1980's bicycle geometry?!?!

[paredown]

Originally Posted by warren128

This is a very interesting and timely thread for me. When I was a teen in 1974, my dad and I went to a local bike shop to buy a Raleigh for me. My dad's already stretched budget could only afford a Super Course. I remember the salesman/owner asked me to try various bikes by straddling the bike, and after looking me over on top of a couple of bikes, pronounced that a 23 1/2" frame was the right size for me. I'm 5' 10". So I loved that bike, and I rode around with very little seatpost showing, and a relatively short stem. It wasn't until years later that I realized that my optimum size is a 56cm square frame.

I recently was hit by N+1 fever, and I impulsively searched for a 80s steel frame/fork to be a stablemate to my 1987 Raleigh 531c. As luck would have it, I found one, a 1980 Carlton, and then shortly after that, I found a 1986 Pro Miyata locally for a great price, all original.

I recently finished a badly needed rebuild of the Carlton, you've seen the thread. But I have not had a chance to spend time with the Pro Miyata yet, but I'm looking forward to ride experiences with these old bikes.

Interestingly, the 1980 Carlton Super Course appeared in the 1980 catalog as 74/74 degrees parallel frame geometry, but in actuality, my frame is 73 seat and 74 degrees head tube angles. I'm sure the Miyata has similarly steep angles.

original_ce120ccb-999a-4094-b864-051d8cf36eac_IMG_20240305_171052676 (1) by warren t., on Flickr

Nice.

I too started in 1971 on a bike built with a taller seat tube and shorter top tube, which in retrospect was probably one size too large, but i fit pretty well on it because I have long legs/short torso.