I have experienced the same thing on a few of the bikes I have. This one especially.
http://www.flickr.com/
Notice the short stem and small amount of seat post showing. It is 58 cm and I also normally ride 55-56. It rides so easily it seems I hardly ever ride in the small ring. But I have also found some smaller than normal frames that I like very well too, like my 54 cm 1962 Paramount, which is my fixed gear daily driver. I also had a very nice looking Nervex lugged frame from the 60s made by a famous English maker who shall remain unnamed, and I just didn't like it at all. The ride seemed dead. Can't explain it for geometry or anything. It had great parts on it too, and it was my favorite 56 cm frame size. I sold it.
I think there is a lot more to it than the frame size and angles. Very hard to quantify. Some frames just have that magic feeling and some don't.
Message: 1 ate: Wed, 26 Jan 2011 15:59:04 -0800 rom: "Charles Andrews" <chasds@mindspring.com> ubject: Re: [CR] big frames ride better--from an average sized rider.. o: <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org> essage-ID: <74DF3B67FBEE4C1F952944F1FA7EC642@DELL> ontent-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I've followed this thread with some interest. It is an ongoing amazement to me hat I keep learning more and more about sizing and fit even after so many years iding a road bike. I've found that older bikes with slack angles, lower bb shells and longer stays nd top-tubes tend to be very nice in slightly larger sizes. If my racing size s 55cm c-t, a 57-58 cm c-t in a frame of this older style will not only be more omfortable for me in general, especially on longer rides, but overall handling eems...easier. I notice that my position on these larger frames always seems deal with regard to weight distribution and body position, although I suppose ou could achieve the same thing on a smaller frame. I've tried, though, and t's not quite the same, even on a smaller frame with the older geometry. I recently bought a 58cm c-t Bianchi Competition from the early 1960s, with just little seatpost showing when it's set up correctly for my leg-length. It ides like a perfect ocean-liner, with plenty of refinement, and I don't specially notice that frame is a bit big. Sure, a 57 or 56 would probably feel etter in some ways, but a bigger frame of this kind is perfectly fine too. Problems crop up for me with later-style frames, with steeper angles, higher b-shells and shorter stays and top-tubes..I really notice it when those frames re even slightly outside my ideal size of 55-56cm c-t seat and 55-56cm c-c top. 've bought and sold a lot of really nice criterium bikes of this sort..they ever seem to feel right. They just feel too big..as if the bike's riding me nstead of the other way around. Maybe there's something less forgiving in eneral about these later, more aggressive frames. They're certainly ideable..the effect can be subtle. But I'm at the point where I don't have any ven slightly oversized bikes in this later style. It's because I'm getting older..but I find those later aggressive criterium ikes to be distinctly unappealing. Such bikes seem to have been designed for a ot of seat-post showing, and long stems. Ride one in a size larger than ideal nd they just don't feel right. The earlier road geometries, with the long tays, low bb and slack angles, esp slack seat-tubes, feel better and better as he years go on and are more forgiving of variations in fit. Charles Andrews os Angeles
Bob Freeman
Elliott Bay Bicycles
2116 Western Ave
Seattle, WA 98121
206-441-8144
http://www.elliottbaybicycles.com
http://www.davidsonbicycles.com