I have pretty much exactly the same PBH as you and I ride a 59cm first-gen Clem H. However, I ride my saddle a few cm lower than the Rivendell recommendation--around 78.5-79cm from crank bolt to top of saddle, depending on crank length. I have tight hamstrings and use a mid-foot pedaling position with flat pedals, and this saddle height has worked well for me for a number of years. Here's a picture of my Clem H to give you a sense of seatpost and stem extension. Where the bars clamp to the stem, they are ~4cm above the saddle nose
https://flic.kr/p/2iaCxSi All that being said, my understanding is that Rivendell has no intention of doing another run of Clem H's. I don't think they ever sold as well as the L models. So at this point you're probably looking for one on the used market. -Jeremy Till Sacramento, CA On Thursday, April 1, 2021 at 12:28:41 PM UTC-7 Kevin wrote: > Hi folks, > > I am semi in the market for a Clem H and am looking for some first person > thoughts on fit. I worry I am in between the 59 and the massive 65. Can > anybody who has ridden either or both of those chime in with their > measurements and how the bikes felt? I think the proper solution to this > problem is to just get the 64 L but I am just not sympatico with the > aesthetics there. > > I'm about a 95-96 PBH and ride a 62 Sam pretty comfortably with drops, > would prefer more reach every time I've set it up with flats. > > Also, the bike seems to have been excised from the models section of Riv's > site. Anyone know if they are planning on only offering the step through > model moving forward? > > Thanks! > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/8a801d25-1504-44e7-b9e2-7b3d675f82f2n%40googlegroups.com.
