Hey everyone - I'm looking to upgrade my bike within the next year, possibly to a CF bike. Road bikes have always been difficult to fit for me because of my odd body type - slender female about 5'8" with longer arms and legs, shorter torso. Basically any stock bike I buy I need to refit the front end with a new stem and bars - right now I have 36cm bars and a 70mm 35 deg rise stem on a 52/53ish cm top tube frame. I know it's a weird and kind of ugly setup but it's the only thing that alleviated my initial back pain when I first bought the bike (stock bars were 40 cm and the stem was 90/95ish mm with a 10 deg rise). All the literature I have read says that for my body type I will have a hard fit because I will generally need to bring the bars as close and as high as possible. I was wondering if someone could recommend a make/model/manufacturer that has frame geometry with shorter head tubes and slightly longer head tubes (I think this is what I would need to make the lease modifications in the long run). or if people with similar body types could chime in with any advice they may have. Price is not an issue at the moment as this is something I will be saving up for. Comfort is my main concern. Thanks in advance!

I think just about everyone who replies to you post would advise you to find a reliable bike shop. For a reliable bike shop, ask in the Northeast Regional area of this website. There are plenty of cyclists abound Boston who know the best shops. Northeast Good luck.
Bern

Price is always an issue. In any case I think it is safe to consider CF frames as 'exotic'. As such there isn't a wild amount of avant garde design and customization going on. I generally go against the advice to make the frame do the heavy lifting of enabling a perfect fit. My approach is to buy the frame that is in the ballpark (i.e. not 62cm if you are a 5'4" female) and anything else can be fixed with the right stem, bars, seatpost. Anything. If you are recognizably human you can be accomodated by the stems, bars and seatposts on the market and your bike will fit. Carbon fiber is not IMO the best material for a do it all daily driver bicycle. I'd look to steel or aluminum for something like that. This may change, but in 2014 the state of the art of CF is that it does not do the daily grind kind of performance dynamic all that well and if and when it fails there is usually no saving it. FWIW.

H

Ok...

...There is no such thing as just a CF frame. The expensive pro bikes have frames using multiple and complex weaves that get excellent results (umm... which actually means a marginal performance increase) CF. Entry level CF bikes do not; they're most marketing oriented.

..You're in a difficult to fit category; concentrate on fit first and everything else second.

..If you want comfort, a good fit and relaxed riding position and wider tyres will do more than any frame.

So... what does that mean exactly. The o.p. asked about specific frame intrinsics and which makes might have them. Do you know of any like what they are looking for? I'm picking on you because you have given this advice to focus on fit. How exactly is this fit to be achieved?

I think you meant shorter top tubes and longer head tubes. Most brands offer an "endurance" model that has a more relaxed fit (shorter reach, higher stack) than the "race" models. From there you could go down a size if you need to further shorten reach. That will also shorten the head tube some, but in the smaller sizes you quickly reach the point where head tubes are as short as they can get and still accommodate big CF tube diameters. You may still need a high-rise stem if you need to minimize saddle-bar drop. That won't score points in the "Hot or Not" thread in the 41, but functionally there's nothing wrong with going that route.

Of course if you don't totally have your heart set on CF, a custom frame builder can set you up with a very nice light steel or titanium frame sized exactly to your measurements. Price may be a little higher than CF, but there are some good builders that are surprisingly affordable (full custom True Temper S3 road frameset for $1400). My road bike is CF and my CX bike is custom steel. If I could only keep one, the CF would have to go.

Yes. And my answer, which seems to have gone over your head, is that this is the wrong way to approach her real problem.

Despite what you junior school teacher told you, there ARE stupid questions. You just asked one. If I knew of a CF frame that seemed ideal then I would have suggested it, yes?

If the OP wants me to expand on what I mean by a relaxed fit, then I'll certainly do so (it sounds to me like she needs the sort of geometry that Rivendell favour, although this doesn't restrict her to one of their bikes - it .) But talking over that is complex and time consuming so it makes sense to see if she's interested in going that route.

I think you need to grow up a little and realize that not every post can be a complete essay. People with lives say stuff and then explain more if the person who needs information expresses an interest.

But - because I like you! - I'd suggest reading this:

https://www.rivbike.com/kb_results.asp?ID=38

...I think some of Rivendell's recommendations are generally over-cautious (not everyone over 35 needs their bars as high as Elron seems to think) but they fit here. I suggest taking her bars higher than she has so far, using either a fork with an uncut steerer or a bike designed for a quil stem, which she could fit with an extender. And it might be an idea to go for moustache bars rather than drops - if bar height is a problem, then getting multiple positions from one height can make sense.

