I'm approximately 5' 10 1/2 " and fall into the both medium and large frame sizes for the bike I'm thinking of getting ( 2016 specialized sirrus comp carbon ) . I have in fact rode both sizes and do feel comfortable on both but only on short test rides here in cold NYC . 95% of My riding is in manhattan and Brooklyn which often involves quick maneuvers dodging in and out of traffic, pedestrians, potholes, construction etc... My present ride is an 11 year old Giant NRS 3 full suspension mountain bike with 26 " wheels that I have street tires on . Is there a difference in maneuverability when it comes to medium and large frames that are rolling 700 x 30 mm tires ? Thanks

If the geometry is the same there shouldn't be much difference in handling. I doubt if you'd notice the effect of the marginally longer wheelbase on the larger bike.

But if you're between sizes, the usual advice is to go for the smaller frame. It's easier to make a too-small bike fit than a too-large one.

Conventional wisdom says the smaller frame will be lighter and more maneuverable. It feels that way to me but I've never tested it other than the feel of riding. FWIW I ride a 55 Guru steel and a 58 Masi AL.

This post is another example of why this subforum should not be at the top of the list of forums. There is a sub forum dedicated to the topic of this post. In the past I would tell someone which forum to go to, but now I'll just tell the OP to scroll down the list of forums and find the right one. If you are looking for advice, the other forums are better as there are often more knowledgeable people reading them.

Yeah, I agree. Usually I point people in the right direction, but ...

Actually, for most visitors, what bike to buy is pretty much as General as a question gets. Fuirther, he isn't asking about Fit specifically, as in, which stem length, what should my riding position be. Do we have a "Handling as Affected by Frame Size" forum?

If we really want BF to be full of people like me, who are already full of it, Then it is fine to drive away everyone who doesn't read the title of every single subforum, and then also discern exactly what each veteran poster believes belongs there.

Otherwise, we need to be a little kinder to people who come here with questions, I'd say.

Seriously ... what goes into a "General Cycling Forum"? Please provide a comprehensive list of topics that are acceptable for this subforum and I will be the first to tell people we don't welcome there offerings and that they should go elsewhere.

Really ... how much was any of you hurt by this guy's post? Show me on this doll where the OP's flagrant forum abuse hurt you.

I'm telling you---I either have not enough coffee or too much.

Thanks very much for the advice folks. And thanks for the defense Maelochs , I'm a newbie and still learning how to navigate this hugh forum .

Methinks your post was a perfectly reasonable question in/for General Cycling. I'd agree that if you're short test ride comfortable on both and you can't get any longer before buying the smaller frame should be best.

Yeah, I was in the same position when I bought a used bike last year. I'm 5'11" and fell smack dab in between the medium and large frame for most compact frames with sloping top tubes. I got the medium frame and raised the seat post.

But if I was buying a road bike with horizontal or less sloped top tube I'd be pickier about fit, try both and consult with a good bike shop.

I'm 5' 10" and bought a new 2015 Specialized Sirrus Elite the first of January in a size large from a LBS.

I rode a medium and a large prior to purchase in the parking lot for about 5 - 10 minutes each.

I ended up getting the large and am regretting it now...not sure why I got the large...probably an ego-driven decision.

It's too stretched for me. I've played with adjustable stems, high rise bars, stem risers...

Get a medium.

You can't tell anything from a bike riding it 5-10 minutes in a parking lot.

It's when I do my local 20 mile TT's that I realized I had made a mistake.

Great bike...just too big...~200 miles on it in a month.


Rod
Oriental, NC

Full of it, as you say.

He wasn't criticising the poster, he was criticising the positioning of General Cycling at the top of the forum. Giving it that top billing inevitably means it ends up as a dump for threads that really would be better placed elewhere. Better not just for the tidy-minded, but for the poster who, presumably, wants a response from someone who knows what they're talking about.

Until recently (before your time, though it's becoming quite hard to remember what the forum was like before you started posting the equivalent of War and Peace every day) General Cycling was at the bottom of the list of sub-forums. That was a superior arrangement. It meant that newcomers didn't use it as a default, they'd read through the list and frequently stopped at a place more appropriate to their needs. They were better served.

Try responding to the actual content of the post, rather than playing to the gallery and defending people from attacks that haven't been made.

I don't think there'll be a consequential difference in handling between the two sizes of Sirrus, but there will be a big one between the Sirrus and your current bike.

I'm pretty firmly in the "go smaller" camp when crisp handling is the issue. The shorter wheelbase and the positioning of the rider's weight centrally or a bit forward l, combine to make a bike reactive to more subtle input and more "flickable".

That's all assuming the basic geometry is right, of course. I don't know anything about the Sirrus Comp or how aggressively the OP rides, but as someone pointed out above, just moving from the Giant NRS to the Sirrus alone should satisfy the OP's needs, irrespective of size. Still and yet, I'd advise sizing down, especially for dashing around the city in a sporting mode.

Agreed.

I apologize if I offended anyone with my response.

What I saw, was that a brand new poster made a new post and some of the first responses he saw were all negative. Not aimed directly at him, but sort of ... because he stopped at "General Cycling" with a general cycling question. While no one directly insulted the poster ... the controversy (and I have read threads about people discussing the mods moving "General Cycling" and the fact that "Cyclocross" for instance, had its name but not is location changed, destroying the alphabetical purity of the list) was and is tangential at best to the post in question ... but the replies were decidedly negative.

If there is still a large push to move "General Cycling" back into alphabetical order, great! No problem. Maybe an "Open Letter to the Mods" type of thread? What I saw instead, was that this new poster got caught in the blowback from some controversy from months ago which had nothing to do with his post .... and while he was not specifically targeted, if a drunk pukes on you, you don't ask if he was aiming.

I stand by my original reaction, though perhaps I should have softened my tone ... but dumping an old controversy into a new poster's first thread, and sort of making it seem like his fault because he stopped at what seemed the appropriate sub-forum instead of reading every single other possible sub-forum, seems an unwelcoming and un-neighborly thing to do.

So ... I await the "Mods-Put General Cucling In Its Place" thread.

As for how the forum was before I arrived .... those were the "Good Old Days." Savor the memory, rue their passing.

I agree, that's the biggest difference you face. But as the other poster said, it's not good to be too stretched out.

Wow so much helpful information here , especially PalmicoRod's who sounds more or less My size . I'm Going to get the Medium size frame . As I watch the flurries come down here @ 21° I can only imagine the Good times I'm going to have exploring the streets , bridges and neighborhoods of NYC on this bike . Thanks again people. ..

Best first post!

I just checked out the Sirrus Comp and see it's a hybrid type bike; yeah, definitely size down.

Did Sirrus used to be a road bike? I was thinking it was, for some reason.

Looking at the geometry, those are pretty long and slack-headed, and have a good amount of trail, so it's not what I'd call a quick handling bike. Bring everything in with the smaller frame will be good, and hopefully make it feel more reactive.

I think it should be a great bike for exploring NYC, though!

How does one keep a brand new Carbon fiber bike in NYC from being stolen?

I'm new to all this, but here's my take....

if the frame is too small, you have to raise the seat a lot. By doing that, you sit hunchbacked so as to get to the handlebars which are then very low ....

ride 50 miles in that position, and your neck takes strain as you have to lift your head up high to see where you are going

I have ridden a few bikes, and prefer a slightly bigger frame that what the calculators work out for me (as long as both of my feet touch the ground when I'm stopped at a traffic light, I'm happy) .... I'm much more comfortable on these larger frames even though the seatpost is a lot lower down than what most riders set there's to

Sometimes referred to as a french fit.
.
As I mentioned above, there is quite a bit of information on the Fitting your bike subforum; some of it is good, some of it isn't. But there are a lot of variables one should consider before shelling out good money, but then it's your money.

Agree 100%. Back when I used to ride my old hybrid, it was a size medium, or 18". I am 5'8", used to be 5'9". The bike was sized correctly for me at the time but the bars were so high I sat too upright. So I switched bars to a lower one, which left me hunched over. On rides over one hour, my neck would start to hurt from being too hunched over.

My current bike is a much larger frame, 55 cm, with drop bars which stretch me out much more. And the larger frame puts the bars at the right height without having to mess around with spacers.

No more neck problems.

Better to be a little stretched out than to ride hunched over. Other things being equal, go with the larger size.