Columbus uses a production tolerance of 2mm (in both directions).
Are you sure this is the same fork? I believe the original was for 28C tyres. This frame is designed for 32C. It looks a bit different than the Futura I see online (no metal reinforcement on crown face, all carbon). Could an updated fork have a longer A2C?
The way I was thinking of it was:
Their drawing shows a “length” of 368. Which would have a AC of 371.
If that was in your models, and you locked in the frame dimensions based on that, then to get the correct geo, you would need a fork with those dimensions.
Then, when the actual fork comes, it would have an AC of 368, and a length of about 365.
So, when that fork is put on the above frame, the front end would be lower (and the HT slightly steeper)
1 Like
If you change the fork length in bike cad to AC 368 (while keeping the fit the same) then it lengthens the head tube to compensate.
This is indeed a drawing for a version for max 28mm tires.
I have now found a version for 32mm tires, but I haven’t found a drawing yet. From all drawings I have seen, though, the 2mm tolerance seems a given.
You also have the Trefoil forks with a special, non-round steerer tube.
This looks like the one, and looks like a 368 nominal A2C. It is definitely not the Trefoil.
Pretty frame! In the picture you included it doesn’t look like you had ridden it yet at that time. As of now have you completed assembly and taken it out for a ride?
Maybe it’s not precisely what was expected but maybe it’s perfectly comfortable. Seeing what others - more knowledgeable than me - have written, perhaps it’ll be fine when ridden. I have about 20 custom bikes and while most of them are as expected, one can expect occasional variances with anything built by hand. For example, I have an Onguza which was shipped with rear brake flat mounts out of alignment. Nothing I did would prevent the rear disc brakes from very significantly rubbing, This was resolved by cold-setting the rear triangle 1-2mm and also adding a shim washer to the non-drive rear dropout. This was much better than sending the frame back to Namibia. Another instance was my Carl Strong titanium all-road bike where the seat tube water bottle mounts interfered with the proper positioning of the front derailleur clamp. It turns out that Carl normally uses BSA shells for his bottom brackets but I requested a T47 on my frame. His jig for placement of bottle bosses works by contacting the BB shell…and mine was larger than usual. He simply forgot to make the correction at the time of fabrication. I could not figure out how to mount a front derailleur until I found an offset FD mount adapter. It works fine now. Lastly, I have another custom frame where the effective top tube was 10mm longer than what had been agreed upon. The work-around was to use a shorter stem than what I had planned.
Is there are way to use a headset with a lower profile? Based on what I’ve read so far in the thread , maybe you just need to account for a few mm. Might be worth a try, rather than sending the bike back to Italy and/or trying to get them to modify or remake the frame.
Good Luck!
SB
5 Likes
In the sense of the last reply:
I made the mistake to design my frame with too much reach. I also went for a shorter stem, but as the original stem was already on the short end, steering became twitchy. I then swapped the fork for one with less offset to compensate. (That last part bit me when a bike fitter put my cleats far back and I got too much toe overlap to my liking. So I swapped the fork once more for one with more offset but compensated by installing and angled headset.)
And my seat tube was also designed a bit on the long side. I wanted my seatpost to stick out more so that it could flex more. A tube cutter, a saw and a drill brought a solution.
So, indeed, maybe there are suitable workarounds. Or you may like the frame as-is more than you think.
1 Like
Also to the point that others have suggested, there is 10mm of spacers currently under the stem. So there is always the option to “slam that stem”.
While it may not be ideal to what you asked for, it isn’t nearly the same compromise as a different stem length or fork rake.
Thank you for this comment. It does put things in perspective. This is my first custom frame, and I was expecting perfection. I guess that is not guaranteed. I would still expect some sort of cooperation from Pegoretti, maybe considering sending a fork which could improve the situation, anything…
I have not fully assembled the bike and ridden it. It sits as is in the photo in my storage while I decide whether to try to remedy it or sell it 
The reason I am quite set on my fit numbers is that I had a very good bike fit last year, which calls for a 50mm drop. I have that set on my gravel bike, while my old road bike is a bit on the low side with 60mm the best I can achieve. This Pegoretti was supposed to be the new road bike… I wanted a 45mm drop with 10mm spacers in order to be able to reduce to 50mm and 55mm by removing the spacers. As it is, I can achieve 45mm with a fully slammed -6* stem. I’ve tested 45mm on the gravel bike and it feels too relaxed even there. In 10 years it might feel OK 
I have been looking at workarounds, but haven’t yet found any super good option. For semi-internally routed headsets, the Cane Creek seems to have the lowest stack. Going to a fully internal, like a Wolf Tooth for Enve In-route + Enve In-route one-piece handlebar and stem could get me 3mm down on the headset plus a one more mm on the stem angle. I could probably get close to the 50mm. I just never wanted a fully internal system on this frame.
