I want someone
to own up. Come on. Who did it? Who in their right mind
decided that, not only would we have two standard sizes
for a head tube, but that they'd be within and eighth
of an inch of each other? Clearly such decisions are
made with the sole aim of confusing people such as myself
- especially when what we're told is headtube width
is actually steerer width, meaning someone can measure
the headtube, see it's a smidgen over an inch and assume
that means it's 1 and an eighth. But is it? Oh no. It's
one solitary inch because that's the size steerer that
goes in.
Building up bikes
you'll come across this all the itme. With my mountain
bike it was easy. The frame was new, the website detailed
and the specifications listed. Bottom bracket, headtube,
seatpost size. Everything. Sorted.
But the Dawes
daily commuter was sent off for a respray, arrived back
gleaming and I decided that it would be unfair to stick
the same old parts on. A few upgrades selected and the
problems commence. Details for the frame are impossible
to find so it's out with the ruler and guestimations
abound. I'm just happy I let the respray people refurbish
and refit the bottom bracket as I had no idea of shell
size or axle length.
It's when you
get into this detail that you realise just how many
'standards' there are surrounding bikes. Absolutely
nothing is set in stone - from dropouts to head angles,
the combinations are legion.
I
guess this all helps maintain the diversity and joy
of cycling. If all frames conformed to the same basic
geometry the world would be a pretty boring place and
the only thing determining the choice between transport
would be colour and material. But if I could go back
to the headtube for one second. There is an eighth of
an inch between the standards. One eighth?!?! How much
of a difference can it make?!? If anyone out there knows
why this decision to depart from the one inch tube was
made can they please let me know.
.anth
|
