Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 110
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Steel Jones Spaceframe

    Jeff has just blogged a Steel Spaceframe - some photos here: http://jonesbikes.com/blog/?p=1308#comment-181

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wannabeRacer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,107
    Woooho... this means I can finally buy a Jeff

  3. #3
    Harmonius Wrench
    Reputation: Guitar Ted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,258
    Interesting.


    I will be curious to hear how much that frame/fork/bar weigh. That's a lot of steel tubing there.
    Riden' an Smilin'
    Guitar Ted

    Blog
    RidingGravel.com

  4. #4
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted
    Interesting.


    I will be curious to hear how much that frame/fork/bar weigh. That's a lot of steel tubing there.
    it's a lot of straight gauge steel tubing at that.

    I'm interested in riding one but I really think space frame bikes are a whole lot of hype without any pudding.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,494
    Looks interesting. Also, check out the bars. Looks like the steerer tube is actaully part of the bars!

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,949
    Finally, someone has figured out how to make a fork and bars out of steel!

  7. #7
    Spooooon!
    Reputation: Hairllama's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    674
    Quote Originally Posted by craigsj
    Finally, someone has figured out how to make a fork and bars out of steel!
    I've had both for quite some time. Granted they're not of the Jones variety, but steel bars and forks are out there.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Hairllama
    I've had both for quite some time. Granted they're not of the Jones variety, but steel bars and forks are out there.
    don't mind him.... that was actually just craigsj's ever-present cynicism and sarcasm.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    I also question the wisdom behind this project.
    The shape of the Spaceframe was tailored for Ti; replicating it in steel, 1:1, does not make sense.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    I also question the wisdom behind this project.
    The shape of the Spaceframe was tailored for Ti; replicating it in steel, 1:1, does not make sense.
    Who says he replicated it 1:1? I'm sure he tailered the bends, tubing diameters and wall thickness for the new material. And obviously he has been testing it for quite some time before even mentioning it on his blog.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: PNW Freeride's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    373
    Quote Originally Posted by wannabeRacer
    Woooho... this means I can finally buy a Jeff
    Agreed .
    Im also wondering about weight and the affect of swiching material.

  12. #12
    ogarajef@luther.edu
    Reputation: 1strongone1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,397
    The ti version sucks to ride, I am sure adding 4 pounds to the design makes it even more worthless.
    "RIDE IT LIKE YOU HATE IT"

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeny
    Who says he replicated it 1:1? I'm sure he tailered the bends, tubing diameters and wall thickness for the new material. And obviously he has been testing it for quite some time before even mentioning it on his blog.
    Don't kid me. You cannot curve butted steel (it will buckle) and curving heavy tubes would not affect their ride properties.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by 1strongone1
    The ti version sucks to ride, I am sure adding 4 pounds to the design makes it even more worthless.
    Do you have first hand experience? I would love you if could elaborate on the poor ride.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Guitar Ted
    I will be curious to hear how much that frame/fork/bar weigh. That's a lot of steel tubing there.
    He posted earlier on his blog that the steel truss fork weighs less than a normal unicrown steel fat fork.
    Too many bikes, not enough time.

  16. #16
    Needed Less ~ Did More
    Reputation: Singlespeedpunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,008
    Climber999, yes you can bend butted tube. Just because you can't does not make it impossible.

    SSP
    "Put any one on one of these singlespeed bikes and they could not help but have fun"
    -
    Otis Guy talking about klunkers c1976

  17. #17
    ogarajef@luther.edu
    Reputation: 1strongone1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,397
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Do you have first hand experience? I would love you if could elaborate on the poor ride.
    I have put many miles on one and I don't like it. If you like your handlebars an inch or two above your saddle then it may be ok, for me it feels like I am driving a bus through the singletrack. I really wanted to buy one, at one time, luckily a friend of mine beat me to the punch. Everyone that actually owns one, is going to like it. They are unique and expensive, you are forced to like it.
    "RIDE IT LIKE YOU HATE IT"

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Don't kid me. You cannot curve butted steel (it will buckle) and curving heavy tubes would not affect their ride properties.
    Who is kidding who here? First, I never claimed he was bending butted steel tubing. But then again, why do you think butted tubing can't be bent? Of course it can, it just depends on how much you want to bend it and what the wall thickness is in the butted section. Must of Jeff's bends are pretty big diameter, no sharp bends, so I'm sure it can be done.

    Secondly, bending heavy tubes (which I guarantee is not what Jeff is doing) most certainly will affect their ride properties.

    Here is what I think Jeff has done: Select the proper diameter and wall thickness tubing to give him the leteral stiffness and the vertical compliance he wants. And then he's been testing it all summer to see if it performs like a Jones should. And I guarantee he has a notebook full of comments and changes he will make if he ever sells them.

    Do your homework before posting such nonesense.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by bikeny
    Who is kidding who here? First, I never claimed he was bending butted steel tubing. But then again, why do you think butted tubing can't be bent? Of course it can, it just depends on how much you want to bend it and what the wall thickness is in the butted section. Must of Jeff's bends are pretty big diameter, no sharp bends, so I'm sure it can be done.

    Secondly, bending heavy tubes (which I guarantee is not what Jeff is doing) most certainly will affect their ride properties.

    Here is what I think Jeff has done: Select the proper diameter and wall thickness tubing to give him the leteral stiffness and the vertical compliance he wants. And then he's been testing it all summer to see if it performs like a Jones should. And I guarantee he has a notebook full of comments and changes he will make if he ever sells them.

    Do your homework before posting such nonesense.
    Well, one may retort that speculating like you do, is a bit more nonsense than coming up with statements based on research. However, we are all friends here, so I take back my comment about 'kidding me'. An apology is extended.

    That's what I know:
    When I inquire about bending butted tubes with James from Black Sheep he advised against it, pointing out it may not withstand the pressure. He suggested restricting bending to straight gauge tubes. Jones may be immensely more talented than James (which I personally doubt). or as you suggest, it may depend on the nature of the curve.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: wannabeRacer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,107
    I been thinking about the price and weight also? uhmmm..... I may not be able to afford it and the frame might weight 3kg not including the fork?

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Well, one may retort that speculating like you do, is a bit more nonsense than coming up with statements based on research. However, we are all friends here, so I take back my comment about 'kidding me'. An apology is extended.

    That's what I know:
    When I inquire about bending butted tubes with James from Black Sheep he advised against it, pointing out it may not withstand the pressure. He suggested restricting bending to straight gauge tubes. Jones may be immensely more talented than James (which I personally doubt). or as you suggest, it may depend on the nature of the curve.
    You are totally correct, we are both (all?) speculating about this. No apology required, and I hope I didn't offend you with my above comments.

    James is certainly a very talented frame builder and bender of tubing. As a matter of fact, I am riding a custom Ti Black Sheep with LOTS of bends and absolutely love it, bent Ti fork and all! But, if any bike could lure me away from my Black Sheep, it could only be a Jones Ti spaceframe.

    My guess is he is using straight gage tubing of whatever wall thickness he thought up to the task. I know, bold statement there! I'm sure more details will come at some point.

    Mark

  22. #22
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,484
    Jones needs to team up with Lynskey and we can have curved, twisted steel tubes

    The SpaceHelix in 3d!

  23. #23
    Plays with tools
    Reputation: customfab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    4,505
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Don't kid me. You cannot curve butted steel (it will buckle) and curving heavy tubes would not affect their ride properties.
    when did you start building bikes?

  24. #24
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,585

    Butting is irrelevant

    Just FYI, guys:

    Whether a tube is butted or not is irrelevant to whether it can be successfully/safely bent. Thinner tubing is more difficult to bend than thicker tubing, likewise smaller diameter tubes are easier to bend than larger ones. Small radius is harder than large, since the outside of the bend has to stretch more (and ends up thinner) as the radius decreases.

    Butted steel and ti tubes are typically not bent because the tubing tends to be relatively thin in the center sections, and most main triangle tubes are also pretty large diameter (ie, >1"), meaning that it's very hard to do and end up with something you want to use for a bike frame. In theory, however, it can be done.

    The curved tubes on Jeff's frame are obviously made from ~5/8" straightgauge 4130 or something very similar. There's no butted tubing available in this sort of diameter/length for bikes (or anything else that I know of). Most likely it's .035" or .049" wall. That would be relatively easy to work with and plenty strong. And no, it's probably not light, but if you're after light, you don't do any tube bending anyway - the shortest distance between two points, and all that...

    -Walt

    Quote Originally Posted by Singlespeedpunk
    Climber999, yes you can bend butted tube. Just because you can't does not make it impossible.

    SSP

  25. #25
    Stokeless Asshat
    Reputation: jeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,352
    Finally, the voice of reason.
    Zip ties? Not on my bike!

    Want:
    650B rims or wheel set. 80's vintage 32 or 36 x 135mm

  26. #26
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    Thread killer


    LOL

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    Nice to hear from someone who actually knows what they're talking about!

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt
    Just FYI, guys:

    Whether a tube is butted or not is irrelevant to whether it can be successfully/safely bent. Thinner tubing is more difficult to bend than thicker tubing, likewise smaller diameter tubes are easier to bend than larger ones. Small radius is harder than large, since the outside of the bend has to stretch more (and ends up thinner) as the radius decreases.

    Butted steel and ti tubes are typically not bent because the tubing tends to be relatively thin in the center sections, and most main triangle tubes are also pretty large diameter (ie, >1"), meaning that it's very hard to do and end up with something you want to use for a bike frame. In theory, however, it can be done.

    The curved tubes on Jeff's frame are obviously made from ~5/8" straightgauge 4130 or something very similar. There's no butted tubing available in this sort of diameter/length for bikes (or anything else that I know of). Most likely it's .035" or .049" wall. That would be relatively easy to work with and plenty strong. And no, it's probably not light, but if you're after light, you don't do any tube bending anyway - the shortest distance between two points, and all that...

    -Walt
    Thanks Walt, that's quite edifying.

    I must say a feel somewhat vindicated, although I have confused between butted and thin-walled tubes.

    One question still remain in my mind; perhaps Walt can respond; are there any tubes sufficiently thick to be bent?

  29. #29
    Northern Aggressor
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    708
    I'm pretty sure you just got served, not vindicated.

    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Thanks Walt, that's quite edifying.

    I must say a feel somewhat vindicated, although I have confused between butted and thin-walled tubes.

    One question still remain in my mind; perhaps Walt can respond; are there any tubes sufficiently thick to be bent?

  30. #30
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil Chocula
    I'm pretty sure you just got served, not vindicated.
    No,I was stating butted tubes cannot be bent, under the implicit assumption their middle sections are too thin for such operation. Walt verified exactly that. Q.E.D.

  31. #31
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,585

    Yes and no.

    The thinnest large-diameter steel tubing that I have seen bent on a consistent basis for bikes is 1.125"x.028" straightgauge (so .7mm thick tube walls). And that's a large-radius bend (ie, Coconino style toptube).

    The *thickest* commonly used butted steel bike tubing (say, True Temper Verus) is significantly thinner in the center section (.6mm, or ~.024"). I don't know anyone that bends main triangle tubes like that, let alone higher-end heat treated or air hardening tubing (which gets down to .4mm center sections).

    In ti, most butted tubing is .6mm/.024" at the center as well (it doesn't get any thinner to my knowledge) and I've never heard of anyone bending that. That's not to say nobody has done it, but I'd be pretty surprised.

    .6mm is regularly bent for seatstays (admitttedly, I only use stuff that thin for 'cross bikes, not mountain bikes), but those are usually pretty small diameter (16mm or smaller, usually), which makes things much easier. Many builders (myself included) struggle with getting consistent good bends even for seatstays.

    Hope that helps.

    -Walt

    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Thanks Walt, that's quite edifying.

    I must say a feel somewhat vindicated, although I have confused between butted and thin-walled tubes.

    One question still remain in my mind; perhaps Walt can respond; are there any tubes sufficiently thick to be bent?

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bikeny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,494
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt
    The thinnest large-diameter steel tubing that I have seen bent on a consistent basis for bikes is 1.125"x.028" straightgauge (so .7mm thick tube walls). And that's a large-radius bend (ie, Coconino style toptube).

    The *thickest* commonly used butted steel bike tubing (say, True Temper Verus) is significantly thinner in the center section (.6mm, or ~.024"). I don't know anyone that bends main triangle tubes like that, let alone higher-end heat treated or air hardening tubing (which gets down to .4mm center sections).

    In ti, most butted tubing is .6mm/.024" at the center as well (it doesn't get any thinner to my knowledge) and I've never heard of anyone bending that. That's not to say nobody has done it, but I'd be pretty surprised.

    .6mm is regularly bent for seatstays (admitttedly, I only use stuff that thin for 'cross bikes, not mountain bikes), but those are usually pretty small diameter (16mm or smaller, usually), which makes things much easier. Many builders (myself included) struggle with getting consistent good bends even for seatstays.

    Hope that helps.

    -Walt
    All good info, Walt, thanks. But I'm starting to think that this discussion is moot anyway. For this type of bike, I think you need to use straight gage tubing to get consistent compliance from the frame. In other words, the whole idea of the space frame is vertical compliance and lateral stiffenss. Using butted tubing would cause the tube to flex more in the thinner section and less in the thicker section. I would think that is not a good thing for the frames lifespan. Also, as Walt mentioned earlier, there is no butter tubing available in the lengths and diameters Jeff is using.

    Climber999: You mention not knowing the difference between butted and thin walled tubing. Thin walled tubing is just that, it has a consistent thin wall through the whole length of the tube. Butted tubing has a thicker wall at one end and a thinner wall for the rest of the tube. Double butted tubing has thicker wall at both ends and thinner wall in the center section. Walt please clarrify if I didn't get it exactly right.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation: OmaHaq's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    639
    Very educational thread toward the end. Thanks!

  34. #34
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: Walt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    6,585

    Yes.

    Yes, it's moot - Jeff is clearly using straightgauge for that frame (and I would guess, for his ti frames as well). I can't speak to the "consistent compliance" part - I do not build this type of frame, and have never ridden one, so I don't know what Jeff's thought process is when designing/building. Bottom line: it's straightgauge. For the record, that's not a dig against it. I use straightgauge for all kinds of things, all the time, as does every other framebuilder on the planet.

    Most builders refer to *any* tubing with varying wall thicknesses (thick/thin, thick/thin/thick, thicker/thin/thick) as "butted". The "double" and "triple" butted tubes you commonly hear about are just thick/thin/thick, with the "triple butted" being slightly thicker at one thick section than at the other (for example .9mm/.6mm/.8mm).

    -Walt

    Quote Originally Posted by bikeny
    All good info, Walt, thanks. But I'm starting to think that this discussion is moot anyway. For this type of bike, I think you need to use straight gage tubing to get consistent compliance from the frame. In other words, the whole idea of the space frame is vertical compliance and lateral stiffenss. Using butted tubing would cause the tube to flex more in the thinner section and less in the thicker section. I would think that is not a good thing for the frames lifespan. Also, as Walt mentioned earlier, there is no butter tubing available in the lengths and diameters Jeff is using.

    Climber999: You mention not knowing the difference between butted and thin walled tubing. Thin walled tubing is just that, it has a consistent thin wall through the whole length of the tube. Butted tubing has a thicker wall at one end and a thinner wall for the rest of the tube. Double butted tubing has thicker wall at both ends and thinner wall in the center section. Walt please clarrify if I didn't get it exactly right.

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    I hope Jeff doesn't mind me quoting from his blog:

    "The ride is very similar to the Ti version. The geometry is the same so the balance points and handling are the same. The bike just has a little more mass to it and it’s a little stiffer. I did use smaller tubes on this frame than on the Ti frame since steel is stiffer.

    The H-Bar Loop is welded directly to the steel steerer and the star nut is in the bottom. Headset adjustment is done at the lower fork clamp.

    I never painted this one. I just wanted to see how it would ride. Maybe I’ll paint it later. I’m riding the second one now and it’s black.
    JJ"

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D.F.L.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,840
    The other problem with bends in butted tubing is that thin-walled material, especially in larger diameters, requires an INTERNAL mandrel, in addition to the customary external piece. The internal mandrel maintains the tubes cross-section (eliminates collapsing/buckling).

    If you're trying to bend the thin, center section, you cannot insert the mandrel, because the end butts have a smaller I.D. than the center.

    but enough of this sexy talk...

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,647
    Quote Originally Posted by D.F.L.
    The other problem with bends in butted tubing is that thin-walled material, especially in larger diameters, requires an INTERNAL mandrel, in addition to the customary external piece. The internal mandrel maintains the tubes cross-section (eliminates collapsing/buckling).

    If you're trying to bend the thin, center section, you cannot insert the mandrel, because the end butts have a smaller I.D. than the center.

    but enough of this sexy talk...
    i've heard of sand-packing and other non-traditional "mandrels"... are these not effective enough on thin tubing, or are they not used because of other practical drawbacks?

  38. #38
    banned
    Reputation: <-meathucker->'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    102
    My biggest questions are a) price & b) wait time. I would love to have a ti spaceframe, but am not willing to pay that amount AND have to wait for years to get it; conversely, I would pay less for a steel version if the ride qualities were the same BUT not if it was a similar wait time. Maybe doing this bike in steel will allow him to contract another builder to do the work like what he did with Merlin?

  39. #39
    Geordie biker
    Reputation: saltyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,376
    i asked this week about buying a jones 2fat snow bike but he has stopped production, he is very busy trying to build peoples custom Ti frames at the moment, the waiting list is high, there must be some backlog to clear i bet.

    the steel bike will be expensive still i reckon, its still a custom frame after all, a typical hardtail steel frame to fit is around £1,000 ($1,500) typically, so i guess a steel spaceframe will be double that.
    2014 milage so far - 2,485
    www.ukfatbikes.co.uk

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    421

    "In Jeff We Truss"

    If JJ's got enough time and resources his steel birdcage should work pretty darn well, and without a major weight gain. With so many tubes, diameters, and bends the tuning variables do seem endless though!

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    399

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TheGenTwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    286
    Quote Originally Posted by ftajiri

    My first impression was that that was a lot of money for a bike without any "bling-steel"; 853 tubing and its other similar grades

    I would be interested to observe the popularity on this one . Personally, I like it because I am inclined favorably to the look and hype of the Jones .

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    694
    Great that he's found a way to bring the price down, but it would be nice to see some weights with all that 4130.

    Also be cool when he moves beyond the current "Model T" phase: and color and size you want as long as it's black and 23".

  44. #44
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    "slight" weight penalty

  45. #45
    banned
    Reputation: <-meathucker->'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by ftajiri
    Oh yes...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Steel Jones Spaceframe-really20want.jpg  


  46. #46
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CJones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    426
    The Jones website has just been updated with the new frames and bars:

    http://jonesbikes.com/production_framesets.html

    http://jonesbikes.com/h-bar.html

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    I can see some cut loop bars in my not too distant future

    And maybe a steel diamond for the hell of it!

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    688
    I don't get it. Am I the only one?

  49. #49
    Just Ride!
    Reputation: kustomz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,141
    He seems to have very good price points on frame and forks, too bad there are no other sizes in stock.

  50. #50
    Newt Guy
    Reputation: FrostyStruthers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    833
    Can I put a 120mm fork on it?

    Yes, steel is most certainly stronger than aluminum EVERY time.
    ~Frosty Struthers

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: D_Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    694
    Quote Originally Posted by FrostyStruthers
    Can I put a 120mm fork on it?


    Why do that when you can put on 10lb tractor tire in the front instead?

  52. #52
    banned
    Reputation: <-meathucker->'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    102
    All joking aside, has anyone seen a published weight for the steel spaceframe and fork? There is only one size available, I have got to believe it wouldn't be so hard to get an accurate weight.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: minh's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by <-meathucker->
    ...Maybe doing this bike in steel will allow him to contract another builder to do the work like what he did with Merlin?
    there was another thread about this a few weeks back and it said that the steel spaceframes are going to be made in asia.

    ah, here it is: Mmmmmmmm

  54. #54
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Englehardt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by D_Man
    Why do that when you can put on 10lb tractor tire in the front instead?
    The fat front wheel/tire that Jeff uses is surprisingly light. The added weight is roughly the same as the diference between an expensive rigid fork and an average suspension fork. It adds about one pound (rotating weight). Don't get me wrong, I don't expect you will see fat tires on race bikes, but it is not as heavy as it looks.

    If you built a 135mm wheel with a normal rim added weight of a 135mm front hub vs a 120mm is fairly insignificant especially when considering the added stiffness. I didn't do any math to figure this out, but I would be that you get the more stiffness out of a 135mm rim with 355 rims vs a 120mm hub with Arch rims. I would also bet that 135mm wheel is lighter depending on the hub choice.

  55. #55
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,647
    Quote Originally Posted by Englehardt
    I don't expect you will see fat tires on race bikes
    too late! Endurance races are admittedly a bit of a different game than regular xc races though, but not by too much

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,523
    Wish it had a split shell EBB though...

  57. #57
    directionless white male
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    68
    From Jone's site it looks like he's only doing frame+fork sets and not allowing mixes. I'd like to see the diamond frame with the ti truss fork. That would be damn sweet for 1500.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Bluebeat007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    279
    I asked him about this and he said you can get the steel frame with either the standard steel fork, steel truss fork, or ti truss fork.

