So it's new bike time for me because the bike I have now was bought when I was 15 and at 30, well, I'm not quite the same shape or size I used to be. I've been going around to all the LBSes in the metro area and I have to say I've been less than impressed. Out of 9 bike shops, only 2 gave me any serious effort at all. The rest of them basically said "You don't fall into one of our sales boxes so I'm not wasting my time trying to help you". Screw 'em. The two shops that were helpful were able to eventually put me on bikes that were kinda-ok but not quite right.

Here's the problem: I'm 6'1" and weigh 285lbs. However, when measured properly for cycling, I have a 30.5" inseam. That means I've got little stubby legs and a great big long torso and arms. Needless to say, I'm getting screwed trying to find a frame that has a low enough stand-over height that I can get on the damned thing while having a long enough top tube that I don't feel like I'm riding a clown bicycle. Add to it asking for things like rack braze-ons and it all goes pear shaped at most stores.

So, what I need out of a bike:
1) Can straddle it safely (seems to be a standover height of about 31")
2) Long enough top tube to feel ok (effective top tube length in the 570mm/22.5" range)
3) Upright-ish seating position due to having a bad back

Things I'd like but accept I may have to compromise on:
4) 700c wheels with clearance to run a 700x40c (and obviously things smaller as well)
5) Steel frame
6) mounting points for both cantilever brakes and disc brakes

You guys got any ideas?

Have you look in to a Surly LHT Not sure if they will have one in your size but don't give up there is a bike for you some place.Some bike shops are snobs for sure we have them here too.You may be better off with 26" wheels just keep on looking.Good luck and let us know how it all turns out for you.

You might also try a Trek 520 -- it has a bit more of a sloping top tube than the Surly LHT, and I *think* the top tube is a little longer (you can check out the geometry of both bikes on the Trek website, for the 520, and on the Surly website, for the LHT).

A lot of 1970s and 1980s ten-speeds have frames with the long geometry that sounds appropriate -- some of the early mountain bikes do, too. A little Craigslist searching and used bike shop visiting might turn up an old Fuji or Motobecane that fits you like Cinderella's slipper. You'd also save enough money to make adding the brakes and brake mounts you want affordable.

Some big guys tour on the Surly Big Dummy.

https://www.surlybikes.com/bikes/big_dummy_complete/

Look at Salsa. The Vaya and Fargo frames fit your spec except for canti studs.

I've just spotted the Kona Sutra. It has VERY low stand-over height as compared to the top-tube length and is spec'd nearly as I'd build it myself. The problem is that no one in the state stocks it in any size.

I did try a 520 earlier today, but it was a 54cm. That was too small (clown bike) so the shop is trying to get a 57cm in for me, but with how little stand-over I had on the 54, I'm worried I won't be able to manage the 57 at all. I must say that I was very impressed with the ride from the cro-mo frame. Even though it was the wrong size, it was rather comfortable.

The LHT is straight out, I think, based on the really high stand-over heights. The Cross-Check comes out a little better, but I'm not sure how good of a touring bike that frame would make.

+1 - the BD has a really long TT and a low stand over...I've toured on one and as long as you don't have to fly with it there is no issue..even if you do have to fly with it's no harder than boxing up a tandem.

I have a pretty bad back, and upright is not the answer for me. Of course it could be for you, no universal back pain. I thought all kinds of stuff like suspension would be required when I got back into it in my late 40s, but it ended up being just as comfortable in the conventional position with drops. Important to consider that what feels best on the test drive will not be the issue after you work your way into it for a few days, or at least not necesarilly be the issue.

I was about 265, same height, and somewhat longer legs than you, but still had the problem you mention. With your numbers, speaking as a frame builder, I would recomend a custom frame. There are some cheap frames out there. Joe Bringheli is said to make frames that are not painted for about 500, He is a pros pro. Even if that isn't the case, I hear they are very reasonable. Locally I can get a frame powdered for 50 bucks, it is all one needs for a touring frame, or even a rattle can finish.

Others can be as low as 1K. There was a recent thread on a fairly cheap custom frame some cop was very happy with. These are pretty uneconomic numbers outside of special circumstances, and represent very good values. Really, in the big picture, a few hundred bucks + extra over a Surly to get a correctly configured and sized bike for your needs is not unreasonable. Some people fit off the rack, others need custom. This applies to clothes, shoes, guns, whatever. It can be hard to get the right bike to test drive in an LBS, so you could end up making several unfortunate shots in the dark. Custom frames can also go wrong, but it ought to be possible to get it right the first time out.

A properly made custom frame will be better in a number of ways than a frame made in China, or any other mass production context. Frame alignment is very important and an obssession for most custom builders, just to name one quality point normally missed elsewhere.

Yep, a custom frame is in order here. One way to fit riders with shorter legs with longer torsos AND needing higher bars is to use a sloping TT to some degree. While an extended head tube is in order here, a little bit of slope allows even more height, allowing one to use a normal quill stem, or if threadless, you won't have to have a stack of spacers.

My 2 cents.

Back problems are not all alike, but...
You just might want to rethink this one. An upright position means any road shocks go right up a spine that is in a poor position to absorb them. A more horizontal spine generally has a much easier time. To pull off the more aggressive position does require that you maintain good core strength and that you ease into the lower position gradually.

