|Did I buy the right size Trek OCLV?||mc3|
Aug 2, 2001 5:10 AM
|Okay, I'm second guessing myself, but I could use some feedback here. I recently purchased a Trek 5200 56cm frame. We all know that Trek's frames measure to the top of the clap, so that, in effect, they are smaller than comparable ct frames. My inseam is 33" (83.8cm), the standover is 79cm, so I have 4.8cm (or about 2")of clearance. The drop from seat to handlebar is about 3" (using 4cm of spacers). The problem is that I my lower back and shoulders are very stiff after riding in the drops. Is it that I need to get in better shape, or did I buy a frame that's too small? I tried the 58cm bike, but the reach(top tube)seemed too long.|
Aug 2, 2001 5:39 AM
|You have more like 7 cms (2.7") of clearance. You must add around 2 cms for shoes and cleats. And I am assuming you are measuring your inseam with pressure as described in Colorado Cyclist. I'd bet your drop from seat to handlebar is more severe than you think. I have around 1.4" of standover clearance on my bike and my drop to bars with 4 cms of spacers (with stock stem which is almost horizontal) is close to 3". Is your stem angled way up? The 56 top tube is probably the right size, but if you can't handle the drop, then no OCLV would be right. You gotta hate that deceptive size labelling. OCLVs have a very long top tube for the real (not fake) seat tube. Hope things work out.|
|yes, if he really has only 3"; I doubt it (nm)||ET|
Aug 2, 2001 6:00 AM
|Aren't Trek frame sizes C-C?||kenyee|
Aug 2, 2001 6:02 AM
|I emailed them on their web site and the person who replied said: |
Ken thanks for emailing us! We measure center of bottom bracket to center of top tube including the Y-foils.
Have a great day!
What is the "top of clap" you refer to?
|Aren't Trek frame sizes C-C?||ishmael|
Aug 2, 2001 6:05 AM
|nope .i dont know what that guy is talking about..deffinately c to top|
|here we go again||ET|
Aug 2, 2001 7:39 AM
|A shame even the Trek representative gives you bogus info, but I'm not surprised. Even Bicycling mag mentioned the misleading sizing (I think it's reading our forum) in its review of the 5900 in its August issue. Under "Caveats", it says, "The frame is measured from the bottom bracket to the top of the seat collar, so they feel small--a 58cm feels more like a 56."
I'll add that a 56 c-c would typically have a standover of just under 81, not 79. You can do the geometry calcs to verify this.
|slight correction in my argument's favor||ET at home|
Aug 2, 2001 8:55 AM
|That should read "over", not under 81. A 56 c-c is slightly larger than a 57 c-t, which typically has standover a bit over 81.|
|That would explain a lot||kenyee|
Aug 2, 2001 9:37 AM
|I've been staring at the y-foil specs to see which size I fit since I'm looking for a used one and the numbers didn't make sense. My numbers (inseam of 83cm, etc.) in theory say I need a 55cm c-t frame, yet the specs for their 54/56 give lots of standover clearance. |
54cm frame has a 75cm standover (3.15" of clearance)
56cm frame has a 76.9cm standover (2.4" of clearance)
59cm frame has a 79.7cm standover (1.3" of clearance)
I wish all the bike makers would standardize on their frame size or get rid of it or use standover for their advertised size. The way it currently is, you have to stare at the standover, top tube size, tube angles, etc. and guess. No wonder it's easier if you go to a shop and just try a bunch in your size :-P
|Trek's email support is iffy..||dotkaye|
Aug 2, 2001 9:32 AM
|I got a secondhand frame, didn't have calipers to measure seatube diameter, so emailed them to ask what size the seatpost should be. They answered: 'the seatpost on your frame is 350mm long'. I don't know if this answer came from stupidity or sarcasm, either way it wasn't real helpful..|
|ask for the spec sheets||kenyee|
Aug 2, 2001 9:38 AM
|They'll happily fax you copies. |
On the spec sheets, you'll find the real numbers you need...in black and white :-)
|re: Did I buy the right size Trek OCLV?||Hank|
Aug 2, 2001 7:41 AM
|I thought of buying an OCLV when I worked in Trek shops some years ago (could have gotten one dirt cheap). But after lots of fiddling with setup and several test rides I decided that the 56 was too small and the 58 too big. Sounds like you're in the same boat. And from the looks of how some of the Postal guys set up their bikes, it looks like you're in good company. I think road bikes should come in 1cm increments. And of course some people need custom to get the right fit.|
|re: Did I buy the right size Trek OCLV?||jtolleson|
Aug 2, 2001 8:51 AM
|Maybe the question should be (as others hint here) not whether you bought the right size Trek (56 cm vs. 58 cm), but whether you bought the right bike. Not all manufacturers fit all body types, especially folks such as women (me!) who can have reach problems when the get a supposed right-height stock frame.
But not to panic. If your only complaint to date is feeling too stretch out riding in the drops, consider a stem one size shorter and with about 5 degrees of rise. Not so dramatic as to give it the upright old-lady quality, just a comfort adjustment for your aching back. Obviously a good fit specialist at your LBS should actually slap in on the trainer and give you a look-see. But this problem can likely be rectified.