Moots Compact SL aged like a fine wine

Who are you (no off-topic talk please)

Moderator: Moderator Team

Bigger Gear
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: Wet coast, Canada

by Bigger Gear

Since the Moots Compact SL in Reynolds 6/4 came up in RyanH's Litespeed thread:
IMG_2652.JPG
Story: I acquired this frame as new from a guy in Calgary who had it built for him but never built it up, as he had the trifecta of marriage, baby, and house descend on him all at once. This was back in 2007! It sat in my basement with several different plans to build it, parts were acquired and then shunted off to other projects. It was becoming a joke with my wife that I was letting it appreciate like fine art, since it was no longer being made and was relatively rare. Finally last year in the midst of some mid-life health issues I decided I had better set about getting this on the road. I've been riding it for a year now and it's pretty sweet. The geometry up front is steep, 73.75 HTA with a 40 rake fork, so it is quick and nimble but still stable at speed. The 6/4 tubing provides a lot more road feedback, but at the same time it does not feel rough or beat me up even on long rides on chipseal. It's a nice mix of great feedback and yet not rough, unlike any other Ti or steel bike I've ever ridden. I am 6 feet tall and 165 lbs, 50 y.o. ex-cat 1 recreational rider these days. The chainstays are very oversized and the BB flex is not a problem. I find it plenty stiff enough for me on steep climbs, I have many walls in my area that are 10-15% and this bike performs as well as anything I've ever owned when I'm really pushing it out of the saddle. On hard downhill corners the front end feels planted, if I could change anything I would probably want a a tapered headtube/fork combo but this bike was built well before that became the new "standard".

Here's the details:

Geometry: 57 cm effective top tube, 53.9 cm seat tube c-top, 15.4 cm head tube 1.125" straight, 41 cm chainstays, 7.1 cm BB drop, 72.75 degree STA, 73.75 degree HTA with a pump peg and chain hanger on the DS seatstay, seat post clamp is integrated into frame.

The somewhat conservative build:

ENVE 2.0 road fork, 40 mm rake
Chris King NoThreadset headset

Dura-Ace 9100 shifters w/ supplied Polymer cables
Dura-Ace 9100 derailleurs, front is 31.9 mm clamp-on
Dura-Ace 9100 brakes
Dura-Ace 9100 crankset, 172.5 mm, 52-36
Shimano HG-901 chain w/ quick link
Ultegra 6800 cassette 12-25
Chris King BB, steel bearings, BSA

ENVE SES 3.4 Gen 1 wheelset w/ DT240S hubs, rear with 54T ratchet upgrade
(or HED Belgium+ on King R45 ceramic, 24/28 Sapim CX-ray spokes, not shown)
Dura-Ace 9000 skewers
Vittoria Corsa G clinchers, 700x25
Michelin A1 Airstop tubes

ENVE compact handlebar, 42 c-c
ENVE stem, 120 mm
Wheels Mfg alloy spacers
Thomson Elite seapost, 27.2x330 mm
Fizik Aliante R3 (now swapped to Bontrager Serano Pro carbon which is maybe my new fave at least this month :wink: )

King Ti cages with alloy bolts
Speedplay Zero stainless pedals

Weight 7.42 kg/ 16.3 lbs
Last edited by Bigger Gear on Fri Jun 28, 2019 4:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

by Weenie


RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 2555
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

Nice. One of the reasons I hesitated on picking up these is due to the HTA and original specc'd fork. Axle to crown on the original fork was around 5mm higher than the Enve I think, so HTA is actually steeper than originally designed and I was concerned this would handle funny. It sounds like that might have been an non-issue?

Js2
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 6:55 pm

by Js2

I picked up the one on ebay (vamoots sl size 53)

It came with an RSL fork, I swapped it out for a enve fork with 43mm rake (vs the 45mm recommended by moots) to account for the steeper head angle with this fork. Closer to my preferred trail and handling wise its just a tad bit quicker than my tarmac sl6. If i remember correctly, trail ended up being about 56mm vs. 58mm (Tarmac) on 25c tires.

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8150
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

That geometry seems very sound to me all the way around. I assume the headtube angle was selected with the 40mm fork offset in mind. And the 57mm top tube, I’m presuming that’s actual, and that virtual effective top tube length (horizontal) would be between 58-59cm? I’m sure it rides very nicely. And good job getting it built up before your wife throws it out.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

Bigger Gear
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: Wet coast, Canada

by Bigger Gear

RyanH wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:37 pm
Nice. One of the reasons I hesitated on picking up these is due to the HTA and original specc'd fork. Axle to crown on the original fork was around 5mm higher than the Enve I think, so HTA is actually steeper than originally designed and I was concerned this would handle funny. It sounds like that might have been an non-issue?
It is quick handling no doubt. I can't recall the exact fork spec for it, I remember seeing them built with Reynolds Ouzo Pro, True Temper Alpha-Q and even Moots own fork which was built by Edge/Enve I believe. Reynolds was 371 or 372 axle to crown IIRC, the Alpha-Q might have been even longer around 374, and I don't recall the Moots. I do know the fork spec on the larger Moots Vamoots SL and Compact SL was for 40 mm rake at size 57 and up, because the head tube angles went to 73.5-74 degrees. When I was racing I always liked a steeper HTA and shallow rake combo for quick handling but reasonable stability. Only issue is toe-overlap with that combo, exacerbated if one runs a rearward cleat setup.

I should probably try to accurately measure the HTA in real life with the Enve fork. The spec on the 2.0 is a 367 mm axle-crown length. Interestingly King does sell a 1.125" baseplate that is 5mm taller, I could consider installing this to see how much effect it has. Would be do-able as I have left enough steerer above the stem and I have a friend who bought the fancy Park crown race puller.

EDIT: Found this on Moots site after a quick google.

https://moots.myshopify.com/products/moots-road-fork

So the fork Moots sold was 370 mm and for frames pre-2009 they spec a 40 rake for 57.5 and up (this frame is effectively a 57.5 but the orginal buyer had them tweak the STA and HT length a tiny bit). I know the HTA spec was 73.75 for sure just like the stock frame. This would mean a 3 mm difference in axle-crown height, which is not very significant, would take the HTA from 73.75 to ~73.92. If I were to use a 5mm baseplate from King I would get an axle-crown of 372 and a HTA 73.62. All assuming the frame was designed around a 370 mm axle-crown.

Some good info here:

https://www.sheldonbrown.com/rinard/forklengths.htm
Calnago wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:05 pm
That geometry seems very sound to me all the way around. I assume the headtube angle was selected with the 40mm fork offset in mind. And the 57mm top tube, I’m presuming that’s actual, and that virtual effective top tube length (horizontal) would be between 58-59cm? I’m sure it rides very nicely. And good job getting it built up before your wife throws it out. Image
Actually the TT is 57 cm effective/horizontal. At 6'/183cm I would be stretched out massive on a top tube longer than 58! I've edited the orginal post.

User avatar
pdlpsher1
Posts: 2270
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:09 pm
Location: CO

by pdlpsher1

Nice bike and thanks for sharing.

But I envy your Cat. 1 pedigree more than the bike, haha

I have a Carl Strong, with a sloping TT and white logos. Our bikes share a similar look.

Have fun with your new toy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Imaking20
Posts: 1864
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

Js2 wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:47 pm
I picked up the one on ebay (vamoots sl size 53)

It came with an RSL fork, I swapped it out for a enve fork with 43mm rake (vs the 45mm recommended by moots) to account for the steeper head angle with this fork. Closer to my preferred trail and handling wise its just a tad bit quicker than my tarmac sl6. If i remember correctly, trail ended up being about 56mm vs. 58mm (Tarmac) on 25c tires.
The RSL fork is also 6mm taller than the Enve - a difference which has a greater impact on trail than the 2mm fork offset. That said, I would have done the same thing (and did put a 43mm offset fork on my Vamoots) but didn't really care for how it came together.
Current:
Wilier Wonka | The Dentist | The Bucket List

Retired:
Specialissima | Evo | T2 | Blue | Project C6.0 | Felt AR FRD | Colnago C59 NERO | 2014 S-Works Tarmac | S-Works Venge | Wilier Cento Uno SL | Tarmac SL2

RyanH
Moderator
Posts: 2555
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2012 4:01 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

by RyanH

I'm pretty curious if a 5mm CK spacer makes a noticeable difference or if it's something that you notice for 5 minutes and then forget about. So, my vote goes for trying the CK spacer in the name of science and WW knowledge base!

