I own a 50cm Platypus and I wish I had sized up and gotten the 55 cm because it could fit 700c bicycle tires (where the 50cm can only do 650b). Something to think about if you might end up using your Clem for more gravel. On Monday, February 26, 2024 at 3:21:33 PM UTC-8 Mackenzy Albright wrote:
> I've ridden a 59 clementine and "sized up" 64 clem jr. I would have been > equally happy with both in terms of ride and fit. I don't feel reach (TT) > is an issue with hillibikes given their headtube angle and design around > sweptback bars. I'd be cautious sizing up if you want to run flat bars. > Aesthetically the saddle was a bit low in the seattube on the 64 for some > peoples tastes - but had no issue with leg rub etc. The main reason I kept > the 59 and resold the 64 was: a really tall person (the previous owner with > regret) wanted the 64 back if I decided it wasn't for me as well as I found > the previous Clementine (59) to have a slightly more traditional handling > feel which worked better for it's utiliarian commuter purpose as I often am > lugging around weight on a porteur rack for work. For unloaded trails and > general rides I would have slightly preferred the new gen 64. Both are > incredible riding bikes. I can't imagine my life without a Clem. > On Saturday, February 24, 2024 at 1:07:39 PM UTC-8 Johnny Alien wrote: > >> My PBH generally puts me in the middle of sizes. Either at the top of one >> range or bottom of the net. For a step thru/general use bike I would go >> with the size up and for a road setup or diamond frame model I would size >> down. That has always worked for me. I understand that Rivendell will >> sometimes suggest massively sizing up on step thru frames but I have never >> been comfortable that way and also just don't like the look of a slammed >> stem and seatpost. >> >> On Saturday, February 24, 2024 at 3:41:09 PM UTC-5 rmro...@gmail.com >> wrote: >> >>> Yes! >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On Feb 24, 2024, at 2:38 PM, Patrick Moore <bert...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Isn't Grant's intention with these very long reaches to the bar, to >>> allow bars with long sweepback on a stem of reasonable length and with a >>> lot of rise? >>> >>> In my own case, with short arms and long torso and a drop bar level with >>> or below saddle, I need a very undersquare frame (60 X 56 c-c is perfect) >>> for a level top tube; of courses, if I were to use a non-drop bar with a >>> lot of sweepback, things could be different. >>> >>> On Sat, Feb 24, 2024 at 11:23 AM Josh C <getjosh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I could fit on anything between 59-64cm with the low top tube but I'd >>>> pick the 59 just to keep the overall length down. These bikes are already >>>> crazy long, I don't want to make it longer unnecessarily, a 64 clem is >>>> like >>>> riding an 80s Lincoln Towncar. I don't understand the draw of sizing 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-bun...@googlegroups.com. >>> >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgu5jTaTQ1JhcrX4-ncWw9Zdk-xqiz6fSWhUoYFWtogH%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/CALuTfgu5jTaTQ1JhcrX4-ncWw9Zdk-xqiz6fSWhUoYFWtogH%2Bg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >>> -- 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/5a3e9b43-8c08-4dc8-8f2e-c694da2e632bn%40googlegroups.com.
