the little 34t on there so that I can drop it down manually if I bonk. I'm a little worried about chainline though... I do spend some time crosschaining with that set-up, and the nashbike offers a pretty decent chainline even in big/big. It's hard to eyeball clearance on the Access frame...I'm hoping to be able to run the 50t pretty far inboard to keep the chainline decent. aah, the stresses of summer.


----------



## SAWS (Sep 20, 2007)

CB - I will be really interested to see how your project turns out. I have been really tempted to buy one of those Access frames to build up for my wife - just haven't figured out how to justify the expense of the complete bike. I figured I can get the frame and a carbon fork for about $100 each, but the overall bike ends up at about $700, and I can get her a complete "off the shelf" bike for about $500 that will work for her riding. 

I also want to build myself a drop bar 9er or monstercross, but have put that project on hold. Your results may make that project harder to put off. 

Keep us posted.


----------



## Chris V. (Oct 11, 2006)

CommuterBoy said:


> I'm embarking on another little project here... decided it would be really cool to have matching 29ers... one for the trail, one for the street. Same frame, same color, same size....one with drops, fat slicks, and a rigid fork, and the other trail ready.
> 
> Performance Access frame and Soul Cycles Dillinger fork are in the mail. The plan is to rob almost everything from the Nashbike, which will be reincarnated as a singlespeed after a nice vacation hanging from a hook in the shop.


Just out of curiousity what type of drop bars are you planning on using? Road drops or Dirt drops?

From experience with my Surly CX it is quite hard to get dirt drops (in my case Midge Bars) in the right spot. My Midges are still a little too low if I compared their height to that of a where they would be on a dirt drop specific frame like that of the Salsa offerings. The top of my bar is slightly lower than my saddle height. From my understanding I should have the top of my bars level with or slightly above the height of the my saddle. But, this can be very hard to accomplish if you don't have a drop bar specific frame

Good luck!! I love my dirt drops because they are so comfortable!


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

I have thought about something like the Midges in the past...but I have a nashbar oversize road bar in the garage that I used on my 'cross bike...I'll probably start with that and kick around the idea of switching later. 

Is it wrong to use a road bar with a downhill stem? :lol: I need to use a short little chunky stem to get the bars in the right place.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

CommuterBoy said:


> Is it wrong to use a road bar with a downhill stem? :lol: I need to use a short little chunky stem to get the bars in the right place.


I think that`s life when you want dropbars on a bike designed for flats. Think your stem looks odd?


----------



## martinsillo (Jul 31, 2009)

:lol: rodar did you powder coat that stem already? :lol:

Is not odd or wrong CB...I've seen that setup in a couple of pics from other users and I remember they were very happy with it

I can´t post the exact pic from the office...but the most recent one I saw it on this guy´s Big Dummy pic set.
Edit: his before and after!



















and...

you can play with one of these:










:yesnod:


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Ooh that's fun. :lol: 

Frame and fork came to a grand total of $170 including shipping. Beautiful. Cheap entertainment.


----------



## JordyB (Oct 26, 2007)

I wish I could follow you CB, build a new commuter, and turn my Unit into a trail bike again. I do get some cool comments about running the 2.35 BA's as full time commuter tires!


----------



## Gary the No-Trash Cougar (Oct 14, 2008)

I'm looking forward to seeing how this turns out!


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

And it begins... 

Soul Cycles Dillinger Gen 3 fork... disc only, of course. Purchased from Nitrousjunky here on mtbr. 

Lame cell phone pic, but you get the idea...


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Picked up the frame this week. 

Yesterday I ordered 2.35" Big Apples, new BB7's, seatpost shim and bar tape...I think everything else is a direct swap... 

I have two camping trips in the next two weeks, so not sure when I'll get it put together, but it will be soon... aah, summer.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

I feel your pain, CB. Just hang tough and eventually you`ll make it through to September.


----------



## steeneriam (Aug 4, 2009)

Subscribed

My commuter frame is a little small and have been looking for another that would fit my 26" 2.35 BA's and have room for my fenders and chainstay clearance for my 50T ring.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

^^ If you go 26" you're going to have BB height issues with this frame. You will smack your pedals on stuff. I've done it on the 'cross bike, and it worked, but it wasn't ideal. This BB is slightly higher than 'cross geometry, but it's not high enough to eliminate that issue, I don't think... 



