View Single Post
Old 10-25-11 | 07:36 AM
  #20  
trevor_ash's Avatar
trevor_ash
Happy go lucky
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 286
Likes: 0
From: Illinois

Bikes: 2010 Nagasawa (Track), EAI Bareknuckle (Track), Custom Jonny Cycles (Track), 90's Eddy Merckx (Road), 2002 Colnago Tecnos, 200? Felt F60 (Road), 1992 Schwinn Paramount Series 3 (Road)

Originally Posted by SurlyLaika
A lot of people seem to be satisfied with their CC's and I think I just need a smaller size. Just out curiosity, what about the geometry is wonky exactly? and what bike did you end up getting?
Wonky wasn't a fair word. As mconlonx describes above, it quickly became obvious that you need to size via top tube, which is fine. But I couldn't work out (virtually) how much drop I'd acquire and I was worried I'd spend too much effort fiddling with the fit. I normally ride a 54 to 56 frame, basically a 55 top tube. So in the Surly model I was torn between a "52" or a "54" (which have top tubes of 54 and 56). Anyway, it put an awkward taste in my mouth when I started thinking about the height of the head tube along with everything else.

That's what I meant by wonky. I didn't mean to imply anything was wrong with it. It was just causing me confusion and uncertainty. I don't have a local dealer withou driving almost 2 hours.
trevor_ash is offline  
Reply