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

Example: Production Builders:Pogliaghi
In-Reply-To: <001b01c79b5c$78bfa2f0$6501a8c0@maincomputer>
References: <F016848C232375449D66E2D139DFED2F01B2A62C@IMCSRV4.MITRE.ORG> <> <000001c79b31$68080f90$6501a8c0@maincomputer> <> <000d01c79b3d$df203a10$6501a8c0@maincomputer> <> <002a01c79b40$44b95f80$0300a8c0@D8XCLL51> <a06230944c276c3eed436@[]>
Date: Sun, 20 May 2007 21:41:25 -0700
To: "Ken Freeman" <>, "'ternst'" <>, <>, <>, <>
From: "Jan Heine" <>
Subject: RE: [CR]Was: intro... now: frame geometry

At 11:59 PM -0400 5/20/07, Ken Freeman wrote:
>Jan if you trace back through the thread, no assertion was made that
>chainstay is a critical aspect of handling. How to measure chainstay was
>the question.

Sorry, I wasn't trying to respond to a question with the second part of my post, just adding something new to the discussion. Perhaps I should have saved it for a separate thread. I never implied to say that anybody claimed that chainstay length was the determinant of bicycle handling. If my message came across as such, I apologize.

Jan Heine
Bicycle Quarterly
140 Lakeside Ave #C
Seattle WA 98122