What its like to ride a Turbo Mecacycle (split seatube)

[Lazarus]

Just thought I'd share my experiences of riding My Turbo Mecacycle. I've rode a fair few miles on this beauty now, mainly short 6-10mile runs, but a few 20's. She's not had her proper respray yet, but I coated her in pure white just so I could go out on it. Slapped this bit of kit on it because I've never ridden Mavic before.

Mavic Starfish chainset
Mavic 501 hubs on MA40's
Mavic 851 ssc Rear
Cinelli Pista Handlebars
white SPD's

First thing I notice is how fast it is off the mark, real fast. I can jump a car starting at the lights, you know the kind, those who like to rock, rev and edge forward, just because you are a cyclist on the inside of them. They stare at you, you laugh back, which really gets under their skin. They floor it, yet with this setup they just can't beat me of the mark. Don't know why its so quick out the blocks, The rigidity of the Mavic Starfish perhaps ? delivering power instantly to the drive. The shorter wheel base perhaps ? A combo of the 2 ? The smoothness of the bearings on the 501's.

Once I settle into the saddle, get up some speed, it then seems to start sapping me, draining my legs, its the wierdest feeling because my fitness levels are fine ? It's not the gear ratio's either, I'm used to riding a 53, infact I've always rode 53 until I am forced to drop into 42. I'm just 1 of those who is happy riding between 21-12 on a 53, hills included. (maybe I'm just a closet masochist ?). After a few more miles I seem to settle in again, that is what is so wierd, this small window that asks questions of my legs ?

My main observation is the shorter wheelbase to the rear. It's a strange notion that shorter wheelbases = greater performance. The front has enough wheel clearance from the downtube to build a block of flats, yet you couldn't squeeze a fart between the spacing inside the top of the forks. I guess what I'm saying is this " why shorten the wheelbase ONLY via the rear ?". All of this comes into play when you get up a head of steam, get out the saddle for some welly, and your feet clip the rear QR lever. Yes, the rear QR hits your feet if you're not careful, as does the driveside chainstay. Its a real close call avoiding it and takes some getting used to.

I can compare this bikes wheelbase to when I had the 753 Geoffrey Butler. It didn't have the shorter rear, just a very close clearance (just about fit a sausage finger like mine between the seatpost abd the tire), BUT, and it is a big but, the front forks had a much tighter rake, the wheel missing by a sausage finger. The Butler was a seriously good ride, and I have lived long enough to very regret selling her. Best ride I've had so far of a dozen bikes or so, beautiful, smooth, responsive, fast, like riding a bike that wasn't there, all in all, a much better designed bike than the Meca, albeit not as cool looking.

Perhaps she just needs some getting used to, not sure yet. After riding it regular for 2 months whilst my Faggin was elsewhere, it was very odd to get back on my trusty stead of 27years, and have to get used to it again. So anybody thinking of getting 1, "IMHO they are beautiful, especially kitted with a full Mavic Groupset, but they also come with ... how shall we say " a certain set of strange quirks ". Anyone else care to post their thoguths on riding a Mecacycle ? Would love to hear from you Yours Laz.

 

[Jonny69]

TTIUWP. You can't post about a bike like that and not post any pic

Once I settle into the saddle, get up some speed, it then seems to start sapping me, draining my legs, its the wierdest feeling because my fitness levels are fine ? It's not the gear ratio's either, I'm used to riding a 53, infact I've always rode 53 until I am forced to drop into 42. I'm just 1 of those who is happy riding between 21-12 on a 53, hills included. (maybe I'm just a closet masochist ?). After a few more miles I seem to settle in again, that is what is so wierd, this small window that asks questions of my legs ?

Is this down to the riding position do you think? I recently swapped from my fixed gear (48/16 gearing) to my geared bike (52/42 and 12-24) to get used to it for a long distance event. I noticed that despite having gears, it was knocking the stuffing out of me. I can only put it down to a different riding position and using parts of my leg muscles that weren't used so much in the position I rode my fixie on.

My main observation is the shorter wheelbase to the rear. It's a strange notion that shorter wheelbases = greater performance. The front has enough wheel clearance from the downtube to build a block of flats, yet you couldn't squeeze a fart between the spacing inside the top of the forks. I guess what I'm saying is this " why shorten the wheelbase ONLY via the rear ?". All of this comes into play when you get up a head of steam, get out the saddle for some welly, and your feet clip the rear QR lever. Yes, the rear QR hits your feet if you're not careful, as does the driveside chainstay. Its a real close call avoiding it and takes some getting used to.

