Fat Tired Track Bikes

[Pilgrim]

I've recently become a fan of 26" wheels, and fat tires. I do most of
my riding on city streets, and between the crumbling asphalt, subway
grates, and street-car tracks, fat tires are almost a necessity. I
don't doubt that skinny wheels roll faster, but I do doubt that they
roll so much faster as to make their tendency to dent rims, and get
flats worth it.

So run fat tires, what's the problem? All the bikes that have
chainstays wide enough to accept fat meats are mountain bike or BMX
style frames which also happen to feature sloping top tubes so you can
put the seat really low since most of the serious pedaling in those
sports is done out of saddle.

I want my top tube flat, and my seat stays tall because I keep my seat
high so that my legs are fully extended when I'm in the saddle. A long
seat post would get me up high, but that combined with the higher BB
of most dirt bikes makes me feel like I'm riding a folding bike.

Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires. Maybe
something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say "Fatties
Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for the lowered
BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?

[Kinky Cowboy]

On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:45:57 -0800 (PST), Pilgrim <jesse@codery.com>
wrote:

>I've recently become a fan of 26" wheels, and fat tires. I do most of
>my riding on city streets, and between the crumbling asphalt, subway
>grates, and street-car tracks, fat tires are almost a necessity. I
>don't doubt that skinny wheels roll faster,

All things being equal, fat tyres are faster up to the point where
their increased aerodynamic drag outweighs their lower rolling
resistance.

>Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires. Maybe
>something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say "Fatties
>Fit Fine".

There are plenty of wide 700c tyres now; I'd at least look at a cyclo
cross frame, some of them will take 700x42s. There are also 700c
hybrids to consider, with more conventional frame shapes than current
MTBs, and of course old school rigid MTBs had horizontal top tubes.

You don't say what you want it for, besides urban assaults. If it's a
beater, a 1980s rigid MTB would do. If you are stuck with the terrain
but want a no expense spared play bike, a custom frame in 853 or even
953 could be built around your favourite tyre and selected riding
position
Kinky Cowboy*

*Batteries not included
May contain traces of nuts
Your milage may vary

[Steve Gravrock]

On 2007-12-14, Pilgrim <jesse@codery.com> wrote:

> So run fat tires, what's the problem? All the bikes that have
> chainstays wide enough to accept fat meats are mountain bike or BMX
> style frames which also happen to feature sloping top tubes so you can
> put the seat really low since most of the serious pedaling in those
> sports is done out of saddle.

The sloping top tube on mountain bikes is to provide adequate standover
despite the tall front end. Not many people would be tall enough to
ride a bike with a long travel fork and a level top tube. Mountain bikes
come with long seatposts so that the saddle can be set at a normal
height. Every recreational mountain biker I've encountered did the vast
majority of their pedaling seated.

> I want my top tube flat, and my seat stays tall because I keep my seat
> high so that my legs are fully extended when I'm in the saddle. A long
> seat post would get me up high, but that combined with the higher BB
> of most dirt bikes makes me feel like I'm riding a folding bike.

If sloping top tubes turn you off aesthetically or you have other
reasons for avoiding mountain bikes, that's one thing. But don't reject
mountain bikes because you think they're not supposed to be set up for
full leg extension. They are.

> Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires. Maybe
> something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say "Fatties
> Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for the lowered
> BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?

I'm not sure about that, but a Steamroller with some fat 700c tires
seems like it would do the job nicely. Something like the Schwalbe Big
Apple in 50mm or 60mm should be cushier than any 26" slick tire.

[Tim McNamara]

In article
<8a96eb11-e105-444c-a380-d933161dcb3c@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Pilgrim <jesse@codery.com> wrote:

> Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires.
> Maybe something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say
> "Fatties Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for
> the lowered BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?

http://www.mariposabicycles.com/fixed-650b.html

http://www.rawlandcycles.com/store/index.php?strWebAction=item_detail&int
ItemID=3420

Or just put fat tires on the Steamroller, you can probably run Schwalbe
Big Apples if you want. If those aren't fat enough, it's time to move
somewhere else.

[Steve]

Pilgrim wrote:
Snip
>
> Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires. Maybe
> something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say "Fatties
> Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for the lowered
> BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?

