Pinkbike will be undergoing scheduled maintenance on May 29 at 9pm PST for up to 6 hours. We apologize for any inconvenience caused during this time.
Powered by Outside

Are Low Slung Frames Taking Over?

PB Forum :: BMX (20")
Are Low Slung Frames Taking Over?
Author Message
flag sherbet
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 17:38 Quote
Beside the fact that when they're made, they're typically trendy, and therefore as light as can be. That in itself typically makes them weaker. Think about the way the forces are put onto the bike. When the BB goes under force, it's transmitted throught the seat tube, putting downwards. When there's a slight pyramid, or higher slung, the tubes would need to compress to be tugged down. When straight, or near it, less force is needed to make the bike collapse. Really bad explanation, but hopefully it got the point across.
flag
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 17:39 Quote
The closer to an equilateral triangle the stronger. I am not sure if I am right but that's my guess.
flag freeridr3
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 17:40 Quote
sherbet wrote:
Beside the fact that when they're made, they're typically trendy, and therefore as light as can be. That in itself typically makes them weaker. Think about the way the forces are put onto the bike. When the BB goes under force, it's transmitted throught the seat tube, putting downwards. When there's a slight pyramid, or higher slung, the tubes would need to compress to be tugged down. When straight, or near it, less force is needed to make the bike collapse. Really bad explanation, but hopefully it got the point across.

ya i got the gist of what you are saying. The top tube angle into the seat tube is the strength in the frame
flag thatius3
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 17:47 Quote
sherbet wrote:
truffles wrote:
drewfunk wrote:
Unfortunately, yes Frown
I see you and Lettus hating on low frames left and right...what exactly is wrong with them, other than being trendy?

Weaker.
They claim they are weaker without actually breaking the framesRolleyes . I do understand that the low slung frames are generally weaker, but some people just look at the mass- without actually riding it- and assume its weak. I undertand that they dont trust these frames due to their riding style, but those two in specific rag on the trends all the time without any first hand expierance.
flag sherbet
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 17:48 Quote
Read the post a few above yours. From a logical point of view, they're weaker.
flag thatius3
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 17:52 Quote
sherbet wrote:
Read the post a few above yours. From a logical point of view, they're weaker.
I did read it and I also stated in my post that I understand they are generally weaker. I'm just saying they always bash these style of frames without actually putting them to the tests, but I understand why they also wouldn't purchase one.
flag lettusdude
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:00 Quote
I hate frames with dress-friendly geometry. Is there really any need to have your seat THAT low? The whole purpose of slamming the seat is so that it's out of the way when tucking and stuff. Doesn't that defeat the purpose if your seat ends up being LOWER than your rear tire? Plus it's pretty lame when your pedals/cranks end up hitting the seat because it's so low. They aren't as strong and they look ugly.

If things keep going in this direction, BMX frames might start looking something like this
Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.trials-uk.co.uk/files/ecomproducts-image-1814.jpg
At least this is my opinion. If people want to ride these light, low, and weak frames, who am I to judge.
flag sherbet
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:00 Quote
...That's not always a bad thing. Seatless trials frames rock.
flag lettusdude
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:02 Quote
sherbet wrote:
...That's not always a bad thing. Seatless trials frames rock.

Oh I'm not denying that. They look cool for trials. But for BMX they just seem weird.
flag sherbet
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:03 Quote
It's not for everyone, but that doesn't mean it's a bad thing.
flag lettusdude
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:04 Quote
Again, I'm not saying it's a bad thing. I don't think it's a good thing either. It's just different. I'm not a fan of low frames. Some are.
flag ron-burgundy
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:11 Quote
lettusdude wrote:
I hate frames with dress-friendly geometry. Is there really any need to have your seat THAT low? The whole purpose of slamming the seat is so that it's out of the way when tucking and stuff. Doesn't that defeat the purpose if your seat ends up being LOWER than your rear tire? Plus it's pretty lame when your pedals/cranks end up hitting the seat because it's so low. They aren't as strong and they look ugly.

If things keep going in this direction, BMX frames might start looking something like this
Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.trials-uk.co.uk/files/ecomproducts-image-1814.jpg
At least this is my opinion. If people want to ride these light, low, and weak frames, who am I to judge.


it will never get that bad while you are still alive.
flag freeridr3
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:14 Quote
ron-burgundy wrote:
lettusdude wrote:
I hate frames with dress-friendly geometry. Is there really any need to have your seat THAT low? The whole purpose of slamming the seat is so that it's out of the way when tucking and stuff. Doesn't that defeat the purpose if your seat ends up being LOWER than your rear tire? Plus it's pretty lame when your pedals/cranks end up hitting the seat because it's so low. They aren't as strong and they look ugly.

If things keep going in this direction, BMX frames might start looking something like this
Unsecure image, only https images allowed: http://www.trials-uk.co.uk/files/ecomproducts-image-1814.jpg
At least this is my opinion. If people want to ride these light, low, and weak frames, who am I to judge.


it will never get that bad while you are still alive.



A frame that is that low would be more like a skateboard with 2 wheels and a handlebar.
flag scotteh
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:19 Quote
sherbet wrote:
truffles wrote:
drewfunk wrote:
Unfortunately, yes Frown
I see you and Lettus hating on low frames left and right...what exactly is wrong with them, other than being trendy?

Weaker.
I'm not talking these frames specifically, I just mean a low slung frame in general. I doubt low slung frames are that much weaker than an equal weight frame with a higher toptube, look at how strong some trials frames are and their tt is barely raised above the dt.

Just to clarify, I think it's dumb when frames are so low that they start sacrificing functionality (cranks hit seat...but I doubt any are like that) or like some of these frames that are stupidly light and therefore, probably weak. But if someone wants a bit more standover for cans or something, who cares. Let them have it.
flag ron-burgundy
Posted: Nov 19, 2008 at 18:21 Quote
freeridr3 wrote:
A frame that is that low would be more like a skateboard with 2 wheels and a handlebar.


and no board.

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.011278
Mobile Version of Website