Reisen

After a few weeks of research and a few test rides, I bought a Trek 1500 double on sale for $899 at Revolution cycles here in DC today. This will be my first road bike (or any bike for that matter) since high school. I'm excited about getting into cycling, and will be commuting 25 miles round trip on the W&OD trail from Vienna to Georgetown University (I'm a 27 year old starting business school there next month).

I wound up buying from Revolution because I felt they did the best job in fitting me (taking a ton of measurements versus just having me stand over the bike as at REI and Spokes). That said, their fitment confirmed what I already knew: that I have a relatively non-standard body measurement, in that much of my height is in my torso rather than my legs. I routinely hit my head on the interiors of sports cars when I sit up straight, even though I'm only 6'1, as I am very tall when sitting.

Each time they measured me (I had them do it twice, on different days), the measurements came back screwy in the computer, and either recommended 50 cm frames, or 63 cm frames (neither of which is right, obviously). They wound up putting me on a 56, which had about the right amount of top-bar clearance.

I test-rode a 56 for about 30 minutes, and liked the bike a lot, but was pretty sore afterwards (I had already test-ridden another bike for 30 minutes before that). Besides the fact that I can barely sit down due to 15 miles on non-padded shorts, my shoulders and neck are pretty sore, and I kind of felt like I was craning my neck to see.

The bike is going to be prepped tomorrow (clipless pedals put on, wireless computer, etc.). When I got home tonight, I did some research on the forums, and found both competitive cyclist's fit calculator (www.competitivecyclist.com) and Dave Moulton's fit calculator (https://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm#FrameChart), which were both very useful.

I measured myself carefully using a level and a yardstick. At 72.75 inches tall, with a 33.25 inch inseam, and an 11.5 shoe size, Dave Moulton's calculator has me between a 56 and a 59 cm bike.

Looking at Trek's website on measurements for the 1500, and plugging in all the measurements I took into competitive cyclist, it appears a 58 cm trek would give me ideal #'s (57.3cm top tube length, 58cm C to T size) for the "Eddy" fit (Eddy fit range for the size was 58.0-58.5). A "Competitive fit" would have me between 56.8 and 57.3 cm's, but the 1500 doesn't come in a 57.

When I stood over a 58 at the bike shop, I still had about an inch of clearance, versus two inches on the 56. The girl at the bike shop said the 56 would be more comfortable for longer rides (25 mile RT commute), as I would be more upright, and wouldn't have to lean over as much to reach the bars on a longer wheelbase bike. After doing all this research, I now think this was wrong, and everything points towards the correct answer being a 58cm bike.

Anyone mind helping out a new cyclist and telling me whether I'm on the right track, or if I'm missing something here. I haven't picked up the bike yet, so it's obviously not too late.

Edit: I'm 6'1, 185lbs, and pretty fit, if that helps at all.

Hirohsima

There is no easy answer as each person may have a different preference on how they want their bike to fit. For 6'1" I would have put you on a 58cm bike (worked at a shop for 6 years... 10 years ago so the compact frame craze may make that a bit different now).

Perhaps they were sizing you down because your upper body is shorter than normal, or perhaps so you could ride in a more upright position (which is what a smaller frame tends to do).

You could have been tense when riding (since riding is new to you), and 30 minutes of tense shoulders makes for pain afterword.

The best thing IMHO is to see if they have rentals that you can use for 1 day each. Ride both sizes. Most of the time shops will rent a lower model of the same bike (probably a Trek 1000). The only difference will be in the grade of parts and not the frame or sizing geometry. Try both sizes and see what feels the best.

Since I presume you have already paid but have not taken recepit of the bike, they should be motivated to still make you happy. Once you have taken the bike home and ridden it, the shop will be less inclined to take it back since they will not be able to sell the bike as new.

MONGO!

I'm 5'8 and I ride a 56cm, it's at the large end of the scale for me, but it fits.

A 56 and a 58 could be set up to have the same seat to bars length, so there's not absolute right or wrong size.
If it can be adjusted to be a comfortable top tube length, it's the right size.

Stand over clearance is pretty irrelevant as far as riding comfort goes.

Having said that, I think the 58 would be more in the ballpark.

USAZorro

It sounds like all you may need to do is raise the stem a little bit. It is not unusual for a new/returning rider to experience discomfort in the locations you've mentioned for the first couple weeks of riding. Definitely tell the people in the shop what you said here, but they might have it right, and you could well find yourself loving your bike in 2-3 weeks.

greyg8r

I am 5'11 1/2 with a 32" inseam and have about 1" of clearance on the standover height wth a 57cm Klein. Like some of the earlier posters, I think 58 is probably more reasonable than a 57 as your torso and legs are reasonably proportional at least to me, but is probably well within the adjustment range. And, I suspect that some of your neck strain will subside with time and muscle development.

When I worked in an LBS many years ago, many new road (then called 10-speed) riders would return after two days complaining about neck pain but then would be fine.

wrobertdavis

I am 5' 11" and ride a 58 cm specialized. I had to fight with a couple of shops over size, who said a 58 would be too big. I think the issue was that they did not have a 58 in stock. I finally bought from a shop that had both a 56 and 58 in stock. That dealer recommended the 58. On the 56, I had to move the saddle way back. On the 58, I had to move it forward. I put a shorter stem on the 58. I am glad I insisted on the 58. After 4000 miles, a couple of professional fits and various tweaks and a few saddle changes, I am very happy with my situation. I could never have arrived at my current fit on the smaller frame.

I simply cannot fathom that you could be happy with a 56 frame as you are taller than I am. Standover clearance has nothing to do with proper fit, unless you are determined to ride your bike by walking it down the street. :-)

I am sure your soreness is largely due to lack of adaption to the forward leaning roadbike position. I had it too. It lasted about a week, if I recall correctly. The body naturally adapts. Today I ride with my handlebars 4" lower than when I first started riding.

Bob

Reisen

Thanks for the responses. So, quick question, if you have to err, do you err on the side of a smaller frame, or a larger? I've read that more aggressive riders ride smaller frames, would you agree?

I have to think it's telling that so many of these fit calculators have me on a 58. I'm thinking I should test-ride a 58 tomorrow... Will I feel a difference? I mean, 2cm really isn't much, so is it even worth test riding?

Too bad Trek doesn't make the 1500 in a 57...

yogi13

I tend to err going small, but the best course is not to err.

You've got to take the online fit calculators with a rather large grain of salt. They don't do so well on people like you or me whose proportions tend to run to mostly torso and arms, and they don't take into account some fairly important individual characteristics, such as flexibility and core strength, that can move you up or down a size.

For instance, I'm 5'10", mostly torso with very long arms for my height. The competitive cyclist calculator put me on anything from a 52 to 55 top tube, with a fairly normal stem length. I got a split between people recommending that I get a 54 or 56 when LBS sales people gave me a snap judgment on size, and test rode several bikes at each size. Finally I got measured at an LBS using the specialized fit system, and ended up on a 56 with a 130 stem. Main difference is that other factors were taken into account, namely that I'm extremely flexible, with the core strength to ride comfortably on the hoods in a fairly laid out pose, and to get really low in the drops. They also asked about my preferences in riding stance, from fairly upright to aero, and intended type of riding (i.e. length of ride, casual vs. speed, racing or not, etc.). As a result my bike fits both my body proportions and physical capabilities. I also own an older bike that is around a 53, and while it is a little small, I rode it for years without a lot of problems.

Your LBS may have taken you in the other direction because you don't have a lot of flexibility, didn't look capable of sustaining an aggressive position, etc. I would definitely test ride the two sizes.

brianallan

Then you don't have much experience with bike fitting. Height is not a good determiner of frame size. Torso length is the primary consideration. I'm 6'1" and I ride a 56 with a 90mm stem.

FidelCastrovich

Longer torso usually means longer top tube, which means bigger size bike with the saddle set lower than what "appears" normal.
Bigger bike also means higher headtube = higher handlebar. Which is good for a beginner.


I'd go for the bigger bike, if i were you. Then again, i subscribe to the Rivendell view that bigger=more comfortable, which is not commonly accepted here.

idcruiserman

Get a 58.

j.w

+1. I'm 6'1" riding a 56 with a 110mm.

I used to ride a 58cm and it never felt right regardless of changing stems etc.

OP you should definitely test ride both sizes. One may feel more 'natural' and comfortable than the other.

EatMyA**

This is soooooo true. I ride a 63 with the seat way in front and a VERY short stem. or I ride a 56 with the seat back and the regular stem. and I am over 6'5".

dekindy

If they have Trek, then they may also have Lemond bikes. I have read several comments that Lemonds are designed for cyclists with longer torsos. You might try that.

Reisen

They do have Lemond, but only higher end Lemonds. To give you guys an idea of my proportions, my trunk is 29.5 inches, and my (biking) inseam is 33.25. The other thing is I have short arms (24 inches). So just long core, short arms and legs.

That said, it sounds like there's no "right" answer here, although most of what I've read online (Rivendell, Dave Moulton) would seem to argue that a larger bike is going to be more comfortable for someone with a longer torso. It will also reduce my reach given my short arms.

On the flip side, it seems a lot of people around my height are on 56's that fit them. I think I'm going to have to go back in and ask them to fit me on a 58 as well, and see how it feels.

alfidog

I'm 6'1.5" with a 34" inseam and just bought a kuota kharma in Large 55 seat tube and a 55 top tube, I argued till I was blue in the face that I needed a size bigger but the local bike shop wouldn't have it. I started with a 12cm stem and I am on a 10cm stem and might try a 9cm stem yet!

fprintf

Same bike here, Trek 1500 but I got mine in a 58cm. I am 6'0" with 32 inch inseam. The bike fits me reasonably well however there were some adjustments that had to be made to get it to fit just right... I have always thought that a 56cm would have fit me better but the fit said otherwise and I was right between two sizes. Fortunately the bike has enough adjustments to make either size fit.

1. We spent 90 minutes with the bike up on the trainer with me lightly pedaling. First adjustment was fitting the cleats to the shoes.
2. The saddle was pushed *all* the way back to make more room in the cockpit and get my knees over the spindle.
3. My back angle was a bit sharper than they would have liked and they recommended I change out the stem for one with a few more degrees of angle.

Other than that, I think most of the aches and pains will tend to go away with mileage. So if you are feeling tight in your shoulders/neck or tingly in your hands/feet you may need to give yourself a few miles to get your body used to it. I see in your original post that you are a fairly inexperienced cyclist. Just as a point of reference, my first 6 mile ride I felt the same way as you. But I gave it some time and just yesterday I did my first metric century (62+ miles) and felt good the entire way with only a little neckache towards the end in the last 5 miles.

skiracing

While we're on this topic of bike sizes, I got a question about mine. I recently got a TCR 2 size large (55.5). I'm at around 6 feet with fairly long legs (sorry dont have precise measure, but that's what i've been told). When i stand over the top tube there is decent amount of clearance but for riding the bike I haven't had to raise the saddle too much. The stem is at 90 mm and my arms are stretched out but not quite fully straight out. Since I'm new I dont know enough to say what feels normal and what doesn't... but I think when I'm in the drops (i hope I'm using proper terminology) it feels as though i'm somewhat cramped on the bike... as though the top tube is on the short side. The the other riding position that makes me wonder about the size is when I get out of the saddle, it almost feels like my hands have to reach far below in order to have my legs extended over the pedals and spinning comfortably (im guessing this is due to the longer legs i mentioned), so this kinda created a hook type position where I'm slightly bending my back over the handle bars (not sure if u see the picture).

I guess my only question is, what do you think of the bike size? Is this typical of Giant's compact frame design? And finally what sort of feeling/positioning am I supposed to expereince when i'm riding out of the saddle on a hill (aside from the burn in the legs ).

