Bob Weston wrote:Rivendell...drool...

They are 700c. Where do I measure the frame? Center of BB to top of seat tube, or something like that?

b

I'll take the BART out to the Walnut Creek stop to go to Rivendell. I roll up on my Surly, which is basically set up like an 80s cyclocross bike, and I get old men with leather saddles giving me the stink eye.

There are two ways to measure frame size.
1. the way you mentioned, center of BB to top of seat tube.
2. center of BB to the point where lines drawn at the center of the top tube and the center of the seat tube intersect.

Ultimately, though, if you're comfy, awesome. I rode a 58 cm 70s Raleigh for a while. My Surly is a 54 cm, which is technically small, but has been good for urban abuse. I'd not want to tour on a frame that small.

Ben

wiggins wrote:You can hate, but there's probably some appeal in getting all those dirty looks from the spandex chumps.

That's why I used to smoke while riding my steel bike. I'd pass some spandex guy, smoking, riding a bike that was 10 lbs heavier than their bike, and give them a little wave.

Of course, they were going 50 miles or more in their ride, and I was just running down to the market a half mile away. But it was still fun.

Ben

benadrian wrote:

wiggins wrote:You can hate, but there's probably some appeal in getting all those dirty looks from the spandex chumps.

That's why I used to smoke while riding my steel bike. I'd pass some spandex guy, smoking, riding a bike that was 10 lbs heavier than their bike, and give them a little wave.

Of course, they were going 50 miles or more in their ride, and I was just running down to the market a half mile away. But it was still fun.

Ben

I am no stranger to the smoke-n-ride.

I had an old "squiddy" dude pass me on the way to work once:
"haha Hey guy, where's your gears?"

"Oh, probably in a mason jar somewhere with Lance Armstrong's other testicle"

If I get a nice tax return this year I'm buying one of these:





Oh and: http://sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

Mine is blue and has a seat for my kid, but this is the same model.

Its huge too. I think the wheels are 28", but I could be mistaken. I know it dwarfs bikes with 26" wheels

Whatever size it is, the bike is almost too big for me and I am 6' tall.

I don't own one, but if I did it would probably look like this.

TheMilford wrote:If I get a nice tax return this year I'm buying one of these:



Oh and: http://sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html

RIP Sheldon.

Sell enough pedals and buy a bike!

Ben

Damn, pugeot's are heavy. There's a lot of kids riding fixie conversions with pugeot frames cause they're so cheap and common, but DAMN, that shit's heavy.

My old bike was a nice Meile frame. A little small for me, but a light, solid ride all around. Hauled ass as a single speed.

My Puegeot is indeed heavy, but not super heavy. Probably 20-25 lbs

However, it is a lot fucking heavier when my two year old wants to come along. Which is every time it comes out of the shed.

Mine is not a fixed gear. I enjoy all of the ten speeds it has to offer.

Bob Weston wrote:
This is 80's FRAME. Big and chrome-moly. Eat me.

bob

Bike fit has been the same since before the 80's. Today's frames look much smaller because they have a sloping top tube, this shortens the seat tube length on a given frame, making it seem much smaller. The standover height of the bike is reduced, and the frame is more compact and stiff.

But the more important measurement in frame fit, the top tube length, remains the same. (for the most part).

I imagine if your bike feels just just right, but looks too tall, the top tube length is probably correct. Go with it.

If you were to size up a brand new bike, you would want to use this measurement as a reference. On a frame with a horizontal top tube, it's usually from the center of the seat tube juncture to the center of the head tube juncture.