Classic & Vintage - Look at the Size of this Bob Jackson, Show Your Tall Bikes!!!!!!!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Bob-Jackson-531-reynolds-steel-complete-road-bike-handmade-in-england-no-reserve-/261014675845?pt=Road_Bikes&hash=item3cc5afe185

Oh my....

http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Bob-Jackson-531-reynolds-steel-complete-road-bike-handmade-england-no-reserve-/00/s/MTIwMFgxNjAw/$%28KGrHqRHJD!E90wE%29GdUBPnFJyjddg~~60_58.JPG

For a basket ball player !!

Geeze. What do you think that is? 70cm?

I saw someone riding a bike roughly that size yesterday. My buddy and I were in awe.

Frames that size should have bigger wheels.

Bill Walton used to ride quite a bit and he eventually had a big frame made for him with additional diagonal tubes to help stiffen it up.

In about 45 states a subject line like that will get you arrested. Or at least investigated.

Looks cool but I think extra tubes might have been in order?

In about 45 states a subject line like that will get you arrested. Or at least investigated.

That was Jackson, not Johnson!

Geeze. What do you think that is? 70cm?
Pretty close guess!

Quote from the ebay listing:

58cm toptube, 68cm seattube, and 28cm headtube

Only 1 bottle cage?? There's room for at least 5 more.

that's a heck of a reach to the shifters. lol

Geeze. What do you think that is? 70cm?

the text on the listing says 68cm C2C ST and 58 TT


Frames that size should have bigger wheels.

Bill Walton used to ride quite a bit and he eventually had a big frame made for him with additional diagonal tubes to help stiffen it up.

I saw a write up on a big custome frame like that years ago.... '89 maye in one of the bike magazines. I am suprised this one does not have an extra TT or something.

Frames that size should have bigger wheels.

It looks like a folder with 20" wheels :lol:

I'll pass that on to my friend, the gentle giant Montessori teacher who rides a 73cm Colian. He doesn't have a lot of seatpost showing on that bike iirc, maybe he could go smaller.

Just added it to my watch list, I ride a 68cm now but that Jackson has got to weigh a lot less than my Super Grand Prix.

Looks bigger than my bike though doesn't it?

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/FORDSVTPARTS/Bikes/DSC05081.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/FORDSVTPARTS/Bikes/KGrHqRHJDE90wEGdUBPnFJyjddg60_58.jpg

That was Jackson, not Johnson!

That begs the question, why doesn't GIANT make a model called the Johnson? :innocent:

Yao Ming's bike:

http://i.imgur.com/Rfp0x.jpg

68cm seat tube with 58cm top tube? That is some messed up geometry for someone with looooooong legs and a relatively short torso.

It looks like it would wheelie pretty easily.

Just added it to my watch list, I ride a 68cm now but that Jackson has got to weigh a lot less than my Super Grand Prix.

Looks bigger than my bike though doesn't it?

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/FORDSVTPARTS/Bikes/DSC05081.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y171/FORDSVTPARTS/Bikes/KGrHqRHJDE90wEGdUBPnFJyjddg60_58.jpg

Yes ! there is no way the one in the Ebay listing is ''only'' 68cm if yours is a 68.

Yours looks a lot closer to a 64 than a 68; I suppose geometry could account for some of the relative difference in headtube length, but I really don't see the SGP as being an honest 68.

I know a guy who could ride it (and appreciate it); he's got a Woodrup that size he just had Chris Kvale repaint, but he's always on the lookout for new-to-him and nicer.

Yes ! there is no way the one in the Ebay listing is ''only'' 68cm if yours is a 68.

That headtube is a dead giveaway.

It looks like a circus bike :D

Yesterday, at a swap meet, there was a 28.5-inch c-t 1970s Witcomb for sale. That's 72.4 cm. Biggest dang vintage lugged frame I had ever seen....

Yours looks a lot closer to a 64 than a 68; I suppose geometry could account for some of the relative difference in headtube length, but I really don't see the SGP as being an honest 68.

I know a guy who could ride it (and appreciate it); he's got a Woodrup that size he just had Chris Kvale repaint, but he's always on the lookout for new-to-him and nicer.

