Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Blog NEW Galleries NEW FAQ Contact About
It is currently Wed May 04, 2016 1:30 am
Recently the board software has been updated and there are some known bugs/failures:
- Avatars are currently not being displayed ✔ FIXED
- Tapatalk connection is currently broken ✔ FIXED

If you find more errors please post it here: http://weightweenies.starbike.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=139062


All times are UTC+01:00





Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:06 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 11
I am ordering a Baum Corretto and at the end of month will be attending a fitting for the frame and to discuss how to spec the build.

Ahead of this I thought I would seek the advice opinions of this forum some of whome are Baum owners about my potential selections for the build.

Paint is locked down in terms of colour scheme just need to decide between the GTA and GTR designs I like certain parts of both but will wait until I get back the paint designs from Baum.

I want a race geometry build not necessarily to compete on not necessarily but because that is what I most comfortable riding. As a rider I am a climber, puncheur by nature not big at 5'10 65kg but able to good watts on flat roads.

Ok enough about me on to the build.

I was thinking of selecting a build with 44 mm headtube and tapered for but I am concerned ggta this is overkill. The idea would be to increase front end stiffness making the bike more solid while descending and on rough roads. The concern I have is that will alter the weight , rid and Asthetic of the Baum negatively and that a rider of my size would struggle to get the perceived benefit of the oversized headtube.

Also to add stiffness in the Drive Train area I was thinking of selecting the Press fit BB option to increase stiffness whilst dropping weight but the issues with good press fit installation, creaking and bearing life concern me and that PF30's benefits are not that muh greater than BSA in terms of stiffness and power transfer.

Fork selection if I go with a 44mm headtube that pretty much restricts me to an Enve 2.0 tapered or 3T Rigida the Enve is 43mm and Rigida is 46mm having read Darren's Baums opinions on geometry I am thinking that the rake on these forks may not be suitable for a build to my spec.

If I went with a 38mm headtube I wanted to look at the Enve but want to know if any Baum or Ti frame ownes have experience of using this fork and is it stiff and solid enough on high speed descents to be worth the extra investment over the standard Enve 2.0.

I want a Baum that climbs well, descends like its on rails and is solid enough to survive the odd city cycle around the uneven roads of London. In the end I will probably tell Darren and the team at Baum the characteristics I want along with my measurements and differ to there widom and let them build the perfect ride for me. But until then I will still pour over my options and hopefully get some sound advice from the members of this forum.

Thanks


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:15 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Posts: 1931
Location: Atlanta, GA, US
I don't have a Baum, but I have a Seven Elium with the standard 1 1/8" headtube and BSA bottom bracket. I am quite a bit larger than you, and I have never found either the front end or the BB lacking in stiffness.

_________________
My Bikes

My Photoblog


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:53 pm
Posts: 430
I'll preface this by saying I have worked for Baum in sales and bike fitting among other things...

I honestly would just tell Darren / Ryan what handling characteristics you are after and leave the details to them. That's what you're paying for, not just Baum's experience in building a great bike, but a bike that suits your riding style.

Remember a bike is full of compromises and certain decisions affect other things, it's about getting the balance right for you.

It's easy to say you want a stiff front end for descending and a comfy rear end for rough roads but understanding how to get both working in sync in a balanced way is what separates a good builder to a great one.

What groupset are you going to use? If Shimano or std Campag I wouldn't bother with PF30... Only if you want Sram should you consider it IMO.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:02 pm
Posts: 416
Location: UK
...what haydos says, plus you can have enve forks in other offsets than 43mm, like 45mm etc

_________________
trek 5200 nude carbon
pegoretti marcelo


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:34 pm
Posts: 586
I'll second all the advice above and BTW I'm thinking of getting a Baum - On a good day I'm around 100-110kg and the Normal Headtube (Baum's is not normal - it's extensively machined/engineered) and BSA BB are more than enough stiffness even for Pro's. The ENVE 1.0 has more than enough Stiffness as well.

Having just built a Custom Ti by another nameless builder/lbs with 44mm Headtube and a Rigida LTD - I'll second the thought on the overall Tube Selection/Size is the critical design Choice. Mine ended up being almost Unrideable. The rear end is 1" Chain Stays (Non-Butted and it turns out too short) with 19mm SS (Non-Butted) into an ISP with a Fully butted OS Front Triangle (44 DT, 38 TT).

