Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34
  1. #1
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    I hate myself for starting a Mark V fit thread

    ...but I'm ordering tonight and I need a really quick answer. Here's the deal:


    I'm going to try and order a Mark V tonight, and I can't decide between the 59cm and the 56cm.

    My stats:

    Height: 6'1"
    Weight: 150 lb
    Inseam: 33"
    Torso (crotch to top of head): 40"
    Age: 20

    Riding experience: Almost exclusively MTB 'till this year, and as such I really prefer a more upright position. A handlebar drop of more than 5" or so would make me pretty uncomfortable. I usually have my stems dialed up about an inch above the "minimum insertion" mark. (!?) I'll probably be using the bike for recreational long-ish rides and commuting. It may see a velodrome once in its life, just for the experience, but that's it. I prefer a light and twitchy feel, for what its worth. I'll probably put bullhorns on there too.


    This is a pic of my old bike, dialed up the way I like it:



    I think the red line is what is meant by "center-to-center" right?

    Notice the saddle is moved as far forward as possible. It still felt like I was a always sitting on the narrow tip of the saddle, like the TT was too long or something. The bike pictured is billed as a 59cm.

    Here's the geometry of the Mark V: (or go here: http://irocycle.com/iro/index.php?ma...&products_id=6)

    Code:
    Size      S/T      T/T      S/T      H/T     H/T      Wheel    B/B      C/S             Stand
               c-c     length  angle    angle   length   Base     Drop     Length         Over
    50cm     46 cm       52 cm       72.0°     75.0°     10 cm     95cm     5 cm     39.1 cm     29.5"
    53cm     49 cm       54 cm       72.0°     73.0°     10 cm     95.7 cm 5 cm     39.1 cm     30"
    56cm     52 cm       55.5 cm    73.0°     73.0°     12.5 cm 96 cm     5 cm     39.1 cm     31"
    59cm     55 cm       57 cm       74.0°     73.0°     15 cm     96.6 cm 5 cm     39.1 cm     32"
    62cm     58 cm       59 cm       75.0°     73.0°     17.8 cm 97.5 cm 5 cm     39.1 cm     33.5"
    So, in the fg/ss forum's collective expert opinion...which Mark V size suits me, 56 or 59? I don't mind really jacked up seat posts or extreme combinations of headset spacers/weird stems.

  2. #2
    Geek Extraordinaire sivat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    My Bikes
    Bianchi Advantage Fixed Conversion; Specialized Stumpjumper FS Hardtail
    Posts
    1,769
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For longer rides you want a bigger frame. You're about my size, though skinnier, and I ride a 58-59. If you get the smaller bike, you'll end up with a big drop from the saddle to bars, so you'll need a really long stem. If you go for the bigger bike, it will be much easier to get the bars just under or even with the saddle. If you get the 56, you'll have a huge amount of seatpost showing, and need a really long stem to bring the bars up where you like them. The bigger bike will allow you to run the stem lower, making for a better feeling and looking bike. Since the mark v is threadless, running 4 or 5 inches of threadless spacers will make the frame feel kinda noodley.

    Also, the tracks around here don't really consider the mark v a "track bike," and usually won't let you on the track with it.
    I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

    Sintesi Conversion Serotta Track

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Somerville, MA
    Posts
    104
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    59cm!

    That has the 55cm seat tube, center to center and a 57cm top, center to center. It'll be just a teeny bit bigger than what you have now.

    I am 6'3" with a 34" inseam and I ride the 62cm....

  4. #4
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sivat
    Also, the tracks around here don't really consider the mark v a "track bike," and usually won't let you on the track with it.
    Really? That sucks.

    Any concern about the fact I had my saddle brought all the way forward and it still felt a little uncomfortable (like I was sitting on the tip of the saddle all the time)? I don't know what the deal was about that...

  5. #5
    THIS SPACE FOR RENT
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,849
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    59 for sure. Remember you can get seat posts with no offset, give you some adjustment range in the area you like.

    What is the bike in the pic? Probably something obvious, but I don't know it. Those dropouts look like you beat up a bmx kid and cut them off his bike with a torch (that's a compliment, unless that's actually how it happened)
    "I don't buy new frames, it just encourages them."

    -T.G.

  6. #6
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Ha, yeah its a very low-end (I was going to say ****ty but realized that would be in poor taste as the BikesDirect people read this board a lot) BikesDirect bike, a "Dawes" Lightning SST. She rode pretty decently, really, a good cheap beater, and the hideous track ends were sort of a built in theft-deterent.

    Sadly, her wheel base was permanently shortened by about 4 inches last month, when I ran into a Civic.

  7. #7
    THIS SPACE FOR RENT
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,849
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Heh, I actually looked on the bikesdirect site, but I guess they aren't doing this model this week. I'd seriously like to run through a pile of BMX frames with those dropouts and see what they actually are, they're so burly and awesome.
    "I don't buy new frames, it just encourages them."

    -T.G.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nouia
    Really? That sucks.

    Any concern about the fact I had my saddle brought all the way forward and it still felt a little uncomfortable (like I was sitting on the tip of the saddle all the time)? I don't know what the deal was about that...
    not that i speak with any authority, but the fact that you have the seat all the way forward and still feel like you are on the tip might mean that you're top tube/stem gives you too much reach. where do you usually place your hands? tops, hoods, drops? it could also mean that the seat is a bad fit for you. it might also be angled down causing you to slip forward.

    edit: let us know what you end up getting. also, is there a reason why you are in such a rush? you'd be better off putting more thought into the size you really want instead of rushing.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    109
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    59 cm - absolutely -I think IRO's are BIG for their frame size - I am 6'0 and just got a 57cm (BB to CENTER TT) Lemond Filmore, and it is perfect (seat tube right in the middle). Go 59, worst case talk to Tony - from what I hear he will make it alright...
    Last edited by wildbird; 12-21-06 at 10:30 PM.

  10. #10
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by vinnydelnegro
    not that i speak with any authority, but the fact that you have the seat all the way forward and still feel like you are on the tip might mean that you're top tube/stem gives you too much reach. where do you usually place your hands? tops, hoods, drops? it could also mean that the seat is a bad fit for you.

    edit: let us know what you end up getting. also, is there a reason why you are in such a rush? you'd be better off putting more thought into the size you really want instead of rushing.
    I'm usually on the hoods or on the tops. What does "too much reach" mean? I'm not too familiar with the term.

    [Oh, and I'm not in a rush, that was sort of just a ploy to get a lot of responses in a short time. Don't tell anyone though.]

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    470
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nouia
    I'm usually on the hoods or on the tops. What does "too much reach" mean? I'm not too familiar with the term.

    [Oh, and I'm not in a rush, that was sort of just a ploy to get a lot of responses in a short time. Don't tell anyone though.]
    what i meant by reach was the distance that you have to lean forward to place your hands on your bars/hoods. i was wondering if your seat was that far forward because you feel like you are stretching to place your hands on the bars/hoods. if that is the case (not that it necessarily is) you may want something with a shorter top tube and/or shorter stem. Careful with getting the stem too short though. I have a short stem on my road bike and it makes turning feel twitchy.

    at the end of the day though, bike fit is totally subjective. i'm still trying to figure out what i like. i'm 5'6" and got a 51cm Mercian a few months ago. I love how it feels, but now I want to try and even smaller bike to see if i can handle the drop.

  12. #12
    san francisco nucka!
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    446
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    go for what fits. im 6'3" and im on the 62cm. it fits a little too well. hard to describe. f*ck the small shtufffff
    im a ****ing idiot. well, im happy to admit it.

  13. #13
    jack of one or two trades Aeroplane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Suburbia, CT
    My Bikes
    Old-ass gearie hardtail MTB, fix-converted Centurion LeMans commuter, SS hardtail monster MTB
    Posts
    5,635
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I can't believe I'm the first to suggest a 56? If your current bike has a 56.8 TT and the Mark V in a 59 has a 57, wouldn't that make it even bigger than the current bike, which is already too big? Go for the 56, and just leave a few spacers on the fork. You might get used to saddle-bar drop once you sit on the right part of the saddle too.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr Irwin Goldstein
    Men should never ride bicycles. Riding should be banned and outlawed. It is
    the most irrational form of exercise I could ever bring to discussion.

  14. #14
    :jarckass: deathhare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    6,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Aeroplane
    If your current bike has a 56.8 TT and the Mark V in a 59 has a 57, wouldn't that make it even bigger than the current bike, which is already too big?
    Thats what i was thinking

  15. #15
    Don't smoke, Mike. shapelike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    Devinci Tosca, IRO Rob Roy
    Posts
    3,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    A few things - I wouldn't go w/ the 56, but the next size up.

    A larger frame size will have a taller head tube which will let you bring the bars up a bit without relying on so many spacer stacks. It can get sketchy if you use too many but you're not in that neighbourhood yet. It would be nicer aesthetically, for whatever that's worth. I would just use a slightly shorter stem.

