|Seeking some advice about titanium and sizing.||LAIrish|
Oct 21, 2001 10:32 PM
|OK, you guys have given me the bug. I've almost completely stopped riding that full suspension mountain bike, and I've actually put together a "training schedule" for my riding. I got on a friend's ATB the other day, and the upright position, and soft ride felt just weird. I'm using chamois butter and starting to think team jerseys (or prints that mimic them) look kinda neat. I'm afraid I'm becoming a roadie. (Though I'm sure I'll never have the miles to compete with some of you big boys.) The thing is, I'm starting to think I need another bike. Obviously, two is just not enough.
Actually, I probably do need a different bike. I am 179cm tall with an 84cm inseam. I'm riding a 54cm (center-to-center-of-top-tube), older, Klein Quantum. According to the sizing information I've read, I should be on a 57cm (center-to-center) frame. Which would explain why I had to have a 130mm stem put on (and I can still see my front hub while riding on the drops), which seems to have made the bike feel really squirrelly underneath me.
Besides, the aluminum frame on the Klein is really stiff, and my teeth rattle on rough roads.
So, here's the deal. I've got my eye on a Litespeed Tuscany (with Ouzo pro carbon fork) on e-bay. It's 57cm, but I believe litespeed measures center-to-top-of-top-tube (at least, that's the way it is in the Colorado Cyclist catalog). So, my first question: Is that 1cm or so difference between center-to-center and center-to-top-of-top-tube really that important?
Second, what kind of ride am I likely to get on the titanium litespeed? I've figured out from reading this board that geometry and construction are as important as material, but I don't know that much about titanium or litespeeds. I figure some of the obsessive (and knowledgeable) riders on this board must have some experience with them and can give me some insight.
|re: Seeking some advice about titanium and sizing.||PsyDoc|
Oct 22, 2001 3:28 AM
|Assuming you measured your inseam correctly, I think a 57cm (c-c) frame could be a bit big for you...not that it would be too big. When you measure your inseam, you want to measure from the floor to the pubic bone. So, when a place states to use "firm pressure," what they really mean in "hard pressure" as this will give you the most accurate measurement of inseam. |
For example, I am 5'-9" with an 84.45cm inseam and I ride a 55.5 (c-c) frame that has a standover height of 81.3cm with a 56.5 toptube length. With a 57cm (c-c) frame, you are probably looking at a standover height around 82.5 to 83cm. But, standover height is just one of several components that make a good fit. Depending on the diameter of the toptube, you would be looking at a little bit larger difference than 1cm in the c-c and c-t measurements. For example, a few bikes use a 1 3/8" toptube diameter which puts the difference between c-c and c-t right around 1.75cm.
As for the ride of a titanium bike, I really like it. I have not spent enough time in the saddle on a Litespeed, but I have spent a good deal of time riding a Merlin Extralight and, recently, a Seven. There are a number of people on this board who ride Litespeeds and they will be able to tell you specifics about the Litespeed product. Before you drop some cash on a new or used bike, you might be better served by finding a dealer that has a Serotta size cycle. You can go in with specific angles and lengths and ask them to set up the bike according to those specifications and see how a particular geometry with a particular toptube length and stem length fits.
Just my .02
|According to the Litespeed website . . .||LAIrish|
Oct 22, 2001 12:34 PM
|the 57cm Tuscany has a standover of 81.1cm and a 56.5cm top tube. My inseam measures from 32 3/4" to 33 1/4" depending upon the jeans I'm wearing. Taking an a average and adding a 1/4 inch for lycra shorts, gets me an inseam of 84.45. If I multiply that by the .67 that seems to be suggested most places, I get 56.58. If I use .68, as I have seen suggested, I get 57.42 If I add 2 centimeters to my inseam for cleats and shoes, I get 57.92 and 58.78 respectively. That's where I came up with the idea that a 57cm frame would be the right size.
You have the same inseam as I, but I'm nearly two inches taller. So a longer top tube would probably give me a better fit. Doesn't that probably mean a little larger frame, with less seatpost?
I don't know of a place around here with a Serotta size cycle, but I'll have to make some calls.
|Anyway you can test ride...||PsyDoc|
Oct 23, 2001 3:37 AM
|a 57cm frame with the same makeup as the Tuscany? There is a wrench down at a bikeshop in Tallahassee, FL that has the same inseam as us (84.45), but he is 6'-1". He rides a 57cm Palmares with a 130mm stem in order to get the correct toptube length for him. I doubt that you will notice a 1cm difference and a 57 c-t frame may just be the ticket.|| |