OSO Bike: First Impressions

Several weeks ago, Shane Stock from Osobike sent us a bicycle to test. I’ve had a chance to ride this bike almost 100 miles, including lots of commutes to and from work and in many weather conditions. With this “first impressions” article, I wanted to address some of the questions our readers had when we first posted about this bike. I also want to talk about some of my initial likes and dislikes. A more formal review will be coming in another couple of weeks…


Several readers had comments and questions about the braking ability of this coaster-brake-based singlespeed. During the course of my riding, I had no problems whatsoever with braking — I’m a longtime fan of the simplicity of coaster brakes and I’ve never experienced any fading or failure of coaster brake systems, no matter how extreme the conditions. But, since I only weigh somewhere around 130 lbs. soaking wet, I decided to recruit two strapping friends of mine from the Seminole Heights Bicycle Club to help me test the bike’s braking performance. Meet Ken Sturrock, dapper gentleman and fan of all types of bikes:


A little background on our “test”: a major bicycle manufacturer was considering the release of their own coaster-braked singlespeed, but they were concerned about stopping distances under a heavy rider. I don’t remember the exact stopping distance they were concerned with, but it was somewhere around 100 feet. There was also concern about meeting the requirements of the California Vehicle Code (which is somewhat vaguely worded as to braking performance of a bicycle). So, after hauling the Oso over to the Bikecommuters.com closed-circuit/skidpad testing facility on my “bicycle tow truck”…


…we paced off a 130 foot “stopping area” (white painted lines in the above photo are 10 feet apart). Getting up to a speed of 17-19 MPH, our 200 lb. tester was able to stop without skidding or using the front brake in less than 60 feet. With skidding, the stopping distance was even less. At no time did we feel that we wouldn’t be able to stop in time when needed. My other “guest tester”, Steve Swiger (200+ lbs. of all-American man) also reported no gripes with the braking performance of the Oso.

Another question/concern of some of our readers was about the possibility of mounting fenders to the Oso and whether there was enough frame/fork clearance to mount cushier tires. As many of your noticed, the fork of this bike is equipped with fender eyelets…and that is a real mystery to me, as there is NO WAY to mount even a narrow fender between the legs of this fork (well, actually, there IS one way, but it requires a “River City Reacharound” and cutting a fender into two pieces…not an elegant solution). Here is a photo that illustrates the clearance around the front brake caliper and the fork crown:


Not much room around there, is there? I’m going to chalk up the fender eyelets to “unsolved mystery” status — I’m having a hard time figuring out why the Taiwanese frame manufacturer even makes a fork model like this!

How do larger tires fit? 23 mm tires aren’t everyone’s cup of tea, so I wanted to mount some cushier rubber just to see if such a thing was possible. I happened to have a pair of 28 mm road tires on hand, so on they went:


There’s a few millimeters of room to spare on either side of the tire. I’m guessing that a tire up to 32 mm wide would probably fit, but if it were up to me, I wouldn’t go bigger than 30 mm. The same applies to the rear of the bike — there’s a bit of room to spare, but not much. No knobby cyclocross tires or plush “fatties” on this bike:

more 28s

The wheels on the Oso are made by Alex. These aren’t run of the mill Alex wheels, though — they’re drilled and laced under a patent by Rolf Wheels. The wheels themselves aren’t particularly light — they are 36-spoked models and the hubs are nothing to write home about — but they have performed quite well on Tampa’s notoriously rough streets. After the wheels “settled in” (the initial creaking and popping of most machine-built wheels), they have withstood many trips down brick-paved streets and even a few stairways without coming untrue. Nice!

Ok…now for an aesthetic concern and two serious performance concerns. I really like the clean lines of the bike and its dazzling white color scheme with subtle silver decals. I especially like that Shane has specified a silver stem and seatpost for the bike (when was the last time you saw anything but black components on budget bikes?). That being said, this silver component scheme should have and could have been carried throughout the bike — especially the crankset:


This crankset looks out of place on such a sleek bike…and guess what? It IS out of place! This crankset is a modified mountain triple (the mounts for the innermost chainring have been somewhat crudely ground off) — far better suited for a freeride or all-mountain bike than a singlespeed road machine. And, with a mountain bike-standard bolt circle diameter of 104 mm, finding big chainrings to replace the existing one or to modify the gear ratio isn’t an easy feat. Despite extensive Web searching, the biggest I’ve found is a 48t, same as the original chainring. Want to go bigger? Good luck, and happy searching. Smaller chainrings are readily available, though, so adjusting the gear ratio won’t be too daunting for folks who like to tinker.

That brings me to the first of my performance concerns: specifying the crankset used on this bike may contribute greatly to the poor chainline this bike suffers from. As many of you surely know, chainline is crucial on a singlespeed bike. A straight chain is a smooth one, and a straight chainline prevents undue wear from chewing up the cog and chainring and also minimizes the possibility of throwing a chain while pedaling. Using Sheldon Brown’s chainline calculation methods, I determined that the rear chainline measurement is 41.5 mm and the front chainline measurement is a hair over 50 mm. 2 or 3 millmeters of difference is ok; nearly 10 mm is NOT. While I haven’t thrown a chain, I can hear and feel some pretty serious grinding going on, even after a liberal application of chain lube. The bottom bracket spindle needs to be replaced with a shorter model.

The other concern was pointed out by one of our commenters on the original article…the chain is too tight, and there’s no adjustment available to give it some slack. The rear wheel axles are all the way to the front of the forkends. This chain desperately needs an additional full link…and while I could have added a link and swapped out the BB for a shorter spindle, I refuse to do those sorts of things while testing a bike. If a bike comes like this from the manufacturer, that’s how it’s going to be tested!

In the review, I will discuss how the bike rides…but until then, I leave you with a couple thoughts — the Oso is fun, it’s simple and it is pretty sleek. Oh, and it can be VERY fast. None of my gripes are difficult to surmount…a little tweaking here and there can eliminate most of my concerns.

Steve and Ken, guest testers


  1. Dman November 14, 2008 5:23 am 

    Can’t say I’m impressed or interested in this bike at all. Especially after watching Shane’s video…doesn’t seem like the guy knows what he’s doing, and I don’t count throwing together crappy mis matched parts as designing a bike.

  2. Marla November 14, 2008 6:08 am 

    I have a question about the Xtracycle in the pic. How did you hook the bike up to it? It looks like a QR is somehow mounted on it, but I can’t see clearly in the pic.


  3. Ghost Rider November 14, 2008 6:19 am 

    Marla, I have an old Yakima roofrack fork block mounted to the rear tube of the FreeRadical frame — shimmed with pieces of PVC pipe. I’ll post better pictures of it in an upcoming article.

    @Dman — you’re under no obligation to be interested in the OSO…it’s definitely not a bike for everyone, and it serves a very narrow niche of commuters. We’re always eager to test all manner of bikes around here, though, even ones that many of our readers might not find useful for their purposes.

  4. Shane November 14, 2008 8:08 am 

    First of all thank you so much for taking all the time and effort to do this un-biased review. I am glad to hear some positive comments about the coaster brake. I just can not understand why there all of these kids riding around on fixed gears when to me the coaster brake option seems better.
    As far as the color scheme of the Osobike is concerned, the three colors are white, chrome and black. The black crank matches the black seat, handle bar tape, and wheels. The chrome items are the seat post, the spokes, the stem and the chain. The rims are chrome on the machined part and black the rest. My guess is that if I asked 50 people weather they would prefer the crank black or chome, I would get about 25 on each side.
    Concerning the chain alignment: I have ridden the Osobike several hundred miles and notice no grinding. When you ride a geared bike and have the chain on the inside chain ring and the last sproket on the rear wheel you will be out of alignment by around 20mm, and that is normal, so I don’t understand why it is a big deal for the Osobike to be off by 9mm.
    As far as the chains being too tight, I would have to disagree with that also. Yes, they come in the box a little on the tight side. I bet if you look at the chain now, since you have rode the bike 100 miles, it will be a little looser now that it is worn in. By adding another chain link you are adding to the risk that the chain might become accidentally loose (which is not likely since the Osobike has chain tensioners).

    What was the purpose of your post? The components on this bike are not “crappy”. I will be the first to admit that I am not a bike expert, although I have been learning a lot through this project. On the otherhand, the people I worked with to develop this bike ARE experts who have been building bikes for many many years.

  5. Mike C November 14, 2008 8:29 am 


    A crank with 110 or 130 spacing would have been a better spec–see reviewer’s comments on chainring availability. While a 48t ring might be best for most, there are those who would look to up their ratio a bit. Same thing with the chainline–while most won’t notice it or care, there are those who will, and for them, it’s a big negative, especially when the solution is to swap out the bottom bracket, not just a mere adjustment. Reviewer would have been remiss in not pointing out these few technical details. Same thing with the too-tight chain–you might think it’s OK; most customers might not notice; but them what know bikes will take issue with it.

    Consider it all constructive criticism. Instead of defending your choices or getting at all bent out of shape about it, maybe view it as very much focus group feedback, and adjust future orders based on this. The customers who wouldn’t notice the difference still won’t, and the customers who would, will be mollified by the corrections–not just the spec, but also the fact that you respond to customer criticism and comment. Maybe quit being so defensive. Especially in response to a fairly neutral/positive review.

    On the flip side, all you haterz suck Shane’s balls–get back to Shane once you’ve spec’d, manufactured, and imported your own bikes. Even companies like IRO get things wrong on basic design (Rob Roy rear canti placement) and if Shane can manage to swallow just a bit of the extra pride that shows through in his responses, the second gen of OSObikes could obviously address the teething problems of OSObike 1.0.

  6. Dman November 14, 2008 8:41 am 

    When I say “crappy” I mean things like three ring cranks w/the small mounts ground off, mounted to the wrong size BB. It’d be one thing if this was a bike you built for yourself…but it’s not acceptable on a production bike to sell to others. BTW – the tight chain doesn’t bother me..in BMX we always had the chain as tight as possible, lets you put power down quicker when you get on it. But with a big misalignment it is going to wear very quickly. I do like the concept of this bike, just not the execution. But like Mike said, the next generation could be a really cool machine.

  7. Josh November 14, 2008 8:47 am 

    I’m very interested in the tow truck rig on the extracycle too. Do you do anything to secure the handlebars, or do you let the fork pivot freely? Does the towed bike ever flop over?

  8. MattG November 14, 2008 8:59 am 

    That’s too bad about the bottom bracket problems. It sounds like a really neat low maintenence bike, otherwise.

    Hopefully, Shane will take this feedback and improve on the bike’s next incarnation.

  9. Ghost Rider November 14, 2008 9:21 am 

    Good comments, everyone…keep ’em coming!

    Shane, chainline is critical on a singlespeed/fixed gear bike. Your example of a multi-geared machine with 20 mm of misalignment isn’t valid for three reasons: 1) on a multi-geared machine, you’ve got two devices that serve as chain guides and as gentle chain tensioning devices — the front and rear derailleurs. 2) On a multi-geared bike, if the chain gets “thrown”, it only throws to the next gear in line (as long as the high and low derailleur stop screws are adjusted correctly). 3) On a multi-geared bike, cross-chaining as you describe will result in accelerated wear on both the chain and cassette cogs…there will be plenty of life left in some of the cogs, but others will be too worn to properly carry the chain without skipping.

    On a singlespeed or fixed gear…especially one that relys solely on rear-hub braking (coaster or reverse pedal pressure on a fixed cog)…if you throw the chain, you’re screwed. If you don’t have an auxillary brake, as many riders choose not to use, you’re either “Flintstoning” it or you’re crashing. Also, chains are not designed for the incredibly high sideloads that a misaligned chainline generates, and complete chain breakage is a strong possibility, particularly when the chain is too tight (and on this test bike, it is still far too tight).

    I’ve been obsessed with bicycles for far too long (building, racing, riding, voraciously reading about them) to overlook what I’m convinced is a serious performance and safety issue

    My aesthetic quibbles are a non-issue for most, and you’re right when you say that you’ll get a variety of answers as to what the ideal colors of the components should be.

    @Dman — it IS the right BB for this particular crank. It’s just the wrong frame application for the crank/BB assembly 😉

    @Josh, the fork is free to pivot. There’s no way the towed bike can flop since both fork legs are clamped firmly into the mount. Turning radius of the entire rig is pretty extreme, though. Overall, this setup is surprisingly stable…I thought I’d have tracking problems with the towed bike, but it follows along beautifully!

  10. Clancy November 14, 2008 10:10 am 

    The gearing always be changed via the rear cog. It comes with a 18T and you can go as small as 14T.

  11. Ken Sturrock November 14, 2008 11:29 am 

    As one of Jack’s OSO Bike “Crash Test Dummies” I’ve been thinking a bit more about the OSO Bike.

    Maybe the OSO is actually “just” a toy? There’s nothing wrong with that. A lot of us that see bicycles as useful tools have grown defensive about the idea of a bicycle as a simple toy. Here’s an imperfect analogy: Mazda has made good money selling Miatas for over 18 years so there is obviously a well developed market for the right kind of toy. Miatas aren’t fast enough to keep up with higher end cars, they can carry almost nothing, they’re hard to climb in and out of, they are elemental but they handle well, feel fast, look cute and are a lot of fun. Miatas are also driven a lot because they’re fun.

    Furthermore, Miatas are bought by people who know what Miatas are capable of and accept them for what they are. Miata drivers may also own pickup trucks, Corvettes and minivans. Miata owners don’t expect their Miata to do any of those functions. Miatas are not really meant to be “your only car” (Although, sometimes they are!) and OSO bikes probably shouldn’t be “your only bicycle” (Although it could be!) Miatas are typically driven by people who don’t feel the need to “race the world”. Rather, Miatas are driven purely for the private enjoyment of their owners regardless of what the teenager driving the fart-can muffler Honda Civic, the good old boy in his pickup truck or the mid-life-crisis sufferer in the Mustang in the next lane thinks.

    The OSO bike doesn’t fit any categories, and it has features and details that make you scratch your head. Much like early sports cars that used parts from other non-sporty vehicles, the OSO uses weird parts that were bought cheap – or even by mistake. Aside from these, really rather petty, quirks, it is undeniable that the OSO bike is actually a blast to ride. Could it be better? Sure. However, what’s better for one may not be better for another and it might be useful to step back and look at the big picture “What’s it for?” as well as the detail questions “What should be changed?” Fixing the chain line won’t necessarily help things if too many people don’t get the concept.

    For me, the big question remains: Are people willing and able to buy this bicycle (untried) simply because it’s fun?

  12. Jesus Christ November 14, 2008 12:31 pm 

    I think I am going to buy one of these just to have fun hammering through traffic on really can’t beat the price even if you upgrade the crank. Just waiting on my next stimulus lol, Cool review you are a mad scientist Ghost Rider, that is a badass xtracycle tandem mutant. Are there any Bicycles are fun shirts left? The lord wears a large, email me if you do let me know. Chea Chea

  13. Raiyn November 14, 2008 4:05 pm 

    I’d have to say 110 BCD cranks would have been a much smarter spec. There’s a much better selection of ring sizes available. I make no bones about it, that crank is just not something I’d expect to see on a supposedly professionally equipped bike. I could see a garage tinkerer working from leftovers doing that, but not a factory bike. Don’t get me started on the tire spacing.

  14. Ghost Rider November 14, 2008 4:13 pm 

    I wholeheartedly agree about the crank spec. 110 or 130 BCD would be a much smarter choice…although, as Clancy pointed out, swapping out the cog in back to play with the ratio is really easy (pop out the hog ring, drop a new cog onto the splines, push the ring back into its groove and off you go).

    Raiyn, what size of tires would you use, if you could fit your choice into this frame?

    In a sense, though, being able to fit wider tires into this frame is a non-issue. For folks who prefer meatier rubber, they’re probably looking for other features that this bike doesn’t satisfy, either…like a more relaxed geometry, capability of attaching fenders and a rack, etc. This bike doesn’t do any of that — but then again, it was never intended to.

