I need to do some measurements and move stuff around on my San Marcos too. I suppose it is a much shorter reach since the bars are level with saddle, but I'm trying to set this one up more comfortable, yet racy - this is supposed to reproduce a 'go fast' bike for me that perhaps is more comfortable than my All City. Similarly to the Hillborne, 71.5* seattube - so i imagine the saddle needs to be moved up a bit to emulate the position on my All City?
As a follow-up, I saw somewhere Grant writing that people like to slam the seats ALL the way back - is this due to the upright bars / higher than seat bars / upright posture on a bike? On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 at 8:53:10 AM UTC-4, Belopsky wrote: > > Good point, I did not even consider! I just went out and measured my > 'reach', and it is bigger on the All City, but also we're comparing my drop > bar brifter setup and albatross. Riding the Hillborne this past weekend I > felt a bit too far 'back' on the bike, very upright. > > I just moved the seat (b17 narrow imperial) up as far as it would go with > the Nitto 65 post, which was somewhere in that '1.5cm' vicinity, and > yesterday moved the stem a bit lower into the headtube, so I'll see how > this feels too. > > On Monday, October 10, 2016 at 5:54:26 PM UTC-4, Bill Lindsay wrote: >> >> Another important "if", when comparing Rivendells to non-Rivendells, is >> this: *if you are particular about having your saddle-to-pedal position >> being just perfect on all your bikes*, then your Rivendells have SHORTER >> top tubes than the numbers state. Rivendells in general have slacker seat >> tube angles than other bikes. In the case of the OP's Sam Hillborne vs his >> All-City, the Hillborne has a 1.5 degree slacker seat tube angle. This >> means that he should run his saddle about 1.5cm farther forward on his Riv >> than he does on his All-City to achieve the same butt-to-feet position. >> This makes his Rivs effective top tube length 1,5cm shorter (effectively). >> If you blindly slam the saddle all the way back on all your bikes, then >> the Riv will allow you to get your butt farther back, and that will >> influence your fit. I'm not making a recommendation, but just reminding >> the OP that seat tube angle matters. >> >> Bill Lindsay >> El Cerrito, CA >> >> On Monday, October 10, 2016 at 2:44:56 PM UTC-7, Patrick Moore wrote: >>> >>> I can't address your size questions, since I'm a bit taller, but I can >>> address the top tube question. Yes, this is something to be careful about, >>> *if >>> you are particular about where you want to place your drop bars. *I am >>> not saying that Rivendell tt sizing will be a problem for you, but it >>> *might* be a problem for you. >>> >>> Example: I owned a 56 cm (57?) Sam Hillborne that had a 59 c-c tt. I >>> wanted to put a drop bar on it, and particularly a 46 cm Noodle, quite a >>> bit wider than the 42s I was used to. In order to get a comfortable >>> position on hoods and hooks, I had to position the bar some 1 1/2" or 2" >>> higher than saddle -- which felt awkward to me. That was one reason I sold >>> it. I would not even have been able to set it up like my Matthews, the SH >>> replacement, with such a long top tube, because with this "road bike for >>> dirt" I like the bar about even with or perhaps 1 cm above saddle -- a >>> long ramped Maes Parallel, but only 42 cm wide >>> >>> My road drop bar position (dialed in over 25 years) is presently a >>> gentle 3 cm below saddle. I would not be able to get that position on the >>> Sam Hill because of the top tube. (Not that I'd set up the SH exactly like >>> my road bikes, but you get the picture.) >>> >>> OTOH, my 3 custom Rivs have all had 56.5 or 57 cm c-c tts; this is >>> perfect; with a 8 cm stem and long-reach/shallowish drop bars (Compass Maes >>> Parallel, 37 or 38 mm wide) 3 cm below saddle, I get very comfortable >>> positions on ramps, hoods, and hooks. >>> >>> In fact, one of the very best fitting bikes I've owned was that 1958 >>> Rene Herse which had a 60 cm c-c st and a 56 or 57 cm c-c tt -- perfect; I >>> only had to adjust the saddle. >>> >>> Now if you use upright or "tourist" bars like the North Road or even >>> more so the Albatross and so forth, top tube length is (I think; I'm not an >>> expert on these bars, though I've used many such) far less of a determinant >>> in comfortable bike setup. And even for drop bars, if you care only about >>> reach and not about height, then again, tt length is far less of a concern. >>> >>> Top Tube length matters! >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 9:43 AM, Belopsky <belopol...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Riv sizing talks about me riding 55-57cm depending on the frame, but I >>>> always worry that the top tube is too long. Anywho, I was under the >>>> impression that for a 'fast' bike you want a slightly longer stem, for >>>> more >>>> weight in the front..but also with bars at seat height I suppose I can >>>> ride >>>> a bigger frame with a shorter stem - how short is too short, with drop >>>> bars >>>> - anything can work with some pullback. >>>> >>>> -- 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.