Wow, yes, hadn't considered all of this with those short rears. I also don't know why shortening bikes is likened with performance. I had assumed it was so that less metal was used on the bike which reduced the weight. It also has the effect of stiffening the frame because the bending moments are smaller. I've also heard it said that it's done for aero improvements. But neither of these would be the case for yours, surely?

 

[Citoyen du monde]

I own a Rigi which is one of the many bikes that predated the Mecacycle which also has the dual seat tubes. It too gives the impression of fast starts, but I have put this down to impression not fact, as everybody who I have ridden with has not noticed any change in my riding. My Rigi also tends to be less comfortable when riding longer distances. This I put down to what Jonny describes as a change in riding position, which makes use of different and less efficient muscles.

 

[Piperdave]

Don't know if you've seen this...

http://www.classiclightweights.co.uk/designs/hs-saxon.html

Saxon....

Dave

 

[Lazarus]

Hi Johnny Thanks for the drop by buddy, sorry about the lack of pic (holds slapped wrists limply LOL) haven't bothered with 1 as she's only been slapped back together until I have time to do the re-spray properly. It was just burning a hole in my pocket, so to speak.

"Riding Position" ... Good observation J The shorter wheel base may well be the answer, after all, if I'm not mistaken shorter wheelbase was really "invented" for track racing, short haul, max output, max drive to the wheel via the crank etc. It's certainly got my brain working again, instead of me just thinking I was being silly re: power drain after a few miles. Its all food for thought J Later my friend, yours Laz.

......................

Thanks for the drop by Cito, always nice to hear from you buddy Again, I'm starting to think "Track Bike Design" becoming roadbike incorporated, hence long haul being less comfortable, after all, track boys are NOT road boys and vice versa. Later my friend, yours Laz.

......................

Hi Dave "I have my friend yes". I love the way the concept was given not only thought but finances and time. Functionality wise are they any better ? we don't know, but aesthetically for my mind they are a pure form of beauty, stunning even at their worst. The Turbo Mecacycle is certainly worthy of owning, if only for it's different & unique design, and despite my post, I can't resist riding it. It has many positives too. I guess its fair to say "owning & riding a Turbo is an experience that the visuals can't bring". Later my friend, yours Laz.

 

[Old Ned]

A friend of mine has an Ian May (from Bebington) time trial frame that has not only twin seat tubes but twin top and down tubes as well. Not sure why - but perhaps just done as an exercise in frame building!

I can also remember seeing a Condor TT frame with twin seat tube ridden by a top star of the 80's. I think it was Ian Butcher (?). Possibly got a photo in an old 'Cycling'.

 

[Lazarus]

Hi Ned An Ian May came up last year on fleabay just a few miles from me and it had a split seatube, the version that had a normal sized seatube just long enough for a seatpost brased onto 2 single narrow tubes that connected like the Meca at the bottom. All in all she was quite a machine, but the bidding got out of my reach so I let her slide. Love the sound of that "all twin tubing"

I know that Colnago did the Bi-titan which is a split downtube and recessed seattube (you know the 1, like a dinge in it to allow for wheel clearance). 1 went just last week for £600, but I'm skint now so had to settle for just watching instead. Tianium tubes if I'm not mistaken. I think I just have this thing for "oddities" in the bike design department. The Meca is certainly a bike to own with pride. Sure it has its wee faults, but it is truly stunning when standing next to "run of the mill CF jobs". Different doesn't describe it. Nice to hear from you anyways my old friend. Take care, yours Laz.

 

[Old Ned]

You've seen these have you?

 

[Lazarus]

Nice aren't they Ned I'm slap in the middle of finally rebuilding the Turbo (the bike that brought me here to Retro. The seller invited me to keep him updated ... never seen him since :roll: ) I'll upload tomorrow what she's like now, and what she's like in a few days. Won't give too much away, but suffice to say, "after owning her for 9months, pondering endless build options, a saddle has finally shown me the way forward. Daft I know, but I'm finally excited to be making her good and finished. Later Ned, yours Laz.