Mountain Bike Reviews Forum banner

21 - 40 of 118 Posts

·
Shamisen Appreciator
Joined
·
2,029 Posts
mikesee said:
I'll give one HUGE hint, which pertains to the wheels, BB, cranks, and frame/fork as well: the wheels are built on-center. Any guesses as to how/why this was done?

MC
I assume by "on-center" you mean flange center, not axle end center. I would make a couple of guesses. Someone already said to use the same spoke length, which would potentially reduce the number of spare spokes you would carry (if any at all). Can we assume that your frame and fork are dished to one side? Monty and Megamo used to do that for their trials bikes so the rear wheels would be built centered between the flanges.

With 150mm hubs, aren't the flanges centered between the locknuts anyway?
 

·
Recovering couch patato
Joined
·
14,017 Posts
Seems like a waste to not put the fuel in the tires, so much room there :)
 

·
Duckin' Fonuts.
Joined
·
297 Posts
Do I see H2O cage braze ons on the back of the fork legs?

Building the whole rig and trailer on center should make the design of the trailer and its pivots simpler to keep the thing balanced and turning geometry easier to calculate.
 

·
Powered by ice cream.
Joined
·
6,355 Posts
The only thing that stood out to me that was not mentioned was the Gripshift.

Simple, reliable, easily actuated with gloves. The only intelligent choice.

My preferred shifting method as well.:)

Same wheel build so all the wheels track in the same line in the snow?

Also, super slack HA for toe clearance, necessitating lots of offset, also improving toe clearance.
 

·
I'm how far behind?
Joined
·
571 Posts
I thought the whole family was weird, but your's takes the cake

Nice build up, definately lots of thought went into those mods. That trailer is is great, how does it ride? I know he said no more, but so did Brad a few years ago.... I don't think I would ever be out long enough to use one, but you never know. I didn't think I'd be doing half the stuff I do now 5 years ago.

As you can see, I could not resist the great deal on the snowbike, so here is a picture from my first ride this morning. Just a short ride to the back of Keystone. I started to late and the snow was pretty slushy by the time I finished. Tomorrow I'll start earlier and higher. You definately have a beefier fork than mine, I think my crown is either a rockshox or manitou, it is a little flexxy but will definately do the trick for what I'm planning on doing.

Good stuff,

jim
 

Attachments

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
15,681 Posts
Discussion Starter #27
GlowBoy said:
Hmm. Endomorphs, check. Large Marge rims, check. 70oz fuel-carrying capacity in the fork legs and downtube, check. (Not to diminish this incredible innovation, but we have known about this feature for a few weeks. Very, very cool.
No, they're not LM's. The LM's are 'only' 65mm wide, and as a result the tire takes on a more rounded shape that makes keeping the bike on line in soft snow (even at 3psi) a handful. But using the 82mm wide Sand Rims, the tires are much more square in profile, so you not only track straighter, you use a lot less effort doing it.

GlowBoy said:
I see 135mm axles front and rear, for swappability and up-front tire clearance. Or wait ... are the axles wider than 135? I only see the DT 440 available with QR in 135mm, but the the TA versions also come in 150mm and 165mm -- that fork looks suspiciously wide, so I'm wondering if you got one of the wider versions and did some special conversion to QR. Also did you have to go with a 100mm BB shell, a la Pugsley?
See above (below?) comments about 150 hubs and Maxles.

GlowBoy said:
Fork looks like it has a lot of total offset, both at the crown and again at the dropouts. I presume this is to clear your size 50 Lake boots (I thought they went up to 48?) No surprise -- my regular size 44 shoes have no problem even with booties on, but my size 46 Lakes buzz the tire on my Vulture.
69 degree HTA, but it seems the fork only ended up with about 61mm of trail. I'd asked for ~92, and the difference is noticable. Gonna ride it a bunch more before I decide if I need to change. 70 degree STA, 11.75" BB.

GlowBoy said:
I notice the front hydraulic and rear mechanical disc brake. Not familiar with the specific disc, being such an avid Avid user. Full length cable to the rear, of course, to keep ice out ... but still, if you were going to do one of each I might have guessed you'd do it the other way. So still scratching my head trying to figure that one out.
I wanted to test them side by side (back to back?) to see if I preferred one over the other, and also to see if I could get one or the other to hiccup in the cold. The hydro has SO MUCH MORE POWER. Temps only got down to -31 on this trip--no problems to report.


