Hi,

I picked up a new bike last week. Specialized Secteur.

I did some research on frame size prior. Here are some of my stats..

5'10 or 5'10.5
84.5 to 86 inseam. Every time I measured, came out different, but always in that range. Used the book between the leg method and I guess depends on how far I jam it up there.

I get to the bike store and hop on a 58, didn't even ride it. Just felt too big and straddling the tube felt way too tight. 56 felt much better. Cruised it around and really liked it. Ordered the color I wanted and picked up a week later.

Now I read around on all the proper sizing stuff. Adjusted the seat height so my leg is slightly bent at 6pm, moved it back about 1 or 2cm also so my knee bisects the pedal axle at 3pm.

Then there is the part where when riding on the hoods, the handle bars should block the wheel hub. This doesn't happen. When using the dropped part of the handle bars it does, but on the hoods the hub is between me and the handlebars. So I guess I would need a slightly longer stem so I am more leaned forward.

I mean the bike feels comfortable, When on the hoods I feel pretty extended and my arms are slightly bent. But really haven't ridden more than 6-10 miles a day so far, so have no idea how a long ride would feel. And what long term is going to be like.

So to my question Since this bike has a "relaxed geometry", what does that actually change? And based from what I have said, do you think the frame is the right size? I guess on a larger frame, the wheelbase would be bigger and I would have to lean more forward.

Thanks.

Anyone? Give me a hand

Now I am even more confused since some sites say when on the drops it should block the hub, then the video on watched on youtube says the hoods. And not even sure if I would need a shorter or longer stem now.

No matter what anybody says, size matters.

Now...regarding your fit...you need to ride it as is for a month before messing with things. You'll get a feel for how it fits your body with more miles. You'll also find your body will strengthen in certain ways to accomodate your setup. Neck, knee, back pain are all warning signs that the fit is off but until then, ride.

Relaxed geometry may be nothing more than a 20-30mm taller head tube. It might also have a little shorter TT length.

How can you expect some help when you didn't bother to post your saddle height, the frame make and model or your stem length?.

The bars blocking your view of the hub is mostly worthless. If you go by that idea, then having the hub between you and the bars, or in other words, the hub is behind the bars, means the stem is too long. If the view is blocked in the drops, that means the stem is too long too. You'd be more likely to see the hub a little in front of the bars, from the drops. Whether that idea is valid at all varies greatly with body proportions. This idea also misses the difference in handlebar reach and brake hood reach. Someone using standard reach bars will have about 10mm more reach than short reach bars and the new Shimano brake hoods might add another 5-10mm compared to SRAM or Campy.

Thanks,

Did say it was a specialized secteur, but will post the rest of the stats when I get home. It has the default stem in the highest position.

Mainly concerned with the frame size right now. Not even sure now which direction the next size frame would put me. Seems like it would put me in the opposite direction, but the seat post tube is longer so that would change the way I lean.

Having to buy a new stem a month down the road is fine, but getting stuck with the wrong size frame is what I want to avoid.

Thanks.

Here's the geoemetry. https://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/...enuItemId=9257

The head tube is longer, but the frame reach is not out of the ordinary. The frames have a little more slack head tube angle that slows the steering, but more fork offset that speeds it up. In my size, a 52cm, the steering trail is smaller (quicker) than a LOOK 585. The chainstays are longer and the front-center is a little longer, so the wheelbase is longer than a racing model.

I'm no expert, but I'm 5'10" and ride a 56cm Trek. Unless your proportions are very different than mine, I think it's unlikely that you need a different size frame - maybe some positioning tweaks and/or a different stem. But go with dstrong's advice and ride it for a while before changing things too much.

I understand that hub blocking the handlebar is worthless, but it seems to be a good starting point for a newbie.

I made a few measurements. Not exactly sure the right way to measure these, so will tell how I measured.

Saddle - Put a book on top of the saddle and marked the wall along the bottom of the book = 98cm

Stem length = Measured from the center of the headcap? screw to the centerline of the handlebars = 11cm

Stem height - This is probably way off, bottom part of the stem is on a slant, so measured from the center of the tube (bottom part of the stem) straight down to the ground. = 91.5cm. The stem is in the highest position. I did play around with lowering the stem the day after I got the bike, but felt very little difference so just put it back to how it came.

Also just rotated my handlebars a bit so the drops are parallel with the ground and that put me closer.

