Building TT bike - help!

[G]

As you may know that I am building a time trial bike for my big day in March, I am seeking some guidance.

I am sourcing a carbon frame from an offshore supplier, and wot they are selling me is an ISP (integrated seat post) frame. From wot I understand about ISP frames is that they are more rigid (which is wot I need in a TT bike). But this means seatpost is required to be cut to a height that fits me? They have sent me this drawing which doesn't make much sense to a n0ob I am.



How to cut the integrated seatpost to fit me? If I take it for a bike fit session, will they cut it for me? Is it too much hassle/risk?

[shrubb face]

Well to start off with, whilst a ISP frame may make the seat post stiffer and i reinforce the word may, stiffness isnt really the overal goal of a TT bike.

If you look at the design of many top tt bikes from a engineering point of view you can see where tube shape has been purposefully made more aerodynamic, at the expense of stiffness. On a track bike, were you are often out of the saddle, rapidly changing power output, stiffness is very important. On the other hand during a tt where your aim is to keep your power output as smooth and controlled as possible, stiffness takes a back seat to aerodynamics.

Anyway back on topic, cutting a integrated seat post is no more difficult than cutting a carbon steer tube. Once you've determined the approximate height which you need your seat, the post is cut. The little module peice to which the seat attaches, then slips over the remain post and offers you a couple of mms of adjustment. As always the age of theory of measure twice cut once applies here.

If you go to a bike fitting session they are going to have to cut the post for you, otherwise they arent going to be able to fit the bike to you.......
Its hard to work out if your comfy in the aerobars if you sitting 30 cms to high on a uncut saddled.

[weiyun]

Most of the brands using IS design have a saddle adaptor that offers a few cm of adjustment. So cutting of the IS doesn't have to be space science but does require you to be reasonably close and it may be wise to do in multiple stages. There's no going back once you've cut it. As for getting a proper fit, you had better use a reputable fitter. Better still, find the perfect TT position and then have it matched across on the new bike.

One other thing you need to be aware of is that a frame with IS is less compact for travel than a regular frame and may be an issue fitting it in a some travel boxes. And with a CF frame, you can't afford to not use a good quality travel box if you want to see it in one piece at the other end.

[PeterOS]

How much are they asking for the frame G.

[HOP]

G

The exact tt frame without ISP. Just do a search in Alibaba. There is also a few different style to chose from. Wot's your fancy.

[G]

Thanks Shrubface, Weiyun

It was helpful.

@HOP
The deal is half way through. I initially asked for Non ISP, but he made ISP. Then I thought that maybe ISP is not that bad?!

[weiyun]

Don't forget to add a few hundred $$$s for a travel box in your budget.

[G]

I sorted out the frame, and now I am looking for a crankset.

I was considering Easton EC90 but they come in two models for the same price - standard and compact. I think the compact is 50/34 and the standard is 53/39? I am clueless which one should I go for? Can someone guide me to a decision here?

I will be using it in 20km to 180km time trials, with cruising speeds varying between 35 to 40km/hr on flats, target cadence 90 to 100. Ironman courses are not flat, and may have some serious hills. Port Macquarie has a hill about half the size of artillery hill, but we hit it three times in 180km. Ironman France has a 90km climb. All that climbing will require low gearing to maintain the target cadence. Would you recommend the standard or compact?

Also, wot cassette configuration (SRAM red) with the recommended crankset will suit my needs?

Thanks for your time!
G

[weiyun]

If you need the lower gears to allow you to spin, then CT is the consideration. If you don't need that lower gears, then stay with regular double.

[christian]

Getting EC90 cranks, feeling rich are we, or have they come down in price. You will need to go with standard cranks that are 130BCD as you are going to want to run a chain ring bigger then 50t. If you are going to this extent then there are TT specific chain rings available that are more aerodynamic, I know FSA makes them and I'm sure there are other manufacturers.

As for the cassette, this depends on you. I'd run an 11-23. You can get bigger chain rings for TTs as well if you are one of these people that can push really big gears.