So this will be the build list:

Access 29er frame
Soul Cycles Dillinger fork
Titec 'el norte' DH stem
Nashbar road bars (31.8mm)
Ascent carbon seatpost (with shim...28mm post)
FSA Gossamer road double crankset (50/34), Mega Exo BB
8 speed shimano mountain cassette...12-32
Shimano Deore rear derailleur
no front derailleur
MTB Speed Disc wheelset, Shimano centerlock hubs with alligator adapters
BB7's with 180mm rotors, Tektro road levers
2.35 Big Apples, gorilla tape ghetto tubeless
Selle Italia C2 saddle
PB Freddy fenders, if they'll fit...otherwise that is something to figure out before fall


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

I'm probably a rarity, but I hate pushing fat, high volume and low pressure tires around. I had a KM with the BA 2.0 and it felt slower, was slower and was murder for anything longer than a short climb. Different strokes... they were smooth and they were a blast downhill.

Surprised you're not going with a dirt drop. I recently built up an old Bianchi touring frame so I can hit trails up as a fake cross bike with WTB dirt drops. Once I got over how high the handlebars were, I enjoyed it a lot and the hooks were more comfortable and accessible than any traditional dropbar. Considering you can nab an Origin8 Gary for ~25 (at least you used to) and the veritable Midge for 39, it seems like a must option to me.

Still, CB, you got your game plan. I'm waiting for the end result.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Got the Jenson USA box the other day... I think I have everything now. I'll get it together in the next couple of weeks. A couple teaser pics to give you the general idea... That is nowhere near where the bars will wind up, by the way.


----------



## Dion (Oct 22, 2009)




----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)




----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Well my 50 tooth big ring clears the chainstay by about 2mm. phew. I could do another spacer on the drive side of the BB but that would jack up the chainline I think. 

I also ordered some bar end shifters... I love my old LX 8 speed trigger shifter, but this thing will eventually see a front derailleur I think...considering a big touring trip next summer. Shimano Ultegra 8 speed friction. I'm feeling a little guilty stripping the Nashbike for parts, but it will see action as a singlespeed in the future I suspect.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

2mm clearance from the teeth on the ring or from the chain while it`s on the ring? I guess 2mm is enough even if that`s a naked ring.

Barend shifters are sweet, especially for the front. I prefer indexed in back, if possible, but being able to trim a FD makes life much simpler. And since I keep my bars high, my hands stay in the drops most of the time- the only time it becomes an issue to grab the shifters is on really bumpy surfaces.

Hey, let me know if you get a serious bug to do some touring. I don`t know if I`m up for a long one, but you know as well as I do what kind of opportunities there are around you for weekend trips. In fact, I just got back from an overnight loop between Beckwourth and Taylorsville about two hours ago.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Wow, these shifters are cool... They are the Shimano SL-BS64. Got them through Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000F5EFOC/ref=oss_product
Jenson has them but these were a bit cheaper. They are selectable for the rear...indexed or friction. I got them on there and I do like the feel of the indexed out back...but you could literally change to friction on the fly and trim the rear D if you needed to. The front is friction only.

I'm stumped on a front D. I haven't had one on the commuter/road bike in so long. Do I go double since I'm running a compact double crankset currently, or go triple assuming that I'll want a triple set-up if I do any touring? From what I have read a 105 or similar triple will work fine with a double chainring, especially using a friction shifter. I could save some coin and try to get a mountain one to work, but that might be sketchy with a 50 tooth...

Will I definitely want a triple chainring for touring? Seems like it... Bike is looking sweet though... These Big Apples are massive!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

The Great Sheldon Brown has a pretty long article about front derailleurs. What it boiled down to was that in order to make a front derailleur work with indexed shifting, the companies had to come up with the complicated ones we have now. Triples made it even harder. With friction shifting, you should be able to shift a triple ring with a derailleur for a double. You may have to overshift and back off to a slightly greater extent.

I think the real issue would be the height of the bottom of the cage - as in, if you install it so that it clears the big ring, will the chain for the small ring run freely, or rattle on the bottom?

I'd just start with a derailleur from my parts shelf and tinker with it some. I'm sure you'll get a much better idea what the issues are after a little experimentation.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Bar ends are great! About which FD, fortunately they`re cheap, so if you guess wrong it won`t cost much to change later. Yeah, with friction shifting the only problem you`re likely to run into is the cage length. The guy who puts out the Mountain Tamer quad ring dealie has a good article on FD mods to make just about anything work:
http://abundantadventures.com/mtfaq/frontderail/fr.derail.mods.html
Are you using those 287-V levers? Did you find them cheap somewhere? I`m thinking about trying drop bars on my mtb and will need new levers, possibly long pull road levers.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

rodar y rodar said:


> Are you using those 287-V levers? Did you find them cheap somewhere? I`m thinking about trying drop bars on my mtb and will need new levers, possibly long pull road levers.


