You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Step through folding bikes and an improved seatpost/floor pump”.
Cyclelicious » Weekend link love
I’ve always felt that the ultra-low step through is a strange feature to add on a bike, pushed on to consumers who don’t know what they really want by designers who are just looking for something on the frame to play with.
Indeed, having an 280mm step-through is somewhat illogical. Unless the crank arms on the bike are 140mm long (pretty unlikely, considering the terrible, egg-beater-clown-bike ride that would produce), the rider of the bike is going to have to bend their knee more when simply going through a full crank rotation than when stepping over the bike frame. Guessing that the crank arms are instead 165mm, this means that you’d be raising your leg a full 50mm (2″) more when pedaling than when getting on the bike. If you are so inflexible (due to physiology or attire) that you need a bike with a 280mm step-through to get on board, you’re going to ruin something once in the saddle.
Granted, there’s a slight benefit when dismounting, but having ridden some ultra-low step through frames, I feel like the step-through-swoop is frequently too small to properly fit a shoe through reliably, and you end up raising your leg higher than the chainring anyway.
Having a step-through on a frame is a fantastic way to improve the ride experience, especially in the city. It just doesn’t need to be so low.
well I like more the step through frame design than the classical male frame design… Im referring to the bast majority of frames… that have the top tube really at the top… they should be eliminated