[othy]

If you are happy with the crankset on your current bike I would go with that.

I switched from a compact (50/34) to a standard (53/39) and find it has a much better top end and more usuable bottom, as I never went to my smallest gear but would often find myself at the top. The cassette can be changed to affect this too.

I had a 12-25 cassette on both cranksets and have the same on my new bike too (with a standard crankset). Once again I would try to replicate your current setup unless you are specifically trying to fix something about it.

[G]

Getting EC90 cranks, feeling rich are we, or have they come down in price. You will need to go with standard cranks that are 130BCD as you are going to want to run a chain ring bigger then 50t. If you are going to this extent then there are TT specific chain rings available that are more aerodynamic, I know FSA makes them and I'm sure there are other manufacturers.

As for the cassette, this depends on you. I'd run an 11-23. You can get bigger chain rings for TTs as well if you are one of these people that can push really big gears.

Thanks for the reply Christian,
I am getting compact version for about $600 at eBay with ceramic BB. I haven't been following their prices to say whether they have come down or were always like that?!

About cassette, ideally I would like to keep the cadence high (90-100) rather than grind in high gears. Isn't it that the bigger chain rings (12-27) will increase cadence and you don't need to grind in bigger cassette gears?

[weiyun]

At the end of the day, it's really a question of your riding style and the particular course you are targeting. Using your present bike and work out the range of gears you need and then try to replicate it on your new TT bike. Select the chainset and cassette to match. Further, close gear ratios is said to benefit in TTs.

Check Sheldon Brown's gear calculator.
http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

[G]

If you are happy with the crankset on your current bike I would go with that.

I switched from a compact (50/34) to a standard (53/39) and find it has a much better top end and more usuable bottom, as I never went to my smallest gear but would often find myself at the top. The cassette can be changed to affect this too.

I had a 12-25 cassette on both cranksets and have the same on my new bike too (with a standard crankset). Once again I would try to replicate your current setup unless you are specifically trying to fix something about it.

Thanks othy

I want to focus on my lower end because in my current setup 53/39, (don't know the cassette), I find that my cadence drops below 60 when doing any reasonably serious climb, even when I am in the lowest gear. If I will change to compact 50/34, will it increase cadence in the lowest gear? I would prefer to have higher cadence in climbs - especially if I'd do Ironman France which has 90km climb.

[weiyun]

Find out your present cassette. It can significantly alter your available gear ratios.

[G]

At the end of the day, it's really a question of your riding style and the particular course you are targeting. Using your present bike and work out the range of gears you need and then try to replicate it on your new TT bike. Select the chainset and cassette to match. Further, close gear ratios is said to benefit in TTs.

Check Sheldon Brown's gear calculator.
http://sheldonbrown.com/gears/

Thanks Weiyun
This is helpful tool!

[orphic]

I've got a compact on my road bike with a 12/25 on the back. I am thinking of moving to a 11/23 cassette, which will mean my biggest gear is a bit bigger, even though that means my smallest is pushed up a bit too. While I have been known to use my tiny gear when climbing hills like Arden Street in Coogee, I could probably get by with the small adjustment. Having a bigger gear to push on the way home from Waterfall would be nice.

A standard with 11/23 will push your gears up even higher but by the sounds of it you may not enjoy climbing on it. A standard with 12/25 will give you a closer range of gears, with the smallest being higher than the compact and 11/23 combo - but the largest will also be a tad smaller. How significant or noticable this is on the bike I am not sure.

[G]

Find out your present cassette. It can significantly alter your available gear ratios.

My current configuration is 52/39T, and 12/25T, and I want to increase cadence while climbing in the new setup.

[orphic]

My current configuration is 52/39T, and 12/25T, and I want to increase cadence while climbing in the new setup.

In that case you will most likely need to get a compact, unless you want to put an 11-28 on the back with a standard - but do people actually do that? You would lose so many mid range gears. I prefer shifting to be a bit more smooth than that.

[othy]

Thanks othy

I want to focus on my lower end because in my current setup 53/39, (don't know the cassette), I find that my cadence drops below 60 when doing any reasonably serious climb, even when I am in the lowest gear. If I will change to compact 50/34, will it increase cadence in the lowest gear? I would prefer to have higher cadence in climbs - especially if I'd do Ironman France which has 90km climb.

Cadence always drops a bit on climbs. I found that I didn't climb any slower when I went to 53/39 - in fact I think I got faster. I also find myself using the 39 more then the 34. I would almost spend all my time in my 50 chainring as the 'jump' felt absurd even when changing down 3 at the back at the same time.

I have my old compact crankset you can borrow and see if you find it better. They are 175mm cranks though.

[christian]

If you want a lower gear but want to retain your big gears for descending and the flat sections then I'd be changing the cassette. The biggest you can run on the back with a road derailleur is 27t, so the 11-28 is out of the question. If you don't think you'll need an 11 (I rarely use mine) then there are a few options, 12-26 and 12-27.

[orphic]

Cadence always drops a bit on climbs. I found that I didn't climb any slower when I went to 53/39 - in fact I think I got faster. I also find myself using the 39 more then the 34. I would almost spend all my time in my 50 chainring as the 'jump' felt absurd even when changing down 3 at the back at the same time.

This is my problem with the compact. I only ever use the 34 to climb a big hill. Sometimes I try to use it to spin when I am warming up, but that lasts a couple of minutes until I feel too ridiculous and move onto the 50. I started out changing down 3 on the back when I did move to the smaller ring, but now I change down 4 otherwise the difference is just too large.

[orphic]

PS - Is a SRAM Red cassette really necessary? It's a lot of money to pay for something that will wear out eventually.

[G]

Cadence always drops a bit on climbs. I found that I didn't climb any slower when I went to 53/39 - in fact I think I got faster. I also find myself using the 39 more then the 34. I would almost spend all my time in my 50 chainring as the 'jump' felt absurd even when changing down 3 at the back at the same time.

I have my old compact crankset you can borrow and see if you find it better. They are 175mm cranks though.

I want to keep high cadence to save legs for a marathon that follows the time trial. I may save a few seconds climbing the hill faster in higher gear or by increasing the top speed on descends, and can even go for a sprint finish, but that means I will have to die in the run! I want to finish the 180km time trial feeling fresh for the run, and grinding high gears up the hill won't help iniit!

[G]

PS - Is a SRAM Red cassette really necessary? It's a lot of money to pay for something that will wear out eventually.

Wot else would you recommend Vic?
Wot is important in a cassette? Weight? Stiffness?

[othy]

I want to keep high cadence to save legs for a marathon that follows the time trial. I may save a few seconds climbing the hill faster in higher gear or by increasing the top speed on descends, and can even go for a sprint finish, but that means I will have to die in the run! I want to finish the 180km time trial feeling fresh for the run, and grinding high gears up the hill won't help iniit!

I think you need to do some testing (if you haven't already) and try and establish if this is a gearing or technique problem. When you find yourself grinding are you already in the 39x25 gear?

Wot else would you recommend Vic?
Wot is important in a cassette? Weight? Stiffness?

PG1090 = 210g and $215
PG1070 = 220g and $65

I think it comes down to a question of value...

[G]

I think you need to do some testing (if you haven't already) and try and establish if this is a gearing or technique problem. When you find yourself grinding are you already in the 39x25 gear?

Yes Othy, I won't climb steep hills like artillery hill in any other gear, and my cadence my wall as low as 50... which means I am grinding.

[weiyun]

I've got a compact on my road bike with a 12/25 on the back. I am thinking of moving to a 11/23 cassette, which will mean my biggest gear is a bit bigger, even though that means my smallest is pushed up a bit too. While I have been known to use my tiny gear when climbing hills like Arden Street in Coogee, I could probably get by with the small adjustment. Having a bigger gear to push on the way home from Waterfall would be nice.

I run CT chainsets on both my bikes right now and would highly recommend 11/25 cassettes and has been said to be the ideal cassette for CTs. Prior I had 12/25 on the Bianchi and 11/25 on the Ridley and couldn't tell the difference b/n the two except on the Mad Mile.

