|What size frame for someone who is 6'2"? 60cm sound right?||spcons|
Jul 3, 2001 5:54 AM
|Any help appreciated! I'm looking for a nice steel frame for training.
|Read this.....||S. Izer|
Jul 3, 2001 5:57 AM
|re: What size frame for someone who is 6'2"? 60cm sound right?||RandyMH|
Jul 3, 2001 7:51 AM
|I'm 6'3 and I just bought a 60cm. In looking at me most people thought I would be at least a 62cm. It wasn't until I went a local shop and had a person who really wanted to sell a bike take the time to realize I almost need a custom fit. I have long legs and a short torso. On the 61-62 I was stretched out way to far, even with a shorter stem. I tried everything from a 62 to a 58 and ended up with the 60 with a modified stem. If you haven't riden before or in a long time I suggest you go down to the LBS to get an idea of your correct fit. Everyone can tell you what fits who in theory but until you sit on a bike and ride it, you'll never know if it really fits.
|So true, but...||SteveO|
Jul 3, 2001 9:45 AM
|beware of the bike shop that wants to sell you what they have in stock and actually fit you on a bike that is either too small or too big. I've seen it happen. I'm 6'-0" and fit a 59 Jamis. I was looking at another shop and they tried to sell me a 55! I was with my wife and I took the 55 down to show her what I'm getting (I had a 59 on order from another shop) I was standing over the bike and was just about to tell her it looks to be her size when a salesman walks up and says "Looks like it fits you perfect!"
|shouldn't happen in a GOOD LBS||ColnagoFE|
Jul 3, 2001 11:11 AM
|but yes it does happen so you better know ballpark what size you think you should be before coming in. it's gonna vary a LOT between brands and models. I'm 6'2" and ride a 60cm C/C Bianchi (relatively long TT), a 61cm Merlin XL (C/T) and a 62cm(CT) Colnago (little shorter TT)|
|But it does!!!||Cima Coppi|
Jul 3, 2001 11:25 AM
|When I needed to be fitted for my new frame, I went to a shop in Boulder (I won't give the name to protect the guilty) that specializes in high-end road frames and bikes exclusively. I brought in my 60cm c-c Merckx to compare its fit with what I should be fitted to. My inseam is 87cm, and the salesman performing the fit said my fit on the 60cm looked good, but recommended going to 62cm c-c. I thought that was crazy, esp. for standover height with my inseam. I gave all of the dimensions to the builder, and he built a 59cm c-c seat tube and 58cm c-c top tube that fits me like a glove. |
Moral of the story, never trust any LBS until you get to know them well.
|well you didn't name it but||ColnagoFE|
Jul 3, 2001 11:43 AM
|you may has well have...anyone that knows boulder knows what shop you are (most likely) talking about. depends on who you get to help you out there. sometimes some snobbery going on as well. did they put you on a size cycle? seems they would have know they were off at that point.|
|if you're talking C/C||ColnagoFE|
Jul 3, 2001 8:40 AM
|probably around a 60cm. but there is really no way to tell unless we know your proportions (ie short waist...long legs or the opposite). Go to a good LBS and get fitted. the size will vary a few cm between models and manufacturers too.|
|re: What size frame for someone who is 6'2"? 60cm sound right?||jaybird|
Jul 3, 2001 8:58 AM
|I'm 6'3" and I recently just got fitted on a 59. The most important dimension in my opinion is the top tube length, actually the distance from the seat tube to the handlebar. Standover height has become less of a factor with the relatively recent evolution of bikes with a sloped top tube.
Check out a Merckx MX Leader. Columbus MAX tubing and traditional geometry. I love it...
|re: I am 6'2", I ride a 55 cm||PingPong|
Jul 3, 2001 9:26 AM
|I am 6'2", I ride a 55 cm frame. Fits me really well.
These days seat tube length seems of very limited usefullness. Reading formulas for inseam - seat tube conversions I would have gone for a 60+. That would have been like riding a farm gate for me.
You need to ride a few different sizes, noting down as many dimensions as you can, preferably with someone experienced watching and giving you feedback.
|Your bike is too small (nm)||SteveO|
Jul 3, 2001 9:35 AM
|Hey, thanks for that! (nm)||PingPong|
Jul 3, 2001 9:45 AM
|Sorry, It was harsh - but probably true...||SteveO|
Jul 3, 2001 11:59 AM
|If you are truly 6'-2" a 55cm traditional frame is too small.
I guess a good fit is possible with a compact frame measuring 55cm c-c, but it would need a long top tube and have alot of post showing.
|not true - not a traditional frame.||PingPong|
Jul 4, 2001 9:30 AM
|My point is that most manufacturers ar moving away from traditional frame dimensions.|
|I'm 6'3" and size by top-tube length||geezer|
Jul 3, 2001 10:02 AM
|The problem with listed frame sizes is that there is a lot variation not only in geometry between brands but also in how the company measures their frames. Some measure center-to-center, some center-to-top of the top tube, some measure center-to-top of the seat collar. 60cm frames using each of those measuring systems can result in 3 very different sized frames, even though each one says it is a 60cm. That's why I judge by top-tube length instead of seat-tube length. All top tubes are measured center-to-center.
That said, I like a 61cm top tube, but I am also a long, thin dude at 6'3", 180lbs and I ride a lot. At 6'2", I think you'll probably be happy with a top tube length of about 58-59cm. You'll usually find that length on 60-62cm frames, depending on how the company measures their frames and on their specific geometry in larger sizes. In larger sizes, American bikes tend to have longer top tubes while Italian bikes have shorter top tubes.
My recommendation is to look for a top tube length you want instead of seat tube length. Seat tube length has very little to do with bike fit.
|TT not always a good solution||ColnagoFE|
Jul 3, 2001 11:12 AM
|depends on the geometry. Colnagos really don't have all that much shorter "effective" TTs due to geometry factors.|
|Re: importance of seat tube length||Starliner|
Jul 3, 2001 11:34 AM
|Seat tube length is important in bike fit, especially when going threadless. How one wants their stem set up to be (with or without spacers, stem angle) and the relationship of handlebar height to seat height are both areas where seat tube length comes into play.|
Jul 3, 2001 11:44 PM
|Granted, handlebar-to-seat position is important and is affected by seat-tube length. But that is easily adjustable by raising or lowering the stem, placement of spacers, rise and length of stem, lots of ways to account for a centimeter or two of seat-length variation. I guess the reason I am a stickler for sizing by top-tube length is that I am definitely on the long side for a cyclist. With many bikes, the largest size frame sports a 59cm top tube which has me searching for 150mm stems (hard to find) to get enough reach.
And now we have all these sloping top-tube designs which makes seat-tube length an even less reliable indicator of bike size.
You know, we could discuss frame geometries and measuring methods for ages and never even hit upon the fact that different handlebars, stems, and seatposts cause as much variation in bike fit as 1 or 2 cm differences in frame sizes. It sounds to me like the original poster isn't looking for the perfect fit. Just wants a training bike that's the right size.