truman

rack and fender eyelets both, it appears.

OhiOH

I’ve had one since Feb, using it exclusively as a daily commuter.
It’s cool: Sweet ride, relaxed handling, great paint job. Components seem pretty solid, not great, but a good value.

It is stock except for my Brooks (so I can’t comment on the saddle), added fenders and a rear rack.

My only complaint is brake squeal, but that wouldn’t keep me from buying one.

dirtyphotons

brake squeal's not the frame's fault there guy.

OhiOH

Pardon my ignorance. I missed the frame+fork post. Just trying to help.

dirtyphotons

ah, early morning crankiness on my part. didn't mean to be nasty, i'm sorry.

OhiOH

I understand. Looks like I was a bit terse as well

flargle

Group hug!

fender1

No, Group Buy! I am in for a 58cm check your e-mail.

SaltyDog

Why does he say a frame is 60cm when it is actually 56cm? I don't get it. Why do the frames stop at 56cm, it seems kinda small?

dirtyphotons

i think a link and a note about sizing should be included in the first post of the thread (trust me, this is easier than the way ss/fg did it). don't pay attention to iro's "size," their top tube is usually a little longer than the seat tube and especially for these frames the top tube is what matters.

the "size" 60 rob roy has a 57cm top tube.

caloso

Great to hear! I'm going to build mine up as a superduper all-conditions commuting machine.

flargle

56cm is center-to-center seat tube with a sloping top tube. Nominal size of 60cm is the rough equivalent in traditional road sizing (center-to-top, horizontal top tube) which you would use to compare with (for example) the .67 Lemond formula.

mr.luteus

If I ride a 56cm sized bike, I should order the 58cm IRO which has a top tube lenth of 56cm?

dirtyphotons

rob roy's top tube slopes less than a cm from front to back. it's essentially horizontal.



and yes mr. luteus, that is what i'm saying. seat tube measurements on these frames are misleading, as the seat clamp is almost 2 cm above the center of the seat cluster. i actually have a size 58 rob roy and the tt seems a hair longer than 56cm, but less than 57. you'd probably fit on either a "size" 58 or a 56, depending on if you like the tt a little long or a little short.

climbhoser

Just to echo the statements on sizing:

Tony has told me he rides a 60cm and he is 6' tall, even. I'm 5'10" and would usually ride a 56, but Tony told me to pony up on the 58.

I was reading an article lately about how people in 'merica buy bikes too small for them frequently because they're scared of the bigger sizes. However, a bike that is big enough for you will end up being better overall for fitting and efficiency.

LLGlcNAc

You should get in on this. All the cool kids are doing it. You want to be cool right?

doco

hey Adam, just sent you an email...I am in ... jim

thanks again

mrsalty

check your mail..............

dwainedibbly

I got in on the SS/FG forum IRO group buy and it went very well. If I didn't already have a Bianchi San Jose commuter I'd be all over this. Good luck!

period3

Hmm, I'm about 5'9" with an exact 32" inseam (or whatever the floor-to-crotch measurement is called). I was looking at the standover height and the 58 has a 32" SO... TT length might be more important for fit - but I was thinking a SO height >= inseam could be a problem...

Thoughts on whether I should be on a 56 or 58? (I mainly just want to know if I definitely shouldn't be on a 58 due to the SO)

flargle

Assuming the 32" is from floor to pubic bone, the Lemond formulas are:
32" x 2.54 x 0.67 = 54.5cm (traditional frame, C-T)
32" x 2.54 x 0.65 = 52.8cm (traditional frame, C-C)
By both measures the size 58 frame would be too large, even without accounting for the sloping top tube.

period3

OK, thanks, I'll stick with the 56...

OhiOH

I’m 5’10” with the legs of a 5’8” person (thanks mom). I went with the 56 and have never bought a bike that fit me so well out of the box.

Nice bike ‘dirty’ if it wasn’t for the springs on your B17 (I assume) I’d be chasing you down wanting my bike back -mine has a Brooks Pro. Armadillos too?

caloso

OhiOH, you and I must be long-separated twins. I'd emailed Adam about a 54 and now I'm going to have to seriously reconsider about getting the 56. I'm going to measure my other bikes and compare the spec chart on the IRO site first.

dirtyphotons

actually that's a pretty old picture of it. right now it's headed toward race trim. stripped but for the essentials and the brooks has gotta go for the season.

i'm rolling on ritchey speedmax pros, which feel great on road and off and are pretty light.