[G]

PG1090 = 210g and $215
PG1070 = 220g and $65

I think it comes down to a question of value...

Hands down, rival wins in value. Why is red priced at so much premium?

[weiyun]

In that case you will most likely need to get a compact, unless you want to put an 11-28 on the back with a standard - but do people actually do that? You would lose so many mid range gears. I prefer shifting to be a bit more smooth than that.

+1.

I don't think there are 11/28 cassettes but something in the 13/27 range. Even if there is, the gaps b/n cogs would be getting too large for racing and in particular TTs.

[othy]

+1.

I don't think there are 11/28 cassettes but something in the 13/27 range. Even if there is, the gaps b/n cogs would be getting too large for racing and in particular TTs.

The PG-1070 comes as an 11-28 - whether his rear derailleur supports it is another question.

[weiyun]

The PG-1070 comes as an 11-28 - whether his rear derailleur supports it is another question.

Thanks for that and just read up on the specs. That's one big cassette for a road bike!

[mikesbytes]

Christian isn't 100% correct about the max size ring you can put on a compact, I have a 53 on a compact. But they aren't that common.

I can't ever see you needing a gear lower than 39/25 in a time trail, but I can see you needing higher than 50/11.

Go 53/39 111-25

[weiyun]

I can't ever see you needing a gear lower than 39/25 in a time trail, but I can see you needing higher than 50/11.

I understand that there are some significant climbs on G's TT course ie. Not a typical TT course.

[G]

After Christians recommendation, I searched for FSA time trial, and came across this thing:



54/42 config.

This is a bit expensive than Easton EC90 and 1kg in weight as compared to 663g of Easton.

Wot is the opinion on this one?

[G]

Why are crank arms relatively longer for TT cranksets?

How to find out which one is optimal for me?

[christian]

Longer cranks will enable you to produce more torque, so you can push a bigger gear. I guess most TTs are flat or not that hilly so the riders push big gears. Long cranks are also good for climbing hills at a low cadence.

[weiyun]

But be careful of long cranks. It'll be an aspect of bike fit your body will have to adjust to. Further, longer cranks will restrict your top end cadence, but that's probably not that important for TTs.

[mikesbytes]

Check out gain ratios. It works out that and extra 5mm of crank is about one extra tooth on the big ring

[weiyun]

At the end of the day, if the legs can't put out the power, even a 190mm crank won't be of use. So focus on the rider and develop that sustainable power.

[orphic]

Check out gain ratios. It works out that and extra 5mm of crank is about one extra tooth on the big ring

How do you work that out?

I'm a bit confused about gain ratios and how they equate to real life pedalling. If I go down in crank length my gain rations rise - much as if I go up in gear inches my gain ratios rise. So by your logic would it not go the other way?

[mikesbytes]

gain ratios are the distance your foot moves in comparison with the distance the bike moves. A longer crank means a greater distance the foot moves. If you use longer cranks you use a higher gear to achieve the same foot velocity, inversely if you us a shorter crank, you use a lower gear to achieve the same foot velocity.

[weiyun]

I'm a bit confused about gain ratios and how they equate to real life pedalling. If I go down in crank length my gain rations rise - much as if I go up in gear inches my gain ratios rise. So by your logic would it not go the other way?

Just remember that they are all gears with differing mechanical advantages through the use of levers and cog ratios. And for a rider's leg, anything b/n the foot to the rear wheel are all within a black box. So gain ratio goes one step further and includes the leverage advantage of crank length in the calculation while the traditional gear ratio/gear inches only takes into account of the chainwheel/cog ratio.

Sheldon Brown is the proponent of this reference standard and has a good write up on it.
http://sheldonbrown.com/gain.html

[Toff]

I would be very surprised if that FSA crankset was UCI legal under the new rules.

Probably doesn't matter for triathlon racing, but will obviously affect price and resale value...

[weiyun]

After a second look, if you really want that aero disc look on the chainring, then just stick sheets of contact adhesives on 2 sides of a regular chainring.

