zigzag

Merida sau Cube?

Recommended Posts

Sau, sau, sau. Pai ai face bine sa argumentezi. Diferenta intre unghiurile alea despre care vorbesti cum se traduce in manevrabilitate? La ce ajuta alea 0.5 grade la HT? Te-ai uitat, prin comparatie, la dimensiunile Merida 17'' si Canyon 18.5''? Care este mai race :))?
Aceeasi marime de cadru, despre care vorbesti, nu este aceeasi marime de cadru la toti ci a devenit un standard de marketing, la fel ca la dimensiunea placilor de snowboard sau a hainelor. Tine foarte mult de productor si de piata de desfacere. Deci? Sa-ti mai spun ca o diferenta de un grad la unghiul seat tube se traduce prin aprox 1.3 mm sus la sa...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probabil ca @@Kimosabe știe răspunsul la întrebarea pe care pus-o, dar eu as fi chiar interesat care este diferența între un cadru race și unul touring, chiar cu cele 2 exemple de față.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decat sa faceti stouri, mai bine spuneti-mi, voi pe care ati alege-o?

Pana acum e 1-0 pt Merida, punct dat de Andrei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

E cel puțin 1-1, că am votat mai demult cu Canyonul ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oricum Cehia si Olanda porneste ca favorite.....incredibil la ce s-a ajuns

Sa-i vezi pe aia din Olanda pe ce putregaiuri merg, vechi de ani (zeci de ani?!) si cu toate astea nu-i poate nimeni vreodata acuza ca nu iubesc bicicletele, iar noi ne dam de ceasu' mortii pentru o diferenta de 1.5 grade la head tube, chainstay length etc

Ii mai aud pe unii (foarte multi chiar) cum se dau peste cap pentru o furca cu cateva zeci de grame mai usoara, cum isi achizitioneaza ei seat tube de carbon si alte din astea...dar nu-si pun problema ca au ei nouajde' kile si pot recupera 10kile daca dau burta jos

In fine, ia-ti omule bicicleta care-ti place, inclusiv la culoare daca e la o adica, ca diferentele majore se vad cu siguranta intre downhill si road race, asa ca e slx si nu e xt, recon si nu reba, fasss, oricum nu ajungi Nino Schurter!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S-au mai discutat avantajele unei biciclete usoare, manevrabilitate, etc. Discutia ar fi redundanta. 

 

Si cand ajungi la o suma din asta, gen 1000E, parca vrei ce e mai bun in banii astia. Mai ales ca discutia cu gioarsele pe care le folosesc aia mai civilizati decat noi prin ORAS nu prea are legatura cu scopul unde va fi utilizata bicicleta asta.

 

Cat despre discutia de fata:

 

-ca aspect as alege Merida

-ca echipare as merge pe Canyon (numai franele nu ma prea coafeaza pe mine), mai ales la pretul dat, dar am considerat ca pleaca de la egal la egal aici chiar daca Merida e mai scumpa. 

 

Daca e sa compari un Canyon la aceeasi bani, ai avea asta: https://www.canyon.com/_en/mountainbikes/bike.html?b=3174#tab-reiter2

 

Nu e mare chestie fata de aia propusa de tine...Fox si angrenaj SLX si niste roti mai usoare. Tu decizi daca merita asta (Fox e mai pretentios la intretinere, implicit mai scump).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eu am avut 3 mtb-uri , toate hardtail si pot spune ca diferentele de geometrie sunt foarte importante .

La prima bicicleta(cadru Gt 3.0) mi se ridica roata fata pe urcari abrupte chiar daca muscam din ghidon , la a doua nu am avut nimic de reprosat era perfecta , dar nu cred ca imi voi putea permite un cadru similar prea curand(era ala de titan care l-am rupt) , iar acum am un cadru radon care pe langa ca e greu si parca ma simt incomfortabil si pe coborari si pe urcari comparativ cu cadrul anterior .

Nu am stat sa studiez problema pentru ca nu aveam prea multe variante de luat in calcul din cauza bugetului , dar daca as investi acum intr-o bicicleta as fi foarte atent la marime si geometrie.

 

Oricum , la primul mtb nu cred ca poti sti ce geometrie ti s-ar potrivi .

 

Daca tot se contorizeaza , eu votez canyon(dar nu a lui crocodilu , ca e pentru doamne :) ) .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cand ati votat sper ca nu ati tinut cont de pret. La iarna Merida va fi la acelasi pret cu Canyonul. Tocmai de aceea am si luat-o in calcul.

Va cer opinia strict din punct de vedere tehnic, cadru/dotari.

Va multumesc si mai astept opinii, imi sunt de folos. Fiind novice in acest domeniu, mai invat si eu.

