Originally Posted by
Cleave
Hi sarals, something doesn't seem right to me. I know that you had a fitting and I know that your coach is also giving you input. Somehow it seems like you're looking at bikes that are too big. I haven't looked at the Raleigh frame geometry charts, but I ride bikes that are listed as 52 cm or 53 cm. On some more extreme compact frames, such as the Lapierre that I had for a season, the size is 49 cm. I have a significant amount of saddle to handlebar drop but nothing extreme so I'm not sizing my frames really small like many current professionals.
Many moons ago when I was doing bike fittings, back when there really weren't women-specific frame geometries, most women that I fitted ended up with slightly smaller frames based on their leg length because the cockpit length of frames sized to their leg length was too long. We know that really short stems with narrow bars that many women need can lead to excessive sensitivity to steering input.
If you were looking at women-specific frames I would be less concerned. Also, I know there are some fitters that say women-specific geometries aren't needed for women and that these frame designs are just a way for manufacturers to make more money, but my concern still holds on your frame sizes.
Feel free to tell me to take a hike because you've been up and down this sizing road a bunch of times. I just thought I'd give you another perspective. Maybe you need to get with another fitter for a second opinion because one thing I always say and still stand by is that you (I) can't fit someone to a bike over the internet.
As far a Raleigh goes, they used to make great race bikes through the 1980s. I think the original company went bankrupt of another company bought them. Regardless, their bikes fell out of favor with the racer crowd. I don't know anything about their current bikes but the frame you are looking at looks pretty reasonable on paper.
Cleave, you ask great questions. I was and am a little concerned that I may looking "too big", as well. However, the fitting(s) I have had have told me that WSD bikes don't work that well for me, because I have a fairly long torso for a woman. My arms are short, like most gals, and my legs are long, but my torso is also long (it's relative, because I'm a little s**t!
). We're all different, aren't we! I was quite surprised when I found I fit on the 53 CM Bianchi, because up until that point, every time I walked into a bike shop I'd be pointed towards the WSD bikes or the 49 to 50 CM men's frames. After riding a 49 CM frame for almost three years, and also riding a 50 CM "standard geometry" frame for a year before that, I have come to know that they were too small. Seat tube length was fine, and standover was okay, but I was scrunched up in the cockpit and needed longer stems than those bikes came with. The L'una was the first bike I had ever ridden that I was really comfortable on, and I also discovered that I could ride faster on it. When I replaced it's saddle last summer, the LBS owner gave me a good fitting and pronounced that it was, for a Bianchi, the right size for me. He also said that I am sort of on the cusp as far as frame sizes go. 52 is about right, 50 is really too small, and 53 is starting to get too big, depending upon the bike. What I've learned to do is to read "effective top tube length", as well as "standover height". Those two dimensions will usually tell me, right away, if the bike I'm looking at is worth looking at further.
As for the Raleighs, well, I have to admit I was smitten by the 2011 Team when I first saw one. It was a beautiful bike, made very, very well, and I found hard to believe it was a RALEIGH! I tried it out, sat on it, on the showroom floor, and it felt solid, good, but a tad small (it was a 50 cm, in Raleigh speak). I've had my eye open for that frame ever since. It and the Fuji SST!