2nd Bike w TSDZ2 assistance, this time to help with injury

[RTIII]

Hi All,

I've had a very successful e-bike whose build thread is here:

https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=88943

Fun as it has been, it hasn't been fun when I've unfortunately twisted my left knee. Things were getting better (it was healing nicely), but as you can read in that thread, I have been using that bike as a replacement for a car and as such it's my core transportation. Eventually, raising my leg over the front or rear to mount and dismount the bike, unfortunately, have led to re-injuring my knee, making things worse. A lot worse.

To address this, I've secured a "step through" bike, which is the subject of my new build. This was not initiated through anything except a physical reality that when injured you can - as I did! - make yourself MORE injured if you continue in actions that are beyond your true physical capabilities of the moment, as it was for me. Frankly, I haven't wanted this additional experience, but ... "when life hands you lemons, you make lemonade".

To secure my new bike, I traded one in my possession (that I cared nothing about) for the one I wanted (the subject of this thread). Here's the one I traded away:



Here's my new bike upon receipt:



I'll be posting updates as I make this bike e-operational.....

 

[jcool3]

I have a step thru DiamondBack Traverse. It is easier to get on than a man's bike, but you still have to bend you knee.
Still trying to decide whether I will put TSDZ2 or a rear hub motor kit on it. Already secured 36V lithium pack. I'm also live in Oakland, near Jack London Square and work near Laney College - don't dare leave anything on the bike when I park. Take the battery (and controller?) with me.

 

[RTIII]

I have a step thru DiamondBack Traverse. It is easier to get on than a man's bike, but you still have to bend you knee.
Still trying to decide whether I will put TSDZ2 or a rear hub motor kit on it. Already secured 36V lithium pack. I'm also live in Oakland, near Jack London Square and work near Laney College - don't dare leave anything on the bike when I park. Take the battery (and controller?) with me.

Glad to find another Oaklander! DO join us on one of our monthly gatherings! We meet at an industrial space in the Coliseum area. We can PM each other to trade data. We meet on the third Saturday evening, 6PM, for a "pot luck bbq". We also meet at somewhat random times now and then for other random activities, such as attending the PedalFest the Sunday before last.

As for the TSDZ2, get the version with the VLCD-5 and the display is removable separately! What stays on the bike are otherwise useless wiring nobody's likely to steal. And yes, of course, take the battery!

 

[jcool3]

what group is this? thanks for the invite. I have a business making fabric bags, equipment cases, etc. If you need anything
sewn I would be happy to help you.

 

[RTIII]

what group is this? thanks for the invite. I have a business making fabric bags, equipment cases, etc. If you need anything
sewn I would be happy to help you.

Thanks, jcool3, I'll PM you shortly to take that conversation off this thread - not that it's not welcome here, it's just a little off topic! :wink:

Now, my new bike: as I'm hobbling around at the moment with a bum knee, I can't do too much, and also I have (finally) some strong business at the moment, and as the saying goes, make hay while the sun shines, so I've got to cater to my customers' needs as a priority. But I've got to get around... So the bike is a close second priority. (Getting more current images is NOT a priority - sorry these are kind of dim - they're from the night I got it.)

First, let me describe it and inquire if anyone has any idea what its proper name should be. On the upper cross tube, it says "TRAIL WAY", which I take is the likely "name" for this bike, but it also there says, "ALUMINUM", and just forward of the seat tube it says "WOMAN INSPIRED" (which, BTW, was one of the reasons, perhaps, I got it in this trade as the guy made a sexist remark about it as he gave me the bike. ). On the upper rear dropout support it says, "HYBRID", while on the lower it says, "SHIMANO 21 SPEED". Most of these I take it are just intended as descriptive. But a hybrid of what?

View attachment 5

So, we know it's aluminum, "21" speed (3 x 7) Schwinn with front shocks. OK, it's a low-buck Schwinn, but at least it has Shimano "accessories". I take it the 7 indicates it's a freehub cassette and a bit older, but a lot newer than my Legran - the Raleigh replica. It's got those weird-to-me (but normal now) side mounted brakes, front and rear, and it's got a hella-wide rear axle spacing - not sure the word "dropout" applies here (does that apply to all axle mounting points?), but the axle has spacers built in, so my guess is that means the bike was made at a later time when 7 speed cassettes were already on the way out. My guess about "hybrid" is that it could mean either "part road bike part mountain bike", or "part old tech, part new tech" - or both of these! :lol: ... Should I be calling this thing, "Trail Way", "Hybrid", or my original inclination, "Step Through"? :lol:

The bike came to me with a functional rear wheel. It says it's 700C/622. I tried just airing it up and that seems to have gone well. And look at the huge amount of spacing here?! It's all on the left...



View attachment 3

There is a front rim, but no tire on it. Since I have to get around, instead of waiting for shipment of one, I just took the front of my can't-ride-it-injured-anyway 27" Legran (Raleigh replica), and mounted it on the step-through! It went' remarkably well! Everyone has said that the 700C is extrordinarily close to identical to the 27" and I've got to say they're correct. The brakes practically needed no adjustment at all! ... While they work as is, later today I'll adjust them a tiny bit so the fit is perfect. My guess is that there IS an adjustment point where the brake adjustment will fit THIS 27" rim AND the 700C that came with this bike without any adjustment at all! Remarkable.

View attachment 2

Yes, the front brake was disconnected, likely to get the former tire / rim off the bike, as it was when I got it.

LUCKY ME, this bike has the same rear accessory mounts at the rear dropouts as the Legran, so I can run my trailer hitch and likely the kickstand if I want, though for the moment this bike has a functional kickstand. ... That will change when I manage to get the TSDZ2 mounted up! 8)

And speaking of mounting the TSDZ2, look at this crazy narrow chainline - the TSDZ2 will be WAY outboard of this! I haven't measured yet, but I'll bet the pant-guard is inboard of where the stock 42T chainring on the TSDZ2 will be! ... So, I have to figure out a derailleur situation. (Any advice about a very outboard front derailleur is VERY welcome!)



Meanwhile, I have to find / build a place for the battery. It won't go between the two front tubes between seat tube and front axle, and above them would make it harder to step through, so I'm thinking I'll make a new rack for it on the back like I did for my Legran, and just as that one's unique, so will this one be! But the same basic design - go with what works!

And finally, it has this crazy steering / handlebar assembly. I'm going to change / adjust it, but not quite sure what that'll be like yet. The link that the actual handlebar bolts to can be adjusted on the horizontal, and below, oriented vertically upward, it has a screw of some kind (not pictured, obviously) and I'm not sure yet what it's intended for - perhaps that screw securely locks the steering in position, so to adjust you not only loosen the horizontal transverse bolt, but also thread that vertical screw in or out to effect adjustment... Hmmm... Will take some playing to determine.

OK, on to my next steps!

 

[RTIII]

Well DAMN.

I just had an unanticipated result.

I took the bike for a short ride - unassisted by a mid-drive of course - and found that while it's a damned sight easier to mount, it has another big, possibly show-stopping issue for ME riding it: The angle of the seat tube is far too vertical!

The geometry puts the pedals too close for my long legs, forcing a super-high seat adjustment, and I think I actually re-re-re-re-injured my damned knee trying to ride the damned thing. Just as I thought I was starting to heal, I now had to go and do this! It really hurts.

So... IDK what to do about it. I could possibly raise the seat a little more, but I'm WAY not used to a seat so high above the ground. When the pedals are more forward, I gain leg room without having such altitude... I guess it's good to discover this BEFORE putting a lot of effort into the bike, but I'm truly disappointed. No idea what to do about it except try yet another frame... (Input on this very welcome.)

...In addition, the bike has some other problems. The front derailleur works OK - needs a double-pump to latch the second (of three) chainring - but the rear is stuck. The dial in front says it's on "7", but it's in the center - likely gear four. IDK (yet, I suppose) how to address this. Can't be too hard I suppose... Just something to fix. I was only really able to ride it this way on the trip I just had to do (which had a freeway overpass I had to cross over twice) because it has a super low first chainring - must be in the 30s, I guess (haven't counted yet).

 

[RTIII]

OK, so I figured out that the seat was mounted WAY more far forward than need be, so I moved it back - about 3"... Is it enough? Not sure. Since I have a great workshop, I can probably move it back several more inches if that really makes sense by modifying the seat mounting system.

I also got more data. The existing gearing - in so far as it matters - is:

Front: 28T 38T and 48T

Rear: 28, 24, 21, 19, 17, 15, 13

WAY low gearing from my point of view. 48T and 13T seems like a not great top end, while 28T / 28T is... uh, mountain climbing material.

The shocks work well enough, and I like the spring seat. If I can fix the leg length issue, I think I'd be happy with it.

The rear tire says it's: 40 - 622 700 X 38C, by Innova. It's bald on the main contact area but has tread on either side that would only engage when not straight up on hard paving. The tire pressure is modest to: 50 to 75 PSI.

Interestingly, I'd missed that the front shocks say "Sr Suntour" - with two decals and two stickers!

This thing has more stickers on it (that appear original from new) than any bike I've ever seen! There must be a dozen! And I'm NOT counting the decals, such as the ones that claim "Shimano 21 speed", etc.

 

[RTIII]

Damn, it's got a freewheel, NOT a freehub.

OTOH, I think I've got the seat position problem licked. And, I guess with how wide it is, a new rear wheel with freehub can't be that expensive. -shrug-

 

[ScooterMan101]

I have bought many things from a company called Random Bike Parts, ( Ryan at the phone or on their chat )
They have what is the cheepest prices I have ever seen on bike frames,
I will link to an orange color MTB Frame, but they have many other frames as well. https://www.randombikeparts.com/collections/frames-and-framesets/products/17-sundeal-m7-26-6061-alloy-hardtail-mountain-bike-frame-disc-orange-new

With a modern frame you can also have disc brakes, and all the other modern parts as well.

The frames are 3-6 years old, but still good since they are new.

https://www.randombikeparts.com/collections/frames-and-framesets/products/evo-vantage-5-0-55cm-large-aluminum-road-bike-frameset-fork-extras-black-new

So... IDK what to do about it. I could possibly raise the seat a little more, but I'm WAY not used to a seat so high above the ground. When the pedals are more forward, I gain leg room without having such altitude... I guess it's good to discover this BEFORE putting a lot of effort into the bike, but I'm truly disappointed. No idea what to do about it except try yet another frame... (Input on this very welcome.)

 

[RTIII]

I have bought many things from a company called Random Bike Parts, ( Ryan at the phone or on their chat ) They have what is the cheepest prices I have ever seen on bike frames.
https://www.randombikeparts.com

THANK YOU, ScooterMan! Those people are incredible! Here's the frame I like best - recall, this is about helping me while I'm injured - which is getting worse, not better, because I keep re-injuring and also can't stay off the joint for long. And I've re-injured it twice already just trying to get on my Raleigh replica (the Legran). Anyway, that frame:

https://www.randombikeparts.com/collections/frames-and-framesets/products/17-marin-san-rafael-euro-step-through-hybrid-city-bike-frame-gray-alloy-nos-new

Now THIS is a bike I could really mount very easily, which is one of two key issues regarding my injury (the second being that I don't have to bring my lower leg up so close to my ass forcing a tight knee bend). And, they have it in several colors. It's pennies less than $100, not too much, but I'm thinking the cost of the build - since it needs "everything"could be considerable if I buy it all new. OTOH, I might be able to swap over components from this step-through Schwinn - the front fork, in particular. ...As you can tell from my questions, I've never built a complete bike before, so I have a bit of learning to do - and probably a few tools to buy. And, I'd like to get a good idea whether this frame will build me up a bike that fits me! I'm not entirely sure how to determine that. So, I've got a bit of homework to do!

 

[amberwolf]

At a guess, just looking at the pics but without having both bikes in front of me, you could take everything off the one in the start of this thread and put it on the Marin frame.

The only special tools you'd probably need are a crank puller and a BB-lockring removal tool. I suspect you can easily make yourself the latter, and the former is available at any bike shop or online.

(most shops around here dont' carry any of the common BB lockring tools, and they don't want to order me one either, so I don't have any yet. I dislike ordering online, preferring local shopping where i can *see* what I'm getting).

 

[RTIII]

At a guess, just looking at the pics but without having both bikes in front of me, you could take everything off the one in the start of this thread and put it on the Marin frame.

The only special tools you'd probably need are a crank puller and a BB-lockring removal tool. I suspect you can easily make yourself the latter, and the former is available at any bike shop or online.

(most shops around here dont' carry any of the common BB lockring tools, and they don't want to order me one either, so I don't have any yet. I dislike ordering online, preferring local shopping where i can *see* what I'm getting).

Thanks, amberwolf, I'm investigating that right now. I will likely tomorrow buy either this one:

https://www.randombikeparts.com/collections/frames-and-framesets/products/17-marin-stinson-euro-step-through-hybrid-city-bike-frame-gold-alloy-nos-new

OR this NEARLY identical version.

https://www.randombikeparts.com/collections/frames-and-framesets/products/17-marin-san-rafael-euro-step-through-hybrid-city-bike-frame-gray-alloy-nos-new

Other than the name, the key difference (that I noticed) is that the San Rafael version has a parallel seat tube and head tube, while the Stinson has the head tube slightly angled for a longer wheel base. I'm thinking I want that longer wheel base. Thoughts?

