The problem here is that the optimum seat-handlebar relationship gets kind of fixed witin a narrow range. Now consider the headtube length for a big frame. Downtube shifters get awful far down on a bike with an eight or nine inch headtube. As Morgan points out, bar-cons, like stem shifters and brifters stay relative to the handlebars.
I like bar-cons a lot too, especially with modern stiff and smooth cables and housing to give crisp shifting. This is one area where the retro approach was all wrong. Flexible coiled stainless housings plus serrated Campy bar-con cables are virtually unworkable.
As a funny thought think about shifting a Campy Gran Turismo with the period Campy bar-cons, cables and housings. Ouch. Did anyone ever see a bike with that set-up? Lets up the ante- over what I vaguely remember is the the claimed range stamped on the Turismo of 36-54 and 14-34.
Forgive my heretic tendencies as I praise Varsitys and castigate Campy in the same evening.
Joe
At 05:36 PM 11/30/00 -0800, Morgan Groves wrote:
>
>--- Joseph Bender-Zanoni <jfbender@umich.edu> wrote:
>> There is also the issue that downtube shifters can
>> be a long way down for a
>> really tall rider. My wife loves her stem shifters.
>>
>> Joe
>
>I have always believed that a properly proportioned
>frame would fit in such a way that the downtube levers
>would be exactly where the rider's hand falls in a
>relaxed position. This might not always be possible
>on a stock frame if the rider has unusually long or
>short arms, but it worked fairly well in the early
>80s, when all but the bottom line bikes came with
>downtube levers.
>
>Personally, I prefer shifters mounted in the handlebar
>ends.
>
>Morgan in DeKalb
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
>http://shopping.yahoo.com/