You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Rael road bike concept 2.0”.
Interesting ideas. I recall those brifters drew a lot of criticism with the initial post, and they seem to be unchanged. Hopefully the clamp would be more significant that current designs use, since they must transfer the full load of the rider’s upper body forces to the bar. The needle-bearing BB is novel, but seems to disregard thrust forces? As is, the crank would act like a facing tool on the BB shell – lots of grinding.
It think the rationale behind the normal pivot positioning of a brake lever is that you want to be able to have some fingers gripping the bar while you operate the lever with other fingers. Seems like you would potentially pinch some fingers with this set up unless they get the geometry worked out.
So, the head tube angle is normal, but it just has a diagonal stem? Seems like having an incremental angle adjustment on the stem would be a good idea as well. I’ve always been baffled as to why stems need to be replaced to adjust angle and reach.
Most stems need to be replaced to adjust reach because it’s something that doesn’t get adjusted very often. Adjustable stems aren’t worth the extra weight and complication for most riders.
This system takes things to the other extreme by not allowing reach to be adjusted independently of bar height. It assumes there’s some perfect proportion for every dimension on the bike, but if you’re say, a long armed sprinter, you’ll never get the right position on this bike.
how much speed