Yes, this is a discussion that has been provocative in many respects on behalf of the "Riv sizing philosophy" and on this blog. No two people are built the same and it's important to take all the factors mentioned by the responder above - "long limbs / short torso, vice versa, long legs only, etc." - into consideration before making a decision. When I first began serious cycling in the early 70's several bike shops over a period of several years talked me into 23" frames whereas I should have been riding a 21" all along (these were lower end bikes where a greater number of in between sizes were unavailable). And I was miserable. I could not stand across the top tube with both feet flat on the ground and I kept having to seek out shorter than usual quill stems to get the bars back to a somewhat comfortable position. Finally, after almost 10 years of fooling around I dialed in on a higher end 54cm (about 21 1/4") and it all came together. I have shorter than proportionate legs in comparison to my torso and arm length.
Since Riv makes models with slightly sloping top tubes, longer than usual head tubes, and higher than normal lugs, and sells longer stems, it seems that getting the bars high enough on smaller frames should no longer be an issue. Still, if I were "fitted" at Walnut Creek I'm pretty sure I'd be walking away with a 56cm. On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 10:06:52 AM UTC-5, Michael Hechmer wrote: > > My daughter went down one size from their guidelines and got a perfect fit > for her Cheviut. She has short legs and a long torso for her size. My > wife has the exact recommended size on her Betty Foy and has very little > seat post showing. When I bought my Rambouillet I was inside the specs for > a 64 but felt more comfortable on a 62. I think the RBW guidelines are a > good starting point but some personalization is in order. I think GP > assumes the rider wants very high bars and his larger size makes hat > easier, but if you are happy with bars at saddle height one size smaller > may be better. > > Michael > > > > On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 10:07:51 AM UTC-4, Andrew Huston wrote: >> >> I am curious if anyone in the group has had success opting for a smaller >> size frame than would be suggested by the folks at Rivendell. I have had a >> difficult time finding comfort on my 56 Sam but the jump down seems rather >> large. Maybe my proportions are ill built for their methods but a bike that >> does not fit will not get ridden. I am considering an Atlantis or 650b >> Hunq now due to the range of sizing options in my range. Alternatively, if >> there are any of these sizes out there looking for a new home, I'm on the >> lookout. >> > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
