Here are some things that turned up on the Philly CL.

https://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/1820400013.html
https://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/1818895015.html
https://philadelphia.craigslist.org/bik/1814282611.html

I don't see the allure of a mixte frame, unless of course she's going to be riding it to work in a skirt and all. And anyway, most mixtes aren't small enough.

Small frame sizes like 46 cm may reduce the distance between pedal and seat, but will not necessarily give a better fit since the BB and headset are typically no lower than on a full sized bike. So even if you find a mixte with a small frame size, there's probably no benefit, since you will still end up with a bike that doesn't fit.

Terry gets around this problem by reducing the front wheel size, which is fine, but why not a smaller rear wheel as well? It not only looks goofy, but means you have to stock two different tire and tube sizes. The fact that they do it anyway tells me Terry's "woman-specific frame geometry" is basically a marketing ploy, a flashing light that says "serious bike for a seriously small person" in order to justify the price.

Hhhmmm. I don't see my wife wearing a skirt to work, just ER scrubs. In the spirit of being a cheap skate, what are your thoughts on getting a set of 650C wheels and a shorter stem? Do you think that would help lower the bike enough? I'm not sure on the crank arm length, I think they are 165mm. As I sat and drank my coffee this morning I stared @ the C-dale thinking what I could do to make it smaller (other than calling Rick Moranis). The seat post extension sticks up about 2.5 inches above the TT. What if I shortened the extension? I can't see anything that would be an issue.... That would give me a "safe" 1" reduction in seat height. Thoughts? Oh and for the record, the Terry bike while nice is kinda goofy looking....

Keep a sharp eye out for an early steel MTB with non-suspension fork in a small size. MTB 26" wheels are way smaller than 650c, and with narrow tires would reduce the height of everything. Easy to modify with a shorter stem and drop bar if desired, so a good and cheap solution.

+1 on the Terry. Of course it is kind of goofy looking. They had to make a lot of changes to accommodate a 24 inch front wheel, 700c rear, and yet have a super low top tube.

Here's a pic of a Terry I picked up last year. Notice the length of the head tube. Also notice the top tube is only slightly higher than the rear wheel.

But if you are on the thriftier side, then it is hard to beat a XS MTB. That's what my wife rides.

What Rudy said There is one in a 16 inch size now in our local CL

If you rehab it with different stem and drops, and some sort of shifting (these lower end shimano MTB groups have horrid shifters) you can have a 25 lbs bike on your hands. This particular one has a DB Chromo frame and Cromo fork and stays. (It's made around 1990)

take her to a bike shop so a professional (translation: someone other than you because she won't listen just cuz it's you!) can tell her that a proper fit is going to be on her tippy toes and she'll be rewarded with improved speed and safer operation of the bike. any changes to how she sits on the bike for the 10% of the time she is at rest are really going to make the other 90% of the time a lot tougher.

Beg pardon, but how do you know my wife?

Neither Classic nor Vintage but the rider is.......my mom is about 4'10" and 75 years young and a couple of years ago got a little Trek WSD road bike (can't remember the exact model right now). It's like........46cm? I think? 650c wheels all Ultrega components. Weighs next to nothing. A really sweet tiny little bike. Fits her, and light enough that she can put it into the back of her Acura Integra Type-R by herself - without even taking the front wheel off it's so small!

That being said, she doesn't stop while on the saddle. She starts and stops like a proper (slow) rider. If your wife can't master that, it's going to be hard for her to properly fit a traditional geometry frame. Maybe an Electra with the "Flat Foot" geometry?

I think the reason for the 24" wheel and 700c wheel pair is that the 700c wheel still allows for road gearing to apply as it should. If the same gears were pushing a 24" wheel you obviously wouldn't travel the same distance with each revolution.

The fact that your 75 year old mom drives an Integra Type-R is totally awesome. Is it a standard transmission too?

mom was in the same predicament, she was only comfortable with Electra's Townie Step Thru frame with flat foot technology and 7 spds

and integre type-r only comes in stick shift, manual tranny

I recommend either finding a Terry-spec bike, just keeping an eye out for a really small frame, or a mixte (be careful, though, mixte's can be pretty big-I bought one for my wife, and it's an "equivalent' 56cm and too big). Another option, which I can't believe I'm espousing here, is a later model hybrid. A certain BF member in Raleigh has a sister who did 10 centuries last year on a Trek 7.5FX hybrid. She had zero problems keeping up or even riding away from folks at 17-18mph all the time, with a smile. My wife now has one, and it's solved problems with the mixte (too big), old Raleigh MTB (heavy and 2x5 friction) and GT mtb (heavy and ponderous). The hybrids with 700c wheels, road-oriented gearing and light frames seem to be more popular than road bikes with the women around here.

