Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Fifty Plus (50+) Share the victories, challenges, successes and special concerns of bicyclists 50 and older. Especially useful for those entering or reentering bicycling.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-23-11, 11:58 AM   #1
oldbikeguy
Are we there yet?
Thread Starter
 
oldbikeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: St. Charles, MO
Bikes:
Posts: 39
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Question about Trek 'Virtual / Actual' sizing.

I知 looking at buying a slightly used 2005 Trek 1000C. Unfortunately I知 not able to see the bike in person. The sizing sticker on the bike says 天irtual 58 / Actual 53.

Compared to the sizes I知 use to seeing 54, 56, et al; What size is this bike?

Thanks in advance
David
oldbikeguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-11, 12:22 PM   #2
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd say 58 cm.

Most the time virtual mean the direct distance from the seatpost to the headtube on frames with a sloping toptube such as the Pilot and other compact frames.

Most 58 cm bikes have a toptube of 58 cm.

If it's referring to the seatube length, then the shorter distance will be the actual since it is a sloping totube. The vritual will be the ditance to the imaginary tube had it been straight, which would be a greater distance, more like a 58.

I could be wrong but I'm betting a 58cm bike.

Bike was sized in 50-54-58 and 63.......I can't find the geo chart for this model.

http://www.trekbikes.com/au/en/bikes/2005/archive/1000c
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-11, 12:36 PM   #3
CACycling
Senior Member
 
CACycling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oxnard, CA
Bikes: '08 Fuji Roubaix RC; '07 Schwinn Le Tour GS; '92 Diamond Back Ascent EX
Posts: 4,565
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd say Beanz is right. I looked at a pic of the bike on bikepedia and the top tube is sloped quite a bit.
CACycling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-11, 01:09 PM   #4
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Gina's Pilot size 47 (similar slope on tube)

The virtual is 47 (the longer dimension) and the actual is 46 (shorter dimension).

With the difference in size frame dimensions you posted, may change the ratio of the difference in dimensions. As well as maybe a slightly different geometry.

But usually the virtual is the actual distance ina straight line. 58 cm bikes usually havea 58 top tube length.

As her 47 has a 47 virtual toptube length.


Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-11, 04:31 PM   #5
stapfam
Time for a change.
 
stapfam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: 6 miles inland from the coast of Sussex, in the South East of England
Bikes: Dale MT2000. Bianchi FS920 Kona Explosif. Giant TCR C. Boreas Ignis. Pinarello Fp Uno.
Posts: 19,915
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Beanz View Post
All the frames I have known and the measurement given for frame size is the length of the seat tube. So the Actual size of 53 would be that the frame is a compact frame and that is the height of the join of the seat tube to the top tube (Or possibly where the Seat clamp is)----And the size of 58 would be the height of the seat tube with a line drawn as if the frame had a level top tube as measured on a conventional frame

So the frame if built as a conventional frame would be a 58 with the Top tube of the length to suit that size of frame. But if you are looking at it as a 53-- then it may fit on saddle height but the Reach to the bars may be a bit long and the bars may be a bit higher than you are wanting.
__________________
How long was I in the army? Five foot seven.


Spike Milligan

Last edited by stapfam; 03-23-11 at 04:37 PM.
stapfam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-11, 04:50 PM   #6
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's right, I put the virual in as a point to show that the 47 toptube length corresponds to the 47 size of the bike which is the seat tube.

I shouldn't have put in the 46 in this case which was only to show the difference between virtual an actual. I only made it confusing, I confused myself.

But I still say it's a 58.
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-11, 09:49 AM   #7
Mr. Beanz
Banned.
 
Mr. Beanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Upland Ca
Bikes: Lemond Chambery/Cannondale R-900/Trek 8000 MTB/Burley Duet tandem
Posts: 20,030
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hmm, strange how people post then vanish without so much as a yeah you're right, no you're not, or a shut up stupid.
Mr. Beanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:54 AM.