I had a set of those on a (failed) front disc commuter bike project. Those and the used Tektro disc brake were the best things about that bike, for as long as it lasted. Can't say anything about long-term durability. I threw out the frame when I found out it had a French-threaded bottom bracket shell.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

I'm using the cheap Tektro road levers with 'mountain' BB7's... no issues with lever throw or anything. I don't think there's enough of a difference with 'mtn' or 'road' BB7's to affect anything personally... But you KNOW I couldn't tolerate anything but discs on this thing. Pics shortly... I got it running and did the unthinkable...15 mile shakedown ride before I took any pictures. :lol:


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Some pixles... note the chainring clearance  ...and a pic of the twins.


----------



## martinsillo (Jul 31, 2009)

awesome!
that clearance give me chills!

I can see mud on those tires! how was the ride!?

is it me or your rear brake rotor is bigger than the front one? ( and I don't want to start a brake discussion! :lol


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

CommuterBoy said:


> 'mountain' BB7's... I don't think there's enough of a difference with 'mtn' or 'road' BB7's to affect anything personally.


Looks great. Special Ed logo in the works?

I am attempting to build my knowledge base for a potentiial bike build, or at least the daydreams of one.  What is supposed to be the difference between road and mountain BB7s?


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Tasty! I have a real itch to experiment with dropped mtb setup lately and you aren`t helping much. At least your pics have those dorky disc brakes to keep me from drooling all over the company`s keyboard 
I guess what I asked earlier about whether the ring clearance was with or without chain was a pretty dumb question- I can see that it doesn`t mattter. Are you planning to do any overnighters before the school year cranks up again? I sure wouldn`t mind tagging along for a guided tour of your `hood. I know a lot of it pretty well, but I betcha you know it a lot better than I do.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Man that would be great... 3 kids at home makes it hard to break away for a weekend trip though... I have a buddy trying to talk me into the Oregon coast next summer. I'd love to get in a few shorter trips before that, but nothing in the works before school. 

Brian, it's all about lever throw and how much the brake moves before it engages. BB7's are so adjustable, I've never run into a problem. 

The rotors are the same glorious size: 180mm. You know you want them.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

CommuterBoy said:


> Brian, it's all about lever throw and how much the brake moves before it engages. BB7's are so adjustable, I've never run into a problem.


Yes, road levers have less pull. I wonder if the longer pull of Mountain levers gives more power or more range of subtle application claimed for the hydraulic ones?



CommuterBoy said:


> The rotors are the same glorious size: 180mm. You know you want them.


Yeah, I do. . I think I'll be going the used 29'er with disc tabs at least and the slow upgrade route down the road some. My Piggy Bank is tapped for now unless I win the lottery.

BTW: Love the Big Apples. As kids, my brothers and I rode some rough roads with our 2 1/4 " coaster bike tires.


----------



## umarth (Dec 5, 2007)

Pretty nice end result. I'm seriously considering doing something similar, but nobbier- and I'll probably get the Scat cross frame.

You should give it an extensive burn on the Providence Bridge Pedal (in Portland).


----------



## nativeson (Apr 4, 2005)

is the bar too low to get in a real aggressive attack position for the steeps? you might smash your junk when you really wanna get rad. hate to say it, but you need a mtb crank. btw i'm a teacher too and we go back to school in 2.5 weeks. got a couple of small tours in this past summer, last week we rode from home near santa cruz, ca to big sur, up into an old military base, to arroyo seco, back home....not a lot of cars, and some good dirt mixed in. nice job and enjoy the rest of your summer.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

^ :lol: Gotta play with position some. It's comfy, but I admittedly haven't attacked the singletrack with it yet. Just finished the tubeless set up tonight... I know some of you were irritated that the tire logos didn't line up with the valve stem. Fear not, it's corrected. The BA's set up very, very easily tubeless, by the way.

I'll let you know if I run into any issues with chainring clearance... I'm confident.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Another bonus: I went with the same rotor size as the other bike so I can just swap wheelsets for some knobby tire action. And those are Hayes rotors (what I have on the other bike...the Avids are ever-so-slightly thinner) so there should be no brake adjustment needed when I swap wheels.


----------



## byknuts (Aug 9, 2008)

the good news is it's aluminium, so if the chainring clearance is an issue, you'll know quickly... 
I think it looks great!
get those non-knobbies dirty!
I've scooched 25mm roadie tires offroad, you can get further than you think....


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

byknuts said:


> the good news is it's aluminium, so if the chainring clearance is an issue, you'll know quickly...


Aluminum? Heck, no problem- it`ll auto clearance if it don`t quite fit as is


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

First ride to work today... no clearance issues yet. I would put some tape or something in there as a first layer of protection, but I don't think it will fit :lol:

The real good news is that if chainring clearance becomes an issue, the frame was only $99. 

So far so good with the tubeless set-up, and I'm playing with fit... not much room to roam with headset spacers on these frames because of the internal (zero stack) headset. It's a deceptively long head tube so you don't wind up with much extra steerer tube length with most forks. 

