Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Click the "Create Account" button now to join.

To disable ads, please log-in.

Shop at TeamEstrogen.com for women's cycling apparel.

Results 1 to 15 of 27

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    777
    $3000 for a 2007??? I hope that's for the Pro. I got the 2007 Expert earlier this year for much less than $3000. You should be able to get them for even less now that the 2008's are out.

    I too have short fingers and have the max number of shims in my Shimanos - they work just fine for me. I did swap out for narrower handlebars and a shorter stem though.

    Good luck in your search!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Uncanny Valley
    Posts
    14,498

    We're worse than men

    Okay, I had to measure my fingers too, and I can't believe we're measuring the same way, because my hands aren't that big (and I actually get a variation of more than 3/4" depending on how I measure).

    This is worse than frame sizes!

    Center to top (center of MCP joint to end of finger)? Flex the MCP joint, straighten the IP joints and measure from the proximal end of the MCP joint? Splay the fingers and measure from the webbing? Be specific!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,059
    Quote Originally Posted by michelem View Post
    $3000 for a 2007??? I hope that's for the Pro.
    Yes, the Pro, with full DA.

    Quote Originally Posted by oakleaf
    Okay, I had to measure my fingers too...Be specific!
    First, we are NOT worse than men, believe me! (Whatever worse means...)

    I don't know what an MCP joint is. I hold my hand up flat in front of me (like vertically, in front of my face, looking at the edge of my hand, with the thumb towards me). I tilt the finger I want to measure (say the middle finger, my longest ) just a centimeter or two down, toward my palm, keeping the finger straight. I measure from the base of the finger, in the little crease where the finger tilts...to the tip.

    I think if I measured the top of the finger, from the knuckle on the back of my hand, to the tip, I would add about .5 inch to the overal length. I guess I measured the underside because when I put my hand on the bar, that underside is really what has to reach around the bar to the levers.
    "The best rides are the ones where you bite off much more than you can chew, and live through it." ~ Doug Bradbury

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Uncanny Valley
    Posts
    14,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Starfish View Post
    I guess I measured the underside because when I put my hand on the bar, that underside is really what has to reach around the bar to the levers.
    That makes sense.

    Just to clarify, hand bones are metacarpals and finger bones are phalanges. Thumb is #1, pinky is #5. So the joint between the palm and the finger is the metacarpo-phalangeal or MCP joint. All the fingers except the thumb have two interphalangeal joints, proximal and distal or PIP and DIP.

    Measuring that way, I get 3-1/8" for my middle finger and 2-7/8" for the index finger on the left, about 1/8" shorter on the right. So a bit longer than your fingers but in the same ballpark!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    423
    When I measure that way, I don't have a single finger that manages to nudge past 2.75". Short, stumpy little fingers have I...heh.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,059
    Aah, Oakleaf, thanks for the education. Now I know!

    And, Dex, that's right...we are in the same ballpark. I still might take you up on your offer of checking out your bars and levers when I come to Seattle to test bikes.
    "The best rides are the ones where you bite off much more than you can chew, and live through it." ~ Doug Bradbury

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Denver Metro
    Posts
    834
    Another question for all you Ruby women.

    I am looking for a new bike and think I have settled on the Tarmac, I like the more aggressive positioning, where I feel that the Ruby is set up more like the Roubaix- so more of a distance bike.

    Is this true? The LBS doesn't have a Ruby in, in my size, at the moment so I haven't riden one, only the Tarmac- which I love.

    Is the Ruby deceiving? Is it more aggresive then it looks? I would love to hear all your opinions.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,046
    Quote Originally Posted by ehirsch83 View Post
    I am looking for a new bike and think I have settled on the Tarmac, I like the more aggressive positioning, where I feel that the Ruby is set up more like the Roubaix- so more of a distance bike.
    You are correct, Emily, the Ruby is modeled after the Roubaix. However, I've seen a number of smaller women crit racers with Rubies because the Tarmac does not go down so far in size. Taller women racers on Tarmacs? Yes!

    Unless I find a more aggressive racing bike in my size (unlikely) I plan on modifying my Ruby for crits later this year.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    2,059
    Quote Originally Posted by ehirsch83 View Post
    I am looking for a new bike and think I have settled on the Tarmac, I like the more aggressive positioning, where I feel that the Ruby is set up more like the Roubaix- so more of a distance bike.
    I don't know this from any experience...just what the bike shop guy told me as we were comparing all the geometry numbers with the Ruby, the Roubaix, and the Tarmac (I'm also interested in the Tarmac). He said the Ruby fell somewhere between the Roubaix and the Tarmac.
    "The best rides are the ones where you bite off much more than you can chew, and live through it." ~ Doug Bradbury

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •