Boardtrack Theory
- Thread starter Rat Rod
- Start date
Help Support Rat Rod Bikes Bicycle Forum:
Rag me if you want guys,but I am more concerned with how a bike looks.The comfort is second.The perfect bike has both.If you are worried about comfort,Strap a Lazy Boy Recliner to it! I have a friend that is only worried about comfort & I am always telling him to "Get tough Nancy Boy!"
What I found riding the Blue SS was that by putting more weight forward, it allowed me to pump the pedals harder. The old pics thread showed bikes that had the handlebars mounted way forward of the head tube. This would increase the forward weight bias further. I would love to have an adjustable stem like some of those old pics showed where you could change the height and the forward distance of the bars. They also had little or no sweep on the forks. This allowed more cornering ability which on a race track was preferred. Moving the BB more towards the rear would increase the wheelbase of the bike and likely promote more understeer in corners. I'm thinking the intended purpose of the bike should have priority in the design. I found this style of riding great for hill climbing, but not very comfortable for coasting or cruising. A more upright style is much more comfortable for me when riding. If speed was the objective, I would also go with racer style drop handlebars as they are safer in a fall than flipped bars. Thanks!!!
I'd say if you build it boardtracker style, comfort is relatively unimportant. If you flip the bars on your cruiser, that's one thing, but if the plan is to go with a ground-up build, throw comfort out the window.
Rideable and comfortable shouldn't be compared too much, IMO, if they come together, bonus.
Anybody farmiliar with "correct" bike geometry, sizing, etc, would wince at the sight of most of these bikes, but hey, most musclebikes are not intended for adults, look how many adults you see that own and ride them (sometimes).
To the point, it would make sense to put the BB further back or even put trike style cranks fixed to the rear axle to achieve the ultimate positioning. It would kind of make sense since these bikes "should" be ridden on a track...but who has access to that?
:wink:
Rideable and comfortable shouldn't be compared too much, IMO, if they come together, bonus.
Anybody farmiliar with "correct" bike geometry, sizing, etc, would wince at the sight of most of these bikes, but hey, most musclebikes are not intended for adults, look how many adults you see that own and ride them (sometimes).
To the point, it would make sense to put the BB further back or even put trike style cranks fixed to the rear axle to achieve the ultimate positioning. It would kind of make sense since these bikes "should" be ridden on a track...but who has access to that?
:wink:
I'd love to make a 'gravity bike' (ie no pedals, just hang on and enjoy the ride) based on a stretch cruiser mixed with something like the Indian (worlds fastest indian). So knees would be down near the bottom bracket, with legs parrellel to the ground, and your head would be near the headstem. Imagine how fast this thing would be down a big hill with the great aerodynamics :shock: 
Of course, for anything other than screaming down a big hill it is completely useless :lol:
Of course, for anything other than screaming down a big hill it is completely useless :lol:
i like the way my Superbe rides. so far it's very comfy although i haven't rode it really that far. now i am turning it into a road bike an haven't decided onwhat bars i will use. i know it won't be road bars as i can't get down in the drops so they would be a waste. i may keep the bars that or on it. will see.
Outlaw 8)
Outlaw 8)
It seems to me that the problem is simply a lack of large frames. With a standard cruiser frame, it looks cool with the seat down low and with the handlebars low. And I suppose if you're a smallish person, it works great. But for a larger person, it's an inefficient pedaling position and the handlebars hit your knees when you try to turn. The obvious solution is to just scale the whole bike up by about 20%, but no one's thought to do it. (When I asked about this a while back, someone pointed out that Schwinn had made a "king size" frame one year, but I've never seen one for sale.). To keep things to scale, you'd also need to go to 28" or 29" wheels on it as well. It just seems to me there is a market there that isn't being tapped.
A trend I see in modern cruisers is to raise the front and keep the rear low, which is going the wrong direction.
A trend I see in modern cruisers is to raise the front and keep the rear low, which is going the wrong direction.
I think StephenH has it right. Most modern cruiser type frames are a one-size-fit-all proposition for a given wheel size. And one-size-fit-all isn't really true, of course. The key to efficient cycling is having proper leg extension, something that just never happens when the saddle is kept low. I'm a fairly small person, 5'3", and I find my bikes are set with the saddles fairly high, and bikes that looks slightly "wrong". I can't imagine a person of more average height using these frames without looking like monkeys.
One thing I have noticed, is when looking at old pre war bikes, is that all the bikes back then had a tendency to look oversized. Stand-over height didn't seem to be much of a concern. As a result, downward turned handlebars and minimal seatpost extension were common. The standardization (in the US, at least) of the cantilever frame seemed to mark a change, perhaps reflecting the notion of bicycles as being toys for juveniles. And of course, these days, stand-over height is a critical marketing point. So much so that road frames for tall folks even seem to be rare these days.
One thing I have noticed, is when looking at old pre war bikes, is that all the bikes back then had a tendency to look oversized. Stand-over height didn't seem to be much of a concern. As a result, downward turned handlebars and minimal seatpost extension were common. The standardization (in the US, at least) of the cantilever frame seemed to mark a change, perhaps reflecting the notion of bicycles as being toys for juveniles. And of course, these days, stand-over height is a critical marketing point. So much so that road frames for tall folks even seem to be rare these days.
