I am a 5'3" guy and am probably going to get the 47cm mercier kilo tt. I assume that the 50cm would be too big. I have a 28" inseam, so I think the 47 is the right size. Anyone think a 50cm would be better for me? I have a 44cm motobecane road bike and the standover is good, but i feel like the reach to the handlebars is kind of close.
Also, my 44cm Motobecane Road bike came with 650c tires. So with a 47cm frame size (or even 50cm), does that mean I should have 650c size tires? What about any other components that would have to be non-standard size with a smaller frame?
i'm 5'5" and a friend's 50cm was just a hair on the large side for me. remember that with a lot of these stock bikes, a 50cm has a 53cm top tube. the 47, with a 50cm top tube, will probably fit you better - but it's just speculation. however, i feel confident encouraging you to get the 47.
mercier lit doesn't say anything about the 47 having 650s. it probably has 700s.
you should consider getting 165mm cranks, if the bike comes with 170s. for short folks like us, 165s are beneficial.
saddles, saddle height, handlebar-and-stem setups - all these are personal and might take a little while to get to a comfortable position.
you can sit on my 50cm if you want to come out to san ramon. If you're 5'3 and have a 28" inseam, it's kind of apparent that the 50cm will be too big. My girlfriend is 5'5 and has a 29" standover, and cannot clear the top tube of my 50cm Kilo.
Get the 47cm. I wonder if the 47cm will even be small enough for you.
I have a 50cm Mercier. Just measured yesterday, the 50cm is a c-c measurement of the seattube, the c-t length is 53.5 cm, I believe. The top tube is 52.5 cm c-c.
I'm 5'5" with a long torso and this bike fits me perfectly. I just barely clear the top tube when I stand over it, but the top tube and saddle to bar drop are just right. I would guess that if you're 5'3" with a 28" inseam, you're going to be happier with a smaller frame, like the 47cm.
still trying to figure out a good size frame for myself. I thought I would be set with the 47cm kilo tt, but after visiting the LBS, I was measured me to fit anywhere from a 43cm-47cm frame (depending on set up). The kilo tt is 47cm c-c, and 50cm c-t...does that mean that it is really a 50cm compared to other bikes? I rode a 46" IRO Mark IV (or Heidi since it was the small frame) and that fit ok. I don't know how IRO sizes their frames though. Does anyone know how the 46cm IRO Mark IV compares to the 47cm Kilo TT?
Also, a seperate question...Is there any advantage to riding a smaller frame vs a larger one? Or is it just personal preference? Meaning, is it better to ride the smallest frame that will fit you? Or is it better to ride the largest frame that will fit you?
Did you feel like the Heidi felt too small or big? If it was too big, it'll be tough finder a smaller frame, considering the Heidi already uses 650cc wheels.
I'm 5'5" with short legs (28.5" inseam barefoot) and I ride a Felt Dispatch 51, which is really sized like a 49 or 50 (sloping TT with a TT Horizontal is 525mm). And with a 80mm stem, it's a little cramped on the drops, but requires less stretching riding the hoods. I think a relaxed geometry bike will be your best bet for a 700c bike, as they're relatively smaller (Langster, Bowery, Dispatch). See if any of your LBS has one of these in the smallest size and take it for a spin. Of course, the stock components on these bikes won't be as nice as an IRO, although still better than a Kilo TT... maybe...