  15. Shane November 14, 2008 9:36 pm 

    What is interesting to me is how different people like or dislike different things about the same object. I have been doing custom woodwork now for over twenty years. We build things for people based on drawings, pictures or just verbal or written instruction. Once the project is done, it has to be approved by whoever ordered it befor they pay us. What one person would never notice, is the next person’s major gripe and vice versa. Some people are very picky about color, other people are more concerned that all the drawers slide in and out just right and don’t even notice if the color does not match perfect from door to door. Somebody else might be obsesed the spacing between each door is exactly the same as the other doors. Somebody else is mostly concerned that the finsish feels smooth. And the list could go on and on.

    My point is that no matter who reviews this bike, they are bound to find different things they like and dislike about it. I would bet that if I had somebody else review this bike they would have never noticed anything about the chain, but there would be something else they didn’t like.

    It is weird how people finally make up their minds to buy things. People base thier disisions largely on if it is a brand name that they feel confident about, or if they see their friends or people they like using a product. For example, if I were to get Lance Armstrong to ride the Osobike and say he likes, they would probably sell out shortly. If the fixed gear culture for some reason suddenly decided that coaster brakes are more cool that fixed gears (which they are), then again, the Osobike would probably sell out shortly.

    So what sells is often not what really makes sense, but what people think makes sense, weather it does or not. To me the Osobike makes a lot of sense, but unless it makes the same sense to other people, they don’t buy.

    Last week I sold three bikes. One to a lady that I know that we do woodwork for, the other to her husband and the third to their interior designer. If she didn’t know me before hand I would have probably never been able to sell her the bike. So what did the quality of the bike have to do with that sell. It was secondary to the fact that she already had confidence in me because we had done a lot of woodwork in their house.

    I don’t know if I am making sence or not. I am just intreaged by why things sell and why they don’t. Does Coke really taste that great?

  16. RL November 15, 2008 7:16 am 


    “I would bet that if I had somebody else review this bike they would have never noticed anything about the chain, but there would be something else they didn’t like.”

    Are you kidding me? Seriously, Jack did you a favor by pointing out some of the things he saw. Much like everyone has said, take the constructive criticism and apply it to the next gen of OSO bikes. Most bike companies will take their previous models and make it better the next year…that’s part of the burden of being a bike company, and as much as you want to fight it, you ARE A BIKE COMPANY.

    We deal with many bike companies for our sites and we’ve often been asked what our input is on certain models, if we didn’t like it, they’ve taken it into consideration for the next model…

  17. AYHSMB November 15, 2008 8:43 am 

    “For example, if I were to get Lance Armstrong to ride the Osobike and say he likes, they would probably sell out shortly.”

    Mebbe you should have asked Lance to ride this bike. He’s right up the street, ain’t he?

  18. Shane November 15, 2008 12:06 pm 

    Don’t get me wrong. I appriciate jack doing the review, and I agree that the chain is out of alignment by 9mm. If I ever do another run of bikes this will be changed. What I do not agree with is that it is a major issue. Has anybody done a test comparing how long a chain will last when it is out of alignment by 9mm (smaller than the thickness of your little finger for those who don’t use metric), as compared to a chain that is dead on center? (This amounts to being off by about one degree). Because if you are saying that the chain will wear out in 9000 miles instead of 10000, I don’t see that as a major issue.

  19. SkidMark November 15, 2008 6:31 pm 

    You can “up the ratio a bit” with a 17t or 16t sprocket. More than 72 gear inches on a singlespeed is kind of stupid unless you never go up a hill. Most track-style singlespeed bikes come with a 48t so it was an obvious choice. The only people using something huge on the front like a 52t are nOObs doing yard sale 10-speed conversions.

    Coasterbrake sprockets are made with an offset so I have to wonder which way it was offset and if that is what gave it the bad chainline. If you are going to complain about chainline how about of picture of it?

    Shane, chainline is important on a singlespeed. BMXs have decent chainline, at least the nice ones do. Spec’ing a narrower bb or a 110 or 130 bcd crank should not effect the unit price, Bulletproof brand cranks retail for $35 so they must wholesale for the same as those 4-bolt Truvativ copies. It’s true that derailleur chains experience a lot of offset but derailleur chains are designed for that, singlespeed chains aren’t.

