I ride a 60 Bombadil and I am about 6 2or3 and find it to be "just" large enough frontwise so there was no way the 59 Clem would be "big" in any sense of he word ! The HT extension and the TT slope is not any greater than the Bomba is , so there is nothing atypical about the Clem from it, meaning the 59 is not going to feel any larger than it the 60 Bomba. Also, the front center of the Clem was actually shorter also, not something I am interested in. 3 cheers for a larger Clem-entine !
On Friday, January 1, 2016 at 9:48:39 PM UTC-5, iamkeith wrote: > > Interesting rumor. Speaks to how popular the bike was , I guess. This > probably doesn't help jim but in case others dont realize it , the 59 fits > MUCH bigger than it would appear to suggest. Someone 6'-3" to 6'-4" is > probably ideal, and 6'-6" or so might bewithin the realm of "decent fit." > At 6'-2" , it is clearly too big. Personally , I hope they add one > around 56 or 57 or so. -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
