Help deciding on frame size. PICS.
#1
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Help deciding on frame size. PICS.
Hello Everyone,
I was hoping you guys could take a look at some pics and see if anything jumps out at you. I'm trying to decide between a 52cm (black bar tape) and 54cm (white bar tape). The bike is a Specialized Roubaix. After a rough fitting, the LBS guy said that I could comfortably ride either size frame. So, I took each bike out for a test ride. They both felt good to me. He said he set them up with the same measurements. The only difference I saw was that the 52cm bike had a flipped up stem while the 54cm bike had it in the negative. That's just the way the bikes were assembled, and nothing he did intentionally. So, with that in mind, here are the pics. Hopefully they can be of some use. When I look at them, I don't see much difference in my body position...
Thanks in advance for taking a look. Let me know if I can provide any more information.
I was hoping you guys could take a look at some pics and see if anything jumps out at you. I'm trying to decide between a 52cm (black bar tape) and 54cm (white bar tape). The bike is a Specialized Roubaix. After a rough fitting, the LBS guy said that I could comfortably ride either size frame. So, I took each bike out for a test ride. They both felt good to me. He said he set them up with the same measurements. The only difference I saw was that the 52cm bike had a flipped up stem while the 54cm bike had it in the negative. That's just the way the bikes were assembled, and nothing he did intentionally. So, with that in mind, here are the pics. Hopefully they can be of some use. When I look at them, I don't see much difference in my body position...
Thanks in advance for taking a look. Let me know if I can provide any more information.
#3
Banned.
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 1
From: Brighton UK
Bikes: 20" Folder, Road Bike
Hi, the bigger bike, white tape, it's not too big, rgds, sreten.
I see a little more rotation of the torso on the bigger bike,
i.e. your lower back is tilted a little more forward, and
perhaps reading too much into just two pictures, for
the bigger bike your spine has a smoother curve.
For no reason, you look better on the bigger bike.
Thinking about it, a little more stretched out, racier,
at the same time you seem to look a little scrunched
up on the smaller bike, less natural, in comparison.
I see a little more rotation of the torso on the bigger bike,
i.e. your lower back is tilted a little more forward, and
perhaps reading too much into just two pictures, for
the bigger bike your spine has a smoother curve.
For no reason, you look better on the bigger bike.
Thinking about it, a little more stretched out, racier,
at the same time you seem to look a little scrunched
up on the smaller bike, less natural, in comparison.
Last edited by sreten; 07-15-13 at 03:46 PM.
#4
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Thanks for the replies so far. When I left the LBS, we kinda settled on the 52cm, but he had to order one in from another store location because the one pictured was too expensive for my budget. And unfortunately, the 54cm bike pictured is cheaper than I wanted to go. So, he'd have to do the same thing again if I change my mind now. I don't think that will be a problem, but it certainly is a pain. I suppose it's worth it to get the right fit.
#5
Thread Killer

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 13,140
Likes: 2,162
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
I agree with Sreten's assessment, but the 52 will be fine, the stem needs lower and longer, that's all.
Last edited by chaadster; 07-15-13 at 06:05 PM.
#6
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
I will definitely have to ride them both again. Maybe I'll ask the guy to flip that stem over to see if that makes the difference. I hate being in between sizes. Makes it hard to be sure. Thanks again.
#7
The Left Coast, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,757
Likes: 25
Bikes: Bulls, Bianchi, Koga, Trek, Miyata
It's not how you look on the bike it's how your perform; two words...Chris Froome.
That said, your center of gravity looks much, much better on the 54cm and you can always shorten the effective reach by flipping or changing the stem. On the smaller bike your butt is hanging out over the rear axle, not so good.
That said, your center of gravity looks much, much better on the 54cm and you can always shorten the effective reach by flipping or changing the stem. On the smaller bike your butt is hanging out over the rear axle, not so good.
#8
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
It's not how you look on the bike it's how your perform; two words...Chris Froome.
