80's Commuter

SJO76

I recently acquired an 80's bike for the purposes of commuting, popping to the shop etc. It is a Fuji Royale with a 25" frame which given that I am 6'4" should be a good size, and the saddle height is sufficient. But it feels like I am too far forward if I rest near the levers and I don't think I will bother the drops at all. In fact sitting upright is the only really comfortable position. Am I right in thinking that this is just the nature of the geometry of bike frames of the era? The top tube is about 58cm. A longer stem may help but I don't know to what degree. Any thoughts/advice?

rolf_f

Have you adjusted the stem height?

Not quite sure I understand what the problem is - does the top tube seem too long or too short?

SJO76

The riding position near the levers or on the drops is not ideal because the handlebars are too close, the reach isn't far enough. Also I can see the front axle in those positions.

daviesee

A rule of thumb is that when you are comfortable on the hoods your handle bars should obscure your front axle.
If it doesn't your stem may be too long or short.

Rule of thumb = generalisation so don't take it as gospel.

SJO76

Yep I know about that. Does that rule still apply with an 80s geometry bike?

Mike400

Wouldnt worry what age the bike is.

Get the geometry / setup right for you, if you are comfortable on the bike youll enjoy using it more, dont put up with a short reach because "thats the way the bike was designed" - the last thing you want is to end up with back or wrist pain

You can get adjustable quill stems, so you can mess about a bit with height / reach. Maybe check your saddle isnt too far back on the rails.

incidently how much (recent) cycling experience do you have, and on what sort of bike? if you are coming back to cycling, and only ever rode MTB style bikes, you might find a road bike of any vintage a bit of an adjustment.

SJO76

Well I am coming from a modern relaxed geometry bike to an old 80's bike which I bought just for commuting (don't want to lock either of my bikes outside of work). And being a 25" framed bike they don't get any bigger so I have to make it work or change my approach totally.

I will see if the stem can raised and see if the saddle is adjustable.

daviesee

SJO76 wrote:

Yep I know about that. Does that rule still apply with an 80s geometry bike?

Geometry is geometry.

There are 2 fixed values. Your body and your comfort.
There is only one variable - the bike.

Unfortunately for some people, they keep the bike as fixed and their comfort as a variable. Hence the amount of rusting bikes in sheds or garages.

If you cannot achieve the right fit by raising/lowering the saddle and/or raising/lowering the stem and/or extending/shortening the stem then the bike is the wrong size.
Even at that, if you are at any exteremes it is probably wrong.

Hopefully a wee tweak is all you need.

SJO76

Let me rephrase... my purpose here is to get a cheap bike that I won't cry over if it gets damaged or nicked. 80's racers seem to fit the bill so I have bought a 25" framed bike which fits well as far as my legs are concerned. But it feels awkward/different reach wise. I am wondering if this is typical of an 80's geometry bike because if it can't be tweaked I will know that all 80's racing bikes will be similar so there is no point on trying alternative bikes as I can't get a bigger bike.

daviesee

Best I can add is that in that era I had a 22" frame and I am 5'10".
That bike felt a bit compact so I don't think a 25" frame should be too big for someone 6'4".
Seat post and stem heights should be adjustable enough to use and getting a longer or shorter stem to suit shouldn't be a problem.

80's geometry bikes shouldn't be any different from todays. The only difference is the trend for "compact" frames which are sized differently but pedals to seat to bars should remain constant.