Of course, I'd love to get my hands on this...

Lotus Challenger Road Bike - $45 (North Raleigh)

Date: 2010-07-01, 8:19PM EDT
Reply to: sale-em3ct-1821615565@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]



This Lotus Challenger has been sitting in the attic. Needs a tune-up- the back tire needs to be replaced, and the shifters could use some help too. I was going to try and fix it up for myself, but its too small for me (I'm 6'). I'm no bike enthusiast, but I think it would be more suitable for someone around 5'4" to 5'8". Asking $45, but price is negotiable. My guess is that bike is a 48cm.(RT)

• Location: North Raleigh
• it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests

REI Novara Pulse*

Fuji Ace 650

HTH
tcs

*REI is kind of a goofy bicycle company. When their warehouse runs out of a model - they take the spec's off their web site! Anyway, the Pulse is a small frame and component road bike built around ISO559 (26") wheels and 1 1/4" wide smooth tread tires. They don't have any for mail order right now but your local store might have one.

That's the reason that caused Bill Boston to develop this design back in the 1970s, but then he was working with 14T small freewheel cogs. Today you can get cassette cogs down to 9T and Terry just continues the old design as a marketing affectation. Apparently Terry customers don't mind carrying two different sized tubes, and on tour, tires.

tcs

I think this may be perfect. if the reserve is not too bad go for it, you likely won't have trouble getting your monye back. I saw a Bianchi like this on CL somewhere. the price wasn't bad I almost bought 'just to have'

then again the mixtie route.... Soma makes a nice one..

I always carry a couple of tubes with me when I ride. Having 2 different sizes of tubes is not a big deal. And if you are going to do the riding that requires carrying tires with you, these days the folding ones are not that big and with that kind of riding you will be carrying extra stuff anyways, so what is an extra tire or 2? I think that the design is kind of goofy, but I never had the need for one, on the other hand they are people who are loyal customers. Whatever works for somebody...

https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/dawes/lt1000.htm

Comes in 44cm compact.

These are all excellent leads and suggestions, Thanks! I took her (wifes) brother's old Varsity (24" wheels), swapped the wheels out w/ a set of Al 26" MTB wheels w/ slicks, rx-100 d/r, mafac racer brakes, and some other "tweaks" to put together a bike that is HEAVY but, fits her and she feels SAFE! I'll get a few pics and post them up shortly. It looks pretty neat, it's just a tank

Here's the wife's current ride (she's 5'1"). It was a NOS 92 Paramount 46 running on 650s that I picked up this year. A wrist injury necessitates the aerobars for longer rides and whimsy necessitates the cow squeaker horn.



Here was the previous ride, now taken over by Number One Son. 2001 or so Fuji Ace SE in a 43. Chromoly frame and Sora drivetrain. I purloined the 7 speed STI shifters for other projects as the Jawire Faux Barcons are much more kid resistent and less likely to trigger, "Well Dad, what happened was.." whereby my ears seal shut and eyes glaze over.....



I had a similar quest to find a proper fitting bike for a shorter spouse.

For most shorter women, the issue is usually top tube length rather than standover as the limiting factor. It's very difficult to find a sub 50cm top tube on a 700c bike and itty bitty stems lead to "'1975 Buick LeSabre with underinflated tires and bad balljoints" handling since the normal 90mm + leverage isn't there.

B

got lucky off my local CL

got this for the gf she's 5'-0" its a 46 or 47cm columbus frame with 700x23, she LOVES this frickin thing!!!


*the saddle is actually set a bit higher than shown on the pic for proper leg extension*

You are rating "form over function" even understanding the limitation. It is a LOT deeper then you make it out to be and most of it revolves around available components.

This is very true for the racing bikes maybe less so around a leisure rider who is not trying to be competitive. In the perfect world you would just wave the shrink ray and everything about the bike would be smaller...doesn't work in the real world.

