Any Frames with Short Top Tubes?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Point Reyes Station, California
Posts: 4,527
Bikes: Indeed!
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked 3,469 Times
in
1,131 Posts
Any Frames with Short Top Tubes?
Any suggestions for steel frames with shorter top tubes? Eyelets on the dropouts a plus.
As I get older my hands get numb more easily and my neck gets sore more easily on longer rides. Just for the heck of it I tried out the Competive Cyclist and Leonard Zinn fit calculators. The "Eddy Fit" at CC and the Zinn calculators both suggest that I could use a frame with a seat tube (c to c) of about 59cm and a top tube of about 56 to 57 cm. This got me thinking it would be a worthwhile experiment to try out a shorter frame if I can find one. Since this is only an experiment at this point I don't need anything too fancy or too expensive. (maybe $250 tops for frame and fork)
I'd be willing to go as tall as 60cm if I could keep the top tube between 56 and 57.
Brent
As I get older my hands get numb more easily and my neck gets sore more easily on longer rides. Just for the heck of it I tried out the Competive Cyclist and Leonard Zinn fit calculators. The "Eddy Fit" at CC and the Zinn calculators both suggest that I could use a frame with a seat tube (c to c) of about 59cm and a top tube of about 56 to 57 cm. This got me thinking it would be a worthwhile experiment to try out a shorter frame if I can find one. Since this is only an experiment at this point I don't need anything too fancy or too expensive. (maybe $250 tops for frame and fork)
I'd be willing to go as tall as 60cm if I could keep the top tube between 56 and 57.
Brent
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central California
Posts: 1,083
Bikes: 2001 LeMond Nevada City, ‘92 Merlin Titanium, '84 Torpado Super Strada, ‘84 Schwinn Tempo, '81 Bianchi Limites, '73 Raleigh Supercourse
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times
in
41 Posts
Going by his post, the ST is 59 and the TT is 57...
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vi...-x-57-1-a.html
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vi...-x-57-1-a.html
#3
Senior Member
The RRB I used to have was short in the top tube. Mine was a small frame but Ron made a comment to me that they were designed with a short top tube so I gather they all were. Maybe one of the members with a larger frame could give measurements. They are really nice frames; great riding and very versatile. If mine had been a size up I'd still have it. Probably a rare beast on the West coast, but you never know.
#4
Junior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: between the ocean and the bay
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I have a Shogun (champion no. 2 tubing, 600 arabesque, 1 eyelet per dropout) that measures 61cm c to c with a top tube that's about 55.5-56cm c to c.
It's taller than you're looking for but I'm local if you wanted to borrow it for a while and see how the size works for you. I was surprised at the tt length when I first measured it. Fun and quick bike but the frame's a bit short for me.
It's taller than you're looking for but I'm local if you wanted to borrow it for a while and see how the size works for you. I was surprised at the tt length when I first measured it. Fun and quick bike but the frame's a bit short for me.
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 7,639
Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997
Mentioned: 146 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 49 Times
in
31 Posts
Just use a small frame, long seat post, tall stem.
#6
Ride, Wrench, Swap, Race
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Northern California
Posts: 9,193
Bikes: Cheltenham-Pedersen racer, Boulder F/S Paris-Roubaix, Varsity racer, '52 Christophe, '62 Continental, '92 Merckx, '75 Limongi, '76 Presto, '72 Gitane SC, '71 Schwinn SS, etc.
Mentioned: 132 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1565 Post(s)
Liked 1,295 Times
in
865 Posts
When comparing numbers and making a selection, always consider the effect on the reach dimension that the seat tube angle imposes.
As an example, a Merckx Century model will have the same top tube length of the Corsa Extra, but the shallower seat tube angle reduces the reach ahead of the bottom bracket by a considerable amount.
In approximate terms, and in the frame size range you seem to be homing in on, a reach reduction of 0.9cm for every degree of seat tube angle relaxation needs to be figured in to the top tube length requirement.
As well, frames with a shallower headtube angle tend to handle better with shorter stem extensions, which might be equivalent to a significant combined reduction of the forward reach to the handlebar!
Worst case is a racing frame with steep angles ending up needing a shorter stem, which usually results in twitchy, unpleasant steering. The steep seat tube makes the toptube feel longer, requiring a short stem which then makes the steering downright flighty. This is made even worse when the bars are set up near saddle height. Such bikes usually end up not getting ridden much until a larger rider comes along, or until the rider slams the saddle forward, fits a longer stem to calm the steering and then rides at an intense enough level to maintain fore/aft balance atop the bottom bracket more or less by sheer pedaling torque. ...Not out of the question though if you are in relatively good shape and are into shorter, faster rides.
