# The School Bus got some New Wheels!



## Blue Bird (Jul 21, 2011)

I took up road biking about a year ago while recovering from ACL reconstruction. I had been a mountain biker before, but the risk of falling was too great until my graft healed. I first bought a POS Walmart "GMC Denali" road bike to ride until I healed, but I quickly learned to love road riding and decided that a full aluminum road bike weighing 32 lbs (!!!) was not suitable. I talked to friends, did some research and measuring, and picked up a carbon/ultegra "Botteccia-USA" ebay bike. 

It has been great, I have done a few centuries, hit about 3-4 30+ mile rides per week, and even did the legendary "Dirty Dozen":










However, a few things have bothered me about that frame. It was a little small for me (5'9", 53cm frame), it had big toe overlap, my knees could strike the drops, and it was too flexy, especially when standing. This was my chief complaint, but I am an atypical cyclist. 

I am 5'9", weigh about 195 lbs with 12% bf, and have a broad build hence the Blue Bird nickname from my MTB friends. I have USELESSLY strong legs; I can snap chains, pull wheelies, and spin the rear tire if I move too far forward while standing. I got pretty tired of watching my BB swing back and forth like a pendulum...and listening to my chain rub on the side of the big ring. Of course, in an all out sprint, I can blow through my threshold in no time...so they aren't all that useful for sustained efforts. And with all that meat swinging around, it is pretty tough to maintain more than an 80-85 cadence. I am getting better, but I still feel most comfortable just under 80 RPM.

I wanted a frame that was STIFF and aero as possible. I didn't care as much about ride or weight. A lot of research and led me down an odd path; I am trying out a TT frame (ebay FM020) with normal drop bars. For a TT frame, it is pretty slack. It has a 75.5 seat tube angle and a 73 degree head tube. My previous road bike frame has a 74 deg seat and a 72 degree head tube. The new frame also has a low-offset fork, so it is within 1mm of the trail of my old road bike frame and handles very similarly. It also has a similar seat-tube length and a 21mm longer top tube, giving me a little stretch out room. 

The only problem is the head tube. It is VERY short (90mm) and I am still adjusting to the new lowered position, even with 40mm of spacers under the bars. I have not had any hand/wrist/back/neck/"undercarriage" pain with the new position, but it is still an adjustment.

The new frame even rides pretty well...I think it actually rides better over small road grain and imperfections, but worse over the big stuff. The frame is rock-solid stiff, especially when standing on a climb. It takes a great set through corners and the added stiffness is a huge plus. I can honestly feel the aero advantage on the flats, but I am sure the lower position is a big part of that.

I am still adjusting to the seat tube angle. It is less than optimal for seated climbing at 75.5 degrees, but I find that sliding back in the saddle and grabbing the cross tube of the bars helps to give me leverage similar to the old frame. Riding on flatter terrain is awesome. The frame geometry has gotten my thighs away from my chest and really let me hammer.

I am still not sure if I am going to stick with this frame or try something else. I wish the chinese made road frames this stiff!

Some pics:


























The flex-free zone:


----------



## karallam (Jun 24, 2011)

that thing looks pretty sick


----------



## anotherguy (Dec 9, 2010)

Blue Bird said:


> with all that meat swinging around, it is pretty tough to maintain more than an 80-85 cadence.


I've found that taping it to the tob tube helps keep it out of the cranks.


----------



## tippyshooter (Jun 11, 2011)

man, im lovin that. what was your total build cost?


----------



## HazemBata (May 20, 2004)

Nice. Love the large weave in the carbon.


----------



## Blue Bird (Jul 21, 2011)

tippyshooter said:


> man, im lovin that. what was your total build cost?


The wheels/tires (random website), bars (bonktown), saddle (Pricepoint), and gruppo were all carried over from the Bottecchia. Including the new frame, what you see is about $1,850.


----------



## seemana (Jul 1, 2009)

anotherguy said:


> I've found that taping it to the tob tube helps keep it out of the cranks.



nice. :thumbsup:


like the bike too. it looks good.


----------



## tfinator (Nov 4, 2009)

you should enjoy the vuelta corsas SLs. i have the lites on my bike. They have about 4000 miles and about 400 bunny hops and i haven't trued them yet!
that is a very space-age looking bike!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

You know that stem has an up-angled position. 

Bad-ass looking bike.


----------



## Offline (Jun 20, 2011)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Bad-ass looking bike.


+1 that looks awesome

i'm built very similar and have similar problems with my trek.. I'm hoping to upgrade to something more suitable here soon as well... great inspiration

I was stuck at 75 rpm for a while too, until I made a concious decision to figure out how to spin 90+ one thing I did that helped was intentionally run higher gears and didn't worry about my speed, working on holding 90+ for as long as I could (especially on descents, i'd spin up to 120 if i could before shifting) 

now im very comfortable anywhere 80-95 tho I tend to hold 85 the best


----------



## minutemaidman (Jun 14, 2010)

With your power I would be worried about the fork/stem/bar interface. Im not sure that all those spacers and your setup is going to up to the task long term. Looks cool (other than the spacers) though. Good job.


----------



## wibly wobly (Apr 23, 2009)

I agree about the stem / fork height. I'd get a new stem that'll bring your bars up then that flat one is. Then you can lower the stem down while maintaining the same height. Riding with that many spacers is iffy and if you're torquing like you say you are, you might snap off the top of the fork. I know for sure one of the local frame makers here has specific limits to how high you can stack those spacers. I imagine so does everyone else.


