Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Tue Dec 06, 2016 1:31 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:07 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:35 am
Posts: 1974
Location: Wellington NZ
could have this one ready to have a test ride next week!!

i'm actually looking forward to it as i think it will ride well


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:44 am 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7305
Location: Hove
nporternz wrote:
Anthony wrote:
It's a really good find, but that's quite a big frame you've got there isn't it? Looks like a size 20, which is a bit bigger than your other bikes I've seen.

its an 18.5 according to the rocky catalogue. My other bikes do tend to be a bit smaller (as long as they have a decent top tube seat tube doesnt bother me) I'm 6ft 1 so I can fit anything from a 17 to a 20 but I prefer them smaller cos of me back!!

If that's an 18.5, maybe RM used to measure their frames differently than I thought. I'd be interested to know the c-c top tube length and the head tube length Nick - the head tube is certainly way longer than my 18.5 1993 Equipe (below, in female-friendly style).

Bigger bikes can be good for backs IMO, because the longer head tube gives a more comfortable posture and you can always bring the length back with a shorter stem.


Attachments:
1993 RM Equipe size 18.5.jpg
1993 RM Equipe size 18.5.jpg [ 242.66 KiB | Viewed 1663 times ]
Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:50 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:35 am
Posts: 1974
Location: Wellington NZ
no worries anthony - i will measure tomorrow

i am probably wrong!! i can never really be bothered about the exact size as long as its comfy!! i have everything from 14.5 to 20"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:07 pm 
Gold Trader
Gold Trader
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 3:12 pm
Posts: 8433
Location: Oh Canada!
nporternz wrote:
certainly is tape!! - with a layer of old inner tube underneath! cheapset and easiest to replace chainstay protector!!

use on most bikes

dude, your bikes deserver BETTER! :lol:

Anthony wrote:
If that's an 18.5, maybe RM used to measure their frames differently than I thought. I'd be interested to know the c-c top tube length and the head tube length Nick - the head tube is certainly way longer than my 18.5 1993 Equipe (below, in female-friendly style).

Bigger bikes can be good for backs IMO, because the longer head tube gives a more comfortable posture and you can always bring the length back with a shorter stem.

centre of BB to top of seat tube. both my '92 Cirrus and Blizzard are 17" but there's a world of difference in actual stand over height. and both have way more stand over height than my modern ETSX-70 which is a 16.5".

bloody hell, first i wanted to repaint my blizzard black, then i changed my mind after seeing all the proper white blizzards. and now seeing that black equipe, i'm back on the fence on which i'd prefer more! :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:19 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:35 am
Posts: 1974
Location: Wellington NZ
RockiMtn wrote:
nporternz wrote:
certainly is tape!! - with a layer of old inner tube underneath! cheapset and easiest to replace chainstay protector!!

use on most bikes

dude, your bikes deserver BETTER! :lol:

Anthony wrote:
If that's an 18.5, maybe RM used to measure their frames differently than I thought. I'd be interested to know the c-c top tube length and the head tube length Nick - the head tube is certainly way longer than my 18.5 1993 Equipe (below, in female-friendly style).

Bigger bikes can be good for backs IMO, because the longer head tube gives a more comfortable posture and you can always bring the length back with a shorter stem.

centre of BB to top of seat tube. both my '92 Cirrus and Blizzard are 17" but there's a world of difference in actual stand over height. and both have way more stand over height than my modern ETSX-70 which is a 16.5".

bloody hell, first i wanted to repaint my blizzard black, then i changed my mind after seeing all the proper white blizzards. and now seeing that black equipe, i'm back on the fence on which i'd prefer more! :P



The tape actually looks okay and works well - i've always used i!!

I think you should go for the black bike!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:37 pm 
Dirt Disciple

Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:23 am
Posts: 39
i had one of those, one of the best handling bikes i ever had, or so i thouhgt, great bike, how much do they sell for these days..


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 26, 2009 11:46 pm 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:35 am
Posts: 1974
Location: Wellington NZ
this one was about 250GBP


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 1:43 am 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider

Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2007 11:22 pm
Posts: 7305
Location: Hove
RockiMtn wrote:
bloody hell, first i wanted to repaint my blizzard black, then i changed my mind after seeing all the proper white blizzards. and now seeing that black equipe, i'm back on the fence on which i'd prefer more! :P

The Equipe is metallic green actually - quite a dark 'rich olive' though! Sadly, the original owner didn't like the arty yellow decals, so that's why it has an unsuitable The Edge DT decal instead and no TT decal, all that the dealer could offer him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:58 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 4:35 am
Posts: 1974
Location: Wellington NZ
anthony,

seat tube ctc 17.5
seat tube ctt 20.0
top tube ctc 22.0


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:19 am 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 16747
Location: Yorkshire, England
nporternz wrote:
anthony,

seat tube ctc 17.5
seat tube ctt 20.0
top tube ctc 22.0



That's a 20.0" frame similar to my '91 Altitude though since yours is 1993 it has slight adjustment for suspension and of course the lowered seatstays and inch extra (I think) drop in the top tube.

the effective top tube length (horizontal) should measure 23 1/4"

don't let the 22" you measure fool you ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: cherrybomb, stew-b and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

About Us

Follow Retrobike

Other cool stuff

All content © 2005-2015 Retrobike unless otherwise stated.
Cookies Policy.
bikedeals - the best bike deals in one place
FatCOGS - Fat Chance Owner's Group

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group