Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Softrides and Tri Geometry
Quote | Reply
In reading this site regularly, I'm finally understanding what Dan and others have written about Tri geometry as opposed to Road geometry. Among other things, as the torso moves forward about the bottom bracket, the wheels on many frames have moved forward also, preserving balance. Now I know why I won't stand and sprint for the county line on my forward-post road frame.

Over the last couple of weeks I've been studying geometry charts from several manufacturers. In terms of where the wheels sit with respect to the bottom bracket, Softrides seem much closer to a road geometry than the tri configuration of a P2K or a Caliente, as examples. What am I missing?
Quote Reply
Re: Softrides and Tri Geometry [flyebaby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I wouldn't really agree. A P2K can be rode in a road or tri position quite easily because it allows a wide range of adjustment. Some of the tri bike manufacturers have painted themselves into a corner IMO by not having a wide range of adjustment on their bikes.

I've never owned a Softride, but from reading their site the bikes also seem to allow a wide range of riding positions. It's explained fairly well on their site http://www.softride.com/positioning.html
Quote Reply
Re: Softrides and Tri Geometry [cerveloguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Cerveloguy, what you say is correct, but I was aiming at something different. Softrides and Cervelos are adjustable - I owned a Rocketwing briefly. My point is about the parts that are NOT adjustable: chainstay and wheel base. What I think I'm seeing is that those aspects on Softride's charts are more similar to road frames than many tri frames, especially as often described on this site.

I'm contemplating a tri frame, after years of using a forward post on a road frame. I'm beginning to believe that certain subtle difficulties I've experienced in that set-up might well be attributable to the resulting balance (or lack thereof) as opposed to the poor skills of the rider.

I have to believe that Softride has figured this difference out, and has accounted for it somehow.
Quote Reply
Re: Softrides and Tri Geometry [flyebaby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I can't answer the Softride part of this question, but the real way to think about the tri position is not the seat moving forward relative to the wheels, but the bottom bracket moving backward. That is what creates the steep seat angle. That is also what allows you to rotate forward and get your front low so you punch a smaller hole through the air.

If you just move the seat forward on a road bike, you will likely get too much weight on the front wheel and compromise handling.

Moving the bottom bracket backward will make the chainstay short relative to road bikes. If the bottom bracket isn't short, it isn't a tri bike. Hope this helps a bit.
Quote Reply
Re: Softrides and Tri Geometry [ajfranke] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Art - that's my point exactly! It's easy to see in some manufacturer's charts, but I just don't see it in Softride's.
Quote Reply
Re: Softrides and Tri Geometry [flyebaby] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
"What am I missing?"

here's what you're missing. you're only looking at the 700c bikes. yes, in this case you're correct. this is why i point out that the road and tri models are basically identical in a variety of sizes. they're the same frames. but only in 700c.

if you look at the 650c models, the softrides really are tri geometries. the smaller-wheeled bikes have shorter head tubes, and the chainstays are 37.5cm to 38cm as opposed to 41.5cm in the 700c-wheeled size.

for those who want a softride for tri bike riding, you ought to more seriously consider the 650c wheel models.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply