Any opinions on the Calfee bikes in their tri geometry for long course races? Dan makes a passing remark of not being in favor of their geometry, but I assume if you shop thru the top tube lengths a proper fit could be attained (custom is also available). The bikes are designed around a 76.5 deg seat angle in the large sizes which are as steep as the QRs, Elites, Gurus etc. & head tube lengths compare favorably as well. No bladed tubes, but the tubes aren't fat like OCLV. Just curious...
Triathlon Forum
Login required to started new threads
Login required to post replies
Re: Calfee Tri Opinions [MattinRI]
[ In reply to ]
Hi Matt-
I purchased a used mid-90's Tetra Tri frameset last spring to build into my long-distance rig for IM-Wiscowsin. At 5'9" with a 32" inseam the fit of their 54cm frame was about "perfect". I didn't use any sort of forward seatpost to overcome the slackish (by Dan's standards) seat tube angle, but I did use a zero-offset post and slammed the saddle all the way forwards to compensate a little bit. I say a little bit because for the IM distance and lots of little hills I wanted to be a little bit roadie-ish.
Built it with DA 9spd, Syntace base and clips (Streamliners). The top tube I found relatively long compared to the seat tube...the roadie influence that is part of Dan's geometry gripes I imagine...and had to go with a fairly short & high-rise stem to compensate if I wanted to get my arm-to-torso angles right.
When I was done tweaking I was very happy with the ride quality. Put in lots of miles, including a tour of the Verona loop of the Moo course, and enjoyed the light weight...though it became obvious I needed a bailout 25 or 27 in the rear. Unfortunately, a shoulder injury sidelined me with a month to go and I DNS'd.
I've since stripped the frame and am doing some paint touch-ups before hanging a for sale sign on it. Not because I don't like it, but because I know I want/need the steeper angles for short stuff...which is all I really have time for anymore with 2 kids under 3yrs old in the house. And I wasn't willing to compromise the Calfee's looks with a bent post.
One voice in the crowd...
Carl
Carl Matson
I purchased a used mid-90's Tetra Tri frameset last spring to build into my long-distance rig for IM-Wiscowsin. At 5'9" with a 32" inseam the fit of their 54cm frame was about "perfect". I didn't use any sort of forward seatpost to overcome the slackish (by Dan's standards) seat tube angle, but I did use a zero-offset post and slammed the saddle all the way forwards to compensate a little bit. I say a little bit because for the IM distance and lots of little hills I wanted to be a little bit roadie-ish.
Built it with DA 9spd, Syntace base and clips (Streamliners). The top tube I found relatively long compared to the seat tube...the roadie influence that is part of Dan's geometry gripes I imagine...and had to go with a fairly short & high-rise stem to compensate if I wanted to get my arm-to-torso angles right.
When I was done tweaking I was very happy with the ride quality. Put in lots of miles, including a tour of the Verona loop of the Moo course, and enjoyed the light weight...though it became obvious I needed a bailout 25 or 27 in the rear. Unfortunately, a shoulder injury sidelined me with a month to go and I DNS'd.
I've since stripped the frame and am doing some paint touch-ups before hanging a for sale sign on it. Not because I don't like it, but because I know I want/need the steeper angles for short stuff...which is all I really have time for anymore with 2 kids under 3yrs old in the house. And I wasn't willing to compromise the Calfee's looks with a bent post.
One voice in the crowd...
Carl
Carl Matson
Re: Calfee Tri Opinions [Carl]
[ In reply to ]
The only bike in larger sizes I can find designed around a steeper seat tube angle than the Calfee's 76.5 deg. is a Yaqui (78 deg.). I'm not counting variable geometry bikes like the Softride & Cervelo. The longer top tube isn't too far out of spec., especially if you effectively shorten it with a forward seat position. Just trying to understand the comments regarding the Calfee geometry.
Re: Calfee Tri Opinions [MattinRI]
[ In reply to ]
After a year of researching tri frames I decided comfort was my primary concern in a tri bike and decided to go with Calfee in lieu of other more "aero" frames. I recently built up a 60 luna tri and am very happy with the fit and ride. Calfees are available in any conceivable geometry and their customer service is second to none. If you have questions or concerns about your frame you can email Craig Calfee himself and get answers from the source. Craig will also work with your measurements to ensure that you do not end up with the wrong size. Calfee intentionally makes their tri-bikes with longer top tubes for use with shorter stems for better weight distribution (according to their website). Also note head tube angle as a consideration when looking at frame geometries...
I have a long torso so the top tube dimensions fit perfectly into what my ideal tri-bike dimensions would be. I built the bike with a no setback post and have the saddle slightly forward of neutral. My back is perfectly flat and arm angles slightly obtuse of 90 - but am very well supported over the front end. This seems a very comfortable position for a long race (I'm concentrating on 1/2 ironmans this year gearing towards my first full ironman next year). Add to that the amazing feel of these carbon frames coupled with the light weight for hills and you're in for a treat.
These frames are definitely worth a look for longer races though the more aggressive position this site professes is also possible with a little tweaking...
I have a long torso so the top tube dimensions fit perfectly into what my ideal tri-bike dimensions would be. I built the bike with a no setback post and have the saddle slightly forward of neutral. My back is perfectly flat and arm angles slightly obtuse of 90 - but am very well supported over the front end. This seems a very comfortable position for a long race (I'm concentrating on 1/2 ironmans this year gearing towards my first full ironman next year). Add to that the amazing feel of these carbon frames coupled with the light weight for hills and you're in for a treat.
These frames are definitely worth a look for longer races though the more aggressive position this site professes is also possible with a little tweaking...
Matt, I am 5'9, with a 31" inseam. I just purchased a 54cm Luna Tri. I have 1" of spacers under the Stem, with HED Aero Bars, a Thomson straight post, a Thomson 100mm 5dg stem. Unfortunately I have only ridden it outside once this year, but my initial opinion and or comment is: WOW!! I have ridden some pretty awsome bikes and this is the best ride thus far. The aestetics are also very nice. It takes 6 weeks to get a new frame so if you are in a hurry you should make your choice soon before the season begins. I believe for comfort, carbon is a wonderful material if done correctly, Craig Calfee has figured it out. If you go to the web site calfeedesign.com, they have quite a write up, "white paper" regarding their geometry and material choices.