Paging Andre Jute

I have been told on uk.rec.cycling.moderated that you have a stiff,
upright bicycle! Can I ask what it is? My Email address is real.

I need one where I can get the saddle at least 44-45" above the
ground, the handlebars 4-6" higher and swept back, and with a
long wheelbase (ideally 48+") for stability. For comparison,
my current one has figures of 44.5", 47" and 44".


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 3:13:32 PM UTC, Nick Maclaren wrote:
I have been told on uk.rec.cycling.moderated that you have a stiff,
upright bicycle! Can I ask what it is? My Email address is real.

I need one where I can get the saddle at least 44-45" above the
ground, the handlebars 4-6" higher and swept back, and with a
long wheelbase (ideally 48+") for stability. For comparison,
my current one has figures of 44.5", 47" and 44".


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

You must mean my Utopia Kranich. It's a crossframe (think mixte with an additional tube from the seat tube just above the bottom bracket to the head tube) with 170kg load rating and a provenance going back to 1935, redeveloped for 60x622 Schwalbe Big Apple tyres and modern transmissions (I have the Rohloff version but you can get other hub gears, and probably derailleurs as well, though I've never heard of anyone who ordered it with derailleurs -- Utopia is a baukasten, a semi-custom house; they'll basically give you anything that you want to pay for and they approve of), built on specially developed Columbus steel tubes. Ex-factory, it is a lighter bike than my ali Gazelle and Trek bikes in similar spec, but in service with me it is pretty hefty -- my bike luggage is leather, to give you an idea, and I specify nothing by weight -- because I discovered that once it is rolling, it is fast and efficient, in the same way as my Turbo Bentley used to be; effectively unstoppable, with exemplary roadholding and handling, and of course superior comfort on those fat tackies.

You can see my bike at
http://coolmainpress.com/AndreJute'sUtopiaKranich.pdf
and for comparison my Gazelle and Trek can be found on this page
http://coolmainpress.com/BICYCLING.html
together with several more articles containing photos of my Kranich in later stages of development than in the PDF above, for which the photographs were taken on the day it was delivered to me.

I used to buy a new bike of technical interest every year or two -- see especially the Trek with automatic gears and electronic adaptive suspension at
http://coolmainpress.com/BICYCLING.html
-- but in the six or seven years since I got the Kranich I haven't bought a new bike because I've seen nothing better or even more interesting, so I imagine the Kranich will see me out (it has a ten year guarantee...).

There is an even bigger Kranich than mine, though mine is two metres long already, for really big people.

If you don't like the stepover design, Utopia also makes a crossbar crossframe design for large people called the London, which has a carrying capacity, and thus presumably stiffness, very close to that of the Kranich.

Unfortunately, the next bit isn't so encouraging. Utopia won't supply you. They work exclusively through dealers, and all the dealers are in Germany, and most of these dealers won't want to know you. It gets worse. Utopia bikes are sold in the main to worthy (read rich) burghers, who have no intention of getting their hands dirty and take their bikes to the dealer for service once a year; the way the guarantee is written virtually enforces an annual dealer service; this is how the dealers make most of their income on Utopia models, so they're not keen on selling their allocation outside their catchment areas.

I'm a pretty persuasive sort in a couple of dozen languages, including vernacular German in whichever Land the dealer might be in, but it took me eight months to find my dealer and close a deal. After that the guy couldn't do enough for me, and it went swimmingly; I presume you know it is safe to deal with Germans from a huge distance; I've bought several expensive bikes sight unseen on the Continent and never had a problem that cost me money.

In these hard times, Utopia has been cutting the amount of gear supplied with the bike as standard (getting on for a grand's worth when I bought mine) and offering some cheaper options in components, so that some of their models are now outright bargains when compared to the competition, which isn't numerically strong: Utopis is called the Rolls-Royce of bicycles for a very good reason; everything is just so, done perfectly right.

However, considering both the price and longevity of all that quality built in by a bunch of obsessives, there's no harm in buying a Utopia secondhand, though prices can be a bit higher than one would really like for used bikes. Utopia operates a newsgroup and one branch of it is for their owners to sell on their bikes:
http://www.utopia-velo.de/gebrauchtrad-boerse/

The main Utopia site is at
http://www.utopia-velo.de
and the first thing you need to download from it is the Advisor, which will explain their models and their fitting out, and above all their philosophy, to you. They don't just sell you a bike, or a lifestyle, they sell you an entire philosophy of excellence, with a bike included. Here's the Ratgeber, in German:
http://www.utopia-velo.de/nc/service...chash=0a8b2403

If you appreciate German punctilio, nothing less than a Utopia bike will suffice; there are absolutely no competitors.