My other bike is a 64cm.

I just rechecked the one pictured above and center of crank to the top of the crossbar at the seat tube is 68cm, crossbar is 60cm center to center and the steer tube is 27cm from cup to cup.

I didn't measure the stand over again but I'm 6'6" with about a 36" inseam and I barely clear the crossbar, I love the bike though because it's the first bike I could ever stretch out on.

.

That's my TT size. A simple hacksaw and pipe couplers and I'm set.

Looks cool but I think extra tubes might have been in order?

Yeah, mixte tubes would have been a possible option.

Well, maybe I found who I want to draft behind on my next ride! :D

Check the diameter of the seat stays...beefy! They look as wide as the tires.

Bill Walton used to ride quite a bit and he eventually had a big frame made for him with additional diagonal tubes to help stiffen it up.

Current Bill

http://www.adventurecorps.com/mlbc/2010/2010show5/images/DSC04033.jpg

Just added it to my watch list, I ride a 68cm now but that Jackson has got to weigh a lot less than my Super Grand Prix.

Looks bigger than my bike though doesn't it?

I have to agree that the Bob Jackson must be bigger. My Panasonic is also a proper 27" (68cm) and the headtube isn't nearly as long:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7117/6983700656_0797243900.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jpbikeresearch/6983700656/)
Commuter setup (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jpbikeresearch/6983700656/)

I can only guess it's because the top tube is shorter, bringing the headtube closer the the seattube. Still, I'd love to take this for a testride, since it's most definitely lighter than my gaspipe steed.

Why do frames seem to "top out" at 58cm top tube? I've seen a few 60cm tt, but rarely bigger. It is like they are forcing big dudes into a more upright and less aero position. I believe this was a conspiracy by smaller guys to get an even bigger wall to draft behind? :p


I understand that if you built a huge, say 70 x 70 frame, it would be noodly, but wouldn't an extra tt help that? Or some more triangles like Yao's ride? Isn't that why big-boy Rivendells come with an extra tt?

247687

That Jackson looks bigger than 68... here is a 68 cm Fuji Sports 12 frame I picked up off Craigs a couple weeks ago. Threw some wheels on it to demonstrate hugeness. I think its roughly an '80. I'm 6'5" and the stand over height is insane.

Why do frames seem to "top out" at 58cm top tube?

Mondia seems to be the exception among vintage marques. Most Mondias I've seen have a top tube just about the same length as the seat tube.

For once I see a bike that I is TOO BIG for me to ride :P

Aaron :)

So I messaged the seller and they said from center of crank up the seat tube to the center of the top tube it's 68cm.

I know manufacturers advertised based on center or top of the crossbar but is there a standard that most here go by?

I was always under the impression that center of crank to top of crossbar was the accepted measurement.


.

Just stumbled across this and thought I'd post the link for all you tall riders: http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/2966160446.html
http://s931.photobucket.com/albums/ad157/matketze/CeCnturion%20Elite%20GT/?action=view&current=DSCF0116.jpg

So I messaged the seller and they said from center of crank up the seat tube to the center of the top tube it's 68cm.

I know manufacturers advertised based on center or top of the crossbar but is there a standard that most here go by?

I was always under the impression that center of crank to top of crossbar was the accepted measurement.


.


There have been two methods of measuring for a long time, probably because they started in different countries. With standard diameter top tubes, it makes only a small difference.

Frames with tight clearances for wheels have longer head tubes, making them look bigger.

There have been two methods of measuring for a long time, probably because they started in different countries. With standard diameter top tubes, it makes only a small difference.

Frames with tight clearances for wheels have longer head tubes, making them look bigger.

Just to add to that, with non-oversized tubing, add 1.5 cm. to a c-c number to get c-t size.

Also, BB height (or BB drop, more precisely) and seat tube angle affect head tube length. A track frame with an 11" BB height 'lengthens' the head tube by about one-half inch vs. one that is otherwise the same but has a 10.5" BB height.....

650B frames have longer headtubes than the same size of 700c frames, etc., etc....