As an example, a Merckx Century model will have the same top tube length of the Corsa Extra, but the shallower seat tube angle reduces the reach ahead of the bottom bracket by a considerable amount.
In approximate terms, and in the frame size range you seem to be homing in on, a reach reduction of 0.9cm for every degree of seat tube angle relaxation needs to be figured in to the top tube length requirement.
As well, frames with a shallower headtube angle tend to handle better with shorter stem extensions, which might be equivalent to a significant combined reduction of the forward reach to the handlebar!
Worst case is a racing frame with steep angles ending up needing a shorter stem, which usually results in twitchy, unpleasant steering. The steep seat tube makes the toptube feel longer, requiring a short stem which then makes the steering downright flighty. This is made even worse when the bars are set up near saddle height. Such bikes usually end up not getting ridden much until a larger rider comes along, or until the rider slams the saddle forward, fits a longer stem to calm the steering and then rides at an intense enough level to maintain fore/aft balance atop the bottom bracket more or less by sheer pedaling torque. ...Not out of the question though if you are in relatively good shape and are into shorter, faster rides.
#7
Thrifty Bill
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mountains of Western NC
Posts: 23,524
Bikes: 86 Katakura Silk, 87 Prologue X2, 88 Cimarron LE, 1975 Sekai 4000 Professional, 73 Paramount, plus more
Mentioned: 96 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 964 Times
in
628 Posts
Be more flexible on ST length, say a range of 57 to 61, and your choices will be endless.
#8
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,796
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1392 Post(s)
Liked 1,324 Times
in
836 Posts
My 23" 1971 Nishiki Competition had such a short top tube that I needed a very long-reach handlebar stem, even though I could barely straddle the frame.
In contrast, my 57cm 1980 Peugeot PKN-10 had such a long top tube that I needed a minimum-reach stem.
A shorter seat tube may help you, but some of the 1960s and early 1970s frames did not scale the top tubes with the seat tubes. Case in point -- my 21" 1970 Peugeot UO-8 really stretches me out, despite a lot of seat tube showing. The top tube is long. In contrast, my 55cm 1960 Capos and 1981 Bianchi seem to fit perfectly with normal-reach stems.
More recently, the relationship between seat tube and top tube length has been the main differentiation between diamond frames made for men and those made for women (e.g. Terry Cycles). If you don't mind riding a "girl's bike," it would at least have the shorter top tube you seek.
In contrast, my 57cm 1980 Peugeot PKN-10 had such a long top tube that I needed a minimum-reach stem.
A shorter seat tube may help you, but some of the 1960s and early 1970s frames did not scale the top tubes with the seat tubes. Case in point -- my 21" 1970 Peugeot UO-8 really stretches me out, despite a lot of seat tube showing. The top tube is long. In contrast, my 55cm 1960 Capos and 1981 Bianchi seem to fit perfectly with normal-reach stems.
More recently, the relationship between seat tube and top tube length has been the main differentiation between diamond frames made for men and those made for women (e.g. Terry Cycles). If you don't mind riding a "girl's bike," it would at least have the shorter top tube you seek.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
#9
Get off my lawn!
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Garden State
Posts: 6,031
Bikes: 1917 Loomis, 1923 Rudge, 1930 Hercules Renown, 1947 Mclean, 1948 JA Holland, 1955 Hetchins, 1957 Carlton Flyer, 1962 Raleigh Sport, 1978&81 Raleigh Gomp GS', 2010 Raliegh Clubman
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 93 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 98 Times
in
48 Posts
The UO variant Peugeot's in the taller frames 23"+ have shorter top tubes in comparison.
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,154
Mentioned: 481 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3808 Post(s)
Liked 6,676 Times
in
2,607 Posts
1970s Raleigh also tend to have relatively short top tubes, no matter the seat tube size. I have a Grand Sports with a 62cm seat tube and a 57cm top tube (c-c),
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Point Reyes Station, California
Posts: 4,527
Bikes: Indeed!
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked 3,469 Times
in
1,131 Posts
Thank you all! You folks are a wealth of information.
@Essthreetee I think his seat tube measurement must be c to t. Lemond catalog for that bike (2001 and 2002) shows equal length seat tube and top tube.
@due ruote I've never seen an RRB on this coast but I will definitely keep an eye open for one. Looks like a nice bike.
@brokensf Thanks for the offer! A little taller than I wanted but if I don't find something else fairly soon I'll be in touch.
@jyl and @wrk101 A shorter frame with taller saddle and stem will be my fall-back if I can't find what I'm looking for.
@dddd Thanks for the education. I had never before seen the .9cm/degree spelled out before; a good number to memorize!
@John E I'll see what info I can find on the Nishiki Competition. The heads up on the "girl's" bikes is also a good one. Maybe hard to find one in a 59 to 60 cm seat tube but I'll see what I can come up with.
@Velognome My first real ten-speed was a UO-something or other from the late sixties! If I could scratch the nostalgia itch and find a shorter top tube all in one bike I'd be set.
@nlerner I never owned a Raleigh. Maybe it's about time. I'll definitely see what I can find out about '70s Raleighs.
Brent
@Essthreetee I think his seat tube measurement must be c to t. Lemond catalog for that bike (2001 and 2002) shows equal length seat tube and top tube.
@due ruote I've never seen an RRB on this coast but I will definitely keep an eye open for one. Looks like a nice bike.
@brokensf Thanks for the offer! A little taller than I wanted but if I don't find something else fairly soon I'll be in touch.
@jyl and @wrk101 A shorter frame with taller saddle and stem will be my fall-back if I can't find what I'm looking for.
@dddd Thanks for the education. I had never before seen the .9cm/degree spelled out before; a good number to memorize!
@John E I'll see what info I can find on the Nishiki Competition. The heads up on the "girl's" bikes is also a good one. Maybe hard to find one in a 59 to 60 cm seat tube but I'll see what I can come up with.
@Velognome My first real ten-speed was a UO-something or other from the late sixties! If I could scratch the nostalgia itch and find a shorter top tube all in one bike I'd be set.
@nlerner I never owned a Raleigh. Maybe it's about time. I'll definitely see what I can find out about '70s Raleighs.
Brent
#12
Keener splendor
I've owned two Japanese bikes from the 80s, a Fuji and a Shogun, with 56cm top tubes. Based on what I've read on this forum, it seems like 80s Japanese bikes (including the Nishiki mentioned) tend to have shorter top tubes. I have no idea if this is true, but there seems to be anecdotal evidence.
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 185
Bikes: 4
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
To take pressure off your hands you need to move your butt back and hands up.
I've found that most short top tube bikes often have a corresponding steep seat tube angle (think criterium geometry) that negates the butt-back position and actually places more pressure on the hands. Just something to be aware of.
Ultimately the solution for me was better fitness that allowed me to apply greater counterforce to the pedals. This unloads the upper torso taking pressure off the bars. The bike also hands better as I can ride with relaxed arms and hands. Hands are always a little tender in the spring as my fitness is lagging.
YMMV
I've found that most short top tube bikes often have a corresponding steep seat tube angle (think criterium geometry) that negates the butt-back position and actually places more pressure on the hands. Just something to be aware of.
Ultimately the solution for me was better fitness that allowed me to apply greater counterforce to the pedals. This unloads the upper torso taking pressure off the bars. The bike also hands better as I can ride with relaxed arms and hands. Hands are always a little tender in the spring as my fitness is lagging.
YMMV
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central California
Posts: 1,083
Bikes: 2001 LeMond Nevada City, ‘92 Merlin Titanium, '84 Torpado Super Strada, ‘84 Schwinn Tempo, '81 Bianchi Limites, '73 Raleigh Supercourse
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times
in
41 Posts
My '81Bianchi Limited has a CTC ST is 61cm and CTC TT of 56cm.
#15
Junior Member
Lemonds are the opposite of what you want. Relatively long top tubes to seat tube length.
I had an '81 Miyata 912 that was a 63cm ST x 58cm TT. I liked the way it fit, felt like I could ride in the drops forever.
I had an '81 Miyata 912 that was a 63cm ST x 58cm TT. I liked the way it fit, felt like I could ride in the drops forever.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose (Willow Glen) Ca
Posts: 9,842
Bikes: Kirk Custom JK Special, '84 Team Miyata,(dura ace old school) 80?? SR Semi-Pro 600 Arabesque
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2337 Post(s)
Liked 2,820 Times
in
1,540 Posts
I would check out Miyata's my 1400 is 58 cm seat and 55 cm top tube. This seems to be fairly typical geometry for their sport to race bikes.
