Re: [CR]Frame size speculation


Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2001 23:06:55 EST
From: M4Campy@aol.com
Subject: Re: [CR]Frame size speculation
To: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>


Since I'm a bit younger than the avg. age of the group I really can't comment on if the _trends_ have been to go smaller... Pictures of riders from that time period compared with today seem to confirm the trend. Amazing how much we want to emulate our cycling heros;) Their bad back and all.?.

But, I remember when I first started the hype was push- ing me towards a smaller frame, longer stem, long seat- post, etc... I don't know if it is psychological but I think a smaller frame makes one feel they can dominate it, control it, save weight, etc... That was early 80s

And may be true until you get your first century in on it and find the short top tube and 14cm stem make your shoulders want to seek the closest massage parlor.? Is that a bad thing;)

Dunno, I tend to side with Grant Peterson's philosphy: "Beware the long seat post".

Nowadays I am just as interested in top tube length as the seat tube and can forgive 1cm on either side if it has an adequate top tube length.

ps. I enjoyed the Medici story too! Riveting:) My eyes were glued and I plan to print it off a read it again. But, I was also a little uncomfortable reading it:/ As the cycling world turns... Kinda reminds me that there three sides to every story:) And it was so long ago!

Mike "Dyno-Myte roller kicked my butt" Wilkinson