Storck geometry

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
konky
Posts: 839
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:26 pm

by konky

Mario Jr. wrote:The Storck forks are 10-15mm longer axle to crown, compared to most other forks on the market. That you should add to the head tube length.

For instance, the 51 Fenomalist I ride now, has 115mm head tube. I have no spacers under the stem. On my former Addict with 120mm headtube, I had 10mm underneath. My saddle to handlebar drop is the same.


Out of interest Mario Jr. did you have the same seat post on both bikes i.e. straight or set back. As we know reach affects drop.

User avatar
Mario Jr.
Posts: 2183
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:49 am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

by Mario Jr.

No, but my seat is always in the same position in relation to the BB, as that's the base for all other measures. I always set my bike up according to a Retül fit I had.

by Weenie


konky
Posts: 839
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 6:26 pm

by konky

So Mario Jr you had a setback post on your Addict and a straight post on the Storck? But still maintained correct over BB positioning and a comfortable reach on both. Is that correct?

User avatar
Mario Jr.
Posts: 2183
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 8:49 am
Location: Denmark
Contact:

by Mario Jr.

On the Addict I used the Ritchey stubby as it was an ISP frame. It had a little setback. On the Storcks I have used both inline and setback seat posts, but my seat is always in the same position to the BB. This can be achieved with most seat posts. It's just a matter of where you clamp the rails...

Ypsylon
Posts: 1403
Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 6:25 pm

by Ypsylon

A little late to the party, but I ride a 54 Soloist and a 55 Storck CD1.0 and both fit me well.
"Nothing compares to the simple pleasures of a bike ride," said John F. Kennedy, a man who had the pleasure of Marilyn Monroe.

User avatar
djconnel
Posts: 7926
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 1:57 pm
Location: San Francisco, CA
Contact:

by djconnel

Are the frame angles measured with the specific fork? A longer fork will slacken both seat and head tubes. This will increase the trail.

The less rake makes the fork more stable, not "floppy". Chopper forks are floppy. Straight forks are super-stable. The "caster effect" is reverse from the direction the bike is riding.


User avatar
Fixie82
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:45 am

by Fixie82

Hi,

Been lurking here for a while and this is my first post. I am looking to make a frame/bike change as I have grown weary of the poor shifting performance from my Stevens SLR. I enjoy the bike itself but the shifting issues have become too much. The bike is running SRAM Red and has been to a multitude of mechanics and used a few different cable systems all with the same outcome, I would simply change to Di2 if it was a compatible frameset but is not. I also ride a Cannondale System Six with Red for training and crits so I have an appreciation for just how good SRAM shifting can be.

I am looking at replacing it with a Storck Absolutist (2012) as Storck bikes have always been an unattainable dream, however I have found a frame for a good price and it is compatible with both mechanical and Di2 so should be fairly future proofed in that sense. I can also transfer all my current components over without hassle. Where I am stuck is in which size to get, I am 182cm tall (short legs, longer torso) currently riding a 56cm SLR with a slammed stem and find this very comfortable. I recently did a 12 hour day on it so no real complaints there. These dimensions but me at the upper end of the Absolutists 55cm or the lower end of the 57cm, normally I would go with the 55cm size but the extremely short headtube concerns me. I could go to the 57 which jumps up in headtube size but the TT length looks quite stretched out.

Any Stork owners out there that can advise on if to go with the smaller or larger frame? I prefer to run lower bars but also don't want a stack of spacers under the stem. Due to the boutique nature of Storck in Aus, test rides are not really possible on both sizes either.

Thoughts much appreciated.

User avatar
fa63
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, US

by fa63

If you don't want a stack of spacers, it looks like the 57 is the way to go. You might have to run a 10-20 mm shorter stem on the Storck though, so that may not work well if you are already running a shorter stem on the Stevens.

That said, Storck has got one of the craziest geometries in the business...

User avatar
fa63
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, US

by fa63

Actually, I just drew up the geometry for the Stevens, and got a reach of 388 mm and stack of 562 mm. Looking at the Storck geometry chart, the reach for a 55 is 401 mm and the stack is 552 mm (the Storck must have a tall fork or something). So it looks like you could get away with a 55 using a 10 mm spacer and 10 mm shorter stem. On the other hand, the 57 has a slightly longer reach (405 mm) but quite more stack (574 mm), so it could probably be made to work as well but you might need a stem with more negative rise to achieve the same position as your Stevens.

User avatar
Fixie82
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:45 am

by Fixie82

Excellent, thanks for crunching the numbers like that. I hadn't realised that they do use a slightly taller fork (just googled it). I am currently running a 120mm stem on the Stevens so could easily go to 110mm and 10mm of spacers is not too bad. Looks like the 55cm is the way to go.

Much appreciated!

User avatar
Fixie82
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:45 am

by Fixie82

Further thought, it seems that Storck recommend running an inline seatpost with their frames, something about power delivery and it would seem that they lengthen the TT to account for this. So I could possibly still need a 120mm stem but at least I know I will fit on the 55cm without a huge stack of spacers.

Again thanks

cyclenutnz
Posts: 763
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

Ignore Storcks comment about inline seatposts - the seat tube angle is the same as the Stevens so you will need the same amount of offset on the post for the Storck. Using stack and reach removes the confusion caused by the effect that different STA has on TT length.

I don't know the specifics of your saddle position so the hoods reach and bar drop below are just indicative. But it's clear that going 1cm shorter on the stem and 1cm taller on spacers will match your position within a mm or two

Image
http://www.speedtheory.co.nz
http://www.velogicfit.com - 3D Motion Capture and Frame Finder Software

User avatar
fa63
Posts: 2256
Joined: Mon Feb 19, 2007 7:26 am
Location: Atlanta, GA, US

by fa63

Agreed; if you are comfortable with the amount of setback you have now, I wouldn't change it because Mr. Storck thinks you should. Sometimes I wonder if he is trying to put everyone in a TT position, even on a road bike...

by Weenie


User avatar
Fixie82
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:45 am

by Fixie82

Again, thanks for the help.

This information has been excellent, I have just ordered the 55cm.

Will have to let you know how the build goes.

Cheers

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post