Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68

    Rawland dSogn nearly finished

    I am excited like most in this forum about the "new" wheel size. I have had more than my fair share of bikes and I will admit each new bikes brings an amazing amount of excitement but i think this is the "niche/Do-All" bike. It might not make the same old roads more excited but it will make all the trails seem new and allow some "bike camping." The bike specs should be fairly easy to see. I can't wait til spring comes. The really neat part about the frame it is can easily accept 29ers.

    I am not a photographer and i do not try, so sorry for the poor images.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: MMcG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    9,591
    It is interesting that you still have to use so many headset spacers in order to get the bars at the right height with these Rawlands - even with all that extra headtube extension above the TT.

  3. #3
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    I really like the Rawland frame and especially the fork. I am about to pull the trigger on one. Any idea what it weighs?

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68
    I am sure I will end up cutting the fork down, I always leave forks overly long just in case. The bike is about 26lbs and thats how you see it, heavy seat and pedals. I am sure it could be down to 24ish very easily.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68
    and yes you should buy one, $350 for frame and fork is an unbelievable deal. They say it has a paint flaw, but the frame looks better than a surly that is "flawless."

  6. #6
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    I agree the price right now is great. Thanks for the info I just wanted to get a rough estimate on what it will weigh. I'm sure I can build it up at 24 pounds easily now.

  7. #7
    Not a regular
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,079
    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    It is interesting that you still have to use so many headset spacers in order to get the bars at the right height with these Rawlands - even with all that extra headtube extension above the TT.
    Based on the seat post extension, stem length...I would suggest the next largest size may have been a better fit. And a stem with rise would have also eliminated some spacers as well. Oh, and point that front QR to the back, please.

    I'm loving my dSogn. It's the perfect allrounder. Perfectly at home on a mountain bike ride with the 650b wheelset, a little cross action with the 700c wheelset, or commuting with either set.

    Frames weigh around 5 pounds. I think my L size was just a hair over 5 so smaller ones will be sub-5.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68
    You may be right on the next size up but I purchased it based on top-tube length and it does feel alright although looks=a bit "different". I have fairly long legs for my height so bikes usually end up having a fairly large amount of seat post extension. Time on the bike shall be the only factor that will judge the true "proper" fit of the bike. Thanks for the feed back. I will most likely change the orientation of the front QR along with taping the bars or removing it from the car next time.

  9. #9
    Not a regular
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,079
    Quote Originally Posted by harvestlaser
    You may be right on the next size up but I purchased it based on top-tube length and it does feel alright although looks=a bit "different". I have fairly long legs for my height so bikes usually end up having a fairly large amount of seat post extension.
    I'm in the same boat, but my problem is that the largest stock size most companies offer is still too small. As long as the 3 contact points on the bike (seat, handlebar, pedals) are where I need them to be, I don't worry too much about how they all got there.

    I'm sure you'll enjoy the bike once you get in out.

  10. #10
    Self-defeatist
    Reputation: CLONG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    965
    Those Sogns are real lookers, and I like the idea of a bike made to fit 650b's and 29ers.

    Since you mentioned TT length, I was wondering if you went a bit smaller to account for the extra reach on the drop bars?

    Nice frame, nice build, have fun!

    C.
    I'm covered in beer.

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68

    geometery/sizing

    I simply based my frame size on what the top tube is on my road bike and did not pay any attention to the frame size of my MTB. I figured with a drop bar the overall fit would be more similiar to my road bike and the only factor in common with my MTB is the tires and crank. With my specific toptube/frame size I also have ample stand over if I choose to ride with 29ers. I believe the salsa la cruz is basically the same geometry overall so you could also consult with la cruz owners, as there maybe a few more out there. In the prelimanary phase of the bike I plan on leaving the steer tube as long as possible (you can't make the steer tube longer down the road).

  12. #12
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    I just ordered a large DSOGN and I'm going to set it up as a singlespeed with my Groovy Luv handle which puts my hands in the same positiona as my Easton low rise bar.

    I'm 5'11" and the large has a shorter top tube than I am used to so I will have to use a setback postand a slightly longer stem to make up the difference. I figure I'll make up the difference a little bit on each end.

    I also have an extra 29er wheelset that I will tryn on this frame as well, although I will use it primarily as a 650B bike. I have been riding a 650B 1x1 for a while now.


    I'll post pics as soon as it is built.

  13. #13
    Not a regular
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,079
    Quote Originally Posted by rmb
    I'm 5'11" and the large has a shorter top tube than I am used to so I will have to use a setback postand a slightly longer stem to make up the difference. I figure I'll make up the difference a little bit on each end.
    IMHO, you don't want to "create" a longer top tube by scootching the seat further back that what you are used to. To me, the seat height/seat set-back over the bb is sacred (within a few mm's). Artificially lengthing the cockpit might give you the "top tube" length you want, but at the expense of possibly being too far over the rear wheel and by positioning your lower body too far behind the bottom bracket.

    I'm 6'3" and the large dSogn fits me very nicely without resorting to cockpit lengthening techniques. I don't think you necessarily want to duplicate your top tube position on this bike. Give it a try first. I too have bikes with top tubes over an inch longer than the Sogn, but they are different bikes.

    YMMV

  14. #14
    rmb
    rmb is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    660
    Quote Originally Posted by ssmike
    IMHO, you don't want to "create" a longer top tube by scootching the seat further back that what you are used to. To me, the seat height/seat set-back over the bb is sacred (within a few mm's). Artificially lengthing the cockpit might give you the "top tube" length you want, but at the expense of possibly being too far over the rear wheel and by positioning your lower body too far behind the bottom bracket.

    I'm 6'3" and the large dSogn fits me very nicely without resorting to cockpit lengthening techniques. I don't think you necessarily want to duplicate your top tube position on this bike. Give it a try first. I too have bikes with top tubes over an inch longer than the Sogn, but they are different bikes.

    YMMV
    I think I will try it with the more relaxed position as you are right this is different than my other bikes as well. The top tube is less than an inch shorter than I would like, which is not too bad. I don't mind being slightly rearward though as I would take up most of the distance with the stem.

    Thanks for the suggestion; I will try it with the shorter cockpit first.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: laffeaux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,978
    Quote Originally Posted by MMcG
    It is interesting that you still have to use so many headset spacers in order to get the bars at the right height with these Rawlands - even with all that extra headtube extension above the TT.
    I think by using a -17 degree road stem, and flipping it upside down, the number of the spacers would be greatly reduced, and the bike would look nicer.

    I like the look of the Rawland frames.
    Each bicycle owned exponentially increases the probability that none is working correctly.

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation: meat tooth paste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    682
    Questions about sizing on your Rawland.

    What size frame is that?
    How tall are you and what mountain bike size do your ride?

    I've been eyeing these, but find myself confused about what size to get.
    I am 5'10" and ride a medium mountain bike, but the small Rawland frame matches my cyclocross frame's 54.5cm top tube. I ride a large road bike with a 55cm top tube.
    I'd rather be riding my bike...

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68
    i should probably take a different picture as the "angle" of the picture does not help. I could not use road stem because i have a nitto rand. bar which uses a 25.4 clamp. and i am getting around to cutting the steer tube down a bit.
    now on the bike- it seems to ride smooth as butter off road, almost smoother than my gary fisher paragon 29er (aluminum).

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: meat tooth paste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    682
    Quote Originally Posted by harvestlaser
    i should probably take a different picture as the "angle" of the picture does not help. I could not use road stem because i have a nitto rand. bar which uses a 25.4 clamp. and i am getting around to cutting the steer tube down a bit.
    now on the bike- it seems to ride smooth as butter off road, almost smoother than my gary fisher paragon 29er (aluminum).
    What size Fisher do you ride?

    I am thinking about getting of these Rawlands, but trying to sort out size.
    I rode a medium Tricross with 54.5cm top tube, which places me on a small Rawland if going by top tube priority.
    I'd rather be riding my bike...

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    68
    I ride a 17.5" paragon, a 53cm lemond road bike, 17.5" hifi.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: meat tooth paste's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    682
    Quote Originally Posted by harvestlaser
    I ride a 17.5" paragon, a 53cm lemond road bike, 17.5" hifi.
    Sounds like were ride the same sizes.

    One last question, what size Rawland is that? Looks like a SM?
    I'd rather be riding my bike...

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

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

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.