Genesis "Fugio"....

Talk about anything.

Moderators: Bearbonesnorm, Taylor, Chew

User avatar
benp1
Posts: 4054
Joined: Sat Dec 07, 2013 7:36 pm
Location: South Downs

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by benp1 »

whitestone wrote:Try this for starters - http://www.reynoldstechnology.biz/materials/
Thanks Bob, I hadn't seen that. Although it's still not clear on how they compare and contrast, and why one is better than the others

What I really don't get is someone saying "Wow, it's made of 853", when I don't understand how that's better, and presumably the design is more important (e.g the fallacy of ally being stiff and steel being springy)

Was hoping to understand the facts
bearlymoving
Posts: 172
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2015 9:42 am

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by bearlymoving »

I don't know much about this, but can give you an example.

853 isn't necessarily better than (eg) 631. It's stronger, so you can use a tube with a thinner wall, and therefore get a lighter bike.

You might prefer the feel of 631 (or one of the many others available) though. When I bought my Bob Jackson frame I got to choose the tubing and was advised to plump for the cheaper 631 as I valued comfort more than low weight.

I know another well known frame builder who doesn't like 853 at all (he thinks it's too hard). It just doesn't suit the kind of bikes he makes.

There's clearly more to it than that, but that's the kind of thing that I think is worth investigating.
User avatar
johnnystorm
Posts: 3951
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:55 pm
Location: Eastern (Anglia) Front

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by johnnystorm »

firestarter wrote:Yeah the pomp was great I had it ss and fixed but fixed offroad was too much for me lol

I've had surly cross-check and karate monkey and they use made up name tubing but if I'm honest I prefered the on ones
To be fair to Surly they don't dress up their tubing badges.

4130 is a recognised generic term:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/41xx_steel
Image
SteveM
Posts: 237
Joined: Sun Feb 02, 2014 10:26 am

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by SteveM »

Ben98
Posts: 1151
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 8:21 am
Location: Somewhere in the 4th dimension

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by Ben98 »

Anyone else think that's fugly as sin?
User avatar
fatbikephil
Posts: 6537
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Fife
Contact:

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by fatbikephil »

whitestone wrote:Try this for starters - http://www.reynoldstechnology.biz/materials/
Good find, makes me want to get some brazing gear :cool:
jameso
Posts: 5049
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:48 pm

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by jameso »

gma wrote:I don't know much about this, but can give you an example.

853 isn't necessarily better than (eg) 631. It's stronger, so you can use a tube with a thinner wall, and therefore get a lighter bike.

You might prefer the feel of 631 (or one of the many others available) though. When I bought my Bob Jackson frame I got to choose the tubing and was advised to plump for the cheaper 631 as I valued comfort more than low weight.

I know another well known frame builder who doesn't like 853 at all (he thinks it's too hard). It just doesn't suit the kind of bikes he makes.

There's clearly more to it than that, but that's the kind of thing that I think is worth investigating.
853 may be materially hard to work with but it's not stiffer, perhaps the builder is misquoted? Maybe just doesnt need the strength of 853. Ride feel is purely stiffness/flex so grade of tube or alloy doesn't affect it, only the OD and wall thickness, butting etc. TBH if used well basic crmo can make a great ride, higher cost steel may help drop a few oz but thinner walls ding easier, etc.
User avatar
slightly
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 8:22 pm

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by slightly »

I have a first gen Fugio (from Ebay for £400) and can with conviction say it's the best 'feel-of-steel' frame I've ridden - undone somewhat by the rigid carbon fork mind! If it had been made available with more rear tyre clearance (it'll take about a 35mm - but not say a Rock'n'Road) and a steel fork option then it's be my perfect bike. I don't think they were made in great numbers but can still be bought for silly money (£700) - http://edgwarecycles.co.uk/frames/genes ... view=write

Would recommend the 2014 Fugio for those doing mostly road/forest long day rides without much kit - it's a quality lightish bike (Genesis said it was 2.39kg for frame and fork - fork being 0.46!), albeit rather old fashioned-looking these days.

Geometry, comparison-wise, the 2014 was a more traditional and upright CX-style frame (not surprisingly, as the prototype dates back to the dark ages of 2012!), the new one is more compact, lower and, in XL form, pretty long in the TT. The head tube is much taller and a bit slacker too, so it has to be drop bars (not flat), I guess.

I also have a 2017 Vagabond (new FS for £280), whilst set up very differently, I'd say the Vagabond is noticeably stiffer on the rough stuff and has a fair bit less of that 'steel-feel' subtlety, despite having a steel fork. Genesis say the frame weight of the Vagabond is 3.92kg compared to 3.5kg for the new Fugio (significantly up on the 2014 model).

I do like the idea and design of the new Fugio - based on my experience above, I'd be keener on an 853 version with a steel fork option, although non-comparable geometries means they'll feel/ride completely differently anyways...

EDIT: Going forward, as much as I'm an N+1 kinda guy, I think it better value in times of such austerity to invest in some 27.5+ wheels and try them on the Vagabond first.
Attachments
Fugio Gem Comparison.png
(77.97 KiB) Downloaded 3456 times
Last edited by slightly on Tue Sep 19, 2017 11:02 am, edited 4 times in total.
> r a n d o m e u r <
restlessshawn
Posts: 1459
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 2:04 pm
Location: Scottish Borders

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by restlessshawn »

The 2016 CDF I had was 725 but didn't have that steel thing, just felt like a stiff tank and was heavy

I had an on one gas pipe pompino that felt great

My 853 on one feels good but it's from a time before CEN testing so is not built as beefy as newer hard tails, this makes more difference than the 853 really. It's just little lighter and more corrosion resistant but then only the main tubes are usually 853. I mostly liked the sticker

My ritchey swiss cross is triple butted ritchey logic tubing with nice skinny tubes and is the best riding frame I'd ever had

Basically what jameso said, it's what you do with the material rather than just the material

That fugio is 3.5kg frame and carbon fork seems pretty hefty
mat_swan
Posts: 233
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 8:46 pm
Location: South East

Re: Genesis "Fugio"....

Post by mat_swan »

I'd like to compare it to something like the Cotic RoadRat or Escapade frames
I had a pompetamine, when it got stolen I replaced it with a mk1 roadrat second hand.

The roadrat definitely feels springier- now there may be something in the fact that I tend to run the Roadrat singlespeed and the Pomp had an alfine, so the back end would feel lighter, but I've run them both loaded and with gears too. The roadrat starts to feel a little noodly with too much luggage weight at the ends whereas the Pomp was rock solid. I think the new roadrat/escapade have a stiffer downtube though.

I'd have either happily, I like the roadrat more as it's a nicer ride most of the time i.e. when not loaded. It looks nicer too, which helps.
Post Reply