It's because that's what BikesDirect does: https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...zing.html#road

Also, when I'm in Performance Bike, I hear the sales associates doing the exact same thing. They get the customer to stand over a bike and based on how much or how little space there is between the top tube and their crotch, they choose a bike for them.

Does anyone have the time and or the links to guide new riders on fitting? Maybe this will be a sticky or in the "Start Here" thread to which we can direct new riders instead of having the discussion every other week.

not to diss bike salesmen but I'm sure most of them aren't going to spend the extra time trying to find the perfect bike for someone and possibly risk losing a sale. Stand-over is an ok indicator for pretty much anyone who isn't a gorilla or a t-rex. Apes and dinosaurs should expect more work finding a bike that fits perfectly.

but I think I understand what you're saying and I agree that "misleading" people into thinking that correct standover = bike! is a little shady.

https://www.competitivecyclist.com/za...LCULATOR_INTRO

Good place to start

70% of the time it works everytime.

Made with bits of real panther.. so you know it's good.

Dear Carleton,

Everyone always says "you're not standing on it, you're riding it" but would you ever buy a bike whose tt was higher than your inseam? I know I wouldn't. If a bike wasn't offered in a size that combined an acceptable tt length with a standover height that I could actually stand over, I'd buy a different bike.

I think short of making a cross-brand database of sizings, it becomes very difficult to use more than 1-2 variables when picking a new bike. After looking at a few bikes it all becomes very overwhelming. It doesn't really differ from any other industry. We base things off a few numbers at best unless having things custom made. As a tall individual, clothing comes to mind.

Plus most bike shops would probably rather sell their "custom fitting" packages instead of finding a bike that is near perfect stock.

Yes I would and yes I have.

What's more is that we are riding fixed gear and often track spec bikes. Track spec bikes have higher BBs which mean, once you are in the pedals you are actually a few centimeters higher than you would be on a standard road bike...which is why the top tubes are sometimes higher than standard road bikes.

A "square" bike is one where the Top Tube and Seat Tube lengths are equal. So, you may see ads for a "57cm square road bike".

So, if I have two properly fitting bikes, a standard "square" road bike and a standard "square" track bike (with higher BB) the standover height of the track bike will be higher because the BB is higher.

Riding style plays a big role in bike fit too....competative (pro fit) vs. "French fit" which is similar to the fit Grant Peterson prefers comes to mind.

If you are under 5'-6" and riding a track bike with a high BB, horizontal TT and 700c wheels you may have no choice. You just learn how to mount and dismount your bike w/o banging your junk on the TT. As long as you get the correct relationship between contact points (pedals, saddle, bars) all is good.

Dave Moulton has many great articles regarding fit and this particular article is a good start for new riders.

God no, it smells like, like a used diaper... filled with... Indian food

said it before and I'll say it again for the millionth time ... like Kellencorkill posted... https://www.competitivecyclist.com/za...LCULATOR_INTRO USE IT!

NOT all track bikes especially the cheaper entry level lifestyle bikes have higher BB's ... either way at that rate, if sized properly, the stand over with a "track" BB clearance would still be ok. Other rule is with shoes off standing over the bike lift the front end up until it hits your crotch front wheel should come up off the ground about 3".

This is precisely why I stopped caring about standover. Since I'm short, I expect standover to be some type of issue. I prefer to be care more about the comfort when I'm riding it. You can always lean the bike a bit to one side.

I have short legs and a long torso. I can barely stand over either of them flatfooted (I can but I'm resting on the TT), however, the TT length fits almost perfectly (even though I need a shorter stem on the road bike). I don't think standover is the most important factor, however, it's a simple way of finding a round about size for new riders and you can always change stem length if the TT doesn't fit properly.

No one wants to rack their balls.

But shoot me now for saying this. Kudos to BD for actually giving a ballpark figure, opposed to other vendors---box stores---who aim at one size fits all policy.