Also if I change my posture a bit that changes everything. If I bend my arms a tad more the hub is blocked. I don't know why, but my natural position is pretty much locking my arms and then a slight bend. It seems the more I bend, the more stomach muscle is being used.

https://www.bacinfo.com/popup/tips/bikefit.htm

Just like this guy, so seems my natural position is OK, and better than forcing a position that doesn't feel right. And I'm not fat, but my stomach now is probably the weakest it's ever been in my life, I am sure it will strengthen over time and my posture will change.

So based on everything I have said, regarding the frame? Just ride it and forget about all this nonsense? Adjust the stem? Change it in for a different size? etc.

I also realized that the stem has writing on the other side, looks like it could be turned over.

Thanks.

Saddle height is measured from the center of the crank to the top of the saddle, along the centerline of the seat tube. The vertical measurements that you made do have value. One easy way to measure saddle to bar drop is to measure vertically from the floor to the top of the saddle in the area where your sitbones rest, then measure vertically from the floor to the top of the bars. The difference is saddle to bar drop. Yours is about 5cm, which is fine, for a beginner.

Many fitters will position the saddle fore/aft position so the knee is directly over the pedal spindle. That's OK too, as a starting point, but if you feel too much weight on your hands, try a little further back.

Your stem is probably flipped up. Depending on the angle, flipping it down could lower the bars 2-3.5cm. It will also increase the reach by about 1cm. If you don't find the extra drop and reach to be uncomfortable, go for it. It's the first step toward a racier position.

As Dave said, measure from the center of the crank along the seat tube to the top of the saddle. You should be near 76cm.




Center to center is right, 110mm on a 56cm is within normal, maybe a bit long. If you feel stretched out after everything else is adjusted, consider a 100mm stem.


Your arms should not be almost locked or locked. Your core should hold up your upper body, not your arms. This could also mean you have too much reach. You want to control the handlebars with your arms, not be supporting your upper body with your arms.



Biking requires more core strength than it allows you to build. You need to do core exercises.


Stems are "flipped" and are denoted in angle in addition to length, i.e. +/-17 degrees.


p.s. Listen to Dave

I am in the same height range and ride a 56cm Trek. Sounds like righ sized frame and you need a fitting. Worth the extra money.

I measured the saddle height again, and came out to 73cm.

I actually think the stem is already flipped down, I attached a pic. Also looked on the site and the 56cm comes with a 100mm stem. Measured it again and it is 10cm. No clue how I got 11cm, all my measurements could be +/- 1cm.

If my core is what should hold me up, then I am definitely riding wrong. Need to just get stronger.

Thanks.

EDIT: Going to raise the saddle up 2cm and see how that feels. Waiting for it to get dark so I can go ride for a while. Very hot today.

Yes, your stem is flipped down.

2cm is well within normal tolerances for saddle height due to differences in pedals, shoes, clips (if applicable), shorts, and toe angle. If the saddle is too high you'll feel your hips rocking side to side or your feet will feel toe-down. Keep in mind that moving the saddle up also moves it back, you should move it forward ~6mm if you raise it 2cm to keep your saddle to handlebar reach the same.

Once you get on some longer rides, you'll get a better idea of what works and what doesn't.

Saddle height is ~75.5cm now. Put me a bit closer to my imaginary goal of hub blockage.

Just rode about 7 miles. There is absolutely nowhere to ride around here. I won't be living here much longer, which is a good thing. Suburban streets are not safe for bikes.

What I have noticed is when I am actually pedaling and putting power to the wheels, I shift a bit forward and the hub is blocked. I guess since my legs are carrying most of my weight at that time. When coasting or pedaling lightly more upright.

Nobody has yet to mention in this thread "Your bike is the wrong size, return it asap", so I think I am cool. Bike is pretty comfortable in its current state, just going to ride it now.

I actually need to do something about the pedals. they put some super cheap plastic pedals with plastic toe clips and straps. The problem is they aren't the same size. Left one fits my foot like a glove, but the right one has less height to it so really pinches my toe. Thought at first my foot might be deformed, but checked. Can take 2 fingers and put them in the left with even a bit of wiggle room, the right two fingers won't even fit without really squeezing them in there. They both have an S on them which I guess means small? Same pedals, but bigger clips would work for now, gonna swing by the bike shop tomorrow and see what is available.

Thanks for all the help. If anyone else has additional comments, or information, please do post it

No pretty for sure the 56 is right for you...if you like a smaller bike then the 54 could be made to work but in that case you probably should have gotten the Allez. Now getting the fine tuning right is something the bike shop should do/have done with you.