As far as the ride... I no longer have to think on the dirt roads. It's just point-and-shoot. I was running 28c 'cross tires all last year, and it was pretty unforgiving. This feels like suspension. 
On the roads, it is slower to get up to speed, that's for sure. These tires are heavy. But momentum is great once you're rolling. It feels solid and confident with the drop bars, and I'm getting used to shifting with the bar end shifters. 

I haven't taken it on the new singletrack commute option yet, but I will soon. I am getting excited about this winter. Anyone run 29er fenders that will clear a 2.35 inch tire? Suggestions?


----------



## martinsillo (Jul 31, 2009)

I remember someone using cascadias on his Surly KM wearing Big Apples too...I even ask him about it...It was on the post your commuter pic thread!


----------



## Shayne (Jan 14, 2004)

Any reason you have the bars rolled so far up?


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

I've played with it a lot this week. they are lower now, but not too much. I spend most of my time on the hoods, and this was the best position for that. The drops are primarily a headwind weapon... with the BB7's I can lock up either tire with one finger from the hoods, so I just don't spend much time in the drops.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

I like your build (bike, let's be perfectly clear). A lot. :thumbsup: 

Curious from a daydream design my next bike viewpoint, if you don't mind:

1. If you like the hoods there, why not have more stem extension which admitedly would also bring the hoods back a bit (about the same as the tilt-up?) and give you horizontal flats just behind them? Was that the length of the steerer on the fork as it came, and uncut?

2. Remember I have no mountains close to hand here, it's a half a day to Kentucky for what you'd call foothills.  I have a 'Country Bike, nothing remotely 'mountain'. SO a lot of bike experience some off road but nothing remotely 'mountain'. I do understand the hard tail. I've seen the pics of mountian vistas (I hear them calling).  

Most MTBRs reading this thread seem to get the 29er versus the Nashbar Cross. Having no Hybrid, or Cross (of the secular cycling kind), nor a rigid, HT, or a FS 29er, but needing a disc bike and wanting to road and trail it, I wonder if I should duplicate your build or buy a cheap-a$$ preferably used 'hybrid' and see how that goes. So why did you build it when you have the HT and the Cross, if I may be so bold? :???:


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

You may be so bold... 

1. I'd consider the longer stem/bar rotation thing... I like the feel of this as-is, but I'd give it a shot... maybe swap the stem from the mtb at some point and see if it puts me too far out there. I was being really intentional about analyzing my position this morning, and I wind up about 1/2 way on the bars and about 1/2 way on the hoods most of the time. The drops are not ideal, but they get me out of the wind and closer to the shifters. I think if I was going to buy a new stem, I'd just buy a Midge or a Woodchipper bar instead and give the true 'dirt drop' a try. Of course, that would probably require a new stem too in order to get the position right... 

The steerer tube is just a bit over 8 inches. I believe it is uncut from the factory, but I am the second owner. These frames have a pretty tall headtube and my stem is pretty chunky so there's only 1 small spacer in there. 

The whole idea for building this came from wanting to fit a fatter tire on my 'cross bike. I couldn't get more than a 1.75 (45c-ish) or so on there and I wanted it to be even more dirt-road/trail friendly than it was. My commute is partly dirt, and I've got hundreds of miles mellow dirt road type trails around me, and after building the hardtail 29er I started thinking that a rigid one with some decent squish in the tires and drop bars would be the ideal weapon for such terrain... then a buddy started talking about a big touring trip, and I started to combine the two ideas. Then I found a singletrack option for my commute. 

The 'cross bike was a bit chattery on the dirt. Fatter tires would have helped, but I wanted REALLY fat tires, and the road geometry was not as friendly for the trail. This thing (with suspension corrected fork geometry) feels like a rigid mtb on the trails, and the drop bar and gearing makes it road friendly for the commute (and hopefully touring). 

My Nashbike will be reincarnated as a singlespeed I think (flat bar?). 

The cross bike felt faster on the street, but if you want to road/trail it, I'd go with something like this. The cross bike could handle the trails but was more at home on the street, this thing LIKES the trails and handles the street just fine.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

CommuterBoy said:


> You may be so bold... .


Thanks. Like my move to bigger tires a lot. Guessed close, dovetails with my thinking. Aluminum has been around long enough to be a mature frame technology, but I have ridden nothing but steel frames. The Access frame looks great and is at a surprising price point (on sale).


----------



## SAWS (Sep 20, 2007)

CB -

Now that the drop bar Access is done and you've ridden it some, can you give us a bit of comparison between it and the Nashbike? I'm still wanting to put together a drop bar bike with fairly fat tires for use on the rough pavement and gravel/dirt roads around where I live - probably not much if any real MTB type terrain (I'll still have my Fisher X-Cal for serious off-roading). I'm waivering between a 'cross type frame like the Nashbike or a Soma Double Cross and a 9er frame like the Access or a Soma Juice. Any insight you can offer would be appreciated.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Let's see...comparing the two...
The nashbike had a carbon fork and road geometry, and I used pretty lean tires. It felt like a beefy road bike... I could bomb down my dirt road and not worry about it at all, but it was chattery and skiddish with the thinner tires and road geometry. I would not have felt comfortable tackling singletrack on it, but it was fast (although it beat you up) on dirt roads. On the pavement it was fast and furious. The Access feels like a lean mountain bike, not a beefy road bike.

The Access is heavier. The frame is not heavy, but I'm running a steel fork and these gigantic big apples. You notice it while accellerating and climbing. I admittedly went for a giant tire which is well into the overkill department, and this makes for some increase in rotating weight. My commuter Access is heavier than my mountain Access, even though it's got less parts on it. That said, it is a Cadillac on the dirt roads. It's amazing for that. Where the Nashbike beat me up, this thing pours me a cup of lemonade and offers me a footstool. 
I took it on the singletrack commute yesterday, and I was very happy with it in that area too. I feel way more confident carving into corners (paved or dirt) on it. I think this is due to the mountain geometry. 

For what you describe (rough pavement, gravel/dirt roads) I would think that the Nashbike (with the fattest tire you could cram on it...maybe 1.5") would be faster, but there is something great about the overkill of the Access. I will enjoy it like this through this set of tires, and then consider something a little more lean to lighten it up and make it a bit faster on the road.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Nice analysis. Helps a lot. Your take on a road-trail 29er makes works for me and fits my stable. So the Big Apples are Overkill. If you were replacing the BAs tomorrow, what would you go for as a better compromise?


----------



## SAWS (Sep 20, 2007)

Thanks for the analysis, CB. How much the beating you take on dirt roads on the Nashbike do you attribute to tires vs. frame/fork?


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

80% tires, 20% frame/fork. I never went as big as I could with the tires...but I did run 38c's for a season. It was more plush, but you could probably fit up to a 45 or so. I was more concerned with clearing my fenders. 38's and PB freddy fenders was a tight fit. I was more limited by the nashbar carbon fork than the X frame.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Brian, if I was replacing the BA's, I don't know... There are lots of options in 700c and 29er...the best thing about this frame/fork for me is that there isn't a tire that won't fit, even with fenders. I really like the beef of the BA's for now, and I can't see going smaller than something in the 1.5" range to maintain the glorious plushness. If I make it through this school year with no flats on my tubeless BA's, I might just get another pair.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

The BA's nominal 50mm are about 45 mm wide. You can drop 180 gram per tire with the folding version to 700 gm:

http://www.schwalbetires.com/big_apple

I can clear a true 700-33 mm with fenders but with a load of groceries, I have to run them fairly high pressure. A 650-45+ with fenders but that means long reach brakes and another set of wheels. There is a circa 412 gram 650-42 mm tire which compared to the Big Apple is about 80% of the volume at less than 60% of the weight, but costs almost 50% more per tire. Brakes, rims, spokes, tires, tubes and sundry items would be about $500: a good chunk of a new 29er. The frame is solid but not built to MTB strengh, and no discs.

Expensive dreams...but the fact you like the BAs has me thinking that a 29er with BAs is a good way to go.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Another point I'm noticing... not using the same shifter set-up I haven't been really intentional about realizing what gear I'm in on various parts of my commute (on the old bike I knew what gear I typically used on every hill, etc...just from repetition) I'm using the same crankset and rear cassette on this bike, but I'm not able to pull the same gear up most of my hills. I'm sure this is partly due to rotating weight, but I also think it's a distinct gearing difference with these tall tires. The 700x28 tires I had on the other bike were probably at least an inch or inch-and-a-half smaller than these. So every gear is a higher gear on this bike. This is good for top speed, but it's taking some adjustment on the climbs. Sometimes I'll go for the next gear, and then realize that I'm already in the lowest one.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Oh and if anyone's interested... Planet Bike Cascadia 29er fenders on sale - $42.21 delivered from Tree Fort Bikes. Most other places they're $54 plus tax, plus shipping.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

I`d guess the difference is mostly in your tire diameter. I just ran some assumed numbers through a gear calculator:
28-266 with 36t ring and 32t sprocket gives 30.1 GI
50-622 with the same drive gives 32.6 GI, so roughly 8% lower with the 28s.
Since you mentioned not having another gear to drop into, I imagine you weren`t rolling very fast. Can`t see how much difference rotating weright makes at low RPM.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Mostly talknig about climbs. Climbing the singletrack trail home is brutal in my 36 tooth 'granny' ring. :lol:

It's making me rethink my set-up for touring in the future. I was planning on a road triple, but I may just go with a traditional mountian 44/32/22. Can't imagine missing the 50 tooth big ring when I'm fully loaded, and you could set it up with a nice mtn crankset and front D cheaper than nice road stuff. I'll want the big 50, or something close, for the commute though... maybe I could find a 48 or so to bolt on a mountain triple?


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

I hope you`ll pardon me for not digging through all the previous posts to see what cranks you have now, but 74/110 triples are the cat`s meow for me. Suginos are cheap from a variety of sources, very easy to get a big variety of replacement rings for, and they look great (especially if you can find the old crown logo). Depending on where you order from, the big and little rings could be 24/26 or 46/48- seems everybody ships them with a 36 in the middle. The only catch, which is actually a benefit for me, is that they only come in square taper flavor, so if you want a schnazzy modern hollow outboard BB they won`t help you.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

I am schnazzy, modern, and hollow on both bikes currently... not opposed to using ancient technology, just hesitant :lol: curious why square taper is a 'benefit' for you... ? 

I've used square tapers...and other than coming loose, squeaking, and being really heavy, they were great. 

Are the sugino big rings a 4 bolt? I wonder if they match any cranksets from more recent decades? Might be a cheap way to experiment...


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Quite honestly, the main reason I prefer square is the asthetics- I also prefer cup and cone BBs because I like how the locknut looks . Besides asthetics, I understand it (a big point) and it`s easy get different spindle lengths, arm lengths, etc. And since the same standard was "standard" for so long that square taper will be in production for the remainder of my cycling life. Octolink came and changed and went, ISIS came and kind of disappeared already, there are already a plethora of outborad hollow systems that are fighting it out like Beta and VHS, so who know what`ll be the king by the time DVD bottom brackets come out.

On the other hand, I`m a small guy- don`t weight much and don`t pedal very hard and never have my cranks come loose. If I were having a problem with that, undoubtedly I`d be more excited about a solution. Same as the disc brake thing. The only penalty I pay for keeping tapered BBs is the extra weight. When you add the exra weight I`m willing to carry in order to keep my quill stems, it starts to be clear why I can`t seem to get my road bike down to 20 pounds. My next bike might very likely have hollow cranks and a threadless headset. Maybe even a 9-speed cassette.

AFAIK, all Suginos are/have been 5 bolt, but I certainly can`t say that for sure since I don`t even window shop the "Four Bolt" department in the eMall. I`m not sure what you mean about matching recent cranksets- Sugino uses 74/110, which is the same bolt pattern as most (all?) compact doubles, all (most?) "road" triples use 74/130 and , I think, BMX generally uses 110 for the rings with arms that can often be adapted for use as a double.

I`ll probably be back here again when I need to sort out the "how to"s involved with piecing together a hollow BB/crank.


----------



## nativeson (Apr 4, 2005)

the shimano external bb wears out quickly. for the price you'd pay for an external chris king bb or other high end external bb + crank, you could almost afford 2 sugino cranksets. you also need specific tools for installing/removing external bb's. square taper bb's last forever and are relatively inexpensive. most of the new mtb technology is overbuilt/overpriced/overmarketed. the old stuff is simple and to me looks better. for general commuting, touring, and mtbing square taper's still rules for me. i guess you could argue for weight, but i could probably eat less too. that said, i own three hollowtech cranksets (2 mtn, 1 road) and they're ok. saving pennies for my sugino cranksets now. i've still got an old lx square taper crankset (a bit flexy) on my chi-chi custom cx bike and a bomber old race face anodized blue crankset on my dropbar 29er that's stiffer than sh*t, these bikes get ridden a ton, 'cept their 94/54 bcd. i also found some aluminum cups on ebay to replace the plastic non driveside cups for shimano un54 bb's.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

I don't want to sound too anti-square... I've just had really good luck with the newer stuff. I switched to ISIS as soon as it came out because I'd had issues with repeated removal/replacement of square taper cranks. Since theyr'e a taper-fit, they wear down after a few removal/re-installations, and then I had them start coming loose. Once you've ridden on a lose one, it will never be the same. ISIS doesn't rely on a taper, they bottom out, so you can pull 'em off and on and never worry about it. 

External bearings are the simplest thing ever...and the BB part is cheap. I'm really happy with them so far. Along the way I've collected the tools for everything I've had, so I can pretty much get anything and have the ability to remove/install it. I can't see going back after a couple of the external bearing types though. Light, stiff, simple. And you can hide some gummy worms in the hollow part for a snack later.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Your "not too anti-square" semi rant is quite understandable, as is all the hype I hear about the superiority of disc brakes- they just don`t seem to apply to me in either case.

What the heck ever happend to that LX Trekking line that was supposed to come out a year or two ago? When they brought in SLX to the mtb lineup, I was under the impresion that LX was going to live on as their touring line? I even remember seeing porn shots of the cranks (which looked just like Deore or mountain LX to me), but with 26-36-46 rings. Just a few minutes ago, I did a quick search and it looks like they didn`t ever get to market, at least in NA. If you can dig up one of those cranksets, you might have your perfect solution. Maybe on ChainReaction or SJS, since I didn`t look there. Also, Universal has a Deore model that doesn`t specify in writing, but the PICTURE looks like a Hollowtech with one option (not available, of course) being 26-36-46. Maybe some odd internet store has that poor orphan model hanging around and is dying to unload it on somebody. Ditto for the rings that went on it.

EDIT: How bout this?
http://www.chainreactioncycles.com/Models.aspx?ModelID=40496


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

^^ something like that would be good... you can snag a Race Face XC crankset with included external BB for less than $100 if you hit a sale at pricepoint or nashbar... both come with a 44...one of those with a 48 tooth big ring would be the cats pajamas... then a sram X9 front derailleur and I'd be set...for cheap.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Just a FYI... 150 miles or so on it, road and trail, and not a single dropped chain or issue with the chainring clearance... so far so good.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

You are running 2.3 Big Apples. So you may have no idea, but I thought is worth a shot.

I have Kathryn's old bike I might shoehorn Big Apple 700C 50 mm if they are really 45 mm wide to get her riding again. (Go cushy, upright.) At 50 mm, I will have aboiut 1 mm chainstay side clearance each side once the frame is cold set to 130 mm AOK otherwise to 55 mm on a 700C rim. Do you have any experience with the actual width of the 2 inch ones on 700C? Rivendell says 45, another source says 49 mm.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Zero experience here, sorry. This is my first taste of the big apples.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Fenders have arrived... we'll see how much bending and tweaking I get to do to make them work with the BB7's and suspension corrected fork...there's a monster gap between the top of the tire and the fork crown, and there's no hole for a bolt in the crown or threaded holes at the front hub area. Soul Cycles apparently does not believe in fenders. Might have to get very creative with the zip ties.


----------



## Henrythewound (Jul 1, 2007)

I'm late to the party here but did you use spacers on you BB install? That could be one reason why the rings are so close. I just installed a LX crankset on my mountain bike and the instructions called for 5 mm of spacers on the drive side, I think my BB shell was 68 mm although I may be misremembering the exact numbers.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Yes, I have two spacers on the drive side, none on the left. Any more would throw off chainline too much, and potetially weaken the pinch-bolt situation on the left crankarm (two piece design). The clearance issue is due to the fact that this frame was designed for a 44 tooth sprocket, and I am running a 50 tooth sprocket. I would space it out further if I wasn't using the 50 tooth sprocket so much, but I use it 90% of the time (no front derailleur), since my commute doesn't involve too much climbing. I drop the chain to the smaller ring manually for big hills, or when I take the singletrack home. I need the best chainline possible with the 50 tooth, and that means putting it really, really, really close to the chainstay.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Went to your post 39 to have a good look at the fork again. It is no nonsense. 

Your bike, but I'll hazard a coulpe of ideas, take 'em or leave'em.  

Does the fork crown bottom have a downward facing opening like some crowns do? It looks rounded off and closed, but I can't be sure. If it is open, I have seen rubber stoppers that are squeezed by a bolt to expand to fill holes in things like barrels at the hardware store, if they have one that size it could be used to anchor a bolt and drop a bracket from the bolt down to a fender. 

If you don't mind P-clamps or some call then D or hose clamps, one on each fork with a small threaded rod through each ones hole, with acorn nuts on the ends, backets in the center for a fender mount, and light aluminum or even PVC tube between to cover the rod and make the assembly tight side to side, might do the trick. Painted black, the assembly would not draw attention and look workmanlike, at least.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

BrianMc said:


> Does the fork crown bottom have a downward facing opening like some crowns do? It looks rounded off and closed, but I can't be sure. If it is open, I have seen rubber stoppers that are squeezed by a bolt to expand to fill holes in things like barrels at the hardware store, if they have one that size it could be used to anchor a bolt and drop a bracket from the bolt down to a fender.


My mountain bike fender works kind of like that. It's a SKS Shockblade. It's more of a motocross-style fender, though - not great coverage compared to a commuter bike. But the plug thing works fairly well, and the fender has rubber things that go over the fork crown too, so things stay put together.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Thanks guys...it does have an opening there, and I've been considering using it...I have an extra star nut laying around that I could insert up there to have a permanent threaded mount, but I'm still not crazy about the gap that would create between the fender and the tire. Anything hanging down far enough to eliminate the gap would probably be flimsy. 

I'm now thinking towards making my own 'fork crown' just above the tire, and mounting the fender to that...initial design is working well in my virtual real-world test labratory inside my head. I'm also going to get creative and use the disc brake mount somehow for the left side, and the quick release skewer (?) or a hose clamp on the right.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

CommuterBoy said:


> ...it does have an opening there, and I've been considering using an extra star nut to have a permanent threaded mount, but I'm still not crazy about .. hanging down far enough to eliminate the gap would probably be flimsy. I'm now thinking towards making my own 'fork crown' just above the tire, and mounting the fender to that....


Not pooh-poohing your idea I mean how can I, as it's in your head! 

Just that the star nut idea made me think of using a threadless cap on a nice piece of tube cut to seat well when clamped by the star nut and cap with a longer bolt and maybe carrying nice L brackets fore and aft on fender top and up the fornt and back sides of the tube. Somewhere I saw nice arrowhead ones, can't find them now, of course, but a bit of time with a grinding wheel in the drill and a vise and you'd have elegant brackets that would not look like National brand hardware store bits. You may have some scrap aluminum strapping. If ift still isn't robust enough, the twin P-clamps holding a piece of aluminum angle across the fork just above the fender on the backside of the tube would smarten it up a lot and look better than pipe clamps. That setup should be light, rigid, cheap, and good looking. Just and idea. No guarantee, No charge.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

OK now I'm picturing a 'crown' made from PVC or something similar, wedged up into the fork above the tire, being held in place by the star nut and a long bolt, just using the taper of the fork to clamp it in place as you tightened it using the star nut. The length of PVC would determine how high it sat above the tire...That would be pretty simple and clean looking if you did it right. hmmm....


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

You have it. 

If someone (lbs?) had a demolished Al frame headed for recycling, then the tube could be Al and already painted, save some touch ups at the cuts. (No midnight Al harvesting on some poor schmuck's bike! Man! wouldn't THAT be a pisser: a chunk of frame AWOL!) but I digress. 

The PVC would be easier to carve to fit 'just so'. Both would be close on weight. Both overkill on strength unless you try to stuff a large squirrel into the crown area. (Been known to happen in spokes, but I think that would be one for the books, it's not like you have aggressive kobbies to really grab hold of it.) 

Nothing like a couple of ideas to make a project look easier.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

OK I finally got around to the front fender. I used a star nut for the top, which was relatively painless... a little scary getting it in there with a hammer between the fork legs, but no scratches or damage :thumbsup: I'll never get either one of them out now that I have one in the top and one in the bottom facing each other, but I've never had to remove one, so I'm not too worried about it. I bent the bracket on top of the fender, and just used a long threaded bolt up into the star nut. A presta valve nut fit the threads nicely, so I'm using that and a washer as a 'clamp' on the end of the bolt...so I have infinitely adjustable height options, just by threading the bolt higher up into the star nut and then clamping down the presta nut which holds the fender on the end of the bolt. 

I made a little tab out of a small piece of metal and borrowed a disc brake mounting bolt for the left side, and just used a hose clamp around an old piece of inner tube for the right... I slightly bent the fender bracket and just put the mounting bolt right through the "tail" on the hose clamp. It's working nicely...as solid as fenders this massive can be, I reckon.

...time to clean up the workbench.


----------



## BrianMc (Jan 5, 2010)

Not bad, not bad at all.

Reminds me of a dirt bike. Looks like there should be a 1 lunger with big ol' sparkplug aimed at that front fender. Nice look.


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

Experiencing the benefits if having 2 29ers today. Snow in the forecast, so I grabbed the knobby wheelset off of the mtb and slapped it on the commuter. Same size brake rotors made it an easy swap. Then I remembered that the commuter is an 8 speed and the mtb is a 9 speed... but THEN I remembered that I can flip a switch and have friction shifting...sweetness. this thing looks like a Mad Max bike with knobbies on it.


----------



## CS2 (Jul 24, 2007)

I love the concept of dual bikes. keep up the good work.


----------



## rodar y rodar (Jul 21, 2006)

Long Live Friction!!!


----------



## SmilMick (Apr 9, 2006)

It looks like a cheap-o taiwanese pseudo-cyclocross bike to me....

I bet it rides as good as it looks too lol!


----------



## CommuterBoy (Oct 4, 2007)

It's actually a cheap-o Chinese psuedo cyclocross bike. And yes, it does.


----------



## Spinnyspinspin (Aug 11, 2011)

Gorgeous!


----------

