Fūjin: Kumo Travel Roadie

Very nice Keith, can I ask why a 565tt and a 120 stem not a 575 tt and a 110 stem?
It’s so classy, will this do all your roadie work now?

I prefer longer stems for tracking and stability, and all the weight balance stuff kicks in here too

Yeah the Litespeed has been sold, I’m gonna ride the hell out of this thing

Also my bad the TT is actually 552.3mm !!

Short! I guess the short TT / long stem means you can keep a short wheelbase without the head tube getting too steep.

Also love that you’re measuring to 0.1 of a mm…

That’s the bikecad measurement that Steve gave me, it makes me chuckle.

I measure to the mm

Great build Keith, as a fellow lanky rider, its great to see a tall bike look sooo good!

Cannot get enough of your builds Keith.

It’s funny cause I’m the complete opposisite. No legs, but plently of chest/arms. 120mm stem and my TT is only 1cm? Less than yours?

Bike is gorgeous by the way. Very much like a hampsten I drew inspiration from.

Sweet bike ,all my questions about the geometry and ride have already been answered. The top tube and head tube lengths seem too work for you ? Looking forward to you blasting out some PRs


Very nice bro. You keep cranking it up !! Seeing the geo and position makes sense … I can actually picture you on the bike. Looks like a nice set up too. Understated, letting frame & colour sing. Certainly a better fit than an inadequately stretched Vitus :wink:

The tyres will actually get better too, after about 1000k’s and they’ve scrubbed off some rubber. Play around with pressures, at least 5psi more on the rear … maybe more. You’re only light … I’d shoot at 80/85-7 and see how you go.

Tell us more about the fork? Out of the box … finish, quality?

Fat fork lets it down IMO. Maybe better left naked carbon.

That’s funny … I usually hate carbon forks but think this one looks very nice (purposeful) and integrates well because it’s painted.
Of course this is all subjective but I like what he’s done and the way it looks a lot.

Cheers Ben!

You could probably see the wheels turning in my head and the furrowed brow after that fit session

I’ve got the tyres on about 80 rear, 75 front at the moment. They are soaking up a lot of the bumpy crap on the roads, and just feel right.

Fork is good on first impressions. Good quality, stiff, nice finish. It did require a bit of framebuilder input, had to caress the crown race with a file to take off a tiny bit of material. I think that is why they are only being sold to framebuilders.

I’m not really a carbon fork guy anymore, but I think this one works.

I will probably build up a steel fork for this bike when (if) I get time, just because I like making steel forks

Aint bike geometry a wonderful thing. I’m barely 5’6" and the TT on my primate is only about a cm shorter.

i love the flamboyant fluros as much as the next FOAer, but something about understated builds like this that just feels/looks/is right.

ima keep putting my pennies away for a custom kumo.

But your ST probably isn’t 75 degrees, so the ‘short’ TT on this bike is in reality longer than yours. Compare front centre instead.

Image originally from my friend Jimmy

Kinda my point: how things like TT length are affected by ST angles, HT lengths etc. Too many variables for my little brain to deal with.

Thanks Blakey, that diagram explains it well.

Personally I like to design, and think in terms of contact points (saddle, bars and pedals) then the linear measurements are a means to an end

75 degrees seems very steep though, usually only seen on tinybieks that are trying to shorten the reach to the bars without considering saddle-BB setback properly. (see: Every surly ever.)

What’s your setback (BB centre - saddle tip) on this setup, and what was it on your previous road setup?

Those are the 26mm Cerfs too aren’t they? Do they measure >26mm on Archetypes?

Edit: To clarify, I’m trying to understand Hogg’s fitting philosophy.

I was going to ask the same?