I found this fit calculator that I am sure you are all familiar with.

Your Measurements
Gender M
Inseam 86 cm
Trunk 61 cm
Forearm 33.5 cm
Arm 63 cm
Thigh 59 cm
Lower Leg 56 cm
Sternal Notch 151 cm
Total Body Height 181 cm

And here is what they said.


Now I guess since my bike has a curved top tube, 56cm is the number it would be if it wasn't curved. With a 56.5 top tube length.

My stem is 10cm

Saddle Height = 77cm

Saddle to Handlebar = 51.5

Saddle Setback = 6cm

Everything is pretty close in range. Getting shoes and pedals tomorrow and then going to take some longer rides this weekend and see how everything is.

Was actually going to try and drop the stem down 1 notch, before I saw this. Sometimes it feels like I need more reach. But then when I am cruising and get low I feel fine.

Can't wait to get shoes. I bought some different clips 2 days ago, and after taking off one of the old clips I realized the new ones won't fit. So just took them back and decided I will enjoy real cycling shoes and pedals much better.

That fit info is outdated and nearly worthless. The seat tube numbers meant something many years ago when all frames had horizontal TTs and most brands followed one of the two traditions for measuring the frame size center to center or center to top. These days, those values are meaningless. What you need to look at is the head tube length, with the headset to estimate the bike's vertical size.

The TT lengths are equally worthless since it requires both a TT length and a seat tube angle to define the reach. Two frames would have TT lengths of 53 and 54cm, but have the same reach and fit the same, once the saddle is moved to the same position relative to the BB. The frame with the 53cm TT could have a 74 degree STA and the 54cm could have a 73 degree STA. The result is a nearly identical reach.

Looking at the other measurements. Wouldn't matter what frame measurements this page said, can't change them without getting a new frame.

What I was looking at were the other 3, saddle to handlebar, setback, and height. Unless I am missing something, those should be standard across all bikes right? Even if you have 2 different shaped frames and they both measure 60cm from the tip of saddle to handlebars will be the same reach. And if saddle height is 80cm and 5cm back the legs will be positioned identical on both bikes.

At least it's good to know i am in the range for reach based off my arm length. If I were like 7 or 8cm out of the range that would be a red flag imo.

So I have been constantly fiddling with this bike. Ended up raising the seat up even more, and also lowered the handlebars 2 spacers. Unfortunately my cat stole my tape measure, and haven't found it or got a new one, I think they are 1cm each.

Then realized I was always riding on the tops of the bars. So moved the handlebars back up and also rocked them back a bit. Not gonna touch it for 1 week and force myself to ride on the hoods only. Think I am pretty satisfied with the seat height now, my legs aren't burning out as quick and feel more burning it other muscles.

I use this bike to commute, and probably doesn't help lugging a bunch of crap on my back.

It's crazy since this whole time I was thinking that this bike was too small for me, I have to raise the seat so high that it causes excessive seat to handlebar drop. But right now there is just under a 3" drop. According to everything I have read, its in range. The sloped top tube exaggerates the seat post height.

Dave, I know you say those numbers are worthless, but for example these specialized bikes that have sloping tubes still have a virtual number. For example my bike has a seat tube length center to top of 51.5. But the tube slopes, so that number is pointless. The sticker I pulled off the bike showed an imaginary line straight across with a measurement of 56 (not sure if it was center to center, or center to top though). And then a top tube of 56.5.

Those above recommendations all make sense now. A longer seat tube wouldn't hurt, but a shorter head tube is needed. Kinda happy I didn't go with the 58 now, would of been even worse off than I am now.

I do really like the bike though, just wish I could love it.

Get a pro fit done.

A good fitter will take more measurements than you know what to do with and make the little changes you'll never know you should make. Just for reference, here's some of the numbers from my fitting:

Anatomical Measurements:

Height: 178.8 cm
Inseam: 84.8 cm
Arm span: 178 cm
Torso/Trunk length: 152.2 cm
Forearm length: 35.3 cm
Arm length: both 61 cm
Thighs/Femurs: right, 61.5 cm; left, 61 cm Lower Legs/Tibia: right 56.5 cm; left: 56.8 cm Sternal Notch Height: 149.3 Shoulder Width: 41 cm

