Weird Lightweight Chinese Steel Frame - CLR6200 Reynolds 520

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
waltthizzney
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 pm

by waltthizzney

Has anyone seen one of these before? I must admit they look pretty good. The sizing/geo of the bike is a little crazy though? A large lines up with a 52cm Caad almost. The HT is stupid short on these

Image

Image

This Reynolds 725 frame looks nice too

https://www.ebay.com/itm/SEABORAD-Reyno ... SwldRZ9IXl

User avatar
silvalis
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:02 am
Location: Brisbane

by silvalis

There was a bit of discussion about this frame in here
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=113717&start=2580#p1314770
Chapter 2 Tere
Scott Spark 720plus

by Weenie


waltthizzney
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 pm

by waltthizzney

Do you understand the frame comparison? It seems like the geo of this bike is actually bigger than it appears? minus the small HT?

lone wheeler
Posts: 482
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 11:34 am
Location: Dubai, UAE
Contact:

by lone wheeler

For that price it looks like it's worth a punt! Just don't like the oversize seat collar. Geo looks ok, long and low.

waltthizzney
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 pm

by waltthizzney

lone wheeler wrote:For that price it looks like it's worth a punt! Just don't like the oversize seat collar. Geo looks ok, long and low.



Does the Large line up with say a 52CM CAAD or FM066? Or am I missing something here?

Image

Image

User avatar
prendrefeu
Posts: 8609
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:32 pm
Location: Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Contact:

by prendrefeu

Your first geometry table is not the same as is posted for the Steel Frame in question, according to the eBay links in both this and the other thread.
Exp001 || Other projects in the works.

User avatar
silvalis
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:02 am
Location: Brisbane

by silvalis

The geo of the large (535 tt) is in the ballpark of a 56 caad or similar L bike, as mentioned in the FM66 thread. See the bike geometry chart on the next page. I think the short TT lengths are due to the extremely short headtube + steep seat tube, hence reach is ballpark large sizing.




I noticed the other day an ebay aluminium frame with the same geometry as these steel frames - "marechal soul road bike"
Chapter 2 Tere
Scott Spark 720plus

waltthizzney
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 pm

by waltthizzney

silvalis wrote:The geo of the large (535 tt) is in the ballpark of a 56 caad or similar L bike, as mentioned in the FM66 thread. See the bike geometry chart on the next page. I think the short TT lengths are due to the extremely short headtube + steep seat tube, hence reach is ballpark large sizing.




I noticed the other day an ebay aluminium frame with the same geometry as these steel frames - "marechal soul road bike"



Thanks, so what you are saying is due to the Seatube and Heattube angle, the reach is actually a lot longer than what is traditional with an effective TT of that size?

User avatar
silvalis
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:02 am
Location: Brisbane

by silvalis

Got curious again and plugged numbers into an online geo calc.
Note: I guesstimated the fork length. Ebay listing has dropout-brake bolt 352mm, so i guesstimated 363mm

In short, it's extremely long and low.
393/512mm reach/stack

Stick a crapload of spacers on and the large 535mm tt is ballpark medium 54cm.


am6200.jpg

Pic 1:
red: clr5200
green caad12 56
blue caad12 54


clr6200.JPG

Pic2:
red: clr5200
green is a 54 R3
blue caad12 54
Chapter 2 Tere
Scott Spark 720plus

ddsg
Posts: 34
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:30 pm

by ddsg

I don't understand why everyone just doesn't list stack/reach. Aren't they essentially the only measurements that determine fit?

User avatar
silvalis
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:02 am
Location: Brisbane

by silvalis

ddsg wrote:I don't understand why everyone just doesn't list stack/reach. Aren't they essentially the only measurements that determine fit?


most places do now.
reach, stack and seatpost angle.
Chapter 2 Tere
Scott Spark 720plus

istigatrice
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 8:32 am
Location: Australia

by istigatrice

head tube angle is also needed to determine the effective stem angle (e.g. a 71.5 vs a 73 degree head angle results in a ~3-5mm difference in handlebar stack and reach).
I write the weightweenies blog, hope you like it :)

Disclosure: I'm sponsored by Velocite, but I do give my honest opinion about them (I'm endorsed to race their bikes, not say nice things about them)

waltthizzney
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 pm

by waltthizzney

thanks, still have no idea what size i am if I bought this bike lol

istigatrice
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat May 12, 2012 8:32 am
Location: Australia

by istigatrice

I'd say silvalis is spot on, the large is similar to a 56 CAAD based on reach. The stack is much lower so it could have been designed for a +17 stem, or for people with really long torso and short legs. I'd suggest the small and medium frames would both be close to a 54/55 in terms of reach.

Another explanation is that they could be trying to save material (by using shorter tubes and steeper angles) to make the frames cheaper... Or they could just have no idea and those angles/lengths were what was available at the factory...

EDIT: I didn't see the second geometry chart, the above is based on the first geometry chart in the OP.
I write the weightweenies blog, hope you like it :)

Disclosure: I'm sponsored by Velocite, but I do give my honest opinion about them (I'm endorsed to race their bikes, not say nice things about them)

User avatar
silvalis
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2015 1:02 am
Location: Brisbane

by silvalis

After I did that second compare I didnt know what to think. You could have nailed it with the +17 stem...

Interesting, as I've spotted at least 4 different (3 steel, 1 alu) ebay frames with the same geometry so far (535tt, 74.5-75deg sta and 71.5hta, etc)
Chapter 2 Tere
Scott Spark 720plus

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post