Wartezimmer Praxis Dr. ICB2.0

Aber es ist schon so, dass mit einer Lieferung nicht vor Ende März / Anfang April zu rechnen ist oder besteht Hoffnung auf eine frühere Lieferung?
 
Bis vor Kurzem hätte ich dem Wunsch noch Chancen eingeräumt. Bist aber sicher einer der wenigen Reisenden in der Zeit, die diesen Wunsch hegen. ;)
 
Baut die Fabrik immer nur ein Modell nach dem anderen? Teibuns gerade eingetroffen (also vor 4-8 Wochen fertig geworden), Sennes gerade fertig und Mitte/Ende Februar hier. ICB angekündigt für Ende März/Anfang April...
 
Baut die Fabrik immer nur ein Modell nach dem anderen? Teibuns gerade eingetroffen (also vor 4-8 Wochen fertig geworden), Sennes gerade fertig und Mitte/Ende Februar hier. ICB angekündigt für Ende März/Anfang April...

Ich denke einfach mal Alutech hat die anderen Modelle früher, in anderen Mengen und zu anderen Konditionen platziert.
 
Question about the geometry.
Why the stack is so high, compared to other "similar" bikes?

Let's see some frames I was considering before pulling the trigger on ICB 2.0 :)

All frames size L
ICB 2.0: 636
Kona Process 134: 610
Banshee Spitfire: 596
Transition Scout: 606
Bird Aeris: 598
Vitus Escarpe 601
Canyon Spectral: 621
Even compared to other Alutech bikes the stack is higher on the ICB 2.0

As we can see the ICB 2.0 has the higher stack of all (in some cases by far), the closest one is the Canyon Spectral that in some reviews has been criticized for the high cockpit...

I'm curious to know which were the design decisions that led to this and how this can affect the handling.
Just for info I'm 188 and now I have a Kona Explosif with a stack of 626 (Kona lowered it by 12mm on 2016 model) and no risers.
 
We have chosen a high stack, because most of the average riders in this Forum are using spacers from 10 to 25mm plus handlebars with rise from 10 to 40mm at bikes with this type of "modern" Geometry. Additionaly nearly all riders, who were testing the prototypes of the 2.0 liked the high stack.
 
So in Other words: with the high Stack, you do not need too many ugly looking spacers...
 
We have chosen a high stack, because most of the average riders in this Forum are using spacers from 10 to 25mm plus handlebars with rise from 10 to 40mm at bikes with this type of "modern" Geometry. Additionaly nearly all riders, who were testing the prototypes of the 2.0 liked the high stack.

Thanks for the explanation :)
Like I said I don't use spacers and my bike has a 626mm stack, but I just realized that I changed the fork from 120mm (original) to 150 so in reality I should have about 655mm
Mounting my fork to the ICB 2.0 frame I should actually have less stack ;)
 
Hmm... extending the top of the steerer tube does have the same effect if I'm not completely messing things up in my mind ?!

Reach is measured horizontally between the top of the steerer tube and the bottom bracket. So for a given frame, the longer steerer tube is already taken into account.

Andreas
 
High stack these days is mostly an optical thing. Less spacer, lower ahead cap and low rise bars. Preferring medium to low stack as I can play around with different bar rise and spacers (running "weird" combo of no spacers with 38mm riser on my current bike).

---

Reach is measured horizontally between the top of the steerer tube and the bottom bracket. So for a given frame, the longer steerer tube is already taken into account.

Andreas
Not if you extend the steerer tube after the frame is build. :D
 
Zurück
Oben Unten