__________________
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Central California
Posts: 1,083
Bikes: 2001 LeMond Nevada City, ‘92 Merlin Titanium, '84 Torpado Super Strada, ‘84 Schwinn Tempo, '81 Bianchi Limites, '73 Raleigh Supercourse
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 161 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times
in
41 Posts
Of of all my bikes, my Bianchi has the shortest TT and the longest ST...and is the most comfortable.
#18
Shifting is fun!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Holland, NL
Posts: 11,003
Bikes: Yes, please.
Mentioned: 280 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2197 Post(s)
Liked 4,599 Times
in
1,764 Posts
These are Miki-built Union Sapporo frames. The lavender-colored one has a 64cm seat tube (C-T) and a 56cm top tube (C-C). Miki also built for Sekai. You might want to check those out.
#19
curmudgineer
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Chicago SW burbs
Posts: 4,417
Bikes: 2 many 2 fit here
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked 112 Times
in
70 Posts
I don't have the dimensions handy but check out the late 80's entry level to mid-range Peugeots. My 89 Versailles is pretty big for me in the straddle department, but the reach is perfect, with the original 100mm stem.
#20
Catching Smallmouth
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: In a boat
Posts: 590
Bikes: 1990 Specialized Sirrus Triple, 1985 Trek 460, 2005 Lemond Tourmalet, 1984 Schwinn LeTour 'Luxe, 1988 Trek 400T, 1985 Trek 450, 1997 Lemond Zurich, 1993 Diamond Back Apex, 1988 Schwinn Circuit, 1988 Schwinn Prologue, 1978 Trek TX700, Sannino
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 88 Post(s)
Liked 134 Times
in
79 Posts
Most frames are roughly square c-c at around 56cm. Below that and the top tube is longer than the seat tube. Above and the top tube is shorter. There are exceptions but that rule holds true for the majority of lugged steel road frames. A frame of say 60x57 would be common.
#21
vintage motor
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tepic, Nayarit, Mexico
Posts: 1,595
Bikes: 48 Automoto, 49 Stallard, 50 Rotrax, 62 Jack Taylor, 67 Atala, 68 Lejeune, 72-74-75 Motobecanes, 73 RIH, 71 Zieleman, 74 Raleigh, 78 Windsor, 83 Messina (Villata), 84 Brazzo (Losa), 85 Davidson, 90 Diamondback, 92 Kestrel
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 164 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 102 Times
in
79 Posts
My 71-73 Motobecane Le Champion is 57 ST and 55 TT c-c.
My 74 Raleigh International is 58 ST and 55 TT c-c.
Both of these are nice, classic all-rounders with eyelets, that are fairly easy to find.
My 74 Raleigh International is 58 ST and 55 TT c-c.
Both of these are nice, classic all-rounders with eyelets, that are fairly easy to find.
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: northern michigan
Posts: 13,317
Bikes: '77 Colnago Super, '76 Fuji The Finest, '88 Cannondale Criterium, '86 Trek 760, '87 Miyata 712
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times
in
313 Posts
+1
Any true road racer will do or try criterium geometry if you are hardcore. My arms are not long for my height (meso, here) and wanted an agressive criterium bike which led me to owning a Cannondale Criterium Series frame. Other than that I ride a shorter-than-ideal Trek 760 and with a short reach stem if I want to feel "tight" on certain occasions.
Any true road racer will do or try criterium geometry if you are hardcore. My arms are not long for my height (meso, here) and wanted an agressive criterium bike which led me to owning a Cannondale Criterium Series frame. Other than that I ride a shorter-than-ideal Trek 760 and with a short reach stem if I want to feel "tight" on certain occasions.
#23
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Point Reyes Station, California
Posts: 4,527
Bikes: Indeed!
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1506 Post(s)
Liked 3,469 Times
in
1,131 Posts
Many thanks to all of you for all the help!
My fellow forum members here are one of the things for which I am thankful today.
Brent
My fellow forum members here are one of the things for which I am thankful today.
Brent
#24
Senior Member
My 87 Panasonic DX 3000 has 60 cm seat tube with a 57 top tube. It rides great but I fell like it is too small. If I keep it, I will add a longer stem. I have it listed on CL now at a top price to make it worth selling off.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
lotekmod
Classic & Vintage
4
05-11-17 02:01 PM
trashalicious
Singlespeed & Fixed Gear
30
10-22-10 06:34 PM