I'm in the market for a endurance road bike and have hit a bunch of the local area bike shops to check out their various brands/inventory.

2 of the many bike shops I've visited asked if I'd like for them to do a quick fitting to see what size I seemed to be for the specific bike at each shop that I was most-interested in. I said sure.

One bike shop out of my local area basically watched me ride around a bit in front of their shop, took a few still pics. of me while riding past them, holding onto the hoods, supposedly put that photo through an analysis program they use to assess the fit aspects, and stated I'd need a 60cm for this bike.

Another bike shop located in my city put me up on a trainer bike in the shop, looked at my arm/leg/back angles as I pedaled and they made several general adjustments to seat height while getting everything as they felt it should be. They did some stack/reach measurements on this similarly-equipped trainer bike after all adjustments were made, looked at the geometry of this same brand/model bike that I was getting a fit assessment for at the other store a week or so earlier, and they said without a doubt I'd need a 58cm for the same bike.

So, here ensues the confusion with 2 highly reputable bicycle shops using 2 different means of performing a general fit assessment for the same exact bike, and both stating confidently that I'd need 2 different sizes as my ideal fit for the same bike.

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.

Any thoughts on how to determine what size is likely best for me with 2 different, long-standing, highly-reputable bike shops doing a general fitting for me for this exact same bike and both coming up with 2 different recommendations as far as the right fit of frame for me?

Thanks for your input!

it might depend on what they have in stock. as you said, you are between sizes, so neither of them is "wrong" although I agree with the advice to take the size down as it's easier to "make it bigger" and you'll probably end up in a less stretched position, which you will probably like if you want endurance geometry. if you are splitting hairs like this, then get the one that feels best to you.

you could also just tell them that you were fit somewhere else and the size recommendation was different. see what they have to say. if they know they are competing for your business, and having the sizes in stock isn't an issue, you might be able to play one against the other for a better price.

Price is the same on the bike at both shops, as the manufacturer just reduced prices on most all of their bikes and pushed those reduced prices out to all dealers of the brand.

I actually did get to ride the 58cm of the actual bike I was interested in at the shop that's a few hours away from my home, and it felt fine for the 10-or-so min. I rode it. This is the shop that took the photo of me on the bike and supposedly ran it through a fit analysis program (didn't actually see them do this though, so who knows...) and told me I'd need the next size up (60cm). They, however, didn't have anything bigger than the 58cm in stock.

The other shop in my city didn't have any size of this particular bike in stock and did the fit analysis using another manufacturer's road bike setup on a trainer.

Decisions... decisions...

what bike are we talking about here? are you set on this brand/model, or have you considered other bikes in the price range?

I'm down to 2 bikes for consideration after reading about / riding tons of models by Trek, Giant, Specialized, Carbondale, Fuji, Raleigh, and a few others.

Down to consideration are these Two:
--- Fuji Sportif 1.3 (Fuji Bikes | ROAD | ENDURANCE SERIES | SPORTIF 1.3 DISC)
--- Raleigh Merit 3 (Raleigh Bicycles - Merit 3)

Both ride/handle/feel very similar and are roughly the same price, have generally the same components, etc. I'm leaning towards the Raleigh Merit 3 due to the fact that it has thru-axles, an anti-shock seat post, and an anti-shock stem.

Are the 2 shops fitting you to the same brand and model of bicycle? Different brands are measured differently (sometimes a lot differently) so the nominal sizes aren't directly comparable. Besides, for most people, the top tube length is more important than the seat tube length.

I'd focus on which bike and size puts the handlebars where you want them, preferably without anything pushed to its extreme adjustment. The bike that passes that test will be the bike you can tweak as you get to know it and your body better without having to buy new parts.

At 6'1", my gut says 59cm, the size I raced when I was still 6'1/2" with proportionately long legs.

Ben

At one shop, I was able to actually ride the 58cm of the actual Raleigh bike I'm considering. At the other shop that also carries Raleigh bikes, they didn't have any of the Raleigh Merit 3 in stock, so I wasn't able to ride that model there.

I would say go with the 58 if you carry your height in your legs, the 60 is gonna be a stretch unless you carry your height in your torso. plus you can ride the actual bike you will buy, which is important

Yeah I'd definitely say my height is mainly in my legs as opposed to torso. I'm 6'1" (maybe just ever so slightly over that height, but basically 6'1"). I typically wear jeans (if this helps any) 32 (waist) x 34 (length).

Thanks for the recommendations/input.

Maybe try the fit calculator on competativecyclist.com and see if that might help you decide, you just need someone to help you take measurements. It will at least give you an idea of your size and what geometry might work best for you based on how you want to ride.

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".

Many thanks for the info. and recommendations.

I'm chiming in to agree with [MENTION=35857]oldbobcat[/MENTION]. Longer legs = go to the 58.

Thanks. Still getting a split of recommendations from numerous people between the 58/60-cm. Seems like I could shorten the stem from 110mm to 100mm if needed on the 60cm frame if slightly too long of a reach. Dang this shouldn't be so difficult! :-)

Nope. I would go the other way and lengthen the stem on the 58 if need be.

Lemme tell you my experience: I'm also long of leg, but at my height everyone on the planet was trying to put me on a 54. When I was shopping for my second bike (I'm a noob, although an old noob who has now done a BUNCH or research) I had my heart set on a Domane. So I tried the 54 that the LBS told me I should ride, and it just wasn't right. I tried really hard to make it feel right. Spent 2 hours at the LBS futzing and moving the saddle around and it just wasn't what I was hoping for. And then I tried the 52 and FELL IN LOVE. It was an entirely different experience. It fit me perfectly, and my hands dropped right on the hoods exactly where I wanted them to be, without feeling like I was too stretched out. And while I might be able to go to a slightly longer stem as I get more flexible, I'm so comfortable now I'm reluctant to change anything.

Now, I'm 5'9.5"+/- with a 33" inseam and fairly long arms. Since you're also going for an endurance geometry, and your proportions are similar, I really think you'll be happiest on the 58. (Also, at a later date when you're more flexible, you'll have more room to drop the bar height should you so desire it, whereas the taller head tube of the 60 might not go as low as you want.)

So this is from a guy with similar proportions to you. I don't know what others have experienced in terms of their proportions and bike sizing, but this is mine. Get the 58. You'll be happier!

Long legs is just half the point. With extended top tubes, riders with short legs end up reaching up for their handlebars. This throws the back out of its "power angle," throws the center of gravity too far back for the bike to handle effectively, and introduces conflict between the lower back and arm and shoulder muscles. The back wants to go lower to put the power down, but the elbows and wrists, tired of being bent, are pushing the back upward. And long arms exacerbates the problem.

I think Wheever's story explains it well, the smaller frame positioning the hoods exactly where his arms wanted to find them.

I'm appreciative of the responses and recommendations. Still uncertain which size to go with though. Makes the issue more difficult due to the fact that I'm able to find & ride a 58cm but no one has the 60cm in stock to where I can compare/contrast. LBS still says without a doubt that the 58cm is what I need based on all factors involved, and another shop 3 hours away says without a doubt I need a 60cm based on all factors involved. I'm not buying a road bike to race it or stress over my avg. speed when I ride or anything like that, but I of course am trying to get into whatever size bike frame is the most comfortable and "best" fit for me for long-term use.

A 54? Too small for a 6" man. I'm 5'7" and petite as things go and a 54 is spot on for me.

Like the other posters said, if you fall between sizes, go for the smaller size if you have long legs.

You can put on a stem riser and adjustable stem to get the bars where they feel right.

In your height range a 58 sounds about right.

Ahh, but what's your inseam? That really is the critical dimension, IMHO.

I'm willing to bet anything that the shop 3 hours away has the 60cm in stock, which is why they are insisting without a doubt that you take that size. They are in sales, they make money by selling things, and unfortunately, they don't care what's perfect, they more likely care about what is "close enough" to not have you complain. Either of these frames will accomplish that, in other words be "close enough" that you won't complain, because you don't know any better. Save the gas money and buy the 58, it'll be fine. For someone who says you don't want to stress over this stuff, you sure are stressing out about it lol.

Think of it this way, back in the 80s, frames came in size jumps of 2 or 3 inches, not just 2 or 3 centimeters! It didn't bother anyone back then!

The shop 3 hours away, when I was there about 3 weeks ago, only had a 58cm Raleigh Merit 3 in stock, which I rode. After assessing my fit requirements, that's when I was informed that the 60cm would be the better fit for me. I've read a ton of reviews about this shop 3 hours away and all have said the same thing... that many times a bike slightly bigger or smaller than what was recommended was there and they could've easily been dishonest and tried to say that one of the bikes in stock was the best choice in order to make a sale, but these people were all told that a size not in stock was the best choice. They currently don't have a 60cm in stock right now either, as I've checked. I think they're shooting straight with me.

Yeah, for not trying to stress out over this, you're correct, it's proving stressful. Ha! I'm overly analytically-minded like that. :-)

Mine is 30

I think they're shooting straight, too, but I've seen shops habitually put customers on bikes that are too big.

And many times I've had to look at how a customer sits on two bikes, and get the feedback, before making a recommendation. I'd suggest a test ride on any other bike with a 59 cm top tube and 21 cm head tube, give or take a couple millimeters. Just a try-on for size.