Fitting Your Bike - What frame size should I be focus on for a vintage road bike?
Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.
07-10-13, 02:05 AM
Two weeks back I was in a collision with a car while riding my bike. I've recovered from the crash, however my 1972 Peugeot PX-10 E is toast (bent frame and fork). So I'm back on the hunt, looking for a new vintage road bike to ride.
My question is this: What frame size or size range should I be focusing on? I'm totally lost here. I'm 184,5 cm tall (6.05 feet) and got a inseam of 88 cm (34.6 inches). My PX-10 is 58 C-T and i feel that it's little on the big side. That would be about 60 C-C, right? Since I live in Europe a C-C measurement would be most appreciated.
07-10-13, 05:53 AM
First, have you taken the frame to a frame expert to see if it can be straightened? It would be sad to truly lose the bike.
Second, is your 88 cm your trouser inside leg or your cycling inseam?
Third, C-T is usually about 1.5 cm longer than C-C. 58 cm C-T should be about 56.5 cm C-C. To go 1 cm smaller is a 55.5 cm, and this seems a little small for someone of your stature. My upper limit is 56 cm (only some 56 cm bikes) and my inseam is 81.4 cm. My theoretical size is 53 cm, so yours should be 57 c-c. I think you have long legs for your height.
What seemed too big about your PX-10?
07-11-13, 01:52 AM
I took the bike to my LBS who also is a frame builder (and locally regarded as a pretty good one at that). He told me that it probably would cost me more to straighten the frame and repaint it than finding a different bike. Unfortunately, during the crash, the paint was cracked along the top tube and the down tube. He also measured the frame with some kind of tool to see the difference and it was about 2 cm difference between the both sides (about an inch).
I'm not sure what the difference is but I used a large hard cover book held between my legs up as far as it would go (simulating the saddle pressure). Standing on the floor without shoes my girlfriend made a pen mark against the wall where the book spine was then I measured with a tape measure. We actually did this three times to be sure.
Oh I see! So my theoretical size should be 57 c-c and 58,5 c-t? Yes, 55.5 cm seems a little small. How is this calculated? Just curious :)
Usually bike inseam x 0.65 = seat tube c-to-c is the rule of thumb.
If you have long legs for your height, you have a short torso for your height, so possibly the dimension to focus on is top tube length. In other words, a bike with seat tube c-to-c of 57 cm might be right for your legs, but that doesn't mean the tube, which might be 57 cm as well, is right for your torso/arms.
07-18-13, 12:38 PM
184 cm tall here. I have a longer torso and shorter legs (generally). I ride a 58 cm frame, usually about a 57 c-t-c top tube, and find that a 11 cm quill stem is right. So the reach, generally, is about 68 cm. +/- 0.5 cm and with variations in the saddle to handlebar drop. Saddle height from extreme pedal spindle is ~94 cm.
Does this help?
07-19-13, 06:03 AM
Phil, how did you measure reach? Between what two points did you measure?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.