Consequently the front end is very stiff, the rear end transmits all the Vibration through the rear end into your Butt and the Connection between the two isn't so great - It's not Noodly but not that stiff.

I asked for STORCK like stiffness with the Ride of Ti. My Original thought would have been Straight CS and DT with everything else butted but I was talked out of it by the Builder and my LBS. What I still don't get is that I specked 405mm CS which I thought would have been enough to get 25mm Tires in a my STORCK was 399 with the same size ST and ST angle - however a 25 rubs the ST on a narrow rim. The BB is lower on the Ti by I think 5mm but this should have only ate up 3mm of space between the tire ST - there was an extra 6mm to play with.

The write up's on the RIGIDA is that it's a little floppy but actually really isn't.

If I was to build a BAUM it would probably be fully butted except for the DT and I would use the ENVE 1.0 Fork - The ENVE carbon stuff just feels like it transmits less vibration - it almost feels soft but still really stiff.

I have a 2.0 on a lugged 853 Steel Bike I built with a normal HT and BSA BB and the stiffness is more than adequate - almost Storck like but a lot better ride.

I hope this helps.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 2:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 11
Thanks for the reponses, as usual the advice on this forum is excellent.

dcj9 the Enve fork I was talking about is he tapered version which is 43 mm rake only which is another reason to not go 44 mm.

I am likely to go with new mechanical super record or Di2 but was considering using a pair of Hollowgram SiSL2 cranks with the Di2 another reason to consider

I think the advice to just tell Baum what I want characteristically and let them deliver the correct bike for me is the soundest advice of all, Its just hard when your forking at 6 grand to just
hand over control even to an expert like Darren Baum.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 11
Morrisond,

Its interesting that you specified the Storck like stiffness for your Ti build. I have ridden both the Fenomalist and Aernario and the frames are the total opposite to what I would expect would build good Ti frame. Short chain stays 399 mm and low rake 38 mm of Storks are the total opposite to the kind geometry Baum and other noted custom builders seems to prescribe which is long chain stays 412 and plenty of rake.

These characteristics works on the stork because they are carbon race bikes and balance the short rear and front ends long TT and utlize the amazing forks produced by THM but when translate to metal frames they don't hold up.

In my first inquiries I asked Baum if they could make a frame that would impress a Tour Magazin tester. On reflection I regret asking for this Tours tests are engineered to test characteristics that are more prevalent in Carbon frames than metal ones, hence the realtive low score for Ti and steel reviewed frames. Tests should be tailored to the specific material and test the relative characteristics.

In the end the last thing I want to do is make a Ti bike that rides like carbon that is the last thing I want from my Baum build.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 4:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 8:34 pm
Posts: 586
It was supposed to be a Bike for short quick rides to get away from the wife and Kids so I wanted Storck like responsiveness.


Top
   
PostPosted: Sun Sep 14, 2014 4:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 11
That makes the choice more logical and what I wrote was in no way meant to be critical just and observation that if you ask for characteristics native to carbon to be translated Ti the results are always less then stellar.


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 11:25 am
Posts: 881
Location: Adelaide, Great Southern Land
I am the happy owner of a Corretto - now over 2.5 years old. I would concur with the advice above that you should sit down with Darren and give him e a good brief - the sort of riding you want to do, what your preferred components are and possibly what aesthetic style you like and he will create the bike. I went to Darren with a reasonably firm idea of what I wanted based on my existing WW carbon bikes but during the discussion with Darren I realised that I was possibly going to miss out on all the benefits of Darren's experience and using Ti if I tried to prescribe the solution I wanted - particularly when my only previous experience was on carbon bikes. In the end I gave him a brief to work to and now my carbon bikes are gathering dust and my Baum is the bike I measure other bikes by. It might be a bit heavier than my carbon bikes but it is certainly more enjoyable and in some directions a lot faster.
Enjoy the process and the outcome
Look forward to seeing the outcome.