IF I go ahead, keeping build price down will be crucial. So, I'm thinking I'll just move the parts over from the Legran AND the new step-through. The Legran will temporarily give up the TSDZ2 and its front wheel while the Schwinn step-through gives up nearly everything to the new Marin frame. As cash permits, I'll restore the Legran to full service - buy a second TSDZ2 WITH the hand throttle for times like this where I'm injured (but put it on the step-through, of course), etc. and I'll buy new 700C wheels / tires, etc. I'll need a second set of Kool Stops apparently! :lol: Assuming I proceed, I'll end up replacing BOTH the wheels on the new bike with either the biggest Road Bike wheels / tires I can find OR the smallest Mountain Bike wheels & tires! If anyone (Chalo?) can comment on what size that might be, now is the time I need the data!

OF COURSE, this step-through, with whichever frame, will have to do service as a "utility" vehicle, too, but given the limited torsional rigidity of such a frame, I'm thinking I'll keep it limited to a (custom) rear rack fitted with special panniers. The original pannier-style I'd done on the Legran was a plastic crate because it'll fit two grocery bags, but only with the bag's wide dimension going outward. This put a lot of load outboard - and width, too. Instead, I'm thinking of a pair of two soft-sided/bottomed two-tandem-grocery-bags-long panniers that is a lot lighter, and narrower... This would probably increase the carrying capacity while at the same time reducing torsional loads. And, I'd skip the front basket and include the trailer hitch...

Would love the thoughts of others on all of the above. As I'm about to spend money, now is the time for comments!

 

[RTIII]

One thing I've never bothered with before is learning the guessing game of bike sizing. Heretofore I've always just TRIED various bikes that were suggested, such as the Legran (the Raleigh replica). The Trail Way Step Through didn't have a front wheel that was useful for sizing at the time, I just made the swap....

In doing my homework, I have gathered that sizing a Road Bike will show up as a "larger bike" than either Mountain or Hybrid. Someone (second method of five at the link below) said that to find the size, multiple a person's inseam in cm by 0.66 to get the size of an appropriate Mountain or Hybrid Bike, by 0.685 to get the size of a "City Bike", or 0.7 to get the size needed in a Road Bike. ... No Idea If This Is Correct, just what I've found in reading up.

Of the frames I'm considering, there aren't many sizing options. For one of them, the seller has this image posted:

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0286/5998/products/365260-4_1024x1024.jpg?v=1495115132

NOTE THAT EndlessSphere truncates the image's right edge, where the key data is, so click to view the image directly (in another tab maybe).

Note that it says it should be considered a 26" frame but ALSO a 17". This is for what the manufacturer calls a "hybrid."

I'm very concerned about getting a frame of the right size... When I look at the charts and such, I find my own height and inseam don't match the population's norm. If you listen to my Doctor or the DMV, I'm either 6'2" or 6'3", but I have a 32" or so inseam - much shorter than the charts think I could have. I guess all my height is in my torso (or my big head! :lol: ) KEY POINT here is that I have the inseam of someone that several charts say should be at most 6' tall.

And in any event the charts variously say that based on inseam I should fit a 21.5+" Road Bike, or a 17" to 18" Mountain Bike, and based on height, bigger bikes by a whole inch or more: 22.5" Road Bike or 19" Mountain Bike.

As mentioned above, these guys have five different methods of choosing. The first method, based only on height, says I should have anywhere from a 19 to 23" bike - no consideration for what type of bike:

https://www.bicycle-guider.com/bike-articles/bike-size-chart/

Their third method considers both height and inseam. Based on both height and inseam, it says I should have an 18" mountain, city, or hybrid bike. But if you consider I'm out of the norm and factor in inseam, it's saying I could take either a 17 or 18". ... I'm thinking that this hybrid frame claiming BOTH 26" and 17" could work. I'm thinking inseam is more important than torso height. (The seller doesn't have any bigger step-through frames.) It also says I should have a 23" - 23.5" road bike...

To make matters more confusing, they also have another chart based only on inseam that says I should have a 21" Road Bike or a 17 to 18" Mountain Bike... But that second part seems to agree with what I was saying about 17 or 18.

