New Rourke 953 build

Velonutter

I love this thread, thoroughly enjoyed it and you have now helped me settle what my next winter frame is going to be as I was playing with going for a Ti, but will now go for 953 with mudguard stays.

What sort of price has this worked out as? I'm presuming similar to a good Ti frame.

Are the forks still carbon?

drlodge

EKIMIKE wrote:

Just curious... what kind of post/bar/stem are you going for?

Ritchey WCS, in "wet black" with the white lettering. Bars are the Logic IIs with the flat part in the drops, stem is 120mm.

drlodge

Velonutter wrote:

I love this thread, thoroughly enjoyed it and you have now helped me settle what my next winter frame is going to be as I was playing with going for a Ti, but will now go for 953 with mudguard stays.

What sort of price has this worked out as? I'm presuming similar to a good Ti frame.

Are the forks still carbon?

Thanks for the feedback. I think price is similar to Ti, and I think Rourke's actually discount the frame if you order mudguard eyes, which is supported by their advertised pricing:

Reynolds 953 Stainless Oversize, Race Carbon Forks, from £1650

Audax - Road frame geometry, but built with extra brake clearance and mudguard fittings.
Reynolds 953 Oversize Carbon with M/Eyes from £1550

My frame was more expensive since the price varies according to headset and forks selected. I originally went for Campag integrated headset, then changed to Chris King after reading their blurb on why integrated headsets are a bad idea (wear occurs on the headtube where the bearings sit, which is part of the frame and so it can't be replaced). Forks are Ritchey WCS carbon, the most expensive and lightest @300g. All in, it'll cost me the thick end of £5k especially with the custom paint job, I'll try and provide a rough breakdown of costs here shortly.

drlodge

Jase just gave me a call, frame is being shot blasted now, primed and some paint going on soon, so more pics to drool over due tomorrow

drlodge

The guys have been working hard, the frame is now primed ready to take top coats...you can see masking on the rear stays where the finish will be bare stainless.

MickTup

I originally went for Campag integrated headset, then changed to Chris King after reading their blurb on why integrated headsets are a bad idea (wear occurs on the headtube where the bearings sit, which is part of the frame and so it can't be replaced).
I was in two minds which to go for I have change mine to Chris King after read this it apparently makes the frame a tad lighter as well

drlodge

MickTup wrote:

I was in two minds which to go for I have change mine to Chris King after read this it apparently makes the frame a tad lighter as well

A separate headset may well be a tad lighter, since the headtube has to be worked on for the integrated headset.

For me, it made sense to keep the frame and headset (which will wear) separate. Logically it makes little sense to "integrate" an expensive item like a frame, with a cheap "disposable" item that will wear like a headset. Its a bit like integrating your car brake pads with the alloy wheels.

bluedog99

Are there cheaper headsets than the Chris King that will suit the 853 frame.Reading the previous posts, it makes sense not to have an integrated headset, especially as i expect to have my Rourke frame for a long time. Looking forward to the next Pics. Cheers.

drlodge

I'm sure Rourkes sell various makes of head set e.g. FSA, Cane Creek, Hope etc. to suit your budget. I chose Chris King simply because its the best.

drlodge

Here the paint...
- Peal White
- Metallic Black
- I think the other black has some silver in, not sure if both are going to be used, we'll see!
And for teh lining colours:
- Silver
- "Lucifer Sand2" aka titan is the grey

May be Jase is going to use 5 colours not 4, we'll see...I trust him.

drlodge

Seat post detail, before lacquer is applied...

drlodge

and finally...fork detail and the finished and lacquered frame...

declan1

Ooooooh. Now that is nice.

bluedog99

Wow! Now that will stand out in the crowd, a cracker. Can`t wait to see the full build.

rajMAN

Going to be a stunner. :shock:

nevman

Insanely jealous here-this shoves all my other plans on the backburner.Heading for website.Thanks for sharing this build with us.

alihisgreat

Make sure you seal and wax that paint... I wouldn't be able to ride it through fear of stone chips!

Rourkie

Hello, Nice thread

Thanks also for the nice comments.

I just wanted to clarify the point on using Cannondale's 'geometry'. My Dad and Gareth, who do the measure ups have tried all the jigs and systems for measuring up, but haven' found one they are happy with. As bike builders we are obsessed more with the shape of a bike and how customers sit on bikes than colours, weight etc. When clients visit the shop for a measure up we like to see how people sit on their existing bike currently and how think they should sit (if different) we use actual bikes for that as we have a huge stock of Cannondale, Wilier, Spec, Scott in the shop we either use a Rourke or one of those, which ever fits best. If we can't fit the customer to any stock bike we dry builld a stock frame 99 times out of 100 we swap bars stems etc, on any bike we have in stock. Seeing a real bike with the person sat on it gives us a better idea of balance than sat on a jig with no wheels etc.
In David's case we sat him on a Cannondale to get an idea of seat/tt lengths frame angles then we use our own computer programme to design the actual bike geometry etc.

Sorry for the long winded explaination but like I say were bike shape and ride obsessives! Leave the colours to the customer.

Regards Jase.

drlodge

Thanks for your input Jase. My frame angles match those of the CAAD 8 i.e. seat tube is 73.5, head tube is 73. That differs slightly to my Condor 531 which has (I think) 74 seat and around 73 head, but the Condor has a 1" shorter top tube than seat hence the angles need to be different.

I can imagine that, should I have needed a longer or shorter top tube than the stock CAAD 8 geometry, this would be catered for by juggling some angles ad lengths.

I think the Rourke measure up approach is great, since ultimately its how you sit, look and feel on the bike that matters, and using real bikes, whilst being flexible on the design, allows for all factors to be considered. Compared to using jigs, I think its the difference between theory and the real world.

EKIMIKE

drlodge wrote:

Compared to using jigs, I think its the difference between theory and the real world.

Hmm can't say i agree with that! I would suggest it is simply a case of workmen who have a preference for particular tools. There is no theory and real world here... just fit and doesn't fit. Preferred and not preferred.

Sorry but i find this kind of (apparent) brand/purchase affirming conjecture a little strange and illogical. Clearly you can attain a good fit whether you use a jig or a bike. There is no right or wrong so long as you have the correct skills to use either tool well - which no doubt the Rourke guys posses!

drlodge

Picked the bike up on Saturday, wow, its stunning (I hope you agree). There are some pics of the final fitting and a few close ups.

Chris doing final fitting of the wheels (I brought them with me), saddle and seat post.

drlodge

Front chain ring and 953 decal

drlodge

Gareth doing final fitting of saddle height.

drlodge

Always a relaxed atmosphere, chatting with Brian for the best part of 3 hours while I was there.

drlodge

Close up of the fab colour scheme I asked Jason to do, its a black/white take on a blue/white scheme Jason did recently on a track bike. Brain said he preferred mine to the blue once the frame is made up into a bike

drlodge

More of the bike and that paint job....

drlodge

The rear wheel and gears, a Record RD is fitted as a temporary measure until a Super Record is available from the distributor (I know, having to slum it). Cassette is 12-27 Chorus, chain is Chorus too, rest is Super Record.

drlodge

Another shot of the rear...

napoleond

Very smart

drlodge

...and in all its glory...