But if you just want a stiff bike, for 40% of the money you can buy an oversized ali frame from a reputable maker and build it up with Shimano components and still have a good bike.

Also, in Britain and a lot easier to deal with than the Germans, though at prices creeping ever closer to Utopia, you can buy a good bike designed by another obsessive, Andy Blance, on custom-drawn and scaled steel tubes; it's the Thorn and it is sold by SJS in Somerset. They make a huge range of sizes and are famous for fitting people with the right bike. The only thing anyone (me, actually) has ever said about their bikes, or their superlative after-sales service, is that lugs would look better than welding -- but that they don't go the extra mile, and cost, merely for appearances tells you everything you need to know about them. Thorn owners are also a nice bunch to hang out with.

Andre Jute

In article ,
Andre Jute wrote:

I have been told on uk.rec.cycling.moderated that you have a stiff,
upright bicycle! Can I ask what it is? My Email address is real.
=20
I need one where I can get the saddle at least 44-45" above the
ground, the handlebars 4-6" higher and swept back, and with a
long wheelbase (ideally 48+") for stability. For comparison,
my current one has figures of 44.5", 47" and 44".

You must mean my Utopia Kranich. ...

Thanks very much. Yes, that is the one - it definitely looks right,
though my German isn't brilliant.

I'm a pretty persuasive sort in a couple of dozen languages, including vern
acular German in whichever Land the dealer might be in, but it took me eigh
t months to find my dealer and close a deal. ...

Cripes! I had to import my bicycle from Holland myself, and I am
glad that they didn't weigh it for loading on the aircraft, but
that pales into insignificance compared to your task.

But if you just want a stiff bike, for 40% of the money you can buy an over
sized ali frame from a reputable maker and build it up with Shimano compone
nts and still have a good bike.

That's not it. I need one large enough for me to stretch my legs
(knee damage), ride fully upright (various other issues) and be
EXTREMELY stable (no inner-ear balance, and 67 years of age).
There was nothing suitable in the UK, except for one marginally
satisfactory Gazelle from Yorkshire - but that was over a decade
ago. I am not sure what the situation is now, but I wouldn't
bet on it being any better.

I may well get a recumbent tricycle for my retirement, but still
ride in places that you need a bicycle for.



Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/multi-use

http://www.konaworld.com/bikes.cfm



http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/multi-use

On Thursday, January 22, 2015 at 8:39:14 PM UTC, Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Andre Jute wrote:

I have been told on uk.rec.cycling.moderated that you have a stiff,
upright bicycle! Can I ask what it is? My Email address is real.
=20
I need one where I can get the saddle at least 44-45" above the
ground, the handlebars 4-6" higher and swept back, and with a
long wheelbase (ideally 48+") for stability. For comparison,
my current one has figures of 44.5", 47" and 44".

You must mean my Utopia Kranich. ...

Thanks very much. Yes, that is the one - it definitely looks right,
though my German isn't brilliant.

I'm a pretty persuasive sort in a couple of dozen languages, including vern
acular German in whichever Land the dealer might be in, but it took me eigh
t months to find my dealer and close a deal. ...

Cripes! I had to import my bicycle from Holland myself, and I am
glad that they didn't weigh it for loading on the aircraft, but
that pales into insignificance compared to your task.

But if you just want a stiff bike, for 40% of the money you can buy an over
sized ali frame from a reputable maker and build it up with Shimano compone
nts and still have a good bike.

That's not it. I need one large enough for me to stretch my legs
(knee damage), ride fully upright (various other issues) and be
EXTREMELY stable (no inner-ear balance, and 67 years of age).
There was nothing suitable in the UK, except for one marginally
satisfactory Gazelle from Yorkshire - but that was over a decade
ago. I am not sure what the situation is now, but I wouldn't
bet on it being any better.

I may well get a recumbent tricycle for my retirement, but still
ride in places that you need a bicycle for.



Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Clive sent you to the right place. My Kranich could almost have been specced for extreme stability, though it was in fact specced for comfort and the stability came from the basic design as well as the comfort spec. I have described its stability under conditions that some may consider abusive at
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/...p?topic=3798.0

What is noteworthy is that, regardless of road conditions, I always have to wait for everyone at the bottom of the big hills around here; I just pay the road no nevermind because those tyres smack obstructions out of existence, and the stiff frame, combined with the ultra-lazy geometry, doesn't permit them to shift the bike off course. Of course a roadie, coming from a shortass carbon frame with twitchily steep geometry might think the steering slow, but it's the difference between a 12-cylinder Mercedes and a little Lotus sportscar: I know which arrives first, and it has never been the little English sportscar.

However, if you balance is gone, a Kranich still has only two wheels. I don't like the odds. Mind you, I like the idea of a recumbent three-wheeler even less; too low; I'm a big believer in showing a profile that looks like ten grand's worth of damage for just driving your Range Rover too close to me.

***
A tricycle that I liked was the Scooterbike. (Utopia produced, and will produce again when it has been redeveloped, the two-wheel version of the Scooterbike as the Phoenix, but I fancied the Scooterbike long before I even heard of Utopia.) It's a semi-recliner, which gives you a more confidence-inspiring profile on the bike. Where you can get one is another matter.

I can't see your address; and note that my fiultra addresses are just spam traps -- I don't ever look in them. Send mail to andrejute at coolmainpress with the commercial extension and I'll send you a pdf file I saved when I looked into the Scooter-bike and -trike.

Andre Jute
Laterally yours

In article ,
Andre Jute wrote:

Clive sent you to the right place. My Kranich could almost have been specce
d for extreme stability, though it was in fact specced for comfort and the
stability came from the basic design as well as the comfort spec. I have de
scribed its stability under conditions that some may consider abusive at
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/...p?topic=3798.0

I will take a closer look. I enjoy riding off-road (farm and forest
tracks, not crag hopping), but that was what 1920s roadsters were
designed for.

However, if you balance is gone, a Kranich still has only two wheels. I don
't like the odds. ...

I am lucky - I lost it VERY young, and so have adapted. I learnt
to parallel ski at 64-5 - it took me five times as long as most
people and I am the sloweest parallel skiier on the slopes, but
I could do it.

I can't see your address; and note that my fiultra addresses are just spam
traps -- I don't ever look in them. Send mail to andrejute at coolmainpress
with the commercial extension and I'll send you a pdf file I saved when I
looked into the Scooter-bike and -trike.

Thanks. It will be there, but your viewer may well have suppressed
it.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

In article ,
Andre Jute wrote:

Clive sent you to the right place. My Kranich could almost have been specce
d for extreme stability, though it was in fact specced for comfort and the
stability came from the basic design as well as the comfort spec. I have de
scribed its stability under conditions that some may consider abusive at=20
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/...p?topic=3798.0

What is noteworthy is that, regardless of road conditions, I always have to
wait for everyone at the bottom of the big hills around here; I just pay t
he road no nevermind because those tyres smack obstructions out of existenc
e, and the stiff frame, combined with the ultra-lazy geometry, doesn't perm
it them to shift the bike off course. ...

Interesting. Up to the introduction of the Big Apple tyres, I often
got flamed for saying that wider tyres could be faster than narrow
ones, but I investigated that some 30-odd years ago and the effect
was very marked. The point is that a tyre can take up irregularities
proportional to its width, and above that at least the whole frame has
to move. The 'narrow is better' data all comes from laboratories and
tracks, but real roads are often irregular in the c. 1" scale.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

One last thing, Nick: If these crossframes are of interest to you, you can buy a frame with the special Columbus tubing from Utopia and build it up. There frames are reasonably priced, considering you get the fork, headset and bottom bracket (or did the last time I checked, years ago).

But here's the trick. You can buy a whole WorkCycle bicycle built on the Kranich frame (last time I looked it was called the City or Commuter or something like that) for only a little more than a Kranich frame from Utopia. It may not use the Columbus thin wall tubes, but you don't care about the weight, and it may not be the latest wide tyre development, but it is very likely solidly built by Van Raam in The Netherlands, same people who build Utopia frames, and most likely will handle 50mm Big Apples which quite a few people think are almost as good as 60mm (I don't, but my objection is based on math rather than extensive experience). Check out the video linked here -- the man you're seeing is the ancient craftsman who painted the gold coachlines on my bike, and the workshop is Van Raam, and the frame he's working on is another Utopia cross frame: Cycling history personified! at http://coolmainpress.com/ajwriting/archives/4443

I seem to remember that Workcycle also do a bike on the London frame, again maybe not as fancy as the Utopia version but functionally 90% the same, it seemed to me anyway; the London is a big bike with a crossframe crossbar.

