6' 2'' on a 56cm?
#1
6' 2'' on a 56cm?
Is it strange that I feel better on a 56cm than anything larger? Top-tube clearance seems just right with 1-2'' clearance, and I can adjust my saddle to give me a position that is comfortable and powerful on the bike.
#2
Administrator

Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 13,652
Likes: 2,698
From: Delaware shore
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
It's not all that uncommon. You must have proportionally longer legs than upper body. Many people of averge build at 6'2" ride a 58 so you're really one size difference. But if it works and you are comfortable, there's really no question.
#3
Iconoclast
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,176
Likes: 2
From: California
Bikes: Colnago Super, Fuji Opus III, Specialized Rockhopper, Specialized Sirrus (road)
It's not that strange. I'm 6' 1" and I fit best on the smallest of 56cm frames, (frames with with a true 56cm stack height).
Something that a lot of people overlook is, if the distance from the top of your shoulders up is disproportionately long, that can mean that the rest of your body (for practical purposes related to bike fit) may be similar to the proportion of a person say, 2-3" shorter.
Something that a lot of people overlook is, if the distance from the top of your shoulders up is disproportionately long, that can mean that the rest of your body (for practical purposes related to bike fit) may be similar to the proportion of a person say, 2-3" shorter.
#4
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 423
Likes: 0
From: St. Petersburg, Florida
Bikes: 2011 Specialized Tarmac SL3, 2013 Sram Red
I'm 6'2" and have 2 58's. I also have a 56. Once set up, they all feel the same.
56=longer stem, 58=shorter stem, etc. You can tweak to fit your needs.
56=longer stem, 58=shorter stem, etc. You can tweak to fit your needs.
#6
doesn't sound unusual to me either... i'm 5'11" and was told by the LBS that i "needed" a 56 or 58 cm frame. i test rode all of them and felt most comfortable on a 54, so that's what i ended up buying. my legs are slightly shorter than the average 5'11" human (by a little less than an inch, but enough that the 54 frame felt best).
#7
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 782
Likes: 0
From: Evansville, IN
Bikes: 73 Raleigh Supercourse, 99 Specialized Stumpjumer, 08 LeMond Tourmalet
Me too. I went through 2 bikes before I stopped listening to the experts. Mostly they say you will fit best with whatever they have in stock. I ride a 54 now (not a 58) and I love it. I don't really care what Lance rides.
#11
got the climbing bug

Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 10,268
Likes: 1,053
From: San Diego
Bikes: one for everything
no never bothered me because you lean the bike more then you turn the handlebars. Toe overlap is more an issue on MTBs IMO
__________________
Rule #10 // It never gets easier, you just go faster.
Rule #10 // It never gets easier, you just go faster.
#12
Despite all my rage, I am
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,613
Likes: 0
From: Los Angeles, CA
Bikes: LeMond Zurich, Colnago C-50
Ignore the top tube clearance measurement. It's irrelevant. I'm 6'1" and have a 55 cm bike and a 57 cm. (different brands and geometries - they fit equally.) My legs are shorter than most people my height.
#13
I am five foot 9 and ride 52-56 cm frames with my road bike being 555 (square) and most of my regular rides being 55... most can ride within a certain size range and not all frames are square... my 52 cm road frame has a 54cm top tube.
Your total height might suggest that you should ride a 58 but some people are proportioned differently with shorter than average legs and longer torsos relative to their total height and the biggest issue I find with fitting folks like this is that they might find things cramped up top or need to fit a longer stem to adjust for a longer reach.
Stand over is not as critical as the top tube measurement although one should be able to stand over their bike without crushing their bits.
Your total height might suggest that you should ride a 58 but some people are proportioned differently with shorter than average legs and longer torsos relative to their total height and the biggest issue I find with fitting folks like this is that they might find things cramped up top or need to fit a longer stem to adjust for a longer reach.
Stand over is not as critical as the top tube measurement although one should be able to stand over their bike without crushing their bits.
#14
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 684
Likes: 0
From: Phoenix, Arizona
Bikes: Elephant custom road bike, 08 Redline D440, Motobecane Fantom cross Uno.
Not odd at all. I'm similarly most comfortable on bikes with much shorter top tubes. I might add that if your body proportions are such that you are most comfortable on a smaller bike than what someone your height normally would ride, you might be a good candidate for a custom frame. When Specialized, Giant, Cannondale or whatever manufacturer design a bike of a certain size, they do so with a certain height range and proportions that are with a standard deviation or so of the norm in mind. When we try to stuff a square peg into a round hole, we end up distributing weight on the bike in ways other than what it was designed for and screwing up the way the bike handles.
I recently had a custom frame built, which has a 55cm top tube, and 59 cm seat tube. On my old bike, I could never take my hands off the handlebars or get in the IAB position, holding my line while reaching for my water bottle took ever bit of concentration I could muster and I always had to take corners slower than other riders. I blamed these things on my own bike-handling skills, but as soon as I got on a bike that fits, I instantly discovered that I actually have pretty freaking good bike handling skills. The difference is night & day.
I recently had a custom frame built, which has a 55cm top tube, and 59 cm seat tube. On my old bike, I could never take my hands off the handlebars or get in the IAB position, holding my line while reaching for my water bottle took ever bit of concentration I could muster and I always had to take corners slower than other riders. I blamed these things on my own bike-handling skills, but as soon as I got on a bike that fits, I instantly discovered that I actually have pretty freaking good bike handling skills. The difference is night & day.
Last edited by Debusama; 02-08-12 at 01:00 PM.
#19
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,160
Likes: 14
I'm just the opposite. I'm 6'-2" and just finished building up a 57cm frame for a bike I already have in 61cm. The 61cm feels Okay but still a little cramped; the 57cm has the seatposts and stem at the height limits and still feels way too small.
But I agree with what everyone is saying; there is no right/wrong here and each person has different dimensions and different preferences.
- Mark
But I agree with what everyone is saying; there is no right/wrong here and each person has different dimensions and different preferences.
- Mark
#21
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
It's not that strange. I'm 6' 1" and I fit best on the smallest of 56cm frames, (frames with with a true 56cm stack height).
Something that a lot of people overlook is, if the distance from the top of your shoulders up is disproportionately long, that can mean that the rest of your body (for practical purposes related to bike fit) may be similar to the proportion of a person say, 2-3" shorter.
Something that a lot of people overlook is, if the distance from the top of your shoulders up is disproportionately long, that can mean that the rest of your body (for practical purposes related to bike fit) may be similar to the proportion of a person say, 2-3" shorter.
#22
ka maté ka maté ka ora
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,423
Likes: 4
From: wessex
Bikes: breezer venturi - red novo bosberg - red, pedal force cg1 - red, neuvation f-100 - da, devinci phantom - xt, miele piste - miche/campy, bianchi reparto corse sbx, concorde squadra tsx - da, miele team issue sl - ultegra
#23
#24
I am five foot 9 and ride 52-56 cm frames with my road bike being 555 (square) and most of my regular rides being 55... most can ride within a certain size range and not all frames are square... my 52 cm road frame has a 54cm top tube.
Your total height might suggest that you should ride a 58 but some people are proportioned differently with shorter than average legs and longer torsos relative to their total height and the biggest issue I find with fitting folks like this is that they might find things cramped up top or need to fit a longer stem to adjust for a longer reach.
Stand over is not as critical as the top tube measurement although one should be able to stand over their bike without crushing their bits.
Your total height might suggest that you should ride a 58 but some people are proportioned differently with shorter than average legs and longer torsos relative to their total height and the biggest issue I find with fitting folks like this is that they might find things cramped up top or need to fit a longer stem to adjust for a longer reach.
Stand over is not as critical as the top tube measurement although one should be able to stand over their bike without crushing their bits.
I'm 5'9" and am most comfortable on a 56cm.
I tried 54 & 58. 56 was the "just right" fit for me.
I probably could've ridden a 54 with a different stem/saddle set-up.
But the 56 with a 110mm stem felt right from the get-go.
I have a 3" saddle top to handlebar top drop.
What is someone "supposed" to ride?
Whatever fits them best IMO.
#25
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,846
Likes: 0
From: Los Alamos, NM
Bikes: Fuji Cross Comp, BMC SR02, Surly Krampas
I'm right at 6'2, and ride a 58 on one bike and a 61 on my other. Both are comfy.
But I disagree that too large is worse than too small - both are uncomfortable. Having gone through life trying to find shirts with sleeves long enough, having a large frame is a dream.
But I disagree that too large is worse than too small - both are uncomfortable. Having gone through life trying to find shirts with sleeves long enough, having a large frame is a dream.