  20. Ghost Rider November 15, 2008 8:06 pm 

    SkidMark, I tried to get an FGG-style “money shot” of the chainline, but my camera just couldn’t do it.

    I agree with you about chainring size, but a rider should be able to choose that on their own without having to spring for an entirely different crankset, eh? Maybe I’m making a bigger deal of the 104mm BCD than I should, but it definitely limits choices, especially when coaster sprockets come in such few toothcount flavors.

    The sprocket is installed in the “normal” orientation. Flipping it would make it that much worse. Believe me, it’s the BB spindle length that’s throwing the chainline off on this bike.

  21. Raiyn November 16, 2008 12:25 am 

    I’d like to see room for true 32’s and fenders without the “reacharound”.
    I’m standing my ground on the 110 cranks simply because the sheer amount of rings available for that BCD make it a no brainer for n00bs or people who’ve been around the ‘drome a time or two. Hacked MTB cranks just don’t cut it even at the $420 level

  22. SkidMark November 16, 2008 1:38 am 

    48 x 16 is 88 gear inches. If you live anywhere with hill this gearing is way too tall. This is of course the debate of the century, with nOOBs selecting tall gearing and experienced singlespeed or fixed riders selecting lower gearing. Coasterbraked bikes like beach cruisers typically run gearing in the neighborhood of 60 gear inches. Most production singlespeed road bikes run 48 x 18 and it used to be 48 x 16. So who is gearing up taller than 88 gear inches?

  23. 2whls3spds November 16, 2008 5:56 am 

    @ shane ref: Chainline…

    I have had a single speed chain on a old Raleigh 3 speed last over 15,000 miles. I have had chains on multi speed bikes last less than 5,000. All first quality chains, BTW.

    You say you are a wood worker. Do you align and sharpen your planer blades? Or just let them chip and snipe? Same thing with chain line. From a mechanical stand point the optimum chain ring to rear cog ratio is 2:1. By limiting the choices in chain rings it is more difficult to achieve.

    I too would like to see more tire clearance for fender installation. Even my current single speed (Redline 9.2.5) has fenders. The only bike I will ride with out fenders is a racing bike…period.


  24. Raiyn November 17, 2008 3:30 am 

    @ SkidMark
    It’s time to clean your undies. With a 110 you can go down as well as up allowing for greater flexability. Now say it with me “110 good – hack job104 bad”

  25. Totalchaud December 8, 2008 1:49 pm 


  26. Babau December 8, 2008 6:02 pm 

    Shane, please don’t take this the wrong way but if you:
    * Know nothing about bikes
    * Don’t know much about singlespeeds
    * Have no background in marketing or understanding of consumer behaviour

    Maybe being a bike company just isn’t the best strategic fit for you. I know it can be really hard to pass by what you see as a profitable opportunity. I struggle with it too in my business. However, if the opportunity doesn’t fit any of your core competencies and you can’t build any kind of sustainable advantage, maybe it’s best to let someone else exploit it and keep looking.

    If you’re determined to pursue this, though, it’s time to do some serious research. At least read through all of Sheldon Brown’s material on singlespeeds and fixed gears. It’ll only take you a few hours, and that’s nothing considering the money you’ve poured into this thing. Also, you need to find a new supplier. The ones currently building your bike have screwed you. Seems like they had a container load of cheap mtn triples hanging around and were desperate to unload them. Shoddily grinding off a few rings does not a good crankset make.

  27. nat December 8, 2008 11:38 pm 

    I’m surprised no one has mentioned it here yet, but a hugely important reason to put an extra link in the chain is to facilitate wheel removal. with track ends like the oh-so’s, unless you have a solid two centimeters of space to move the axel forward, you can’t take the wheel off without breaking the chain. and when it’s flat time, breaking chains sucks more balls than haters do. hopefully the oh-so-badly-put-together bike’s chain has a master link. but then, if the chain’s as tight as the reviewer states, most master links, which require bending the chain a bit to get the retainer plate to pop off, won’t work. foiled again. and shane buddy, there’s no need to ram that axel up against the track end to avoid “adding to the risk that the chain might become accidentally loose.” my grandmother can torque axel nuts down enough to keep that sucker in place. i’ve never had an axel move. ever. if axel slippage was such a problem, horizontal dropouts wouldn’t have lasted until now. i mean seriously shane, should we disassemble the rear triangle and fit chain stays of a new length every time we want to change gear ratios, which will be soon after buying this over-geared monstrosity?

