Quote:
Could it be that Raleigh have been shit for 40 years?
Well, there's a couple of Team Replicas on sale right now here:
http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewto ... p;t=419505and neither of them appear to have a longer drop at the front- if anything, the opposite is true- there is a longer drop at the rear.
doctor-bond wrote:
that looks great.
On the great brake drop debate, I’m a bit baffled:
Say a frame builder is making a custom frame, and requires a certain fork curve to achieve the trail needed to get quick steering, but also has to fix the TT length to fit the rider, what variable has to give to keep the brake drop exactly the same front and rear? I would have thought a couple of mm is an acceptable difference to mange trail correctly?
I don't understand why anyone would think brake drop, within the customary range, was a limiting factor in frame geometry? I'm no frame builder, but I assume frame builders can both cut and bend tubes- even fork blades. If there's a variable, I would think it was the head tube length, which would be finessed to keep the other two clearances balanced (rear tyre to seat tube and front tyre to down tube)
Btw, your Andy Powell is interesting in this respect because to my eyes it suffers (aesthetically) from unbalanced clearances and perhaps not unconnected- the front brake drop is greater than the rear. Are you sure they are the original forks? Or is there a rationale for building a frame this way that I am unaware of?