That said, your center of gravity looks much, much better on the 54cm and you can always shorten the effective reach by flipping or changing the stem. On the smaller bike your butt is hanging out over the rear axle, not so good.
That said, your center of gravity looks much, much better on the 54cm and you can always shorten the effective reach by flipping or changing the stem. On the smaller bike your butt is hanging out over the rear axle, not so good.
#9
Thread Killer

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 13,140
Likes: 2,162
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII, 23 3T Strada
Color me daft, but what is the nature of this 'axle/butt' problem? What's the dynamic? I've never thought of it in a meaningful way, or as an important measure.
Based on my own experience, shorter wheelbases 'buck' a little more over big bumps than longer wheelbases, but in terms of negative impact on performance, I don't have any associations there, aside from feeling shorter wheelbases feel more sporty.
And this from a guy who rides a mini-velo and a folding bike, where my butt is not only way out over the axle, but the whole wheel!
Based on my own experience, shorter wheelbases 'buck' a little more over big bumps than longer wheelbases, but in terms of negative impact on performance, I don't have any associations there, aside from feeling shorter wheelbases feel more sporty.
And this from a guy who rides a mini-velo and a folding bike, where my butt is not only way out over the axle, but the whole wheel!
#10
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Color me daft, but what is the nature of this 'axle/butt' problem? What's the dynamic? I've never thought of it in a meaningful way, or as an important measure.
Based on my own experience, shorter wheelbases 'buck' a little more over big bumps than longer wheelbases, but in terms of negative impact on performance, I don't have any associations there, aside from feeling shorter wheelbases feel more sporty.
And this from a guy who rides a mini-velo and a folding bike, where my butt is not only way out over the axle, but the whole wheel!
Based on my own experience, shorter wheelbases 'buck' a little more over big bumps than longer wheelbases, but in terms of negative impact on performance, I don't have any associations there, aside from feeling shorter wheelbases feel more sporty.
And this from a guy who rides a mini-velo and a folding bike, where my butt is not only way out over the axle, but the whole wheel!
And fwiw my measurements:
5"8' 3/4 tall
31 inch inseam
#11
The Left Coast, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,757
Likes: 25
Bikes: Bulls, Bianchi, Koga, Trek, Miyata
Speaking about road bikes, like the Roubaix, you want your center of gravity closer to the center of the bike. Too much of your weight over the rear and I think you'll experience the bike laboring in turns, climbing issues and not floating over bumps..more like riding a rear loader tourer than a road bike. As I read it, 50-60% weight on the back wheel is what pro riders shoot for, not to say we should worry about those figures. On the 52cm you look pushed toward the rear. Of course, it could simply be how you are fit on that bike, i.e. the saddle position.
#12
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Speaking about road bikes, like the Roubaix, you want your center of gravity closer to the center of the bike. Too much of your weight over the rear and I think you'll experience the bike laboring in turns, climbing issues and not floating over bumps..more like riding a rear loader tourer than a road bike. As I read it, 50-60% weight on the back wheel is what pro riders shoot for, not to say we should worry about those figures. On the 52cm you look pushed toward the rear. Of course, it could simply be how you are fit on that bike, i.e. the saddle position.
#14
The Left Coast, USA
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,757
Likes: 25
Bikes: Bulls, Bianchi, Koga, Trek, Miyata
True. My understanding was that saddle positioning was adjusted based on my leg extension. So I'm not sure that moving it forward is the right thing to do. It may just be that I need the larger frame. When I tried the drop position on the smaller bike, I got the sensation that I was leaning out over the front tire quite a bit. On the larger bike my weight felt more evenly distributed. Not sure if that is anything to go by.
I say, if you are going to plunk down good money for your #1 road bike get the opinion of a knowledgeable fitter to advise you about size up or size down on that frame. You won't get a do over, and riding a mis-fit bike can be a long term annoyance.
#15
Zip tie Karen
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 7,005
Likes: 1,546
From: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100
Larger Frame, Invert The Stem
I like your proportions on the larger (white tape) 54 cm frame. I would recommend that you flip the stem upward, though, until you are more experienced on the bike. I'd also like to see more elbow bend and relaxed hands...
#16
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Thanks for your feedback. Regarding elbow bend and relaxed hands, is that something I need to do myself, or is it an adjustment of the bike?
#17
Banned.
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,662
Likes: 1
From: Brighton UK
Bikes: 20" Folder, Road Bike
It comes with just riding a bike a lot, no effort.
And with bars lower than you start with, generally.
rgds, sreten.
Last edited by sreten; 07-17-13 at 07:12 PM.
#19
Zip tie Karen
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 7,005
Likes: 1,546
From: Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
Bikes: '13 Motobecane Fantom29 HT, '16 Motobecane Turino Pro Disc, '18 Velobuild VB-R-022, '21 Tsunami SNM-100
Yes. It's intentional as to you hold your posture and engage your core muscles. Just relieves pressure from your hands/wrists. PG
Last edited by Phil_gretz; 07-18-13 at 10:56 AM. Reason: relieves instead of takes
#20
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,643
Likes: 68
From: Portland OR
Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997
Try a bigger one. Even w/ the 54 cm/white tape bike, you look a little cramped in saddle-to-bar dimension. Not bad but why not try a 56 cm? Get down in the drops and pedal hard, see if you can stretch out comfortably or if your midsection feels cramped, knees overlap elbows too much, etc.
#22
As a general rule, racers will find that buying the smaller bike and making it longer gives them a better range of fit options, and handling characteristics that are preferable for racing. At the same time, a rider who is just looking to get out and enjoy the ride will likely do better buying the bigger size and shortening the reach if need be. One of the major determining factors for me is how hard you plan to push down on the pedals.
A racer will plan to put a lot of force on the pedals a good portion of the time, and because of this the legs will take a lot of weight that would go to the hands. As a result, you can ride a lower front end position without adding any weight to your hands. Also, a racer will need to get up and sprint. When sprinting, a higher bar/torso setup makes it difficult to get leverage to apply as much force as possible to the pedals. A smaller frame size with a longer stem keeps the rider low over the front wheel to increase steering responsiveness, and allows a lower bar position due to shorter frame stack.
A recreational rider is not typically putting as much force to the pedals, meaning that same low position results in more weight for the hands and back to support on their own. The bigger frame has a taller head tube, so the bars are easier to mount higher. Also, how the bike sprints is usually much less of an issue. This position will generally have more forgiving handling as well. Imagine you ride through a patch of sand... you will be more likely to emerge out the other side unscathed if you shift your weight back (which a larger frame size & shorter stem will help do), and this holds true to most handling situations that can get novice road cyclists in trouble.
In the end, your shop is right. You could ride either bike, and in most cases you would never look back and think "what if I got the other size". Judging by your comments, it seems you enjoyed the feel of the 54 better, so I am curious as to why you then ordered the 52... is there something that felt better about that size that you haven't mentioned yet?
PS - would it be the end of the world if you rode a 56 around? Not really. But for someone who thought the 52 was a better fit than the 54 to all of a sudden want a 56 would be a huge red flag to me. Your pictures above do give a vague idea of what your position is like, but there are too many variables in distance to subject and angle that I wouldn't draw any in depth conclusions about what adjustments I would make... but I see nothing at all in those pictures (and more importantly how you felt about each) to suggest trying a 56.
Since you are looking at Specialized, your shop almost certainly has a BG fitter. Talk to him or her. The shop clearly is not trying to simply sell you inventory that they have, as they are ordering either size anyways, so I would feel pretty confident that they are (1) unbiased enough to give you straight answers, and (2) in a better position to give you real answers than a bunch of people looking at one tiny snapshot online.
A racer will plan to put a lot of force on the pedals a good portion of the time, and because of this the legs will take a lot of weight that would go to the hands. As a result, you can ride a lower front end position without adding any weight to your hands. Also, a racer will need to get up and sprint. When sprinting, a higher bar/torso setup makes it difficult to get leverage to apply as much force as possible to the pedals. A smaller frame size with a longer stem keeps the rider low over the front wheel to increase steering responsiveness, and allows a lower bar position due to shorter frame stack.
A recreational rider is not typically putting as much force to the pedals, meaning that same low position results in more weight for the hands and back to support on their own. The bigger frame has a taller head tube, so the bars are easier to mount higher. Also, how the bike sprints is usually much less of an issue. This position will generally have more forgiving handling as well. Imagine you ride through a patch of sand... you will be more likely to emerge out the other side unscathed if you shift your weight back (which a larger frame size & shorter stem will help do), and this holds true to most handling situations that can get novice road cyclists in trouble.
In the end, your shop is right. You could ride either bike, and in most cases you would never look back and think "what if I got the other size". Judging by your comments, it seems you enjoyed the feel of the 54 better, so I am curious as to why you then ordered the 52... is there something that felt better about that size that you haven't mentioned yet?
PS - would it be the end of the world if you rode a 56 around? Not really. But for someone who thought the 52 was a better fit than the 54 to all of a sudden want a 56 would be a huge red flag to me. Your pictures above do give a vague idea of what your position is like, but there are too many variables in distance to subject and angle that I wouldn't draw any in depth conclusions about what adjustments I would make... but I see nothing at all in those pictures (and more importantly how you felt about each) to suggest trying a 56.
Since you are looking at Specialized, your shop almost certainly has a BG fitter. Talk to him or her. The shop clearly is not trying to simply sell you inventory that they have, as they are ordering either size anyways, so I would feel pretty confident that they are (1) unbiased enough to give you straight answers, and (2) in a better position to give you real answers than a bunch of people looking at one tiny snapshot online.
#23
Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 17,196
Likes: 761
From: Ann Arbor, MI
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Hi, the bigger bike, white tape, it's not too big, rgds, sreten.
I see a little more rotation of the torso on the bigger bike,
i.e. your lower back is tilted a little more forward, and
perhaps reading too much into just two pictures, for
the bigger bike your spine has a smoother curve.
For no reason, you look better on the bigger bike.
Thinking about it, a little more stretched out, racier,
at the same time you seem to look a little scrunched
up on the smaller bike, less natural, in comparison.
I see a little more rotation of the torso on the bigger bike,
i.e. your lower back is tilted a little more forward, and
perhaps reading too much into just two pictures, for
the bigger bike your spine has a smoother curve.
For no reason, you look better on the bigger bike.
Thinking about it, a little more stretched out, racier,
at the same time you seem to look a little scrunched
up on the smaller bike, less natural, in comparison.
#24
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
As a general rule, racers will find that buying the smaller bike and making it longer gives them a better range of fit options, and handling characteristics that are preferable for racing. At the same time, a rider who is just looking to get out and enjoy the ride will likely do better buying the bigger size and shortening the reach if need be. One of the major determining factors for me is how hard you plan to push down on the pedals.
A racer will plan to put a lot of force on the pedals a good portion of the time, and because of this the legs will take a lot of weight that would go to the hands. As a result, you can ride a lower front end position without adding any weight to your hands. Also, a racer will need to get up and sprint. When sprinting, a higher bar/torso setup makes it difficult to get leverage to apply as much force as possible to the pedals. A smaller frame size with a longer stem keeps the rider low over the front wheel to increase steering responsiveness, and allows a lower bar position due to shorter frame stack.
A recreational rider is not typically putting as much force to the pedals, meaning that same low position results in more weight for the hands and back to support on their own. The bigger frame has a taller head tube, so the bars are easier to mount higher. Also, how the bike sprints is usually much less of an issue. This position will generally have more forgiving handling as well. Imagine you ride through a patch of sand... you will be more likely to emerge out the other side unscathed if you shift your weight back (which a larger frame size & shorter stem will help do), and this holds true to most handling situations that can get novice road cyclists in trouble.
In the end, your shop is right. You could ride either bike, and in most cases you would never look back and think "what if I got the other size". Judging by your comments, it seems you enjoyed the feel of the 54 better, so I am curious as to why you then ordered the 52... is there something that felt better about that size that you haven't mentioned yet?
PS - would it be the end of the world if you rode a 56 around? Not really. But for someone who thought the 52 was a better fit than the 54 to all of a sudden want a 56 would be a huge red flag to me. Your pictures above do give a vague idea of what your position is like, but there are too many variables in distance to subject and angle that I wouldn't draw any in depth conclusions about what adjustments I would make... but I see nothing at all in those pictures (and more importantly how you felt about each) to suggest trying a 56.
Since you are looking at Specialized, your shop almost certainly has a BG fitter. Talk to him or her. The shop clearly is not trying to simply sell you inventory that they have, as they are ordering either size anyways, so I would feel pretty confident that they are (1) unbiased enough to give you straight answers, and (2) in a better position to give you real answers than a bunch of people looking at one tiny snapshot online.
A racer will plan to put a lot of force on the pedals a good portion of the time, and because of this the legs will take a lot of weight that would go to the hands. As a result, you can ride a lower front end position without adding any weight to your hands. Also, a racer will need to get up and sprint. When sprinting, a higher bar/torso setup makes it difficult to get leverage to apply as much force as possible to the pedals. A smaller frame size with a longer stem keeps the rider low over the front wheel to increase steering responsiveness, and allows a lower bar position due to shorter frame stack.
A recreational rider is not typically putting as much force to the pedals, meaning that same low position results in more weight for the hands and back to support on their own. The bigger frame has a taller head tube, so the bars are easier to mount higher. Also, how the bike sprints is usually much less of an issue. This position will generally have more forgiving handling as well. Imagine you ride through a patch of sand... you will be more likely to emerge out the other side unscathed if you shift your weight back (which a larger frame size & shorter stem will help do), and this holds true to most handling situations that can get novice road cyclists in trouble.
In the end, your shop is right. You could ride either bike, and in most cases you would never look back and think "what if I got the other size". Judging by your comments, it seems you enjoyed the feel of the 54 better, so I am curious as to why you then ordered the 52... is there something that felt better about that size that you haven't mentioned yet?
PS - would it be the end of the world if you rode a 56 around? Not really. But for someone who thought the 52 was a better fit than the 54 to all of a sudden want a 56 would be a huge red flag to me. Your pictures above do give a vague idea of what your position is like, but there are too many variables in distance to subject and angle that I wouldn't draw any in depth conclusions about what adjustments I would make... but I see nothing at all in those pictures (and more importantly how you felt about each) to suggest trying a 56.
Since you are looking at Specialized, your shop almost certainly has a BG fitter. Talk to him or her. The shop clearly is not trying to simply sell you inventory that they have, as they are ordering either size anyways, so I would feel pretty confident that they are (1) unbiased enough to give you straight answers, and (2) in a better position to give you real answers than a bunch of people looking at one tiny snapshot online.
I rode each of these frames one time, back to back. And I really do not have a good frame of reference for what a proper fit should feel like. When the LBS guy said either frame will work I simply thought smaller would be better due to the lighter weight. But reflecting back on my test rides after the fact, I started to recall some differences. Primarily when in the drops. Really, I need to ride both sizes again. And pay better attention to the differences.
This is what I intend to do later this week when I get back from vacation.
#25
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
For once I agree with sreten. I think you do look better on the white tape bike, slightly flatter back - it allows you to be more stretched out, and probably has a little longer top tube, or what they now call reach (horizontal distance from the top of the head tube to a plumb line to the BB). I'd also think about fit evolution - how is your fit preference likely to change, barring abnormalities. Mainly, choose the bike for which your saddle is less slammed back, that has the shallower seat tube angle. You are in a moderately aggressive position on these two bikes, and I think you will want to dig in lower as you get used to the bike. That will probably result in slowly pushing the saddle back and down a bit, with the bars moving forward as you want to get more aero, with comfort.





