Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 5 of 5
  1. #1
    Senior Member rankin116's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Troylet
    Posts
    3,642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Sizing question, looking for opinions

    I'm looking at picking up a BD bike, though not sure what size. I ride a 52 road bike with a 53cm TT. I think I should get a 49 from BD, which according to the website has a 52.5cm TT and a standover of 29.6". The 52 size has a 52.9cm TT and a standover of 30.3". My inseam is ~30".

    I think I would be better off with the 49. What do you all think? Thanks.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,965
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rankin116 View Post
    I'm looking at picking up a BD bike, though not sure what size. I ride a 52 road bike with a 53cm TT. I think I should get a 49 from BD, which according to the website has a 52.5cm TT and a standover of 29.6". The 52 size has a 52.9cm TT and a standover of 30.3". My inseam is ~30".

    I think I would be better off with the 49. What do you all think? Thanks.
    You said your road bike is a 52 with 53 TT, so why do you think the 49 cross bike would be better than the 52?

  3. #3
    Senior Member rankin116's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Troylet
    Posts
    3,642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was pretty much going by standover. The difference between the toptube lenghts is almost nil. Is the standover not that important?

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    1,965
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by rankin116 View Post
    I was pretty much going by standover. The difference between the toptube lenghts is almost nil. Is the standover not that important?
    Standover is irrelevant, on a road or cross bike at least. Standover is relevant on a mountain bike where you are picking your way through boulders and such, but mountain bikes are built with tons of standover anyway. In other words, standover is irrelevant.

    What is relevant is the spatial relationship between the five contact points (two hands, two feet, and arse).

    There is only 4mm difference in TT between the 49 and 52. But there is a roughly 30mm difference in head tube length. (They don't publish exact HT numbers, I am inferring 3cm from the seat tube numbers). That means the handlebars are going to be over an inch lower on the 49 than on the 52, while saddle height stays the same. In other words, your butt-to-bars reach would actually be longer on the smaller bike.

    Another way of visualizing this, is that when you move to a smaller frame, you will be using that much more seatpost, which moves your butt up and away from the handlebars. Most people don't quite grok this.

    Sure, you can make up for the lower handlebars with a riser stem, or more spacers, or both, but at a certain point the handling of the bike changes, and you might as well get the correct frame to begin with.

  5. #5
    Senior Member rankin116's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Troylet
    Posts
    3,642
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Allright then, thanks for the help!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •