Originally Posted by
bmccollum
I'm 6'1" and for the bike sizing charts for this particular brand/model road bike, it states that the upper end of the 58cm frame should fit for up to 6'1", and the 60cm model should fit from 6'1" on the shorter end up to a larger height of individual. So I do see that I'm right on the fence as far as my height apparently splitting me in-between the 58cm and 60cm frame size. Seems like I've read that if your height puts you in-between sizes, you generally want to choose the smaller frame as you can most always adjust either/all the seat post or the stem length to "make the bike bigger", whereas it's not as easy to take a bigger frame and try to coerce that bike into being smaller by stem length shortening/etc.
Endurance bikes all have tall head tubes, so if your legs are short and the bike is on the large size, you'll always be reaching up for the handlebar, might be comfortable at first, but is not the way one rides a road bike. On the other hand, if your legs are long, then your torso is short, and you'll be reaching too far forward for the handlebar. And with 195 and 215 mm head tubes, neither of these bikes at 58 are going to be excessively low. If anything, you might find them a little short, which is easily solved with a longer stem.
Trust me on this. At 6'1", you do not want a bike that has a head tube taller than 215 mm
and a top tube much longer than 580 mm. Get a 58. And I prefer the Raleigh, too. If there's one thing Raleigh does really well, it's reasonably priced gravel racers and cyclocross bikes. In this category they are leaders.
By the way, measuring your legs by the size jeans you wear is highly inaccurate. My Levis are 36" inseam, while my Wranglers are 34".