--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/052b4ce0-9cf3-47f8-8587-42f931e5aed2%40googlegroups.com.
More room for a dropper seatpost :)
Oh, yeah misread on my part as well. Hmm, I'm not sure one would want shorter seat tube on a step through.--
On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 10:24:46 AM UTC-5, Garth wrote:Phil k, the ETT length is the same .On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 8:31:40 AM UTC-5, phil k wrote:Like Joe mentioned, the smaller size would have a shorter effective top tube length, thus shortening your reach. He probably mentioned it because maybe you mentioned you intended to run it with drop bars.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
That's not actually the point of it, it was offered to Bill as a solution for bike sharing. The intention on some models was to have longer ETTs per each size frame as a general revamp of the frames. The Clems definitely got longer, as was discussed extensively in a thread dedicated to the topic.