:cheers:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uite cum e cu geometriile astea: How to understand bike geometry

Cyclescheme, 30.10.2013

bike-geo.png

Bike websites and magazines often feature diagrams or tables listing frame dimensions and angles. This is what those numbers mean.

Bicycle geometry affects how a bike fits and rides. It doesn't tell you everything; components and materials are at least as important. And it's less prescriptive than some would have you believe. Bike geometry grew out of practical considerations rather than pure maths. To fit comfortably, the saddle went here, the bars went there, and the front wheel had to be there so it wouldn't hit your feet. Nevertheless, the numbers do tell you useful things about what a bike will be better or worse at, and whether it will suit you.

 

Will it fit me?

 

In the days when bikes had horizontal top tubes and short seat posts, the seat tube length told you whether you'd be able to reach the pedals and stand over the frame when you stopped – in short, whether it would fit. So that's how bikes were sized. This idea hasn't died, despite the fact that most bikes now have a downward sloping top tube and 200mm or more of saddle height adjustment.

Assuming that you can comfortably stand over the frame, the most important frame measurement for fit is the effective top tube length (ETT). This is the length the top tube would be if it ran horizontally from the top of the head tube to the seat post. It tells you how stretched out you will be on the bike, subject to a given handlebar type and stem length.

Once you know the ETT of a bike you find comfortable, you can use this to size up other bikes with the same kind of handlebar. If your 600mm ETT hybrid feels just right and you're in the market for a new one, you want one with something close to a 600mm ETT, irrespective of whether the bike is described as Medium or Large or has 530 or 550mm seat tube. To fine tune the fit, see the Bike Fit Basics article in issue 11 of Cycle Commuter. And don't forget you can try for size before buying at your local bike shop.

 

Frame angles

 

Seat tube angles range from about 70-75 degrees. A steeper angle moves the saddle forward while a shallower angle moves it back. Steep is fine for racers. It allows them to ride hard in an aero crouch, as the more open hip angle doesn't constrain breathing or power transfer. It's not so good for more relaxed riding as it transfers more of your weight from your backside to your hands, which can cause aches and pains.

You can change the effective seat tube angle by sliding the saddle forward or back in the seat post clamp, or by fitting a different seat post with more or less 'layback' (the distance the clamp is behind the seat post centreline).

Head tube angles range from about 66 degrees (gravity-oriented mountain bikes) to 74 degrees (razor-sharp road bikes). Other things being equal, a bike with a steeper head angle with steer more sharply and a bike with a slacker head angle will be more inclined to travel in a straight line. Small-sized bikes often have a slacker head angle too, not to change the steering (although it does) but too keep the front wheel from hitting the rider's feet.

The head and seat tube angles on bikes with suspension change as the suspension compresses. Riders cope easily with this, which shows that small differences in geometry aren't critical.

 

How a bike steers

 

The biggest influence on how a bike steers is not head angle alone but a measurement that head angle helps determine: trail. This can be calculated if it's not listed. Trail is the distance that the contact patch of the front tyre on the ground trails behind a line drawn through the steering axis (the head tube) to the ground.

Trail figures for bikes range from the low thirties to the high nineties in millimetres, with sixty-something being typical. Lower is good for a more immediate steering feel but can feel 'nervous'; higher is for good for holding a line on bumpy trails but can feel 'lazy'.

These things produce more trail: a larger diameter wheel; a shallower head angle; a smaller amount of fork offset (which is the distance between the fork dropouts and a line through the steering axis). A smaller wheel, steeper head angle, and increased fork offset all reduce trail. Have a look at the diagrams of trail on Wikipedia to see how this works.

This isn't the whole story. Steering feel is also affected by the wheelbase of the bike, your weight distribution relative to the front wheel, the weight of the wheels themselves, the size of the front tyre, the length of the stem, and the width of the handlebar. These things change enormously between types of bike but not so much within types.

 

Other useful numbers

 

Wheelbase is the distance between the wheel axles. It's determined by the front centres (the distance between the centre of the front axle and the centre of the bottom bracket) and the chain stay length (the distance between bottom bracket and rear axle). The modern trend is for shorter wheelbases and particularly shorter chain stays. Shorter makes the bike feel more lively. Longer improves stability and, since you're not 'on top of' the rear wheel as much, comfort; it also provides heel clearance for panniers.

The bottom bracket needs to be high enough that the pedals don't hit the ground and low enough that you can still get a toe down. Bikes ridden off-road benefit from extra clearance – a bottom bracket height of more than 300mm – whereas commuter bikes ridden in stop-start traffic are more manageable with a low bottom bracket (270mm or so).

There's more to bike geometry than this, not least because of how the different measurements interact. Just don't be blinded by pseudo-science or someone else's opinion: if your bike feels right, it is right. 

