On Sun, Jan 18, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Jim Thill - Hiawatha Cyclery < [email protected]> wrote:
> > I suspect that geometry is more important than tube diameter when > we're talking about bikes that climb well vs bikes that don't. Now *this* is an interesting topic! What do y'all think makes for good climbing, first with respect to geometry? I throw out the suggestion that one quality is a frame designed for saddle back, butt back, riding position (which would be slack seat angle, except that mine all have had 73 deg sts.) I know Grant has favored a long stayed, shortish front-center design; perhaps that aspect trumps seat tube angle? In any event, IME (and I emphasize in *my* experience), a butt back position favors fast climbing. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
