Advice on Soma Rush sizing
 

Hey, I am interested in getting a Soma Rush but I am not sure what size to get. I am 6'1" about 170lbs with a 33.5" inseam. I was just wondering if there are other riders out there about my size who ride Rushes that could give me suggestions as to which frame size I should get. I basically want a quick responsive fixedgear/track bike for transportation and general fun city riding (already been riding a conversion for a while). I am not looking for an undersized frame for doing tricks or anything like that. Thanks!

5'11" ride a 54cm Soma. Love the fit.

I the same height as you..the 59cm Soma Rush is most consistent with the size frames that I ride. I usually aim for a top tube length in the 57-58cm range.

I'm 6' and I ride a 59cm. Perfect fit. I originally got the rush without the fork and slapped a threaded straight fork on it. Recently however I went back and picked up an original unthreaded Rush fork and I love it. It's an excellent frame.

6'2" here and I ride the 59cm. Perfect!

sorry about posting any opinion whatsoever. I will refrain from posting any "nonsense" from here on out.

Your whole post seems like nonsense to me, especially this statement, which is completely devoid of logic or meaning.

Maybe in comparison to aluminum bicycles?

I am 6' 1" and ride a Soma Rush--- went with a 57--- and it effectively runs large. I cannot imagine a 59--- it would definitely be too large for me. Consider the geometry--- with the higher BB, the TT is set relatively low (considering the seat tube is measued to the top of the tube) to offer a decent standover, and with a relatively short headtube, unless you go with a rising stem, you should end up with a lot of reach. My 57 has a longer TT than any of my other bikes (a 57, 58, and 59). I would go for a 57--- mine fits perfect.

I had similar deliberations after reading the size chart--- 57 vs 59. I went with my gut--- and have no regrets.

I have no idea why Sau's bike is so "twitchy" or "heavy"--- mine rides like a dream.

Seriously...you can't "imagine" riding a frame that is 2cm talller?
I'm not saying you are wrong, but I think its hilarious how people insist they have a perfect fit just because they feel reasonably comfortable on their bike, even if the size of their frame is outside the norm for someone their height.

How do you know your bike is a perfect fit? Can you really narrow it down to a cm or two of ST length? Maybe you can, but how is anyone to know if you (or anyone else) is full of ****.

I have seven bikes...none of them are the perfect fit, but I've ridden enough bikes and experimented enough to come as close as can be expected (and it has nothing really to do with standover, BB height, or seattube length). Nobody's perfect fit (if there is such as thing) is the same and to make matters more complicated, fit is a moving target. It changes with your fitness level or even riding style.

I think the best you can expect of these sizing threads is to give the OP some sense of the most common size frame for someone his/her height, but depending on your own personal physical peculiarities that still could be bad advice.

Good luck OP....you might also try plugging your physical dimensions (height, pubic height, etc.) into an online fit calculator, if someone else can provide the link. (I forgot where to find it). They usually do a pretty good job of getting you in the ballpark.

Yeah, I can imagine that I would completely regret it if I went with a frame 2 cm taller--- mainly for the TT length--- the only real measurement that matters. My 57 Rush is set up the the same contact point measurements of a 58 conversion and a 57 Look that I ride. The 57 Look is larger than a 58 Trek, due to differences in how the frames are measured. Just saying.... the size is just a number.

I have 5 bikes--- so I have a point of reference myself. Furthermore, if you look at the geometry chart for the Rush, I have a hard time with the concept that a 57 is outside the range of normal. Also, this is track bike geometry--- with a higher BB than for a road bike, and different angles. The listed "size" of the bike is just a label. It is rather arbitrary that they measure it to the top of the seat tube (rather than the top to the top tube, or center of the top tube, or any other arbitrary end point).

But I agree--- my stating that my bike fits me perfectly doesn't mean anything to someone else. All you need to do is spend a few minutes around here to see how crazy people have their bikes set up to realize how blind this sort of advice is. But given the geometry of the Rush, I am not sure how relevent an online size calculator would be.

Mostly agree with your points. I would say if you had to reduce frame size to one number, that best number would be top tube length...but it really isn't that simple either. The tube angles (not just lengths) play a role. Head tube length is important as well, but for a given frame size (say a 57 c-t) head tube height is going to be directly influenced by BB height, so you have to consider BB height...and so forth.

The bottom line is...even if everyone were built to the same proportions, correctly sizing a frame is a complex problem...and most people here are clueless about it. You can't reduce it to a single number. However, good bike fit isn't really a point...there is a window of sizes within which someone can ride comfortably and efficiently. In the beginning, the goal really is just to get within that window. Once you are there, lots and lots of riding and tweaking your fit (and riding other bikes!) will slowly help you hone in on exactly what fits you best.

A professional fitting is a good way to start, but its no substitute for miles and miles in the saddle.

My reference to fit calculators was really only as another point of reference. Good fit calculators will spit out more than a single number, which can then be compared to the Rush's geometry.

It also changes with age. I've put on weight over the years, and in the wrong places too. I also have a bad lower back, which does not allow me to bend at that point. All of this has affected my bike setup.

I haven't been able to ride this past year quite as much as previous years, and I've been noticing that my bars seem a bit too low and my gears a bit too high and my stem a bit too long, if you know what i mean.
Another thing I've noticed about fit. I usually spend 1-1.5 months off the bike every year for research related travel. When I get back on the bike, the fit seems all ****ed up, the bars too low and far away with the saddle too high. A week of riding and it always starts to feel normal again.