Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Road Bike Optimum heights for the Tall

Search
Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Road Bike Optimum heights for the Tall

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-29-06, 11:51 PM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
belowzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Road Bike Optimum heights for the Tall

I'm 6'2 - 188cm tall, just in the tall height range. I'm planning on purchasing a new road bike that will be primarily for ride trips >60km and the occassional race. So I want an optimum bike height that will suite me and feel comfortable.

I should mention I'm used to riding an aluminium MTB atm, 51cm frame height. My saddle is very high. The roadbike I'm looking it is all carbon roadbike, and I've been recommended a 56-58cm frame, even 59! I was told that the bigger the frame the steadier the ride will be and since i'm a beginner it will be right for me. However I've noticed that the pro riders (eg; Jan Ullrich) appear to have medium sized frames with saddles nice and high, guess that is good for racing but uncomfortable for a duration. But hey I'm used to a 51cm frame so far doing a couple of hundred km a week, and when I was a youngster I rode a couple of old roadbikes, but never racing or club riding.
belowzero is offline  
Old 03-30-06, 12:06 AM
  #2  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Northern California
Posts: 10,879
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 104 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 5 Posts
You need to take some road tests and figure out for yourself what is "comfortable". A fit rider may be less comfortable trying to ride a very upright bike.
johnny99 is offline  
Old 04-01-06, 04:38 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
belowzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 194
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I guess I consider myself quite fit as on my mountain bike I can keep up with 26-30km/h average riders on road bikes on a hilly course.

I haven't had a chance to go to the cyclestore again yet but was wondering what an optimum height you think would be for a 6 foot 2 rider? I saw someone complaining at 5'11 that their 55cm frame was too small.

re: https://www.bikeforums.net/road-cycling/185358-how-stupid-does-my-lemond-look-now.html . . .how stupid does my lemond look now

Now not too long ago a colleague at work recommended 56cm frame would suite me.
belowzero is offline  
Old 04-01-06, 04:52 PM
  #4  
DocRay
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)
Tagged: Thread(s)
Quoted: Post(s)
I'm 6'4" and have a 61cm, professionally fitted. You should be around 58-60.
 
Old 04-01-06, 05:32 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
big john's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: In the foothills of Los Angeles County
Posts: 25,292
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8280 Post(s)
Liked 9,044 Times in 4,477 Posts
I'm 6'2" and I ride a 63. This is to get the bars high without some strange stem. You need to check out the top tube length, too. Like they say, try different frames or get fitted by someone who know their stuff. My friend is 6'4" and he rides a 65 C50 and is very fast on it. Depends on your body.
big john is offline  
Old 04-02-06, 12:37 PM
  #6  
qqy
▒▒▒▒▒▒
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 476
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm 6'4" and I ride a 58, but I don't recommend it unless you've got a strong lower back. I have a 59 TT and a 130mm stem, so the reach is just right for me. However, especially if I flip my stem down, there's a lot of pressure on my back when I stay in the drops for a while (but the aerodynamics are great!). Presonally, if I had to do it again, I would have gone with no less than a 60.
qqy is offline  
Old 04-02-06, 05:21 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,941
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Different makers use different ways of measuring, so you can't necessarily just use a specific number.

Many shops will do fit measurements before looking at bikes so you can get a good idea of what sizes to start with.

It's hard to give you a simple answer on the big frame/small frame question. A bigger frame would have the saddle less extended, and therefore the bars would be higher. But it would also have a longer top tube, which would make your reach longer.
__________________
Eric

2005 Trek 5.2 Madone, Red with Yellow Flames (Beauty)
199x Lemond Tourmalet, Yellow with fenders (Beast)

Read my cycling blog at https://riderx.info/blogs/riderx
Like climbing? Goto https://www.bicycleclimbs.com
ericgu is offline  
Old 04-02-06, 05:43 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I'm 6'4" and on a 62cm. I am thinking I should have gone with 61 or 60 though.
tekhna is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.