Re: [CR] Measuring Frames question

(Example: Racing:Jacques Boyer)

Date: Wed, 13 May 2009 11:55:49 -0700
From: <mrrabbit@mrrabbit.net>
To: Charles Nighbor <cnighbor1@comcast.net>
References: <C0550C1C59DB41328C51F70147D37694@gatewayan2blld>
In-Reply-To:
Cc: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR] Measuring Frames question


It would be until you suddenly realize that standover height is a matter of personal opinion...and I really really really should leave it to that unless Dale loves discussions about human anatomy including manipulation and comparisons of human anatomy.

=8-p

You'd think just reading the tape would be the end of it. In all my years, I've tried C-C, C-T along seatube, C-T Vertical, Standover, etc....and I have found in the long run that C-T along seatube just seems to work the best.

I just tell folks going for a track bike to go 2-3 cm down and things work out just fine. Of course, actually being there and trying out the bike to begin with beats all.

=8-)

Robert Shackelford San Jose, CA USA

Quoting Charles Nighbor <cnighbor1@comcast.net>:
> If you are measuring a frames size along seat tube doesn't it give different
> frames size depending on the angle of the seat tube to the top tube. If it is
> a 68 degrees versus 74 degrees aren't we describing two different frame
> sizes. Isn't a better way to measure standover height and top tube length. I
> am waiting for comments.
> Charles Nighbor
> PS a perfect 57cm frame size no a prefect 56cm frame size or is it a 58cm
> frame size.
> Walnut Creek, CA USA
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> --
> PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has been
> saved in a permanent database.
>

--
PRIVACY WARNING: For auditing purposes, a copy of this message has been
saved in a permanent database.