Rutnick

or

Lemond
Trek
Specialized

the list goes on...

It seems the traditional frames are going away other than custom.

timmyquest

Why is it so difficult for you to understand that this is something fairly new and that people trying to understand it doesn't make them morons. I don't think i ever said i didn't "embrace" anything, i simply stated that it is something new. I am trying to understand it in another thread then some tool comes and calls people a bunch of idiots for doing so and not being born with the knowledge of compact frame geometry.

Get off your damn high horse.

Rutnick

I said it wasn't "rocket science" and nowhere did I call anyone "moron".

You're the "tool" that implied the rest but I'm not going back to get some knowledge from a thread that has 25 pages of "which frame" when you can just look at the geometry of the frame. Thow out the ST length because that is meaningless and go with angles and TT length.

It really isn't all that "new".

Rutnick

wrong

timmyquest

Don't be coy

You ever take a reading comprehension class?

"fairly" would imply slightly
"unorthodox" would imply untraditional

You yourself are comparing this frame to being untraditional, i said kind of...get it?

Rutnick

It seems you are failing on the 1st part.

English on the 2nd part. That sentence is wrong on so many levels.

When the largest bike companies have geometries that are very similar, it is the norm. Trek would have gone to the sloping TT years ago had Lance not squashed it.

timmyquest

Correct.

You said yourself that this frame is untraditional thus making the other frame traditional.

Better?

Care to get back on topic or have you not demonstrated to the forum that your internet dick is very large, yet.

Rutnick

actually, it is the norm now. Not too many companies are making the "traditional" frames anymore so the new frames become the standard.

I merely said figuring it out wasn't "rocket science". You are the one that goes off and starts the flame war with poor spelling and grammar to boot.

As far as reading comprehension, you are the one that reads into statements whatever you wish and then responds.

timmyquest

You are insulting people who are trying to understand. What is the motivation for this? It's not rocket science?

I'm 5'10", 31" inseam. My current frame is 56cm and has a TT of 55cm and i feel that the top tube is too long. What frame should i get? It's not rocket science...so lets hear it.

Rutnick

that's for you to decide and not 20 more pages of asking people. I'm not going back to read your ST or HT angles, your stem length or your riding history. I have no idea why you think a 55cm TT is too long and if you wanted me to care then you should have probably NOT starting calling someone a "tool" or whatever else you said.

Basically, if you want my blunt answer then it would be a 52 and get over it.

bdcheung

Catfight!

timmyquest

My point is that my questions and others in that thread were good natured and they aren't really deserving of ridicule, especially when they are questions in an attempt to understand and your attack is based on the idea that they don't.

What fools we are!

Bike Lover

Dude, give it up. He's nothing but a troll. He'll start arguing various things that don't even relate to the topic at hand in apparent hopes of trying to get you down to his level. That of a first grade reading comprehension.

Rutnick

You beat around the bush long enough.

You've picked the wrong forum and wrong sport to be this thin skinned.

Rutnick

hey, the definition of troll just showed up.

I started the thread. Timmy changed it. I stated picking the frame wasn't rocket science and you came trolling around.

Good work.

timmyquest

The internet really makes you feel tough doesn't it

Rutnick

I didn't start the "tool" or other references.

Listen, I went back and read your last post on the other thread. You are looking at it wrong. The chart isn't showing you riding a larger frame. It shows a Medium for you. Go with the smaller of the two. You COULD fit a large frame giant but really, it should be a medium. On a compact frame, there is TT length and effective TT. The effective is more of a "virtual TT" meaning that the TT is really longer than the actual because of the frame angles and slope of the TT.

With that said, my bet is a 53 in the PD deal but hey...I just know what works for me and that's between a 56 and 58cm TT depending of the geometry of the frame. 57.5cm on my Lemond. 57x57 on my steel lemond. 57.0 on the pedal force. 56x56 on my Miele from the 80s. 56x56 from my 80s steel trek and 57 on my Raleigh One Way. 56TT and nearly a 60cm seat tube on my 80s Lotus.

/thread closed

timmyquest

Being nice feels good, doesn't it?

prendrefeu

Timmy!

timmyquest

Unoriginal

OldRoadGuy

Yeah.... but what size frame should I get?

timmyquest

A good question!

yogi13

Funny, I have about the same proportions as you, own two road bikes now: one is a compact with a 56.5 TT and a c-t of 52, the other is a classic that is about a 54-54. I feel cramped on the smaller frame, the other one fits me like a dream. I'm getting the size large in the group buy (57 TT, 55 c-t), which has an overall geometry close to my compact. I debated for awhile about getting the 55/52, but worried I'd be a bit too cramped on it. Of course, I have extremely long arms for my height, also have great flexibility and good core strength, so my posture while on the hoods is about as low as a lot of folks in the drops; YMMV.

Did you try the fitting aid on the PF site? They have one that works on your body measurements, and if you have an existing frame that fits there is another that will tweak the setup by recommending a stem length and angle, and I think seat setback. Suggest you get someone to help you make accurate measurements per the instructions on the fitting aid site before you commit to a final frame size.

timmyquest

This is why i haven't. There are only two people in my life i think would go along with that, they are both in illinois at the moment.

My flexibility is great, i've worked on my core a lot this winter. As i mentioned to someone else, the problem isn't my back, it's more in my arms and wrists. I don't think i have overly short arms, but they certainly are not long.

elgalad

You are a first-order tool. Congratulations.