_________________
'83 De Rosa Professional
2011 Baum Corretto
2008 BMC Pro Machine - sub6
'86 Pinarello Team
'72 Cinelli SC NOS
'58 Bianchi (in bits)
'71 Cinelli SC Reborn
'78 Masi 'Breaking Away' Replica
Project 2016.1 - underway


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Sep 18, 2014 2:26 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 11
Spoke to the man himself yesterday and got all the answers I needed.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 1:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 2:10 am
Posts: 303
I've had a Corretto for over a year. I got a standard external headset. I use a 130mm 3T Team stem, Ergonova handlebars and Enve 2.0 Fork. Front end feels fantastic on fast bumpy descents...but the only bike I can compare it to is my old steel bike with a 1" fork and quill stem...so you'd hope it felt better!

I chose PF30 mainly for future proofing. It gives you a wider range of cranksets as you can always fill a hole with spacers/adaptors but you can't make a threaded bottom bracket larger. I run a SRAM BB30 crankset. It's possibly the one regret I have with the bike as it does sometimes squeak/click when I'm out of the saddle...although the noise is sometimes related to my lightweight rear skewers (KCNC Ti). Sometimes on a climb I'll stop and and reclamp the rear skewer and it will go away. I've greased the drop-outs and have occasionally swapped an old closed cam Shimano skewer but that's another thread topic.

The other thing I'm not mad about is that PF30 bearings require regular maintenance (so does Hollowtech for that matter). I'm savvy enough to take apart the crankset and regrease the bearings myself but you wonder if doing this regularly makes it more prone to squeaking/clicking having to disassemble/reassemble the crankset at regular intervals. My old Shimano 6400 Ultegra sealed square taper bottom bracket is still turning after 20 years and has never needed maintenance. Progress?

I note that Baum no longer advertise PF30 on their website.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 9:28 pm
Posts: 1132
At your height and weight I suggest 11/8 headset- unless you want the frame to be carbon like in ride quality.
I would not touch a PF30/BB30 with a 10 foot pole. You talk about future proofing- going with threaded bb is noise proofing!
You are correct that tubing choices will result in the ride that you seek- especially 1" chainstays.
I am on my 2nd version of custom ti- 1st version had 44mm headtube and Enve tapered fork. I thought it was too stiff for me (you and I are similar size though I am more diesel than high power). 2nd version had lighter gauge tubing and also 11/8 headset- it is perfect for me. I am considering a matching cross/gravel bike.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 10:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2014 12:47 pm
Posts: 11
Hi,

After speaking to Baum and considering the advice on th eis forum I have settled on a fully butted 1 1/8 head tube, BSA bottom bracket Baum Corretto.

The only consideration I had left was the choice of fork. I contacted Enve and this is the information they provided.

I have gathered the information for the three possible options. Though I cannot release the actual numbers, here is how the forks compare to each other:

1.0 straight steerer is definitely a good option with a nice compliant ride for a sub-100kg rider
2.0 straight steerer would be approximately 40% stiffness increase and 43% strength increase
2.0 tapered steerer would be approximately 70% stiffness increase and 13 % strength increase (over 2.0 straight)

The 1.0 will certainly provide sufficient strength, and a more compliant ride. For long, rough rides, it may be preferred.
The 2.0 straight would be a stiffness and strength increase.
The 2.0 tapered would be a significant stiffness increase if the rider really likes to hammer and wants that rigid feel.

At my weight I had thought the Enve 1.0 the best option but the 40% drop in stiffness and 43% drop in strength from the Enve 2.0
is quite large and I like to do a variety of riding from Grand Frandos to Crits.

Is my concern warranted or is the Enve 1.0 the best solution ?


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2014 11:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Posts: 1931
Location: Atlanta, GA, US
I would go with the 2.0, given that you are not going after a super lightweight bike.

_________________
My Bikes

My Photoblog


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 Next

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. The BAUM corretto

[ Go to page: 1 2 3 4 5 ]

in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.

Bely

60

9554

Sun Mar 20, 2016 1:32 pm

Bely View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Baum Corretto - "Eifelschleicher"

in Comments

nmx

0

144

Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:35 am

nmx View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Baum Corretto - "Eifelschleicher"

in Comments

nmx

0

152

Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:43 am

nmx View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Baum Corretto Review

in Road

Sailinbum

3

920

Mon Nov 02, 2015 2:37 am

HammerTime2 View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Advice on build please

in Road

lone wheeler

3

249

Mon Feb 01, 2016 10:20 pm

wheelsONfire View the latest post


All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Exabot [Bot], Google [Bot], jdc5r, Yahoo [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited