Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think this was "standard" geometry for bikes of this era. I have a 1971 63cm Mercian with a 58cm TT that I have been fretting over for a little while now (I'm 6'5" with longish arms). From my research into this frame, a short TT was common.
Jason Moore Dallas TX
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 10:51:27 -0500 From: "Steven Willis" <smwillis@verizon.net> To: <chuckschmidt@earthlink.net>, <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> Subject: RE: [CR]re: ebay outing: gios super record..sad Message-ID: <000d01c4edbe$57829000$2f01a8c0@desiron.com> In-Reply-To: <41D25D97.47DD1E08@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain;charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: list Message: 10
Can I start this off in another direction? Why would any builder make a 62cm frame with such a short 57.5 top tube. Is it me or should it be longer. Hell with my legs and arms I could ride this frame but they do not make a stem long enough for me, not that I would want to ride a stem that long. Steven
The Bike Stand
1778 East Second Street
Scotch Plains NJ 07076
908-322-3330
http://www.thebikestand.com
-- Jason Moore