Bicycle toe-front wheel overlap

I understand the geometry that contributes to overlap, and also accept that the same geometry also affects the handling of the bike.

I'd still contend that their are very many "great race bikes" that don't have toe-overlap. Your statement that it can't be a "great race bike" without overlap is perhaps a little limiting. It might be true below a certain frame size.

I'm not skilled enough to turn my bike at low speed other than by turning the bars. I can't trackstand nor hop the back wheel. When I turn my bike that has overlap overlap up onto the bridge ramp on my morning commute, I have to remember to keep my foot clear (ratchet the bike around, as you say). It is exacerbated by fenders, admittedly. I'd rather not have overlap, but can live with it.

My race bike (and every other bike I've owned) are evidence that sweet handling bikes can be built without it.

Dear winky,

My classic "second rank in terms of heavier tubing" English geometry racing Carlton [formerly suppliers to English teams in the Tour] is relaxed enough in the forks and steering tube angle for this never to be an issue. There is no interference in any circumstances. But my French Peugeot, which is nominally the same size, and is no faster [rather the reverse] is quite disconcerting in this respect.

The side effect of the Carlton’s added length is not weight - it is already lighter than the Pug - but in its ability to accept jolts in the road going fast downhill. It stays straight and does not buck or oscillate. The Pug will do both so is necessarily slower downhill, because one brakes so as to keep control.

Now I realise that quality Carbon Fibre frames address this issue, in the sense that they absorbs shocks better than steel [both my bikes are in the second rank Reynolds 501 steel tubing], but they both could be repaired into the life of my nephew’s children's lifetime!

ATB from George

There is indeed a trade-off between stiffness, stability, comfort and "quickness-of-steering". The best designed bikes don't compromise much. They have all four in generous helpings. But the very stiffest bikes aren't usually the most comfortable, and the quick steering ones aren't always the most stable.

John contended that a "great race bike" couldn't be built without toe-overlap. I disagreed.

Steel can keep on keeping on. That's for sure. It can be reapired by skilled artisans. No argument there. But people don't replace carbon frames because they wear out (usually). They replace them to "update". Whether this is driven by fashion or performance varies with the rider. Often a combination of both.

I'm enjoying the discourse. Riding is a passion for me.

Dear winky,

I have no problem with Carbon Fibre - bar that I could not run to the price. It offers a saving in weight and some handling advantages.

I am old enough for the weight advantage to be be moot, and even though the Carlton is long and reassuringly stable, it actually is very cute at turning. Something going on with its evolution.

Be sure that one day you at least try one. It may surprise you, or you may hate it! Let me merely picque your curiosity. They are cheap as dirt on that famous auction site! Mine was given ... so no reason to find it fine, except that it is!

ATB from George

PS: I wished that the pond did rule out your trying mine ...

quote:

Originally posted by winkyincanada:
I understand the geometry that contributes to overlap, and also accept that the same geometry also affects the handling of the bike.

I'd still contend that their are very many "great race bikes" that don't have toe-overlap. Your statement that it can't be a "great race bike" without overlap is perhaps a little limiting. It might be true below a certain frame size.

I'm not skilled enough to turn my bike at low speed other than by turning the bars. I can't trackstand nor hop the back wheel. When I turn my bike that has overlap overlap up onto the bridge ramp on my morning commute, I have to remember to keep my foot clear (ratchet the bike around, as you say). It is exacerbated by fenders, admittedly. I'd rather not have overlap, but can live with it.

My race bike (and every other bike I've owned) are evidence that sweet handling bikes can be built without it.

Winky, I didn't say every great road bike has overlap. Every race bike I've owned has happened to have overlap. It's not a requirement for a decent bike. Great handling bikes can be built with or without it. My Lightspeed Ultimate (first year, 1" headset) is my favorite ride. Fast, stiff but comfortable, curved seatstays like a Hetchins, quick steering, short, short wheelbase.

Don't bikes tend to far more flexibility in the horizontal than the vertical?

