Tom-
I wouldn’t automatically reject the 49cm size; I think it might depend
on what handlebar height you prefer and what sort of terrain you will
be riding. I have a 1992 MB-2 in 49 cm. When I bought it, I found it
quite comfortable but as I have gotten older, I lost my tolerance for
long rides
I had a 1994 49cm MB2http://www.flickr.com/photos/cyclotourist/2863214487/,
and ended up selling it as too small. Should have bought the 52cm, but I
wanted that agressive racey-thing back then... regrets.
I have an 89cm PBH.
DE
On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Pete Olson apol...@centurytel.net
I sometimes commute on an 18 MB-5 (my fendered rain bike) and also
have a 19 MB-3 or -4 frame (its battered and no longer has the model
number; I bought it as a spare). The head tubes are identical, but the
actual top tube has less slope on the larger frame and is a cm longer.
The canonical sizing
Several of the Bridgestone catalogs from the 1990's indicate the 49cm
MB-4 had a 57.5 top tube. Standover heights range from 75.9 to 76.6.
On Jan 23, 4:45 pm, tlawnsby tlawn...@clearwire.net wrote:
Hi,
Just curious if anyone has a Bridgestone mountain bike and how much
shorter the size is vs
Thanks for all the info. I think I would be pretty stretched out on
the 19 -- I'll wait for a smaller size.
On Jan 23, 5:25 pm, Richard rsv...@netzero.net wrote:
Several of the Bridgestone catalogs from the 1990's indicate the 49cm
MB-4 had a 57.5 top tube. Standover heights range from 75.9
