Looks sold. Seeing this makes me miss my lugged Bob Jackson Audax. Would
have kept that one but it was too small and I was too silly to not order
one in a larger size. Oh well.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To
..and don’t forget about drop, if stand over is part of your sizing
equation.
Ray
--
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
C-to-C top tube is about useless without seat tube angle. Stack and Reach
are about as objective as you can get for numbers that indicate size and
fit. IMHO
BL in EC
On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 9:22:30 PM UTC-7, Joe Bernard wrote:
>
> Reason #4752 why all bikes should be sized by C-to-C
I have a blue one (54cm). They are really nice bikes and are also great
for 650b conversion, too.
Just use 42 x 650b and Tektro R559's with KoolSTOP thinline pads and you
are all set!!!
BB height turns out same as a Bleriot, so no problem. At least for the 54cm
models.
I would love to have an
Reason #4752 why all bikes should be sized by C-to-C toptube, or vitual
thereof. The seattube number fluctuates wildy, and is about useless for
determining fit even if you get it right.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW
Owners Bunch" group.
To
I'll bet a dollar that it's actually a 58, because there never was a 57,
and it looks too big to be a 56. 57 center to center is a close
description of 58 center to top.
BL in EC
On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 7:56:14 PM UTC-7, Joe Bernard wrote:
>
> No affiliation, lovely bike.
>
>
>
