RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: Frame fault (cracked brake boss) on Soma Double Cross

Post by mrjemm »

Excellent news, bealer.

Look forward to seeing the pics. I like their stuff. Kind of a shame they're quite rare over here, but also rather nice for exclusivity once you get one, I am sure.
bealer
Posts: 376
Joined: 1 Apr 2010, 1:16pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by bealer »

New frame arrived today via UPS!

So super happy. I can't post a pic just yet as I'm actually out of the country. But will do so shortly.
reohn2
Posts: 45183
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by reohn2 »

Two frames,not a bad deal on warrantee :mrgreen:
Glad you got it sorted :)
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
bealer
Posts: 376
Joined: 1 Apr 2010, 1:16pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by bealer »

Ta-da!

Image

Sorry about the poor pic, bad lighting. Still unsure about the matte paint finish, but I can work with it. Think it'll look much better when fully built.

It weighs in at 2055g (frame) and 1114g (uncut fork). Interestingly only 100g lighter than the faulty DC version which was disc and canti capable. So (in this instance) a frame catering to discs is only marginally heavier for anyone who was wondering.

...Time to get the linseed oil out and give the internals a nice coat.
Last edited by bealer on 21 Apr 2014, 10:37am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
CREPELLO
Posts: 5559
Joined: 29 Nov 2008, 12:55am

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by CREPELLO »

bealer wrote:Ta-da!

Image

Sorry about the poor pic, bad lighting. Still unsure about the matte paint finish, but I can work with it. Think it'll look much better when fully built.

It weighs in at 2055g (frame) and 1114g (uncut fork). Interestingly only 100g lighter than the faulty DC version which was disc and canti capable. So (in this instance) a frame catering to discs is only marginally heavier for anyone who was wondering.

...Time to get the linseed oil out and give the internals a nice coat.
Nice :P
You could think of the matt finish as like teflon. I've always fancied having a non stick coated bike 8) (although I suppose it would still suffer the same chips and scrapes as teflon pans, which is why I now stick with stainless steel - the best non stick bike frame, I mean saucepan, material)
bealer
Posts: 376
Joined: 1 Apr 2010, 1:16pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by bealer »

* Better pic above uploaded

In the light it's quite nice. The colour varies quite a bit depending on the light. I think I enjoy the build more than the look anyway. Going back to canti's for this build :shock:
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13780
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
Was at the recycling tip the other day and I saw a alluminium fram being passed around the staff, it ended up on the floor with the other bikes as it had no markings for make and un damaged, picked it up no forks was a light as a feather, but I decided to leave it as no real use for the frame at the mo. They would have wanted abot £ 3 for it.
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
mrjemm
Posts: 2933
Joined: 20 Nov 2011, 4:33pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by mrjemm »

Looks good. Why cantis?

CREPELLO wrote:...which is why I now stick with stainless steel - the best non stick bike frame, I mean saucepan, material)


Stainless. Mmmmm. 8)
PH
Posts: 13122
Joined: 21 Jan 2007, 12:31am
Location: Derby
Contact:

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by PH »

Good result, as a SOMA owner I'm glad to see such issues dealt with even if not the fastest.
bealer
Posts: 376
Joined: 1 Apr 2010, 1:16pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by bealer »

mrjemm wrote:Looks good. Why cantis?

CREPELLO wrote:...which is why I now stick with stainless steel - the best non stick bike frame, I mean saucepan, material)


Stainless. Mmmmm. 8)


:) wish I could afford the Triple Cross.

Canti's... don't want the harsh fork discs come with, and sick of v-brakes with TA's. Yet to try long reach caliper brakes. Got a set of Tektro CR720 canti's, they served me pretty well years back. They'll provide more than enough stopping power for me.
User avatar
NATURAL ANKLING
Posts: 13780
Joined: 24 Oct 2012, 10:43pm
Location: English Riviera

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by NATURAL ANKLING »

Hi,
Dont know why I mentioned alu frame :? must have been on my mind and for some reason I thought yours was alu.

Looking at their web site, I see that the top tube length is pretty long, but I guess that modern bikes go for plenty of Saddle pillar showing so you just get a shorter frame, or are the recomended H/B stem's short :?:
Havent read the whole frame specs but looks interesting head angles and rake :?:
Does the blurb on handling ring true any frame builders :?:

Edited - Canti's are Ok if you have good hands, more than man enough even loaded, never tried discs so cant comment.
NA Thinks Just End 2 End Return + Bivvy - Some day Soon I hope
You'll Still Find Me At The Top Of A Hill
Please forgive the poor Grammar I blame it on my mobile and phat thinkers.
niggle
Posts: 3435
Joined: 11 Mar 2009, 10:29pm
Location: Cornwall, near England

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by niggle »

bealer wrote:
mrjemm wrote:Looks good. Why cantis?

CREPELLO wrote:...which is why I now stick with stainless steel - the best non stick bike frame, I mean saucepan, material)


Stainless. Mmmmm. 8)


:) wish I could afford the Triple Cross.

Canti's... don't want the harsh fork discs come with, and sick of v-brakes with TA's. Yet to try long reach caliper brakes. Got a set of Tektro CR720 canti's, they served me pretty well years back. They'll provide more than enough stopping power for me.

These Shimano 90mm v brakes work fine with Campag Ergos without travel agents, superb powerful and controlled braking and less fussy to set up than cantis. Counter-intuitively they work better than the usually recommended Tektro 85mm mini v brakes, which I found too squishy; I think the reason for this is the much stiffer design of the arms. The Shimanos also clear a 35mm tyre with mudguard quite comfortably.
bealer
Posts: 376
Joined: 1 Apr 2010, 1:16pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by bealer »

I've used the Tektro RX5's, in fact still got a set in a box kicking around. I liked mini v's, but the clearance is just a bit too tight for my set up. I've got chrome guards on, and they need to be set perfectly so that there's no rubbing, and I run 32c or 35c tyres, so I found the set up needed just a bit too much accuracy. 90mm would probably give that extra bit of gap though. So maybe I'll keep that on the list when cash-flow is a bit better.
bealer
Posts: 376
Joined: 1 Apr 2010, 1:16pm

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by bealer »

NATURAL ANKLING wrote:Hi,
Dont know why I mentioned alu frame :? must have been on my mind and for some reason I thought yours was alu.

Looking at their web site, I see that the top tube length is pretty long, but I guess that modern bikes go for plenty of Saddle pillar showing so you just get a shorter frame, or are the recomended H/B stem's short :?:
Havent read the whole frame specs but looks interesting head angles and rake :?:
Does the blurb on handling ring true any frame builders :?:


It is actually a fraction longer than typical I think. My Croix De Fer 56cm, has a 56cm top tube. 57.6cm top tube on the Soma is getting quite long for a 56cm frame. Also it's got a slight slant to it too, but yeah it's generally a few fists of seatpost and slightly lower stem.

I plan on having a little more steerer showing and handlebars that don't have ridiculous reach to make it a little more relaxed.
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16148
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: RESOLVED - Soma Frame fault

Post by 531colin »

Well, I didn't read too much "blurb" on handling, but 72 deg. head and 45mm offset are pretty standard offerings, shared with Surly's LHT and Spa's Audax, to name but 2.
As for top tube length, with that combination of offset and head angle, if you want toe clearance you come out at that sort of length (Spa's 56 Audax has the same seat angle, head angle and offset, and 574mm effective top tube, but a taller head tube.)
For the C de F you can probably add 10mm to the top tube for the 73.5 deg seat tube, if the geometry table I found is to be believed.
Post Reply