[RBW] Sizing on a A Homer Hilsen

[tucker]

Hi all, my PBH is 89 and I'm trying to decide between a 63 or 61 A
Homer Hilsen. Someone told me the listed standovers are a bit high.
I will be running the bike with 35 mm tires, or 23-24 wide rims.
anyone have any experience with this or the true standover of a 63
frame, or with sizing up in general. I know this has been covered a
bit here, but i can't help obsessing over this purchase. thanks.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.

[cyclotourist]

I'm 89 PBH, and have two 61cm frames.  If you like your bars to be at saddle height with a "normal" stem, that'll work fine.  If you want them higher and don't want to use a Dirt Drop type stem, go with the 63 IMHO.

That said, if I was getting an AHH, I'd get a 63.

--
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

"Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym."  ~Bill Nye, scientist guy

[amoll68]

Hi Tucker,

It's worth obsessing over. I imagine you're wishing for a 62?

This 63cm AHH with 35mm Supremes, has a stand over height just under
87cm (measured just forward of the BB spindle):
http://www.flickr.com/photos/39151498@N07/sets/72157622960184871/

My PBH is around 91, and BB to center of my Brooks B17 is 80cm (I ride
with sit bones on the higher back end of the saddle.) The stem is 9cm,
approximately level with the saddle, and H-bars are 48 Nitto Noodles -
which reminds me that the TT length on the 63 is 1.5cm longer than the
61. Gotta think about that fit, too. I have a relatively long torso,
and this setup feels dialed in to me. (I'm 6' 3", if that helps at
all.) 64cm is a good size for me also, and I even have a porteur style
bike that's about a 66 - but that has swept back bars.

Depending on your torso and that TT length, I'd lean toward the bigger
size myself. Have you called RBW?

Good luck!

Alex
Seattle, WA

On May 10, 9:21 pm, cyclotourist <cyclotour...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm 89 PBH, and have two 61cm frames.  If you like your bars to be at saddle
> height with a "normal" stem, that'll work fine.  If you want them higher and
> don't want to use a Dirt Drop type stem, go with the 63 IMHO.
>
> That said, if I was getting an AHH, I'd get a 63.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:23 PM, tucker <jamison.bross...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi all, my PBH is 89 and I'm trying to decide between a 63 or 61 A
> > Homer Hilsen.  Someone told me the listed standovers are a bit high.
> > I will be running the bike with 35 mm tires, or 23-24 wide rims.
> > anyone have any experience with this or the true standover of a 63
> > frame, or with sizing up in general.  I know this has been covered a
> > bit here, but i can't help obsessing over this purchase.  thanks.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> > "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to

> > rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com<rbw-owners-bunch%2Bunsubscrib e...@googlegroups.com>
> > .

[Mike]

I have a PBH of 91, SH of 80 and a 63cm Hilsen with a 10cm stem just a
touch below the saddle. It's my favorite fitting bike. I also have a
62 Ram which is a touch small and a 64 QB which is a tad big. Given
these three bikes I feel like it's easy to comment on going small, big
and perfect. well, perfect speaks for itself right. It appears you're
in-between sizes. I say go big! But call Riv and talk to them.

My QB has Panaracer T-Serve 700x35 and a higher BB height but I still
have enough SO height. On my Hilsen I've ridden tires from 32 to 41
and SO has never been a problem.

I can't stress this enough, call the folks at Riv and discuss it with
them. They're sooooooo nice and helpful.

--mike

[tucker]

Thanks everyone,
I did call Rivendell, and they told me i could go with either size.
On my current bike a custom track frame. The standover is 84.5, the
top tup is 59cm and stem a 110 nitto pearl is about 4 cm below my
seat. My saddle height is right around 78.5. I am planning on using a
nitto dirt drop stem with mustache bars. I guess i am leaning towards
the larger frame, so i can get higher handle bars easier.

[MKahrl]

I also have a PBH of 89cm and ride a 61cm AHH with the handlebars
level with the seat. I had been using a 90mm stem but now I use 120
and it's much better.

> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[cyclotourist]

I've found that w/ M-bars, you want the stem ~2cm shorter (closer) than you would w/ drops.

