I guess I would start off with stating the obvious that small bikes with large tires are incredibly difficult to design and fit. That's a fact. But I'm not suggesting anything about which size Appaloosa you should buy your wife. I only wanted to bottom out on what about the BB drop had thrown you for a loop. It sounds like it would be useful to draw your four bikes all on top of each other on a big piece of paper.
1. Rambouillet 2. XO-1 3. 46 Appa 4. 51 Appa Grant did a great step by step frame drawing exercise on the predecessor of the BLUG. Maybe somebody has it archived. That would be a great exercise for you to walk through, possibly. Otherwise, if you are eager to buy an Appaloosa on the pre-sale, then at least talk it over with Riv. Let me know if you want help drawing your bikes. Bill On Saturday, November 21, 2015 at 11:32:39 AM UTC-8, iamkeith wrote: > > I guess I get that explanation. And that would probably suggest that the > 46 might be the best choice. The on-the-bike fit would feel familiar, even > though the seatpost would be extended a *lot* further than I currently > perceive as "correct," and she'd be higher in the air (the whole point of > doing this would be specifically to get her on significantly fatter tires, > so she can carry more and ride more comfortably on rougher roads), and > there would also be way more standover clearance than she needs. Hopefully, > the sloped top tube would yield a higher headtube than the 50 Ram, so that > her stem could even extend a little less. The 51, on the other hand, might > not give her *enough* standover clearance. Since there are > (intentionally?) no standover heights listed, its hard to know for sure. > You guys who can test-ride are fortunate. > > I guess, now that you point out the error of my thinking, what I'm really > still having trouble with is trying to relate the new limited/expanded > sizing system to the old system that had more increments and, in this case, > looking incorrectly to the bottom bracket drop and standover height for > explanations as to why they fit so differently. That's been hard enough to > understand even for me, but even harder trying to speculate on her behalf > since she doesn't think about this stuff enough to be able to articulate > what works and what doesn't. > > I've long felt like I had a good handle on what her next Rivendell would > be, based on this current bike that fits fairly well, combined with the > thought that I could ratchet it UP one more small increment. But I > probably just need to let go of those preconceptions. Not unlike my old > WTB phoenix which, numerically, is 3" or more smaller than would fit me on > any other bike of the era but actually works great, maybe the way to > properly size a Rivendell nowadays is NOT to get the biggest frame you can > straddle. > > > On Saturday, November 21, 2015 at 10:42:49 AM UTC-7, Bill Lindsay wrote: >> >> OK, so since your small roadish 559 wheeled Rambouillet has 55mm of drop, >> then all other Rivendells with 559 wheels throw you for a loop, because all >> of those bikes take wider tires and all of them have 55-57mm of drop? I'm >> with Grant that fit is about how your body fits in relation to the bike >> when you are riding. BB drop effects how my body fits in relation to the >> bike. BB drop is about fit. Tire size changes standover, to be sure, but >> tire size does not affect fit, in my opinion. BB height is about >> clearances: your pedals striking the ground, and your crotch to the top >> tube. These are clearance issues, not fit issues, in my opinion. >> >> I know about the "on the bike" vs "in the bike" feel. That handling feel >> is about how the rider's body is positioned relative to the bike while >> riding, in my opinion. It is not about how your center of mass is >> positioned above the ground, in my opinion. Jan Heine and Grant are the >> two who folks on this group tend to respect the most. Jan thinks BB height >> and BB drop don't matter at all. Grant thinks BB drop should be as low as >> practically possible for the minimum tire width, and that you shouldn't get >> too hung up about standover. >> >> More directly to the point. Have you ever seen a 559-wheeled frame with >> more that 57mm of drop? The Surly Long Haul Trucker 26", a dedicated >> touring bike, has only 47mm of drop. Maybe Alex Wetmore's Travel Gifford >> with 26" wheels might have more drop, and the category that has inspired: >> the All-Road Enduro, may evolve with 65-70mm of drop and will only work >> with Rat Trap Pass tires. But I don't know of anything off the shelf that >> will do that for you. >> >> Bill Lindsay >> El Cerrito, CA >> > -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