Kopsis - I did mean shorter top tubes and longer head tubes - just a typo on my part. I was also wondering if ordering a frameset with an UNCUT steerer would also be an option? (I thinking of doing the build myself.) That way I could roughly position the stem and bars to the height where I wanted it then have the LBS cut it to my spec. Would this affect stability or handling of the bike in any way? I'm not looking for a crazy 6 inch rise above stock, maybe 1-2 inches max. Changing my initial stem probably raised my bars roughly an inch which helped greatly. I was also thinking of going the titanium route. And by no means was this purchase going to be my daily commuting bike - not in downtown Boston. Lol. I'd keep my current bike or get a cheap single speed for commuting.

meanwhile - I know I'm in a "difficult to fit" category - I stated that right in my OP and yes I know how pro bikes are constructed with multiple layers and weaves.

Most manufacturers spec a maximum of 40mm (1.6") of spacers below the stem. More than that and you potentially stress the steer tube and the top headset bearing beyond design limits. Depending on the HT length of the frame you're considering, that may be enough to get the bars where you want them.

??? I have trouble accepting that steer tubes and headset bearings can't deal with 2" of extension. I run a stem extender and it is adding over 3" to the original steer tube. An acquaintance with a bad back got an uncut steer tube for his Rodriguez tandem with way more extension than that. Must be legal or liability issues that make manufacturers conservative. The aftermarket doesn't seem to share their concerns.

H

You have been extremely condescending and rude in reply to my extremely reasonable and impersonal observations. Luckily I have a thick skin. I read the article, thanks? Bars 4" higher than the saddle? Why use such a conservative and controversial piece of tripe to make a point? Everyone in this thread should, I think, take a minute and think about what they know about bikes, frames and the people that ride them. Come on. You know more than you think. O.p. included. First thing. A woman with longer legs and arms and shorter torso is not at all weird or unusual. Women specific designs assume these very proportions in fact.

I think if pressed I could name every manufacturer of CF frames easily available in North America. If further pressed I could list their geometries and size ranges! On paper, none would suit the o.p. Ah... but is that really true? Yesterday, in another thread I said words to the effect that in general I go against the usual impulse to make the frame responsible for the heavy lifting of "fit". IMO the frame merely needs to be in the ballpark of "reasonable". In other words I would not recommend a 50cm for the o.p. nor a 62cm. That leaves about 5 or 6 common size options open and if the o.p. chose ANY one of them I could make it fit her with suitable selections from the VAST assortment of stems, bars, seat posts and even cranks on the market. An uncut steerer is one way of getting bars higher than normal. There is, however, I think a growing culture of "its all good" when it comes to bike fit. I live in Portland and this exposes me to huge racks of commuter bicycles at large institutions. I love looking at the different rigs people saddle up and go to work on! I wince though when I see saddles tilted 30* from horizontal nose up! I shake my head when I see saddles tilted 30* from horizontal nose down. I cringe when I see bars 12" higher than saddle... 12* lower than saddle. I'm sure those riders can justify their choices. Friends... some things are really just wrong. A little effort learning to work with what is generally accepted to be normal might mean still having a bike and enjoying cycling in a year versus getting rid of it cheap on Craigslist because it was just too painful.

The great thing about using components to dial in "fit" is that they are usually cheap (often very cheap) compared to a frame. What "fits" today might actually cease to become comfortable as you develop new muscles and adapt to the tensions inherent in riding diamond frame bicycles. You can buy a longer stem to stretch out more for under $20. You can buy an adjustable stem to try out new positions on a whim for under $30. New positions within reason of course. There really is no good reason barring unique orthopedic intrinsics to have drop bars higher than saddle height. There really isn't. For one thing your saddle manufacturer expected you to have a certain amount of weight on your hands and when you throw those expectations out by significantly altering your torso angle your saddle is now going to be uncomfortable. A saddle wide enough and plush enough to make one comfortable with a high bar height will not allow for a lot of pedal effort. So you will be slow compared to other riders. Knees will hurt, etc.

I'm done but if you get anything from this its that the actual frame matters little. Especially if the frame that does it for you by the numbers costs $5K. Nashbar has been selling a CF frame in touring, CX and RR dimensions for years. $1K. I wouldn't spend more at this juncture in CF evolution. I don't know what seat tube length would fit the o.p. , or what top tube length but a decision on one will make a choice in the other moot. You pick the one that is important and finesse the other with component choice. A 400mm seatpost can fix ANY choice of top-tube length desired in a mass market product. FWIW.

H

It's less a matter of liability and more a matter of engineering. The engineer designing/selecting the CF steer tube wants to go as light as possible without exceeding the amount of deflection (bending) the headset bearings can tolerate. To do those calculations he/she needs to know the moment arm length above the top bearing and the maximum force that will be applied. If the engineer assumes 5" of unsupported steer tube, it will be necessary to select a much heavier tube to meet the design constraints. So they pick a "reasonable" number based on typical use and design to that.

No one is saying that if you exceed that number the bike is certain to fail. They're simply saying that they haven't done the analysis, so they don't know what will happen. Maybe reliability drops by 0.001%, maybe it drops by 1%. The bottom line is that exceeding the spec is adding an unknowable amount of additional risk to your riding. Some people are ok with that, some aren't.

