Smaller British frames pre 1970's

[Deleted member 69416]

Is it me or did British manufacturers make fewer frames in smaller sizes , 21" or less , pre 1970's ? I seem to be able to find loads that are 22" and above . Smaller sizes appear in catalogs of the time but seem scarce now . Did the style of the time have anything to do with it ? Just curious . {I'm looking for a Higgins btw}

 

[Takingabreak]

they were designed to be ridden with only a fistfull of seatpost showing, so were a bit snug on the standover but didn't tend to have particularly long top tubes

 

[Old Ned]

they were designed to be ridden with only a fistfull of seatpost showing, so were a bit snug on the standover but didn't tend to have particularly long top tubes

I agree with that. I have a 23" road/path frame from 1952 given to me by its original owner who had it made for riding Fallowfield track - and he is Ronnie Corbett size! He said he had the saddle virtually against the top of the seat tube.

 

[Deleted member 69416]

they were designed to be ridden with only a fistfull of seatpost showing, so were a bit snug on the standover but didn't tend to have particularly long top tubes

It's actually the top tube that concerns me more , they seem to be 22.5"+ which is just a touch too much for me . I have longer arms and legs and a shorter body .

 

[Deleted member 69416]

 

[Deleted member 69416]

they were designed to be ridden with only a fistfull of seatpost showing, so were a bit snug on the standover but didn't tend to have particularly long top tubes

I agree with that. I have a 23" road/path frame from 1952 given to me by its original owner who had it made for riding Fallowfield track - and he is Ronnie Corbett size! He said he had the saddle virtually against the top of the seat tube.

So , yes then I suppose . There won't be so many of them about . I thought that might be the case .
Patience Grasshopper !
Thank you both .

 

[Jonny69]

Yes, they were generally bigger. Seatposts were shorter, like total length 220mm was a long one! Stems were also shorter, so the total reach was probably around the same. Today you see 100mm stems as a minimum, but back in the day stems were really about 80-90mm maximum.

 

[Deleted member 69416]

Yes, they were generally bigger. Seatposts were shorter, like total length 220mm was a long one! Stems were also shorter, so the total reach was probably around the same. Today you see 100mm stems as a minimum, but back in the day stems were really about 80-90mm maximum.

I've been trying to get a sensibly priced , not knackered 80mm Cinelli for ages.
As far as the frames go , they must still exist , just rarer . Which also means that once you've found one you'll be less likely to sell it !

 

[slarge]

I'm really hoping my 22" Falcon frame I have just finished painting fits me at 5'7". All my other bikes are <21".

So hopefully you are right - I'll measure Top tube to see how it compares to my more modern bikes