Can consider clear, silver, gold or even wood grain for variety.

[G]

I would be very surprised if that FSA crankset was UCI legal under the new rules.

Probably doesn't matter for triathlon racing, but will obviously affect price and resale value...

Wot rule it violates?

[G]

FSA TT chainset is a 1kg in weight including BB, as compared to 660g for Easton EC90.

Is the weight factor more important or the aerodynamics?

[weiyun]

Is the weight factor more important or the aerodynamics?

If you have long and greater than 8% grade climbs, then weight. If you have 50km of flat land, then aero, especially if you can cruise at 45+km/h.

[T-Bone]

What wheels do you have?? No point having aero cranks with shallow rim wheels... You may even want a disc depending on the amount of corners, technical aspects of the course, and the prevailing winds.

[othy]

What wheels do you have?? No point having aero cranks with shallow rim wheels... You may even want a disc depending on the amount of corners, technical aspects of the course, and the prevailing winds.

I agree - cranks are a long way down the list of things to spend money on to make aero improvements. Just get something simple, reliable and readily available, with a standard BCD.

[G]

PG1090 = 210g and $215
PG1070 = 220g and $65

I think it comes down to a question of value...

SRAM cassette 1090 is 155g!

[othy]

SRAM cassette 1090 is 155g!

I just went off the specs on ChainReaction. You are right though and I don't think it changes my point...

[weiyun]

SRAM cassette 1090 is 155g!

It's not so precise. The weight ultimately depends on the groupset as well as the particular model. A 11/25 will be heavier than a 11/21 within the same groupset.

[G]

It's not so precise. The weight ultimately depends on the groupset as well as the particular model. A 11/25 will be heavier than a 11/21 within the same groupset.

Good point raised Weiyun! It is 155g for 11/23. Rival cassette is 220g for 11/23

[G]

I compared the weights and prices of DA, Ultegra, Rival and Red's cassettes, derailleurs, brakes, and TT shifters and considering the following components to go with the FSA 54/42 crankset:

SRAM Red Cassette 11/26
SRAM Red Derailleur Front
SRAM Rival Derailleur Rear
SRAM aero brake levers
SRAM Rival brakes
SRAM TT shifters
and SRAM hollow pin chain

Is it going to work?!

[weiyun]

Why are you buying components in piecemeal? It's usually cheaper to buy a full groupset and there are lots of online options. For your TT bike, you can always flog the unnecessary components on eBay for a decent price.

[G]

Why are you buying components in piecemeal? It's usually cheaper to buy a full groupset and there are lots of online options. For your TT bike, you can always flog the unnecessary components on eBay for a decent price.

The groupsets are sold for Road bikes. I don't need the hoods, and standard brake levers/shifters for TT bike. Also, I have chosen to go with the FSA 54/42 crankset, so that's why I won't buy the full groupset.

Although buying a full groupset may be slightly cheap, I think there is just too much premium on certain components. For eg, rear derailleur of RED and Rival are priced at 200, and 60 euros (sample price), and the weight difference of 25g (188g-153g) is not worth 140 euros to me. So I want to opt for a Rival rear derailleur. But will it work with the other red components?!

[christian]

Do you have the derailleurs around the wrong way, I'd go a red RD and a rival FD. The red RD uses ceramic bearings in the jockey wheels where the force doesn't, also it uses a titanium main spring to cut the weight. The red FD uses a titanium cage, not sure that's worth the money. The only difference between the rival and force FD is the colour, they weigh the same.

Other brake options would include FSA K-force at 268g or the Token Accura CX brake at 211g although I think its only a single pivot.

[christian]

There is no problem with mixing the SRAM parts, they use the same cable pull across the the different groupsets.

[G]

Do you have the derailleurs around the wrong way, I'd go a red RD and a rival FD. The red RD uses ceramic bearings in the jockey wheels where the force doesn't, also it uses a titanium main spring to cut the weight. The red FD uses a titanium cage, not sure that's worth the money. The only difference between the rival and force FD is the colour, they weigh the same.