YMMV

[Patrick in VT]

On May 11, 9:22 am, tucker <jamison.bross...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks everyone,
> I did call Rivendell, and they told me i could go with either size.
> On my current bike a custom track frame. The standover is 84.5, the
> top tup is 59cm and stem a 110 nitto pearl is about 4 cm below my
> seat. My saddle height is right around 78.5. I am planning on using a
> nitto dirt drop stem with mustache bars. I guess i am leaning towards
> the larger frame, so i can get higher handle bars easier.

with a saddle height 78.5, you're going to have very little seatpost
showing on a 63, so spend some time thinking about where you want the
bars. assuming you don't want the bars at/above saddle height, you
might not be able to get the bars *low* enough with dirtdrop/m-bar set
up.

i recall seeing a rockin' AHH recently (maybe jinxed's?) - the
dirtdrop stem is fully inserted and the bars still look "up" for his
riding style (he rides stuff where it helps to have a bit of bar
drop).

and speaking of riding style ... standover clearance is a personal
thing. if you think you don't need it for whatever kind of riding
your doing, that's cool. i'm intimate with the top tubes on some of
my bikes too. but, if you're going to be rough-riding, and anticipate
needing to put a foot down every now and then, especially in places
where it's not always convenient to put a foot down - standover
helps. or, if you plan on loading up your hilsen for a tour of sorts
- having more standover helps. and i can't imagine that you're going
to have much on a 63. just something to consider.

[tucker]

stocking feet pbh is 89, with sneakers on it moves up to 92.5. I have
big feet (size 13). The bike will mostly be ridden as a commuter in
NYC. If the actual standover with 35mm tires is 87 or so, that would
give me 5.5 cm standover, over two inches. If it follows that the 61
would have 85 standover on 35 mm tires, that would give me three
inches of standover, which seems like alot, for even a country bike.
On a 63 my saddle will be approximately 15.5 cm above the top tube,
that seems like i will get the requisite fistfull of post. Maybe im
wrong, Im just afraid on the 61 i will have trouble getting the handle
bars a couple cm above the saddle. thanks for all the input.

[wile]

I have a PBH of 89 and ride a 63cm AHH. I was given the exact same
option from Rivendell - either 61 or 63 would work. However, Rich
advised me that with handlebars set up the same way (shorter stem on
the 63), the 63 would handle better. I'm very happy with the 63. I
have a small handful of seatpost showing - 3" or so, and with the stem
sticking 2" out of the headset, both are level. The top of the seat
and the crook of the stem are both about 6" above the top tube and the
bike looks perfectly proportioned. I think if I raise the stem up to
the max, it ends up about 2" above the top of the saddle. I ride 40c
Schwalbe Marathons and ride the bike mostly for commuting. Keep in
mind that when you stop and put a foot down at lights, etc. you have
even more standover height because one foot is up on the pedal.

Dylan

[Seth Vidal]

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:51 PM, wile <dylanm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have a PBH of 89 and ride a 63cm AHH.  I was given the exact same
> option from Rivendell - either 61 or 63 would work.  However, Rich
> advised me that with handlebars set up the same way (shorter stem on
> the 63), the 63 would handle better.  I'm very happy with the 63.  I
> have a small handful of seatpost showing - 3" or so, and with the stem
> sticking 2" out of the headset, both are level.  The top of the seat
> and the crook of the stem are both about 6" above the top tube and the
> bike looks perfectly proportioned.  I think if I raise the stem up to
> the max, it ends up about 2" above the top of the saddle.  I ride 40c
> Schwalbe Marathons and ride the bike mostly for commuting.  Keep in
> mind that when you stop and put a foot down at lights, etc. you have
> even more standover height because one foot is up on the pedal.
>

Dylan,
if you wouldn't mind, just to humor me - measure from the tip of your
saddle to the middle of the flats on your handlebars.

I'm curious what that distance is.

thanks
-sv

[wile]

Ha - no problem. It's sitting right in front of me - every week is
bike to work week here :)

Exactly 21.75 inches from the very tip of the saddle (B-17 Team
Professional) to the center of the stem clamp.



On May 11, 1:03 pm, Seth Vidal <skvi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[wile]

Oh yeah - stem is 9cm.

On May 11, 1:03 pm, Seth Vidal <skvi...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Doug Van Cleve]

Tucker,

A Dirt Drop stem is pretty tall (altitude) and pretty short (extension).  M-bars want a stem 2-3cm shorter than the same bike with drop bars.  If the bigger frame most likely requires a short stem for you, you might find it hard to get m-bars close enough.  Me personally, I would never buy a frame that would require a stem shorter than 8-9cm extension with drop bars.  There are several tall Nitto stems, Technomic Deluxe, Technomic, Dirt Drop.  I can't imagine that you wouldn't be able to get the bars high enough using one of them.  RBW designs fit small, due to the low BB, but if you are on a bike that is the right size (a lot of folks come to RBW having been riding bikes several sizes too small), I think your RBW fit is going to be good on a bike that size or maybe 1 size up.

Doug

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:22 AM, tucker <jamison....@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks everyone,
I did call Rivendell, and they told me i could go with either size.
On my current bike a custom track frame.  The standover is 84.5, the

top tube is 59cm and stem a 110 nitto pearl is about 4 cm below my

seat. My saddle height is right around 78.5.  I am planning on using a
nitto dirt drop stem with mustache bars.  I guess i am leaning towards
the larger frame, so i can get higher handle bars easier.

[tucker]

Im definately going with the 63cm Hilsen, and I just ordered a 60
Bombadil. Thanks for your input.
jamison

[Blindrobert]

I have a 63 for sale, with S&S couplers - if you haven't already
ordered the new one!

[Rene Sterental]

I have an 89.5 PBH and the 60 Bombadil feels pretty high "up there". As I try bigger tires on the Bombadil, my concerns grow to the point I'm now starting to have second thoughts. I ride a 61 AHH and it fits perfectly; I'm actually considering a 61 Atlantis now... just thinking!

 

René

On May 11, 7:59 pm, tucker <jamison.bross...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Im definately going with the 63cm Hilsen, and I just ordered a 60
> Bombadil. Thanks for your input.
> jamison
>

[jamison brosseau]

I actually got my 63cm hilsen, and i have just over an inch of space,
the top tube fits perfectly. I really think a 61 would have been too
small for me, and would have been close to not being able to get my
bars higher than my saddle. my saddle height is right at 79, i'm not
too worried about the 60cm bombadil, most of the time i will have one
foot on the peddle when i stop, and that gives me even more room.
its funny that i was so worried about the size at the time, i remeber
as a kid riding my dads schwinn world tour that was way too big for
me, i rode it off road, on mountain biking trails, and did small dirt
jumps with it . i wasn't even tall enough to sit on the saddle. had
to stand the whole time. never hurt myself once, until i tried to
drop in with it on tom jone's half pipe. any how i wouldn't ride a
bike that big now, but i had fun didn't get hurt.
i guess two extra centimeters doesn't meen too much to me.
if your thinking atlantis, what about the hunquapillar?
jamison

[Rene Sterental]

My saddle height on both bikes is set at 76.5cm; with your saddle height I do agree that standover with the 60 Bombadil should not be an issue. I haven't hurt myself, but I always get very conscious of the top tube height when straddling the bike, especially if wearing sandals... :-)

 

I don't quite feel atracted to the Hunqa... can't really say why... if I ended up swapping frames, I think I'd be more comfortable with the Atlantis. It's a bike that is somehow growing on me after my intial reaction of rejection during my pre-Riv days... :-)

 

I do love my Bombadil, in the end, perhaps I'll just keep it and just ride it with up to 700x50 tires to keep the standover height manageable.

 

René

[jamison brosseau]

its funny cause the atlantis was the first riv bike i was interested
in. i plan on getting another next year, but am afraid the 61 would
be too small. when i was concerned about the 61 vs 63 Keven suggested
i just ride the 63 for a while and see what i thought. I couldn't be
happier. Out of curiosity how tall are you. I am 6 ft even.
thanks jamison

[EricP]

This is an interesting conversation. Every time I think about getting
an even bigger frame, end up thinking more about reach more than
standover. Based on these statements, I should be trying a 63cm
frame. Yet about a year and a half ago straddled a 62 orange
Quickbeam. The reach was so far my arms were fully extended on the
hoods. Couldn't really even get to the drops.

