Originally Posted by
nanter
My understanding was that Lemond felt that we were all riding frames that were too large for us, so it seems strange that the sizing convention wouldn't be the exact opposite of what you describe here, as this would often cause us to end up on a frame too large for us.
I know when I was sized for this particular bike the stem was longer than other stock stems and the saddle was set back - both had to be replaced because the top tube length was already a bit excessive.
Judging by what you've said, I'd be more comfortable on a 61cm Lemond, so either way it's the different sizing "approach" taken by Lemond that helped land me on a larger than appropriate frame. That's what I meant by saying it was funky. I didn't mean to cause offense.
No offense taken. Just wanted to set the record straight as Lemonds get maligned for having long top tubes and it is simply untrue. In fact the opposite is true because they have slack seat tube angles...Lemond is a proponent of large set back...how he rode. His center to center convention has nothing to do with portending a particular geometry either...it is purely a convention and has nothing to do with the angles of his frames. In summary, Lemonds have very forgiving top tube to head tube ratios with slack seat tubes which are very friendly to average cyclists. You bought what happens to be a 65 cm center to top bike and it may be a big for you is all.