which road bikes...

[silver]

I'm no expert (long legs with normal torso) but Mr. is a Short leg/Long Torso (SLLT: pronounced S l u t )

He was advised to get a Lemond by Fred at the Bicycle Garage. It really does seem to fit him well and he's pretty comfy. He has a 49cm. His inseam is probably 27 inches ?

http://www.lemondbikes.com/bikes/roa...minum/reno.php

Seems there might have been a thread about this. hmmm...

[silver]

Whoopsie! I missed the steel requirement on the OP. Sorry!

Lemond does have a Steel bike that I think looks great! But the geometry is different. It does come in a 49cm, so maybe it's worth a try.

http://www.lemondbikes.com/bikes/roa...eel/sarthe.php

[Mr. Bloom]

Mr. is a Short leg/Long Torso (SLLT: pronounced S l u t )

Hmmm, I walk in the door after being gone for a week, and this is the thread I see up on the computer screen...NOW, I know what she really thinks...

But, notwithstanding this, I am VERY pleased with my 49cm Lemond

[Eden]

I'd suggest looking at touring models as they generally have longer than average top tubes.
Like the Trek 520, or the Kona Sutra (both steel) - the Sutra in a 49cm has the same tt length as the Jamis in a 50, but 5cm less stand over.

Remember also that you can tweak the fit too. Most small bikes come with a fairly short stem. You should be able to put on a slightly longer one without messing up the handling, but remember that it is complex. You also want to be sure you can get good knee position, so the length of the cranks makes a difference too - smaller bike w/ shorter cranks means you'll have the saddle further forward - moving you closer to the handlebars again. If you are a hard fit, try to get the store to work with you and swap out components until you've got it ALL right.

I have to say I almost wish I had that problem - few bikes have a short enough tt for me..... (longer inseam than Mr. Silver on me, but only 5' overall)

Also cyclocross bikes usually are a bit longer too - but are often fairly tall as well. You can make them fine road machines with a swap of tires though.

[KnottedYet]

Sounds like a WSD would be right out...

I still vote for trying a Surly Cross Check and Surly Long Haul Trucker, but I loved the Jamis Aurora. If you felt the reach was too short on that, well, maybe the Cross Check will still feel a little cramped, but try it anyway! Cyclocross bikes will likely feel a little too tall, even when the reach is good. They lean toward having the bottom bracket higher from the ground than the average bike (more ground clearance). The most noticable effect is it makes standover higher, but that wouldn't be too much fun if you already feel you need a short standover.

I feel great on all 3 of my cyclocross-geometry bikes, but I've never tried the Long Haul Trucker or Kona Sutra or Casaroll or Trek 520. Let me know how you like them!

More steel, more fun!

[boy in a kilt]

Knot, I believe you currently own nearly as many bikes as I have in the 25 yeras I've been cycling. To make this post a little more pointless, here's a list:

Schwinn LeTour (25 pound tank, steel rims, stem shifters, etc.)
Raleigh something or other with aero things on it. I was 15, of course it was cool.
Peugeot Canyon Express (broke my leg on this bike)
Fuji- nothing special about this bike, don't even remember what happened to it
Faggin (First bike with campy!)
Bridgestone MTB
Cannondale road bike (last bike with down tube shifters)
Davidson Stiletto
Trek 540
Co-motion

Ok, that's a few more than Knot has, but not many. And I've never owned more than two bikes at once.

[KnottedYet]

I've only ever owned 2 at once. Sort of...

Elk, the more I think about it, the more I think you'd like steel touring geometry better than the steel cyclocross geometry you tried. (it's that raised-bottom-bracket-so-higher-standover thing that keeps popping into my mind)

[elk]

Okey Dokey

Lisa. No. I mean low enough to get the right bend in my knee with foot on the pedal...and it had ZERO standover height...to my mind, if you're standing over the bike and you're touching the tt...it's high.
My 53" Globe is a step through and we had to swtch out the post so I could be comfortable on the saddle. Fit me on the top...had to mess around to get the bottom to fit.
I don't expect to be able to touch the ground from the saddle. And I like being up high...I just don't want to bang myself on that tube if I need to jump off.

Silver...thanks for the tip...if I see a used one in my size...I'll try it! ( $$)

Eden...I'll check out the trek and Kona...if you mean that the Kona has a little MORE SO room. (the Jamis 50 was too big)

KNot... I think i'll go find the Surlys next. The woman at the shop explained that high bottom bracket deal to me...Touring sounds good.
There is a a sage green 46cm (which is my guess for size for the LHT ) all decked out for touring on the craigslist in alaska....( what have YOU been doing, elk???) I'll try to find one maybe tommorrow to try.. apparently they sell out fast.

and the Casseroll has a sloped top tube which might help. I read somewhere that the Casseroll is the closest you can get to a Riv for the money...

But the sad part is that when I got home and went out for a ride..I thought my bike was kind of....gulp...dull. That slim steel frame felt so strong and light...

[Eden]

yes - the Kona has a smaller stand over height (the top tube is lower) than the Jamis

FYI- the thing about cyclocross frames- It isn't really the fact that the bottom bracket is high that makes the top tube any higher - what it really does is make the seat tube measurement smaller...... so a "bigger" bike measures out to a "smaller" size. A 44cm cross bike is really about the same size as a traditional geometry 48cm bike if you are looking at stand over and TT length.
Seat tube is just kind of a convenient thing to measure a bike with, but it causes a lot of confusion..... compact frames and cross frames tend to measure smaller than traditional geometry frames. Which is why I have a 47cm bike, a 44cm bike and a 48cm bike that all fit me.....