[CR]Frame size question


Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 17:31:47 -0500
From: Robert Murray <robertmurray@sympatico.ca>
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
Subject: [CR]Frame size question

My questions are these: In the 60's/70's was there a trend toward larger frames? Are more bicycle enthusiasts traditionally over 6' tall? Were shorter frames more likely to be ridden-to-death and trashed? Or. . . do you think this is a misperception on my part and there really are an equal number of frame sizes available out there if you look at the big picture.

I think you have to go back to the late 1950¹s and see pictures or film of Coppi on his famous Bianchi to be in the era of really big frames. I often view my 1988 Tour de France tape and wonder how Pedro Delgado could ever be comfortable on a frame size approaching that of a circus act! I always believed that for road racing, choose a frame an inch too small and for touring/recreation an inch or so larger would be comfortable. The stem height can be the problem on a very small frame. I tend to work backwards (being in the arts) and work out my saddle height, I use the inseam x .88 and then figure out how much seat post you want showing. A few years ago, I found myself being drafted by a middle aged italian who promptly pulled up beside me and gave me the distressing news that my new (expensive) racing bike was too big for me and I was foolish enough to feel concerned. I noticed that his stem was raised very high and his riding style looked claustrophobic. I promptly went to a ³fit Kit² dealer and discovered that for a 33.25² inseam (5' 8 1/2" height), my choice of a 55cm c to c seat and top tube length was right on! The moral of this story is to ride whatever you like and don¹t be influenced
by fashion.
Robert Murray
Toronto