Other brake options would include FSA K-force at 268g or the Token Accura CX brake at 211g although I think its only a single pivot.

Good point Christian
I had no clue about the ceramic bearings in Red rear derailleur, and was only comparing the weight to start with. Since I will be riding it long distances in possibly hot weather conditions, I will pick red RD. Thanks for the help.

I just looked at FSA K-force brake, they are 275 euros, compared to 78 euros for Rival, which weighs 279g. I think I will stick with the rival.

[othy]

Is there a reason you've gone from wanting compact gearing to huge gearing?

[G]

Is there a reason you've gone from wanting compact gearing to huge gearing?

Yea, FSA TT crankset looks bloody awesome! Although it is a whole kilogram as compared to 650g Easton EC90, but I got it at similar price.

I can change the gearing at the cassette init?

[othy]

Yea, FSA TT crankset looks bloody awesome! Although it is a whole kilogram as compared to 650g Easton EC90, but I got it at similar price.

I can change the gearing at the cassette init?

Possibly, but I don't think you are going to enjoy riding it on anything but flat ground. I would avoid it.

[G]

Possibly, but I don't think you are going to enjoy riding it on anything but flat ground. I would avoid it.

My current bike is 10kg, and this TT bike is going to be 5kg?! So, I guess I will be able to grind a bigger gear while climbing hey? I know it wasn't a rational decision. I just got flattered over its stunning looks, and now I am looking for reasons to justify it. Oh well, I can always replace it if I don't like it. Or I can have two cassettes, one for ze mountain climb stages and one for ze fast and flat stages.

[T-Bone]

Which parts of your bike are made from paper to achieve this 5kg weight???

[weiyun]

My current bike is 10kg, and this TT bike is going to be 5kg?! So, I guess I will be able to grind a bigger gear while climbing hey? I know it wasn't a rational decision. I just got flattered over its stunning looks, and now I am looking for reasons to justify it. Oh well, I can always replace it if I don't like it. Or I can have two cassettes, one for ze mountain climb stages and one for ze fast and flat stages.

You are jumping b/n being technical one minute and then bling focused with your choice the next. It's very hard to understand and makes us worried that you'll be wasting your money.

If money is no object, then you can try every piece component under the sun and don't really need to ask for suggestions.

[shrubb face]

no chance of making a 5 kg time trial bike. Even with the most expensive equipment available you would struggle and that completely rules out a disc.

[mikesbytes]

Yea, FSA TT crankset looks bloody awesome! Although it is a whole kilogram as compared to 650g Easton EC90, but I got it at similar price.

I don't know either of those crank sets, but I'd be wary of buying on weight, I'd make sure it was stiff, ie not flexy

[christian]

I'd be more likely to go with the Easton cranks. They are lighter and they are based on the same composite technology as the EC70 and EC90 handlebars. I have EC70 bars on my road bike and they are super stiff. You can always run bigger rings on the 130 BCD cranks if you felt the need.

[G]

Which parts of your bike are made from paper to achieve this 5kg weight???

Frame+fork 1.4kg
wheels 1.5kg
crankset 1kg
rest of the groupset 0.8kg
seat 133g, handlebars .5kg
that's roughly 5.5kg

Here's the image of the frame with my road bike wheels and TT saddle.

[G]

You are jumping b/n being technical one minute and then bling focused with your choice the next. It's very hard to understand and makes us worried that you'll be wasting your money.

If money is no object, then you can try every piece component under the sun and don't really need to ask for suggestions.

Sorry Weiyun!
I really value your technical inputs.

[weiyun]

Sorry Weiyun!

Not a problem G. At the end of the day, it's your fun to build a bike that can be considered to be your. And it's faultless to go technical or bling or both. The only concern is with your wallet and most of us hate to see you waste money on frivolous "features" pushed onto us by shrewd marketeers.

[G]

Ok, with the frame and fork, I received two bearings, one washer, and one other ring, and a headset. Now I know that the headset goes on top of the fork tube, but not sure where the washer and the rings go. I know that it should be really simple to fit the fork, just need to know the order in which I have to put the components. Does anyone have a diagram or something?