I figure that given the plethora of different frame geometries available (a nearly infinite number if you include full custom) why not get one with a properly sized head tube so you don't have to push components beyond what they're spec'd to do.

I didn't realize you were talking about CF steerers.

Yeah I figured there would be a max amount of space I could leave, I just didn't know exactly how much space. Whatever manufacturer I decide to go with that is definitely a question I will need to ask them.

I hope this long post wasn't geared towards me and I made you mad. I wasn't trying to start any arguments among forum members - just seeking general advice. I know all about "dialing in fit", I've been troubleshooting for a while now and know what issues need to be addressed and how my bike should fit and feel. I know I need small stems with narrow bars which are generally on stock frames too small for my long, flexible legs. It's a blessing a curse I suppose - they make bike fitting tough but look great in a short skirt.

Seek out a Trek WSD Madone .. the selling retail shop can change components from the OEM build parts list, to suit your desires.

Just built on a used 09 k2 frame. I think you need to establish a price limit and what you want from your bike first. Prices for carbon components can get pretty steep quick especially with di2 components.

I wasn't mad, and I'm sure any remaining peevishness among us guys is dissipating as we contemplate long, flexible, legs that look great in short skirts....

OK I'll say it. We need pictures so we can be objective in our advice. :-0

You may want to consider the Jamis Xenith or Xenith Endura "femme" models. The 54cm sizes in either model appear to have a fairly tall stack (586mm) and relatively short reach (362mm). By comparison, the 54cm Trek Domane 4.3, also an endurance model that has a tall front end, is 11mm shorter in stack and 12 mm longer in reach.

While these Jamis Xenith and Xenith Endura bikes are listed as 54cm, the effective top tubes are 530mm.

There is probably better geometry for you out there, so keep searching. Good luck.

I have struggled to find a comfortable bike with excellent handling and I have similar body proportions to you but am taller. I had a custom steel commotion cicada frame made to fit and I could not be happier now. If you do look at commotion as an option the nor'wester may be a better model for your riding style. If you want CF you will have to live with a stock frame size intended to fit the masses and not you specifically. I also own a $2800 CF bike that mostly collects dust in the garage now because mt steel bike is soon much more comfortable to ride. CF is series looking but for me I found that custom site outperforms it.

I have struggled to find a comfortable bike with excellent handling and I have similar body proportions to you but am taller. I had a custom steel Commotion Cascada frame made to fit and I could not be happier now. If you do look at Commotion as an option the Nor'wester may be a better model for your riding style. If you want CF you will have to live with a stock frame size intended to fit the masses and not you specifically. I also own a $2800 CF bike that mostly collects dust in the garage now because my steel bike is sooo much more comfortable to ride. CF is sexy looking but for me I found that custom steel outperforms it. I think a lot of people have jumped on the CF frame trend because they mostly want a bike for looks or just are uneducated about how nice a good quality steel frame is.

Here's a thought - for the cost of a bike with a carbon fiber frame, you could have a custom built steel frame with a CF fork. It would fit you perfectly, weight would be around 16-19lbs depending on what you add and you'd be very comfortable. There are a number of steel frames makers that are modestly priced - Rodriquez Bikes and Gunnar are two that come to mind. Lead time would be about 4 weeks or less this time of year with Gunnar.

We built some gravel bikes a couple of years ago and used Gunnar frames. Great ride, very comfortable and they fit perfectly. My wife, who is about your size, wound up with a Gunnar Crosshairs and it came in at around 17-18lbs using 105 components and a Gunnar steel fork (looks nice, but it's heavy). If you got a Sport - which would be a very comfortable frame - and a carbon fork, you'd probably be around 15.5-16lbs in a bike which is comparable to a CF frame. Today's steel is high tech stuff. These bikes would ride like butter and be a great ride.

Gunnar bikes are offered through local bike shops. Find a good one and they will help you dial the fit in perfectly.

J.

QtDL, I don't know what particular bike will be the one for you, nor whether any stock frame can fit. I think you need to find your target numbers for reach and stack, and seek out what production frames would be satisfactory. Or, find a custom frame builder who agrees with your approach and see if you can get a frame built for you. I agree with the previous posters who said fit, i.e. geometry, is more fundamental than materials. The best steel or Ti will not be satisfying over a long ride if it doesn't let your body perform correctly.

I just googled "how do I find my reach and stack?" and got a short list of sites where you can calculate it. You'll need to take some measurements on yourself, probably best done with an assistant. If you see a frame builder to discuss getting a frame, let them re-measure you, since they need their own confidence what your best sizing is.

Reach and stack are a good indication of necessary frame geometry, but might not be the whole story. But I really don't know of anything better to characterize a person's needs on a bike. At least you'll have a clear indication. I don't think any of us here can give you that on our own.