Give some thought to a Surley Pugsley.. Seriously FAT tires

Steve

[Peter Cole]

Pilgrim wrote:
> I've recently become a fan of 26" wheels, and fat tires. I do most of
> my riding on city streets, and between the crumbling asphalt, subway
> grates, and street-car tracks, fat tires are almost a necessity. I
> don't doubt that skinny wheels roll faster, but I do doubt that they
> roll so much faster as to make their tendency to dent rims, and get
> flats worth it.
>
> So run fat tires, what's the problem? All the bikes that have
> chainstays wide enough to accept fat meats are mountain bike or BMX
> style frames which also happen to feature sloping top tubes so you can
> put the seat really low since most of the serious pedaling in those
> sports is done out of saddle.
>
> I want my top tube flat, and my seat stays tall because I keep my seat
> high so that my legs are fully extended when I'm in the saddle. A long
> seat post would get me up high, but that combined with the higher BB
> of most dirt bikes makes me feel like I'm riding a folding bike.
>
> Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires. Maybe
> something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say "Fatties
> Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for the lowered
> BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?

I found an old MTB from the pre-compact days to make an urban fixer for
my son. He loves it.

[Anthony DeLorenzo]

On Dec 13, 5:45 pm, Pilgrim <je...@codery.com> wrote:

> Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires. Maybe
> something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say "Fatties
> Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for the lowered
> BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?

If you ride a small-size frame (42-54 cm) the Surly Long Haul Trucker
is set up for 26" wheels and will take up to a 2.1" tire with fenders.
Otherwise, I would say go with a Crosscheck and run 700C tires, it
will take 40-42 no problem.

I don't think you'd want to use the Steamroller for commuting. It's a
pretty specialized track frame with no braze-ons at all -- making it
more difficult to use things like gears, brakes, racks, fenders...
Plus, I can't imagine that the bike would be comfortable or handle
well with the smaller wheels.

If you're totally set on 26" wheels, and you can't use the small Long
Haul Trucker, then go with a mountain bike frame. Like others have
said, the old mountain bikes pretty much had road geometry anyways.

Regards,
Anthony

[Tom Nakashima]

"Tim McNamara" <timmcn@bitstream.net> wrote in message
news:timmcn-45D478.23032513122007@news.iphouse.com...
> In article
> <8a96eb11-e105-444c-a380-d933161dcb3c@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> Pilgrim <jesse@codery.com> wrote:
>
>> Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires.
>> Maybe something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say
>> "Fatties Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for
>> the lowered BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?
>
> http://www.mariposabicycles.com/fixed-650b.html
>

Nice!
I still enjoy looking at them...<smile>
-tom

[Scott Gordo]

On Dec 14, 12:03 am, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
> In article
> <8a96eb11-e105-444c-a380-d933161dc...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> Pilgrim <je...@codery.com> wrote:
> > Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires.
> > Maybe something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say
> > "Fatties Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for
> > the lowered BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?
>
> http://www.mariposabicycles.com/fixed-650b.html
>
> http://www.rawlandcycles.com/store/index.php?strWebAction=item_detail...
> ItemID=3420
>
> Or just put fat tires on the Steamroller, you can probably run Schwalbe
> Big Apples if you want. If those aren't fat enough, it's time to move
> somewhere else.

Those Mariposas are beautiful. The Porteur bike, especially. Drum
brakes are a nice surprise. Looks like they're closing their store and
likely their shop though....

/s

[Dan Burkhart]

Steve Wrote:
> Pilgrim wrote:
> Snip
> >
> > Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires.
> Maybe
> > something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say
> "Fatties
> > Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for the
> lowered
> > BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?
>
> Give some thought to a Surley Pugsley.. Seriously FAT tires
>
> Steve
Sure, if most of your riding is in soft sand.


--
Dan Burkhart

[Tom Nakashima]

"Scott Gordo" <blubberpuss@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:745610de-e455-42eb-a75b-a78b4c68818d@a35g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 14, 12:03 am, Tim McNamara <tim...@bitstream.net> wrote:
>> In article
>> <8a96eb11-e105-444c-a380-d933161dc...@d21g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> Pilgrim <je...@codery.com> wrote:
>> > Basically, I want a frame with road geometry, and fat 26" tires.
>> > Maybe something like a Surly Steamroller since it's chainstays say
>> > "Fatties Fit Fine". Assuming I use shorter cranks to compensate for
>> > the lowered BB, would a rig like that be a good idea?
>>
>> http://www.mariposabicycles.com/fixed-650b.html
>>
>> http://www.rawlandcycles.com/store/index.php?strWebAction=item_detail...
>> ItemID=3420
>>
>> Or just put fat tires on the Steamroller, you can probably run Schwalbe
>> Big Apples if you want. If those aren't fat enough, it's time to move
>> somewhere else.
>
> Those Mariposas are beautiful. The Porteur bike, especially. Drum
> brakes are a nice surprise. Looks like they're closing their store and
> likely their shop though....
>
> /s

Saw that too,
the Shimano Nexave "Roller Brake" is a drum brake?
-tom