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    I asked Jeff that very question, he said you can put a truss fork on a steel diamond frame. He also said the new diamond is lighter than the old one and has better clearance.

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluebeat007
    I asked him about this and he said you can get the steel frame with either the standard steel fork, steel truss fork, or ti truss fork.
    Like Fulton said above, I'm pretty sure it's mix and match now. Pretty cool if you ask me.

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation: dosboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    625

    Wow I'm shockd

    Quote Originally Posted by 1strongone1
    I have put many miles on one and I don't like it. If you like your handlebars an inch or two above your saddle then it may be ok, for me it feels like I am driving a bus through the singletrack. I really wanted to buy one, at one time, luckily a friend of mine beat me to the punch. Everyone that actually owns one, is going to like it. They are unique and expensive, you are forced to like it.

    I have owned literally twenty plus 29ers and my jones was by far the bestriding bike I have ever owned, and I'm not just saying that because i own one, i sold it a year ago, and i still long for that bike, i rode from durango to mob on it and didn't get a shingle blister, i think i can actually say i loved that bike, like i would a family member. I miss it

  62. #62
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TheGenTwo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    286
    Anyone has their eyes on the steel diamond/standard rigid frameset?

  63. #63
    banned
    Reputation: <-meathucker->'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by TheGenTwo
    Anyone has their eyes on the steel diamond/standard rigid frameset?
    yes

  64. #64
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    Has anyone weight or ridden one?

  65. #65
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    I have ridden the Ti one and almost bought one, but 5g was too much of a buy in. At 1,500. I am almost ready to add one to the stable.

    Maybe second run. Just don't know why he didn't add full fat tire to the rear also.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  66. #66
    A Surly Maverick
    Reputation: Dr Feelygood !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,598
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit
    I have ridden the Ti one and almost bought one, but 5g was too much of a buy in. At 1,500. I am almost ready to add one to the stable.

    Maybe second run. Just don't know why he didn't add full fat tire to the rear also.



    Perphaps he will in the not to distant future
    A Fatback'd Lefty for who life IS a Beach

  67. #67
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    I recently asked Jeff that as well - he said he has no plans for a steel full fat bike - I'd certainly buy one if he did.

  68. #68
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    Don't hold your breath I asked already. He said he has other projects to take care of first. That's code for minimum of two years.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  69. #69
    mtbr member
    Reputation: coconinocycles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    997
    Quote Originally Posted by Walt
    The thinnest large-diameter steel tubing that I have seen bent on a consistent basis for bikes is 1.125"x.028" straightgauge (so .7mm thick tube walls). And that's a large-radius bend (ie, Coconino style toptube).



    -Walt
    you are correct. i've curved/bent/destroyed enough tubing that I can tell you what thickness all those radiused tubes are - Steve Garro, Coconino Cycles.
    steve garro el jefe/el solo. coconino cycles www.coconinocycles.com www.coconinocycles.blogspot.com

  70. #70
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by ftajiri
    Which rims are mounted on this build? Look like Large Marge - but these are 26", not 29" like on this picture.

  71. #71
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,647
    Quote Originally Posted by DerBergschreck
    Which rims are mounted on this build? Look like Large Marge - but these are 26", not 29" like on this picture.
    that is a 26" wheel in the fat front picture.

  72. #72
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    Quote Originally Posted by bighit
    I have ridden the Ti one and almost bought one, but 5g was too much of a buy in. At 1,500. I am almost ready to add one to the stable.

    Maybe second run. Just don't know why he didn't add full fat tire to the rear also.

    Well, I'm definitely interested to hear how the steel frame compares to the Ti frame.

  73. #73
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    I waited over2 years for my spaceframe - so I can wait

  74. #74
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    i think he shelved the fat rear diamond frames. he may no be a fan of full fat bikes.

    after riding a space frame in my opinion the only thing it needs is a fat rear end to match the front.

    oh well, my Lynskey built Ti Fatback is just fine while i wait.
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  75. #75
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by boomn
    that is a 26" wheel in the fat front picture.
    Dont mean the fat front picture but the first one from rear/side. These are both the same tires on very wide rims. The front rim has some holes, the rear doesnt have them.

    Look at the picture...
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Steel Jones Spaceframe-jones_steel.jpg  


  76. #76
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,647
    Quote Originally Posted by DerBergschreck
    Dont mean the fat front picture but the first one from rear/side. These are both the same tires on very wide rims. The front rim has some holes, the rear doesnt have them.