The Pug is stiffer horizontally, which is hardly surprising given its more compact frame compared to the long Carlton, as the strength in any plain is a cubed relationship to its length.

But the relative looseness of the Carlton does not seem to affect the power I can put down and for reasons of set up the Carlton is actually quicker [short distance to the grip from the seat, because of the antiquated handle bar], whilst the side torshional aspect is quite comfortable! The bike simply damps out oscillation.

It gives tremendous [possibly false?] confidence downhill and is very efficient uphill. Not everything old is necessarily less effective in the real world of fast progress on varied terrain.

The weakness of the Carlton's geometry is that you need nerves of steel to really power on a steep lean! It is so easy to hit the road with the pedals! I lay off in traffic under such conditions. The Pug wins on that single aspect. The seat tube is simply shorter on the Pug, and the crank further from the floor, compared to the Carlton, which while docile at walking pace, is simply painful in a turn under power!

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by The Hawk:

quote:

Originally posted by winkyincanada:
I understand the geometry that contributes to overlap, and also accept that the same geometry also affects the handling of the bike.

I'd still contend that their are very many "great race bikes" that don't have toe-overlap. Your statement that it can't be a "great race bike" without overlap is perhaps a little limiting. It might be true below a certain frame size.

I'm not skilled enough to turn my bike at low speed other than by turning the bars. I can't trackstand nor hop the back wheel. When I turn my bike that has overlap overlap up onto the bridge ramp on my morning commute, I have to remember to keep my foot clear (ratchet the bike around, as you say). It is exacerbated by fenders, admittedly. I'd rather not have overlap, but can live with it.

My race bike (and every other bike I've owned) are evidence that sweet handling bikes can be built without it.

Winky, I didn't say every great road bike has overlap. Every race bike I've owned has happened to have overlap. It's not a requirement for a decent bike. Great handling bikes can be built with or without it. My Lightspeed Ultimate (first year, 1" headset) is my favorite ride. Fast, stiff but comfortable, curved seatstays like a Hetchins, quick steering, short, short wheelbase.

I took your assertion that "all good race bikes have toe-clip overlap" literally. After all, that's what you said. Sorry if that isn't what you meant.

As an aside, what size frame do you ride? (Update: saw that over in the other thread)

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:

Don't bikes tend to far more flexibility in the horizontal than the vertical?

ATB from George

That is where the compromise comes in. Vertical compliance gives us comfort whilst lateral stiffness gives us performance and responsiveness. Modern carbon frames really tune this.

Look at the skinny seat stays of a Cervelo R3.



These are designed to flex a bit to allow for some shock absorption. But the bike is massive around the bottom bracket to try to give lateral stiffness. The effects of this are easily discernable in even a short test ride. Make no mistake though, it is still a full-on race bike.

Taking this approach one step further is the BMC SLR Team Machine.



Here, equally skinny seat-stays are joined into the seat-tube well south of the top tube. This allows for the top part of the seat tube to flex backwards under shock loads. The shock absorption this provides allows them to build a fully-stiff main triangle. I had a ride of one of these bikes a few days back, and it is incredible.

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:

The Pug is stiffer horizontally, which is hardly surprising given its more compact frame compared to the long Carlton, as the strength in any plain is a cubed relationship to its length.

But the relative looseness of the Carlton does not seem to affect the power I can put down and for reasons of set up the Carlton is actually quicker [short distance to the grip from the seat, because of the antiquated handle bar], whilst the side torshional aspect is quite comfortable! The bike simply damps out oscillation.

ATB from George

This makes sense with steel frames, George. When steel was the material of choice, riders would put up with some flex to achieve light weight. Up until, and including Reynolds 753 tubing (and the Columbus Equivalent) tube-sets were usually much the same diameter. Better steels allowed thinner walls as they were stronger, but in spite of contrary assertions, the were also more flexible. This didn't matter up to a point as steel is elastic with low "hysteresis" losses. We flex it and it bounces back. It energy absorption (wastage) is low, so as long as the frame would still handle well, it was efficient.

