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:
>>
>>
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
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
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
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.
>
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
