Glass Posted December 12, 2006 Report Share Posted December 12, 2006 Ok I had some free time on my hands and decided to do some math here is the result:[attachmentid=8690][attachmentid=8691]Ok so what's the point of this post you might be asking?Well after calculating and comparing effective top tube(ETT), aka "cockpit", of current trial bikes mod and stock I've come to the following conclusions:ALL mods are super short (talking about ETT here though it does apply to WB as well) when compared to stock bikes. Now I know that reach (ETT + stem length) is compensated in mods by using super long stems. Thus the bikes don't feel super cramped even for tall people. I personally don't think thats a good solution as it places too much weight over the front wheel and I personally hate the handling super long stems give. That's not to say there aren't advantages to this type of setup.So currently there are NO mod equivalents to long stocks such as a Koxx V-Racing or a Adamant A1.The longest Mod ETT wise is the old Levelboss long circa 2003 which is 597mm which is roughly equal to a KOT MS2 1065mm.So I think it would be interesting for brands to test out some 1050-1080mm WB mods. These would of course require shorter stems say 90-120mm but obviously still with the same rise.The other thing I picked up is that though many different frames have the same ETT the rider's position on the bike still varies mainly due to bbh (assuming same parts). Some are identical to previous models! Its like the manufactures where just playing around with one variable, eg bb drop.I'll give you an example, The 2003 Levelboss long 26" and the Vinco 8 both have a ETT of 645mm but one has a bbd of +80mm and the other zero (both were designed for Vinco). This means that if you run say a 90mm x 0º stem on both bikes you will be more bent over on the Vinco cause your feet are higher off the ground. Thats why you need to run a high rise stem on that bike and not on the Levelboss. The overall handling of the bike will also be dependant of a variety of other issues such as chainstay length and head angle (though this doesn't vary that much nowadays except perhaps in "street" bikes)This may be obvious to some of you already so don't just reply saying "duh, I figured that out years ago". I am just here thinking out loud...Well I hope this helps or at least provides food for thought,laterMod_Geometry.docStock_Geometry.doc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskimo Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 ALL mods are super short (talking about ETT here though it does apply to WB as well) when compared to stock bikes. Now I know that reach (ETT + stem length) is compensated in mods by using super long stems. Thus the bikes don't feel super cramped even for tall people. I personally don't think thats a good solution as it places too much weight over the front wheel and I personally hate the handling super long stems give. That's not to say there aren't advantages to this type of setup.But mods are designed for back wheel moves like high bb frames are. So that would be the conclusion you are getting at. I still don't understand your topic. It's just an information topic, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SQuiT-man Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Its obviously an information topic.Thats pretty interesting, Ive often thought in depth about all this kinda stuff too, but good to see someone's actually worked it all out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Krisboats Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Ok I had some free time on my hands and decided to do some math here is the result:[attachmentid=8690][attachmentid=8691]....... Someone was bored I think thats pretty much it, i don't get the reason for it though. High bb bikes are designed to feel like mod bikes and low bb bikes are designed to be normal. I don't get what you did a load of maths for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCottTrials Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 So I think it would be interesting for brands to test out some 1050-1080mm WB mods. These would of course require shorter stems say 90-120mm but obviously still with the same rise.I think that would be quite intresting to see, not sure how they would ride though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eskimo Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 I think that would be quite intresting to see, not sure how they would ride though I recon they would look horrible to be honest. However i do think long Pythons look a bit dirty due to there length. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SQuiT-man Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Someone was bored I think thats pretty much it, i don't get the reason for it though. High bb bikes are designed to feel like mod bikes and low bb bikes are designed to be normal. I don't get what you did a load of maths for.I might be wrong, but I dont think thats entirely what he was getting at.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glass Posted December 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) yes my post was an "information topic" rather than the normal question and answer topic found here. But I think some of you may have misinterrupted what and why I did the math for. High bb stocks feel like mods on the back wheel but thats where the similarities end. High bb stocks aren't short or at least not super short like mods so they don't ride like mods. You'd have to have say a stock with a short ETT (like a mod) with a high bb and a mod stem to get a mod-like feel on a stock. For example with the following geometry:Head Angle: 71ºChain Stay length: 365mmFront Center: 655Wheel Base: 1012mmBB Drop: +60mmStem: 150mm x 45ºNo one to date has made a stock bike with that geometry, have they? Why did stock bikes get longer and mods didn't? That is what I've been wondering. By looking at wheelbase alone you'd think mod were getting longer or perhaps not looking at Koxx's 2007 catelogue Zoo Python Long is 1045 but it acheives this through its chain stays (375mm) rather than through the ETT. So the rider isn't actually more stretched out than say on a Koxx monster boy which has chainstays of 350mm and a WB of only 1010mm!Again why is that? Why hasn't anyone gone in this direction:Head Angle: 71ºChain Stay length: 350mmFront Center: 715Wheel Base: 1057mmBB Drop: +60mmStem: 100mm x 45ºWhy do mods compensate for reach with 150mm stems all the time? There short stocks and long stocks but all of them are still longer than mods (excluding "street bikes").And of course we can take this one step further and ask why all the 24" trial bikes available are just disguised BMX cruisers rather than "proper" trial bikes like a Zoo Pitbull? Personally I like to question things and I happen to question the reasons why mods don't seem to evolve geometry wise or at least not as much as stocks. At least with road bikes you know why they don't mess around with geometry and only with materials. Well I hope I've made my points a little more clear though I guess this topic has now become a discussion one rather than pure information! ciao tutti! Edited December 13, 2006 by Glass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damon W Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 ive wondered this before too.. the reason stocks got longer is becuse the front wheel hits your pedal on short frames and because people like the extra leverage the long toptube gives, the reason the stems are relatively short in comparison to mods is because essentially stocks are designed for taps imo so a long stem bike wudnt tap as well.mods are designed primeraly for beginners so the bike feels lighter with shorter cockpit and a bigger stem because of the added leverage over the bike . im too clever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greetings Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 (edited) Haha that's exactly what I was thinking about a few days ago. What geometry should a mod have for it to feel like a stock. I was a mod rider for 5 years and recently went over to stock bikes.These are the things I now find annoying in mods and that I would like to change:-Distance between front wheel and bars.-Bars being almost "in front" of the wheel-The bb is LOW!! Even with a +60mm frame, it's still only 310mm.-Too short chainstaysIn my opinion you can't get a mod to feel like a stock. If you think about it, one of the key points is the distance between the wheels (wheelbase minus wheel diameter). On a Python this is 545mm, on a Control L (1080) it's about 420mm. While the Control feels as if everything was "under" you, the Python feels as if the front wheel was in one place and the rear in another which is a pain in the arse on rocks. So here's one issue you'll come across when extending the wheelbase of a mod.The "low" position on the bike can be compensated by bb rise. ~100mm would probably feel fine but the bike would be awful on the rear wheel. To make this easier the chainstays could be extended to at least 375mm. Seeing as the mod doesn't have a spring chain tensioner, the chainstays can only be extended by 1/4" using a halflink chain or 1/2" using a standard chain. Lets say we give it a 385mm effective chainstay length. This should already compensate for the loss of power due to a high bb. The high bb should allow for a more stock-like position on the bike where the bars are quite low comparing to the bb height. And with the use of a 115x25 stem and riser bars you can probably get the bike to feel low but not wrong. A more flat head tube angle would make the position a bit better but nothing else, so that's a bad idea. Wheelbase could be extended for the bottom tube to reach about 620mm but not more. After writing all this, I still think that mods are just completely different and will never feel like a stock. I'm bored.So:620mm top tube385mm effective chainstays (~381mm between hub and bb using halflink and 18:12 gr)100mm bb rise~1090mm wheelbase?115mmx25 stem370mm forksThis would feel awful, there is a reason for mods not having such geometry. Edited December 13, 2006 by Inur Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxRacer Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Can anyone explain me what's the point in changing mod geo to ride it like a stock??;]IMO If someone likes feel of a stock - buy stock, likes feel of mod - buy mod, like feel of both - buy both:D there is no point in changing mod to be like a stock or there is something I don't know about? Will Mod Stock (yep Mod stock:P) give you some super powers?? I guess Deng knows the answer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glass Posted December 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 Can anyone explain me what's the point in changing mod geo to ride it like a stock??;]IMO If someone likes feel of a stock - buy stock, likes feel of mod - buy mod, like feel of both - buy both:D there is no point in changing mod to be like a stock or there is something I don't know about? Will Mod Stock (yep Mod stock:P) give you some super powers?? I guess Deng knows the answer!The question is not whether you or anyone else wants a mod to feel like a stock but rather if a long mod (like the eg I gave) would work better than a current mod. No one doubts that modern stocks with their long wheelbases works better than their short wheelbase predessors. Are current mods perfect the way they are or would they be better if they were longer?If you're happy with the way things are fine but if I had the money I'd have a 1060mm wheelbase mod made... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash-Kennard Posted December 13, 2006 Report Share Posted December 13, 2006 interesting stuff, ive wondered this too, but i can't seem to grasp why you would want your mods to ride like stocks, I personally like that fact that they ride differently as there is an distinct difference and you can choose which route you wish to follow, rather than them all mingling into each other, which will eventually just make life confusing and there will be such an array of componens that you will be spoilt for choice and wont be able to establish a difference except obviously wheelsize and shape.pretty pointless, but a nice comparison created there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Bleech Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 essentially stocks are designed for taps imo mods are designed primeraly for beginners er..couldn't disagree more why all the 24" trial bikes available are just disguised BMX cruisers rather than "proper" trial bikes like a Zoo Pitbull?because bmx cruisers look cool Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_travis Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 er..couldn't disagree morebecause bmx cruisers look cool i think he means long stock bikes mike!? rather than short leesons and the like!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mods Posted December 14, 2006 Report Share Posted December 14, 2006 These are the things I now find annoying in mods and that I would like to change:-Distance between front wheel and bars.-Bars being almost "in front" of the wheel-The bb is LOW!! Even with a +60mm frame, it's still only 310mm.-Too short chainstaysSo basically what your saying there that everything wrong with a mod is that it's not a stock Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rebelistic Posted December 15, 2006 Report Share Posted December 15, 2006 I've often thought that it's interesting the way 24" bikes are nearly always 'street' bikes with the exception of the Zoot.In theory a 24" bike could be built that would combine the best things from mods and stocks.I wonder if we'll see more bikes like the Zoot - I've never ridden one but they seem to be well rated by people on here.Intersting topic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glass Posted December 16, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 16, 2006 I've often thought that it's interesting the way 24" bikes are nearly always 'street' bikes with the exception of the Zoot.In theory a 24" bike could be built that would combine the best things from mods and stocks.I wonder if we'll see more bikes like the Zoot - I've never ridden one but they seem to be well rated by people on here.Intersting topic The Zoot IS a "street" bike!!! Just look at its geometry! WB: 1040mmCS:380HA:73ºBB rise: 35mmMy previous 24" wheeled bike was what they should be cranking out (pun intended ) !WB: 1065mmHA:71.5ºCS:365mmBB rise: 20mmSo far if you want a decent 24" wheeled trials bike for natural then you gotta go custom! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glass Posted December 19, 2006 Author Report Share Posted December 19, 2006 (edited) here is a pic of what "my" mod would look like:CS: 350mmHeadangle: 71ºWB: 1063mmbbd: +70mmBBH:330mm Edited December 19, 2006 by Glass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie_Neal Posted December 20, 2006 Report Share Posted December 20, 2006 It would be good for people who want to ride stock when they're older as you'd be able to learn on a smaller, lighter bike (20"/24") that feels the same as a standard stock. Also good for vertically challenged people that don't like the feel of mods.Surely more options can only be a good thing but it could get confusing when buying one (I want a 20" stock). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.