The common available components are the problem.

First The crank arm length determines BB height as you said. The lowest you normally see a BB is 265mm (10.5 inches) for the 165mm short "common" crank size. You will be VERY hard pressed to find quality cranks with a shorter arm at a reasonable price. This already starts everything off with a disadvantage when a person under 5ft tall may need something in the 155mm range for their leg length allowing for a BB high to be around 250mm (9.75in). So they are already screwed on that figure. You cant get the BB closer to the ground even with a smaller tire.

Now lets get into gearing. Everything revolves around the rear wheel size. 27-700c being the most common size in a competitive bicycle. That right there means for a short person to be competitive they are forced to those sizes or they are at a major gearing disadvantage.

The Diamond frame is the best rigidity verses weight design but its smallest size is is determined by the wheel size.

So now you are left with how to get the bike smaller but fit the 700c and 165mm cranks. As you down size the frame the top tube gets closer to the down tube, The closer they are the more flex you are going to have in the frame at the head tube and make it spongy as you get below 54cm the angles really start to suffer and you have to angle the top tub but because the top tube is short it doesn't give the stand over clearance advantage under 50cm.

On a bike with a 700 front wheel you start having toe over lap problems as the front wheel moves closer to the BB as you adjust reach for the shorter torso length. Some of this they solve by screwing with seat and head tube angles and then really short stems to compensate and they all put the rider at a less then optimum riding position.

Now understanding all those limitations when you throw a 24 on the front and shorten the seat tube while retaining 700 rear wheel you get the gearing but have fixed the toe overlap problem while retain the better geometry that bikes over 56cm have. Its "Function following form".

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...-who-is-5-tall

Thanks for the link to the other BF thread. There is some great info there.... and links.

Grim, first lemme thank you for addressing my points directly. I appreciate that.

Second, lemme say you are totally right in what you say. I disagree, however, with some of what you didn't say.

As for crank arm length and BB height, yes, you hit the nail on the head. But "quality" is dispensible. You can get perfectly good BMX cranks in 140, 145, 150, 155, etc. sizes. It's a little trickier to find cranks drilled for triples, but this too can be done. There's a quite cheap 'Forza' crank that takes 130 BCD rings and a third ring, available in 145 and 155. Lovely it ain't; perfectly functional it is.

Okay, my last paragraph is not really fair; you should ask: Were these available 20 years ago? Dunno. But I have no doubt they would have been available had Terry propositioned the manufacturers. Anyway, there certainly were 175 cranks that could be lopped down the customary 22 mm to 153's to fit a smaller rider. My real beef with Terry is that she didn't see this as necessary; sure, let a 5' woman hammer a 170 crank, while I, a 6' man, prefer 150's. She'll just 'spin' along at 50 rpm and hate cycling. No problem. I think the fact is, Terry either didn't think of this, or didn't care about her customer enough; either way, fail.


As for gearing, yes, it is true, a 14T cog was for many years the smallest you could find on any freewheel, and a 13T on a Sturmey Archer hub was pretty unusual. But again, had Terry cared about her customers she could have found a manufacturer who would produce some 56T or 60T chain rings. It's not complicated; it's only expensive if you want one of them. Order a few hundred, and I have no doubt the price will drop. Aside from that, the classic 14/52 combo is way overgeared. It's not just that most riders don't need it; but most riders are better off without it. Learn to spin, dammit! I can't blame Terry for not recognizing this, since no one else seemed to get it; but still, fact remains, she either didn't get it or figured her customers wouldn't.

Did Terry really investigate these possibilities? I don't know. If not, why not? I don't know that either. I'd be interested.

I do know that some ten or twelve years ago my wife got an advertising flyer from Terry, showing these odd looking bikes of hers, and my wife's reaction was: why can't I have a bike designed for my geometry? It got her thinking about what she needed, and what she was willing to spend; all this was good. We did some research and found a store that carried Terry bikes. We went there. She test rode one of those strange looking 700/24 bikes. Then she rode a 650c Bianchi, same frame size as the Terry. She preferred the latter, bought it, and still rides it. Why? Dunno. But the fact remains, that by producing something strange looking, which catches the eye, Terry opened my wife's eyes to the fact that her needs were not being met by what she was riding. For this, I salute Terry. For her bicycle design, well, what do I know, I'm a man!