With Reynolds 853, they went with larger diameter tubes (very thin-walled). The Eddy Merckx bikes that Motorola rode were often 853 (with a sprinkling of re-badged Ti frames from US makers).

The development of aluminum frames (they have to be really, really stiff to be efficient - flexy aluminium frames are truly horrible and short-lived) and then Carbon, took steel largely out of the top competitive arena. Ti made a brief appearance, but is difficult to build a truly light and stiff Ti frame. Ti really shines in high-end bikes for non-pros and in the mountain bike world. Here the tremendous strength and durability of the metal are great benefits. Ti is also "efficient" in that it has low energy absorption even when a bit flexy (it is springy).

I could talk about this all day. It is a great interest of mine.

Oh goodness, I should be asleep! But I read and understand your posts! I was once [and still am] was an under graduate in civil engineering. [Coventry].

I am certain that traditional steel bikes are the product of empirical evidence and evolution, and the flexibility of modern Carbon Fibre [not tied to tube diameters] making allows for a real stress and strain analysis to be correctly implemented, which must result in more comfort and also more efficiency. I would not begin to argue the case! But on my commute to work or even my rides out, it is not justified. I am old! I discussed the use of toe-clips with my Carlton's first owner, and I described exactly why they were useless to me. I have traffic lights daily. But I can get all the power I need down on rat traps. On serious hills, and we have enough of them in Herefordshire and west Worcestershire, I can manage a one in four, or steeper if not half way through, but the idea of pulling up on the back-stroke is not going to help in terms of stamina ...

I so wish that you could try the old bird out when she is rebuilt!

ATB from George

Don't tell me you're old! You're the same age as I am.

Winky, thanks for understanding me. I said "every great road bike I've owned has had a geometry where trail and rake led to overlap". So that's just how it turned out for me with the bikes I've owned.
My favorite bike was a handmade (made in Edmonton Alta.) Proctor, Reynolds 531C with Campy Super Record. A classic '80's ride. My carbon bikes seem dull in the short run, but after 3 or 4 hours they feel right. My Marinoni is beautiful to look at, but steel is my least favorite ride. I enjoy my Litespeed the most, the 6/4 downtube is amazing, rear wheel tucked in to a curved seatpost. I'm a bit retro, in that I've retained downtube shifters. I've worked for the past 13 years in a bike shop in Toronto (mechanic/sales). I used to live in the Rockies and I miss my rides in the 'foothills' and front ranges. See you on the road someday!

Both my bikes - the Peugeot and Carlton are in lowly 501 tubing and yet they have quite different characters. The Pug might accurately be called harsh on rough roads [and we have not much else], whilst the Carlton, without being quite soft, is comfortable enough, and completely predictable over the rough.

The Peugeot hat has a toe-overlap and the Carlton is long enough not to. I guess the length of the Carlton contributes to its not being choppy over bumps, but I might be wrong.

In the present absence of the Carlton, I am learning to appreciate the Pug! I have generally adjusted the handlebars and seat height. The handlebar is set so that riding on the hoods is much easier now, and I raised the seat post a bit, as there is zero chance of me ever using the drop position on a modern drop bar. The Carlton has something else altogether for a handlebar!

ATB from George

I have used a Raleigh Special Products custom built titanium racer for dry commuting in heavy traffic for the past 15 years. It has very marked toe overlap but I can honestly say it has never been the slightest problem, and I don't think about it. It can only be an issue at very very slow speeds, otherwise you wouldn't be turning the bars, so if you feel the tyre start to rub your shoe there is plenty of time to adjust for it.
Obviously the "need" for overlap is determined by the size and desired handling of the racing frame.
This Ti bike is by far my favourite as it is the best compromise I have ever found between; speed, comfort and handling. I am begining to stockpile spares eg. cassettes, 1" headsets, etc. to keep it going into my dotage. I suspect some newer carbon bikes could do better, but I think garish team-coloured plastic bikes with overweight middle aged men in matching lycra look more than a little ridiculous.