I know that I had pretty serious back problems in the past and tried an upright posture for a while. In my case it was a big mistake and I almost gave up cycling until figured out that I needed to slowly worked my way back to a more aggressive posture. I went from thinking I could no longer ride to doing a coast to coast and other longish tours and NOT using an upright posture was one of the key things that allowed it.

Trek Belleville. The dropped top tube means better standover. On the large frame, standover is 31.6" with top tube of 60.5 cm, while the medium has a standover of 30.1 and top tube 59. Sounds like it meet your sizing needs at least. The geometry is also a lot less aggressive, with the porteur style bars, so it meets all three of your "musts."

It also hits #4 and #5 on your "wants." Comes with big tires on 700c wheels and has a steel frame (though it is heavy for it).
No way to do disc brakes or cantis, but I suspect you could still do pretty well with a set of kool-stop salmon pads.

You'll likely want to do some switching out and upgrading, but the beauty of this bike is that it's cheap ($600ish) and versatile. If you want, you can throw on a derailleur system, replace the front rack with low-riders and go off on a tour. If you want to go crazy, you could replace the fork, stem and bars—this way you could have drops plus a disc brake in front (which is all you really need).

Seems like a good fit to me.

Crapton of driving around to far-away stores today. Got to ride a Trek 510 in 57cm. It still rode nicely, but there was no standover height at all and weirdly I still felt all scrunched up. I also got to ride a Surly Long Haul Trucker in a 56cm. Absolutely HATED it. I did, however, get to ride a Kona Sutra, sadly in a 52cm. While my knees really weren't ok with such a small frame, I LOVED the way the bike handled and how it rode. I'm now searching a multi-state area to see if anyone has a 56cm Kona Sutra for me to test-ride.

Same story here... a few years back I had two VERY painful back surgeries, and now I don't have a disc in L4-L5. The nerves are still pinched, so I will have pain the rest of my life... and it comes and goes, but one effect is it rather abruptly ended my running career. Once I took up cycling again, I rode a walmart bike for a little bit which worked just fine but gave me leg pain after 11ish miles... due to the upright riding position. Luckily I got a road bike shortly thereafter, and ever since I've become addicted to the one strenuous physical activity that I can do that actually makes my back BETTER instead of worse. But only if I keep my aggressive riding position.

Kona Ute

https://www.konaworld.com/bike.cfm?content=ute

Less spendy than a LHT, built for cargo, 700c wheels, low standover. I'm not sure about the Kona Sutra. The chainstay length at 17.3" seems awfully short to me. Compare that to 18.1" for the LHT

LHT (or other touring bike) with a raised stem.

Meet Notung:



Riding position needs a little work, but just to give you an idea:

The Cross Check makes a fine touring bike but I'm thinking you need a longer top tube than than the standard square dimensions where the seat tube and top tube are roughly the same.

You might think about the Specialized Globe Haul 1. The large size has a 58cm top tube with a 30.5" standover height. I'd look at a rear wheel with 14g. spokes and see if you can get a different crankset or a larger chainring to replace the chainring guard. Handlebars could be changed around to your preferences. Doubt you could get 40mm tires in there but it's worth trying out.

"But only if I keep my aggressive riding position."

I agree, also. There is this view among many that the drops position is strained, but in reality it is the most comfortable. Exactly how far I can come forward is not going to look racy in my case, but it makes an enormous difference in comfort, and aero which is a big deal if you end up in head winds for days on end. Also, getting the full inflation in the lungs is like getting extra horse power for free. When I start on a tour I have my arms relatively braced, and my neck hurts. But after a day or two, my neck is fine, and I have bent arms a looser feel on the bike. Works for me.

Ah, I think I should put things into perspective here based on my test rides in the last two days. Turns out, the bike I'm now is crazy-bat****-insane laid out. I didn't know this until a guy at one of the shops had me get into position on a road racing frame and it was actually more upright than what I'm used to. So "upright" to me seems to mean something like a typical road bike posture, not upright like a hybrid or comfort bike.

Kona Sutra models before 2010 appear to have weak rear rackmount eyelets. I learned that the hard way myself and there were few posts from others as well. The 2010 frame should be better though.

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...he-Adirondacks

https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...ra-broke-today.

The Ute is aluminum versus Big Dummy which is steel.

Assuming the reach is comfortable do you mean handlebars above or below the seat height is preferable?

I reckon you'd be better off getting a mountain bike frame and building your own bike around it, with a long stem to give you the forward room you need on a bike with a low standover height. Some of the more 'extreme' MTB frames are designed for full-size adults but have short seat-tubes to allow for jumps & drops. If you really need big wheels, go for a 29" MTB frame, but make sure it's got braze-ons for racks etc.

Try for a steel 29er frame. Salsa fargo comes to mind with a radically sloped top tube,might fit the bill.

"So "upright" to me seems to mean something like a typical road bike posture, not upright like a hybrid or comfort bike."

Good news. I set up my last OEM bike so the tops of the handlebar are pretty much level with the saddle. That said, I find the top tube is short, so my position is more upright/hunched than I would like.

Right at seat height or no more than 1/2-3/4" above seems to be working well for me. Most of them have been right at seat height.