raleigh 20 for big person?

Hi:

I've been looking at all the interesting sites featuring raleigh 20's: tarik saleh's, sheldon's,
others . . . were all of these '20's' the same size frames? could a large person, 6'6", who is used
to top tubes at least 58 cm long (on a cruiser bike; longer for a road bike) fit on an old '20'
retrofitted with new fork/stem/bars for greater height and reach? Or are these bikes just too short
and low for someone as tall as I am?

TIA

art strum

arthur strum <strum@stanford.edu> wrote in message
news:<strum-56F848.11480015102003@news.stanford.edu>...

FWIW, I'm 5'3" and ride a almost completely stock Raleigh Twenty on a daily basis. I can't imagine a
6'6" person riding one comfortably. Sheldon Brown rides one, and he seems like pretty a tall person.
I'm sure he'll know better than I.

Why the hell would any sane person want to ride a Raleigh 20?

In message <strum-56F848.11480015102003@news.stanford.edu>, arthur strum <strum@stanford.edu> writes
>Hi:
>
>I've been looking at all the interesting sites featuring raleigh 20's: tarik saleh's, sheldon's,
>others . . . were all of these '20's' the same size frames?
Yes.

>could a large person, 6'6", who is used to top tubes at least 58 cm long (on a cruiser bike; longer
>for a road bike) fit on an old '20' retrofitted with new fork/stem/bars for greater height and
>reach? Or are these bikes just too short and low for someone as tall as I am?
>
A 400mm seat post is fine for me but I'm only 5ft 10in. I expect you could adapt an R20 so you
could ride short distances but I don't think you would get much comfort on longer rides because of
the lack of length. Standing could be tricky with lack of knee space. I think these bikes were
designed for people around 5ft 6in tall. These frames are strong at least compared to other folders
of the 1970s.

Martyn

--

Martyn Aldis, e-mail martyn.aldis@syntagma.co.uk
==============================================================================

Quoth Arthur Strum:

> I've been looking at all the interesting sites featuring raleigh 20's: tarik saleh's, sheldon's,
> others . . . were all of these '20's' the same size frames? could a large person, 6'6", who is
> used to top tubes at least 58 cm long (on a cruiser bike; longer for a road bike) fit on an old
> '20' retrofitted with new fork/stem/bars for greater height and reach? Or are these bikes just too
> short and low for someone as tall as I am?

The Raleigh Twenty, like virtually all of Raleigh's bikes of that era, has a virtual top tube of 22
inches (55.9 cm).

Despite being fairly tall, I have a short upper body, and have always found 22 inch top tubes to be
a great fit for _me_.

Back in the day, I used to extend the seat post by slipping a short seatpost on top of the
necked-down part of the stock seatpost. On one of them, I secured them with epoxy; on another, I
drilled through and used a nut and bolt.

Now we've got a source for nice 450 mm "laprade-type" posts.

http://sheldonbrown.org/raleigh-twenty.html

Sheldon "Twenty Nut" Brown +------------------------------------------------+
| Nobody who has anything to do with bicycles | has _all_ of their marbles, and some of us | are
| certifiable! | --Sheldon Brown |
+------------------------------------------------+ Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts Phone
617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041 http://harriscyclery.com Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

Nick.Marshall <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
news:<3f8e5b8c$1_1@news.chariot.net.au>...
> Why the hell would any sane person want to ride a Raleigh 20?

When the hell did *sanity* become a requirement to ride a bicycle??

Jeff the Cursor---

Martyn Aldis <martyn.aldis@syntagma.co.uk> wrote:

> A 400mm seat post is fine for me but I'm only 5ft 10in. I expect you could adapt an R20 so you
> could ride short distances but I don't think you would get much comfort on longer rides because of
> the lack of length. Standing could be tricky with lack of knee space. I think these bikes were
> designed for people around 5ft 6in tall. These frames are strong at least compared to other
> folders of the 1970s.

A 400mm post did not work for me, and I'm 6'3". To get anywhere near proper leg extension the post
ended up only in the seat tube by about a half inch! My solution was to add another tube and extend
from there. Details and pics are at: http://pages.istar.ca/~marker/folders.html

Since the orginal poster said he's 6'6", he may never get comfy on such a small frame. I can ride my
Twenty just fine, but the bike is definitely too small for me, so yes, no standing, and no long
trips. It's a fun errand bike, and I also keep it for visitors, since it can accomodate just about
any height. The long flexy brake arms are suspect, but I did at least convert the bike over to alloy
rims and Kool Stop pads.

Cheers, Mark

Nick.Marshall <usenet-forum@cyclingforums.com> wrote in message
news:<3f8e5b8c$1_1@news.chariot.net.au>...
> Why the hell would any sane person want to ride a Raleigh 20?

Who wouldn't want to ride one modded with large diamond-shaped holes in the chainstays and
disc brakes?

Besides, my Colnago doesn't handle very well with a basket full of groceries. And the knobbies on my
MTB make every road feel like a dirt road. Good thing there's 6" of travel to smooth 'em out.

Seriously, I need a bike that's both more reliable and fun to ride than the bus. That it's easy to
mount/dismount, carries a crate full of cargo, and pulls a trailer well counts for a lot. Plus it
fits me well and stores indoors without too much hassle. On the contrary, I think it's more sane
than most of the bikes available at my LBS.

thanks for all the responses. i'm going to start looking around for one -- -- sounds like i could
make it long enough in the top tube to work, particularly if i put moustache bars on it. i also
looked up the swift which someone had recommended. since one can buy just a swift frame, building
one of those up with old parts or ones i already have might not be much more expensive than
modifying a '20'. but the '20's' look like great bikes to me.

that's what the internet's for: for insane people to be in the company of their fellows.

art strum

In message <strum-9BB8D1.22045816102003@news.stanford.edu>, arthur strum <strum@stanford.edu> writes
>thanks for all the responses. i'm going to start looking around for one -- -- sounds like i could
>make it long enough in the top tube to work, particularly if i put moustache bars on it. i also
>looked up the swift which someone had recommended. since one can buy just a swift frame, building
>one of those up with old parts or ones i already have might not be much more expensive than
>modifying a '20'. but the '20's' look like great bikes to me.

As you do not appear to have been put off the idea I would like to add these afterthoughts assuming
you have drawn all you can from Sheldon's site::

The top steering bearing is a nylon bush and can get dangerously stiff on a bike that has been left
around for a long while out of use. It can also get quite slack.

My preferred solution so far is to get rid of the binder but keep the (Raleigh 26tpi threaded) top
nut and lock nut. Fit the top bearing from an Ahead set then some spacers then the top nut and lock
nut. You will have to adjust spacer thickness to suit the height of your Ahead bearing to give the
right amount of thread for the lock nut to lock down on the top nut once it has done the job
properly done by the starfangled nut and cap arrangement of the Ahead. You may need to turn a custom
spacer from a bit of aluminium rod or very thick walled tube. The faces should be flat and at 90
degrees to the length.

You must still use an expander type stem. Not on any account an Ahead type clamp-on stem as the top
of the steerer is threaded and slotted. Ok you wouldn't do that but someone else might. I have only
used my bike with this headset for 300 miles so there could be some long term problem I have not
foreseen but it looks good so far.

If you put narrow tyres (or tires) on the 406mm wheels you will have a very low bottom bracket
height. With normal cranks this could leave too little pedal clearance for anyone but an experienced
cyclist, if a freewheel or anyone except a wizard if a fixed wheel.

I would say narrow tyres means 451mm wheels. Sun do the rims (CR 16 and 18 I think) and you can get
primos or stelvios in this size so it is still and practical option if you want a faster (style?)
bike like Sheldon's fixed wheel but better. At your height you are more likely to want an R20 for
round the block utility and lending, perhaps 406mm rims, fat tyres, and cantilever bosses brazed on
makes more sense.

As far as cost goes the place that this project could really go expensive is with the next to
easiest bottom bracket solution - the full Phil Woods. I've taken the easiest solution so far and
left the chrome plated steel until it wears out. I've got a couple of good quality axles ready and
hope to be able to use one or other of them with barely used Raleigh shells found on a dumped 1980s
3 speed, when the time comes. I know some work will be needed to get the chain line right.
>
>that's what the internet's for: for insane people to be in the company of their fellows.
>

Maybe. More sanity in a R20 and plastic crate than a 4 by 4 and V8 (suppose a V8 is really rather
moderate in the USA)

Martyn

Martyn Aldis, Syntagma, e-mail martyn.aldis@syntagma.co.uk
==============================================================================