I would say an LBS is the best bet for an entry level bike, but the BD prices are alluring. Especially when visiting a LBS where they had a row of Kilos for $600. That's got to be great service. But hell, It may be worth it to actually get a proper fit.

/tangential

The world is in equilibrium. You get what you pay for at Bikes Direct. Low prices...and low levels of information, service, and support.

Also low levels of torque.

my two cents: you can change horizontal reach to a certain extent by choosing longer and shorter stems. you can also change your angle of riding with positive or negative stems. you can't change the stand over height of a bike (barring switching to 650c wheels from 700c, other junk solutions). if you're not going to be thoroughly planted on the bike (track riding, road tour with no stop and go traffic), then don't get something that you're going to ball yourself on. there's a reason why they invented city bikes, step through frames, mixtes, dutch bikes.

when building my single speed, i chose something that i wouldn't crush my balls on if i had to suddenly stop short in traffic. there's no such thing as perfect bike fit out of the box unless your body type is terribly generic.

They did the whole stand over height thing with me at REI. I just wanted to hop on a bike, and didn't care which. The saleswoman tried to get me, at 5'11, on a small Novara - based on the fact that the sloping headtube was barely touching the crotch of my pants. I just moved back a little when she turned around and was like "It fits".


Sad thing is, the bike was to small.

REI guys don't know much about bikes, in my limited experience.

On my FTP I have plenty of ball-TT clearance, on my TET it's a bit snug (seat tube is 2cm longer). Never had an issue with both and both of them fit fine (52cm/90mm stem and 54cm TT/70mm stem, respectively).

So us shorties (5'1", 28" standover here) can ONLY ever get step-through style frames? Booo. I was pushed into a step-through hybrid by a bike shop for exactly that reason, and I hated it. I had that bike for maybe 2 months before I was ready to trade up. Now it's just my winter beater. Could only hold one bottle cage; had to carry an extra-long u-lock because of the fat tubes + weird angles at the head tube; upright riding position gave me no power and made my body a sail in the Chicago wind...No thanks! I can stop without smashing my ladybits just fine on all of my bikes.

Also maybe you didn't mean it to sound that way, but 650c wheels are not a junk solution if the bike is built for them. I <3 my 650s. Even though with them I still have close to no clearance over my top tube.

@ misskaz: didn't mean to imply 650c was a junk solution. for a purpose built bike, it's appropriate. i was referring to people who have 700c frames and putting 650c wheels on it. this inevitably leads to them complaining about lowered bottom bracket height, incompatibilities with brakes, etc. also: you don't need to have a step through frame. there are new "WSD" bikes that use 650 wheels, compact frames with sloping top tubes, etc. look up georgena terry bicycles, specifically their older style frames with a 700c rear wheel and a 24" front wheel if you're looking for a horizontal top tube.

Being a short person with a nerdy tendency to over-research everything, I am well-versed in the options available for tiny people. I own a 46cm Bianchi Volpe (with 700c) and a 43cm Fuji Classic Track (with 650c). I have a google docs spreadsheet of tiny bikes with straight(-ish) top tubes for myself and all of my shorty friends. I was just calling bull**** on what it sounded like you were saying: that if you can't get standover right, you should get a step through/mixte frame. Now maybe that's not what you meant, but just to be clear: It's perfectly possible to ride a bike that is "too big" for you by the standard LBS standover parameter but is actually just fine for riding. AND you can do so without banging your balls or ladybits on the top tube. To tell people that they MUST get that one measurement (which is only a small component of overall bike fit) right is not true and steers people into bikes that either don't fit them in other ways or are not the kinds of bikes they are looking for. And I believe that is the point carleton was making in the first place with this post.

This whole standover thing is a bunch of goverment promoted crapola, which has little to do with reality. Fact is, I never stand over any of my bikes. I mount and dismount from one side, such that the bike is tilted to that side when my foot is down. When I start riding, I push off with the right foot, while at the same time raising my left foot and clipping into the left pedal. And, yes, most bike shop people are ignorant, and try to sell to you under the assumption that you are ignorant as well.