Road Cycling - Frame size

this is my first post in this section as i usually ride a mountain bike, however after months of lusting i finally bit the bullet and bought a road bike. WOW i totally love it, it's still pretty weird and a little frightening but i LOVE it! I bought a womens Cannondale R500 and the frame is a 53 (mesured by the top tube). When we were sizing it the guy (Dave from Duke's for anyone who's from Toronto) said i could go either way, either the 53 or one size smaller he thought the 53 would be better. So today I go to my usual LBS and they said that the frame is way too big espically since the seat post is only out 5" when aparently they are supposed to be out at least 10" (this is what they told me I know nothing about rode bikes). So i guess i'm looking for an unbiased opion (or a few :D) as to which is better a little bigger or a little smaller. I just hate to think that one of the profesional bike shops wold sell me the wrong frame.:(

thanks in advance

Betsy, you might go to this site, http://www.wrenchscience.com and go through the sizing steps and see what you come up with.

Is it really supposed to be at least 10 inches out? That's so much, for an 'at least'. I think it is definitely not one of the requirements of the road bike, suit it yourself, especially if your body feels uncomfortable with the seatpost that high.

Hey betsy, at the expense of sounding anal,there are 2 great sources of bike misinformation.#1 is LBS and #2 is bike forums.The guy who told you you should have 10" of seatpost showing on a road bike of your size is on crack!! .I ride relatively small frames for my 6' height,with more post than many and the distance on mine runs 5.5" average from the seat rails to the top of the toptube.....you can find additional fit guidelines at www.coloradocyclist.com and www.anvilbikes.com... If the bike feels good, then the fit and size is probably good, some adjustments are possible and the body adapts to small misfits.As to whether a bit big or a bit small is better depends on the indivudal....I do better on a bit small. Others would go the other way.The bike may fit fine and be the right size, but bike shops are notorious for selling the unknowing what they have rather ,than what one needs.And,BTY, one size smaller would only get you about 3cm of additional post. Now maybe a size 40 would get you that 10",but I don't think you want to go there......

The R500 is a traditional design, not a compact frame , so 5" of exposed seatpost would give a frame with adequate standover height.
The 10" of exposed post would be appropriate for a compact design, which differs in the that top tube instead of being horizontal, is tilted down to meet the seat tube lower, hence more seatpost is needed. You shouldnt size a compact frame according to traditional methods (ie by standover clearance).

With your R500, the major difference between the 53cm and 52cm is the length of the bike. The smaller bike is 0.5cm shorter.
How does the bike feel for length. Do your bars come easily to hand without feeling distant or remote? Can you use the drops, holding them by the hook of the curve rather than holding near the bar ends.

If you are chosing between 2 bike sizez, the smaller one will permit you to move the bars lower, and the larger one will have the bars higher. It depends what style of riding you do, but most riders tend to have their bars too low for the riding they do.

10" ?? wow if that was/is true I would never get a bike to fit other than custom made. I ride a compact frame in the smallest size trek makes (43cm) and my seat post is out 5".(I'm 5foot tall) I would be more concerned with reach. The best bet I've found is to find the top racers in your area and ask them who/where they go, who their mechanic is! Everyone I asked where really,really helpfull!! (Wouldn't have anything to do with being female?:p )

If it's any consolation, my old grease-stained bicycle "bible," Richard's Bicycle Book from back in the '70s, says the seat post on a road bike is normally between 3 and 5 inches out of the frame.

My seatpost is out 5 inches, although I have the same problem as you. I suspect I was sold, or I bought, too large a frame because of the length of the top tube. I may just go with a shorter handlebar stem and forget about it.

At least the place you bought your bike fit you according to top tube rather than seat tube lenght.

If I had been thinking faster, I would have sat on some smaller bikes and gotten a feel for them. As it was, I just walked in and bought.

condor

I've a chance at getting a Cannondale R500, it's a 54cm frame, just went through that Wrench Science checkup and it said I should have a 49cm frame...Yikes, right now I am riding a rather old Schwinn Super Le Tour that is about right but not sure of it's frame size as it was in inches when I picked that up in 1976, I think it was 22" or something like that...

The question is, will that 54cm frame be SO much larger that I shouldn't get it? I will go to a store and try one out I guess that would be the quickest thing to do, as the bike I may get is in California and I'm in PA...

By the way...what is the best method for someone to ship a bicycle from California to PA? and about what would be the shipping?

Thanks you guys/gals...
G2

Forget about the "size", get the top tube length right , that is far more important.

Tube length...meaning that when on the bike my reach is proper?
G2

exactly. Its the best way to compare 2 bikes.
To be really accurate, you need to know how much of the top tube is behind the bottom bracket, and how much in front, but that is a minor issue.
You also need to get the stem length, but that can be changed.

Online sizing guides are pretty crude. They take little account of how you like to ride.

Betsy Girl

I believe convential wisdom for traditional frames is the seat tube should be exposed apporxiamately the length of a clenched fist. My clenched fist is approx. 4", so a 5" exposed length of seat tube sounds proper, for a traditional frame. A 10" length sounds like the frame is undersized.

Additionally, two responders made keen statements:
1. Get the top tube length correct so you have less weight on your hands.
2. Exposed seat tube may not be an issue if you have adequate standover height.

You may want to check out Rivendell for framing sizing tips.

John Hawrylak
Woodstown NJ

I am a little confused as how to make sure the top tube is long enough. I just bought a 57cm Lemond Zurich and if I go by the stand over length then it would be a little to small. But when I am in the drops I can't see the front hub which is suppose to mean it is just right. When I check the geometry of the Zurich with other mfg my 57 is almost the same as most 58 and 59's especially the top tube, however the stand over height is a little lower.

As far as seat post goes I will have to measure but I think it is a little more than 5" so I am one of those that feels my LBS might not have been totally truthfull. I have only ridden it a couple of times and it feels good, but I do feel a little streched out. One thing I have noticed though when I am on the brake hoods, even though I feel strecthed when I move up on the bars I don't stay there long I move right back to the hoods. So I must like the streched out feeling. I might add that this is my first drop bar road bike. I have been riding a flat bar road bike and a mountain bike.

Sorry for rambling.

Someone mentioned the Rivendell web site. If you search under "Rivendell frame fit" you can read their philosophy about frame sizing.

They say to get the LARGEST frame you can based on safe standover height because that way the handlebars will be approximately the same height as the saddle (maybe a tad lower), providing the most comfortable riding position.

That position is a 45-degree bend in the back, half way between bolt upright and flat out horizontal.

They say not to worry about getting too long a top tube. That can be "fine tuned" by buying a shorter and possibly HIGHER stem. They have entire essays devoted to stems under their Bicycling 101 column.

Granted, the Rivendell approach is stubbornly traditional, but it is consoling to those of us who feel distraught over having bought too large a frame.

In other words, my giant 24" Trek touring bike with the lugged frame is actually the perfect mount, and the 58cm (23") Fuji I just bought is, if anything too SMALL, not too large. Actually I think it's probably just right.

condor

Well one of the guys I ride with had the best advice I have heard on fit. I told him someone made the comment that the bike I just bought might be a little small. He asked me if it was comfortable and I said very much so and he said then don't worry about it and ride it. Makes sense to me because you can worry yourself sick reading all the opinions on sizing and after all the most important thing is comfort.

I bought this bike because on my other one I sit to upright so I wanted to be stretched out more. For others they may want to be more upright so I guess it is just like the rest of life. Different strokes for different folks.

agreed. seems like the only real way to tell is to ride it. no two people are built the same, nor do they have the same preferences. pretty much hoses the mail order business, i guess. LBSs everywhere rejoice!