Enough to make a guy go Hmmm... OF COURSE, consider what I have that I like, the Legran. I think if I could have it sized how I wanted, it would be a TINY bit smaller, though I fit it fine. It's got a 23" seat tube (to center of bottom bracket)and a 21.5 to 22" top tube (the variation due to the inclination of the seat tube) exactly what one of those charts says I should have. (Lets keep in mind it's a Road Bike!) Meanwhile, the new (to me) Trail Way Step Through ("hybrid") measures 15" on the seat tube, and, the top tube, based on the measurement idea of the frame seller - middle of head tube to middle of seat tube - 23", respectively. So, short but long. Hmmm...

This would explain why I had such a bad experience riding the Trail Way Step Through - it IS too small! Just like I thought! ... So now I look at this other step through, claiming to be 17" and 26". Given all this, I'm thinking that the proposed Marin Step Through (in either the Stinson or San Rafael versions) will likely be about perfect OR 1" small.

Thoughts?

 

[ScooterMan101]

At 6ft 2in to 6ft 3 in and 32 inch inseam , I would think you need a size of 18-21 inch Mountain Bike Frame . More like 19 - 20 inch.
That Marin Step Through is not typical sizing so for it you need to pay more attention to the top ( effective in this case ) length.
Note not all MTB's are measured the same, some from center of BB to top of top tube,
and
some center of BB to top of top tube,
But that can also be a little misleading because of how much slope the top tube has.

This is where many people take a horizontal measurement from the top of the head tube straight and level to the seat tube, then take that measurement down to the center of the BB.
In that case you can see that a MTB with a sloping top tube could be a 18 inch and still fit you.
Best to take the length of the top tube into account, this is also taken level, not the actual top of the top tube.

On a Road Bike I would think you would take around a 58 cm Road/Gravel Bike.

This bike will fit you much better, I would even guess perfect or near perfect ...
And talk about price, never seen any frame with all those parts on it for such an incredibly low price !
https://www.randombikeparts.com/collections/frames-and-framesets/products/evo-vantage-5-0-58cm-x-large-aluminum-road-bike-frameset-fork-extras-black-new

 

[amberwolf]

I don't know the specifics on sizing, but I know that none of the bikes I ever had "fit" me the same as each other--and having ridden basically my whole life, I eventually damaged my knees/etc. I don't know which characteristic specifically was the main problem, but probably the seat-to-crank distance, as well as too-often having to ride in the wrong gear due to either broken parts or not having the right gear combo available for what I was doing.


An aside:

At the time (actually up until just about 10 years ago) I didn't really know anything about bikes, despite riding them for my transportation for so long--I pretty much just found "new" used bikes to ride whenever a problem became too difficult or impossible to work around or deal with. I mean, I could mechanically repair things but I wasn't doing it as a bicycle repair, just as a generic mechanical repair, as I've always been good at that sort of thing...but there are things that can be fixed much easier and more reliably if you actually understand what you're working with/on.


I didn't learn anything significant about bicycles as bicycles until I began my project to add a motor to one to both keep me from overheating on my then-longer trip to/from work, and to maybe decrease the time to get there/back, and to relieve the pain I was just then beginning to feel in my knees whenever I exerted too much pressure on them, especially during bending. (which has grown much worse since then)



Regarding sizing itself, it always seemed to me that much of the stuff printed on cheaper bikes was just marketing-speak, and didn't appear to have much to do with anything I could determine...but I didn't know much about bikes as bikes, either. I never did learn enough about that stuff, even since then, as when I started building my own I just fit things to my body as best I could, to make things comfortable. Might not be the right way either, but these days I also don't really pedal much--I use pedals as a backup to the motor if things fail, and that's about it.

I *should* restart at least "ghost" pedalling to begin exercising my knees/etc., but by the time I get done walking (hobbling, rather, for a lot of days) around for miles at work for a shift, I don't have it in me to try, and on the way to work half the year it's usually either too hot and I don't want to heat myself up any more than I already am, or it's cold enough to make me hurt enough to not want to try.

 

[Solcar]

RTIII, I have used a notion that I heard quite a long time ago, that the main thing to consider in the sizing of a bike is that when seated, the feet should be able to reach the ground. That is with only the toes being able to reach and still be flat on the ground, but that is the only part of the feet to do so. I put it into more like my own words. That figures on the bike having a sort of standardized pedal placement frontward or rearward, I guess.

Keep up the good efforts on tinkering with your bike projects.

 

[RTIII]

Wow! What great support yall are! Thanks to all!

OK, so replies, in order:

At 6ft 2in to 6ft 3 in and 32 inch inseam, I would think you need a size of 18-21 inch Mountain Bike Frame . More like 19 - 20 inch.

If true, that wipes out either of the two Marin frames I pointed to based on the 17" designation - I can't afford that frame at $300, which is more like the most I can put into the whole darned thing right now, and rims alone are more than the frame! (Note that neither of the two rims on the Trail Way Step Through are worth a damn: the front has bent spokes and one pulling through the rim some, the rear has a freewheel for heaven's sake, and both have about 1/3 fewer spokes than I want to see! Here's the cheapest 700C wheelset I've found so far: http://www.bikewagon.com/part/wheels/wheelsets/700c/wheel-master-wheelset-700-sun-cr18-sl-36-m430-sl-ss2-0s I like that they have 36 spokes!)

However, I think either you're likely mistaken or the 17" designation is mistaken and I'll explain why below.

In this next quote, I'm leaving the formatting as was, as I think there was an error in there somewhere! :wink:

That Marin Step Through is not typical sizing so for it you need to pay more attention to the top ( effective in this case ) length.
Note not all MTB's are measured the same, some from center of BB to top of top tube,
and
some center of BB to top of top tube,
But that can also be a little misleading because of how much slope the top tube has.

...You repeated this part, "some [from] center of BB to top of top tube," but the takeaway is that, OK, some are measured differently than others, which doesn't help.

This is where many people take a horizontal measurement from the top of the head tube straight and level to the seat tube, then take that measurement down to the center of the BB. In that case you can see that a MTB with a sloping top tube could be a 18 inch and still fit you. Best to take the length of the top tube into account, this is also taken level, not the actual top of the top tube.

This makes sense and it should be standardized that way. What we have now is technobabble nonsense that leaves consumers like me scratching our heads and making a purchase gamble when buying ONLY a frame. ... If your read what the sellers of the Marin Stinson I'm interested (NOT Marin Bikes) in state its sizing as:

SEAT TUBE: 17" - Center of BB to top
TOP TUBE: 21" - Actual, measured center of headtube to center of seat tube
HEAD TUBE: 4 5/16"

BUT, on a decal on the seat tube (see image I posted yesterday), it ALSO claims to be a 26" frame! My Wild Assed Guess is that the 26" refers to the measurement you suggested be taken: project the seat tube up and then measure on the horizontal where a traditional top tube would be - with intended fork and rims defining the horizontal - and likely based on a center-to-center measurement model.

On a Road Bike I would think you would take around a 58 cm Road/Gravel Bike.

My experience on the Legran, a traditional shape road bike at 23" and slightly "too big", suggests that 58 cm is closer to what I need but probably still a bit big, since 58 cm is 22.83". I dare say the Legran is more than 0.27" "too big", though I can ride it just fine.

You then suggest this other bike, which I agree would be great, is in my budget and maybe fit me perfectly, but unfortunately that makes zero sense for me no matter how perfect I may fit it or how low the price; I already have a road-bike with high top tube, and the purpose of this exercise in bike building is that I need a step-through, the lower the step the better!

...Amberwolf, I appreciate your comments. Back in the 1970s I used bikes a lot, and I had a 32 mile round-trip commute to a "day job" (while putting myself through college) that I did on a bike, and I had scarce funds so, like you, I've had to keep my bikes going myself. My original Raleigh 10-speed (exact same design as the Legran I have now) I got when I was ten and intentionally got it too big so I'd grow into it. When it went over this 3' drop (I describe in the Legran's thread) and bent the frame, it was time for a new one - not only had I out-grown the bike, but the joint where the top tube meets the head tube was compromised. So, I started with a new bike I sized to myself by trying them at the various bike shops around. I don't recall for sure, but I was probably 14 or 15 at the time, and still growing, so again, I bought it a little too big. (And having done this twice, is probably why I don't mind the Legran being too big for me - I'm used to that condition, but it probably contributed greatly to my re-injuring my knee while trying to mount and dismount the thing - couldn't get the leg over the thing!) ...Sorry to hear of all your troubles and I sure as hell hope I have a full recovery from my knee injury. In my case it's not the knee joint at all, it's the "musculature" - likely an issue with one or more ligament or tendon. I'm trying to sort out getting proper medical attention for it. Hope to get my paperwork together TODAY...

