Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: If Softride is way faster than Cervelo... [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Art, I agree the chainstay could be shortened. However, when it gets TOO short, shifting issues arise, especially those noisy cross-overs becoming worse as the chainstays get shorter. On the other hand, some of the chainring differences may be possible without rubbing interference. I know I can't run a 54X39 with about a 40cm chainstay without some rub, but a 54X42 is fine...only thing is, on some hills, I'd sure rather have my 39. Shorter chainstays may stiffen the rear end, but, that may impair ride quality to some degree, and it would affect handling.

So far, we've talked about the issues regarding shorter chainstays as: providing sufficient room to fit the wheel, weight distribution/handling, ride quality/stiffness, and chainline/shifting characteristics. Are there other aspects of chainstay length we're forgetting?



Quid quid latine dictum sit altum videtur
(That which is said in Latin sounds profound)
Quote Reply
Re: If Softride is way faster than Cervelo... [Titan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I've never had any problems with my beam. Also, when it bounces it just means that I'm not pedaling in the right gear. The bike doesn't make any noise except for my Zipp wheels. I was so happy to be riding my Softride up at Placid this year for Ironman. The bike is just amazing. Just one other thing to mention... Jurgen Zack rides a Softride as well as Ryan Bolton when he won Lake Placid Ironman a couple of years ago.
Quote Reply
Re: If Softride is way faster than Cervelo... [Titan] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yes, I have crossover gear problems on my P3, but they are very managable.

I can't add anything to your list of issues with regard to chainstay length. I am afraid the limits of my knowledge are detailed above.
Quote Reply

Prev Next