 

De aici: http://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community/how-to/how-to-understand-bike-geometry

Si din cauza pozitiei mai confortabile, mai potrivita pentru ce vrei tu sa faci, dar si din cauza ca e mai usoara, am recomandat Canyonul. 

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

De unde ideea ca o pozitie "race" nu e confortabila? Racer-ii sunt masochisti? Sau ca o geometrie "race" provoaca trante doar pt ca nu ai sute de mii de km in picioare?

Singurele motive pt care nu as merge intr-o pozitie race/aero ar fi hainele de strada si burta. Daca merg o juma de ora cu bicla spre servici, ma imbrac in haine de strada si vreau o pozitie verticala (hobby/lejera/confortabila/relaxata) Daca pedalez mai mult de o ora, ma imbrac in echipament de ciclism si, fie ca este vorba de o plimbare lejera in jurul cabanei, fie ca particip la o cursa din cupa mondiala, adopt o pozitie race pt ca aceasta e de fapt cea mai confortabila in timp.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racerii* nu sunt deloc masochisti, doar ca fata de “biciclistii de weekend“ ei sunt mult mai bine pregatiti fizic sa suporte o geometrie race (v. solicitarea asupra zonei mediane si asupra bratelor/incheieturilor).

Normal ca un om care nu a mai facut miscare nu se va plange de geometria asta la ture foarte scurte (incercarea bicicletei 10 minute inainte de cumparare). Dar pune-l sa mearga la tura mai lunga sa vezi cum incepe sa se planga de spate, maini, etc.

IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daca stai prea plecat, te plangi de dureri in brate. Daca stai mai vertical, te plangi ca te dor bucile. De fapt ideea e ca, oricat de aplecat stai, nu trebuie sa te sprijini in maini prea mult. Durerile in brate trebuie sa apara doar de la duritate coborarii. Oricum, asta e discutia despre pozitia pe bicla, nu despre geometria cadrului. Pe un cadru race iti poti face pozitie hobby dar pe un cadru hobby s-ar putea sa nu poti obtine o pozitie race, daca ti se pune pata.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eu, dupa multe biciclete si dupa multe componente (pipe lungi si scurte, ghidoane cu rise, backsweep, nosweep, samd) am ales configuratia finala a bicicletei functie de turele care imi plac si fata de partea turelor unde simt nevoia de optimizare fara compromisuri. Adica imi plac turele pe munti, imi place urcarea. Asa ca am bicicleta foarte lunga (cadru + pipa), ghidonul destul de jos si foarte lat, iar pe catarari eu zic ca nu e loc de mai bine.

Problema ar fi pe coborari, unde stau in cap, insa compensez prin viteza mica si echilibru bun pe stoppie :D

 

Daca va place sa mergeti la campie, bicicletele ceva mai scurte si cu pozitie comoda cred c-ar fi de preferat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pt coborari abrupte poti lasa saua mai jos (acum m-am prins de ce MTB-urile au clema, in Leaota aveam surub). Exista si tije de sa cu telecomanda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foarte rar e nevoie sa dau saua jos dupa ce am renuntat la seile de forma asta in favoarea uneia de forma asta.

Mica diferenta de forma din spate inseamna EEEEENORM atunci cand faci tranzitia ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

de 3 luni am cumparat un canyon grand canyon al 6.9 ...super ! mi-am rupt ligamentul si meniscul in vara si deabi in decembrie m`am uract pe bicla, si asa...handicapat, nu m`am dat jos pe urcari lungi si grele si nici nu mi s-a ridicat roata din fata, super confortabil, iar la turele prin parc nu m`a durut nici burta , nici fundul de la sa, nimic...iti recomand cu multa caldura, canyon !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Foarte rar e nevoie sa dau saua jos dupa ce am renuntat la seile de forma asta in favoarea uneia de forma asta.

Mica diferenta de forma din spate inseamna EEEEENORM atunci cand faci tranzitia ;)

 

 

Probabil că s-ar potrivi mai bine la topicul dedicat, dar trebuie să remarc şi eu aceeaşi chestie. Chiar dacă am dropper la bicicleta actuală, tot mă încurcă şaua (fizik gobi) uneori când mă las în spate. Pe cea veche aveam o selle italia lăsată de spate şi nu m-a incomodat niciodată atunci când schimbam centrul de greutate. Mă gândesc serios să o schimb pe actuala tocmai din acest motiv.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pana la urma am facut trecerea la 29 dar n-a fost nici una din cele discutate mai sus.

Hazardul a facut sa fie un Cannondale Trigger 2013. Chiar daca e grea si n-are echipare de top, dupa prima tura am venit cu zambetul pe buze.

Momentan sunt foarte multumit.

 

20140802_150329_zps7f8c4ae1.jpg

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.