Re: [CR]short TT

(Example: Production Builders:Tonard)

To: classicrendezvous@bikelist.org
Subject: Re: [CR]short TT
References: <000001c4ef6e$73be2a20$2f01a8c0@desiron.com>
From: "Morgan Fletcher" <morgan@hahaha.org>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 18:09:35 -0800
In-Reply-To: <000001c4ef6e$73be2a20$2f01a8c0@desiron.com> (Steven Willis's message of "Fri, 31 Dec 2004 14:25:07 -0500")


I've always wondered why older bikes have such short top tubes too, and always chalked it up to the idea that everyone was shorter back then, including the builders.

I'm 6'2" and most comfortable on a nearly square (60 seat, 59 top) frame with a 13 stem. There are lots of guys like me, now. Maybe not as many post-war? Maybe it was a limitation of the lugs available then, or tubesets, or an attempt to keep the wheelbase under a mile while still providing clearance and geometry suitable for poor roads, or...?

Or maybe they'd have put me on a 68cm (exaggerating for humor's sake) back then, with a finger of seatpost showing.

Sometimes newer is better.

Happy new year!

Morgan -- Morgan Fletcher, morgan@hahaha.org Oakland, CA