[EasyRider]

@Dewey 200806 wrote:

Lighter ebikes

This week ebike forums have been abuzz with chatter about the Specialized Turbo Vado SL, a lighter fitness/commuter/road ebike with a Class 3 speed pedelec mid-drive motor and smaller batteries. ebikes are not known for lightness and those are typically more expensive models such as the Specialized Turbo Creo SL or boutique brands like Desiknio, Coboc, etc. Less expensive lighter ebike models have removed weight by using less powerful Class 1 motors (eg Propella), or fragile all-in-one hub motors, or have been decontented, or simply convert light bicycles like BikeFriday’s 20″ folders. The Specialized Turbo Vado SL is an offering from one of the big three sold in bike shops that brings technology from the pricier Turbo Creo models such as a through-axle carbon fork, ‘future shock’ suspension headset on the more expensive 5.0, and a motor/internal battery setup that adds 10lb. Mail order competitors using the Bafang M800 mid-drive will appear over the summer.

In other news, from September DC based ebike brand Riide will offer a regular heavier 2nd generation Class 3 single speed model under their lease-to-own scheme.

28mph. Sounds really practical.

[EasyRider]

Looks fine to me. You’re not going to be looking at your stem angle while riding, and neither will anybody else. As long as it makes you want to ride it more, and you don’t feel like you’ve unweighted the front end, go for it!

“Aesthetics” are subjective. My own two cents is that whatever you decide, consider a polished stem and spacers, to match those lugs and headset. I think it’d look a little more cohesive than the satin finish there now.

[EasyRider]

OP, whatcha gonna do? Fit the bike to your body? Or fit your body to a bike set up for racing 18mph+ on an open course?

[EasyRider]

@ImaCynic 199036 wrote:

Since the bike is actually not that much bigger, having the stem so elevated can throw off proper positioning. One way to “shrink” a frame is to increase one’s back angle, but this would result in a awkward hand position with how high the stem is. This is why stem height should be part of fitting process. Besides, if asthetics is in the equation, that stack of spacers is a definite no go.

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk

I get your point, but I think “proper position” is a relative term in this case, which seems to be about jrenaut finding a comfortable fit, not a performance one. The stem and bars are several inches below the saddle already, and there’s a lot of seatpost showing, which is not usually a sign of a too-big bike. It looks to me like the bike is already set up for a performance-oriented fit, but it isn’t comfortable that way.

[EasyRider]

@ImaCynic 199022 wrote:

It’s much harder to make a larger frame fit than one that is smaller, unfortunately.

But here we go:

Here’s a bar with very short reach and shallow drop:
https://www.jensonusa.com/3T-Ernova-Road-Alloy-Handlebar

combined with a short (60mm) stem like this:
https://www.jensonusa.com/Whisky-No7-6D-Stem

you might be able to pull back over an inch of reach. Changing seat position can cause all sorts of issues with you knees, so be really careful about that. Also, I noticed a rather large number of spacers between the headtube and the stem, this can have the effect of making the matter worse. You might want to play with that to see how it affects the fit. There is no shame in stacking these on top of the stem for now so you don’t have to cut anything.

I think swapping the spacers from under the stem to over it wonÂ’t give you joy. It will lower your bars, and I think too-low bars is actually the main problem here, given how much lower your bars are than your saddle in the picture.

Removing spacers under the bar and using a shorter stem will to some degree cancel each other out. ThatÂ’s because as a bikeÂ’s stem and handlebars are raised, they also get closer to the rider. As they are lowered, they also get farther away. Picture looking at the bike from the side, as the stem and handlebars move up and down an imaginary diagonal line through the head tube.

[EasyRider]

@TwoWheelsDC 198997 wrote:

I’ve generally run 90 stems on all my bikes, but they definitely can be way shorter. About the shortest you’ll find without getting into more specialty stuff is 60mm. And 0 degree would point “up”, but you could compromise and get something like a -6 degree? Looks like yours is a -15ish?

Also, your saddle looks decently slanted…how’s that affecting things? Could be forcing you into a position where you’re putting additional pressure on your arms/hands, but if it works for you, then obviously go with that.

I think this is good advice, a shorter stem that will let you get the bars higher and closer you. I think thatÂ’s what saddle and lever tilt youÂ’ve tried already are getting at. IÂ’m no fitter, but given the amount of seat post showing in your picture, I wouldnÂ’t have guessed the frame is too big for you. IÂ’d have guessed the handlebars are too low for comfort.

Also, thatÂ’s cool frame!

[EasyRider]

@jrenaut 198981 wrote:

Yeah, I took the tape off to replace the brake cable and housing and am waiting to replace it. Luckily it’s still winter glove season so not a big deal.

I’m sure bullhorns are fine, I just really don’t like the style.

How would you feel about a city bar like the Cinelli Priest, with a little bit of rise and sweep? Modern versions like the Ahearne MAP and VO Milan bar are frequently used in place of drops for single speeds and fixed gears. They look very classy (IMO) and not out of place with chrome lugs like a bullhorn would (again, IMO) and would likely solve the problem of a top tube that is a bit longer than you’d like. They look good with a single brake lever so no dummy lever required for a balanced look like with drops. A flat bar and a brake lever won’t cost more than a new drop bar or new drop levers.

