Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

Frame size- what size do you see in this picture?

Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

Frame size- what size do you see in this picture?

Old 08-06-12, 04:45 AM
  #1  
MIKE is my name!
Thread Starter
 
puchfinnland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: finland,baltimore
Posts: 2,846

Bikes: hans lutz, , puch mistral ultima,2x Austro Daimler Smoked chrome Ultima,Austro Daimler Mixte,Austro Daimler 531 mixte, flying arrow,F Moser,

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 4 Posts
Frame size- what size do you see in this picture?

People have different opinion on how to measure a frame.

look at the picture and write the size you think it is.

there is no answer known, just you opinion.
mike
puchfinnland is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 04:46 AM
  #2  
MIKE is my name!
Thread Starter
 
puchfinnland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: finland,baltimore
Posts: 2,846

Bikes: hans lutz, , puch mistral ultima,2x Austro Daimler Smoked chrome Ultima,Austro Daimler Mixte,Austro Daimler 531 mixte, flying arrow,F Moser,

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 4 Posts
puchfinnland is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 04:53 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
rootboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Wherever
Posts: 16,748
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 132 Times in 78 Posts
I see a 58. But, more interestingly, what are those two machines behind the frame?
rootboy is offline  
Likes For rootboy:
Old 08-06-12, 04:55 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Gary Fountain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Hervey Bay, Qld, Australia.
Posts: 2,928

Bikes: Colnago (82, 85, 89, 90, 91, 96, 03), 85 Cinelli, 90 Rossin, 83 Alan, 82 Bianchi, 78 Fountain, 2 x Pinarello, Malvern Star (37), Hillman (70's), 80's Beretto Lo-Pro Track, 80's Kenevans Lo-Pro, Columbus Max (95), DeGrandi (80's) Track.

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 179 Post(s)
Liked 197 Times in 123 Posts
57 c to c
Gary Fountain is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 04:56 AM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,863

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1853 Post(s)
Liked 659 Times in 502 Posts
There's no way to say for sure, your scale is covering the seat lug.

But assuming the scale starts at the center of the BB, my best guess is the center to center is about 57 cm. To the top of the top tube, the seat tube length looks like about 58 or 58.5.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 05:04 AM
  #6  
MIKE is my name!
Thread Starter
 
puchfinnland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: finland,baltimore
Posts: 2,846

Bikes: hans lutz, , puch mistral ultima,2x Austro Daimler Smoked chrome Ultima,Austro Daimler Mixte,Austro Daimler 531 mixte, flying arrow,F Moser,

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by rootboy
what are those two machines behind the frame?
self built router table- smartlift digital,bosch 1017 motor- no expense spared.
thickness planer- cheap one


This is so funny how many different answers one can get on a question we should all agree on!

do I need to take a picture inline with the seat tube?
puchfinnland is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 05:22 AM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Michael Angelo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hurricane Alley , Florida
Posts: 3,903

Bikes: Treks (USA), Schwinn Paramount, Schwinn letour,Raleigh Team Professional, Gazelle GoldLine Racing, 2 Super Mondias, Carlton Professional.

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked 30 Times in 22 Posts
If it was C-T-C I would say 56.5
Michael Angelo is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 05:23 AM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
rootboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Wherever
Posts: 16,748
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 132 Times in 78 Posts
Which brings to mind the question, which is the correct standard? C to C ? Or C to T ?
That ought to muddy up your thread a bit, Mike !

Last edited by rootboy; 08-06-12 at 06:22 AM.
rootboy is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 06:22 AM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
Lenton58's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sendai, Japan: Tohoku region (Northern Honshu))
Posts: 1,785

Bikes: Vitus 979, Simplon 4-Star, Woodrup, Gazelle AB, Dawes Atlantis

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 58 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 42 Posts
Any linear measurement is from point 'A' to point 'B'. Since this is not defined .... As for the standard that I personally go by when it comes to fit, this frame is a 56.5.

My first build was made on another assumption: I was considering C-T as opposed to C-C, which is more my size in terms of ST. It did not fit. I will not be repeating the same error in the future.
__________________
Vitus 979, Simplon 4 Star, Gazelle Champion Mondial, Woodrup Giro, Dawes Atlantis
Lenton58 is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 06:37 AM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: STP
Posts: 14,491
Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 821 Post(s)
Liked 254 Times in 141 Posts
Originally Posted by Gary Fountain
57 c to c
Works for me as well.

Can't do a ctt with that pic.
gomango is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 06:38 AM
  #11  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 807
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 56 Post(s)
Liked 9 Times in 5 Posts
When designing or building, the way to measure is C to C. When buying or selling, the way to measure is C to T. I started riding in 1972 when everything was C to C but somewhere along the way, in the late 70s or early 80s, some marketing genius decided that C to T was a better way to measure. I assume that this was done to allow a customer to gauge standover height, never mind that variability in bottom bracket height invalidates this.
busdriver1959 is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 06:38 AM
  #12  
Gone World Hepster
 
23skidoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Lincoln, NE
Posts: 1,211
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 4 Posts
+1 on 56.5cm c-t-c. Some makers measure c-t-t and I've had frames that were stamped accordingly.
23skidoo is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 06:46 AM
  #13  
MIKE is my name!
Thread Starter
 
puchfinnland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: finland,baltimore
Posts: 2,846

Bikes: hans lutz, , puch mistral ultima,2x Austro Daimler Smoked chrome Ultima,Austro Daimler Mixte,Austro Daimler 531 mixte, flying arrow,F Moser,