----------



## Blue Bird (Jul 21, 2011)

This fork did not have any specific limit on height, but some research lead me to find that some forks recommend up to 25mm, some up to 40mm...so I went with 40mm. I realize it is not optimal; like I said this is the one part of the build I am unhappy with. I can notice some flex when I really crank, but it is surprisingly less than I expected and there has been no sign of impending death.

The bars are integrated Shimano PRO Stealth Evos. They retail for something insane like $800, but I picked them up on Bonktown for $190. The stem cannot be flipped, obviously...and I love them too much to part with them.

The thing about a flipped stem is that it would have the same effect as more spacers. If you think about the geometry, the critical dimension is the distance from where the torque is applied to the top bearing. I am not sure if it is one-for-one, but the shorter stack of spacers would be offset by the increased leverage from the bar to the stem/steerer connection. It would look better aesthetically, but it may not be any less risky. (I am not trying to be a jerk, I am an engineer and this is something I considered and ultimately dismissed.)


----------



## minutemaidman (Jun 14, 2010)

Thats only 40mm. Oh. My bad. Im not an engineer, sorry. But, I would have the top of that fork snapped off in about a week.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Blue Bird said:


> The bars are integrated Shimano PRO Stealth Evos. They retail for something insane like $800, but I picked them up on Bonktown for $190. The stem cannot be flipped, obviously...and I love them too much to part with them.
> 
> The thing about a flipped stem is that it would have the same effect as more spacers. If you think about the geometry, the critical dimension is the distance from where the torque is applied to the top bearing. I am not sure if it is one-for-one, but the shorter stack of spacers would be offset by the increased leverage from the bar to the stem/steerer connection. It would look better aesthetically, but it may not be any less risky. (I am not trying to be a jerk, I am an engineer and this is something I considered and ultimately dismissed.)


I wasn't suggesting flipping the stem to reduce stress on the bike, but to reduce stress on your body. I missed that it's integrated, though. Sometimes the things we love hurt us. :wink5:


----------



## jr59 (Mar 30, 2011)

Good looking bike!
I hope it works for you. 
If it does then GREAT!

I would try to learn how to ride a bike, before I spent any more money.
Learn how to spin the cranks and not use so much torque. Your strong legs are not useless,
they are just not being used to their greatest advantage. 
Without seeing you on the bike, I can't speak as to your position on it.
I would guess that it could be improved, but who am I to say.


Glad you like your new whip.
It does look good. But there again,
I would rather have something that allowed me to ride in comfort,
mile after mile, after mile, rather than look good and be cheap off of flea bay.

All of the above is of course IMO!

Good luck


----------



## BostonG (Apr 13, 2010)

That bike looks like it was built on the planet Mercury.


----------



## rward325 (Sep 22, 2008)

Blue Bird said:


> I wish the chinese made road frames this stiff


You do realize this bike IS made in China right?


----------



## Blue Bird (Jul 21, 2011)

I know it is made in china. I meant I wish the chinese made a road bike frame as stiff as they made this TT frame. The power transfer is incredible.


----------



## meko3 (May 20, 2012)

blue bird,
I really like your bike and am in fact considering this very frame. a little surprised that this "diva" looking frame seems to be so tough after all. do you still ride it / like it? what frame size is this one of yours? who sold you the frame? have you had any problems with the fork/stem/headtube thing so far? I looked up some of your posts and it seems you upgraded the stem and spacer setup- how did it turn out?

thanks so much!


----------



## Blue Bird (Jul 21, 2011)

meko,

I got the from from carbon_bicycle on ebay. It is a size L. I probably have 5k miles on it now, and I still love the stiffness, but there are a few things I don't like. The ride is stiff, but that is to be expected with a frame like this. The main downside is the short headtube. I have the maximum safe amount of spacers on it now, along with a 12°+ stem, and the bars are just high enough to be comfortable...I still have a 3.5" seat to handlebar drop. If you are used to little to no drop, you will not be able to get comfortable on it. I am content with it as it is now, here is a current photo:


----------



## meko3 (May 20, 2012)

thanks for the reply! I see- the headtube seems to be the same length regardless of frame size with this model. 50mm more would be nice. The "large" size is 55.6cm top tube I suppose. I am used to a lot of drop and I like it, but I am 6'4" and this frame might just be a little on the small side. does this baby take some abuse, I mean a little rough street from time to time or would you consider it too delicate? It seems you are really riding it hard. thanks for the help,

meko


----------



## Blue Bird (Jul 21, 2011)

I think the frame will be too small for you, sorry. Your seat will be much higher - I am only 5'8", but the bars will be at the same height, max. The frame is NOT delicate, it is really tough!


----------



## smoothie7 (Apr 11, 2011)

that looks like a beefy frame with a beautiful carbon weave.


----------



## OldZaskar (Jul 1, 2009)

That carbon weave looks more like a graphic (decal) under the clear coat. Very cool looking frame.

Side note: I'm surprised more manufacturers don't skip the paint and just clear the frames. In other categories - like cars - the carbon look is so sought after, they'll actually fake it, e.g. fiberglass hood with a carbon fiber decal. I wonder how many grams they'd save if they skipped the paint. ;-)


----------



## Pirx (Aug 9, 2009)

Blue Bird said:


> I have USELESSLY strong legs; I can snap chains, pull wheelies, and spin the rear tire if I move too far forward while standing.


Just as an aside: No, you cannot "snap chains" unless (a) something is wrong with the chain, or (b) you're doing some really nasty shift under load. There's track cycling monsters out there that are almost certainly _a lot_ stronger than you, and they don't snap their chains, either.

Here is Robert Förstemann, 5'8", 198lbs:
View attachment 257657


Close-up 
View attachment 257658


----------