Personally, I prefer the Kranich for its low stepover, more suitable to the dignity of those of us who've reached bus pass age than the run-and-legover mounting method hallowed by time but excoriated by Sheldon Brown.

A mad skier! If you see me on the slopes, come give me a tip.

Andre Jute

On Friday, January 23, 2015 at 2:16:42 PM UTC, Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Andre Jute wrote:

Clive sent you to the right place. My Kranich could almost have been specce
d for extreme stability, though it was in fact specced for comfort and the
stability came from the basic design as well as the comfort spec. I have de
scribed its stability under conditions that some may consider abusive at=20
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/...p?topic=3798.0

What is noteworthy is that, regardless of road conditions, I always have to
wait for everyone at the bottom of the big hills around here; I just pay t
he road no nevermind because those tyres smack obstructions out of existenc
e, and the stiff frame, combined with the ultra-lazy geometry, doesn't perm
it them to shift the bike off course. ...

Interesting. Up to the introduction of the Big Apple tyres, I often
got flamed for saying that wider tyres could be faster than narrow
ones, but I investigated that some 30-odd years ago and the effect
was very marked. The point is that a tyre can take up irregularities
proportional to its width, and above that at least the whole frame has
to move. The 'narrow is better' data all comes from laboratories and
tracks, but real roads are often irregular in the c. 1" scale.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

On Friday, January 23, 2015 at 2:16:42 PM UTC, Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Andre Jute wrote:

Clive sent you to the right place. My Kranich could almost have been specce
d for extreme stability, though it was in fact specced for comfort and the
stability came from the basic design as well as the comfort spec. I have de
scribed its stability under conditions that some may consider abusive at=20
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/...p?topic=3798.0

What is noteworthy is that, regardless of road conditions, I always have to
wait for everyone at the bottom of the big hills around here; I just pay t
he road no nevermind because those tyres smack obstructions out of existenc
e, and the stiff frame, combined with the ultra-lazy geometry, doesn't perm
it them to shift the bike off course. ...

Interesting. Up to the introduction of the Big Apple tyres, I often
got flamed for saying that wider tyres could be faster than narrow
ones, but I investigated that some 30-odd years ago and the effect
was very marked. The point is that a tyre can take up irregularities
proportional to its width, and above that at least the whole frame has
to move. The 'narrow is better' data all comes from laboratories and
tracks, but real roads are often irregular in the c. 1" scale.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

My "roads" are very real. They're in quotation marks because in fact they're Irish lanes, more pothole than surface.
http://www.thorncycles.co.uk/forums/...59139#msg59139
They had a brief smooth halflife during the Celtic Tiger, when I got in fast to set my personal ton-up record (kilometres per hour, truck assisted of course -- I'm not being offensive to you, Nick, but if I don't say explicitly what should be obvious to anyone with his brain in gear, the local self-important morons like Krygowski start foaming at the mouth and making fools of themselves for years on end). But now the lanes have reverted to their ur-state and even when rarely fixed, it is by the cheap chip'n'seal method, so all that air is even more valuable to keep RSI out of my wrists.

The problem with a lot of cycling "wisdom", and the cause of so much stubborn resistance to scientific consideration and investigation, is a) that cycling had its origins as a working class sport (actually, I don't think "working class" was even a euphemism back then; they were frankly the "lower classes", uneducatred, reactionary, stubborn, obstructive) and b) that in the Anglophone world the roadies, who are the most reactionary cyclists, still have an undue influence, mainly by being louder and more obstructive than anyone else. RBT is a good example. Three of ten most brilliant minds in modern cycling used to come here. Jobst Brand, Sheldon Brown and Chalo Colina were more often shouted down by people who were clearly ignorant than praised. The net empowers the lowest common denominator, and I (who welcomed the net as "liberating Everyman") am no longer impressed. The persistence of the street corner myth of the superiority of narrow tyres is just one of the more striking examples of wrongheadedness being promulgated daily, years after careful observation in real life and supporting labaoratory and track work shot it down by scientific truth. The list of similar cycling beliefs which are plainly contrary to the facts is depressingly long.

Andre Jute
Liberal (retired)