Bike size and steel types

[mustang1]

Hi, my knowledge of classic bikes is limited and I'm not sure what size frame I should look for. I'm 6ft tall and ride a modern day road bike size 56cm..I've seen some places which suggest I need a 23 inch frame. Yes, I know about bike fitting etc but does 23 inch give me a ball park figure to work with?

Next question is steel. I understand there are different types of steel but why is lighter weight steel regarded as "better" than heavier steel? Is it just the wegiht or is the ride quality supposed to be better?

I'm looking for something from the mid 1980s, cheaper end stuff. I want to be reminded of a bike I had around that time but can't recall the name except it was kind of touring oriented, steel, DT shifters, full mudguards and cost £250 new in 1984. It wasn't anything special (bought from halfords), I just want something of similar vintage and do not care if it's race or tour oriented.

(Ps although I mentioned steel types above, be under no illusion that I'm looking at high end stuff; i''m looking at cheap Raleigh's and Peugeot etc).

 

[Sharky]

An old guide was height in inches, divided by 3.
I'm 5ft 9" and used to ride a 23" frame.

 

[raleighnut]

18-23 (High tensile) was the standard Raleigh tubing but 501 and 531 frames do turn up cheap sometimes, frame size of 23 1/2 (Raleigh loved their 1/2 inch increments as opposed to full inch sizes)
Mind I'd be tempted to find out what @biggs682 has for sale ATM.

 

[Hugh Manatee]

I'm 6' as well and have a few frames ranging from 57 through to 59. I think the latter is 23"

All have horizontal top tubes.

 

[Drago]

Stronger steel requires less material so is lighter, and gives greater opportunities for tube manipulation, butting, etc, which improves the ride and integrity of the frame with less of a weight penalty.

Unlike some folk I don't like 18-30 or similar plain HiTen plain tubes on older road bikes, but im bigger and heavier than average so I'm more of a test of the materials abilities than the average lightweight weakling.

 

[mjr]

An old guide was height in inches, divided by 3.
I'm 5ft 9" and used to ride a 23" frame.

Another old rule of thumb for a starting point is inside leg less 9" (or was it 11" or was that MTB-style frames?). I'm just under 6ft and I think I ride 23" too... although I have had one 22.5" which was a bit snug but it has a fairly high bottom bracket.

 

[biggs682]

Thanks @raleighnut

@mustang1 I would say 22.5" onwards, got a couple of likely rides in that size area and all steel.
Try and aim for either Reynolds 501/531 or Tange or Columbus frame material and you won't go far wrong.

£250 should get a nice example.

Where are you based by all means you are welcome to come over and try what ever I have in size

 

[mustang1]

Thanks @raleighnut

@mustang1 I would say 22.5" onwards, got a couple of likely rides in that size area and all steel.
Try and aim for either Reynolds 501/531 or Tange or Columbus frame material and you won't go far wrong.

£250 should get a nice example.

Where are you based by all means you are welcome to come over and try what ever I have in size

Hi thanks. I'm in London. I'll keep an eye out for your stock.

All these vintage bikes, are they serviceable by bike chain stores (eg cycle surgery, Evans etc) or do they need to order vintage parts when things wear out? (I'm taking mainly about bottom brackets, headsets, hubs).

 

[biggs682]

@mustang1 majority of parts are standard bits so no issues.

Some bikes don't get mentioned on here so keep an eye on Racing Bikes Biggs682 facebook page as well.

 

[Tony Raynor]

If your London way I'm in the Chertsey area and I have a couple of 23" frames if you want to try for size. They aren't in sellable condition as they are work in progress but would give you a good idea.

One is a Dawes full 531 frame the other is a Wilier Triestina Columbus brain frame. Both date from the very early 90s.