hmarks

So, I've been reading a lot and researching this on many different websites, but all it does is confuse me. I'm hoping an expert on here can help me out.

I'm 6'3", with long legs, a short torso, and long arms.

My inseam (not pant length) is 36".

These are the specs for the Motobecane Track from BD that I'm looking at:

For the 58cm the TT length is 57cm, standover is 32.5 inches
For the 61cm the TT length is 59cm, standover is 33.6 inches

I'm not going to be racing, just riding in the city, and I like riding with more of an upright position.

I'm leaning towards the 61cm, but I don't want it to be too big! Please help!

klaw091

I do not think you have anything to worry about.

I am 5" 9", and both my fixed gears are 60" c-c.

but if you really want to be safe, you should go to a lbs and see what you're comfortable.

I personally enjoy a larger frame, my legs are stretched but not overly.

goodluck

LordsOnly

your comfortable on a 60? I'm also 5-9 and can't get comfortable on anything larger then a 55-55.5.

kizzle

im 6'1 and ride the 58cm. go with the 61cm

iBaloney

+1 on the 61cm. you'll still have good clearance over the TT.

LoRoK

Bikes are made for riding, so you'll want to have it sized for riding rather than for standing over it. Go to an LBS and get fitted.

bionnaki

for the thousandth time, dont worry so much about SO height. worry mostly about TT length.


If you're unwilling or unable to get fitted, at least run a fit calc like the competitive fit calculator. use the recommended TT length, and then decide from there.

stryper

just like most every here says, get the 61cm. It will fit you right. The 58cm will be too small.

schnee

I'm your height, and fairly close to your build. Get the 61.

hairnet

Depends how flexible he is.

alexgate

I am 6 2 and my 58 feels slightly big on me. Moral of the storry, every one is built differently and you should get fitted.

zzyzx_xyzzy

I am also 6'3, with a 37" cycling inseam, long limbs shorter torso.

On the assumption that you would fit similarly to me, my "best guess" is 58cm will for sure be too small for you. Hell, I would seriously consider at least trying on a 64cm.

For riding in the city, if I could spec my own frame, i'd give it a 66cm seat tube and 62cm top tube. This I would be able to standover and have the bars in a high-forward position -- which I've found gives the same back angle on the hoods as a shorter/lower position, but the forward position is less cramped in the drops. So I can stay in the drops for longer, ride faster and more comfortable overall.

Everyone says that TT length is what matters. This is only partly true. The truth is it's the combination of TT and saddle-to-bar drop, which work against each other. The less saddle-bar drop you have, the further forward you can stretch. Arms forward opens up the chest for easier breathing and tilts your shoulders so you have less neck strain looking forward; a lot of people prefer that.

This makes it hard for long legged folks testing bikes because every time they get on a test bike they have to set the saddle high, so that have too much saddle-bar drop. So the bike that actually has the right horizontal reach feels bad because the drop is too much; the bike a couple sizes smaller feels better on the hoods, so you get that one, and then you never use the drops.

I have a bike with a 60cm ST, 59cm TT. It came with a 110mm stem that actually felt like too much of a reach to the hoods -- (actually, it was too much drop to the hoods) so I swapped it for a 100mm stem. Rode that for a long time until I was messing around with a larger bike one day. Light bulb went off, I ordered the longest stem I could find with a 25 degree rise -- so the bars are higher AND further forward. Feels much better and I use the drops more.

Inertianinja

I was just in a similar sitation, and sadly you really have to try the bikes to see.

a smaller bike will have you raising the seatpost higher, so you'll be leaning further down to reach the handlebars, and your weight will be further forward. I don't have experience with FG riding, but when I tried it I didn't feel in control.

I went up a size and the ride was more relaxed, I liked it.

I'm 6ft, 34 inseam
I normally ride a 21.5" hybrid
some shops recommended a 55cm for me **over the phone**
all recommended 57-58 once I was on the bike.

xB_Nutt

Another vote for the 61

filtersweep

There is more to life than just the TT measurement--- since the overall geometry will affect actual reach. For example, I purchased a 57cm track frame that has a TT measurement of 56.1 cm ctc. While this is true, the 57 seatpost was measured to the top of the seatpost mast--- which extends a few cm above the TT (and certainly well above the center of the TT). This means that I end up with even more of a "set back" than a more traditional "square" geometry." For me, a 56 TT is normally a bit on the short side--- and I was debating moving up a size to a 59 (thinking it would be more of a true 57, given that it isn't measured ctc). To make a long story short, this is currently my largest frame-- even though it shows the shortest TT measurement on a geometry chart. Does that make any sense (frame is not measured like a triangle). I suggest posting the brand or geometry chart to give you richer information. A 61 cm frame could be huge.... or it could be just right (many low end frame makers don't seem to make any extreme frames).geom.jpg

andmalc

I'm 5' 10" with a 34" cycling inseam (so long legged) and bought the 58 frameset of the MB Phantom Cross Uno which I believe is built with the same frame as the Messenger. This was too small for me so I ordered the 61 which was absolutely not too big but I'm still not comfortable. Why? Because I'm sure the geometry chart is wrong and the seat tube angle is not 72.5 degrees but much steeper, more like 74, which means more of the top tube is forward of the bottom bracket and so better for a rider with average or relatively shorter legs vs. torso. Even with an extra long set back seatpost I could never get my seat back far enough to give my legs room to move.

I can say the Uno/Messenger chart is wrong because I lined up the 61 Uno frame with my 59 Steamroller frame with a 73 degree SA (which is actually about the same vertical size as the Uno though longer in the TT) and could clearly see that the seat tube angle of the Uno is steeper than the Steamroller.

hmarks

thanks for all the replies! looks like i'll be going with the 61!