[weiyun]

Which brand of headset? Their company site may have instruction in PDF. Otherwise Google "threadless headset".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headset_(bicycle_part)

[T-Bone]

Frame+fork 1.4kg
wheels 1.5kg
crankset 1kg
rest of the groupset 0.8kg
seat 133g, handlebars .5kg
that's roughly 5.5kg

You're forgetting tyres, pedals, headset, cables, skewers, bar tape.... plus the rest of the groupset will be more than .8kg, saddle (selle italia optima??) rated at 140g but selle italia are notorious for under reporting. Then there's the requirement for accurate weighing. Anyway, the good thing about all this..... the bike will be sensibly light (my guess is around 7kg), rather than stupidly!!

As for the headset, if you post a pic of all the bits i'll be able to help you.

[G]

Q: Front derailleur

They come in brazed-on version, band 32mm and 34.9mm, how to find out wot I need?!

[G]

Q: Stem

I have purchased almost all of the products online, but I am skeptical about the stem. The bike forks tube and ISP tube are longer than I require, and I was thinking to get them cut as per my fit when I take it for a bike fit.

Does stem size/angle make a difference in the bike fit? Am I better off purchasing it in the store when I take it for bike fit?

[G]

Thanks James, I will post the photos of fork assembly. I had a look at the wikipedia page that Weiyun shared, but it seems my version has a lot less components, or I am missing some!

[weiyun]

Q: Front derailleur
They come in brazed-on version, band 32mm and 34.9mm, how to find out wot I need?!

You have funny shaped seat post and invariably these use braze-on FD. Even for round seat post members, I would buy a standalone derailleur braze-on clamp. This way, it's easy to move the FD to another frame or selling it.

[weiyun]

Q: Stem

I have purchased almost all of the products online, but I am skeptical about the stem. The bike forks tube and ISP tube are longer than I require, and I was thinking to get them cut as per my fit when I take it for a bike fit.

Does stem size/angle make a difference in the bike fit? Am I better off purchasing it in the store when I take it for bike fit?

Buy a set of spacer rings and stack them for the stem/fork tube installation until you are totally comfortable with the drop. Only then should you start to trim it closer to the final set up. If you cut it too short, then you'll be stuck there forever until you replace the whole fork assembly.

And yes, stem size/angle is a very important part of fit as it determines your reach and drop. It's as important as sizing an appropriate frame for your build. For pro fitting, they are likely to find a particular stem that matches your fit bike dimensions.

[G]

Thanks for the advise Weiyun!

[G]

Q: Paint

I want to paint hot pink graphics on the black carbon frame. Wot paint type and equipment I need to use? Where to get it from?

[christian]

I want to paint hot pink graphics on the black carbon frame. Wot paint type and equipment I need to use? Where to get it from?

Now why would you want to do that? If you just want some text or something simple I'd get stickers cut. If you wanted it painted that's going to cost a lot more. You could do it yourself but it may not be very neat. I'd go the sticker method, you just need to find a company that does custom vinyl stickers, a quick google search should turn up a few.

[weiyun]

Or you can use water based modelling paint (eg. Tamiya) for small jobs. They are available from Hobbyco, Lincraft and other similar stores. If it's anything worthwhile, an additional layer of clear lacquer over it would be the go.

[G]

There are two bearings, two washers and a black ring thing stuff which I am sure goes at the top. I have tried putting them in various orders but the fork is always a bit loose. Any idea wot is the correct order to insert these components?

[shrubb face]

Its a standard semi intergrated headset. First you have to install the head crown ring, which is the black one second from the left. It has to be 'push' down onto the fork crown, which is the slightly wider ledge on the bottom of the stear tube. Normally this is done with a special tool, but can also be done using a piece of pipe which just fits over the stear tube.

Next the bottom bearing goes on, which is the silver one on the left. The you can slide the forks though the frame. After that the top bearing race goes on, which is the 3rd sliver ring from the left. Then red split ring is installed into the top of that bearing and then finally the black dust cover goes over the top.

