Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 2 of 2 Posts

·
TheHeadlessThompsonGunner
Joined
·
523 Posts
CleavesF said:
1) Rake is overrated much like crankarm length.
I don't know which part of that pseudophor is the least apt. But if you had ever a) designed a frame or b) fit a bike, you'd know that neither was even remotely true.
 

·
TheHeadlessThompsonGunner
Joined
·
523 Posts
CleavesF said:
Dude, if your bike shop is fitting you by fork rake... there's something wrong...
When you learned to read, dude, did anyone teach you about parallelism? Thus, rake (your post) : frame design (my post) : : crankarm length (your post) : fit (my post).

CleavesF said:
Honestly, I can't tell the difference between 43 and 45 rake, which I have both. I can tell the difference between 43 and 47, but that's a pretty significant jump analogous to say 165mm to 172.5mm

I would love to hear about rake theories right about now...
I don't understand how you're even forming what you're calling analogies regarding crankarm length and trail. Trail is a product of frame design; rake is a component of this, as is head angle, which is, or can and generally should be, a product of fit. The crank arm length a given rider requires or prefers is a product of a number of factors. I don't know how I could draw an analogy between preferring a given crank arm length* and preferring the fork that was or was not envisioned in the design of my frame.

Not really understanding your point, I don't know what to tell you. (Good for you that you can't tell the difference, maybe?) I certainly can't ply you with "rake theories"; build a few framesets, learn what works and what doesn't, and you'll maybe have a better idea of how the parts add up to a whole. My bicycle handles well because the fork and frame were designed to work together; my knees don't hurt (see below) because I use the proper crankarm length for my height and inseam, typical preferred cadence, particularities in my pedal stroke, cleat position, etc. I didn't really want to conflate front-end parameters and crankarm length under the aegis just of fit issues; I just wanted to suggest that it's a little misleading to say, without qualification, that crankarm length and front-end design are "overrated." I don't think anything that contributes to handling or fit could possibly be "overrated," except maybe in the sense that, like weight, again without qualification, it might make you faster or something...

*flyboy50: I agree, crank arm length can be overrated, especially in the sense that it's treated much too formulaically. I'm your height, and the only way I know what crank arm length I prefer is, having (basically) tried them all (170-180), I ended up using the one that doesn't hurt my knees (175, for whatever reason).
 
1 - 2 of 2 Posts
Top