robert schlatte

I have read or heard that bike sizing is somewhat different today. For example, I am 5'8" and I ride a 58cm (23") bike. I bought it in 1980 and at the time I was told that with my feet flat on the ground the top tube should touch my crotch or be slightly below. Also the seat post should extend out of the seat tube about the width of your fist. By today's standards, I think this frame would be considered too large for a person my size. The bike is quite comformtable nonetheless. Can anyone confirm that sizing standards are somewhat different today?

imi

That's "old school", "french fit"...
"Two fingers of crossbar (TT) clearance and a fistfull of seatpost"
Here's Rivbike's take on it
https://www.rivbike.com/kb_results.asp?ID=41
Works for me, but obviously not everybody...

Oh, in the old days bikes were more often measured Centre to Top, nowadays Centre to Centre is more the norm I believe, which means an old 23" frame would nowadays measure in at about half an inch less.
My touring bike is a Bob Jackson, they still measure C-T

djb

actually I tend to picture a frog with a top hat wildly singing "Hello My Darling!" and then promptly sitting back down and lazy eyedly saying "ribbitt".

but I digress.

base

Rivendell are actually pretty conservative about top tube clearance. If you ride a bike with real French fit, there is NO clearance between the groin and top tube (and you don't need it). I've never understood why Grant would spent so much time going on about people riding frames that are too small, but then still insist that you need clearance there.

I have a couple of Miyatas, and a Japanese made French style custom that are all 53cm. I'm 5'4". There is only an inch or so of seatpost showing and my handlebars are level with the saddle. French fit.