My '74 Holdworth Pro has a 62cm c-c seat tube and 57cm c-c top tube. As a tall rider that also needs a long toptube, I'm curious to know why these larger frames did not get longer top tubes. My newer bikes are have roughly an additional 2cm. What was the thinking at the time that resulted in the shorter top tubes? Dan Tedford SF, CA
Harvey Sachs wrote: what fascinates me is that this is another large frame with greatly undersquare design. My Cinelli SC is 64 cm (c to top) x 57 cm top tube. From this I'm beginning to believe that these designers, back then, (still?) thought that the thin-air breathers were all leg and no torso. Are most "oversize" frames that undersquare?
harvey sachs
mcLean Va