Originally Posted by
ksisler
Ronno; Concur on all points. Best I could recommend is trying to get fully back to the original configuration and sort of ride it like a C&V item. But things in the bike world have changed for the better since then and each individual has to eventually decide when it is time to move forward (if ever)...I still mostly ride bikes from the 1980's at the newest (but am building a new tourer--out of boredom prevention and morbid fascination mostly) /K
I am 6'4" tall with a 36" inseam. If I could find a modern bike in my size that I could afford, that exhibited the fit and performance properties of my 27" (68.5cm) Cannondale ST's from the late 80's, I would jump all over it and be done with it. But, as with many things, "the just don't build them like that any more." Shorter riders, who have a plethora of properly fitting bicycles at their disposal just don't get it.
O mtnbke, where are yo when I need you?
Carbonfiberboy, As I attempted to describe, point C is the location of spoke nipples using an OC rim, and point D is the comparable point using a deep V symmetrical rim: moving the point to the DS ( due to symmetrical rim) and towards the hub (deep V reduced ERD.) This maintains the DS spoke angle as you assert, but increases the NDS spoke angle. What I propose are actually 2 triangles overlaid on each other for ready comparison.
Makes perfect sense to me....