Aluminium Giant Cadex STA and year made?

S

samyoooo

Retro Newbie
Hello does anyone know much on aluminum Giant cadexs? I am trying to work out the STA and the year it was made? I was given the frame by a good friend when my old claud butler had a crack in it

My race bike has 9.5cm seat setback with the rails pretty much centered on the seatpost. However on this with 9.5cm the rails are pretty much closer to the end so I have the saddle nearly slammed right back. The photo with it slammed forward ignore that i was just testing positions at the time.

4e2715f6f0981a177f89507b164df001


http://puu.sh/knDrJ.jpg
 
Isn't this aluminium lugs and carbon tubes like most Cadex?
Not sure of year but will check a few of the old catalogues and get back to you.
Not quite sure what you mean about the seat but this machine will have a much sharper geometry than your old Claud Butler and most noticeably different feel in positioning.
They were/are great machines, very stable and quick handling.

Jamie
 
Jamiedyer":tl2w50hm said:
Isn't this aluminium lugs and carbon tubes like most Cadex?
Jamie
Click to expand...

There were some Cadex's made with alloy lugs & tubes I believe. They look look very similar, in fact probably used the same lugs however tubes were alloy.

My CFR3 was built in 1993 I think, which might give a very general idea of dates.
 
Re:

When you say sharper do you mean steeper STA?

The same setback measurements between this bike and my forme victeur the saddle is placed a bit further back on the seat post on the giant and centered on the rails on the forme victeur that males me think that the giant cade is steeper
 
Does it matter that the cadex has a different geometry?

As long as you can get all the contact points in the right place WRT the bottom bracket without having to do anything stupid (like 6cm stems or rotating the seatpin through 180 degrees) it makes no difference at all.

And FWIW the giant cadex (aluminium and carbon) probably would have had a limited range of lug geometries, possibly only one set! So it may well be that the road frames all had (for instance) a 73 parallel geometry with varying tube lengths. Ideally, as frame size increases, the seat tube angle should decrease, as per your forme. 75 degrees on very small frames, dropping to ~72 on the very largest.
 
Re:

My forme is a 57cm and needs to have the saddle placed middle of rails at 10cm setback. The giant is a 58 doesn't feel as much reach even though the stem is same length and stack height

I am trying to do the Steve hogs balance test and now the saddle is slammed back on a zero setback post 12cm setback on a selle smp but on my forme it needs 10cm setback and I can pass the balance test
 
Re:

BTW the reason for knowing the geometry I thought if I have the same measurements. E.g same setback. Same height same stem I'd be in the same position but that doesn't seem to be the case.
 
Re: Re:

TBH, get the numbers from the Forme and just transfer them over to the Cadex.

Work from the bottom bracket centre (saddle set back/height) then from the saddle to the bars (reach, drop).
You'll need to do some mild tweaking with saddle/bars unless you are using either the same models or very similarly shaped ones.

And why would you use the same length stem?
Unless the head tube and seat tube angles are the same and the top tube is the same, you will almost certainly need a different stem length.

And it would seem that the cadex has very different geometry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Once A Hero
1996 Giant ATX 990
Replies
3
Views
1K
STX-RC
STX-RC
moonlite
1998 Kona Explosif work in progress
Replies
7
Views
334
moonlite
moonlite
C
2003 Intense Tazer HT
Replies
7
Views
365
heavyp
heavyp
C
2011 Intense M9 FRO - owned from new and rebuilt
Replies
4
Views
525
Cloverleaf
C
J
1984 Peugeot PGN 10
Replies
2
Views
791
Jonners
J

Latest posts

Back
Top