Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Fifty Plus (50+)
Reload this Page >

Bike size as you age

Notices
Fifty Plus (50+) Share the victories, challenges, successes and special concerns of bicyclists 50 and older. Especially useful for those entering or reentering bicycling.

Bike size as you age

Old 10-25-23, 06:21 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
h_curtis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 579

Bikes: 80's Roberts road bike, Nashiki, ECR, Guerciotti and Penny Farthing

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 32 Times in 24 Posts
Bike size as you age

I was wondering what people thought about the size of your bicycle as you get older. I notice I want to be more upright, by quite a bit which is fine as I am a commuter and enjoy longer rides. I have a few bikes and like my 60cm as I am 6'2", but I am wondering if a slightly smaller frame with a higher seat and handlebars would be good as there would be less reach.

One of the reasons I am asking this question is there is a perfect touring bike for sale that I love, but it is a 56cm. My current daily bike is a 58cm, with a high seat and extended handlebars. Not sure how high you can go with seat and handlebars?

Can a 6'2" man closing in on 60 years old ride a 56cm with a higher seat and handlebars as you are closer to handlebars if the frame is smaller?

I am probably trying to figure out if I can buy that bike and make it comfortable. Has anyone gone smaller for less reach, or do most people get a bigger frame, so you need less spacers and longer stem?

Thanks for your thoughts.
h_curtis is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 07:06 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
freeranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 2,559

Bikes: 06 Lemond Reno, 98 GT Timberline mtn.bike

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 412 Post(s)
Liked 683 Times in 426 Posts
Is the bike locally for sale, so you could test ride? Or does a LBS have a similar bike you could ride? If I was to feel I needed to ride more upright, the first thing I would try would be a shorter stem, maybe with more of a rise. Inexpensive and easily reversable.
freeranger is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 07:51 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 7,748
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4033 Post(s)
Liked 4,416 Times in 2,742 Posts
Originally Posted by h_curtis
My current daily bike is a 58cm, with a high seat and extended handlebars.
It sounds like you are already pushing the limits with a 58 cm frame, which is not surprising at 6'2". A shorter stem would be an easier and more direct solution to shorten reach. Do you know what the stack height of this touring bike is relative to your current bike? That key info would give you a good idea of what bodging would be required to fit.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 10-25-23, 08:00 AM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 24,893
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8067 Post(s)
Liked 8,646 Times in 4,305 Posts
Bikes from different manufacturers can have different geometry even if they're both called "56", or "medium". The fit can be different and you need to look at more than whatever size it is called. To me, top tube length is far more important than the size label.
First, figure out what dimensions you want like reach, stack, etc. Then find a geometry chart for a frame you are considering and see if it will work. Of course, if you can ride it that will help.
I'm against using weird contraptions to make the wrong size frame work but some are fine with it.

Having said all that a 56 seems rather small for someone 6'2". But depending on the rest of the frame dimensions and your body dimensions it might work.

fwiw I'm 6'2" and the smallest frame I have had is a 62.

Last edited by big john; 10-25-23 at 08:03 AM.
big john is offline  
Likes For big john:
Old 10-25-23, 08:00 AM
  #5  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 79

Bikes: 14 F8, 21 F12

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15 Post(s)
Liked 32 Times in 19 Posts
I'm 68 and 6'3" and a bike fit made a huge difference. I was riding the bike of my youth, a MASI GC at 62cm (CtoC) but it kept feeling a bit bigger as the years went on. Now all my bikes are 59 or 59.5 with stems and saddle heights dictated by the fit. Off the top of my head 56 sounds too small but get a fit.
dmanders is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 11:09 AM
  #6  
seor miembro
 
SurferRosa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 8,731

Bikes: '70s - '80s Campagnolo

Mentioned: 92 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3828 Post(s)
Liked 6,395 Times in 3,163 Posts
My bike frames have gotten larger by one or two sizes as I've aged. In my younger years, I wanted to ride the smallest size in my range thinking that, well, they're lighter or more agile. Now, I realize it's more about comfort to be able to stay in the saddle for hours. A taller/longer frame is simply more comfortable on the roads. I used to ride 56. My most recent keeper is labeled a 59, but the top tube is 57.5.
SurferRosa is offline  
Likes For SurferRosa:
Old 10-25-23, 11:19 AM
  #7  
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,508

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5987 Post(s)
Liked 4,617 Times in 3,184 Posts
I rode oversize bikes most all my young life and generally sat more upright. It wasn't till I turned 50 and started riding a lot that I even thought about getting aero. As my speed and distance increased I saw the benefits to being aero. I thoroughly enjoy my Tarmac in the smaller size frame than I've ever had and the low aero position it gives me. When riding at over 20mph, it's very apparent the aero benefit I get in the drops even as opposed to the slightly less aero position I have when on the hoods.

