(in the voice of Sean Locke) Whaaaaattttt?????? HOOOOOOowwwwwwww? Whyyyyyyyyyyyyy?

[novocaine]

View attachment 1009660

IS that the perfect stem for @historyman ? think of all those bars you could have.

 

[Tayside]

A long,long time ago(well ,not that long really ), I stacked it on a bike that I had a set of Pace RC 35s fitted to.
Stem must have been a bit slack, as the bars had twisted around.
Having done this in front of my amigos (who were all riding gods), I was feeling a bit silly and rushed the fix.
I managed to set them up backwards (brakes at the front) and headed off down the trails.
The bigger surprise was how long I took to figure out why it didn't feel 'quite right'

 

[Black_puma]

There's a frame for sale on eBay...Not cheap though.
https://ebay.us/m/XrkX5z

I am really curious how it would handle, it seems quite a stretch!

I get trolley vibes from that...twitchy at high speeds, but I could be wrong of course.

 

[Woz]

Crazy design - 73mm bb shell

With a downtube and top-tube that length, I reckon the extra 2.5mm either side of a normal 68mm would make all the difference in lateral stiffness.

 

[BerthaPog]

With a downtube and top-tube that length, I reckon the extra 2.5mm either side of a normal 68mm would make all the difference in lateral stiffness.

I’m still concerned by the lack of vertical compliance at the rear.

 

[2manyoranges]

I remain completely at sea as to what it is FOR.

The position of the seat over the rear wheel (way back) means that it will be terrifying on climbs.
The compliance of the main triangle will mean that it tracks off-road in the manner of a bedstead made of damp spaghetti.
The flex characteristics of the fork - lunging backwards when hitting resistance - would make OTBs a constant worry
The overall weirdness would make you the centre of much unwanted attention.

I restate the title of this thread

Noooooooooo!!! Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy????????

 

[bikeworkshop]

I remain completely at sea as to what it is FOR.

The position of the seat over the rear wheel (way back) means that it will be terrifying on climbs.
The compliance of the main triangle will mean that it tracks off-road in the manner of a bedstead made of damp spaghetti.
The flex characteristics of the fork - lunging backwards when hitting resistance - would make OTBs a constant worry
The overall weirdness would make you the centre of much unwanted attention.

I restate the title of this thread

Noooooooooo!!! Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy????????

Attention seeker.

It's got the little knobby front mech post.
Why?
So the seat tube can be vertical!
Why?
So the saddle can fit on a gallows post.
Why?
So you can have a yard of toptube
Why? So you can have a backwards looking fork.
That's why

 

[2manyoranges]

Attention seeker.

It's got the little knobby front mech post.
Why?
So the seat tube can be vertical!
Why?
So the saddle can fit on a gallows post.
Why?
So you can have a yard of toptube
Why? So you can have a backwards looking fork.
That's why

...and with those lengths that tubing has to be gas pipe rather than double or triple butted...

therefore

functionally dubious
aesthetically monstrous
irreconcilably messy
and
heavy

a sort of cycling evolutionary offshoot and dead end
like the panda

it joins

URT generally
the Mantra specifically
the Slingshot
the Flexstem
the Haro Extreme
anything with tiny wheels (my Brompton tried to kill me...)
the Softride
the Scott Octane (with saddle extension)
soild tyres

I could name others but I think I have just excited the wrath of many already with the list so far..

Innovation can be fun
It can be good
It can keep some people in the workshop much to the relief of everyone else....

 

[Woz]

I remain completely at sea as to what it is FOR.

Is not like an old school bicycle fit jig - but for off-road use or bike polo or wheelies ?

 

[BerthaPog]

Innovation can be fun

Yep, I’ve been looking for a frame where the front “triangle” would collapse under heavy braking.