Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Singlespeed & Fixed Gear "I still feel that variable gears are only for people over forty-five. Isn't it better to triumph by the strength of your muscles than by the artifice of a derailer? We are getting soft...As for me, give me a fixed gear!"-- Henri Desgrange (31 January 1865 - 16 August 1940)

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-13-09, 08:16 PM   #1
Overwhelming
Overwhelming Undertaking?
Thread Starter
 
Overwhelming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Tall Guy - 61 vs 64

I'm a pretty tall guy, (Somewhere around 6'4") and I have an inseam of about 34.5"

I have decided to go for our beloved BD Messenger, but am having a hard time deciding which size frame to get (61cm, or 64cm)

I know you don't want to click to another page, so here are the sizing dimensions for the bike:






What worries me about the 64 cm frame is the standover height, and potentially the toptube length. My inseam is somewhere around 34.5 in (= 876.3 millimeters) and the standover on the 64 is 880. The toptube on the 61 is 20mm shorter than the 64, and I don't really know how to size the top tube. (I looked on Sheldon Brown, and didn't find anything specifically regarding how to find the right top tube length)

This bike is going to be a daily driver, so I am not too worried about my body dying as I ride this, but I would obviously prefer the better fit.

What do you think, 61 vs 64?
Overwhelming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-09, 08:27 PM   #2
Domovoi
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.coloradocyclist.com/bikefit/

This site helped me a lot when I was looking into sizing(and it has how to measure top tube length). Also, I'm ~6'2" with a 34" inseam and I find the 57cm kilo fits me fairly comfortably. You'll have a longer reach than I, and with your slightly longer inseam the 61 will probably be the most comfortable fit. However, if someone else sees otherwise on this forum, I would probably defer to them as I'm not exactly the most experienced one on here.
Domovoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-09, 08:36 PM   #3
TOKI188
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Bikes: Klein, Trek, Something
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm 6'4" with a 36-37" inseam. My roadbike is a 63cm Trek and my SS is listed as 61cm. I'm comfortable on both of the bikes. I show a lot of seatpost and stem, but I'm OK with that.

Arthur
TOKI188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-09, 08:45 PM   #4
Overwhelming
Overwhelming Undertaking?
Thread Starter
 
Overwhelming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I see that Domovoi recommends the 61 over the 64, do you agree TOKI?
Overwhelming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-09, 10:43 PM   #5
kersnert
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Bikes: Giant OCR-Touring and Surly Cross-Check
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am also 6'4" (192cm with a 91cm pbh). I have an XL Giant OCR-Touring (60cm TT/58.5cm) ST and it feels way too small. The word on the street is that you need about 2-3cm of standover, otherwise fit to the TT. You are supposed to be riding it, not standing over it. Take into account that just about any shoes you wear are going to add 1-3cm.
kersnert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 10:58 AM   #6
Overwhelming
Overwhelming Undertaking?
Thread Starter
 
Overwhelming's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 72
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What you say is true, but at the list height the standover is still barely taller than I am.
Overwhelming is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 11:50 AM   #7
skinnyland
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: philly
Bikes:
Posts: 994
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd go with the 61. I'm 6'4", and I ride a 61 road frame (59 track). 64 would feel too large, I think, unless I grew another 3 inches.
skinnyland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 01:02 PM   #8
CliftonGK1
Senior Member
 
CliftonGK1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Columbus, OH
Bikes: '08 Surly Cross-Check, 2011 Redline Conquest Pro, 2012 Spesh FSR Comp EVO, 2015 Trek Domane 6.2 disc
Posts: 11,380
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by skinnyland View Post
I'd go with the 61. I'm 6'4", and I ride a 61 road frame (59 track). 64 would feel too large, I think, unless I grew another 3 inches.
Not that I'm riding the same bike, but my 1988 Trek 400 fg is a 64cm frame and I'm 6'6" with a 36" inseam. The additional room on the top tube gives me space to accomodate having really long arms.

Even though the standover might be a bit high, if you've got long arms you might want to go with the taller frame. (I mean freaky long arms; like a 37/38 sleeve on dress shirts.)
__________________
"I feel like my world was classier before I found cyclocross."
- Mandi M.
CliftonGK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 01:30 PM   #9
Samwiches
breasts
 
Samwiches's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OP sounds like he has shorter legs. I'm 6'2" with average proportions (35.5 inseam).

Sizing yourself by using the ST length has never made sense to me--your seat goes wherever you need it and your pedals are always where they need to be (that weird setback adjustment aside).

On a too-small frame it's the cramped, hunched reach that makes it obvious how small it is. That's where it gets complicated for tall riders who have shorter legs and are sizing themselves into frames based on a seat tube or standover--until you stack a long stem you're a little hunched, and even when using stem/bar adjustment that seems to put your upper body into place, it's going to screw with the steering once you're out of the saddle, past the steerer and mashing. Try that with one of those kid's BMX bikes that have the bars tilted halfway to horizontal for a teenager and you'll notice the instability, but more obvious.

Oh, my suggestion is like the one above; don't worry about the standover--properly start and stop and you'll never touch the frame.

Last edited by Samwiches; 07-14-09 at 01:35 PM.
Samwiches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 05:52 PM   #10
solbrothers
Banned.
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: on the moon
Bikes: Cinelli Mash
Posts: 2,022
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
im 6'7" and ride a 64cm messenger. my brother sometimes rides it and he is 6'3". neither of us have a problem riding the bike!
solbrothers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 07:03 PM   #11
mihlbach
Senior Member
 
mihlbach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Bikes:
Posts: 6,400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The top tube length differs by 2cm......2 cm is practically nothing. Without knowing anything else about your bodily proportions, no one here can tell you which one of these will be better for you. The difference is so minor, you'll get buy on either size. If you really want a better answer without having to suffer through a fitting session at a LBS, try this fit calculator. It you take your measurements carefully, it spits out surprisingly good results. Chose the frame that is closest to the output.

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za...LCULATOR_INTRO
mihlbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 07:12 PM   #12
TOKI188
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Bikes: Klein, Trek, Something
Posts: 27
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Go with the 61cm. I hate frames that are too big.

Arthur
TOKI188 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 07:20 PM   #13
Scout...
T.A.N.D.
 
Join Date: May 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 58
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TOKI188 View Post
Go with the 61cm. I hate frames that are too big.

Arthur
i completely agree. im 6'3", my hour is a 61, and riding my friends 58 is waaay more fun. feels more nimble and twitchy.
Scout... is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-09, 10:49 PM   #14
wondersloth
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm 6'4" with about a 34" ~ 34.5" inseam and have a 61cm Mercier Kilo. Fits great.
wondersloth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-09, 03:28 PM   #15
hairnet
Fresh Garbage
 
hairnet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Bikes:
Posts: 12,434
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 33 Post(s)
well which frame has the top tube+stem length right for your fit?
hairnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-15-09, 11:01 PM   #16
golfer007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Bikes:
Posts: 625
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just sold my 58cm FG and man it was nimble around campus. I now have and have had a few 61cm frames that actually feel pretty good and I am 6'2 wearing a 34" inseam in my pants. I would say 61cm with a little longer seat post and maybe more stem.
golfer007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:04 AM.