If you’re committed to drops I’d say get a shorter stem. The one in the picture looks like it’s 9 or 10cm? Maybe get a cheapo 7 or 8cm one and if see if that helps. I know some people don’t like the look of short stems and if that’s you, I’d say go for the city bars.

[EasyRider]

@jrenaut 198924 wrote:

Problem is this is my pretty nice day bike. I don’t mind if the bars on my daily rider are a little goofy, but this bike has a higher bar for aesthetics. So I’m trying to balance everything.

It sounds like from what you’re saying, though, that I need bigger hands. I’ll get on that.

I’m not sure which way you want to slide the levers. Down lower, so that they are easier to reach when your hands are in the drops? Or up higher toward the ramps, for riding on the hoods?

If you want to move them lower, you could consider replacing the levers with ones designed for smaller hands. For example, the Cane Creek SCR-5 comes in (or came in) regular and compact versions. I think the TRP RRLs are pretty easy to reach from the drops and my hands are normal-sized. They are easier for me to reach than were Shimano Tiagras.

If you want to move the levers higher on the ramp, maybe it’s the overall reach of your setup that is bothering you, and a shorter stem or raising your handlebars a bit would make the existing brake levers and placement more accessible. I use a compact bar and short stem myself.

[EasyRider]

@Steve O 198838 wrote:

Bollard Busters were represented by me, Pablo and Mr. Happy Onabike

[ATTACH=CONFIG]21329[/ATTACH]
#FS2020soupyride
[ATTACH=CONFIG]21330[/ATTACH]

I’m sorry I missed this. I got stuck at work and didn’t pass through Clarendon until 7:30, at which point I just headed for home. Another time

[EasyRider]

@Steve O 198753 wrote:

Hello Bollard Busters,
Time for a team get together. Pablo told me this morning that Thursday works for him, so Thursday, Feb. 27 it is.

District Trivia will be at Bar Bao in Clarendon, revving up their trivialities at 7pm. We shall gather before that, whenever you can make it. I will shoot for 6-6:15.

Even if you can’t stay for trivia, at least stop in for a bit. Hope to see you there!

Sounds good, I’ll stop in for a beer with the team on the way home from work.

[EasyRider]

@Pablo 197293 wrote:

So around 7:30ish?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oops, missed this one. I’ll try for next Wednesday

[EasyRider]

Hi I’m Pete, and I like to ride my bike every day. This is my second year of FS. Most of my riding is commuting, often towing a 6-year old to school in a Weehoo on the way to work. I also have a 9-month old, but hope to participate in group rides when I can. I recognize Judd and Steve O from DRT events, but I don’t think I’ve actually met either of you or the other team members in person. Looking forward to it!

[EasyRider]

@jrenaut 196594 wrote:

This is the most reasonable discussion of lights on a trail I’ve ever seen anywhere.

Indeed, let’s keep it up. Here’s a situation i can imagine using blinky mode on a headlight.

A few weeks ago I was following another cyclist on N. Irving towards 50, maybe a block or two behind. They were using a white/headlight as a rear light; I guess either their red light died and they had an extra headlight, or they didn’t know better. Anyway, once I convinced my brain that the cyclist wasn’t approaching me, I noticed that their steady white rear light looked a lot like a distant streetlights (we were going downhill too.) In the dark, I could see a driver thinking it was streetlight and not realizing it wasn’t until they were right on top of the cyclist. So if one must put a headlight on the rear, maybe aim it down and only then, put it on blinky mode.

[EasyRider]

@buschwacker 196570 wrote:

My plan is to start blinking with the first mixing portion, dismount and switch to fade for the trail portion, and dismount to switch back to blinking for the final mixing portion. And research remote-controlled bike lights

I did this for awhile, now I use a combination of lights. For a steady mode, I like the battery powered B&M Toplight. It bolts to a rear rack and runs on one AA battery. I find that the battery usually lasts the winter. I never forget it, and it’s not easy to steal. I have a separate clip on blinky that I turn on and off as needed.

After commuting here for almost 20 years, I’ve decided flashing mode is mostly safety theater, at least on powerful headlights. Back before the battery/LED revolution, I think blinky mode on cheapo headlights made riders a little easier to see. Those things were certainly useless for seeing the road ahead. But now I think anything but a steady headlight just serves to dazzle oncoming traffic. I don’t understand the benefit. Why blast oncoming cyclists and pedestrains with flashing light, on a lighted path? It makes things harder for everyone.

I realize people will do what feels safe for them; that’s why people buy enormous cars, because riding high in a big vehicle “feels safe”. But man, those lights really can be blinding.

[EasyRider]

@Jessica Hirschhorn 194495 wrote:

Pink! Pink! Pink!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would also favor pink, or some color other than orange or yellow/green, so that participants can more easily recognize each other.

[Author]

Posts