I think garish team-coloured plastic bikes with overweight middle aged men in matching lycra look more than a little ridiculous.

Dear Rockingdoc,

You met me at the Naim do Stuart [munch] organised a year or two ago, and I am certainly not overweight, but I could never bring myself to wear lycra!

What is quite funny is to pass such people, effortlessly leaving them behind while dressed in my working togs on a rather old fashioned looking bike. Bit cruel, but quite funny!

ATB from George

PS: Watch the Carlton thread in about two weeks for some nice photos, which should be taken by then!

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
middle aged men in matching lycra look more than a little ridiculous.

....but I could never bring myself to wear lycra!

I always find these attitudes a little odd. Cycling in lycra/spandex and other synthetic "technical" fabrics is as much about function as about fashion. Cycling kit really is better to ride in. The knicks/bibs with properly shaped padding are far more comfortable - no need for heavy, expensive, hard-to-look-after, slow-to-break-in, leather Brooks retro-antique saddles. The clothing doesn't flap around in the breeze. It wicks moisture and dries quickly. It is bright and visible. What's not to like?

When you go the beach do you swim in jeans? Do you jog in brogues? The best clothing to cycle in is cycling clothing. What's the problem?

I ride in tight-fitting cycling clothing almost exclusively.

I agree that fat people look bad.

What's not to like?

Two things.

Firstly the skin hugging fit, and secondly the usual colour schemes.

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by winkyincanada:

I agree that fat people look bad.

Assos bib for the wonderful chamois and an Icebreaker merino wool t-shirt - less stinky than synthetics and a little more form flattering. No bizarre colours. When I need to be seen I have a Pearl Izumi windcheater that makes me look as though i have been working in Homer Simpson's place of work.

Fat bloke on a bike (sweat like a basta*d going up, uncatchable on the other side).

PS - on the overlap, it's odd that I hadn't really noticed this, but I guess I just don't turn that slowly or lean rather than actually turn the bars. This led to an embarrassing moment in the street tonight as I was trying to see whether it was actually a bother - note to self, when looking at toe overlap don't forget that you are clipped to pedals when you stop and forget to disengage because you are looking at your toes against the tire rim

...., when looking at toe overlap don't forget that you are clipped to pedals when you stop and forget to disengage because you are looking at your toes against the tire rim

Dear Hugh,

I am sorry to say that your post caused me to laugh with coffee in my mouth. I am sorry, but the image conjoured was briefly all too funny!

I use rat-traps, as I find it quite disconcerting to be "attached" so directly to the pedals!

I agree that there are any number of suitable outfits for riding, and among the choices, some will prefer lycra, and some like you and me will prefer other natural fibre based outfits!

Each to their own on this. In my view lycra is for young and svelte-looking people! Other outfits are more "forgiving" of one's figure or self-consciousness! At the beach I resolutely stick to keeping my shirt on in any company! Unless there is absolutely no one else about, I hate the idea of getting into the sea, but then I was lucky enough to have childhood holidays which allowed access to a completely private beach - family only - and the idea of bearing myself even partially to strangers is beyond the reasonable for me! As children on my grandparents' bit of beach, we bathed as a family completely starkers, but that was in Norway!

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
...., when looking at toe overlap don't forget that you are clipped to pedals when you stop and forget to disengage because you are looking at your toes against the tire rim

Dear Hugh,

I am sorry to say that your post caused me to laugh with coffee in my mouth. I am sorry, but the image conjoured was briefly all too funny!


ATB from George

George, I did manage to recover - saving some grace and once I stopped laughing myself, did a quick check that no one was filming me as the next comedic episode for You Tube.

I actually quite like clips as they have helped me pedal more efficiently and my doctor advised that a correct fitting shoe to pedal link would be better for both my back and knees. I have to agree, as I find those occasions when I ride without clips to be less comfortable than when with. Mind you, it's cheaper without ...

