I'm 70" tall with cycling inseam 32" or so (maximum into crotch) and planned to go with a 2007 Specialized Tricross Comp 56cm frame. I found the smaller 54cm frame just doesn't give me the pedal extension my legs yearn for.
Well, I went into the LBS for a customized sizing. After their calculations, they informed me that I'm on the shorter torso and longer inseam side of things, and that a 56cm would be fine for the legs but impossible for the arms. They said I must go with a 54cm and they'd still need to swap to a shorter (nearer) handlebar extension to correct for the apparent arm stretch and body bend to reach the Tricross's lower grips.
I test rode both the 54cm and 56cm, and the 54cm seemed cramped in the legs, despite their telling me the seat can be adjusted incredibly high. Maybe I'm old school, but I just feel weird riding a relatively tiny frame (my perception) with the seat extended a foot or more.
My dilemma - go with the more comfortable 56cm for legs and swap to shortest possible handlebar extension and live with some arm stretching, or take their advice and go with 54cm more cramped legs and smaller frame feel and raise the seat high?
Thanks!
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
hmmm - seat extended a foot or more. seems like a lot.still, having too long a reach really would suck. on a properly adjusted 54 cm frame, how much is the seat highter than the bar? I have some bikes with pretty high seats, but not a foot of seatpost showing.
i have the tricross in a 54. I am 70" as well, but with a longer torso and shortish legs and the 54 fits me fine. its possible that the tricross is just a bad fit for your dimensions. it happens. I would not intentionally buy a bike that didn't fit in BOTH the reach and seat post length. thats one of the reasons I hace a Felt road bike (long top tube).
Slow Train
Likewise I'm 70 in. with a 32 in pants inseam and ride a 54 cm Tricross. This is a compact frame so a lot of seat extension is normal. Also it's a cyclocross bike so you are supposed to have a more upright posture.
I don't ride the drops much and find it a bit cramped when I do (arms are not particularly long). If I were doing a lot of extended road riding then I would simply swap in a longer stem.
Richard8655
Thanks guys. I wound up buying the 56cm Tricross Comp (2007) after the LBS swapped in a shorter 75mm stem. That brought the handlebars into comfortable range.
In comparison and based on your (jbpence and Slow Train) suggestions, I test rode a 54cm Tricross Comp (at LBS) over and over, since you're both the same height as me. But during pedaling, my legs felt cramped and at one point it felt as if my knees were rotating so high as to be slightly pushing into my lower abdomen (I have no beer gut). This even after initial proper seat height adjustment with slightly bent knee at bottom pedal extension.
The 56cm however felt just right for pedaling. I have an adequate inch or 2 standover height with the 56cm. So, I suppose it all boils down to personal preference, torso/leg ratio differences, and what we're used to from bikes we rode in the past. I wonder if there are any other 70" or so tall Tricross owners who went with the 56cm. In any event, thanks guys for your help.
(By the way, the Scott Cyclocross Comp came in a very close 2nd to the Specialized Tricross in my evaluations, comparisons, and test rides of various cyclocross bikes before making the decision.)
jbpence
well, i did mention i have SHORT legs and a longer torso. I wear 20" inseam pants. good that you found a correct size. I LOVE my sworks tricross.
flargle
I test rode a 54cm Tricross Comp (at LBS) over and over, since you're both the same height as me. But during pedaling, my legs felt cramped and at one point it felt as if my knees were rotating so high as to be slightly pushing into my lower abdomen (I have no beer gut). This even after initial proper seat height adjustment with slightly bent knee at bottom pedal extension.Congratulations on trusting your instincts. You probably could have gotten the 54 to work for you, but it would have taken a riser stem (ugly) and been a total kluge.
JustBrowsing
well, i did mention i have SHORT legs and a longer torso. I wear 20" inseam pants. good that you found a correct size. I LOVE my sworks tricross.
Please tell me that 20" is a typo. If you're 70" tall with a 20" inseam then you should consider riding your bike for the circus. :D
Helmet Head
FWIW, I'm 5'10 (70") and buy pants with a 30" inseam, and I went with the 56 too, thought I'm on a tight budget and getting the Tricross Sport. Should get it this week.
Any problems with the fork shuddering when braking?
jbpence
yup a typo - i meant 30". though that would be a COOL job.
Richard8655
Thanks for input all. Flargle is correct, 54 would have worked but with some awkward adjustments.
HH, no fork shuddering here so far, but have not ridden it enough to really know. Will keep eye out for anything suspicious. Glad 56 was good fit for you too (I feel less weird now about this size choice).
jbpence, while looking at the comp I test rode an sworks - incredible.