Frame sizing question
07-23-05 | 12:41 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: San Fransicko
Frame sizing question
I'm gonna get another track frame. I'm looking at IRO's frames. The question is this. I'm just shy of 6'3" and just shy of 200. My inseam is about 32". I ride about a 59 right now, but I'm considering getting a smaller frame and bringing the seat and bars up higher. Is there any noticeable differences in having a smaller frame? I'm thinking about for freestyle type stuff (bwards circs. bunny hops and skids). Would the 56 be totally too small?
i think some dude just broke the hour record on this bike beast
i think some dude just broke the hour record on this bike beast
07-23-05 | 01:01 PM
#2
i don't stop
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,058
Likes: 0
From: basel, switzerland
Bikes: soma rush, giro
56 seems kind of small for your height, but i think you could go two sizes (cm) smaller than a what you should be riding.
the benifits of a smaller frame are that you'll be able to throw it around easier, and it will handle more direct. i guess if its way too small it could uncomfortable and squirrely.
the benifits of a smaller frame are that you'll be able to throw it around easier, and it will handle more direct. i guess if its way too small it could uncomfortable and squirrely.
07-23-05 | 01:07 PM
#3
Cornucopia of Awesomeness
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,847
Likes: 0
From: not where i used to be
is 32" your pants inseam or your real inseam.
If it's your real inseam then you have really short legs for your height. Then a 56 cm frame will probably have too short a top tube for you. The head tube will also be shorter, making it harder to bring the stem up higher. I guess if it's a threaded steerer you can always just get a nitto technomic with one of those ridiculously long quills.
That being said, as smaller frame will in general be lighter and stiffer, and will be easier to throw around.
PS. that's some ridiculous saddle-bar drop going on there.
If it's your real inseam then you have really short legs for your height. Then a 56 cm frame will probably have too short a top tube for you. The head tube will also be shorter, making it harder to bring the stem up higher. I guess if it's a threaded steerer you can always just get a nitto technomic with one of those ridiculously long quills.
That being said, as smaller frame will in general be lighter and stiffer, and will be easier to throw around.
PS. that's some ridiculous saddle-bar drop going on there.
07-23-05 | 04:46 PM
#4
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
From: San Fransicko
Thanks. So you say that maybe 57-58 would be the smallest I should go? I'm just afraid that I will go too small. I also think it should be important that there is plenty of stand-over for me. Such a drag that IRO only makes a 59 and a 56.
07-23-05 | 05:18 PM
#5
Cornucopia of Awesomeness
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,847
Likes: 0
From: not where i used to be
would need more (accurate) measurements to give a better answer.
an IRO 59 is really a 55 c-c with a 57cm TT. IRO measures seat tube to the top of the collar. I'm 6'2" with pretty short legs, and that's the size that I'd pick.
If your cycling inseam is really 32" you might want to consider going custom.
/don't let 53-11 see that picture. you'll never get him to shut up about aerodynamics, long cranks or "forward positioning"
an IRO 59 is really a 55 c-c with a 57cm TT. IRO measures seat tube to the top of the collar. I'm 6'2" with pretty short legs, and that's the size that I'd pick.
If your cycling inseam is really 32" you might want to consider going custom.
/don't let 53-11 see that picture. you'll never get him to shut up about aerodynamics, long cranks or "forward positioning"
