MKE Geo Update Feb 12, 2009


After the initial release of the geometries, we got a ton of feedback and have addressed those concerns with a new prototype geometry. Bens Cycle has uploaded the new specs on their blog.

What we did was:
-shorten the seat tubes by approx. 2cm each on the Small and Mediums
-this lowered the stand-over and the TT length on the Small model
-we mirrored the BB gusset at the DT / HT
-fixed the wonky cable guides
-recessed the 990 mounts

I’ve ridden the bike for 2 weeks now and am looking forward to the new prototypes and eventually the production models!

Hopefully these new small prototypes will fit the smaller riders out there. Expect more notices as events warrant.

  • I’m starting to think I need to build another bike around this thing..

  • Aren

    will you sell your soul again and get me a fork please?

  • ShawnAlbany

    What size frame have you been riding?? I’m stoked on these frames…can’t wait to order one. I just need to figure out what size will fit best.

  • I appreciate that these aspects are being taken into consideration along the way. Good design needs to be open to change. In bike fitment, user experience is generally going to be more important than aesthetics – to a certain extent.

    Referencing a question in the above linked blog post from Ben’s Cycle, I think the notion of “classic” geometry and modern trick riding are not always compatible. Though my current frame (56cm Rocky Boroughs, 52 c-c st and 55 tt) has a flat top tube, it fits for trick riding because it specifically does not fit for track racing. My last bike, a 57 square KHS, was the opposite.

    The changes seen in the smaller sizes are based on rider input from the target market; I can’t think of a better way to modify the design at this stage.

  • Jon

    I am wondering where someone could see one of the small sizes built up. I know that aesthetics are less important than function but i wanna see how tight the geometry is for one of the smaller bikes. Is Tony riding a size small?