Maybe that bike had an unusually long stem. But to get that bike to
work for me, would probably need a 7 or 8cm stem.

Eric Platt
St. Paul, MN

On May 18, 7:10�pm, jamison brosseau <jamison.bross...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> its funny cause the atlantis was the first riv bike i was interested
> in. �i plan on getting another next year, but am afraid the 61 would
> be too small. �when i was concerned about the 61 vs 63 Keven suggested
> i just ride the 63 for a while and see what i thought. �I couldn't be
> happier. �Out of curiosity how tall are you. �I am 6 ft even.
> thanks jamison
>
> On May 18, 7:40�pm, Rene Sterental <orthie...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > My saddle height on both bikes is set at 76.5cm; with your saddle height I
> > do agree that standover with the 60 Bombadil should not be an issue. I
> > haven't hurt myself, but I always get very conscious of the top tube height
> > when straddling the bike, especially if wearing sandals... :-)
>
> > I don't quite feel atracted to the Hunqa... can't really say why... if I
> > ended up swapping frames, I think I'd be more comfortable with the Atlantis.
> > It's a bike that is somehow growing on me after my intial reaction of
> > rejection during my pre-Riv days... :-)
>
> > I do love my Bombadil, in the end, perhaps I'll just keep it and just ride
> > it with up to 700x50 tires to keep the standover height manageable.
>

> > Ren�

>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
> To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.

> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[Rene Sterental]

I'm 5'11". It seems to me that I might have a shorter torso but long arms and long legs. However, I've never been able to figure it out... :-)

 

When I went for my first fit, they immediately put me on the 61 AHH and also had me test ride the Atlantis, I believe the 61 as well. I initially thought the 61 AHH was too big (coming from where I was coming from) so Mark had me test ride Grant's 58 AHH. After I did that, I realized the 61 was a better fit and trusted them from then on.

 

When I decided I also wanted a Bombadil, Keven said the 60. He even had me try out the 64, but I trusted them again. After I got my 60 frame and built it up, I was initially concerned with the standover height as I had had to adpat to the higher standover height on the AHH compared to my previoius bikes, but had had no issues with the AHH. I even went back and they offered to take it back, but after test riding the 56, I found it too cramped and said I was keeping my 60.

 

That is my story and I'm sticking to it! :-)

[Rene Sterental]

That's why I have 8 cm stems on my AHH and my Bombadil. If I wanted to
run longer stems, I'd definitely need smaller frames. The issue would
then be how much vertical stem and seatpost get exposed to get the
proper heights and relationships. I could place the handlebar below
the saddle... Oh wait! That's how I rode pre-Rivendell and I had the
hand, neck and shoulder pain...

I think I'm happy with my short 8 cm stems... ;-)

René

--
Sent from my mobile device

[cyclotourist]

Hey, I'm the same size and pretty excited about the 54cm Hunq.  It's gonna' have around effective 60cm reach, single top tube and 700c X 60mm wheels.  That could be perfect!

--
Cheers,
David
Redlands, CA

"Bicycling is a big part of the future. It has to be. There is something wrong with a society that drives a car to workout in a gym."  ~Bill Nye, scientist guy

[Frederick, Steve]

Bear in mind too that Noodles have a longish reach if you set them up flat-ramped. So a stem that's a cm or two shorter than one might expect to run for a given frame size isn't that uncommon...

Steve

[Patrick in VT]

On May 18, 8:23 pm, Rene Sterental <orthie...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm 5'11". It seems to me that I might have a shorter torso but long arms
> and long legs. However, I've never been able to figure it out... :-)

not sure about the long legs - your saddle height (76.5) seems a touch
low for a leggy 5'11."

>I could place the handlebar below the saddle... Oh wait! That's how I rode >pre-Rivendell and I had the hand, neck and shoulder pain...

there are many variables involved in a good bike fit. lots and lots
and lots of folks ride with the bars below the saddle with zero
problems. not meaning to take away from the "bars-up" approach, but
it's not the only way to be comfortable on a bike.

have you considered a professional bike fitting? it's not cheap, but
some folks really benefit from that.