Custom Frame Build

Hey friends,

I’m getting a custom polo frame this year. I was hoping to chat with some of the folks here who know a lot more about geometry than I do. I was on a medium Ad Astra and Trek T1 before.

The ad astra was super solid, but a little too over the rear wheel for my liking. The T1 feels great, but its too much of a noodle and I think I want a more aggressive steer angle. I’m thinking if I go Steel and copy the T1 geometry, but oversize the headset I’ll be pretty close.

Any resources, or tips or advice is greatly appreciated! I’ll try and document this process so anyone with a similar idea can learn from my inevitable mistakes.


Do you have any updates on your frame?

Sorry to see no replies. I would say, try other’s bikes and go incremental. Inventing something radically new in terms of geometry is hard in the present day.

Speaking about our clubs, there are 3 main bike types:

  • old mtb (low and long, 26") - great at being sneaky and fast. Not that maneuverable.
  • fixie-descendant (28", road-bike geo) - big and fast. Great for defense, but usually clunky.
  • polo-specific 26"- small and agile. Not that fast and seems lacking in goalkeeping.

Starting from any of those types, you cannot go wrong by adding or subtracting 10-20mm in each dimension to your liking.

The only traits I would advise against are:

  • high bb (unstable, prone to stalling) (-30mm and less is OK)
  • short stem (will fuck up over-the-bars ball handling, solves nothing) (80mm+ is OK)
  • excessive frame reinforcements (they cause fatigue collection)

i d steer away from old ad astra and T1 geo as a lot of bikes dedicated for bike polo have been made since.

one of the most solid , succesful and long lasting ( in term of game meta not abuse) is the riding in circle, they did their first polo bike a while ago and fine tuned a lot of the geo aspect with time , maybe @morganxvx can say more about this.

now if you look at more recent brands like stolen , a lot of the RC specs are used ( colombis zona tubing, paragon parts)

here is my 2 cents tho
when i came back into polo in 2020 , i bought

-max power 26" ( early versions with 2 options of fork drop outs ) geo is old , as you can see below a Medium frame is a 58 cm top tube , the description also state that it has in mind a short stem to avoid turning radius and laidback position ( back then rear wheel pivot where hot)

i didnt like it , the curving was insane but i could barely stay seated on the bike and would be sent over the handlebars.


XS 550 420 (*) 74,5° 74° 20 937 370
S 565 470 (*) 74,5° 73,5° 20 937 370
M 580 520 (*) 74,5° 73° 20 947 370
L 605 560 (*) 74,5° 72,5° 20 967 380

All lengths in mm

  • Sloping geometry

A few words on top tube length: This frame is designed to give the rider a comfortable, laid back riding position on the bike, without needing to run a standard 100 mm stem (which would increase the travel radius on the riders hands while turning). As the top tube is a bit longer than usual, subtract 25 mm from your normal stem length to maintain your usual riding position. Weight distribution is shifted towards the rear wheel, allowing for easier wheelie-turns.

TT – effective top tube length, measured horizontally
ST – seat tube length from center of bottom bracket to top of seat tube
HTA – head tube angle
STA – seat tube angle
BB dr. – bottom bracket drop
WB – wheel base
CS – Chain stay length


-lightfoot 26" ( V2 i believe , sand / goldish paintjob
-riding in circle but with a new max power fork

i found the RC lighter than the lightfoot but some how similar in geo ( i dont have them handy) i kept the lightfoot tho and sold all the other bikes, i then bought a stolen based on their geo + a few specs from my own geo ( 55 cm top tube / 220mm head tube to compansate with my upright posture)

result is im not “laying” on my bike like a racer but more upright position , lots of polo player prefer a more "diving " position to be faster and down to the floor and have quicker control on the front wheel , i just like my back to be as straight as possible, and have less weight on my fragile wrists/ steering hand.

IMO the most important factor for my polo bike is how stable you can be while turning. for me you can try this by turning your handlebars 90 degree and circle back to 180 while your rear wheel stays somewhat in the same place. the wider the circle becomes, the less effective the geo is for me

to @OhManIAmWorried about bb height 30mm and lesser but the limit is pedal striking of course, if i cant pedal while turning without pedal striking then its not good for me.

alex , i know one of your first podcast episode was about 26" vs 700, and i do think 26" are better !

so far what brands have tried to produce is a 700 bike geo that can match the curves of a 26" , and still retain the advantage of big wheels for goal tending and shielding the ball from other mallets.

i recomand you talk with emmet, his kromer is a copy of his pake frame.

ask @Bouchaaaaard about the difference between groucho bikes , his fazan (rip) and his current stolen

also @LaPassoire is an active frame builder

I guess it depends on your playing style.

The first geo I came up with had +10mm drop. Coming from the MTB Street scene, it seemed like a good decision to me at the time.

The bike turned out to be agile, yet prone to stalling. It was resolved by having a greater lever (wider handlebars, longer stem). However, picking the mallet from the ground remained close to impossible.

These days I run -35mm, 175mm cranks, and ultra-short wheelbase. Seems well enough.

As for the TT/stem ratio, here are some thoughts:

  • The headtube angle is pretty standard among the current builds. 72 degrees will put your hands further from the front of your wheel. 75 will make them closer.
  • Long TT = Short stem = Front wheel being far forward. Your hands will be far behind the axle. This should make it harder to handle the ball in front of you.
  • Short TT = Long stem = Front wheel tucked back. The axle is under your arms. You have to deal with only half a wheel.
  • The more upright you sit - the better is the view, and the less pressure is on the hand. However, this provides for less space behind the bars. Straight swings become harder.

At 185cm tall, I run 490mm TT and a 90mm stem, 75 degrees headtube. It makes for unobstructed ball handling and great agility. Liked by some, hated by most =D

1 Like

would love to see your posture on your bike ! great post

Thank you.

(white shirt, blue helmet)

1 Like

nice game i made a thread about the interference call in it : 登录 Facebook | Facebook

Yay, more views =D

To be honest, hearing and understanding the judge was way too hard (for me, at least). Not only was it noisy, some rules are too intricate to keep in mind, and are rarely used in local games. The community could benefit from a series of video tutorials on the topic.

1 Like

yeah i find the facebook page i linked up very useful for me and my understanding of the rules , as well as discussing rules within my local club

1 Like

Sorry for not being active here!

I ended up building an enforcer BD on 26 with my carbon Easton haven wheels, and this winter I added an onyx rear hub and 180mm brake rotor in the front.

As much as I love nerding out about frame geo, it’s hard to justify the price tag when the BD so good and affordable. And then I can blow my budget in balling parts.

what size enforcer bd you got ?

Medium, I have tiny legs.

1 Like

i was wondering : is there any pros to have a 68mm bottom bracket shell ? isnt most affordable and durable cranks made for 73mm ?
the new koncept comes with the wider standard and thats nice imo

also whats 83mm shell made for ? boost stuff ?

Honestly, I’d oversize my BB if I can. I think the amount of force we put through our cranks at weird angles can’t be overstated… also I’m over 105 kg, and durability is the most important thing I care about.