Originally Posted by
sdn40
The proportions thing is real, especially for taller riders. For some, the tall head tube just throws off the look of the bike. It's probably why a lot of tall riders are on the lookout for a Cannondale. The OS tubing takes care of that "odd" look. Just as STI's and modern components eventually made their way into this fabulous forum, we are now entering a crossroads where some of the newer frame technologies are becoming more available at a price point that becomes very attractive. As seen above, looking to achieve certain things can become complicated, and expensive, and sometimes not possible. Riddle mentioned it briefly, but it has flown under the radar what was available for $10. Obviously, that is an extremely fortunate example, but like I said, crossroads.
I recently picked up a prime example of this (pickup scheduled). I wasn't in the market, but we all know how that goes. I didn't believe the picture and the owner had a chuckle as he shared my same thoughts. This isn't your dads 62cm proportioned bike. It looks like a 58cm. Never in a million years did I think I would own a Surly, but here we are, at a price point cheaper than a Walmart bike. 32c here I come. Just like the STI's, at some point you just can't say no. And yes - I'm crossing my fingers that the seatpost is the Dura Ace aero
Your OS tubing comment is an astute one. It "shrinks" a 64cm+ frame to something closer to a 59-60cm, proportionally, and that can make all the difference. I've looked at large ~1990 OS Paramount framesets and thought "That looks like a 60cm." Nope! standard tubing on 65cm+ frames is indeed a delicate balance, even more so when employing large diameter tires (38mm+ IMO).
The $10 Nashbar frameset was indeed a for-a-song price, and would normally be $75-100 on CL. $10 gave room for other components to be bought and not balloon the eventual asking price into unwanted territory.
As a number of early-'00s bikes and framesets reach their desirability nadir (15-20 years old seems to be the trough of a bike's value curve, assuming it is semi-desirable or more in the first place), we will find more of these deals. As a 6'5" rider, from about 1990 to about 2010, give or take a year or two, is the Era of Abandonment (or Great Betrayal) for properly tall production frames. Cannondale, among very few, were the keepers of the flame. Surlys do have a lot to offer, provided the look, weight, and geometry are to one's preference. I've long found them to have much too long a top tube for their stated height/size, with their height/size offerings not being tall enough. I find Somas to be more attractively proportioned (commensurate price increase, naturally) and much closer to fitting me (stack and reach, primarily). That Nashbar frame was revelatory. Trek has made their FX line for at least a decade. Steel, aluminum, or carbon for the forks depending on the level (7.1FX, 7.2FX, 7.3FX, 7.5FX, 7.7FX etc). Twin bottle cage bosses and stack/reach specs, at least at the largest 25" size, to be nearly identical to my 620 and other 25.5" Treks of the mid-'80s. And this is a flat bar hybrid (where a super long TT is the norm), which means drop bar conversions are a snap. 44.5cm to 45cm chainstays (and early-'80s touring bike angles/fork geo), room for 40mm tires if you do it right, V-brakes for great stopping power. Enthusiastic aluminum frame (modern Trek aluminum is a lot of fun). I keep a lookout for a good deal on one as it would be fun to try a modern "hybrid" that possesses considerable vintage touring geometry DNA. Just don't ask me why they put the seat tube bottle cage so freaking low--I don't know either!
Your Pacer looks sharp, and whatever aero seatpost that may be, it looks great. Enjoy!