Thanks
Alex

Campag4life

In spite of some LBS's being good about fitting, just as many get it wrong. We are the same size. I know for fact, I would ride either a 58 or even a 60cm Trek if for touring. I ride a 59 c-t-t now.
The girl that advised you didn't have a clue...common. They also size up riders in other ways...what inventory can they off load thinking at the end of the day one frame size doesn't matter to a novice rider...well it does. That 20mm in head tube length increase you get between sizes makes quite a big difference in comfort.
A 56 for your size is a very racey fit and wouldn't suit most with your size.

Campag4life

A large in a Giant for a 6'er with long legs is on the money. A M/L would be a very racey fit for you with a big drop to the handlebars. I think you are on the right size.

nringo

Not really related to your fit issue - but I bought the same bike from Revolution, on Friday actually. I got mine at the Rockville store.

Reisen

Ok, just got back from Revolution in Clarendon. I walked in 30 minutes after they opened and explained to the manager pretty much what I wrote in my OP. His response was "She messed up, there's no way you're a 56, I can tell just from eyeballing you". Ok...

So they brought out a 58, and had me test ride it. The only confusing thing was they didn't make all the adjustments before the test ride, except for seat height.

Test ride felt good, a little stretched out, but didn't have to crane my neck nearly as much to see.

Got back to the store, and I asked that they put me on a trainer and make adjustments to the seat position, as they had done on the 56. They were friendly, but the reply was "why don't you ride it like this for a week or so, then come back if it doesn't feel right". I insisted they put me on the trainer, and they finally did. Immediately they could tell the seat needed to come down, and be pushed forward. This was nice, as the resulting ride felt less aggressive, with less weight on my wrists. The trainer got progressively more comfortable as they did the adjustments.

I was pretty happy with the bike setup by the end, and I'm pretty confident a 58 is the right size for me. I felt the shop was just "ok". Friendly, and gave lots of good advice, but I'm beginning to think if you really want to get a good fit in anything, whether it's ski boots, road bikes, whatever, the best resource is to educate yourself via the online community...

I spent an absolute ton of money at the shop. $900 bike, $100 clipless pedals/shoes combo (this was on sale), $35 gloves, $50 wireless bike computer, $70 bike shorts, $15 bottle cage, $5 bottle, $35 under-seat-bag with CO2 pump, $6 tubes x2, $40 floor pump, $9 lube. At the end, while they were installing the pedals, I heard the tech ask the manager if he wanted him to give me anything (or at least that's what I thought I heard). The manager said "yeah, give him a couple of those hammer gels, etc.". I never got them, and even hinted a couple of times before I left, asking about the gels, and then just buying a few of them (curious to see if they work).

I'd say for that amount of money (I'd guess lots of that stuff other than the bike are high markup items) I spent, they should at least throw in their own branded waterbottle (if for no reason other than the advertising), and a few of the gel packs... Also, I had to keep asking about things, indicating I was a beginning cyclist and had nothing. It wasn't until the very end that I asked "How do I check the air pressure", that they even mentioned a floor pump. The shop should either give some sort of "beginning cyclist" checklist of things you absolutely have to have to ride (pump, tubes, etc.), or do a better job of steering the customer towards it, without having to be prompted.

Four seconds after I leave the bike shop, I rest my bike against a tree while I unlock my car, and somehow the bark scratched up the seat. So I guess the bike's mine now for good, eh? Without kickstands, what do road cyclists do with their bikes when they get off?

Reynolds 

I'd say a 58 is better for you than a 56. The real issue here is top tube length, the 56 would probably be too short, and the handlebar too low. Maybe you could compensate that with a long flipped up stem, but a 58 will be more comfortable and better looking IMO.

MONGO!

Real bikes don't have kick stands

You can get a stand like this:
https://cgi.ebay.com/delta-rothko-rol...QQcmdZViewItem

Or just get better at leaning it up.

As far as your LBS goes, I'd say it mirrored my experience at my local Trek dealer.
Bought a couple of bikes, one for me, one for my wife, they sold me a bike that is too big (only one they had in stock) with little to no "fit" and as far as service goes I'd have to say it as "adequate"

In contrast the small store where I bought my next bike gave me stellar service, guess which one I'll be going back to?

Pedal Wench

Don't stop riding. Ever.