    Your seat tube is on an angle (obviously) ... as the seatpost goes up, the saddle goes back. With the larger frame size it won't go back so far and won't screw up the fit around the saddle>cranks ... which looks really awkward right now. You should bribe a local bike shop w/ a 6-pack to do a fitting session with you and try to make you more comfortable.

    If you feel too stretched out but everything seems in proportion to your torso and egs, maybe try some bars w/ less drop or reach. I'm a huge fan of shallow drops just because most of the time they're much more comfortable and if I really need to get aero I can drop my elbows - done.

  16. #16
    Senior Member 1fluffhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    baltimore
    My Bikes
    Pake Track; Bianchi XL EV2 El Reparto Corse, Kona Jake the Snake
    Posts
    1,663
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am with Aeroplane on this one. Get the 56. Bikes that are too big suck.

  17. #17
    Don't smoke, Mike. shapelike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    Devinci Tosca, IRO Rob Roy
    Posts
    3,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Standover height is one thing (they're measured c-c on the IRO site, take note) but too much saddle-to-pedal drop sucks more. You mentioned you're planning on using bullhorns ... that'll change the stem length of choice slightly but for longer rides drops really are superior (riding into headwinds comes to mind). On a vaguely related note, your saddle position (angle) looks way off too. That can cause you to slide forward and and up in ass hatchet mode all the time.

    </$0.02>

  18. #18
    suffering... geist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    EAST VILLAGE, NYC
    My Bikes
    2009 Cannondale CAPO, 2004 Look 468SL, CAAD 8, IRO MV, IRO bfssfg, 80's Panasonic x2
    Posts
    1,047
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, I'm almost (6'2") the exact same size as you and I bought the Mark V in 56. I can't Imagine trying to ride a 59 as would would be way too big. You can always dial it in longer but you can't make a bigger frame smaller.

  19. #19
    THIS SPACE FOR RENT
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    2,849
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How big are your feet? If you have normal 6'1" feet (like 11ish, maybe) I think you'd be getting frequent visits from the toe overlap fairy on a 56
    "I don't buy new frames, it just encourages them."

    -T.G.

  20. #20
    suffering... geist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    EAST VILLAGE, NYC
    My Bikes
    2009 Cannondale CAPO, 2004 Look 468SL, CAAD 8, IRO MV, IRO bfssfg, 80's Panasonic x2
    Posts
    1,047
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    There's about 2 cm of clearence in front of my toes. I ride a 165mm crank. Shoe size is 11 1/2.

  21. #21
    :jarckass: deathhare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    6,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by geist
    Well, I'm almost (6'2") the exact same size as you and I bought the Mark V in 56. I can't Imagine trying to ride a 59 as would would be way too big. You can always dial it in longer but you can't make a bigger frame smaller.
    Top notch info there. Id get the 56
    Last edited by deathhare; 12-21-06 at 07:16 PM.

  22. #22
    /\/\ \/\/ Nouia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Nope
    My Bikes
    2007 Trek 6000, others
    Posts
    274
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by geist
    Well, I'm almost (6'2") the exact same size as you and I bought the Mark V in 56. I can't Imagine trying to ride a 59 as would would be way too big. You can always dial it in longer but you can't make a bigger frame smaller.
    This is a longshot, but do you happen to have any pics floating around on your hard drive of you actually on the bike? Or if not, just the bike itself, dialed up the way you like it? It would be tremendously helpful just to see what a 56cm Mark V looks like with a 6'2" rider....I'm leaning towards 56cm at the moment.

  23. #23
    :jarckass: deathhare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Nashville
    Posts
    6,563
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nouia
    This is a longshot, but do you happen to have any pics floating around on your hard drive of you actually on the bike? Or if not, just the bike itself, dialed up the way you like it? It would be tremendously helpful just to see what a 56cm Mark V looks like with a 6'2" rider....I'm leaning towards 56cm at the moment.
    Info on what stem and its length would be good too i reckon.

  24. #24
    dillyshotback
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    M&M@MN
    My Bikes
    '02 Barcode, Le Tour IV, Hoffman E.P.
    Posts
    632
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I am a tad over 6" and I ride a 53 cm tt surly, I previously rode a 59cm schwinn and I by far like the smaller fit, you can get the bike set up to suite your riding style easy enough with some playing around.

  25. #25
    Don't smoke, Mike. shapelike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Toronto
    My Bikes
    Devinci Tosca, IRO Rob Roy
    Posts
    3,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Okay, since I'm apparently the only one trapped in the Twilight Zone here can some of you 6'+ guys post pics of your 53-56cm bikes so I can see how this possibly works well?

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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