Post images of beauty (quote pics sparingly) - see Mod warnings in OP

Beasty · 12-12-2009 12:55am

Just picked up this today:

blorg · 12-12-2009 1:12am

Very nice Beasty. I'd consider changing the brake lever though to something a bit more practical, not sure the TT lever in a drop bar end is a great idea from anything I have read. If you do want to get rid of it I will buy it off you or indeed do swapsies for a drop bar lever.

Beasty · 12-12-2009 1:23am

blorg wrote: »

Very nice Beasty. I'd consider changing the brake lever though to something a bit more practical, not sure the TT lever in a drop bar end is a great idea from anything I have read. If you do want to get rid of it I will buy it off you or indeed do swapsies for a drop bar lever.

Cheers blorg - that's how it came (and how it's set-up in the brochure). I was slightly unsure when I saw it, but would like to give it a go before committing one way or the other.

Greyspoke · 12-12-2009 5:57pm

Very sweet Beasty!. Looks like quite a big gear - what size is it? (the gear that is)

DirkVoodoo · 12-12-2009 7:08pm

48-16

Beasty · 12-12-2009 7:13pm

Greyspoke wrote: »

Very sweet Beasty!. Looks like quite a big gear - what size is it? (the gear that is)

48:16
Thinking of switching the sprocket to an 18, at least until I have sussed out if I can cope with the relatively hilly commute from North County (your WW200 exploits certainly put me to shame:))

Full specs are here

Greyspoke · 12-12-2009 9:28pm

Dirk, how did you know it was 48-16? Did you count the teeth from the pic??
81" is certainly plenty big enough for any spin that includes hills.
Incidentally, as I was driving home after an mtb spin today I passed a guy on a fixie (I assume) fighting his way up the hill to Kindlestown forest (near Delgany). The only thing I really noticed was that the bike was blue - I was wondering was it anyone from on here?

abcdggs · 12-12-2009 9:42pm

Greyspoke wrote: »

Dirk, how did you know it was 48-16? Did you count the teeth from the pic??

it's in the specs linked above

DirkVoodoo · 13-12-2009 2:20am

Greyspoke wrote: »

Dirk, how did you know it was 48-16? Did you count the teeth from the pic??
81" is certainly plenty big enough for any spin that includes hills.
Incidentally, as I was driving home after an mtb spin today I passed a guy on a fixie (I assume) fighting his way up the hill to Kindlestown forest (near Delgany). The only thing I really noticed was that the bike was blue - I was wondering was it anyone from on here?

Googled the name on the top tube

blorg · 13-12-2009 9:58pm

Got some new wheels for my winter bike to save the good ones for summer. Out on them today for the first time, they seem very nice.

Raam · 13-12-2009 10:00pm

@Blorg: full bike pic please

blorg · 13-12-2009 10:11pm

Raam wrote: »

@Blorg: full bike pic please

Fair enough, I've added one in

Previously I had the R-SYS on it but they ended up being shredded through contact with a club-mate's bottom. Hopefully will be fixable.

Raam · 13-12-2009 10:19pm

blorg wrote: »

Fair enough, I've added one in Previously I had the R-SYS on it but they ended up being shredded through contact with a club-mate's bottom. Hopefully will be fixable.

You give with one hand, and take with the other.

blorg · 14-12-2009 1:47pm

New cross bike, a Kinesis Evo 3 with the groupset and finishing kit taken from Lumen's old Focus Mares. Built up by Mr Skeffington who did a great job on it. Took it out for a few laps of the Phoenix Park, it seems to go very well indeed. Not far off my road bike on the tarmac.

Lumen · 14-12-2009 2:28pm

Very tasty! Not my old crankset though, assume you sourced from elsewhere.

hinault · 14-12-2009 2:33pm

blorg wrote: »

Fair enough, I've added one in Previously I had the R-SYS on it but they ended up being shredded through contact with a club-mate's bottom. Hopefully will be fixable.

nice one.

Although the sloping top tube takes a little away from it, IMO.
Nice machine nonetheless.

hinault · 14-12-2009 2:50pm

here is my own humble offering

I have her 13 years now

crashoveroid · 14-12-2009 3:03pm

hinault wrote: »

here is my own humble offering

I have her 13 years now

Now that's value for Money.

hinault · 14-12-2009 3:08pm

crashoveroid wrote: »

Now that's value for Money.

She's a lovely machine to pedal (I only do touring events like the W200, these days) but she's robust too.

Pinarello Treviso gets a lot of attention from other cyclists.
Perhaps she has just aged well!

blorg · 14-12-2009 3:38pm

Lumen wrote: »

Very tasty! Not my old crankset though, assume you sourced from elsewhere.

No, I reckoned 170 would be too short as all my other bikes are 175. I had got that compact for my Litespeed to do the Marmotte but will be putting the standard crankset back on that now. Have a compact on the Planet X so this one was sort of spare.

