Originally Posted by
rpenmanparker
I'm not sure what you think I have backwards. It is well known that small frames, especially women's, suffer from toe clip overlap, hence the historical attempts to use smaller wheels on tiny frames rather than over-lengthening the top tube. There is no reason to assume smaller normal folks are proportioned differently from larger folks within each gender. Yes, smaller frames have proportionally longer top tubes, but I think it is out of necessity, not preference. But I am interested in hearing your idea in more detail. Thanks.
You referenced earlier "most cyclists riding 73-74 degree seat tube angles (some 72s in smaller sizes like his." This is what was backwards.
On a completely different note, I was thinking today, elaborating on geometry and the relative positioning of the rider over the pedal spindle. If you were to move the seat forwards and upwards proportionally, would the cyclists knee-over-pedal remain in the same position? Conversely, the same correlation would exist lowering and pushing the seat back. Of course, this shifts the rider's body position along the y axis of the bike, raising or lowering center of gravity. I'm not really sure on the other effects of such a change.
This was spurred by a friend of mine who mentioned my seat seemed to be a little low as we were riding yesterday. To find out if he was right, I raised my seat 2cm and pushed it forward 1cm. My position relative to the bb stayed roughly the same, as did my reach. Overall, the bike felt virtually the same, with the exception of course being my relatively higher seating position. I'll give it a couple more rides and see if anything changes.