So other than drop outs whats the diff besides geometry, which is really what your discussion is about. Besides having geometry that will will be 'tighter' or 'twitchy' (depending on how you look at it), the only advantage I can see is a higher bottom bracket which which is good when you have to pedal through corners.

^^ yeah, basically. they aren't "superior," but a frame really built well for the track is built for speed over short distances, which can be fun for <10 mile city rides, IMO.

that being said lots of "track" frames that are coming out now are basically road frames with track ends, and ride accordingly...

generalizations here:

Road frames
longer rides more comfort.
slower steering (increased rake) = less twitch more predictable

Track frames
faster steering
stiffer ride
smaller wheelbase

(the horizontal slots on the rear of a track bike are not called drop outs , they are rear fork ends, only dropouts exist on a road frame)

Many frames nowadays in terms of geometry are somewhere between track and road, ie a Raleigh Rush Hour, not a pure track geometry, little more relaxed around teh head tube / seat tube I think

jbucky1:

generalizations here:

Road frames
longer rides more comfort.
slower steering (increased rake) = less twitch more predictable

Track frames
faster steering
stiffer ride
smaller wheelbase

(the horizontal slots on the rear of a track bike are not called drop outs , they are rear fork ends, only dropouts exist on a road frame)

Many frames nowadays in terms of geometry are somewhere between track and road, ie a Raleigh Rush Hour, not a pure track geometry, little more relaxed around teh head tube / seat tube I think

Thanks for the facts, but that's old news.

Wheres the persuasion?

no persuasion, i don't think it matters what you ride.

I have toe overlap on my 57cm, especially with LL toe clips (which is one of the smaller reasons I run clipless now, which helps clearance significantly). Dumb size 13 feet.

You can ride whatever you want, I like have track drops personally. I mean if something comes loose the wheel can only move forward a little. I also like that track frames often dont have cable guides or braze ons, which keeps it looking nice and simple. But as far as geometry it is also kind of a personal thing.

Ride whatever makes you happy.

true, I have a 58/58cm and use clipless 10.5 shoe, it's close but I clear by only about 10mm.

I have a little toe overlap and it doesn't bother me. I don't have to be conscious of it or anything. I like track frames because they are more fun to ride, imho. I do mostly short rides within the city, <10, and have never had an issue with comfort. As mentioned before, they have a higher bottom bracket for better pedal clearance. As far as the steering goes, I wouldn't call it twitchy. They steer themselves. You steer a lot with leaning. It's almost like a motorcycle. I love it. Way more fun than a road bike!

i dont know max. i dont think it has to be one or the other. i mean when Gunslinger gives birth to little FuckFace Jr. it will be a mixie fixie for sure. One Love.

Yea, but if it's anything like it's father it will be short as shit.

I rode my track bike on the road all last winter. It was a steel Rush, but the 75/75 geometry and short chainstays beat me up after a while. A more relaxed seat tube takes quite a bit of road buzz off of you. You can use a carbon post for a little bit of comfort, but every bump and pothole goes straight to your ass when you're running a steep seat tube.

If you setup your fit more like a road bike (ie: no deep drops, saddle sitting back on the post), it's a little more comfortable on long distances. I didn't like having to run such a short stem to get the right fit, though.

Toe overlap is a moot point, I think. My road bike has toe overlap. Unless you're doing a lot of low-speed maneuvering, it won't ever get in the way. If that's the case, you're probably better off on a mountain bike or BMX, where the geometry is more suited for low-speed handling.

Keep your seat height where it would be normally. If you move your seat fore/aft, it'll have to raise/lower a few mm to keep the same distance from your BB spindle. Seat position is pretty important when riding a fixed gear, IMHO. You'll feel some discomfort above or below your knees if it's too low or high, respectively.

I'm on the fence about carbon posts. I have one on my road bike, but I don't really think it makes all that much of a difference for the big hits. My current track frame runs a pretty large seatpost, but I just went with an aluminum post.

The main thing I didn't like about riding my track bike on the street was how beat up I felt after a long ride. If I was going to build another road fixed gear, I'd probably run a more road-like geometry.

Sweet, thanks guys. I'm in the process of building up my track bike right now, which I think will be good for everyday riding, but I'm looking to get into doing longer rides and I'm thinking I'll want a solid road bike for that. I still want it to be fixed though.

track frames are generally quicker and have better acceleration, and have tighter clearances. generally.

Ridiculous. Show me a track bike with lax geometry. And a gamete is a cell stage in human physiology.

The Pista's geometry is essentially identical to the 55cm square "track neutral" geometry referenced in yonderboy's DW article.

super sick:

There is no true 'track' geomety! If you look at geometry charts they're all over the place (road and track frames alike), geometries overlap and each type of frame
(road or track) can shoot the gamete from super lax to really twitchy. If you talk to custom frame builders and tell them you want 'true' track geometry you're going to get a different response from each one of them. It really depends on what YOU want the bike to ride like, not some silly ass bike mfg trying to sell you some shit based on 'legit' track race geometry.

Surly's also super lax geometry

I am not sure that the discussion needs to get convoluted with exceptions which aren't relevant. It's pretty much a given that modern track frames are built around the platform of short stays and steeper angles. 70's bikes aren't relevant because that doesn't reflect current trends and I don't know anyone that races a Steamroller.

I agree with you that there is latitude in what kind of geometry a road bike can have but it's not as variable for track.

Ok, that was a bit of a tangent. My only point is that people focus way too much on 'true' track geometry when there isn't really a standard or 'true' geometry. Track bikes like all bikes have different geometries. They are generally and I do mean very generally a little tighter than road bikes, but not much when you are comparing modern bikes. If you do compare a modern track bike to an older road bike; which most people are doing because older bikes lend themselves to conversions better, then obviouly there is a world of difference. But when I compare my new race bike and new track bike, the geometry isnt' that different; they are both super twitchy.

freebird:

Very simply, track frames are cool, and conversions are wack.

Settled?

bar spinzzz

I did the Sf to San Jose (55 miles) race on my aluminum Rossin last year, and it was absolutely the worst pain I've ever been in on a bicycle. Deep suck.

That said, If you're just gonna light-to-light it around town, you might as well have the steepest, prettiest trackie you can get your hands on. Shit's about 99.9% fashion anyway, right? Why not go all the way?

If you plan on actually clocking some mileage, set up something a little more reasonable. You know, brakes, and hoods, and bottle cages, and a pic-i-nic basket.

It's all about what you need out of your bike.

I ride a 59 cm leader with deg 73 head tube, 37mm rake fork, 170mm cranks and size 12.5 feets in XL/L mks clips...no overlap there. so not all bikes do it.

plus you get used to it in a hurry. it becomes a back brain activity like climbing two stairs at a time in side a week. seriously, amy was pissed about it for the first couple days, now it's no problem.

but I like how track bikes handle, the shorter wheel base is fun to whip around on. I ride alot, but i don't do lots of miles at once, so I can't tell you long ides are fun on a track frame.

stumptown:

So yeah, I'm using the exact same frame as you for the exact same mileage. At 40 miles it's not bad riding it. At 60, you may start to wish for something else.

On the TT? Okay, sweet. Good to know. Thanks!

What it really boils down to, is this: The discomfort you feel on a track bike is a SMALL price to pay for all the poo-nanny and/or dudebutt you will undoubtedly pull as a result of being seen around town on the back of a sweet tarcktarck. What'll it be Max? Conversion and Rosie Plam or tarcktarck and happycock? c'mon

Gilly:

What it really boils down to, is this: The discomfort you feel on a track bike is a SMALL price to pay for all the poo-nanny and/or dudebutt you will undoubtedly pull as a result of being seen around town on the back of a sweet tarcktarck. What'll it be Max? Conversion and Rosie Plam or tarcktarck and happycock? c'mon

best.reason.ever.