I reckon the 90mm stem is also too short for me, will be looking to replace that with 110mm.

Home:Ballyhoura · 14-12-2009 6:47pm

@blorg: Saddle seems to be set way back on the rails! Anyway, got any more pictures of your stable of bikes? How many have you got at this stage? I'm up to 4 now but would love to show off pictures of people with more than me just to show I am not that mad! Cheers

Lumen · 14-12-2009 7:05pm

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

@blorg: Saddle seems to be set way back on the rails! Anyway, got any more pictures of your stable of bikes? How many have you got at this stage?

Bikes are to Blorg as cocktail waitresses are to Tiger Woods.

blorg · 15-12-2009 11:40am

Home:Ballyhoura wrote: »

@blorg: Saddle seems to be set way back on the rails! Anyway, got any more pictures of your stable of bikes? How many have you got at this stage? I'm up to 4 now but would love to show off pictures of people with more than me just to show I am not that mad! Cheers

Yes the saddle was far too far back, I was trying to compensate for the short stem. I had a bit of lower back pain on its first outing. I've put the saddle forward around 30mm now to more like my normal position (it does feel better) and ordered a 120mm stem (that one is 90mm.) Half concerned now though that 120mm will be too long... I think I would need 130mm to have the same saddle-bar reach as on my road bike but wonder if reach should be shorter on a cross bike?

How many bikes? Under 10. For now.

Lumen · 15-12-2009 11:54am

blorg wrote: »

wonder if reach should be shorter on a cross bike?

My 2c...

I think it depends on the handlebar drop. If you're running the same drop, shortening the reach may make you feel cramped, since back and/or arms will have to bend more (bad). Higher bars with shorter reach will rotate you back around the bottom bracket leaving your hands, feet and arse the same relative to each other (good).

blorg · 15-12-2009 12:19pm

Lumen wrote: »

My 2c...

I think it depends on the handlebar drop. If you're running the same drop, shortening the reach may make you feel cramped, since back and/or arms will have to bend more (bad). Higher bars with shorter reach will rotate you back around the bottom bracket leaving your hands, feet and arse the same relative to each other (good).

I have the bars significantly higher (stem angled up) with less drop but was trying to keep the distance between the saddle and the bars more or less the same... With a 120mm stem I reckon I will have the bars 10mm closer than on the road bike.

I have the bars high up on my Tricross commuter but I still have the saddle-bar distance roughly the same and that seems to work OK. As I say I put the saddle forward today and the bike felt better even with the 90mm stem, a little cramped maybe but 120mm just feels like a lot. Most of my other stems are 110mm... although the nominal size on the cross bike (57cm) is 1cm smaller than my other bikes which tend to be 58cm.

I guess I will see when the stem arrives, could always borrow a 110mm off another bike to give that a go either.

blorg · 16-12-2009 8:41pm

velo.2010 wrote: »

@Blorg, a pair of Sheena's for £450 as winter wheels! Incroyable.

Thats more than I spent on a decent summer pair. Though I did pick up a bargain.

I got them for £250, even I would not be spending £450 on winter wheels

Murph100 · 16-12-2009 10:25pm

Hey Blorg,

Just curious about how you find the 170mm cranks versus the 175, especially on the hills.

I'm getting a whole new groupset but am a lil' bit held up on crank length, although I'm using 172.5 at the mo, all the various sources suggest I should be on 175. I've a 35" inseam.

Raam · 16-12-2009 10:29pm

Murph100 wrote: »

Hey Blorg,

Just curious about how you find the 170mm cranks versus the 175, especially on the hills.

I'm getting a whole new groupset but am a lil' bit held up on crank length, although I'm using 172.5 at the mo, all the various sources suggest I should be on 175. I've a 35" inseam.

My inseam is about 36.5". 175 all the way for me. I have ridden a bit with 170 and I find I can't get into my groove as well.

Murph100 · 16-12-2009 10:52pm

Holy crap ..... 36.5" !!! Yeah I think I might give the 175 a go and switch to a standard ..... and walking up hills with blown knees

I think I could well be a contender for Campys wimpy 12-29.

Raam wrote: »

My inseam is about 36.5". 175 all the way for me. I have ridden a bit with 170 and I find I can't get into my groove as well.

blorg · 16-12-2009 11:46pm

Murph100 wrote: »

Hey Blorg,

Just curious about how you find the 170mm cranks versus the 175, especially on the hills.

I'm getting a whole new groupset but am a lil' bit held up on crank length, although I'm using 172.5 at the mo, all the various sources suggest I should be on 175. I've a 35" inseam.

I've never used anything except 175; I sold the 170 crankset before I built the bike up and replaced with 175s. My inseam is only 33.75", I might get on with 172.5" but I am just used to 175.

Post images of beauty (quote pics sparingly) - see Mod warnings in OP

Comments