Another option would be a change of fork to Columbus Trefoil or a d-shaped one and using a normal headset like CK Inset 8, routing it internally. I think I could gain almost 9mm just on the headset stack this way. It would be in fact a fully internal system with the same downsides as the one above. It does look great because you can use a standard stem as long as there is enough space inside to run cables through.
Another option is a -12* stem. Darimo make them. It would look like here on an MTB. The most user-friendly, but I am still wondering do I want something like this on a custom frame.
All the above solutions were suggested by my mechanic. Pegoretti have not engaged in any way in trying to help remedy the problem. It is maybe the worst part of this situation, the disappointment with that “legendary” builder…
Would you have any additional suggestions on headsets with a lower stack?
There is quite a bit of that head tube sticking out above the weld with the top tube. Its it feasible to shorten a head tube by 5mm? At that point maybe it’s better to try to sell it…
2 Likes
Seems like you bought a Pegoretti to assemble yourself?
I own a Responsorium and built it up myself. I did have some surprising issues like having to ream out the seat tube for the seatpost and clean out paint from the hanger thread. I think that they just assume that the frames are going to shops that will do the build and deal with these issues. In your case wouldn’t a head tube reamer easily remove the few millimetres required?
2 Likes
I was planning to have it assembled by the mechanic, but yes, with a lot of input from me regarding the bike fit, which I am very particular about. The fit check was the first thing I did. I haven’t even gotten yet to the point of checking threads etc. I can definitely see some overpaint on the disc brake mount on the fork.
The head tube reamer/facing tool - I don’t know if that is possible. It is Columbus XCR stainless steel. The information I got online is that it would be very difficult and a normal mechanic probably couldn’t do it. Pegoretti definitely could do it. The cost to them would be shipment between Cyprus, where I am, and Italy. So probably 500 EUR both ways. Yet they refuse to take it in to fix…
One of the hopes I had when I asked for help with verifying the drawing was that, if mistakes were identified, I could confront Pegoretti with them, get them to own up and offer to fix it.
Yeah, apart from whether the situation can be remedied, the attitude of Pegoretti leaves a lot of room for improvement. Unfortunately, I have the impression that a lot of top craftsmen are not so customer-friendly or open to feedback. Some even come over as elitist. It’s a shame and really detracts from the experience, which is often something you were really looking forward to. As long as such behaviour is not well-known, and they have their status/reputation for creating quality products in general, I’m afraid nothing will change. Provided they are willing to do some introspection in the first place when their business goes south.
1 Like
BTW, I’ve looked it up: facing and reaming does normally not meaningful alter the head tube lenght.
If you order a custom frame from Italy and the geometry is only off by 10mm, consider yourself lucky.
7 Likes
I believe the days of ordering a Colnago Master and it arriving 6 months later with incorrect paint or dimensions are gone.
I may have missed it but did you order the frame directly from Pegoretti yourself or did the shop do it? If it was ordered through the shop wouldn’t they be accountable for the process and I usually see Pegoretti’s with a Falz fork? Seems odd for a Columbus fork but maybe that was just your choice?
I visited the workshop in Verona and ordered directly.
The fork was chosen by them. This is an internally routed Responsorium. They now do internally routed models. I believe the Falz fork is not internal and it was never suggested to me.
Hmm interesting. The arrogance of Pegoretti is a real concern, a deal breaker for any future purchase.
Ahh yes I see on their site is now says ‘carbon fibre aero’ but it looks like a Columbus fork.
Good luck with the build, I would ride it to see how how feels. You may be surprised?
1 Like
Facing and reaming the head tube is normally meant to ensure everything is straight and that the headset will be corrctly aligned, so one doesn’t usually remove much. However it can at least sometimes be used to shorten the head tube by 5mm or so; we used to do this routinely on small 1990s Cannondales that ate normal headsets rapidly. Needle bearings held up way better but the forks were cut too short for them ex-factory, hence the modification.
3 Likes