robsilverii

I recently bought an Iro Mark V 56 cm and then had Tony send me a 59 bc the 56 feels a bit small. I rode each of them for a few days and I can't really tell which one like. The 56 feels very steep when I am riding on the drops but I don't want to look like a circus clown on a bike that's too big for me. The standover height is bearable on the 59 but better on the 56 obviously. From most people's experience, would you go with a bike that is slightly too big or too small. My bike is primary form of transport so I want something that I am going to enjoy riding.

BrooklynTrack

Really depends what you prefer, obviously: a smaller bike is going to handle better, be a little more agile, you're going to have more control.
with the 59 you might have less control and agility, but unless you're shooting in and out of 12 inch wide gaps on city streets, agility probably wont top your list.

Make your decision, whats more enjoyable.
You don't want to be cramped, but you don't want to feel like a little kid on your dads road bike either.

Personally, I'd go with the smaller frame. I'd feel more comfortable, tighter, and more agile, and living in Brooklyn those things are very important.

A good gauge is your seatpost and stem, if they're both max extended its too small, if they're both slammed its too big. If i were you I'd return it and buy a mercier kilo tt 57cm from bieks direct, but im not you! (I have much dreamier eyes)

StanSeven

When in doubt, go with the smaller. A large frame doesn't handle, corner, or feel as responsive.

robsilverii

When I peddle off of the seat my knees come pretty close to the handlebars. Is this typical of a track frame?

BrooklynTrack

That bikes wayyy too small for non velo riding.

FixedDrinks

If you want a classic road bike fit think of think of IRO sizing like this:
Mark V 59=55 C-C or 57 C-T
Mark V 56=52 C-C or 54 C-T
The named sizes are to the top of the seat tube/clamp, because the seat tube protrudes pretty far above the top tube then most mfrs. or say a classic lugged frame.
They do have longish top tubes however, so you do have to take that into account, and make sure you can handle the length without freaky stem combos.
Standover height is always going to be on the tall side on a track/fixed frame because of the higher bottom bracket(for crank clearance) vs a similarly sized road frame with a normal bb height.
Also keep in mind there's a 3cm difference between IRO sizes, which is a pretty big gap and I bet alot of people fall in between these, which is why sometimes you have to compare other mfrs to best dial in your size.

ZiP0082

hahaha

erichsia

Go smaller. You can always adjust the seatpost and stem to mtach your comfort level. But if a frame is too big, there is no way around that except to get a smaller frame.

sp00ki

you can sprint harder on a smaller frame.

sneaky viking

This is crazy. How is anyone giving advice based on the info given? Maybe he should be riding a 60 for all you can tell from the original post.

How about:
How tall are you?
What's your inseam?
Where are you riding? Lots of traffic?

I'm 6'2" and ride basically 59-62cm frames. In traffic with lots of stops, I like something on the smaller end, so I can put a foot down easier. For longer slower riding, bigger is more comfortable. I go in phases.

obstacle

IRO's frame sizing runs on the small side as well.

robsilverii

I'm 5'11" in shoes. My inseam is about 31". I am in school right now and ride my bike everywhere pretty much, especially since my car is not running at the moment. I don't live in a huge city so I'm not dodging city buses or cutting off cabs but I do want a bike that fits. I ride the 59 around for a while and thinks it feels good and then i switch the parts over and ride the 56 and it seems like the right one. It's tough being indecisive and wanting to make a good decision.