raria

Hi,

I keep on hearing people say, "I have longer arms than normal that's why I prefer a longer top tube" or a similar statements.

I have no idea if my arms, torso, and leg lengths are short, long or normal!

So, what is the typical absolute value (or relative ratio) of arms, torso and legs?

Racing Dan

Its normal to have a "wing span" equal to your height.

Maelochs

https://www.competitivecyclist.com/S...ulatorBike.jsp

If you can easily buy clothes off the rack anywhere at any time and they fit well, chances are you are of average proportions (or have strange dressing habits.)

So long as you know how to pick a bike on which you can ride comfortably, comparisons with others are pointless and meaningless. I might think I have long arms and be wrong .... who knows? but if you can ride a fair distance and get off the bike with no sore spots, blisters, hot spots, unusual pains .... then probably your bike fits and the only important comparison---between your bike needs and your bike size---is satisfactory.

DrIsotope

Whoo boy, do I not have "average" proportions. My upper arm (shoulder to elbow) and lower arm (elbow to wrist) are the same lengths, and apparently those are supposed to be different. I'm also 188cm tall, with a 203cm wingspan. It's said that for most folks, the length of the foot is equal to length of the forearm-- but with my ape arms, my forearm is about 5cm longer than my foot... and I wear EU48 shoes. My feet are actually a foot long.

But yeah, get a flexible tape (having a helper is extraordinarily handy) and do the Competitive Cyclist calculator. Definitely helps out.

Caliper

I've read that the average leg length (cycling inseam) is 46% of your height. Higher % leg length means short torso and vice-versa.

For me, my legs are about half my height. So at 6 feet, I find a 25"/64cm frame quite comfortable as long as the reach is short enough.

seedsbelize 

And at 6', I like a 24"/60 cm frame.