RTIII, I have used a notion that I heard quite a long time ago, that the main thing to consider in the sizing of a bike is that when seated, the feet should be able to reach the ground. That is with only the toes being able to reach and still be flat on the ground, but that is the only part of the feet to do so. I put it into more like my own words. That figures on the bike having a sort of standardized pedal placement frontward or rearward, I guess.[\quote]

Yes, I think you're right about that, and the expression I seem to recall is, "support yourself with the balls of your feet" - meaning, I guess, with just your big toes! One trouble with the Trail Way is that it has a suspension seat post AND a suspension front fork, so that makes sizing it this way a bit problematic! I think that's why I likely figured it could work when it's now very clear to me it's quite a bit too small, even if I can ride it.

I also agree with you about pedal placement - I like it well forward of the vertical from the seat. I can stand on the pedals when I need to - and often do for power - but when seated, it's nice to have an appropriate leg length, not too long on the downstroke, not too high on the upstroke. This 15" framed Trail Way is just too damned short, and moving the seat post up is no real cure; it helped with the riding part, screwed up the standing still part - at least, relative to the seat cushion. (feels a little strange to have the seat rubbing around my beltline when standing)

But a problem with your analysis (that I generally agree with) is how in heck do you size a frame that you can't trial fit yourself to?

Nobody responded to the fact I pointed to about the frame claiming to be a 26". MY GUESS is that's the length of a theoretical top tube if it were projected to the seat tube, since the 21" the seller says from center head tube to center seat tube is nonsensical from a traditionally measured point of view. (Is there some good reason that they're using the measure points they did?)

One can ALMOST get a clue from looking at the manufacturer's sticker on the frame. ... I think I'm going to have to write to the seller and ask them to take a good photo of this sticker and email it to me. Here's what we can see in two images, the first is the original, just cropped to be only that sticker (so ES doesn't crop it off the right), and the second is rotated for better orientation for reading. ...Looks like they gave us a diagram, but the seller wasn't alert to it enough to provide a clear image of it to us buyers!





LOOKS TO ME like it might be saying the vertical projection to a theoretical top tube should be measured as 51cm, which, if true, would make it a 20" bike... And so, now that I've FINALLY gotten here, back to ScooterMan:

At 6ft 2in to 6ft 3 in and 32 inch inseam , I would think you need a size of 18-21 inch Mountain Bike Frame . More like 19 - 20 inch.

OK, so this 20" (51cm) is exactly your upper "best estimate" and falls at exactly 2/3 the way between the total range you suggest as what I might need. In fact, that sticker might be reading 57? ... And in which case it's 22.44", even TALLER than I'd need! ...Maybe I should have the seller give me an image for BOTH the 15" and 17" Stenson frames they're selling! :lol: Anyway NICE JOB, ScooterMan, you just might have nailed this one!

Keep up the good efforts on tinkering with your bike projects.[\quote]

Thank you so much, Solcar, and thanks again to all of you - I need the help!

 

[RTIII]

Bummer...

...A kind gentleman at a local bike shop who I called to try and get an e-address for Marin Bikes (they refuse to publish an email address and say all contact must come through a dealer) pointed out that the 26" on that sticker / decal indicates the tire size and therefore does NOT apply to the bike frame I thought I was looking at.

DAMN.

He also took a moment to discuss finding a step through in my size, and along the way pointed out that that version of the bike was never sold in the USA. He says that while sizing is non-standardized, makers do build bikes to various size ranges and, in general terms, I'm a "large", and that frame is a "medium" and will be too small for me. He then lamented that large step throughs are rare.

 

[amberwolf]

Sounds like it's time to buy a welder.



FWIW, a frame that is smaller than desired would be easier to compensate for than a larger one.

You can use a longer seatpost to put it up higher to give the necessary distance to the cranks and ground. If necessary you can use either an angled seatpost or a saddle/mount that puts it farther to rhe rear to get the right distance to the bars and cranks.

If the distance to cranks is already correct with just the longer seatpost, then using a longer stem set farther forward can make the reach to the bars correct.


The only big issue would be if the frame was too short front to rear for the wheelbase you want, but that's not usually the problem; it's usually just the height fom ground to seat and seat to cranks, and the reach from seat to bars.


Personally I prefer to sit more upright with the bars closer to me, as I'm more concerned with comfort and back issues and my hands going numb from pressure on them than I am with aero. I never did really ride like a drop-bars-cyclist would, and always sat on the saddle unless I was cranking hard or avoiding the shock of big bumps (bad roads, etc) thru my spine.

But everyone's a bit different in how they like to ride, so they need a bike setup for that.

 

[LewTwo]

Remember those sizes are mostly based on a riding position similar to the Hunchback of Notre Dame and full leg extension (particularly road bikes). It does not sound like you are going to be riding in that manner.

 

[RTIII]

Sounds like it's time to buy a welder.

I already have... a TIG welder, a MIG welder, a resistance ("spot") welder, oxygen acetylene, and a blacksmith's forge!

That, however, does NOT mean I'm ready to modify a bike frame, no matter the material; alignment is absolutely vital.

But then, I'm sure that you know that and were just poking me!

FWIW, a frame that is smaller than desired would be easier to compensate for than a larger one.

With that basic advice, and as I already know you have a good point, I think that this particular frame is likely worth the risk. BUT, they have clearly screwed up with the ad and I want it to fit a 700C wheel. It's CLEAR that the ad is potentially wrong, so I've written and asked for clarification and I'll buy based on their answer(s)...

The only big issue would be if the frame was too short front to rear for the wheelbase you want, but that's not usually the problem; it's usually just the height fom ground to seat and seat to cranks, and the reach from seat to bars.

And For This Very Reason, I'm looking more toward the one frame than the other because it has an angled head tube whereas the other is parallel with the seat tube. (Nobody has as yet responded to that, but I think I'm correct in my assessment, as you kind of, sort of intimate.)

We'll see what happens. Expect to make that decision in the AM tomorrow.

 

[jcool3]

Check out The Bikery, 1246 23rd Avenue Oakland 94606. It is a community bike shop that you can go in and use their tools
and work on your bike there (for small donation or free?) They have pile of used bike parts scavenged off bikes. Probably everything
to build up that marin frame. However, they don't know much about ebikes.

 

[RTIII]

Remember those sizes are mostly based on a riding position similar to the Hunchback of Notre Dame and full leg extension (particularly road bikes). It does not sound like you are going to be riding in that manner.

:lol: Nice visual there! ... Yes, agreed. I'm a little uncertain how I'll be riding this one. I don't mind the "hunches over" posture, kind of used to it, but several people have been trying to convince me to be more vertical - I'm open to it. I don't see why one setup can't accommodate either one, as the rider desires at the time? Anyway, the Trail Way step-through has a great upright seat with suspension post!

Check out The Bikery, 1246 23rd Avenue Oakland 94606. It is a community bike shop that you can go in and use their tools and work on your bike there (for small donation or free?) They have pile of used bike parts scavenged off bikes. Probably everything to build up that marin frame. However, they don't know much about ebikes.

THANK YOU, jcool3, for that pointer! They're near by - 1/4 to 1/3 mile, I'm guessing, just beyond the grocery store I usually bike to. One problem, though, is getting the stuff there - the logistics won't be fun, but at least, as I say, it's not that far. (At this particular moment in time, I can't ride ANYTHING.)

As a combined approach, I think I'm going to try and get the frame going with what I have on hand - salvaging from the Trail Way, and maybe buying a few new components, then going for the community thing for whatever else I can't just seem to get going easily. As for salvaging from the Trail Way, the front indexed derailleur works but will do me no good because I already know it won't serve the TSDZ2 at all, and the rear derailleur only gets five of the seven speeds - not clear if it's the gear selector or the derailleur itself... I don't require indexed shifting - kinda used to just levers anyway, and like how I can manually tweak out any rubbing issues which are a lot more common with the crazy chainline the TSDZ2 forces on us.

I've already got Random Bike Parts helping me with selecting from among their frames - they called me back this AM and I went through the particulars with their guy. He agrees there are some listing issues with what the frames really are and what their ads describe, so he's pulling ALL of them from their storage and sorting it out for me. I also asked if he thinks they might be able to help with some wide rims that would fit that frame, and he said he'll check.

BTW, that brings up the issue of wheels. Yesterday I spent several HOURS digging through available wheels online and what I found hard to get was something wider - is this more an issue of tire, or rim?! I thought the RIM was important, but can find nothing notably bigger than about an inch wide. Hmmm... I was thinking I want at least a 1.5" tire, maybe 2", if there's something that's not going to be terrible on smooth pavement - I dont' need knobbies! ... Something like 36 to 38 mm would be great, I think, up to around 50mm which I think is as big as I'd ever need go. Will these fit on a "standard" (roughly 1") rim?

Thanks again for the help everybody! Yall are cool! 8)

 

[jcool3]

bikery is about 5 miles from you. they have limited hours, check the website.

 

[RTIII]

bikery is about 5 miles from you. they have limited hours, check the website.

FIVE MILES?!

Hmmm... Further investigation suggests it's further than I had thought, but not 5 miles - try 4.3!