> Every woman I know has had a tremendously hard time fitting frames (whatever > the maker) due to "reach." They try to correct with super short stems, > Terry shorter reach bars, compact levers, etc. This is after they size down > a frame from what they could/should be riding based on PBH. For women, it > seems to definitely be a factor to consider.
My read of the article is Grant says TT length itself is not so important as other factors including joint angles and other tube lengths. The Sweetpea in this photo, built by a woman for a woman, uses angles one does not normally see to get what I am pretty sure is a fine fitting bike for its obviously pleased owner. http://www.flickr.com/photos/lynnefitz/4867248171/in/set-72157623345581999/ My read of the article is this is exactly what GP is getting at. On Aug 9, 9:35 pm, cyclotourist <cyclotour...@gmail.com> wrote: > Every woman I know has had a tremendously hard time fitting frames (whatever > the maker) due to "reach." They try to correct with super short stems, > Terry shorter reach bars, compact levers, etc. This is after they size down > a frame from what they could/should be riding based on PBH. For women, it > seems to definitely be a factor to consider. > > > > > > On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:14 PM, William <tapebu...@gmail.com> wrote: > > In the most recent step on the frame-drawing tutorial, Grant stated > > more directly than I can recall his feeling about top tube length: > > > "It's not the key, or even a key dimension. It matters, but not nearly > > as much as other things, or as much as people think it does. Bar > > height affects how far you have to reach to the bar more than top tube > > length does. Seat tube angle affects reach, too. But at some point > > yep, you gotta pick a top tube length." > > > On every bicycle forum on the planet, including this one, there will > > be numerous posters who emphatically state that top tube length is the > > single most important dimension on a bike, and that frame size itself > > should be stated as a top tube length dimension rather than a seat > > tube length dimension. I know I used to be convinced of that thinking > > and am only beginning to accept the possibility of an alternative. > > The fact is, everybody wants to know what the top tube length is, so > > Grant lists it. If handlebar height is way more important, then I > > wonder why Grant/Riv don't propose a way to quantify that > > characteristic on a frame or a bike. I can't think of an easy way to > > do it, either. Is it just the altitude of the headset locknut with a > > particular normal tire? Is it the x,y coordinates of the headset > > locknut relative to (0,0) placed at the center of the BB? > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "RBW Owners Bunch" group. > > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2bunsubscrib...@googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > > -- > Cheers, > David > Redlands, CA > > "One man's religion is another man's belly laugh." > --Robert A. Heinlein- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bu...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
