Another fit question, or weirdness
 

I've recently had the opportunity to ride a number of bikes, and am seeing a lot of discrepancy in what should fit vs. what does fit. Is this normal?

I'm 5' 10", 175#, 31-32" inseam. The sizing charts from most companies put me on a medium to large bike with a 19.5"-20.5" (495-520mm) frame.

Yesterday I rode an XL bike, spec'd at 23" frame, 31.9" standover height, and an effective top tube length of 24". This thing felt really good. The top bar lightly contacts my crotch area when standing over it, but the length of the frame really lets me stretch out, and made me feel like I was getting more out of my legs.

Conversely, today I rode a Medium bike, 19.5" frame, 30.5" standover, ETTL of 23.5", and it felt like it was way too small. The shop dude said he was surprised, because if anything he expected me to say the bike was too big. And according to the specs this is the bike I should be on. It just didn't feel right, though. Cramped feeling fore-to-aft, and a feeling that the top tube is so far down there that I might as well be on a mixte or step-thru. Almost enough to give you vertigo...

Looking at spec sheets, and how measurements are done (when shown) I can see that different manufacturers measure things differently. For instance, I note that Breezer and Trek take top tube measurements at completely different points on the bike, so even if they were the "same size" the measurements would not match.

And then there's weight, which no one will talk about, "because there's no standard". Thanks, that helps a lot.

Is it just me, or does this kind of thing happen all the time? I admit I haven't bought a bike in a while, and have never spent this much time researching it, but it seems like these measurements should mean something. Do I just need to ride everything that catches my eye, in every size, till I find what's right?

-- Sam

Well of course, yes, getting what fits you best takes precedence over any number (except, maybe, cost!), and yes, some companies give sizes that aren't a measure of anything on the actual bike, and are rather "it fits like a traditional size 54cm" or whatever.

That said, actual measurements, like the effective top tube length you gave as an example between Breezer and Trek, should be measured the same way, e.g. center-to-center along the horizontal; I can't recall seeing effective top tube measured any other way.

To your point that there are a lot of different numbers flying around out there, yes, you're right about that. I think that once you get those most relevant to you locked in, though, it will be much easier to sift through the options. For example, it sounds like you like longer reach, so bikes with longer TTs are of more interest, but what is the # you're looking for, right? If you can determine its between 23.5" and 24", you can weed out the 23" ETT bikes even though they may be designated Medium or something else seemingly appropriate. Same goes for minimum standover height, though I think your distaste for low top tubes a bit strange.

yeah, things have changed...
the new paradigm is aimed more to downhill specs and less to all-round trail. This works because most buyers don;t like being stretched out and the up close feeling makes them comfortable that they aren;t stickin their nose out. Frames are effectively shortened from where they were 8-10 yrs ago. And fork travel is way further than at that time. Stretched out also means less flexibility in weight distribution during any airtime, which is a lot more of what goes on these days.
Depending on the frame, my tendency has been to split the difference - not go Md, but not go XL - so Lg and add a bit longer stem and set the seat back a hair. Gives that stretch many of us have been accustomed to, without being totally jacked up by the bigger/higher Headtube. Ideally I like the lowest TT/standover I can get, but I can make due with the Lg... but I still prefer a Md. - some of the race frames offer more tt, so a Md works out nice.
Straighter bars without a big sweepback. Often it means quite some mods to a stock bike, but maybe the LBS will be amenable to making some swaps to get a sale...

Or worse, "One size fits most".

Here's what I'm talking about regarding non-standard measurement locations.

Trek's diagram:
http://s7d4.scene7.com/is/image/Trek...0,0&iccEmbed=1
"E" is the effective top tube length. As you can see, the measurement is taken at the top of the seat post to the top of the head tube.


Here's the Breezer diagram:
http://www.breezerbikes.com/images/geochart/so.png
"B", the label being hard to make out here, is their ETTL measurement. They use an arbitrary (?) point on the seat tube and an imaginary point in space below the head tube.

When I measure my current bike using these two basis I get a difference of 1-2", depending on how picky one wants to be about OD or center-of-tube measurements. (Hey, I'm an engineer (albeit software), what can I say?)

But you're right about the standover height; I should actually be thankful for a low one. Getting on and off the bike easily is a priority as I get older. I think any unconscious preference comes from years of riding a road bike with a horizontal bar, from the days before tall seat posts.

Thanks to both you and cyclezen for your suggestions. I'm going to take another look at the Medium bike before it gets away (it's a killer deal), but I'm not sure it's the one for me. We'll see.

-- Sam

If you wouldn't mind my asking, how does standover clearance affect the ease of getting on and off the bike? Are you talking about just standing on both feet for a rest, or completely dismounting the bike?

It doesn't, in a perfect world. But in the event of a dismount under less than ideal circumstances, having too tall a bar can make life interesting. I also have a (slightly older) friend experiencing this very problem with a road bike, and want to avoid it.

Also, if the bar is low enough, you can step over/thru it, rather than swinging a leg over the back. Believe me, as I age little things like that become more noticeable.

-- Sam

Ah, that's what I missed. I don't think I can get on/off my bike that way unless it's a step-through bike. I've got a pretty stiff body. :(

Yes, those diagrams would make the Breezer measurements seem wacky, however, Breezer doesn't actually reference those lines in their geometry table, so maybe they don't measure that way? If they do, though, that'd be one wacky way (in the sense of it being non-standard, anyway) of measuring ETT! It may make some or better sense than the standard, but no, it really doesn't help us as consumers, does it?!

I've actually got a newer Breezer Venturi out in the garage, I should go measure it...

Okay, so I did, and measuring on the horizontal from the center of the top of the head tube to the center of the top of the seat tube (or seat post, as it were) comes in on the money at 570mm.

Damn, I just realized didn't measure as the diagram shows to see if it arrives at the same number, but oh well, the standard measurement seems to work.

Hey, thanks for checking!

BTW, from Breezer's page for the Uptown 8, they reference measurement "B" in the table:

[TABLE="class: geomtable, width: 1"]
[TR="bgcolor: transparent"]
[TD="width: 200"]Size[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"][/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]S (17.5")[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]M (19.5")[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]L (21.5")[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]XL (23.5")[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR="bgcolor: transparent"]
[TD="width: 200"]Top Tube - Effective[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]B[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]575[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]595[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]615[/TD]
[TD="width: 40, bgcolor: transparent"]635[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Weird. And they say weights are too non-standard to report! :)

-- Sam

Well I'll be damned! I learn something new every day, just like mamma said!

Thanks for the follow-up, and I guess that leaves us with as complicated a world as you figured in the outset! Sorry I couldn't help simplify things. :)

I see those numbers rather long , but its not a drop bar frame , its for MTB/hybrid setups..

Being similar size (5'9") My Road bike a 56, level top tube is 565 long..

a proper fit for purpose for Me..


short leg /long torso, or visa vesa? overall height is incomplete data.

long torso might like more front center ..

FWIW, I ended up going with the Soho for a variety of reasons. The ETTL on this bike is 565mm by their measurement (see above), with a standover of 30.39". This is the 20" frame model.

I realized in all my searching and test riding that one bike really won't do it all, and the Soho is my commuter. If I decide to get a road bike (or whatever) then I'll focus on the needs for that particular riding style. There I might want a real stretched out reach, for a better position. We'll see.

-- Sam

The Venturi is a drop bar road bike, and yes, it's quite long relative to ST length. Joe Breeze knows how to design frames for gettin' work done! His frames are definitely trend-setting and not trendy. Look back at 35 years of Breezers and you see the evolution of that seminal MTB idea into a riding philosophy. And he's one of the nicest, most down-to-Earth guys in biz. Still.

Never Met him , since I didn't get to go to interbike or any industry trade shows ..

You have just made your cycling life easier.:p

just for future reference, IDK if this is the case, but if the Head tube angle and seat tube angle are the same on the breezer (or any bike) you can measure anywhere along the head tube (or imaginary head tube line in that pictures case) and seat tube and you should get the same length. However, if the angles differ that will not work.

good call on the SOHO, it should suit you well.