That big watt savings will benefit those that want to do long rides at more than just a pace you'd do for bike touring with loaded paniers on front or back. So I'm never certain why older people tend to want to sit up. At 65 y.o. I'm lower and more aero on the bike than ever.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 01:27 PM
  #8  
climber has-been
 
terrymorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 6,787

Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3160 Post(s)
Liked 3,240 Times in 1,640 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
I rode oversize bikes most all my young life and generally sat more upright. It wasn't till I turned 50 and started riding a lot that I even thought about getting aero. As my speed and distance increased I saw the benefits to being aero. I thoroughly enjoy my Tarmac in the smaller size frame than I've ever had and the low aero position it gives me. When riding at over 20mph, it's very apparent the aero benefit I get in the drops even as opposed to the slightly less aero position I have when on the hoods.

That big watt savings will benefit those that want to do long rides at more than just a pace you'd do for bike touring with loaded paniers on front or back. So I'm never certain why older people tend to want to sit up. At 65 y.o. I'm lower and more aero on the bike than ever.
Lower may be more aero, but narrower is also more aero. Hence the narrower bar trend.

Theres also a trade off when you get lower, as your hip angle gets smaller. If your hip angle is more open, you can put more force into the pedals. Ill sit up a bit on steep climbs to open my hip angle, trading off aero for more torque.
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat

Zwift: Terry Morse [OldAF]
ROUVY: terrymorse





terrymorse is offline  
Likes For terrymorse:
Old 10-25-23, 01:56 PM
  #9  
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,508

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5987 Post(s)
Liked 4,617 Times in 3,184 Posts
Originally Posted by terrymorse
Lower may be more aero, but narrower is also more aero. Hence the narrower bar trend.
I didn't know there was enough difference from wide to narrow to make a difference. But I agree with the move to narrower handlebars. I've always used narrower bars since the first drop bar bike I had in the 70's. Most probably being 38 cm. I ran 42 cm bars for a few years just recently and went back to 38 cm early last year or the year prior. Narrower is more comfortable for me and actually seemed to improve the feel and reading of the road for sharp twisty turns. As well it made the bike more responsive to last minute changes to my line when road hazards suddenly appear.

There’s also a trade off when you get lower, as your hip angle gets smaller. If your hip angle is more open, you can put more force into the pedals. I’ll sit up a bit on steep climbs to open my hip angle, trading off aero for more torque.
Getting rid of those offset seat posts will help with that some. As the saddle moves forward, that will somewhat open open up that hip angle again and put you where better power can be maintained on the pedals. However the recent trend of everyone wanting to not have any weight on their hands still has some moving their saddles to far back for good power output.

I tend to stay in the drops on climbs that I can maintain speed. And even for climbs at moderate speed as the angle of my arms in the drops seems to help me offset the push of my legs so I keep power in the pedals.

But in general I agree with you.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 02:08 PM
  #10  
Mother Nature's Son
 
delbiker1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Sussex County, Delaware
Posts: 3,082

Bikes: 2014 Orbea Avant MD30, 2004 Airborne Zeppelin TI, 2003 Lemond Poprad, 2001 Lemond Tourmalet, 2014? Soma Smoothie

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 832 Post(s)
Liked 1,381 Times in 783 Posts
I have not changed bike size, but I have switched stems with 17 to 35 degrees of rise. With drop bars, I have also gone to shorter stems with very shallow drop, like the Ritchey Beacon Bar. I have chronic shoulder and spinal issues and cannot do the long and low, at least not with comfort. I had my saddle height a bit lower, but have returned to what it used to be, 72cm from center bb to top of saddle. There was a time I would not have a riser type stem on a road bike. Now, I do what gives me the comfort to continue to ride like I want to.
delbiker1 is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 02:30 PM
  #11  
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,429

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3835 Post(s)
Liked 1,879 Times in 1,342 Posts
My ride is the bike I bought new in 2000. Still perfect for me. Although a few years ago I went to a fitter, who shortened my reach and put on a stem with a few degrees of rise. Over time, I've moved my saddle forward some and now I'm going to go back to my longer -17 slammed stem. So basically no change. I do a good stretch routine most days and go to the gym twice a week. I'm planning on riding RAMROD again next year at 79. I'm riding the tandem with my wife now, trying to get back in shape. We bought it in '07, haven't changed the setup since we reconfigured it then except for adding aero bars for both of us..
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 03:18 PM
  #12  
Veteran, Pacifist
 
Wildwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 13,236

Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?

Mentioned: 284 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3843 Post(s)
Liked 4,689 Times in 2,164 Posts
h_curtis - I am 6'1" and 73yo, still riding drop bar road bikes. Until not too long ago I was riding 58 - 63cm frames. In the last purge, the 58s and 63cm frames exited. I could not image making a 56 fit unless it was a time trial or track only bike. Butt,... anything is nearly possible with saddle setback, long seatposts, tall stems, handlebar styles, 650 wheels, etc.

