Classic & Vintage - height estimate plz? [pics]

I've been chewing my fingernails on this one, as the seller is of the uneducated, unmotivated variety.

Can anyone eyeball the size of this frame for me?

http://i1.ebayimg.com/08/i/001/1a/08/3b99_1.JPG
http://i12.ebayimg.com/01/i/001/1a/08/43a7_1.JPG

It looks like a collegiate like mine, so.. 56-58cm.
Hope that helps.
-Gene-

Edit: Although, after looking at it again, it doesn't have one piece cranks, so, I imagine it's a raleigh sports. But, irregardless, it still looks about that size.

My guess, 57cm seat tube.

Hrrrm. This would fit more like an MTB than a road bike, right? Might be just a bit much. Shame.

And it's a Triumph (although quite possibly from after Triumph was acquired by Raleigh.)
I have a 'thing' for Triumph.

Thanks!

Yeah, a much more upright position that a MTB. Although, some people prefer the bars being close on these, some don't. It'll be a much more relaxed, less speed oriented ride than a road bike, but, smoother and more efficient than a MTB.
-Gene-

58/59 cm....

23", center to top. Guaranteed.

The only other size Raleigh (I realize this is a secondary-brand variant) made the Sports in was 21" center-to-top. There might have been a 25" exception somewhere along the line, but this isn't it - I'm 100% sure of that.

-Kurt

Given the size of that head tube, I'd say it's a 25" frame. That's hard to find in a 3-speed.

Neal

Edit: Okay, I now agree that it's 23" after looking at pics of 23" frame 3-speeds I've owned.

Like he said, 23"

Good to know!

/files it away

Much appreciated.

Just to clarify, considering this:


Yeah, a much more upright position that a MTB. Although, some people prefer the bars being close on these, some don't. It'll be a much more relaxed, less speed oriented ride than a road bike, but, smoother and more efficient than a MTB.

Does that suggest I can go a little bigger than I would with a MTB frame, or should go a little smaller? I have a 23" Schwinn Sierra, and it's a little on the bigger side for me. On the other hand, I have the ~58cm Peugeot PX-10 I'm fixing up which seems about right (maybe a tiny bit big, but not really noticeable.)

Here are my WS measurements:



WS Recommended Sizes -- Road

Frame Size center-to-center:54 cm
Frame Size center-to-top:6 cm
Overall Reach: 65.72 cm
Saddle Height: 74.01 cm
Handlebar Width: 46 cm

WS Recommended Sizes -- Mountain
Frame Size center-to-center: 17 in
Frame Size center-to-top: 18 in
Overall Reach: 65.72 cm
Saddle Height: 74.01 cm
Handlebar Width: 46 cm
These seem like under-estimates to me. Especially on the MTB side.
Am I missing somthing?



Your Measurements
Height: 71.00 in
Sternum Notch: 58.10 in
Inseam Length: 33.00 in
Arm Length: 23.50 in
Shoulder Width: 18.50 in
Flexiblity: 6
Weight: 178.00 lbs
Foot Size: 12.00 USMens
I know there's no way of really knowing how well a bike will fit until you can try it out, but what do people think? Would I be reasonably comfortable on this 23" or should I be holding out for the smaller 21" frame?

And it's a Triumph (although quite possibly from after Triumph was acquired by Raleigh.)
I have a 'thing' for Triumph.

I had a '69 (Raleigh) Triumph, and it was a little different: the gear cable went down the downtube all the way to the chain stay. The one in your photo seems to have a fulcrum on the top tube and presumably a wheel at the top of the seat tube; this means better shifting than the one I had. Whether this means yours is earlier I can only speculate, but I would speculate: yes, it is.

Whether you go bigger or smaller on that is all a matter of preference. Some like being a bit more leaned over so that they can still go a little faster, while some want smaller so that they can have the handlebars higher and closer to them. If you can go try it out I'd suggest doing that to see if you like the position it has.
-Gene-

58/59 cm....
+1, and maybe even 60.
Not a 56, I ride those.

looks a little bigger than my 56cm.