Frame sizing advice (road: 58 vs 61)

[igg]

I'm looking to buy a road bike and I'm struggling to figure out what frame size I need. Based on the shopping I've done, none of the nearby bike stores have 61s on the floor in any brand and the 58s are few and far between and none with pedals. I've sat on 56s: too small.

 

My stats: height 190cm, inseam 89cm. All the charts say I should be 58 with some in between 58 and 61. Here's my issue: posterior chain flexibilty which typically manifests itself in neck/back pain. I've been working on this with my physio for a few months now, but I've been informed I'm likely never going to be able to touch my toes.

 

With this in mind would it be feasible to just go with a 58 and then get a bunch of handlebar spacers? How adjustable are these typically? Or should I rather consider just getting the larger frame and potentially shortening the stem? Are there other considerations I need to worry about (like slamming my nuts on the frame if I dismount forward on a 61)?

[Super J]

I am 2 meters tall so I have the right to voice my opinion here,go bigger and try avoid slopping frames! Touching your toes means nothing on a bike, but your reach does, so that means you need frame length and cockpit length! PM me if you need any "tall" advice.....

[BDF]

I would advise that you talk to the guys at CycleFit before you spend the money. It's hard to undo a transaction if it turns out to be the wrong bike size.

[quintonb]

I'm 1.87mts tall with a 91cm inseam. I ride a 58cm C to C cannondale frame.

I have a short torso with slightly out of proportion arm and leg length.

Cannondale measurments are normally equal seat tube to top tube ratio's(ie: 58cm C to C and 58cm Top tube length). I find this is a good geometry for me.

 

When it comes to classic steel frames (I have 3 of these) I generally ride 60cm C to C with a 58cm or 59cm Toptube.

 

I agree with Super J, Stay away from slopping/compact geometry frames, they just don't suit guys like us and they look very odd.

 

The "Old School" way of seeing if a frame was the right size was to straddle the bike bare foot and you should just feel the toptube touching your undercarriage...

But those don't necessarily apply to the modern frame.

[Berry]

I'm looking to buy a road bike and I'm struggling to figure out what frame size I need. Based on the shopping I've done, none of the nearby bike stores have 61s on the floor in any brand and the 58s are few and far between and none with pedals. I've sat on 56s: too small.

 

My stats: height 190cm, inseam 89cm. All the charts say I should be 58 with some in between 58 and 61. Here's my issue: posterior chain flexibilty which typically manifests itself in neck/back pain. I've been working on this with my physio for a few months now, but I've been informed I'm likely never going to be able to touch my toes.

 

With this in mind would it be feasible to just go with a 58 and then get a bunch of handlebar spacers? How adjustable are these typically? Or should I rather consider just getting the larger frame and potentially shortening the stem? Are there other considerations I need to worry about (like slamming my nuts on the frame if I dismount forward on a 61)?

I"m 1.97 was on a 58 had to change after i had bad neck pain and cramps. i rode a 61scott  for 2 years all were fine no problems. I"m back on a smaller frame now and all is fine now but the top tube is longer than the first 58.  btw I will never be able to touch my toes. 

[igg]

Thanks for the great responses.

 

I'll definitely give CycleFit a call.

What's an example of a compact/sloping frame that I should avoid?

 

I've been considering something like these:

https://www.bikehub.co.za/classifieds/119130-scott-addict-r3/

https://www.bikehub.co.za/classifieds/116452-spezialized-allez-e5-2012-comp-xl/

 

Just very concerned about buying blind and getting the size wrong. My main drive behind a 61cm is to benefit from the added bar height so I won't be too bent over.

[quintonb]

Out of those 2 I would say the Scott is more than likely the one that would suit you.

But a bike fitment will give you most desirable geometry and then you can find a bike with the closest to that.

 

Remember not all 58cm or 60cm frames have the same top tube length. Do your homework and get the closest possible geometry to what the fitment recommends. 

[igg]

Can CycleFit do a fitment without me having a bike yet? Or is there somewhere I can go that can do said fitment?

[arendoog]

6,4" with long legs and arms .I ride a 62cm Pinarello .On a mtb i prefer a 640cm or very close effective toptube.On the suppleness scale close to 5/10 i would say .Most tall people cannot touch their toes with straight legs except Ernie Els 

[BDF]

Can CycleFit do a fitment without me having a bike yet? Or is there somewhere I can go that can do said fitment?

No, but they can give proper advice as to sizing and dimensions of the bike you should buy. Then you take it there and they do the fitment.

[J∆kk∆ls]

I'm 191cm tall with 84cm inseam riding on a 59cm frame with no spacers on a 110mm stem. 

Quite an agressive riding position when Im in the drops but it is comfortable.

Comfort is key, I have had a few say I need a bigger frame but my frame doesn't hurt me.

[Starvin' Marvin]

Hi

 

I'm 1.9m tall. Ride a 58cm C to C. I rode a 61cm Scott for a week and hated every second of it, was stretching for the bars etc.

 

+1 on the bike fit.

[Spoke101]

I'm 191cm tall with 84cm inseam riding on a 59cm frame with no spacers on a 110mm stem.

Quite an agressive riding position when Im in the drops but it is comfortable.

Comfort is key, I have had a few say I need a bigger frame but my frame doesn't hurt me.

Jeez you have a long torso!!!

 

To add my 2c.

I am 188cm, inseam 92cm. I ride a 58 Cervelo S5 with the seatpost at low as it can go and the stem slamed with know spacers, but then Cervelo have there geometry sorted as in everything increases with the frame. Also have a 60cm old Alu Trek. Both very comfortable.

 

I would say a 61 might be a little on the big side as you will have virtually no seatpost out the frame and still might be quite bent over due to the long top tube. I would rather go with a 58 due to your inseam and then use a 35°degree stem to bring the bars up and with the shorter top tube you will sit more vertical.

 

Definitely try get some advice from the experts before you pull the trigger.

[J∆kk∆ls]

Jeez you have a long torso!!!

 

 

Hehe some say I have short legs 

[igg]

I would say a 61 might be a little on the big side as you will have virtually no seatpost out the frame and still might be quite bent over due to the long top tube. 

 

This is exactly what concerns me. However I've just remeasured my inseam using the method on this site: http://www.competitivecyclist.com/Store/catalog/fitCalculatorBike.jsp and it's 91/92 (it's hard to take measurements like this on your own).

 

It's too bad none of the bike stores I've visited stock 61s, so I can't really check the reach.

[Spoke101]

 

 

This is exactly what concerns me. However I've just remeasured my inseam using the method on this site: http://www.competitivecyclist.com/Store/catalog/fitCalculatorBike.jsp and it's 91/92 (it's hard to take measurements like this on your own).

 

It's too bad none of the bike stores I've visited stock 61s, so I can't really check the reach.

That fit guid is very good if done correctly. (Best if you have another set of hands to help)

I see your profile says JHB, have you tryed Cycle Lab? They should have at least one 60/61 and a specific machine to measure your inseam. 91/92 sounds alot more like it for your hieght.

 

I would still say you need a 58, get hold of the frame geometry's of the bikes that you looking at and let me know or post them here. The manufacturers should also have general size recommendations for your hieght.