This discussion of frame sizing is very interesting. The quote from the Cycling Yearbook of 1941 was especially provocative I thought. To judge from photos of racers of the period, not many people were following the advice in the yearbook!
There is no question that by raising the seatpost relative to the bars, you can get a lot more power, especially sitting down on hills. I've noticed this without exception every time I ride one of my bikes set up in this way.
However, because the joint between my cervical and thoracic spine has deteriorated significantly, I simply cannot ride bikes with high saddles and low bars anymore. For a long time my size was 55cm c-t. I raced on a 53cm c-t frame for years. Then, after using the method outlined in *the custom bicycle* and by Grant Peterson, I arrived at 56cm c-t. Since I have a long torso and short-ish arms, and short legs, most fitting schemes just do not work right for me, and I've had to take from various schemes to come up with something that works.
In most stock frames, a 56cm is perfect for me, if the tt isn't too long. I can also do ok on a 57cm, and even a 58cm in a pinch, but I prefer not to ride a frame that big. It always feels like the bike is riding me, instead of me riding the bike!
I've found that even small differences in geometry and measurements can materially affect what size frame feels right. All by way of saying that a one-size-fits-all method of frame fitting isn't ever enough.
Charles Andrews SoCal
Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.
--Kenneth Boulding