[CR]Not quite my idea of size, but I think I can explain

(Example: Humor:John Pergolizzi)

To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
From: "Toni Theilmeier" <Toni.Theilmeier@t-online.de>
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 09:01:27 +0200
Subject: [CR]Not quite my idea of size, but I think I can explain

Well, as Dave Martinez has said, not all bikes that look the wrong size really are.

Being 2 metres tall myself, I have had to make do with a great many cycles that were to small. What I found out in doing so was that one is in for pleasant surprises if willing to get away from the idea of scientifically established frame heights.

For example, one of my favourite mounts is a 1939 FW Evans Super Continental with 62 cm frame height. I find it very comfortable, and the original saddle pin and h`bar extension suggest that the original owner was a good deal taller than I am. My 62 cm 1958 Johnny Berry on the other hand is not very comfortable for me (I still ride it regularly, though). It´s in the geometry, I guess.

It is quite clear, too, that frame heights vary with fashion, here´s a striking example for that: Look at some racing photos from the twenties: Even pros used huge saddle pins sometimes.

Also, I was taught that differing frame heights apply for differing uses of cycles. I have ridden everything from 57 cm to 74 cm frames, and all of them were my size, so to speak, although admittedly the 74 was a bit over the top and was sold on after a short time.

And yes, I do buy bikes that are too small for me; I can´t ride two thirds of the bikes in my possession, and I still derive a lot of pleasure from them. If I were to collect only cycles my size I don´t think it would be sensible to start in the first place. Any appreciative visiting cyclist can try them out, of course.

Regards,

Toni Theilmeier, Belm, Germany, whose Thanet SL is nearly 65 cm. Phew.