Huw

quote:

Originally posted by GFFJ:
What's not to like?

Two things.

Firstly the skin hugging fit, and secondly the usual colour schemes.

ATB from George

So you just don't like to look of the clothing. That's fine, but doesn't explain why you wouldn't wear it to ride your bike. It is practical clothing, designed for a purpose. I wouldn't wear the lycra around the office or out to a restaurant either, but I still wear it to ride my bike because it works best. Can you not "get over" the aesthetics? Is fashion so important to you ?

So you just don't like to look of the clothing. That's fine, but doesn't explain why you wouldn't wear it to ride your bike.

For most people that would be explanation enough, even if I had not gone into greater depth in my previous reply.

As I noted, some people will prefer lycra, and some others, different fit-for-purpose outfits.

We might consider it reasonable to choose what we like best, then use it, and accept that other people will find other choices more to their taste!

Quite often what I have worn while riding my bike has as much to do with what I am doing at the other end of the journey. Work clothes, and the work is physical, so the same rules apply about absorption and so forth, mostly.

Sometimes going to the pub, so a little tidier, but still cotton based. When I played in the Opera pit in the local theatre, then I would wear a dinner jacket with black bow tie, and best black dress shoes! And a hi-vis coat over it!

At the weekend, I wear much the same as I would if going to a pub in the summer. Cotton shirt or T-shirt, cotton trousers, tucked into long socks, and a cap! Always a cap! Even when in black tie!

ATB from George

PS: Not interested in the constantly shifting modish fashion! I wear what I find comfortable, and I am comfortable with! This has been constant for nearly forty years.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by winkyincanada:

So you just don't like to look of the clothing. That's fine, but doesn't explain why you wouldn't wear it to ride your bike. QUOTE]

It's simply not British. Rather Common.

If I'm riding my bike just for a ride I'll wear the most practical clothing, i.e. cycling clothing.

If I'm heading off on my bike to do something else, I'll usually arrange for a change of clothing for that activity. For example, I ride into work each day in lycra and then get changed there. I keep my business clothes at work. It would be completely impractical (and very expensive in terms of cleaning bills and replacement clothes) for me to ride 25km each way in all weathers in a business suit. If I'm riding for some other function, I might sometimes wear more casual clothes, provided the ride is short. If it is longer ride, I'll wear cycling clothing anyway, and perhaps take a change in a small pack, or suck it up and lounge around in my cycling gear, or make other arrangements for clothing to be available. It is rare that I am "forced" to suffer the discomfort of cycing in street clothes.

Anyway, each to their own.

If I'm heading off on my bike to do something else, I'll usually arrange for a change of clothing for that activity. For example, I ride into work each day in lycra and then get changed there. I keep my business clothes at work.

Your circumstance is thus entirely different to mine. It is as I have noted more than once therefore likely that you will wear entirely different suitable clothing for riding your bike than I do.

As I have already noted, each person will wear whatever that person feels most comfortable with! We are all different, and I personally would never feel comfortable in skin hugging lycra, just as I imagine you might not feel comfortable wearing a Dinner Suit [trowsers tucked into long black socks], hi-vis coat, and flat cap ... riding a bike!

I am more than pleased that you enjoy lycra at - as we have found out elsewhere - the same age as me! Good for you!

I find that for pure pleasure riding, a cotton shirt or T-shirt for me is rather nice, cotton trowsers with long socks to tuck the trowsers into! The weight of clothing depending on the season and rate of progress attempted! Lycra clothing is not the only suitable outfit for riding a bike for sure, though it is obviously one option among many.

For me the pleasure of using a bike is equal when making the journey for a definite other purpose such as going to work, shopping, or for social reasons, just as much as riding for the sheer sake of it. So my priorities are oriented that way. Make the bike convenient enough for commuting first and formost, without making too many compromises for longer pure pleasure outings ...

ATB from George

PS: Fatcat, that made me smile!