Emanuel Lowi wrote:
> Bored as I am with mere existence, I've taken to studying the
> various theories and formulae for frame fitting.
> Reading the extensive text on the subject on Dave Moulton's
> website -- which he bases on his career-long empirical evidence
> (and he's surely one of the best) -- I confess to being baffled.
> Using Moulton's chart and method, I get a result that suggests I
> should be riding on a frame quite a bit smaller than the one I am
> using. I also get a suggested stem length that is rather longer.
> You can read it for yourself here:
> http://www.prodigalchild.net/
> Can any of you who know Moulton or who ride his bikes -- Moulton
> or Fuso -- confirm that he means all that, that you are indeed
> riding smaller frames by him, with longer stems?
> Any other comments appreciated.
Here's my '83 Dave Moulton Pro Road: <http://davesbikeblog.blogspot.com/2006/10/chucks-custom- bike.html#links> 57cm (c-t) seat tube, 55.5cm top tube, 12.0cm stem with the seat post almost at limit line.
On the chart I'm inseam 33 1/2", height 5'10", shoe size 8.5, frame size 57cm (c-t), top tube 55.5cm, stem 12cm... straight across the chart except for the shoe size (8.5 instead of 10) so Dave's size chart works for me. I'd probably run a 12.5cm stem now instead of the 12cm that is currently on the bike.
When I first started riding as an adult (32) in 1976 my local club (PAA) was a race club, so they had me riding with a stretched out, flat back position on the bike, right from the start. My custom Moulton fit like my previous half dozen bikes had fit.
Chuck Schmidt
South Pasadena, CA USA
http://www.velo-retro.com (reprints, t-shirts & timelines)