    Look at the picture...
    oh, those. Most likely Kris Holm rims... 38mm XC version in the rear, 47mm version up front

  77. #77
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    The front is a 50mm 29" Speedway Uma I think - the rear is a 47/50mm? Kris Holm.

  78. #78
    SyT
    SyT is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    550
    Still no weight #'s on fork/frame? Anyone have an educated guess on the possibility of the above pictured build coming in at 25# or sub 25#? (im guessing it's way over, but am not ready to accept it yet )

  79. #79
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    I don't think light weight has been Jeff's goal when he designs a bike. It's more about the ride and feel, stength and reliability, that sort of thing.

  80. #80
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mbkot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by Futon River Crossing
    I don't think light weight has been Jeff's goal when he designs a bike. It's more about the ride and feel, stength and reliability, that sort of thing.
    Off the record many builders usualy laugh when dealing with serious weight weenies, and advice to take a serious piss before riding

  81. #81
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Climber999's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    720
    Still no weight #'s on fork/frame? Anyone have an educated guess on the possibility of the above pictured build coming in at 25# or sub 25#?
    Surly KM is over 7# with chromoly 4130.
    The only butted tube on the Jones is the down tube, the rest are straight gauge.
    Giving so much length, I would expect on the Jones frameset to end up in the 8# to 9# range.

    It should be a hefty beast, but that's only a guestimate. "The proof is in the pudding..."

  82. #82
    mtbr member
    Reputation: bighit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,524
    speedway uma 29er's
    2013 mongoose Fat bike
    2012 Moonlander.

    http://undergroundvelo.proboards.com/

  83. #83
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    I'm more curious about how it rides, but that is a lot of steel so it just begs the weight question. I guess one so motivated could make an educated guess based on the relative weight difference between his Ti Spaceframe and Ti diamond frame

  84. #84
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    Well Jeff said the steel Truss Fork is lighter than his normal steel fork - so appearances can be deceptive.

    I have no idea what my Ti Spaceframe weighs, or if it has butted tubes or not, ride and feel are what counts at the end of the day.

  85. #85
    jmw
    jmw is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jmw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    831
    Quote Originally Posted by Climber999
    Surly KM is over 7# with chromoly 4130.
    The only butted tube on the Jones is the down tube, the rest are straight gauge.
    Giving so much length, I would expect on the Jones frameset to end up in the 8# to 9# range.

    It should be a hefty beast, but that's only a guestimate. "The proof is in the pudding..."
    the JONES uses smaller gauge tubing than the KM though...and even though it's straight gauge, it might be thinner walled?
    future nature

  86. #86
    directionless white male
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by mbkot
    Off the record many builders usualy laugh when dealing with serious weight weenies, and advice to take a serious piss before riding
    That's all good when we're talking about ounces, but when we're in the range of pounds, like with this frame, I think its a fair question.

  87. #87
    banned
    Reputation: <-meathucker->'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by SyT
    Still no weight #'s on fork/frame? Anyone have an educated guess on the possibility of the above pictured build coming in at 25# or sub 25#? (im guessing it's way over, but am not ready to accept it yet )
    All it took was a simple question to the man himself, I don't think it was supposed to be a secret:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jeff Jones via e-mail
    The steel Spaceframe with EBB and hanger, and the Truss fork with the steerer tube weigh 4240g.
    Using my online calculator tool, that equals 9.4lbs. I'm certainly not hung up on the weight, I too was just curious. Framesets & forks should be available in December. I am 95% sure I am selling my tricked out 2008 Yeti 575 to fund one. I think it will be a dope ride, hell my XXIX frame/fork/ebb is in the 8+ range.

  88. #88
    Geordie biker
    Reputation: saltyman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,376
    my jones has weighed from 25lb to 27lb, so will be interesting to see what the steel ones weigh.
    2014 milage so far - 2,485
    www.ukfatbikes.co.uk

  89. #89
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    Heavy then LOL!

  90. #90
    SyT
    SyT is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    550
    I can think of exactly zero reasons for a rigid single speed to be much over 25#s, 28 is just stupid. At that point, you've negated all of the advantages and joy that platform has to offer. This coming from someone that rides nothing but rigid/single.
    Thanks to those with informative answers, to the rest, well you just gotta be you now don't ya?

