Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    custom bloke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    88
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    bike fit problem

    My current bike is a size 60-61 with a sloping top tube. The effective top tube length is 59 cm, the stem is 12 and I feel that I'm too stretched out. However, the 35 cm seatpost is already beyond the limit mark, so in this respect you couldn' t say the frame was too large for me. Also, here are my measurements and results from Competitive cyclist:
    Measurements
    -------------------------------------------
    Inseam: 87
    Trunk: 70
    Forearm: 33.8
    Arm: 63.5
    Thigh: 63.5
    Lower Leg: 56.8
    Sternal Notch: 156.5
    Total Body Height: 187.5


    The Competitive Fit (cm)
    -------------------------------------------
    Seat tube range c-c: 56.4 - 56.9
    Seat tube range c-t: 58.1 - 58.6
    Top tube length: 54.8 - 55.2
    Stem Length: 11.2 - 11.8
    BB-Saddle Position: 74.6 - 76.6
    Saddle-Handlebar: 54.2 - 54.8
    Saddle Setback: 6.6 - 7.0
    Seatpost Type: SETBACK

    This also suggests that I need shorter top tube. But, A. where do I get a frame with 58 seat tube, 55 top tube, B. I'm 6' 2", doesn't a 55 top tube seem odd for my height?

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I got the same problem myself, below are my numbers off comp. cyclist. I ride a 61cm frame today with a 59cm Top tube, fitted with a 90 mm stem. Still I feel too stretched out. Planning on getting a new bike, but it's not easy. I'm looking at frame sizes 57-59 and max TT around 57. I believe the 2cm extra will be enough, since moving my seat forward 2cm on my 'old' bike feels right when stretched out. (too bad my knees don't like this setup...)



    Good luck finding your setup



    Measurements
    -------------------------------------------
    Inseam: 92
    Trunk: 66
    Forearm: 35
    Arm: 68
    Thigh: 65
    Lower Leg: 62
    Sternal Notch: 161
    Total Body Height: 191


    The Competitive Fit (cm)
    -------------------------------------------
    Seat tube range c-c: 59.6 - 60.1
    Seat tube range c-t: 61.4 - 61.9
    Top tube length: 56.0 - 56.4
    Stem Length: 11.7 - 12.3
    BB-Saddle Position: 86.0 - 88.0
    Saddle-Handlebar: 55.3 - 55.9
    Saddle Setback: 6.3 - 6.7
    Seatpost Type: NON-SETBACK

  3. #3
    Senior Member gfrance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    1,757
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Whenever I see these skewed results that just appear too odd, I always assume that something is wrong with the inputs. Make sure all your measurements are correct. Double and triple check.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gfrance View Post
    Whenever I see these skewed results that just appear too odd, I always assume that something is wrong with the inputs. Make sure all your measurements are correct. Double and triple check.
    Trust me, already did
    I'm tall, using 36" inseam jeans, I got long legs and little shorter torso.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    5,252
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It seems almost impossible for most folks to take accurate measurements of their body parts. I've measured my "cycling" leg length (floor to public bone) dozens of times, and come up with measurements between 34 inches and 35 inches, with 80% of the measurements coming in at about 34 1/2 inches. I wouldn't even bother with arms, and torsos, and other vague and hard-to-define measurements.

    But, rather than spend hours measuring my legs, I can spend two minutes in a bike shop. Stand over a bike, with my belt buckle up against the back of the stem. If the top tube is lightly brushing against my crotch, that bike is in my size range, and I can take it for a test ride. If the top tube is pressing against my crotch, the frame is too tall, and if there is daylight between the top tube and my jeans, the frame is too short.

    In a given model of road bike, there will only be two sizes that are candidates for an "ideal" fit: the frame that lightly brushes against your crotch when you stand with your belt buckle up against the back of the stem, and the frame that is one size smaller. A few minutes at a bike shop tells you which of those two sizes feel the best in a road test.

    Many hours spent measuring yourself and reading stuff on the internet will not get you properly fitted on a bike.

  6. #6
    Mmmmm potatoes idcruiserman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Idaho
    Posts
    1,921
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's because your arms are relatively short for your height. Same 'problem' I have.
    Idaho

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    58
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I tried out your measurements on http://www.bikesuperhub.com/bikefit with a Saddle Height above Handlebar of 7cm and it gives a longer top tube + stem length combination.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    247
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No worry.
    I also received some questionable measurements from the Competitive calculator.
    Although Competitive's method seems better than Lemond's, because it also takes into cosideration thigh length (hence KOPS position),... No formula is 100% bang on.
    Try to also obtain a good fit/size recommendation from an experienced fitter.

  9. #9
    Senior Member rufvelo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    4,189
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by alanbikehouston View Post
    It seems almost impossible for most folks to take accurate measurements of their body parts. I've measured my "cycling" leg length (floor to public bone) dozens of times, and come up with measurements between 34 inches and 35 inches, with 80% of the measurements coming in at about 34 1/2 inches. I wouldn't even bother with arms, and torsos, and other vague and hard-to-define measurements....
    Quit using measuring tapes made in China, Alan

    You do have a point though.

Posting Permissions

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