Retrobike Forum Index

It is currently Mon Dec 05, 2016 1:56 pm

* Login   * Register * Search  * FAQ



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 7:12 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 16747
Location: Yorkshire, England
Most should give standover height and virtual top tube length.
But remember that will be modern bikes so long forked and short stemmed relatively.

I think i've shown you the kona charts before.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 7:14 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
The History Man wrote:
Well that one was a faff! Gave me numbers that mostly have no relation to frame sizes you can see on majority of listings or websites. But reach helpful?



Standover height is not really something I worry about, as my frames are all 18", rather than 19.5" that most charts recommend. But the other dimensions are, I feel, all pretty critical.

In respect to those (and other) measurements, all my mtb's are almost identical with only minor variations to allow for slight differences in frame design.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 7:15 pm 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16922
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
FluffyChicken wrote:
Most should give standover height and virtual top tube length.
But remember that will be modern bikes so long forked and short stemmed relatively.

I think i've shown you the kona charts before.


Nope. . .?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 23, 2013 7:18 pm 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 16747
Location: Yorkshire, England
Based on 1997 Kona's with Suspension
Image

Image
part of
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 9:42 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:29 pm
Posts: 1877
Location: Somerset
FluffyChicken wrote:
Based on 1997 Kona's with Suspension
Image


Going by my height, 5'10", I should be on an 18"
Going by my inside leg, 34", I should be on a 20"
Assuming my body was 55% of my height, I should havean inside leg of 29" & I should only be 5'5" Tall & should be riding a 16".

Hmm, maybe I need a custom frame.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 9:45 am 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16922
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
I have concluded from this that reach and bar height is more important as there is less adjustment without changing parts etc.

Inside leg varies greatly amongst similar heights but can be accommodated across a range of frame sizes.

Would I be wrong?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 10:00 am 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
Nope, in my opinion you are spot on the button.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 10:02 am 
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
Gold Trader / PoTM Winner / RB Rider
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 6:26 pm
Posts: 16922
Location: 54 Festive Road Winchcombe GLOUCS Yarp...
Morning! :lol: beats the Sunday Times!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 10:13 am 
retrobike rider
retrobike rider
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:08 am
Posts: 6840
Location: Nth Somerset, UK
Morning.

Been up since 6.30am :facepalm:

Just off to me 'oss. :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 26, 2013 10:18 am 
Retro Guru
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2011 9:29 pm
Posts: 1877
Location: Somerset
The History Man wrote:
I have concluded from this that reach and bar height is more important as there is less adjustment without changing parts etc.

Inside leg varies greatly amongst similar heights but can be accommodated across a range of frame sizes.

Would I be wrong?


Yes exactly, there is one brand of road bikes, where the frame 'size' refers to top tube length rather than seat tube.

There's an interesting article from Cervelo here, where they show that as some frames get taller, they don't actually get longer.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 60 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: unkleGsif and 20 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