Cycling Equipment · Public discussion

Ridley Standover Height

Started by ksawyer · · Last activity · 1 post · 1,467 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Cycling Equipment
Published
9 November 2005
Last activity
9 November 2005
Original author
ksawyer
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
1,467
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Ok - I'm having a real hard time here. . .

    Am getting a Ridley frame and am trying to decide between their standard and sloping geometery.

    I've contacted Ridley, a bike shop, and Ridley rep and no one can/would answer my questions.

    Currently, I'm riding a 48 Cannondale with a standover height of 73.5. I could probably standover a 74.5 for 75, but much higher and I'd be way to friendly with my bike. My c'dale effective top tube is 51.5 (riding a 90 stem, so I couldn't go much shorter there) and I'm just about perfect. The smallest top tube lengths for Ridley 48's/xxs are 52 (standard) and 52.5 (sloping). I feel like the standard would be better reach-wise, but I'm concerned about standover height. Ridley does not note the standover height nor the bottom bracket height in any geometery tables.

    Anybody know?

    Thanks.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.