My custom roadie from nearly 20 years ago, anticipating aging shrinkage and loss of flexibility, still runs a 14cm stem. Newer saddles have helped me.

Stay flexible. Work the core.

edit: I find I'm keeping many with longer chainstays and slacker angles. This 60cm is a perfect fit.
__________________
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.

Last edited by Wildwood; 10-25-23 at 03:32 PM.
Wildwood is offline  
Likes For Wildwood:
Old 10-25-23, 06:40 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
oldbobcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Posts: 4,318

Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 484 Post(s)
Liked 418 Times in 318 Posts
Originally Posted by h_curtis
I was wondering what people thought about the size of your bicycle as you get older. I notice I want to be more upright, by quite a bit which is fine as I am a commuter and enjoy longer rides. I have a few bikes and like my 60cm as I am 6'2", but I am wondering if a slightly smaller frame with a higher seat and handlebars would be good as there would be less reach.
.
Unless you're built like a gorilla (short legs, long arms), a 56 cm anything will be too small. If you're considering a new bike, consider an "endurance" geometry bike, like a Trek Domane. Or tweak the fit on your current bike with a shorter stem, with possibly more rise.

Last edited by oldbobcat; 10-25-23 at 06:44 PM.
oldbobcat is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 07:45 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
h_curtis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 579

Bikes: 80's Roberts road bike, Nashiki, ECR, Guerciotti and Penny Farthing

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 32 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by freeranger
Is the bike locally for sale, so you could test ride? Or does a LBS have a similar bike you could ride? If I was to feel I needed to ride more upright, the first thing I would try would be a shorter stem, maybe with more of a rise. Inexpensive and easily reversable.
It is super far away. I would consider driving a day away for the right bike, but this is way far away.
h_curtis is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 07:57 PM
  #15  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
h_curtis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 579

Bikes: 80's Roberts road bike, Nashiki, ECR, Guerciotti and Penny Farthing

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 32 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
It sounds like you are already pushing the limits with a 58 cm frame, which is not surprising at 6'2". A shorter stem would be an easier and more direct solution to shorten reach. Do you know what the stack height of this touring bike is relative to your current bike? That key info would give you a good idea of what bodging would be required to fit.
Yeah, I am really probably a 59-60, but I didn't know if trends or ideas have changed much over the years. Higher handlebars, short stems and higher seat post.
h_curtis is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 07:58 PM
  #16  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
h_curtis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 579

Bikes: 80's Roberts road bike, Nashiki, ECR, Guerciotti and Penny Farthing

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 32 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by oldbobcat
Unless you're built like a gorilla (short legs, long arms), a 56 cm anything will be too small. If you're considering a new bike, consider an "endurance" geometry bike, like a Trek Domane. Or tweak the fit on your current bike with a shorter stem, with possibly more rise.
I actually have slightly short arms. lol Yeah, I was sort of dreaming I could make it work. Big investment and to find one used, wow.
h_curtis is offline  
Old 10-25-23, 08:23 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
oldbobcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Posts: 4,318

Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 484 Post(s)
Liked 418 Times in 318 Posts
Originally Posted by h_curtis
I actually have slightly short arms. lol Yeah, I was sort of dreaming I could make it work. Big investment and to find one used, wow.

The T-rex build, the ideal candidate for a short top tube and long head tube. If you don't mind, I bird-dogged some used bikes for you. Endurance Road Bikes & Framesets | TPC - The Pro's Closet (theproscloset.com)


The 60 cm Trek Domane SL5 looks like a match.
oldbobcat is offline  
Old 10-26-23, 06:15 AM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 7,748
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4033 Post(s)
Liked 4,416 Times in 2,742 Posts
Originally Posted by h_curtis
Yeah, I am really probably a 59-60, but I didn't know if trends or ideas have changed much over the years. Higher handlebars, short stems and higher seat post.
Seatposts are longer on modern bikes, but the saddle is not higher. It's just that the top tube is sloping more. Stem length and bar height on road bikes has not changed much, if at all. There is maybe a slight trend toward higher stack and shorter reach with modern endurance bikes compared to their race counterparts, but it's pretty subtle.

Like I said before, tell us about the geometry of the 58 cm bike you are currently riding and the 56 cm you are considering.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 10-26-23, 10:32 AM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
bruce19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lebanon (Liberty Hill), CT
Posts: 8,456

Bikes: CAAD 12, MASI Gran Criterium S, Colnago World Cup CX & Guru steel

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1722 Post(s)
Liked 1,272 Times in 734 Posts
I started cycling when I was about 35. I rode a 54 frame with approx. 55 TT. Today I am 77 and ride a 54/55 frame with a 55 TT. Even after a crash that resulted in a C1 & C2 fusion. Just bought a Canyon Aeroad in that size.
bruce19 is offline  
Old 10-26-23, 10:46 AM
  #20  
climber has-been
 
terrymorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Posts: 6,787

Bikes: Scott Addict R1, Felt Z1

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3160 Post(s)
Liked 3,240 Times in 1,640 Posts
Originally Posted by bruce19
I started cycling when I was about 35. I rode a 54 frame with approx. 55 TT. Today I am 77 and ride a 54/55 frame with a 55 TT. Even after a crash that resulted in a C1 & C2 fusion. Just bought a Canyon Aeroad in that size.
Well done that you're maintaining your bike position through the years.

There is some common wisdom that says as you age, you become less flexible, so older riders must reduce bar drop and reach. But I don't think that applies to active, athletic cyclists. The older riders I know have been riding the same position for decades. Myself included (age 65).
__________________
Ride, Rest, Repeat

Zwift: Terry Morse [OldAF]
ROUVY: terrymorse





terrymorse is offline  
Likes For terrymorse:
Old 10-26-23, 11:17 AM
  #21  
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,508

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5987 Post(s)
Liked 4,617 Times in 3,184 Posts
I've too always hear people say they aren't flexible enough to ride in a aggressive aero position. I don't know that being flexible is a requirement. If you can sit in a chair and lean forward enough to tie your shoes, you should be able to sit on a bike an lean forward in a aggressive aero position. And actually I think tying your shoes requires more bending.

A almost no time in my life have I been limber enough to touch my toes. Today I can't even get my hands more than midway down my shins when attempting to touch my toes standing up. But I've never thought that a reason not to ride bikes that provide a aggressive aero position.
Iride01 is offline  
Likes For Iride01:
Old 10-26-23, 08:17 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
h_curtis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 579

Bikes: 80's Roberts road bike, Nashiki, ECR, Guerciotti and Penny Farthing

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 32 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
I've too always hear people say they aren't flexible enough to ride in a aggressive aero position. I don't know that being flexible is a requirement. If you can sit in a chair and lean forward enough to tie your shoes, you should be able to sit on a bike an lean forward in a aggressive aero position. And actually I think tying your shoes requires more bending.

A almost no time in my life have I been limber enough to touch my toes. Today I can't even get my hands more than midway down my shins when attempting to touch my toes standing up. But I've never thought that a reason not to ride bikes that provide an have aggressive aero position.
I have issues with my neck that it has no curve. I know I need to be more upright. Lucky you that you can ride like a racer for 80 miles with no issues. I wish.
h_curtis is offline  
Old 10-27-23, 06:53 AM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 7,748
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4033 Post(s)
Liked 4,416 Times in 2,742 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
I've too always hear people say they aren't flexible enough to ride in a aggressive aero position. I don't know that being flexible is a requirement. If you can sit in a chair and lean forward enough to tie your shoes, you should be able to sit on a bike an lean forward in a aggressive aero position. And actually I think tying your shoes requires more bending.

A almost no time in my life have I been limber enough to touch my toes. Today I can't even get my hands more than midway down my shins when attempting to touch my toes standing up. But I've never thought that a reason not to ride bikes that provide a aggressive aero position.
There's a bit of a difference between leaning forward for a few seconds to tie your shoelaces vs putting out max power for hours in an aggressive aero position. For me position depends mostly on duration of the ride as it does for the pros too.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 10-27-23, 04:01 PM
  #24  
Senior Member
 
70sSanO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Mission Viejo
Posts: 5,688

Bikes: 1986 Cannondale SR400 (Flat bar commuter), 1988 Cannondale Criterium XTR, 1992 Serotta T-Max, 1995 Trek 970

Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1898 Post(s)
Liked 2,104 Times in 1,284 Posts
So have you started to shrink a bit?

Getting slightly smaller may make things fit better as you age.

I know that Im a bit shorter at almost 72 than I was at 32. At 58+ Im still riding a 56cm which was always a bit big for me 30 years ago, more so now. On the positive side, with a long torso the top tube fits me really well.

John
70sSanO is offline  
Old 10-27-23, 06:12 PM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
downtube42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 3,766

Bikes: Trek Domane SL6 Gen 3, Soma Fog Cutter, Focus Mares AL, Detroit Bikes Sparrow FG, Volae Team, Nimbus MUni

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 869 Post(s)
Liked 1,985 Times in 1,038 Posts
With age, the spinal column compresses and connective tissue becomes less flexible. Genetics and substances might have some effect, but it is inevitable. Legs and arms, generally, don't get shorter. Neck flexibility reduces. Impact on bike fit follows. More upper body than lower. Bar drop and reach, not seat tube length.

Unless you already have a short tall stem, I don't see reason for a smaller frame.
downtube42 is offline  
Likes For downtube42:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.