[RBW] Re: Seat tube length
Oh, yeah misread on my part as well. Hmm, I'm not sure one would want shorter seat tube on a step through. On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 10:24:46 AM UTC-5, Garth wrote: > > > Phil k, the ETT length *is the same* . > > > On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 8:31:40 AM UTC-5, phil k wrote: >> >> Like Joe mentioned, the smaller size would have a shorter effective top >> tube length, thus shortening your reach. He probably mentioned it because >> maybe you mentioned you intended to run it with drop bars. >> >> >> >> -- 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/052b4ce0-9cf3-47f8-8587-42f931e5aed2%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Seat tube length
Correct, I didn't say anything about a shorter ETT. It was a misunderstanding about a quote in another thread which Bill cleared up. -- 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/a2b5c656-52ea-44a4-acba-3af9f257a0b1%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Seat tube length
Phil k, the ETT length *is the same* . On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 8:31:40 AM UTC-5, phil k wrote: > > Like Joe mentioned, the smaller size would have a shorter effective top > tube length, thus shortening your reach. He probably mentioned it because > maybe you mentioned you intended to run it with drop bars. > > > > -- 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/bc77b0a0-ba46-4119-84b7-5ac32d9aa15c%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Seat tube length
Like Joe mentioned, the smaller size would have a shorter effective top tube length, thus shortening your reach. He probably mentioned it because maybe you mentioned you intended to run it with drop bars. On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 6:48:24 AM UTC-5, Roberta wrote: > > I'm learning a lot about bicycles here and was confused about this, from > another thread: "I briefly owned a 58cm Betty [Foy] with the intent of > running it with drop bars. When I was buying it, Keven asked “do you want > to wait for the new 55? It has the identical numbers, just with the seat > tube 3cm shorter”. I’m a 86cm PBH 5’10” Person. If I was running upright > bars I’d go bigger. I’m certain I could rock a 55 Betty with drops ". > > Why/how would a shorter seat tube be better/ different if the frame was > otherwise the same? I thought one preference for most of us here was to > have less seat post showing, but this would give us more. > > This is not for a criticism of how Riv makes their bikes, just wanting > more understanding of frames. > > Roberta -- 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/3ba5aed9-5d40-4694-88e4-1e18f99291e7%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Seat tube length
Oh, that makes sense! It's just a Bill being thoughtful for visitors thing. Thanks! :) Roberta On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 12:12:24 PM UTC-5, Bill Lindsay wrote: > > That was my quote, and I'm sorry that I confused you two. I can > re-explain it if either of you need it explained. > > A 58cm Betty Foy would have fit me great with drop bars. That's why I > bought the frame. It turns out somebody local needed that frame before I > managed to execute the build, so I never did the build. > > A 55cm Betty Foy had identical numbers except a shorter seat tube. That > means it would have fit identically on me with 3cm more seatpost showing. > It would have been identical in fit with drop bars. > > A 55cm Betty Foy would not be a better fit than a 58cm Betty Foy for me > with drop bars. Stack and reach are the same, so the fit is the same. The > shorter seat tube could have given me the option to loan the bike to > shorter people. I think the 58 would have looked better. > > That's all > > Bill Lindsay > El Cerrito, CA > > On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 7:35:03 AM UTC-8, Joe Bernard wrote: >> >> The only benefit to a frame having a shorter seattube relative to its >> effective toptube length is a shorter person who likes that much reach can >> ride it. I didn't really understand the quote you're asking about because >> the seattube change wouldn't make the bike a better candidate for dropbars. > > -- 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/292f20fe-b21c-4e2f-a102-15cd603a76a2%40googlegroups.com.
[RBW] Re: Seat tube length
That was my quote, and I'm sorry that I confused you two. I can re-explain it if either of you need it explained. A 58cm Betty Foy would have fit me great with drop bars. That's why I bought the frame. It turns out somebody local needed that frame before I managed to execute the build, so I never did the build. A 55cm Betty Foy had identical numbers except a shorter seat tube. That means it would have fit identically on me with 3cm more seatpost showing. It would have been identical in fit with drop bars. A 55cm Betty Foy would not be a better fit than a 58cm Betty Foy for me with drop bars. Stack and reach are the same, so the fit is the same. The shorter seat tube could have given me the option to loan the bike to shorter people. I think the 58 would have looked better. That's all Bill Lindsay El Cerrito, CA On Tuesday, February 4, 2020 at 7:35:03 AM UTC-8, Joe Bernard wrote: > > The only benefit to a frame having a shorter seattube relative to its > effective toptube length is a shorter person who likes that much reach can > ride it. I didn't really understand the quote you're asking about because > the seattube change wouldn't make the bike a better candidate for dropbars. -- 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/82c588d7-5743-4d53-ab45-0e505c6094a4%40googlegroups.com.
