I am a frame builder AMA

Posted on
of 51
  • Hmm. Thinking about buying one of these welders in the near future. Is there a different pedal that'll work for less?

  • The last time i bought a pedal was a few years ago so i havent looked recently, but i don't think there is much out there for cheap other than a diy one annoyingly. And its pretty vital for most welding.

  • Did you haggle through email? Was it as simple as just asking for it cheaper?

  • Pedals are specific to each machine but all work on the same principle. The only difference seems to be the type of plug and the wiring of the plug, and values of the potentiometer.

    I bought 3 dead pedals for the chassis, will be keeping one to use and sell the other two. Should pay for most of the welder.

  • no, on the live chat actually. i put together a little package with a welder, some rods and some PPE and asked if they could do a deal.

    TRUFAX: i've never used a pedal to weld even though i have one

  • Im not sure i could weld without a pedal

  • Actually i do have the orginal torch with a button somewhere but that thing gives me nightmares

  • we didn't have them at college, just a button. in fact, the only setting we ever adjusted was amps! no pulse, no slopes, no messing with pre and post gas.

    weld or do not weld.

  • Same. Best way to learn imo

  • I've just ordered from R-tech, but only after read about their torches being a bit basic. I've opted for one of their pedals so i'm thinking i should try and amend the order over the phone tomorrow and get a buttonless CK torch instead. Hopefully their famous customer service lives up the hype.

  • they wouldn't do a direct replacement for me when i asked for the same (even if I paid a bit more)

  • It's all sorted. I forgot to say that I had chosen a WP9 torch as an add on, they have very kindly agreed to upgrade it to a CK9 for no extra charge with a free mug thrown in. Top guys!

  • oh that's fair enough. i was a bit wary of the R-tech torch being crap, but it's been fine, if a bit bulky (WP-26)

  • Does anyone know the max tyre clearance when using an Everest C57 wishbone? Would I be able to fit 32C with guards through it?

  • My lovely wife has signed me up to a TBA course as my 30th birthday present. As no courses are running for the foreseeable future I have an indefinite planning and saving phase, could lead to some over-ambitious spec.

  • That’s the smaller one of the two that Ceeway do?

  • I’m using 45mm guards with 32mm tyres, no way that’ll fit.

    32mm tyres alone is uncomfortably close.

    2 Attachments

    • DAD5751E-F4CE-4DA7-A8F6-5A4A3CDF0D3D.jpeg
    • 15595F22-8E00-413E-A986-392EC56924E1.jpeg
  • If it’s the larger one (16mm stays, 19mm top tube?) I may still have the one I cut out my frame out in the garage. Don’t think the clearance is that much more though.

  • Yeah that’s that one.

    There is a slightly larger one somewhere. Maybe the ‘What’s new’ bit.

    I’ll have a look for it in the garage in a bit.

  • Ah yes, but the C57 actually looks from the photo that it has more clearance. Obviously if you have the actual parts to hand that is more reliable than the photos... Thanks for the super fast response btw!

    1 Attachment

    • Capture.PNG

  • 35c KOjaks with Radial mudguards.

  • Not sure this is the best place to ask about frame geometry, feel free to redirect me to the correct thread.

    I have a current bike that I quite like how it rides, it is a 650B fixed gear custom frameset that I based on another bike with slight tweaks.
    Current main specifics are:

    • 280mm high bottom bracket (to avoid pedal strike)
    • 75° seat tube
    • 75° head tube
    • 42mm trail

    I am beginning to think about a kind of rando bike inspired by french 650B bikes, to start making longer rides in tarmac and light dry gravel ; and I would like to base it on the current custom frame I have with adjustments:
    1) Thought about changing the headtube angle to 73.5°, but with changes in fork rake to have the same 42mmtrail, this would help me limit toe overlap (already using 165mm cranks) without changing how the bike steers as I quite like how it is now. Is this coherent or the reasoning is wrong?
    2) Thought about lowering the BB to 270mm high. I don't like pedal strikes, and have the habits of fixed gear pedaling almost constantly, but as this one will be geared and I read that low BB is preferable for bike stability, I thought it could be good to lower it. But I don't want to have it too low either ; so what are the advised BB height for this use? is 270mm coherent? is it really necessary to lower the BB? I guess it can also help to increase stack and thus comfort. Is it coherent thinking?
    3) Current seat tube angle is 75°, what would be a benefit of changing it? Currently my fixed 650B has porteur bars as I always feel too stretched on drops, but I believe this is also due to the drop between saddle and handlebars. Basically I need a frame that is taller than long similar to @edscoble 's bike in this thread I believe which is another reason to go custom. Would 75° be problematic for a randonneur frame, as it is my current set-up, or it won't have any impact at all?

    Thank you in advance for the advises

  • That must be an n1?

    This is my c57 over a 35mm tyre (on a wide rim right enough).

    1 Attachment

    • F5239DF0-5099-4B99-81A2-ED0DB2496BDD.jpeg
  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview

I am a frame builder AMA

Posted by Avatar for coldharbour @coldharbour