oldturd
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 12:10 am

by oldturd

very nice! 10-15% walls.. you must be in north van or west van? hope to catch this on the road sometime! :D

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8150
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Come out and meet me in White Rock someday and we can do this “wall”... quarter mile of constant 20%. When I say “we” I mean I will video you attempting it. I’d be afraid of breaking a chain... or falling over Image
Image
The line painting machine couldn’t even stay straight enough to avoid a squiggly double line.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

oldturd
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 12:10 am

by oldturd

Calnago wrote:
Fri Jun 28, 2019 7:48 pm
Come out and meet me in White Rock someday and we can do this “wall”... quarter mile of constant 20%. When I say “we” I mean I will video you attempting it. I’d be afraid of breaking a chain... or falling over Image
Image
The line painting machine couldn’t even stay straight enough to avoid a squiggly double line.
https://www.strava.com/segments/715788 ? :D

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 8150
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

Ha, is there anything that’s not a segment in Strava?
By the way, what’s that blip up by Roper Ave about half way up. Looks like a stop start again scenario, backtracking down to get started again before heading up the rest of the way.
Last edited by Calnago on Fri Jun 28, 2019 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

Js2
Posts: 71
Joined: Mon May 08, 2017 6:55 pm

by Js2

Imaking20 wrote:
Fri Jun 28, 2019 12:59 pm
Js2 wrote:
Thu Jun 27, 2019 9:47 pm
I picked up the one on ebay (vamoots sl size 53)

It came with an RSL fork, I swapped it out for a enve fork with 43mm rake (vs the 45mm recommended by moots) to account for the steeper head angle with this fork. Closer to my preferred trail and handling wise its just a tad bit quicker than my tarmac sl6. If i remember correctly, trail ended up being about 56mm vs. 58mm (Tarmac) on 25c tires.
The RSL fork is also 6mm taller than the Enve - a difference which has a greater impact on trail than the 2mm fork offset. That said, I would have done the same thing (and did put a 43mm offset fork on my Vamoots) but didn't really care for how it came together.

I could have gone for a 40mm offset but then the wheelbase will be even shorter and possibly more toe overlap, To me the 43mm is a good compromise and I am happy with it. The enve 2.0 fork weight is a good 40g lighter than the rsl fork after cut. The rsl fork is beefier and my guess is probably stiffer, but it looks like a huge tooth in front of the bike haha, so I preferred the enve 2.0 fork to balance the looks.

I briefly considered the 5mm chris king spacer, but I can't get over the gap between the bottom headset cup and the fork, as it is the ck headset already seem like it has a decent gap with the crown race. :mrgreen:

Imaking20
Posts: 1864
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2011 5:19 am

by Imaking20

I very strongly agree with everything you just said :)
Current:
Wilier Wonka | The Dentist | The Bucket List

Retired:
Specialissima | Evo | T2 | Blue | Project C6.0 | Felt AR FRD | Colnago C59 NERO | 2014 S-Works Tarmac | S-Works Venge | Wilier Cento Uno SL | Tarmac SL2

by Weenie


Bigger Gear
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2009 6:58 pm
Location: Wet coast, Canada

by Bigger Gear

Calnago, that wall is Oxford street. I rode it one time when we first moved to the area back in 1999. It's ridiculous. The pitches are 20-23%, with little flatish sections at the traffic circles. I did it on a CX bike with a 38x25 as my smallest gear and I thought my knees were going to EXPLODE. I live very close by and I NEVER ever ride it.

A local guy with one of the big clubs from Vancouver did it as a charity fundraiser on New Years Day 2018, on one of the Shaw Citi share bikes that they have in Vancouver. He made it, with a couple of rest stops and a few generous pushes.

At the bottom of that road if you head east up Buena Vista Ave that is the hillclimb that was formerly used in the Tour de White Rock, when it was a 3 day event. A fast time in the men is about 1:45-1:50, I think the record is around 1:41 by Cameron Evans back in 2007 or so. I was a solid 2 minute guy up that thing, even in my best form. Only thing was I could ride it 2 min in July or 2 min in January. Diesel.

Most of my riding out in the Fraser Valley to the east and north is rolling but there are many short climbs around 1 km in length with 10-15% sections and averages of 8-9%. We like to call them stem-humpers.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post