easypedaler
contributor
Reged: 02/08/04
Posts: 149
|
|
I received the poor example of 2004 bicycling buyers guide. What caught my interest was an artice With The Editor. Page 20. It spoke of bike builder,Grant Petersen of Rivendell Bike Works. Petersen states that riders are riding bike way to small. The editor rides a 54CM and was measured for 61CM. What is up with that. My size is 49CM frame that is fitted for me. I have ridden bigger frames and almost killed myself. Just thought this was an intersting artice. Tried to find on the bicycling web site but that was useless.
|
Steve
new member
Reged: 12/19/03
Posts: 9
|
|
I own a Rivendell that I believe is just barely too big (or on the large end of okay). Grant Petersen tends to size people so that they can get the bars up to the level of the saddle. My mistake was that I don't ride that way, so I have no spacers in the headset, and have the stem all the way down. Grant is pretty obsessive about the big bike sizing idea.
Steve
|
Lon
sage
Reged: 12/20/03
Posts: 595
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
|
|
My thought when I read it was he better not drop from his seat over the top tube after he went from a 54 to a 61. I ride a 54 and I have "strattled) a 62 and I sure would not want to ride it.
Ditto on the Buyer's Guide being a waste of paper. What they provided on road bikes was pititful.  If you want to read a good one find the Velo one that just came out. It has plenty of good reading on bikes and parts.
What I can't understand with Bicycling is since they now sent Mountain Bike right along and that had a Buyer's Guide then why did they spend so much time in Bicycling on Mt. Bikes and so little on road bikes. It doesn't seem to make much sense. 
|
PsyDoc
friend
Reged: 01/14/04
Posts: 37
|
|
...at the "older" TDF pics of riders on their bikes. The bikes they were riding are much larger compared to the bikes the pros now ride. In the Bicycling article, I seem to recall that the editor received three frames from Grant that migrated up to a 61cm. If the editor was riding a 54cm frame and also could comfortably ride a 61cm, then I think that 54cm frame must have a 140 or 150mm stem and a whole lot of seat post exposed. If I raced, then perhaps I would ride a 54cm or 55cm frame (c-t). But, my 55.5cm (c-c) frame with a 56.5cm toptube and 11cm stem is quite comfortable on long rides.
|
easypedaler
contributor
Reged: 02/08/04
Posts: 149
|
|
I also went to the rivendall web site, I think he make all his bike BIG. Does seem like a real nice bike though. I don't think I could reach the pedals on a 61CM 
|
Cory
new member
Reged: 02/05/04
Posts: 16
|
|
I'm 6'4", and I've ridden a bunch of 62cm bikes because that's what most shops stock ("We'll put on a long seatpost and it will fit you fine"). When I bought my Atlantis, Grant's sizing method put me on a 65cm, which he didn't make at the time (he does now). I ordered a 64, and it was MUCh better than anything I'd owned in years. Right out of the box, I could ride at least 25 percent longer in comfort than I'd been able to on my old bike, which I liked and thought fit well.
I love the bike and have no complaints, but when I look at it now after three years, I think it has a little too much seatpost showing... Next time I'd get a 65.
|
Previous
Thread Index
Next
Threaded
bigger bike better....?????
Edit
Reply
Quote
Re: bigger bike better....?????