Fuji Team '09 56 cm

Center-Top of seat tube collar 56cm
Center-Center Top Tube length 56
Seat tube angle: 73°
Head tube angle: 73.5°
Head tube length: 14.4 cm
Fork offset 45 mm
Trail: 53.8 cm
Stem: 100 mm, with 6° positive rise
Crank length: 172.5 mm
Handlebars: 42 cm (center to center)

Ideal frame geometry:

C-C Seat Tube: 55 (or virtual c-c measure for sloping/compact frame) C-T Seat Tube: 56-57 C-C Top Tube: 55-56 Seat tube angle: 73.50 degrees Head Tube Length: 17-18 cm
Stem: 110 mm
Handlebars: 42 cm
Crank Length: 175

Key measurements for leg extension and torso angles (before / after adjustments):

Knee flexion: right 40° / 35°
Knee flexion: left 40° / 35°
Torso angle, hoods: 40° / 35°
Torso angle, drops 38° / 30°
Torso angle, tops 45° / 44°
Shoulder angle, hoods 93° / 93°

In addition to the minor changes on my bike, he added wedges to both my cleats to compensate for the screwed up rotation of my hips.

+1
When I went back to cycling after many years I purchased a giant OCR2 second hand. The first thing I did was get a pro fit, and haven't had any fit/comfort issues since. Like smoothdome, I even ended up with special shaped inserts in my cycling shoes to fix my wonky feet. Well worth the investment

You are the same height and inseam as myself. I typically ride a 55/56 and like a 56cm tt.

I run my saddles on all of my bikes, with some minor variation due to shoes, peddles etc, at about 75.5 cm.

Sound like you bike fits you to me and just needs some fine tuning. A 58 would have been too large. If you have your saddle higher than 76cm from c/BB to crown of saddle, you are getting it out of range, people tend to run their saddles too high these days because ti looks cool, 75.5ish is about right for your stated measurements.

So I haven't touched my setup since.

But have been getting some left knee pain. Inside knee pain. That ball that is on the inside of your knee, the soft part between there and the knee cap. It doesn't hurt at all while riding, it hurts after.

I did adjust my left cleat as it was slightly positioned differently than my right one. Basically just rotated it a few mm. This was about 4 days ago. I didn't ride at all today, but did walk about 5 miles.

I feel the pain when I rotate my leg. Like say I am standing square and I step back with my right foot and twist my body to the right while keeping my left leg planted will trigger the pain. This type of movement never happens when riding, which is why I never feel it when riding.

One quick thing to note, I did check when riding and I seem to have float in all directions no matter where I am. So doesn't seem like I am restricting movement at all.

I did google around and came across a site that says to move the cleat out.

You think the move I did 4 days ago would of worked by now? Not sure if I should give it a few more days, or try to move it again. Any ideas?

Thanks.

Wow can't believe I posted this near 10 years ago.

Went back to find this since don't feel like measuring myself again. Also can't believe the measurements I am seeing.

I got into fixed gear shortly after getting this (above) bike, and have since built 3 bikes. The bike I have been riding the past ~5 years has a 53cm seat tube, and 55.5 top tube. With a 70mm stem and risers. I put a 90mm stem on at times if I know I will be going for a longer ride (10 miles+) as a 70mm stem is a bit crunched (but best for wheelies and bar spins)

Hence my dilemma. Getting older now and when I take my bike out these days its to ride, not really trick and get smoked on the trails by guys simply because they have gears. And after around 30 minutes of riding fixed I am beat. And bored.

Have my eyes dead set on the surly midnight special. I have always liked surly bikes, had a steamroller for a couple years.

Does anyone own one? Its either a 54 or 56. Leaning toward 54. But unfortunately no LBS even up to several hours radius has this bike for test riding. So testing riding one prior wont be possible.

There is an LBS somewhat close by that carries cross checks. They seem to have similar geo in a way so going to test those to get an idea of how a 54 vs 56 surly feels in the drops.

My question to the forum is outside of owning own and being able to call out a 54 or 56 for me based on my above info, are there any other mainstream bikes that have similar geo / sizing I can test to get an idea on sizing for the midnight special?

Thanks!

According to the formula I have used successfully for 40 years, the 84.5 cm inseam would indicate a 56 C to C frame. The formula I use is the LeMond-Guimard one. There are several others that might work for you. Generally most people can fit a range of frame size. Mine is 54-56. When I started doing this I was 5'10.5" with a 32.5" (82.55 cm) inseam. Sounds like your inseam is longer than mine and your reach may be shorter. Perhaps a change in stem length would help.