On 11/12/2013 05:13 PM, Garth wrote:
Steve .... I say this with light heart .... You're missing the point I made. It's not that it does not "have" a liberal HT extension. The point I made was that relative to the ST top , the frame appears to have *less *ST-HT differential height , making it's no better, if not worse than a "classic" level TT frame with no HT extension. Most bike are a "plus" in this differential , meaning the top of the HT is higher than the top of the ST. Even a "classic" road frame has some "plus". This appears to have "minus", and that I do find strikingly odd. Hence, the "track bike" reference, where this "may" be a good quality.
I suspect, based on these comments, that you have never tried to raise the handlebars on a traditional level top tube frame. It is not the difference, if any, in height between the seat tube and the head tube that is relevant, it is the difference between the top of the head tube and the top tube that matters.
There is no shortage of long seat posts. You can always put a super long seat post into a frame without a seat tube extension, but the height of the bars is limited by the length of the quill and the height of the head tube, and even with stems like the Nitto Technomic quills only come so long -- much, much less than long seat posts.
Your belief that a head tube extension of at least 3 cm, judging from the photos, is no better than a classic frame is wrong, by at least 3 cm.
-- 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 post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