GlowBoy said:
Who built the trailer? Hard to tell w/o closeup pics, but clearly not BOB with the 3.0 Gazzi out back and using some kind of bolt system that attaches it to the frame above the dropouts. Is the "narrow" 3.0 on the trailer for better tracking in deep snow? OK, and whassup with a disc brake on the trailer? There's clearly not just a disc but a brake too. I could definitely see the usefulness, but how is it activated? Wait now I'm starting to see why you're running a cable disc on the back of the bike -- are you using some sort of cable splitter to allow a single lever to control both the trailer brake too? Also, I see a cassette on the trailer wheel -- is this so you can swap your skinny, full-knobby tire onto the rear of the bike for traction while climbing on firmer snow?
Devin Lenz built the trailer. The trailer wheel is also an 82mm wide Sand Rim with a Surly 3.7 tire, 150mm hub and Maxle attachment. No brake on the trailer.

GlowBoy said:
Finally, does the right seatstay have a valve to dispense silicone spray onto the cassette to keep it from packing up with snow? :)
I considered it, but lubing the chain for pure snow riding happens so infrequently that it just didn't seem worthwhile. I rode 700+ miles on this trip, much of it on sanded, icy roads, and still had no need to relube when I was done. Both times I rode the Iditarod I went the full 1100 miles with only one relube, and I don't think I really NEEDED it--I just did it out of habit.

GlowBoy said:
I still have more questions than answers I guess.
Well, let's hear 'em...

MC
 

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
15,681 Posts
Discussion Starter #29
bikecop said:
Are the schrader fittings on top of the fork legs to pressurize the fuel to the stove?
looks like they hit the down tube as there is a big bump pad there.
there's a fitting on the down tube too.
Yes, to pressurize the fuel cells. This will change this summer, but the bump pad won't. The fork crown is so wide and the fork is also non-sus corrected (standover in soft snow was way more important) that the crown will always hit the DT.


bikecop said:
and what's with the white tape on the fork and seat stays? reflective for visibility or rub strip or maybe some sort of snow shedding trick?
Reflective.


bikecop said:
and your stem looks kinda funky. can't really see it, but is that your light mount on the bottom side?
and your bar-ends look suspiciously fat. are you storing stuff in there?...batteries for the lights or are those the lights?
Stem has velcro tape underneath to help stabilize the bar pack. Good eyes. Bar ends are fat because more surface area equals less pressure on hands. More comfy.


bikecop said:
On a more general note...if you getting into Long Slow Distance, are you hinting about some sort of super ultra mega endurance outing coming up? Alaska to Patagonia maybe? circumnavigate the US coast on the beaches? I'm sure it will be fun and well documented, whatever it is.
The Alaska part is right, but it's only a small part of it.

MC
 

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
15,681 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
Nonracerrichie said:
Do I see H2O cage braze ons on the back of the fork legs?

Building the whole rig and trailer on center should make the design of the trailer and its pivots simpler to keep the thing balanced and turning geometry easier to calculate.

Yes, there are bottle bosses on both fork legs. Each cage (King Iris) holds a stainless thermos, so that I can have two hot meals during the day (helps to keep my core temp up) without having to stop and cook.

The on-center thing seems to be throwing people. Perhaps I should have written it differently. The wheels are not offset. Ring any bells?

MC
 

Attachments

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
15,681 Posts
Discussion Starter #31
Soloracer said:
As you can see, I could not resist the great deal on the snowbike, so here is a picture from my first ride this morning.
Congrats on the score. For god's sake man, RUN (don't walk) down to your nearest LBS and order a pair of Nokian 3.0 Gazzaloddi's. Much more control, much more traction, much less fighting the bike. Oh, and they'll last a season or three, where the Remolino's are good for ~800 miles.

MC
 

·
Most Delicious
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
mikesee said:
The on-center thing seems to be throwing people. Perhaps I should have written it differently. The wheels are not offset. Ring any bells?

MC
150 hubs build dishless, don't they? So you get equal spoke length, as previously mentioned, and you also don't have to use a spacer in the truing stand like you do with the offset Pugsley wheels.
 

·
Compulsive Bike Builder
Joined
·
1,512 Posts
Thinking out loud

"The on-center thing seems to be throwing people. Perhaps I should have written it differently. The wheels are not offset. Ring any bells?"

Yes, it is throwing me. The wheels are not offset, spoke lengths are the same, flange heights all look pretty similar, rear hubs are used all the way around, 150mm, and you have a good chainline.

The Pugsley and Fatbike "emulate" a 170mm wide hub by using a 135mm hub and offsetting the frame 17.5mm on the non drive side, plus the fork is offset. See the Pugs here:



By going with a 150mm hub, you could move the non drive stay out another 15mm compared to a 135mm hub, and would only need 10mm offset in the frame. If you could get drivetrain clearance with something less than a 148mm bb spindle, perhaps you could reduce the offset further, perhaps to the point where frame offset would not be necessary. This kind of thing makes my brain hurt, but it is fun.

Your stays and fork look pretty symmetric in the pics, but are they? Is there any offset in the frame or fork? How about some head on pics of the rear stays and the fork.
 

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
15,681 Posts
Discussion Starter #36
DirtDad said:
Yes, it is throwing me. The wheels are not offset, spoke lengths are the same, flange heights all look pretty similar, rear hubs are used all the way around, 150mm, and you have a good chainline.

The Pugsley and Fatbike "emulate" a 170mm wide hub by using a 135mm hub and offsetting the frame 17.5mm on the non drive side, plus the fork is offset. By going with a 150mm hub, you could move the non drive stay out another 15mm compared to a 135mm hub, and would only need 10mm offset in the frame. If you could get drivetrain clearance with something less than a 148mm bb spindle, perhaps you could reduce the offset further, perhaps to the point where frame offset would not be necessary. This kind of thing makes my brain hurt, but it is fun. Your stays and fork look pretty symmetric in the pics, but are they? Is there any offset in the frame or fork? How about some head on pics of the rear stays and the fork.
If I wasn't in the middle of refinishing wood floors (sanity break at the moment) I'd go out and take those pics. But there's really no need--everything is symmetrical. No offset anywhere. There is a SMALL catch--the 135mm BB that I'm using gives me chain/tire rub in small ring/big cog. I've already contacted Brent at PW and he's gonna swap my 135 BB for a 140. That should solve that.

So the combo of all the above mentioned factors adds up to a good chainline, no offset wheels, no offset frame or fork, no silly ISIS BB, and no E-type front der. I'm using a 20 x 29 up front, with a 12/34 out back.

Make more sense?

MC
 

·
This place needs an enema
Joined
·
15,681 Posts
Discussion Starter #37
dr.welby said:
150 hubs build dishless, don't they? So you get equal spoke length, as previously mentioned, and you also don't have to use a spacer in the truing stand like you do with the offset Pugsley wheels.
Yessir.
 

·
Compulsive Bike Builder
Joined
·
1,512 Posts
Puzzled

mikesee said:
Everything is symmetrical. No offset anywhere...gonna swap my 135 BB for a 140.

So the combo of all the above mentioned factors adds up to a good chainline, no offset wheels, no offset frame or fork, no silly ISIS BB, and no E-type front der. I'm using a 20 x 29 up front, with a 12/34 out back.

Make more sense?

MC
So this then is the puzzle. I am missing something. If you build the wheels as described, they would look something like this, schematically (I did this in like 2 minutes in Word, so feel free to flame away):



Mounted on a symmetric bike, it would look like this:


(that is actually the opposite, a centered wheel mounted in an offset frame, but the effect would be the same).

You must counter this somehow to get everything centered again. And you do not do it with the frame/fork itself. Is it some kind of cleverness with the Maxle? Are the mounts for moved over to recenter things? Does not look like it in the pics.

Is it the coriolis force? Can you ride the bike in the southern hemishere, or do you need to turn the left to go straight? Do you take advantage of the magnetic pole, and that is why you like to ride in Alaska? Do the spokes protrude 1 inch into the rim just for the sake of being the same length? Do you use alien technology or hyperspace travel?
 

·
giddy up!
Joined
·
3,249 Posts
DirtDad said:
So this then is the puzzle. I am missing something. If you build the wheels as described, they would look something like this, schematically (I did this in like 2 minutes in Word, so feel free to flame away):



Mounted on a symmetric bike, it would look like this:


(that is actually the opposite, a centered wheel mounted in an offset frame, but the effect would be the same).

You must counter this somehow to get everything centered again. And you do not do it with the frame/fork itself. Is it some kind of cleverness with the Maxle? Are the mounts for moved over to recenter things? Does not look like it in the pics.

Is it the coriolis force? Can you ride the bike in the southern hemishere, or do you need to turn the left to go straight? Do you take advantage of the magnetic pole, and that is why you like to ride in Alaska? Do the spokes protrude 1 inch into the rim just for the sake of being the same length? Do you use alien technology or hyperspace travel?

I think what Mike is saying is that he's using a 150mm hub in order to build a wheel with no dish. The flange spacing is the same on the drive and non-drive, hence the matching spoke lengths.

Then, to compensate for the wider hub he's using a super long spindle. This also helps in the chain/tire clearance department.

That scenario makes sense to me....unless I'm missing something here...

Mike?

B
 

·
Powered by ice cream.
Joined
·
6,355 Posts
Mike:

Is a longer stem an advantage on a snowbike....tiller effect so to speak? Slows down inputs and decreases feedback from the trail.
 
21 - 40 of 118 Posts
Top