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 4 Posts
reason for asking is I am looking for a frame for the wifey
any cheap 531 with shift bosses, this size or slightly bigger.- I have a Crescent mixte frame that is a tank- but the components are ok-it has indexed suntour DT shifters and that is a plus for da wifey.

there is one in Austria that is interesting and seller says C T C is 56

apples and oranges- I just want the same framesize or bigger
puchfinnland is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 07:01 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
SJX426's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 9,578

Bikes: '65 Frejus TDF, '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '89 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8

Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1606 Post(s)
Liked 2,211 Times in 1,102 Posts
I prefer CTC measurements, its the engineer and designer in me. The picture does not allow for a good measurement guess as the edge of the ruler should be along the center of the ST. I am inclined to belive the other end is not on the crank axis CL, if it is, it is closer to 57 with the extrapolation of the TT CL.
SJX426 is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 07:04 AM
  #15  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 30

Bikes: 81 Specialized Sequoia, 87 Wangel, 85 Specialized Stumpjumper, 86 Bridgestone Atlantis, 94 Yeti Pro FRO

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I'd guess it would be closer to 57 CTC if the measurement is done with the ruler's marked edge running along the center line of the seat tube and the reading taken at the intersection point of the seat tube and the top tube.
sd8450 is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 07:06 AM
  #16  
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 30

Bikes: 81 Specialized Sequoia, 87 Wangel, 85 Specialized Stumpjumper, 86 Bridgestone Atlantis, 94 Yeti Pro FRO

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
SJX426 beat me to it
sd8450 is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 07:09 AM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
ColonelJLloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Louisville
Posts: 8,343
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 111 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 10 Posts
Originally Posted by SJX426
I prefer CTC measurements, its the engineer and designer in me. The picture does not allow for a good measurement guess as the edge of the ruler should be along the center of the ST. I am inclined to belive the other end is not on the crank axis CL, if it is, it is closer to 57 with the extrapolation of the TT CL.
+1
__________________
Bikes on Flickr
I prefer email to private messages. You can contact me at justinhughes@me.com
ColonelJLloyd is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 07:49 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
rootboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Wherever
Posts: 16,748
Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 132 Times in 78 Posts
I'm glad so many here prefer C to C. That's the way I learned it, but sheepishly added my guess as C to T, because I thought that was the accepted norm these days.
rootboy is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 08:38 AM
  #19  
Get off my lawn!
 
Velognome's Avatar
 
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
57 cTc but would appear as a 60cm on eBay or CL
Velognome is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 09:11 AM
  #20  
Senior Member
 
himespau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,440
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4219 Post(s)
Liked 2,940 Times in 1,800 Posts
Gotta move that rule ~1.43 cm to the left.
__________________
Bikes: 1996 Eddy Merckx Titanium EX, 1989/90 Colnago Super(issimo?) Piu(?), 1990 Concorde Aquila(hit by car while riding), others in build queue "when I get the time"





himespau is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 09:52 AM
  #21  
Senior Member
 
1987's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 859

Bikes: Cinelli SC 1971, Daccordi 1985

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Liked 8 Times in 8 Posts
C-T ~ 58,0 cm
C-C ~ 56,5 cm
1987 is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 10:49 AM
  #22  
Senior Member
 
mikemowbz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 1,324

Bikes: Are several.

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 79 Post(s)
Liked 75 Times in 21 Posts
C-t-C makes most sense to me, but that's just what I'm used to.

That said, I don't much care as long as the method employed is explicit. Not that it matters much when the measurements provided on ebay or CL are several cms different from either possibility...

I'd sight this one as ~57cm (c-t-c) based on the pic, but reserve judgment within ~.5cm based on the pic/placement of the ruler/measuring tape.

Heck, when I post ads or describe size for other purposes, I typically make sure to use that '~' symbol to note that my measurements are always approximate anyways.

Last edited by mikemowbz; 08-06-12 at 05:03 PM.
mikemowbz is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 10:52 AM
  #23  
Cat 6
 
Ex Pres's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Mountain Brook, AL
Posts: 7,482
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 500 Post(s)
Liked 183 Times in 118 Posts
56.5 or 58, but the real question is - what is the TT length?
__________________
72 Frejus (for sale), Holdsworth Record (for sale), special CNC & Gitane Interclub / 74 Italvega NR (for sale) / c80 French / 82 Raleigh Intl MkII f&f (for sale)/ 83 Trek 620 (for sale)/ 84 Bruce Gordon Chinook (for sale)/ 85 Ron Cooper / 87 Centurion IM MV (for sale) / 03 Casati Dardo / 08 BF IRO / 09 Dogma FPX / 09 Giant TCX0 / 10 Vassago Fisticuff








Ex Pres is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 11:13 AM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: STP
Posts: 14,491
Mentioned: 74 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 821 Post(s)
Liked 254 Times in 141 Posts
Originally Posted by Ex Pres
56.5 or 58, but the real question is - what is the TT length?
I agree.

Changes the whole discussion for me, as I am rather intolerant of an incorrect tt length.
gomango is offline  
Old 08-06-12, 11:19 AM
  #25  
MIKE is my name!
Thread Starter
 
puchfinnland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: finland,baltimore
Posts: 2,846

Bikes: hans lutz, , puch mistral ultima,2x Austro Daimler Smoked chrome Ultima,Austro Daimler Mixte,Austro Daimler 531 mixte, flying arrow,F Moser,

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Liked 20 Times in 4 Posts
you guys.....
Yes the bottom is zero, you think I would use quality Japanese stainless scale if I didnt????

here is the rule tilted back...

puchfinnland is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.