Do you think its ugly? Saddle height question.
Moderator: robbosmans
I like the look of a long post, and I run one as well, but this is too much extension. You need a larger frame. Get a flat headset cover our a -17° if you need the bars that low.
Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓ Broad Selection ✓ Worldwide Delivery ✓
www.starbike.com
That frame has an extremely sloping top tube; there seems to be no way to set it up with more than a couple of inches of drop without having lots of seat post showing. Getting a larger frame would not make a lot of sense in my opinion, as it would just mess up the weight distributon and handling. I think this frame is the right size for the fit you're after, and if the look bothers you, you should get a different frame instead of sizing up.
I think it looks fine. However my taste runs to functional/industrial look. It'd be even better in raw carbon. If the bars are set up for the OP a larger frame of that model is going to require a short stem that will be too high- yes he could use a negative rise stem but if it's short it won't get the bars much lower.
But why care what random people on the internet think about looks? If it looks good to you, and fits, get it.
But why care what random people on the internet think about looks? If it looks good to you, and fits, get it.
-
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
- Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
- Contact:
Tinea Pedis wrote:It's this calculation you've done that I would like to see.
Best way for you to play with this would be to download Martin Mannings BG_101
http://www.os2.dhs.org/~john/Bicycle_Geometry/
Front weight dist calc is in cell H124 on the frame geometry page.