Aurora frame sizing question
I just bought a new Jamis Aurora. I'm on the tall side of 6'1"--I size to about a 60/61cm frame for most bikes. My LBS had the Aurora built up for a customer (who went w/something else) w/Spartacus wheels, Champion tires and 105 parts for $750--a real deal IMO. But the frame is a 62cm (Jamis only does 59 and 62). The jewels are a bit snug, but with shoes on it's not uncomfortable, and I can hop off the bike and stand w/out "jamming." But I can feel the top tube slightly.
I prefer the larger frames for their upright ride, so it's more standover height that I'm concerned about. Is this just simply a matter of preference/tolerance? I obviously don't want to hurt myself.
I've always felt a teeeny bit big is better than small
I have an older Auroroa (57CM) and I"m 5'10
Thanks. Yeah, I do want to err on the side of large, especially because I'm purely looknig for comfort and the higher handlebar height and relaxed/upright ride a larger frame allows sold me. I suppose I just can't go biking barefoot and jump off too quickly.
Anybody else think the frame's too big?
A 62cm frame will likely be just about a perfect fit for you. I would not even call it on the large size. I am 6'2" and ride 62-64cm frames. Generally, 63cm is about the optimum. I prefer a larger frame all else being equal. A good rule of thumb is to position the saddle for your saddle height then look at the visible seat post showing. A fistful +/- a finger and you're about right. More then consider a larger frame. Less then consider a smaller frame.
After this you should address the stem. Once you pick the proper one for comfort, hopefully it will fall between 100-130mm. Less then the frame may have too long a top tube for you - more then, well, I doubt seriously you will need more than 130. Since this particular bike has an effective 59cm TT, you will not have to be concerned with the TT possibly being too long. It just won't be.
The bike weights a few pounds. But, I am sure it will exhude that smooth lovely ride of steel. And, the bike doesn't cost too much. If you decide against it, please forward the dealer name to me because I am interested.
From the anotomical perspective, two different peson's leg length can vary, despite them being the same overall height. This is one reason why someone might be brushing the top tube and the other clears it entirely. I always felt better on a slightly larger frame, but came way too close to the top tube.
I am 6 foot with a 57cm Aurora and am frustrated that I did not get my proper sized frame- 62cm. Especially with moustache handlebars. I ended up with a new fork in order to get the bars high enough. If I had the proper sized frame, I would probably be happy enough with the bike to not want another. But I'm not and I do. IMHO, get the full sized frame. Good luck.
I'm 6'3" and I ride a 64cm after years of bike shops telling me the proper size I should be on is a 60 cm. I don't race and I was NEVER comfortable on a 60cm. I believe in high handlebars and a more upright position. My biggest complaint now is it's getting tough to find new bikes that are above 62 and trying to find a mtn bike frame above 21" is getting impossible.
Thanks all--I figured out the my particular problem. I've got relatively short legs and a longer torso, to the 62, while normally a little large but ok, proved to be too big. I ended up returning the bike after riding it for about 6 blocks total and mostly standing over it in my home for a few days. FYI: the shop is Rapid Transit Cycles on North Ave. in Chicago--great people, and last I checked the bike was stil there waiting for a lucky rider. It's beautiful--red and chrome w/the best components. And like I said it rode it for about 10 minutes.
They sized me to a 59 Aurora (they claim it's functionally a 60). The '06's haven't arrived yet, so I can't try it out. Like you guys, I want the largest possible frame that will allow comfortable standover height. So we'll see if the 59 is too small.
Thanks for the discussion.
Short Legs McGee