This saddens me. I'm definitely feeling a difference between those two sizings. I'd be very interested in teh traditional looking Grand Cru in my size.
On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 10:39 PM, Ted Durant <[email protected]> wrote: > > William wrote: > > > ...Too bad > for me that Chris K insists I can't tell the difference between > 172.5mm and 170. > > > and pruckelshaus added: > > > I agree completely. No 172.5 makes it a non-starter for me.... > > > Interestingly, I used to feel the same way. Recently, though, I took the > vintage 1986 Dura Ace group off the tiny Shogun and put it on my vintage > 1978ish racing frame. The crank in that group is a 165. I went for a 40k > ride on it and, while I'd have to say I think I noticed a difference from my > usual 172.5, I did NOT notice any difference in road speed. I did feel like > I naturally rode at a slightly higher cadence. Whatever difference I felt > was definitely not worse, and maybe was better. It really opened my mind up > to where I'd use 170 instead of my normal 172.5 on any road bike. I didn't > do any significant climbing, but I wouldn't expect that to change my mind. > > Ted Durant > Milwaukee, WI USA > > -- > 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]<rbw-owners-bunch%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en. > -- Ken Freeman Ann Arbor, MI USA -- 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.