I think in general, when bicycles were used for transportation rather than for toys, they were more careful to make them in different sizes. I think they also followed the idea of holding the frame to the ideal size, and dealing with standover height, rather than the current standards. One thing I notice on my Arpan low-gravity bike is that the pedals are higher off the ground, so the whole thing is built higher. It's still a one-size-fits-all frame, but I'm near the limit of standover on it, and a shorter person would just have to dismount to the side when stopping. Which I assume is what they used to do.
You can get some single-speed bikes in the diamond-frame shape that are in larger frame sizes. ( http://www.islandsportshop.com/Caloi.htm, look at the Men's Pan Am Steel single-speed frame). Look at Pashley's old-style bikes as another example. I think that Pan AM would work great as a ratrod type of bike, but I'd hate to start spraypaining a shiny new $200 bike and all. On the Worksman bikes, they make a curved-bar frame and a straight-bar frame. I think overall geometry of the frames is similar, but the straight-bar version does give you a couple of extra inches of frame height. But even then, I had to get away from the cruiser-style handlebars to get adequate knee room.
You can get some single-speed bikes in the diamond-frame shape that are in larger frame sizes. ( http://www.islandsportshop.com/Caloi.htm, look at the Men's Pan Am Steel single-speed frame). Look at Pashley's old-style bikes as another example. I think that Pan AM would work great as a ratrod type of bike, but I'd hate to start spraypaining a shiny new $200 bike and all. On the Worksman bikes, they make a curved-bar frame and a straight-bar frame. I think overall geometry of the frames is similar, but the straight-bar version does give you a couple of extra inches of frame height. But even then, I had to get away from the cruiser-style handlebars to get adequate knee room.
Low bars don't bother me, but being too stretched out is going to make you uncomfortable. Having a seat too low and being leaned forward is going to make your knees hit your chest, or in my case, my belly.
Your are on to something thinking that the seat should be further foward. If you look at old racing bicycles from that era you will see they have very laid back angles, but that the seatpost is shaped like a " 7 " moving the seat forward. So if you wanted to go fast and be comfortable on your boardtrack style cruiser, you would want to move the seat up for full leg extension and maybe forward a little, and you would end up with a riding position similar to a track bike. It wouldn't look as cool as the slammed seat, though. A set of cruiser handlebars upside-down should have enough pullback so that you aren't leaning too far forward.
Most bikes built for style's sake are a little uncomfortable. A burrito bike is basically a recumbent without a backrest, and when faced with going uphill you legs tend to push you back off the seat, and you strain your arms trying to hold yourself in place. You have to stand up to pedal a lowrider bike (no different than a BMX) and when you sit on it you are curled up in a little ball. Apehangers are fine on the level, but if you have to pedal up a hill they aren't that good for leverage. Even a track bike when set up with a drop stem and drop bars may end up with the handleabrs too low for anyone but an athlete to be comfortable on.
Your are on to something thinking that the seat should be further foward. If you look at old racing bicycles from that era you will see they have very laid back angles, but that the seatpost is shaped like a " 7 " moving the seat forward. So if you wanted to go fast and be comfortable on your boardtrack style cruiser, you would want to move the seat up for full leg extension and maybe forward a little, and you would end up with a riding position similar to a track bike. It wouldn't look as cool as the slammed seat, though. A set of cruiser handlebars upside-down should have enough pullback so that you aren't leaning too far forward.
Most bikes built for style's sake are a little uncomfortable. A burrito bike is basically a recumbent without a backrest, and when faced with going uphill you legs tend to push you back off the seat, and you strain your arms trying to hold yourself in place. You have to stand up to pedal a lowrider bike (no different than a BMX) and when you sit on it you are curled up in a little ball. Apehangers are fine on the level, but if you have to pedal up a hill they aren't that good for leverage. Even a track bike when set up with a drop stem and drop bars may end up with the handleabrs too low for anyone but an athlete to be comfortable on.
Personally I love the low, fast look of the boardtracker but it just kills my knees if I put too long of a ride in. Having gears does help a lot so you're not straining too much on the hills. When I built the Gas-Pipe I tried to find a bigger frame that suited my 6'2" but opted for the laid-back seatpost instead to add a little leg extension. I thought of making the pipe about 4" longer but it took away from the Boardtracker look, not to mention I was worried about the seat-tube cracking going down curbs.
I was a bike-messenger for years so I'm more used to the 'tall seat, low bars' look which I find much more comfortable for all day riding and speed. As you can see below, there is quite a difference in the ride-height of my two daily riders...
That being said, cruising down to the local patio for a beer or three on a Sunday afternoon with my Boardtracker certainly gets more great comments than my fixie ever did. It's worth the sacrifice on the cramped legs just to have a Rat that nobody else has and that you put the time and effort into building yourself... Of course, my 40+ year old knees might have something to say about that in a few years
I was a bike-messenger for years so I'm more used to the 'tall seat, low bars' look which I find much more comfortable for all day riding and speed. As you can see below, there is quite a difference in the ride-height of my two daily riders...
That being said, cruising down to the local patio for a beer or three on a Sunday afternoon with my Boardtracker certainly gets more great comments than my fixie ever did. It's worth the sacrifice on the cramped legs just to have a Rat that nobody else has and that you put the time and effort into building yourself... Of course, my 40+ year old knees might have something to say about that in a few years
