Oh yes, bike fit to me is quite personal . Yes, there are generalities and not only is every body form different, but so is flexibility/function of that form, and the ever so infinite "intangibles" , called "feel" or "sense" of unity and balance with the bike , etc . Based on body shape alone almost any fit "formula" would have me on shorter top tube. 15 years ago when I had my first custom frame built the "fit kit" formula said I should ride with 59cm or so TT . I said "forget that" , that was exactly what I knew did not feel right to me, from years of riding racing frames just like it that I always felt unbalanced and cramped on. I knew what I wanted intuitively and told him it was my way or no deal. That road/sport touring frame is a 62cm TT, 62cm ST, and I specified 18" chainstays and an extra inch on the head tube. Turns out years later when I ditched drop bars for the Albatross after literally being unable to ride for a few years, I found I could use a little more length and front end height still ! So I got the Bombadil and it was bliss ! Even on it I use a 130mm zero rise stem . It just feels "right" when sitting or standing on the steepest of hills. So the Bomba is my current reference for a frame. I would like the option to try a little higher bar even , hence it sounds like a 64cm Clementine would be good. It may be too tall as a Clem with the TT , but as a step thru there's no issue with clearance. The 64 Clementine may or may work for you then, if they do indeed make it, you'd have to measure your current frames to see how high 64cm is and how much post is showing if any .
On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 3:38:23 PM UTC-4, iamkeith wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, March 18, 2015 at 11:37:21 AM UTC-6, Garth wrote: >> >> >> I'm 'bout 6'2" with a PBH of 'bout 36.5" . Yes, I was under the >> impression that the 59 would be longer than it was also .... I was kinda >> expecting it to be really long and tall in the front also . The 59 Clem >> isn't long enough for me as I was hoping it would be at least as long as >> the 63cm TT of the Bomba. >> > > Not to imply that you don't know what fits you, but it's interesting how > we're both looking for the same fit, but for such different reasons. I'm > about your overall height but, unlike you, with a short (34 1/4") PBH. > I've discovered that I like/need a long top tube too but, in my case, it's > precisely *because* I'm "all torso." My upper body feels cramped and > hunched on a short top tube. I really would have assumed that you'd be > the exact opposite. > > Rivendell's current "expanded sizing" system, with fewer frame sizes than > before, has not been kind to me, and I have invariably been > falling "between" sizes: The frames that are long enough for me in the top > tube don't provide any standover clearance at all. The Clem may be more of > the same for me, but I decided that it's inexpensive enough to take the > chance! Worst case scenario, it becomes strictly a town bike, with no > off-road duty. Maybe the inverse could be true for you? > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
