Originally Posted by
joejack951
So what's the deal with smaller cyclists getting screwed on bike fit, presumably because the industry doesn't want to build a 'road' bike with anything smaller than 700c wheels? Why should smaller cyclists have to ride bikes that handle differently than 'big people' bikes and/or have them improperly balanced on the saddle (shifted forward relative to the BB to compensate for the long reach)? Discuss.
I am completely stumped as to why smaller road bikes dont use 650(b or c depending on need) more often. I just started a framebuilding class and one of the students is building a mixte for his shorter statured mom. It was really interesting to see on paper the difference 650b wheels make compared to 700c within the frame design.
Trek has a 650 Emonda, Fuji has an Ace 650, and Diamondback has a Podium 650. I know there are some others too, but they are far and few between. In an age of cycling where there is such a diversification and flood of different bike styles- 650c road bikes are almost totally ignored.
I fully intend on getting my oldest kid a 650 bike when she grows out of her current converted 26" bike.
Originally Posted by
Carbonfiberboy
650 isn't the solution either because there's so little availability both overall and during a ride. Woe to the 650 rider who goes through both tubes or ruins a tire. Personally, I'd take better balance and a shorter stem.
How often have you seen/experienced/heard of a rider blowing 2 tubes AND a tire on a road ride? This is such a rare example that it seems there is no reason to mention as a fear/concern. If someone blows 2 tubes and destroys a tire in a ride- they need to just stop, call it a day, and try again later. I would think the odds of this all happening close to a shop that has a 700c tire would be slim, so whether a shop has a 650 tire or not is sorta moot. Odds are a rider would have to hitch a ride to a shop, so just get a ride home instead.