Then use the black compression plug to hold the whole thing together once you have the head tube spacers and stem on. Though unless you have a massive collection of spacers you will have to cut the stear tube at least a little bit.

[weiyun]

Based on my experience, unless you can easily put the head crown ring down in position, it'd be a good idea to have that done in a LBS. You don't want to get that wrong on a CF fork. And the whole assembly would be a tad loose until it's all compressed down.

[G]

Thank you Shrubb face and Weiyun.

Does LBS mean Mick Mazza??????

[weiyun]

Try one that knows TT bikes.

[Julio]

Try one that knows TT bikes.

http://www.endeavourcycles.com/


ask for george...if the current world ironman champion and a batch of former world ironman champions are to be listened too then this is the cycle shop for you.

[weller]

Take it to Geoff (club member) - he works at Pedal Pushers
LEDA Business Centre, 316/30-40 Harcourt Parade, Rosebery,
Phone: 02 8338 8911
pedalpushers@bigpond.com

[G]

Thanks Jules, Weller

[G]

Q: How to install BB cup spacer?



The golden spacer/cartridge between the BB cups is wider at the ends, and narrow in the middle. The frame barrel also resembles the same shape, i.e., narrow at the middle. I am supposed to insert it from the right. But the problem is, how to get the wider ""L"" end of the spacer through the narrow middle section of the bottom bracket shell? I tried pushing it in, but doesn't work. Is there any technique or should I just push it hard into the frame?

[shrubb face]

umm first question, is that picture actually of the same model bottom bracket as the one you have? Just want to make sure that you dont have a BB30, or other strange type.

[G]

umm first question, is that picture actually of the same model bottom bracket as the one you have? Just want to make sure that you dont have a BB30, or other strange type.

This photo is the same model bb as I have. Both BB and frame shell are english thread. The BB cups actually screw correctly on the frame shell. But the cartridge wouldn't slide in due to narrow center of the frame shell.

[Toff]

The "golden spacer/cardridge" is what FSA refers to as the "middle spacer". There should also be another "center sleeve" [sic.] inside it. These parts are there to stop crud inside the frame from getting onto the spindle, and to ensure that the bearings are not over-tightened during installation.

You can look for burrs on the inside of the bottom bracket shell, and sand them off if you see them. This could enable installation.

However, it is possible that the bottom bracket shell's inside diameter is just too narrow to install the middle spacer. If that's the case, you can install the bottom bracket without the middle spacer or the "center sleeve" and it will still work perfectly. Indeed it will be lighter! However, since you have lost the failsafe mechanism, you should ensure the bottom bracket shell ends are properly faced, and be careful you don't exceed the manufacturer's recommended tightening torque.

[G]

The "golden spacer/cardridge" is what FSA refers to as the "middle spacer". There should also be another "center sleeve" [sic.] inside it. These parts are there to stop crud inside the frame from getting onto the spindle, and to ensure that the bearings are not over-tightened during installation.

You can look for burrs on the inside of the bottom bracket shell, and sand them off if you see them. This could enable installation.

However, it is possible that the bottom bracket shell's inside diameter is just too narrow to install the middle spacer. If that's the case, you can install the bottom bracket without the middle spacer or the "center sleeve" and it will still work perfectly. Indeed it will be lighter! However, since you have lost the failsafe mechanism, you should ensure the bottom bracket shell ends are properly faced, and be careful you don't exceed the manufacturer's recommended tightening torque.

Hi Chris
Thank you for the info.
The middle diameter of frame shell is just too narrow. I had put the spacer in the freezer thinking that it will help slip it in, but then I thought if I ever want to take it out, it will be impossible iniit.

[weiyun]

Did you contact the frame manufacturer to see what spec they used for the BB?

[G]

Did you contact the frame manufacturer to see what spec they used for the BB?

Yes, English thread.

[weiyun]

Yes, English thread.

The internal. Find out their spec ID and if that's compatible with your intended cartridge BB.