Yao Ming's bike:

http://i.imgur.com/Rfp0x.jpg

Shawn Bradley and his 80cm Trek, which was comically stolen from his house by a guy about 5'11" (but thankfully later found and returned). Why didn't they give him longer chainstays? I can't imagine there being much confidence on climbs if you wheelie whenever you sit down.

247909

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f223/BigPolishJimmy/bicycles/Fuji%20Monterey/PICT0260.jpg

Of course I have to post my huge Fuji for size comparison ;p

*edit* I know, I know... my pics are stale. I got to get a new build going now that the semester is over.

There's also this one: http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/2991474779.html
A 68cm Super Course.


Just stumbled across this and thought I'd post the link for all you tall riders: http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/2966160446.html

Just stumbled across this and thought I'd post the link for all you tall riders: http://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/2966160446.html
http://s931.photobucket.com/albums/ad157/matketze/CeCnturion%20Elite%20GT/?action=view&current=DSCF0116.jpg

That ones mine, just moving out some of my smaller bikes.

The largest top tube I have seen by any brand are the Bridgestone's. On my 400 the st is 68cm and the top tube is 62cm, making it the only bike I do not need a 130-140 Nitto extension. It is not whippy at all, but it is not double butted, Bridgestone double butted all 400'd only up to 64cm.

http://i931.photobucket.com/albums/ad157/matketze/Bridgestone%20400/DSCF0080.jpg

Why do frames seem to "top out" at 58cm top tube? I've seen a few 60cm tt, but rarely bigger.

Could it be that really tall people still have fairly "standard" vertebrae? i.e., difference in height is more a function of leg length than back length? Just a theory. I was under the impression that vertebrae don't vary much in size, but I could be wrong.

Yes ! there is no way the one in the Ebay listing is ''only'' 68cm if yours is a 68.

Yup, 64 would be his. Mine is a 63, and it is close to his.
http://www.cehoward.net/helmtor505.jpg

There's currently a 70 cm Gazelle Champion Mondial for sale over here. Pretty easy on the eyes for such a large frame:

http://fietsen-brommers.marktplaats.nl/fietsen-racefietsen/547173927-gazelle-champion-mondial-70cm-racefiets-shim-105-biopace.html

My '85 Trek 600 and '72 Raleigh SuperCourse have a seat tube (CtT) of 64cm. Head tubes are 22 & 21cm respectively. TTs measure 58.5 (CtC). With 27" wheels the SuperCourse is as tall a bike as I dare ride. 6'1" and a tad. The old school of "straddle the TT with a fist of seatpost" still works in the new world of people riding smaller & smaller frames.

That ones mine, just moving out some of my smaller bikes.



If it was my size I'd be trying to find a way to get it to Vegas. It's a beautiful bike. Of course it's no where near my size (well, the toptube is probably about rightl).

Could it be that really tall people still have fairly "standard" vertebrae? i.e., difference in height is more a function of leg length than back length? Just a theory. I was under the impression that vertebrae don't vary much in size, but I could be wrong.

Most really tall people have proportionately long legs, but there are exceptions (think Andre).

Why do frames seem to "top out" at 58cm top tube? I've seen a few 60cm tt, but rarely bigger. It is like they are forcing big dudes into a more upright and less aero position. I believe this was a conspiracy by smaller guys to get an even bigger wall to draft behind? :p


From my experience with this 67cm frame which has a 61cm TT
http://www.pedalroom.com/p/schwinn-67cm-2242_8.jpgI needed a short stem on this bike because the massive head tube forced me into a somewhat upright position. My other bike , a 62cm, also has a 61cm TT but I ride with a 130 stem to get that comfy flat forward extension. On the 67cm with a 130 stem I felt like I was uncomfortably reaching for the bars

So how did the Bob Jackson not sell?

There was bidding on it but it shows to be ended with no bids, it was a no reserve auction so I'm confused.

At T-Town on Saturday, Sam Fitzsimmons brought along a slew of HUGE bikes and frames. I think someone mentioned the Witcomb as being a 28.5" (72.4cm), and I saw that frame there. There was another one Sam had there which was even larger, measuring 74cm (c-c).