Friday, October 8, 2010

Color and Revisions

First thing first, here is what I think works better for the rSogn:

Now, based on numerous email conversations with those who had pre-ordered the rSogn, I thought it would be prudent to revise the geometries of these models.

The table below is based on a smaller tire size at 38c for the rSogn. The resulting standover height of each frame size is now lower. There are some other revisions in response to the conversations as well.

Moreover, each illustration shows an approximate minimum saddle height and a 10mm spacer that doubles as a cable hanger. Please also note revisions in the lengths of top tube, seat tube, and  head tube for some and/or all frame sizes.

Click on all to embiggen.

70cm saddle height

71.5cm saddle height

73cm saddle height

74.5cm saddle height

Extra Large
76cm saddle height

Comment away.



Joe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe said...

Love the new rSogn color!

How is saddle height measured?


Sean said...

@Joe: Thanks. Saddle height is measured from center of bottom bracket to top of saddle.

Jim G said...

The XL rSogn has smaller standover than the L? How?

Sean said...

@Jim G: Oops. I missed that one. The height has been corrected. Thanks, Jim.

Erik said...

Gack! +1 on the shorter Snekka head tube, -1 on the shorter top tube!

We're now in an uncomfortable period where people such as myself have plunked down our twofitty, but now don't know quite what we're buying..

Sean said...

@Erik: Many of you asked for the same top tube length as the Olaf and first-generation Sogn especially for sizes MD, ML, and LG. The way I see it, we started only last month, with many more onboard as the word gets around. This is an ongoing, iterative process that will be rewarding in the end. I might as well add that prototypes are well underway, and I can make some revisions before the torch is lit.

Erik said...

@Sean: Oh, I'm not quite ready to demand my deposit back ;) I do, however, feel a little more invested in the process now that I'm not just kicking the tires. Honestly, (and trivially) what it gets right down to, is that I don't want to have to try to track down a nice 130mm stem in silver. They don't appear to exist on the planet of earth, and I am so deathly sick of black components.. Guess I'm just gonna have to break out the buffing wheel and the Simichrome!

Sean said...

@Erik: I have reasons to believe that the upcoming polished silver Ritchey Classic stem will be available in 130. I will find out for sure after this.

Anonymous said...

I like the shortened top tube (first time in my life I've ever seen a bike that I wished had a shorter tt) and makes the decision between an L or XL Snekka a no-brainer. Deposit to come shortly.


Anonymous said...

re: saddle height measurement, are you measuring 90 degrees straight up from the bb to the saddle or following the seat tube?


Sean said...

@mike: Following the seat tube.

Bonde said...

Nice! That color is perfect. Much more "pewter" than silver.

Anonymous said...

I like the slightly lower standover on rSogn, and the ever so slightly shorter tt makes sense, too. I very much like the new color over the ones shown yesterday.


John Grasty said...

YES! on the new color. Great choice.

Rob in Seattle said...

Comparing the colors on the YS site, absolutely, yes on the new color! Nice.

I'm wondering now about the length of the steerer tube. Will it come uncut? Specifically, I still see myself getting a Large. My saddle height is ~80cm--2" higher than the minimum on the Large. I'd like to get the bars up level with my saddle. Will that be possible? Seems so--55mm of spacers? (First time for threadless for me...)

I like the slightly shorter TT and increased stand-over. (Though I hope to run Neo Motos, so that'll come back up.)

Michael_S said...

The adjustments made are perfect for the ML rSogn I pre-ordered. The new color looks very nice too.

BTW, the new silver Ritchey stem is available in 130mm. There is one on EBAY right now.

Sean, when you say SH is 73mm and 1cm spacer does that equal a level saddle/bar top?


Garrett Belmont said...

Great gray!

The geometry changes are good. Thanks for adding suggested min saddle heights.

Russ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Russ said...

I like the new color, and I'm curious about design changes to the small rSogn. I can't see any on the charts, but the standover height is the same as the older design, even with the lower profile 38c tires.

Am I missing something or will the standover be raised when it wears 2.3" tires?

James Black said...

Now I'm stumped between the L and XL rSogn. But they are pretty close together in size anyway, so I can't complain.

Anonymous said...

The rSogn is still going to fit the big 2.3" Neo-Motos, right?

Protorio said...

I'm confused on the "saddle height." I understand all the other measurements, and I'd probably be on a L Sogn.... but is that saddle height measured "as illustrated" in the drawing, or with the seatpost jammed all the way down!?

Anonymous said...

@Protorio, since the actual seat tubes are in the 50s, I would say the illustration is intended to show the approximate minimum saddle height.

I'm curious about the standover--was it just a matter of publishing the smaller tire size measurement, or did they actually go down a hair? I can't remember what they were with the Pari-Motos.


alex wetmore said...

The actual standover on the ML rSogn went down by about 1cm. This was done by shortening the headtube 1cm and moving the top tube 1cm down the seat tube. I suggested those changes because the original geometry would have made it difficult to get the bars below the saddle with minimal spacers and a 75cm saddle height. Similar changes were made on the other sizes. The old geometry can be found here for comparison:

The other change was a reporting one, the standover is now reported with a "normal" 38mm tire instead of a "maximum" 58mm tire.

Finally, the effective top tube length is a tiny bit smaller. I actually preferred the longer ones because I think a long top tube/short stem is beneficial for front load carrying bikes and offroad bikes, but the differences are pretty minor.

I think that both changes are good ones. The bikes are still "tall" compared to most on the market, but they are slightly less tall than they were before.

When comparing the head tube length on these frames to your other bikes don't forget that the fork length is much longer than most forks on the market (due to the ability to fit very large tires). With the long head tubes, sloping top tubes, and long fork it should be no problem to get the bars level with the saddle. The handlebar heights show are as low as possible (and barely leave room for a canti cable hanger), not as high as possible.

rcnute said...

Sean and Alex--good call on the M changes; just what I was hoping for.


rcnute said...

Actually, will a 72 degree STA work on the M? I'd prefer that.

Erik said...

@Protorio, I haven't looked at all sizes, but I believe that the illustrations do NOT show the saddle in the "minimum height" position. The ML Snekka, for example, has its saddle height at 75.0 in the illustration (I measured it). It looks like the seatpost extension is about the same for all sizes, so I would say that the pictures show the saddle about 2cm above minimum height, give or take.

Sean said...

@Erik: Thanks for pointing that out. If preferred, I can certainly set the seatpost lower for reference. For what it is worth, I had mentioned that the height is approximate. By the way, I will reply to all other comments tomorrow morning. Enjoy your Sunday, everybody.

Anonymous said...

I realize all this data is so you don't get bombarded with questions about sizing, but I'm now slightly more uncertain than I was. Sorry.

I'm 5'10 with a 74cm saddle height. I normally ride a 58-59, and was going to go with the ML since my trend has been going big, but based on what Alex is saying and the min. saddle heights, I might be better off with the M, since I do still like the bars slightly lower than my saddle. But then I lose a cm on my usual tt length... What would you say, Sean? M or M/L?

Also, as someone else asked, why does the Med go to 73 seat tube?(I suspect it has to do with the fine tuning mentioned--shortening ht, etc.) I was hoping for more room with my Brooks.

One final question. There is a big range of tires that will fit the bike. Is there a range within the range that will be likely to give optimal handling? (Somebody needs to make a 48 Hetre. Call it the Cushy-Moto.)


Anonymous said...

Where do I send in my deposit for a pair of those Cushy-Motos?!