  28. Rick Burton December 13, 2008 11:58 am 

    You said, “(your) point is that no matter who reviews this bike, they are bound to find different things they like and dislike about it”

    Shane, a 10 mm chain misalignment on a single speed bicycle can’t be chalked up to personal preference. It’s a manufacturing defect.

    I recently purchased a single speed Bianchi, which had a chin line misalignment of about 1.5 mm. I was able to remedy the problem by shifting the bottom bracket outboard by using a $2 spacer. Had the chain line been off by another mm, I would have expected Bianchi to remedy the defect, which is exactly what you should do for the unfortunate few who have purchased your product. I somehow doubt you will do this. Perhaps my doubt is fueled by the fact that you intend to continue selling a defective product until you current inventory is depleted. This exemplifies your lack of integrity.

    It amazes me that a man who admits to being less than an expert in the realm of bicycles can so fervently discredit the opinions of actual experts.

    Shane, you need to read this: http://www.sheldonbrown.com/singlespeed.html#chainline

    Furthermore, that crankset looks familiar. It’s Identical to a crankset that Nashbar.com was trying to sell for $11.00 a year or so ago. When they finally dropped the price to $9.00, I bought a pair and fit them on a single speed bike for my brother in law… although I didn’t grind off the granny gear mount… and it was a mountain bike.

  29. Phil Kratz March 30, 2009 7:00 pm 

    youfolks ar harsh n the guy, I’m sure getting a bussiness like this up and going inst the easiest thing to do on a normal guy’s budget . I made made minor adjustments on my osobike and i love it the frame is sweet and its a very comfortable fun ride. I like the fact that is a bike from a small guy rather than some huge company.

  30. Eric M May 24, 2009 6:45 pm 

    I personally would take this bike and support a smaller enterprise than buy something similar from Bikesdirect.com. Babau and Rick Burton: You guys are making a very personal argument against the manufacturer of this Bike. It’s very insulting to hear you speak about a man’s integrity, ambition and intention after knowing very very little about him. It makes your argument seem more juvenile and smaller than it would be it you were to stick to facts. If you people would have read the initial review you would see that it is very positive in most points. So what if he’s not an expert (Shane), this is an option. None of you can really say that this bike wont get you to point A from point B in a safe, efficient, speedy , stylish way. That is the point.

  31. Steve July 4, 2009 5:26 pm 

    The crankset used on this bike is a modified Lasko mountain triple crank. It has a specified chain line from the factory of 47.5-50mm. The bottom bracket on this bike is 110.5mm. Even changing the bottom bracket to a 103mm will only correct the chain line by about 3.5 mm. A single speed specified crank set will usually give you a 42-43 mm chainline with a 110mm bottom. Again, I do not think it is the bottom bracket! This is just a mismatched crank set for this application.

  32. Nadeem October 12, 2009 3:57 am 

    Hi mates!
    I have recently been working on a task called “extended essay” Its a compulsory task to be done by every student doing the International baccalaureate. My subject is physics and I have decided to do my EE with a bike. The task is supposed to be a minimum of 3000 words and must involve some experiments. I am not sure if this is the right place but is there anyone who has an idea of a good reseach question. any comments or reply would be appreciated. I thought about doing “how would the air pressure in the Tyre affect the breaking distance?” or something similar?

  33. Johnny December 15, 2010 7:43 pm 

    Interesting exchange here.

    As a Champion of the Coaster Brake, I’m proud of Shane for getting out there and building his own bike even if he doesn’t have all the answers.

    At the same time Jack made some good points about chainline. Throwing a chain on a Coaster Brake bike without a front brake is No Joke. At Coasties we always say more brakes is better than less brakes, and most folks that buy a Coaster Brake wheel set from us ride a front brake too.

    Osobike is for sale…any takers? :)

  34. Jeebus June 12, 2012 12:32 pm 

    second chance bikes dot com. I don’t know what to say.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *