|
rbent Forum
https://rbentonline.org/YaBB.pl General Category >> rbent Lobby >> 26/26 vs 26/20 https://rbentonline.org/YaBB.pl?num=1375901801 Message started by Seavo_Sam on Aug 7th, 2013, 1:56pm |
|
Title: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 7th, 2013, 1:56pm Now that I/we are hooked on the Rans Seavo tandem, it is time to start looking at replacing my single bike!!!! Is there much/any performance differences between a bike with dual 26 inch(or 650) wheels and a bike with a 26 inch rear and 20 inch front? Thanks for your input. Sam |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jayg on Aug 7th, 2013, 4:00pm Seavo_Sam wrote:
Depends on configuration (aerodynamics) where speed is concerned. My 26/20 Baron and Performer low racers were a little faster on the flats than my 650c/650c Corsa high racer. All of them would be faster than a 26/20 Sun EZ-Sport or RANS Stratus LE with their low bottom brackets and more upright seats. The Corsa would be the better performer on hills, due to its lower weight. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by TonyWard on Aug 7th, 2013, 4:21pm why go dual 26s when you can go dual 700s! http://www.bacchettabikes.com/bikes/performance/corsa if you are rich....I am not :'(: http://www.bacchettabikes.com/bikes/performance/carbon-aero-2.0 |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Phantom Rider on Aug 7th, 2013, 6:07pm TonyWard wrote:
Can anyone draw comparisons between the corsa 700 or CA2 and the P-38???? I know what my 700/20 P-38 will do and my 26/20 Phantom(lightning makes some real sweet bikes). I am however interested in what I could do on either of the Bachetta's or a Metabike. If anyone has experience or opinions I would love to hear them, understanding engine means lots in the final outcome. I would like to try on the corsa 700 but Plano is to far from Fort Worth to entice me that much. The big difference right now is the P-38 is paid for and as Mike Librik says "after you pay for it you can ride all you want for free". |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by TonyWard on Aug 7th, 2013, 6:23pm You would probably be better off asking that question on BROL - more likely to find someone that owns/has owned both to give you a comparison. You never know - someone around here might surprise me. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jayg on Aug 7th, 2013, 6:47pm Phantom Rider wrote:
Can anyone draw comparisons between the corsa 700 or CA2 and the P-38???? I know what my 700/20 P-38 will do and my 26/20 Phantom(lightning makes some real sweet bikes). I am however interested in what I could do on either of the Bachetta's or a Metabike. If anyone has experience or opinions I would love to hear them, understanding engine means lots in the final outcome. I would like to try on the corsa 700 but Plano is to far from Fort Worth to entice me that much. The big difference right now is the P-38 is paid for and as Mike Librik says "after you pay for it you can ride all you want for free". [/quote] I ride with people that own those bikes, but none that own, or have owned, all three. So, don't know anyone that could draw comparisons based on actual experience. Seems like the CA 2.0 has been the bike of choice for a number of past and current high-performance RBENT riders. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jcsadowski on Aug 7th, 2013, 7:02pm Quote:
And a low performance RBENT rider. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jayg on Aug 7th, 2013, 7:06pm jcsadowski wrote:
Would Clown #1 ride anything but the best? :D |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Phantom Rider on Aug 7th, 2013, 7:11pm jayg wrote:
Would Clown #1 ride anything but the best? :D [/quote] I believe that should read #1 clown! |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by TonyWard on Aug 7th, 2013, 7:36pm Phantom Rider wrote:
Would Clown #1 ride anything but the best? :D [/quote] I believe that should read #1 clown! [/quote] You must not have met him. [smiley=smiley.gif] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jayg on Aug 7th, 2013, 7:38pm We're not "clowns", we're "Clowns". http://i1021.photobucket.com/albums/af339/jayg_2010/DSC00194_zpsc309cf5e.jpg (http://s1021.photobucket.com/user/jayg_2010/media/DSC00194_zpsc309cf5e.jpg.html) Club Jersey |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Phantom Rider on Aug 7th, 2013, 8:10pm I believe we have hijacked Seavo_Sam's thread...My apologies on a serious note, I may have an opportunity to join the clowns next week. What is the appropriate protocol for entry? |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jayg on Aug 7th, 2013, 8:33pm Phantom Rider wrote:
We ride on Tuesdays and Thursdays. If you want to join us for breakfast, we arrive at Barbec's on Garland Road about 7:45 AM (We order at 8:00). If you don't want to do breakfast, you can meet us at White Rock Lake's Sunset Bay parking lot about 8:45. We start riding about 9:00. Look forward to meeting you. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Phantom Rider on Aug 7th, 2013, 8:45pm jayg wrote:
We ride on Tuesdays and Thursdays. If you want to join us for breakfast, we arrive at Barbec's on Garland Road about 7:45 AM (We order at 8:00). If you don't want to do breakfast, you can meet us at White Rock Lake's Sunset Bay parking lot about 8:45. We start riding about 9:00. Look forward to meeting you. [/quote] Cool thanks, I need to find out where that is. fort worth boy gets lost east of 360 ;D |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by CruzbikeChris on Aug 7th, 2013, 9:05pm You going to White Rock? I don't believe that one at all. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by AustinSkater on Aug 8th, 2013, 7:33am Seavo_Sam wrote:
Undoing the thread-jack briefly. One thing to consider on riding a bike with two different sized tires means you end up carrying at least twice the spare tubes, and if you're riding ultra-distance the odds are you will be carrying a spare tire as well. Easier to only have to deal with one size. Ok, back to the regularly scheduled thread-jack. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Bud_Bent on Aug 8th, 2013, 9:08am TonyWard wrote:
You can find as much BS and disagreement on BROL as anywhere else. So much of the arguing there is done by engineering types who don't ride enough miles to really have a clue. My own experience is that the high racer platform is the best combination of speed and comfort. Of course, YMMV. Mark L does pretty well on his Baron, and Paul gets around smartly on his Xstream, too. What kind of bike a rider likes best makes a big difference. But, if I had believed what I was reading on BROL at the time, I would have thought that a P-38 was faster than my Corsa. That was disproved, riding with Greg. He was faster than me on any other bike he rode, other than a V-Rex, but he was slower than me on his P-38. Any bike that puts you sitting very upright without a fairing will be slower than something more aerodynamic. But you have to be fast enough to take advantage of the aerodynamics. Every year at HHH, I see riders on velomobiles and fully faired and socked bikes creeping along. If you average 11 mph on your bike, a very aerodynamic bike won't help much. If you run small wheels, run wider tires. Small wheels with narrow tires don't handle rough roads well at all. And don't underestimate the comfort factor, especially on longer rides. It's a big player in my calling my Corsa the best combination of speed and comfort around. The big wheels do help, especially on rough roads. But, I've seen people saying that 700C wheels make a bike a lot faster (even Greg is guilty of that claim). I call BS on that. My own experience is that once you get up to 559 (26"), the gains from bigger wheels are very small. When he rode RAAM solo, John Schlitter chose Corsas with 650C wheels. I'll put his ultra distance racing knowledge up against that of any recumbent rider. If you are a heavier rider like me (185 lbs) and you do end up on rough roads quite a bit, then a 700C bike is probably worth considering. But don't expect the 700C's to be a magic bullet. There are those who think the LWB bikes are as good or better than high racers, but I don't share that view. The Xstream is probably the fastest of the non-faired LWB's, but if you recline the seat enough to be as aerodynamic as on a Corsa, the handling suffers. I can balance my Corsa perfectly at 3.5 mph on a steep climb. I couldn't do that with the seat really reclined on my Xstream. I've liked my Xstream better since I put a more upright Sling Mesh seat and a fairing on it. But with most of my weight on the rear wheel, rough roads really jar me. I love that fairing in the winter, and the Xstream is a blast to ride, but I'll never use it for the long rides where I love the Corsa. There are also people who prefer the low racer platform over everything else, but I never liked my view of the road well enough on something really low to want to do lots of miles on it. The other thing that people argue about is what material a bike should be built from. Steel tends to make a bike heavy, but gives a great ride. Carbon fiber makes for a lighter, but very stiff, bike. Aluminum is a good compromise, but has a reputation of not lasting as long as steel. I now have well over 20,000 miles on my Corsa, so I'm saying a well built aluminum bike can last pretty well, and I'll likely be shopping for another aluminum bike when the Corsa frame finally does give it up. My thoughts are that for light weight riders, the light, stiff carbon fiber bikes may be best, but for those of us my size or bigger, the speed gain from a bike lighter than 24 lbs is virtually zero, and we're better off with either aluminum or steel. So there are my thoughts. Take them for what they're worth, which may not be much, but still more than most of what you'll read on BROL. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 8th, 2013, 10:28am Thanks everyone for all the info, both on topic and hijacked!!! :) I love the Bozo jersey, I think my first lunch box was a Bozo the clown lunch box, probably could buy a new Corsa with its proceeds if I still had it!!! I really like the dual 26/650/700 Giro/Strada/Corsa bikes, but have seen some 26/20 Giros for sale and wondering if that would do me. I am by no means a speed racer, but want to cruise along at a decent speed. When in shape on the old DF would average 16-17. Not in it to kill myself, but want to cruise along at a decent speed when by myself and not on the Seavo. And I don't want to get back on that bike. Would mind to take the 700 wheels and Ultegra componentry off it though and use it on a high racer. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 8th, 2013, 10:29am Wouldn't mind, not would mind!!! ;) ooppss |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by rmillay on Aug 8th, 2013, 4:41pm Experience says the P-38 is a great climber, but with the skinny tires, poorer aerodynamics, and smaller front wheel, would have a rougher ride, and be harder to make speed on the flats. I know the Corsa can go fast (I've watched Kickstand Larry dust me on the trails), and there are plenty of them around, so good used ones come up for sale often. But, speed aside, there lots of things to buy a bike for. My Moose is a 700/20, but is quite comfortable to ride, even on our dreadful roads. In a lot of ways, it hits a sweet spot for me. So take some test rides to see if the high racer pops your cork. I'll agree 650 vs 700 is not a convincing speed argument, although 700s might roll a little more sweetly over chip seal, but 700s are hot now, and 650s more easily available. I say buy cheap, upgrade at leisure. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by LightningPilot on Aug 8th, 2013, 4:54pm And I love my Lightnings :-) It appears that everyone likes their own bikes. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by AustinSkater on Aug 8th, 2013, 4:56pm LightningPilot wrote:
The ultimate words of wisdom. I would take my 650 Corsa over any bike in my fleet, if I was told I could only have one. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by LightningPilot on Aug 8th, 2013, 6:12pm AustinSkater wrote:
The ultimate words of wisdom. I would take my 650 Corsa over any bike in my fleet, if I was told I could only have one. [/quote] :) |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by jayg on Aug 8th, 2013, 6:32pm A few more comments based upon my experiences: I own a 700c carbon high racer (Carbent Raven) that I've ridden about 8,000 miles. It is a stiff bike, and the lightest bike I have ever owned. It doesn't seem much faster on the flats than my 451/700c, aluminum Musashi (8,800 miles on the computer), but it does climb hills faster. For that reason I prefer to ride it on hilly rides. For light riders like myself (I weigh 143 pounds), it is a handful in high cross winds (The Musashi is not). I don't recall experiencing cross wind handling problems with the 650c Corsa I used to own. The Carbent's 700c wheels do provide a better riding experience on chipseal than the Musashi's 451/700c combo and my Baron's 406/559 combo. The Carbent is glued together. In May of this year, the rear of the bike shifted a little and the carbon seat's glue joint failed, as I was transporting the bike to the Lancaster rally. If I had known the bike was that delicate, and that I would experience handling problems with it, I would have purchased the slightly-heavier, and more robust, 700c CA 2.0. If I had been on a budget, I would have purchased a 700c Corsa and lost 7 pounds (Assuming I could have spared them :)). As stated in previous posts, we all have our personal preferences. I've owned a lot of recumbent bikes (LWB, SWB, FWD, low racers, mid racers, and high racers). If I could only have one, it would be the Musashi - an all around great bike IMO. There must be some reason why Sandy Earl replaced her Carbent with a Musashi. :) |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Tiger_Mike on Aug 8th, 2013, 7:50pm I don't have near the experience of Jay or Bud, but I've got some opinions too - My Xstream climbs much better than my heavier V2. I'm a fat guy at 190 lbs, and the 26/20 on the V2 did well for me. When I got the XStream with dual 650C's on it, I learned all about pinch flats. Those mostly went away once I got smart enough to run 125 psi in the tires, but that made the ride pretty rough. Eventually, I had some really nice 26" wheels built for the Xstream and run 1.25 wide tires on them. For me, that makes the XStream a really nice riding bike. If I had a motor like Paul, my XStream would be way faster for me than the more upright V2 - it is faster for me, but I'm slow enough that the better aero only helps a little bit. I do like having to carry only one spare tube, but that's a minor concern to me (I don't Rando). My 2 cents... |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by TonyWard on Aug 8th, 2013, 8:12pm rmillay wrote:
I owned and recently sold a 650c Corsa and upgraded to a newer 700c Corsa. I can't tell a noticeable difference in speed between the two. To me one of the biggest reasons for my "upgrade" was getting on a standard wheel size. It is nice to be able to walk in and buy the same tires/tubes that everyone else does. Being able to share tubes with other riders (roadies) and the possibility of event support having the right size tube for you appeals to me. That being said - you can buy a lot of tires and tubes to keep on hand for the price difference. I guess in my mind I decided the convenience was "worth it". If one was buying new - I don't know why you would elect to buy 650 when 700 was available for a comparable price. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by FlyingLaZBoy on Aug 12th, 2013, 1:27pm I wouldn't think there would be much perceived rolling speed difference between 650 and 700 wheels in normal or even energetic riding - but the 700 does give you higher "top end" speed when you reach spinout, simply due to the larger diameter... I'd like to see RANS do a 700 Xstream, to have that higher top end - and to make tire/tube exchange with other riders simpler. There's certainly no issue with reach to the ground - but they would need to modify the frame to allow sufficient recline of the seat. The downside to this would be that I'd have to purchase ANOTHER Xstream... gawd... [smiley=twitchy.gif] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by AustinSkater on Aug 12th, 2013, 2:52pm FlyingLaZBoy wrote:
But a similar high end can be accomplished by putting a larger chainring on the front, my 56x11 with a 650 is slightly slower (per Sheldon Brown) than a 52x11 and less than 1MPH slower than a 53x11 on a 700. That, and the bigger chain ring just looks impressive when it's passing a roadie on a climb. Maybe I should look at a 57 for the front. I do agree that having 700s for tire/tube exchange is nice though (although when you're riding with a herd of 650 'bents you might be the odd man out on a 700). |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 12th, 2013, 4:41pm FlyingLaZBoy wrote:
After doing race after race with JS in 2011 when he was on his CA2-700 and I was on my old CA2-650 and us being pretty close to neck and neck when were working it together I thought the same thing. Then I moved to the CA2-700 and discovered the 700 really is faster, even at speeds in the low 20's and even though the CA2-700 frame is most likely less aero due to the greater inclined angle of the frame. The speed increase is both perceived and actual. In my case, the only difference was the frameset and the wheels. Not only that but when JS, Jac and I all moved to the 700s we all had a tendency to mash more because it was easier to get a little more speed out of the 700s when you did than when on a 650. So we had to teach ourselves to try to resist the temptation to get that little extra speed when doing a longer race and go back to spinning as we did more on the 650s. I suspect that the 'wall' is not quite as steep on 700s as on 650s. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Sweeper on Aug 12th, 2013, 10:18pm Let me put my two cents in. I have a Bacchetta Giro 20, I have read this is Bacchetta's best seller, of all their bikes for the last ten years. And for good reason. After 30,000 plus miles on mine in about 8 years it is still is going strong, never, never a problem. I am SLOW on any bike, however, the company's racers say it is Very fast with a (and this is the tell all about how fast it will go ) fast rider on the seat. You might give it a look, the new Giro 20 ATT is a nice bike. You don't have to sell the house to buy one, the 20 is listed at 1700.00 and the 20 ATT @ 2100.00. Is also great on touring, if you every wanted to tow the little ones around the block or across the Good Ole US of A. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Monkeywrangler22 on Aug 13th, 2013, 7:51am Also if the idea of swapping wheel sizes appeals to you, then give the Giro26 a hard look. It will run (using disc hubs) a pair of 24", 559's and 700's with ease. You can run at least 700x25c tires on the old frame (has the brake boss between the rear stays) and if you grind off that boss, you should be able to run 700x28c or maybe one size larger than that. On the 559 wheels you can run fat-tires on it, up to 1.75 IIRC. Also to the OP, if you are in the Dallas area, Dave and I are up in Collin Co and you would be welcome to test ride a Giro set up with 700c wheelset. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by FlyingLaZBoy on Aug 13th, 2013, 11:09am Now THERE'S the voice of experience, folks!!!! 'preciate it, Kent!!! (notice he is talking >20mph speed ranges) goatstick wrote:
After doing race after race with JS in 2011 when he was on his CA2-700 and I was on my old CA2-650 and us being pretty close to neck and neck when were working it together I thought the same thing. Then I moved to the CA2-700 and discovered the 700 really is faster, even at speeds in the low 20's and even though the CA2-700 frame is most likely less aero due to the greater inclined angle of the frame. The speed increase is both perceived and actual. In my case, the only difference was the frameset and the wheels. Not only that but when JS, Jac and I all moved to the 700s we all had a tendency to mash more because it was easier to get a little more speed out of the 700s when you did than when on a 650. So we had to teach ourselves to try to resist the temptation to get that little extra speed when doing a longer race and go back to spinning as we did more on the 650s. I suspect that the 'wall' is not quite as steep on 700s as on 650s. [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 13th, 2013, 12:00pm FlyingLaZBoy wrote:
I will say that while the 700's roll a little easier, I found I generally enjoyed the 650 ride a little more most of the time (except on boulder-seal). Both my Corsa 650 and my CA2 650 handled a little nicer and quicker and accellerated faster but when it comes to racing, the 700 is definitely the way to go, especially if you get your seat set up well (and at a very low seat angle :^). Now that I have my new seat+tailbox set up on the M5, it really putters along at a good clip for very little input power. Doesn't turn right worth a flip at low speed with the chain tubes removed though. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by artcat on Aug 14th, 2013, 10:24am I have owned both a P-38 and a Corsa 650. Enjoyed both but prefer the more reclined seat and more open relaxed cockpit of the Corsa. It for me is more comfortable and a better handling ride than the P-38. I think I am a little faster on the Corsa. I ride the 650 because my legs are not long enough to touch the ground when sitting on a 700. That makes it very hard to start. But my absolute favorite bike is my Catbike. It is a 20/700 and is both comfy and fast. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 14th, 2013, 12:34pm artcat wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Rat Rider on Aug 14th, 2013, 3:00pm goatstick wrote:
Whoa, hang on - am I reading this correctly? Your 700c Carbon Aero is lower with the new seat than the 650 w/ the standard carbon hard shell? That is a game changer. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 14th, 2013, 10:55pm Rat Rider wrote:
I haven't tried the production seat as I haven't built a std stickbike rib version of it yet but the last experimental seat was and I expect this one will be also. Next seat off of the production molds will be a stickbike seat and it will be going on a 650 CA2. I sold the 700 CA2 so can't check that out but can give a seat height for the 650 when it is mounted. You velcro the seatpan to the aluminum mounting plate to help secure the bolts so it sits the thickness of that plate plus velcro above the frame and the seatpan runs parallel to the frame. The seat is VERY fast though... It won it's first race last Sunday after less than an hour of road testing. Met the power/speed design goals on the M5 and it's not even tuned in yet. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by AustinSkater on Aug 15th, 2013, 5:27am goatstick wrote:
Somehow I doubt that the seat didn't have a little help, but if it did it on it's own then I need one of those seats. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 15th, 2013, 5:51am AustinSkater wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 18th, 2013, 7:23pm FlyingLaZBoy wrote:
Speaking of 20mph... Goal this year is to get my old 650 CA2 set up so my wife can generally ride it at 20mph. She's no powerhouse but she's a steady rider. My daughter rides my old Corsa and she can cruise for quite a while at 20-22mph with how I have that set up. There are a lot of things one can do to improve the speed/power ratio on modern stickbikes and I think that 20mph for the average rider isn't asking too much. It only took about 110 watts to do 20mph and 200 watts to do 25.5mph on my old CA2-700 and I can make a CA2-700 faster than that with what I know now. By far, the main thing is to clean up the turbulence below and under the seat. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Monkeywrangler22 on Aug 18th, 2013, 10:37pm Oh? Do tell! How does one clean up the turbulence to get that dramatic a speed increase at 110w? I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to know, so I can go faster at my meager 87w avg output. To get a sustainable 7mph increase for me would be like the grail. I'd be happy with a sustainable 3 or 4mph increase. goatstick wrote:
Speaking of 20mph... Goal this year is to get my old 650 CA2 set up so my wife can generally ride it at 20mph. She's no powerhouse but she's a steady rider. My daughter rides my old Corsa and she can cruise for quite a while at 20-22mph with how I have that set up. There are a lot of things one can do to improve the speed/power ratio on modern stickbikes and I think that 20mph for the average rider isn't asking too much. It only took about 110 watts to do 20mph and 200 watts to do 25.5mph on my old CA2-700 and I can make a CA2-700 faster than that with what I know now. By far, the main thing is to clean up the turbulence below and under the seat. [/quote] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Rat Rider on Aug 19th, 2013, 8:14am goatstick wrote:
I haven't tried the production seat as I haven't built a std stickbike rib version of it yet but the last experimental seat was and I expect this one will be also. Next seat off of the production molds will be a stickbike seat and it will be going on a 650 CA2. I sold the 700 CA2 so can't check that out but can give a seat height for the 650 when it is mounted. You velcro the seatpan to the aluminum mounting plate to help secure the bolts so it sits the thickness of that plate plus velcro above the frame and the seatpan runs parallel to the frame. The seat is VERY fast though... It won it's first race last Sunday after less than an hour of road testing. Met the power/speed design goals on the M5 and it's not even tuned in yet. [/quote] The only nit-pick I have with my 20lb. RANS Rifle is the height of the seat. I would love to squeeze an inch or so off the height. I would be willing to let you experiment. [smiley=bounce.gif] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 19th, 2013, 11:14am Monkeywrangler22 wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 19th, 2013, 11:15am Rat Rider wrote:
To get an idea of how the new RailGun seat might fit, look at my old CA2 experimental seat http://synthetictransport.com/spsbike/ and how it fits up against the frame. Then take a look at the RailGun seat http://synthetictransport.com/railgun/ and notice how pointed the front of the seat is. That allows your legs a lot more room to reach down to the ground. I'll be building a couple of RailGun seats for a CA2-650 and a Corsa-650 and then for a CA2-700, hopefully starting the first of sept. so can check measurements and fit then. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Rat Rider on Aug 20th, 2013, 2:34pm The seat looks very refined for such an early iteration. Well done! |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by FlyingLaZBoy on Aug 20th, 2013, 4:07pm Positively BADASS.......... [smiley=dancer.gif] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by dd5339 on Aug 20th, 2013, 5:30pm Sweet looking design. I'd be real interested when that goes into production. Semper Fi |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 20th, 2013, 6:04pm Rat Rider wrote:
|
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 20th, 2013, 6:07pm dd5339 wrote:
Just got the new custom seatfoam order in! Just in time to try it out at the Mid-Altantic with Jaq and John. |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by goatstick on Aug 20th, 2013, 6:15pm FlyingLaZBoy wrote:
At the Trail to Trail race that Madison and I won a little over a week ago, everyone was calling it "that Ferrari bike". :^) (Now maybe back to your regularly scheduled thread - sorry for hi-jacking it) |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Bud_Bent on Aug 20th, 2013, 7:10pm Well, this is a small enough forum that we usually forgive hijacks anyway, but in this case, thanks for the hijack info! |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 26th, 2013, 3:11pm Thanks [smiley=dankk2.gif] for all the info, both on topic and off!!! ;D All well worth the read. I went down to Easystreet Recumbents on Saturday and rode a P38( truely amazing) and a Strada which I had riden back in the spring. I have been watching Craigslist daily, but nothing new close to Austin that interested me. Then, on Sunday morning, listed in the Western Rockies of Colorado bike section was a Strada in Cedar Park, TX. Very strange. I live in Cedar Park!!!! It was only about 4 miles from my house. So I called, rode and bought!!!! [smiley=pepper.gif] I forgot to ask why it was in the CO section and he lives in TX, but that probably worked to my advantage in that it was not found by anyone else local!!!! Went for the first ride yesterday evening. Nice ride I just need to make sure the tires are fully inflated and I miss rocks. I haven't had such small tires in a while and have to be more cautious than on the Seavo with the 26 inchers!!!! So I got to change my first flat on the bike also!!!! It ride a whole bunch better than my ride on Saturday. My wife it out of town so I took the Seavo for a 24 mile ride by myself!!!! Yesterday I was atleast 20 lbs lighter!!! |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 26th, 2013, 3:28pm It actually rode much better!!! ;) |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 26th, 2013, 3:48pm http://www.flickr.com/photos/100831708@N05/ |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 26th, 2013, 3:52pm Well that didn't work!!! How about this? And go look manually!! :) http://www.flickr.com/photos/100831708@N05/ |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by AustinSkater on Aug 26th, 2013, 3:55pm Seavo_Sam wrote:
Nice, now you need to update your .sig [smiley=grin.gif] |
|
Title: Re: 26/26 vs 26/20 Post by Seavo_Sam on Aug 27th, 2013, 12:18pm Done!!! [smiley=vrolijk_26.gif] |
|
rbent Forum » Powered by YaBB 2.1! YaBB © 2000-2005. All Rights Reserved. |