RE: [CR]Was: intro... now: frame geometry

From: "Ken Freeman" <freesound@comcast.net>
To: <oroboyz@aol.com>, <damann@mitre.org>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <F016848C232375449D66E2D139DFED2F01B2A62C@IMCSRV4.MITRE.ORG> <8C9693BA807914E-7EC-7D4F@webmail-de18.sysops.aol.com> <000001c79b31$68080f90$6501a8c0@maincomputer> <8C9694D9B4EB4F3-1E8-80AE@webmail-db05.sysops.aol.com> <000d01c79b3d$df203a10$6501a8c0@maincomputer> <8C969562C736E1A-1B04-8141@MBLK-M03.sysops.aol.com>
Subject: RE: [CR]Was: intro... now: frame geometry
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 22:19:42 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8C969562C736E1A-1B04-8141@MBLK-M03.sysops.aol.com>
Thread-Index: AcebPw0ymHlWOjgbT0GbCOW7OBFkDwADgF4g

Yes, my reasoning is strictly self-serving, but at least practical. I only have smallish 52/53 cm frames kick around the Freeman paddock, so it works for me. No 26 inchers or 19 inch!

Ken Freeman
Ann Arbor, MI USA