Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50935
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby Mick F » 9 Jul 2011, 9:11am

531colin wrote:Sorry Mick?
Isn't this the Mercian you can't ride no hands, or am I confused?

It's not easy, but I can. I have so sit straight up to keep my weight to the rear.

Handling isn't just a matter of the bike being easy to ride No Hands. My bike doesn't suffer from instability or shimmy, it rides predictably and smoothly and not in the least twitchy.
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
531colin
Posts: 13410
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby 531colin » 9 Jul 2011, 9:29am

I'm glad you like it Mick.
Personally, I wouldn't want angles anywhere near as steep as 73deg either end of any bike I intended to ride for anything like a distance, or to carry anything more than a spare tube. I like a bike thats stable enough to keep going straight when I'm not concentrating (for example watching a bird 2 or 3 fields away) and stability riding no hands is a good marker.
Shows 2 things to me..
1) Preferred handling characteristics is a personal thing
2) What I would describe as "bright" handling can be acheived without overlap, eg. on Mick's bike (somebody asked that, up-thread)

Freddie
Posts: 2509
Joined: 12 Jan 2008, 12:01pm

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby Freddie » 9 Jul 2011, 9:32am

Mick F wrote:Handling isn't just a matter of the bike being easy to ride No Hands.
I dunno, one would think how a bike tracks a straight line unweighted (no hands) is a demonstration of the neutrality of it's handling.

Kazmark, be brave and return the bike/s, any alterations would be an almighty kludge to something poorly suited to your usage.

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby reohn2 » 9 Jul 2011, 9:37am

patricktaylor wrote:
Michael R wrote:... It is simply irresponsible design to make a frame with mudguard eyes with toe overlap.

However many bikes are designed as fashion accessories and not as bicycles

I don't agree. Having read this thread I am amongst those who don't regard a degree of toe overlap as much of an issue. My touring bike is not a fashion accessory and it has toe overlap. The design is a compromise - if it was designed with no overlap it would be more difficult to set up without my foot catching the rear panniers. There is only so much distance between the front and the back and I want a bike that handles properly.

Occasionally my foot smacks the front mudguard but it doesn't take long to get used to avoiding it.


Of the three touring bikes I've owned/own (Thorn Audax MK3,Dawes Horizon(UK built 531st) and Cannondale T800)none have TO and all have heel clearance for panniers,none have handling issues,in fact all have execelent handling characteristics in the classic touring bike sense.
As I said in a previous post up thread if the Charge Mixer had the whole head tube assembly moved further away from the rider by 15/20mm and a corresponingly shorter stem fitted,which would bring it inline with other bike with no TO this problem wouldn't exist and the bike's handling would be even more stable due to the long wheelbase.
Little story completely unrelated,15 year ago on picking up a complete kitchen from Ikea for a customer I was stood at the warehouse entrance with my rear van doors open,I asked the FLT to driver give me the w/tops first as they'd be the last out. On giving me a lift in with them I asked why Ikea only supplied w/tops upto 2.4m lengths and not in 3m like other supplers do, as quite a few households have 3m runs,he explained that everone asked that and that the reason was that Ikea's aisles in the warehouse couldn't take anything longer than 2.4m across the FLT with a safety margin either side :shock:
I'm not suggesting its a w/house issue in Charge's case but how many extra bikes can you get into a container out of China if the package is 20mm shorter? stranger things have happened I suspect, but then again I'm an old cynic :?
-----------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
531colin
Posts: 13410
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby 531colin » 9 Jul 2011, 9:50am

Heel/pannier overlap is a function of chainstay length, foot size, and pannier design.
Chainstay length has very little effect on the handling "feel" of bikes with traditional touring type geometry, you would have to go way outside the accepted range to change the feel of the bike.
The other arguement is that if you have short chainstays, you need to mount the panniers with their centre of gravity behind the rear axle. Then the panniers weight exerts an exaggerated effect on bike handling, as in the tail wagging the dog.
As an aside, most of your foot is behind the ball of the foot, so people with big feet need long chainstays more than they need long front centres. However, as CJ remarked up-thread (re. front centres, july 7th), there is so much prejudice against "long wheelbase" among bike buyers that you have to strike some kind of a balance.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50935
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby Mick F » 9 Jul 2011, 9:59am

Freddie wrote:
Mick F wrote:Handling isn't just a matter of the bike being easy to ride No Hands.
I dunno, one would think how a bike tracks a straight line unweighted (no hands) is a demonstration of the neutrality of it's handling.
Mine goes along perfectly when I walk with it. It tracks straight and true unweighted - if I let go of it and run alongside.

I think my difficulty in riding No Hands is one of rider position. My 'bars are lower than my saddle, so I lean forward more than most folk I suppose. Consequently, I cannot just lift my hands off the 'bars because my arms are supporting me! I have to go to fingertip steering on the tops first, then gently sit up straight.

If my stem was higher/shorter, it would be easier.
Mick F. Cornwall

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby reohn2 » 9 Jul 2011, 10:03am

Freddie wrote:
Mick F wrote:Handling isn't just a matter of the bike being easy to ride No Hands.
I dunno, one would think how a bike tracks a straight line unweighted (no hands) is a demonstration of the neutrality of it's handling............


Its funny you should mention it as I very nearly posted my experience of that very thing.
On descending toward Levens on the A590 aboard the Dawes Horizon, fully loaded two panniers and tent on top of the rack,at 50+mph I plucked up courage(stupidity some would say)to take my hands off the drops,not a flicker it was as if I were still holding the bars (I was covering them all the while).
Both tandems(Cannondale and Santana) can be ridden no hands whilst we're pedalling (don't tell Mrs R2 though :wink:) and its not just the long wheelbase either our Dawes Galaxy Twin would have us off if I let go of the 'bars and similarly the Thorn Discovery too.
-----------------------------------------------------------

reohn2
Posts: 40711
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby reohn2 » 9 Jul 2011, 10:09am

531colin wrote:......... However, as CJ remarked up-thread (re. front centres, july 7th), there is so much prejudice against "long wheelbase" among bike buyers that you have to strike some kind of a balance.


People's ideals can be "made to measure" by good(bad?) marketing.
-----------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
531colin
Posts: 13410
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby 531colin » 9 Jul 2011, 10:17am

RIDING NO HANDS

A race bike with fast handling will be easy to change direction no hands. Watch Le Tour stage winners, they can avoid photographers while they are still holding their arms aloft celebrating. If you can easily weave in and out of the white lines no hands, you have bright steering.

A touring bike needs to be stable...it should require quite exaggerated angles of lean to change direction riding no hands. Weaving in and out of the white lines requires effort.

A lot of bikes don't go straight no hands unless you have the saddle under one cheek....(even Le Tour bikes, if you watch closely)...This is usually because the front wheel contact patch with the ground doesn't line up perfectly with the fork steerer/headset. You can check this with a string line and usually correct it by filing the dropouts.

niggle
Posts: 3424
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby niggle » 9 Jul 2011, 11:06am

Mick F wrote:
patricktaylor wrote:...... and I want a bike that handles properly.
My Mercian has no TO and when I used panniers, my heels didn't hit catch.

My Mercian handles beautifully, (73deg parallel - 1020mm wheelbase - Size 9 shoes) so I don't see why you need to have TO for good handling.
But what size are you and your frame? That Overbury's Tourer I had last year had modest toe overlap. It was the perfect frame for me, at 52cm seat tube and 55cm top tube, but I am 5'6" with short legs. I understand its not possible to cater for all extremes, but the average woman is only 5'4" and for men 5'6" is about the 10th percentile, i.e. 1 in 10 men are as short as me or shorter. I can get off-the-peg bikes and frames to fit, no problem, but some toe overlap is virtually guaranteed for 700c wheels with 170mm cranks and size 7.5 shoes. My road bike also has toe overlap, and with mudguards its quite bad (but to be fair its not designed to be fitted with guards, no eyelets on the front forks).

The solution that has been proposed is to go to 26" wheels, which gives about 3cm extra clearance in theory, but I have some concerns about the dual effects of small frames and small wheels on ride quality. I.e. it would seem likely that a small frame is going to be stiffer than a large one made with the same tubing, added to the fact that short people are on average lighter than tall people, so actually require less stiffness. Then add in the detrimental effect on ride of the smaller radius wheels, plus what rims and tyres are available suitable for light touring/audax in 26"?

Other possible sizes that are in between 700c (622mm) and MTB 26" (559mm) include:

650C (571mm), a time trial and small/youths road bike size, for which road bike tyres and rims are presumably available, so might work for an audax small frame size option? Gives about 2.5cm extra clearance.

650B (584mm), has some sort of following already as an alternative for touring and utility bikes, so presumably tyres and rims available for those sort of uses? Gives about 2cm extra clearance.

26 x 1 3/8" (590mm) the old 3-speed utility size, still in use on some Pashleys' etc., not sure it is small enough to make a real difference, nor whether there are suitable rims and tyres for touring or audax? Gives about 1.5cm extra clearance.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50935
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby Mick F » 9 Jul 2011, 11:56am

niggle wrote:But what size are you and your frame?
That, in a nutshell is the perfect question.

In answer to that for me, I'm 5ft 9in of average build (a little overweight) with a body frame that I can buy clothes off the peg and they fit. ie my arms and legs and body are all Mr Average for my height.

My bike frame is 23.5 inches. (note that it is Imperial and was built as such), top tube is 22.5" and fork rake 2".
The tops of my drops are 1.5" below the saddle and the Cinelli 1R stem has an 80mm reach.
Nose of saddle to 'bar tops is 19.5"
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
patricktaylor
Posts: 2302
Joined: 11 Jun 2008, 11:20am
Location: Winter Hill
Contact:

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby patricktaylor » 9 Jul 2011, 12:08pm

Mick F wrote:My Mercian has no TO and when I used panniers, my heels didn't hit catch ... 73deg parallel - 1020mm wheelbase - Size 9 shoes

Hmmm. My toe-overlapping tourer (frame size 56cm) has 1054mm wheelbase. That is 1.5 more inches of space between the wheels than the Mercian. My shoe size is 8. As I say, it's a compromise as there is only so much distance between back of the front wheel and the front of the pannier, unless the pannier is way behind the back wheel. Longer chainstays (currently 450mm) would result in a very long bicycle. I'd rather put up with some TO (which I never notice) than smacking the panniers.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50935
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby Mick F » 9 Jul 2011, 12:14pm

That's puzzling ......

If you have more space between the wheels than I have, and you have TO and I don't, it must be something to do with where the BB is.
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 50935
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby Mick F » 9 Jul 2011, 12:16pm

BB to front axle is 610mm.

Edit:
Just checked, the front of my shoes are over an inch away from the front mudguard.
Mick F. Cornwall

User avatar
patricktaylor
Posts: 2302
Joined: 11 Jun 2008, 11:20am
Location: Winter Hill
Contact:

Re: Toe Overlap on Charge Mixer

Postby patricktaylor » 9 Jul 2011, 12:39pm

Mick F wrote:BB to front axle is 610mm.

Same here LOL

Mick F wrote:Just checked, the front of my shoes are over an inch away from the front mudguard.

The front of my shoes reach exactly to the rear of the front tyre - actually 'in line' with when the wheel isn't turned. When I turn the wheel the tyre passes my shoe with just less than an inch to spare. But there's no mudguard on (my foot smacks the mudguard).