Road Bike Racing - A smaller bike; is it faster?

I have a Trek 5200 in a size 56. I am borderline for both that size and the 58. The more miles I have on it the more I feel I should have gotten the 58. The 56 is too small and I have had to lengthen the stem and raise the seatpost just past that little mark of doom.

But here's the real question: will a smaller frame size give me any advantage in a race over a larger sized frame?

I hate to say it but it sounds like you are trying to justify keeping the bike. It's too small. Sell it and get another one. Have you considered a profesional bike fit. My LBS does it for about 50 bucks. It may help you to decide. Small frames in racing imo is old school thinking. Frames were a bit heavier years ago. Even then I don't think it would be worth it. If you cannot stretch out enough the bike will suck for racing.

I am not getting how it would be faster

It'll be a tiny bit lighter... but the comfort of one that fits properly will, I'm sure, give you more speed and/or endurance.

It will be a tiny bit lighter, but unless you are already completely blowing yourself to bits on the climbs, and 2 seconds at the top is keeping you out of the money, its pointless. The weight difference is less than the powerbar in your pocket.

And by riding a bike that is to small, you probably can't get as aerodynamic as you could on one that fits you properly, and being aero and comfortable will reap huge rewards as far as time and speed compared to saving a few ounces of frame material.

I hate to say it but it sounds like you are trying to justify keeping the bike. It's too small. Sell it and get another one. Have you considered a profesional bike fit. My LBS does it for about 50 bucks. It may help you to decide. Small frames in racing imo is old school thinking. Frames were a bit heavier years ago. Even then I don't think it would be worth it. If you cannot stretch out enough the bike will suck for racing.
Yep that's exactly what I'm doing.
I will try to sell it this spring.
I can pick up a new one for cheap I just didn't want to hassle with it. I was hoping that a smaller bike may actually have advantages...

Yep that's exactly what I'm doing.
I will try to sell it this spring.
I can pick up a new one for cheap I just didn't want to hassle with it. I was hoping that a smaller bike may actually have advantages...

I'm a little curious about how you can pick up a 5200 for cheap.

The 56 is too small and I have had to lengthen the stem and raise the seatpost just past that little mark of doom.

lower your seatpost, that mark is on there for good reason, if failure were to occur you could get seriously injured... so either buy a cheap longer seatpost or lower it... but it is dangerous to ride with it past the min insertion mark.

The idea behind smaller frames was to be stiffer as well as lighter. On older bikes the stiffness was a big factor before all the improvements in frame materials. I don't think it's a big factor now and I don't really get all the rage for compact frames. If you want a light frame and have the $ you can get it standard or compact without any loss in ride quality...the problem is there are so many great frames to choose from

I am not getting how it would be faster

Maybe it would keep his body a little lower to the ground? or no?

I've been meaning to ask a few questions about the importance of crank length and position and leg length in efficiency in pro racing, someday.

So what you are saying is you have a bike for sale?

I still adhere to the theory that you should buy the smallest bike that FITS you. It will improve the stiffness and it will be lighter, and not just by the weight of an energy bar. You will also gain addtional standover height.

The caveat to this whole discussion is that you need to be fitted properly. I would not get a bigger frame until I was sure that the set-up on the old one had been properly tweaked. There is nothing worse than a frame that is too large.

Check out the pro bikes. To this day they are all using long stems and have lots of exposed seatpost. This is after being custom fitted to their rigs.

I'm a little curious about how you can pick up a 5200 for cheap.
Well it is all about who ya know isn't it?



So what you are saying is you have a bike for sale?
It would appear so. 2002 1,200 miles, complete with aerobars: EBAY here I come.

I have a Trek 5200 in a size 56. I am borderline for both that size and the 58. The more miles I have on it the more I feel I should have gotten the 58. The 56 is too small and I have had to lengthen the stem and raise the seatpost just past that little mark of doom.

But here's the real question: will a smaller frame size give me any advantage in a race over a larger sized frame?

You can't be faster on a bike that does not fit. Find a bike shop with a Cyclocomputer so you can look at your pedalling stroke.

Example..when I got my new R3000, we put it on the computer without any sizing done, just guessed at it. My pedal stroke should look round on the computer screen graph. It looked like a peanut. Two places in the stroke were not good due to fit. After an hour of tweaking and changing and measuring, same resistance, I went from an 85RPM peanut to a 95RPM circle.

Last racer we fit picked up two MPH with a cleat adjsutment and refitting and repositioning his seat.

That's how you get fast...on a bike that fits. Everything else being equal.

It's too bad that you ended up with a ill fitting bike, especially an expensive one. If you bought it at a bike shop at their recommendation, I'd take it back.

Hummm... I just bought a new seatpost with a 20mm setback and it seems to make a heck of a differance in sizing. I bought it in a 330 length but I actually have it at a lower position than I had my old seatpost.
Perhaps it was more of a setback issue than a length issue. On first trial it feels better, but only time will tell I guess.