Conference noted::bicycle

    RE .0
>Note 1855.0                 What would Larry Bird do?                 No replies
    Larry would probably have one hand-made to his specs, but since that's
    out of most of our budgets, I'd opt for the fit kit. Most shops, if
    they'll get a sale from it, will do it for free. If not, it's worth
    the expense. He might not need such a rare frame size as expected.
    I gotta believe they are out there. I've seen frames in the 64-65
    cm range in catalogs.
    
    John

    Lynn,
    
    Tell him to get a inseam mesurement for his crotch to the floor while
    in bare feet. Then multiply by the inseam length (cm) by 0.65. This
    should give him a rought estimate on the frame size he is suppose to be
    riding.
    
    Example :     Inseam     Inseam   =>  Est. Frame size
                   (in)       (cm)
    
                   35"    =   88.90   =>  57.78
                   36"    =   91.44   =>  59.44
                   38"    =   96.52   =>  62.74 etc...
    
    Note: The inseam length is not his pants length.
    
    This was taken out of the March issue of Bicycling Magazine. So as you
    can see, He might not need a 27" bike. 
    
    As for Fit Kit, I think he definitely should get one done. Find a good
    shop who does them regularly and they can give him a little more
    suggestion. Most shop who perform Fit Kit will deduct the cost if you
    purchase a bike from them.
    
    Good Luck
    
    Dave

    
    
    	Lynn,
    
    	I agree with Dave.  The 25"/63cm bike would probably be the right
        size.  I'm 6'4" with about same inseam (note:pants inseam) and the
    	63cm frame is perfect.  I do remember there was some initial
    	concern as to whether the bike would fit me so as everyone else
    	suggested.  Determine what kind of cycle he wants, find a good
    	dealer, and have a fit kit done.
    
    	Mart  

    
    
    Why are frames over 63cm so unusual?
    
    	The largest standard tube sets, Columbus "C", for example, build 
    frames no larger than about 62cm.  If you want to braze anything larger 
    than that, you need to order individual tubes.  Mass production
    builders must not be fond of special tube orders, because I see many tall
    people riding 62 or 63cm frames with overextended or mountain bike seat
    posts.  One victim of the tube makers (you know who you are!) is a hobby 
    builder who seriously considered making a frame for himself that was 
    slightly too small just because finding longer tubes is so #%&* 
    inconvenient. 
    

	I agree too, as I said to Rod the other day, most guys over 6' think
they are taller than they really are.  I would suggest a 64 max, and then keep
away from the so-called lighter models - as a fraction of such a person's
weight, it's not worth sacrificing rigidity.

    	Please look at note 3.113
    
    	I think your friend needs a smaller bike. At one time I
    	thought I needed a 27'' bike.
    
    	Scott

I'd like to add my comments agreeing with what's been discussed so far.  I'm
6' 6", and for my first racing bike went with a 64cm frame - it was too big.

Since then I've been very comfortable on 63s, and have toyed at times with
getting a 62.  I suggest your friend get advice from someone knowledgeable
about fitting a bike to the rider, unfortunately this criterion eliminates
the staff of most bike shops.  A Fit Kit would probably be a good idea.

Jim

	Perhaps tall riders should drop a line to Jan Raas and ask his 
opinions.  He looks after the Buckler team, with the following in his charge:

Van Hooydonck	1,93	6'4"
Eyk		1,92	6'3,5" (this is the guy we saw at Fusberti's, with 
			        hands like a bunch of bananas)
Goense		1,90	6'2,75"
Van der Hulst	1,90	6'2,75"
Zuijderwijk	1,90	6'2,75"
Robeet		1,89	6'2,5"
Solleveld	1,89	6'2,5"
Rayner		1,88	6'2"

Truly a team of Giants of the Road!!

Velo 2000

re .0

	Now that you've been told by just about everybody that knows 
just about everything about just about anything that anybody would 
want to know anything about that what you were looking for for your
friend is not what he should want....  here's a reply to your question

	FUJI	have (or at least HAD) frames up to 27 1/2 inches, 
measured from Bottom bracket centre to top tube centre line.  
A very large friend of mine has one, he somehow broke/split/cracked
the original, but was able to get it replaced despite the fact that it 
was ~8 years old, had been repainted twice (once when stolen, again 
when recovered) and he no longer had his receipt.  "Lifetime warranty, 
no hassle, no questions asked", etc.   Like I said he's very large and 
never gets into arguements when he takes stuff back for 
repair/replacement (-:, (-:   How large ?   Oh, large enough for a 
bigger frame if he could get one.

(from somebody who admits to not knowing anything very much about
anything that anybody would want to know anything about, etc) 

	Reg

    I saw  a  Peter  Mooney  (custom)  27" frame once. It had an extra
    reinforcing  tube,  which he thought was important on a frame that
    size.  He's at Belmont Wheelworks, so you could call him there.

--David

    Well, I figured someone would put it in long before now, but...
    
    Canondale makes both their race (SR) series and tour series (ST) in
    both 25" and 27" frames.  I've seen one of the SR400s (the black one)
    in a 27 inch frame and it looks sturdy.  The rider was 6'7" and used
    the bike in local TTs.  He loves it.  
    
    As I recall, the original question was about a touring bike...  I can
    vouch for the touring bikes - having an ST600 which I like a lot.

     I ride with a guy (Ed Ryan) who runs a Peter Mooney frame. He's
    about 6'4" and goes at least 240lbs. (runs special 42 spokers
    in the rear). I don't the exact size of the frame, but the head
    tube looks like it's the length of my seat tube.
    
     Just 5'6"...
    
       Chip

I don't know what bike Larry Bird would ride, but you can see
what kind of bike Bill Walton rides.  It's on the cover of his bike
book.  (And it sure has a long head tube.)


>     I ride with a guy (Ed Ryan) who runs a Peter Mooney frame. He's
>    about 6'4" and goes at least 240lbs. (runs special 42 spokers
>    in the rear).

42?  I'm skeptical.

-Jeff

    Pretty sure they're 42 holes - Gamache made them up special for
    him

Just an fyi, I'm nigh unto 6'5" (no clue as to inseam, but I don't 
consider myself too abnormally stretched one way or 'tother...). I took 
up riding and found what was a good fit for me before the days of 
FitKit. Anyway, to get a moderate leg extension and not extraordinary 
seatpost extension, I found that 25" is too short, but rideable (I have 
two), 25 3/4 is about perfect (1) and 26" is a bit much (1) but also 
rideable and enjoyable. I'd suggest the FitKit nowadays but it seems to 
me that the framesizes they give out tend to be on the lower end of the 
acceptable range; i.e. you probably wouldn't want to go ANY smaller than
their recommendation....
                                    ken

re  42 spoke wheels:

	I doubt it.   "Conventional"  wheels tend to have 4*i spokes, 
where i is a small integer  - -  usually less than 13, though tandems 
may go a little higher.

	I have a very nice 40 spoke rear wheel, very wide flange hub, 
threaded both sides for  "fixed"  so there is no dish  - -  very old
too, but I've told Y'all about that before (-:, :-) 

	R

    	The Schwinn World Sport, although not a top-quality bike, used to
    be available in a 27" frame.  One of the guys in our group here at work 
    owns one (he's 6'6").  I don't know if it's still available in that
    size, though...

    A bike was found!   My friend bought a Trek 1420 (size unknown) and 
    likes it a lot (except for all the flats he keeps getting). He even
    found size 14 shoes for the Look pedals (Nikes).