  91. #91
    mtbr member
    Reputation: boomn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,647
    Quote Originally Posted by SyT
    I can think of exactly zero reasons for a rigid single speed to be much over 25#s, 28 is just stupid. At that point, you've negated all of the advantages and joy that platform has to offer. This coming from someone that rides nothing but rigid/single.
    Thanks to those with informative answers, to the rest, well you just gotta be you now don't ya?
    coming from someone who has owned a 27lb rigid SS I can tell you that there is still tons of joy and tons of advantages, just less snobbishness about weight

    then again, a Jones will have its own ways to be snobby

  92. #92
    directionless white male
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by SyT
    I can think of exactly zero reasons for a rigid single speed to be much over 25#s, 28 is just stupid. At that point, you've negated all of the advantages and joy that platform has to offer. This coming from someone that rides nothing but rigid/single.
    Thanks to those with informative answers, to the rest, well you just gotta be you now don't ya?
    You couldn't think of compliance or maybe comfort? Have you really no clue that the spaceframe design is meant to be dynamic and not actually rigid? I've never ridden one of these bikes but I'm interested in the design. I don't read threads about bikes that I am not interested in and I don't feel the need criticize what I don't care about. Thank you for an uninformed post, I guess.

  93. #93
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    Obviously it is subjective and depends upon individual tastes, but It'll be interesting to see whether the extra two pounds (~ish) over and above a... say MCR9 w/ steel fork... is justified by the ride quality.

  94. #94
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    If I were in the market for a Jones and couldn't afford the Ti Spaceframe - I'd get the Diamond with a truss fork.

  95. #95
    SyT
    SyT is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    550
    Quote Originally Posted by clarence
    You couldn't think of compliance or maybe comfort? Have you really no clue that the spaceframe design is meant to be dynamic and not actually rigid? I've never ridden one of these bikes but I'm interested in the design. I don't read threads about bikes that I am not interested in and I don't feel the need criticize what I don't care about. Thank you for an uninformed post, I guess.
    If it's comfort and compliance as the main goal, and I'm gonna tote 28#s, then I think the fs bike fills that need.
    No bike is actually 100% rigid. The tires are doing the most work in that regard anyway.
    If I wasnt interested, you think I'd be here sifting through your bs?
    You're welcome.

  96. #96
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459
    The thing is - not everyone wants to ride a full susser. Witness the myriad of rigid bikes shown off on this forum.

  97. #97
    Rigid in Evergreen
    Reputation: topmounter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,538
    I have an FS bike and it's great for certain rides, but for most of the riding I do, the rigid is just way more fun and enjoyable (not to mention less of a hassle).

  98. #98
    directionless white male
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by topmounter
    (not to mention less of a hassle).
    That's the point, the frame design yields the mechanical simplicity of a rigid bike with some of the perks of FS. It's not a race frame, which is why this obsession with weight is just silly.

    If I'm going to do a century on rough terrain I want comfort and I don't want linkages to break and/or seals to leak. Isn't that worth two extra pounds?

    It is.
    Disclaimer: I ride really slow.

  99. #99
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by clarence
    That's the point, the frame design yields the mechanical simplicity of a rigid bike with some of the perks of FS. It's not a race frame, which is why this obsession with weight is just silly.

    If I'm going to do a century on rough terrain I want comfort and I don't want linkages to break and/or seals to leak. Isn't that worth two extra pounds?

    It is.
    Having ridden lots of full suspension bikes, and a Jones extensively, I have experienced non of the perks of a full suspension bike while riding the Jones. I did experience an excellent riding rigid bike however, but rigid non the less.

  100. #100
    directionless white male
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by morandi
    Having ridden lots of full suspension bikes, and a Jones extensively, I have experienced non of the perks of a full suspension bike while riding the Jones. I did experience an excellent riding rigid bike however, but rigid non the less.
    I'm just going by the ad copy on the Jones site, his words, "Itís dynamic. The Jones geometry delivers a rigid bicycle that is anything but..."

    I gave up on suspension years ago and now have two steel rigid 29ers, geared and ss, one straight 4130 the other Japanese sanko--neither of which have I ever bothered weighing. And the sanko is definitely more forgiving and less "rigid." So I know frame material can make for a more comfortable ride.

    What I'm looking for from MTBR threads is to find out if the jones design theory is found in rider practice. So far no one riding his bikes is saying he's full of *****.
    Disclaimer: I ride really slow.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •