RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


what size trek carbon.................(14 posts)

what size trek carbon.................jmikeb
Jul 21, 2002 7:09 PM
i'd like to buy a trek 5200 or 5500, but i'm not sure on the size. i'm 6' 2 1/2" with a pretty long reach. i'm not sure if i could get by with a 60cm instead of the 62cm. i know this is a poor way to go about it. i'd rather ride them before i buy, but it's hard to do where i live.

thanks for any input
Figure out....Atombomber
Jul 21, 2002 9:05 PM
Figure out what effective top tube you fit. I knew I wanted a 58.5ish cm tt, so I went with the 60. My previous bike measured 59.5 and I wanted to go shorter, so I did. No regrets. The 60 fits me like it was custom made for me.
re: what size trek carbon.................BikeViking
Jul 22, 2002 3:38 AM
I ride a 60cm 5200, I am 6'3" with a 35" inseam and it fits wonderfully
Slow down........Len J
Jul 22, 2002 4:01 AM
you need to figure out some bike specific body measurements before you can decide on the correct size. Check out these sites for more info & sizing information.

http://www.bsn.com/cycling/ergobike.html
http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/fitting.htm
http://www.coloradocyclist.com/BikeFit/index.cfm
http://www.cyclemetrics.com/Pages/FitLinks/bike_fit_links.htm

Trek's Carbon bikes are unusually sized. for instance I have a size 56 with a Top tube that measures 56 center to center, but the seat tube measures 52 center to center. This creates a large drop to the bars if I were not to use any spacers. It is very easy to mis-size a trek Carbon.

Good Luck

Len
Re: Trek sizeZyzbot
Jul 22, 2002 5:03 AM
Probably good advice from Len J. I am 6'03" tall with a 34" inseam. I rode a friend's 60cm Trek 5200 once and it definitely felt small to me.
re: I am 6' 2" and have a 62cmbigrider
Jul 22, 2002 5:16 AM
My 5200 is a 62cm and I think it is small for me since the top tube is shorter than a lot of larger bikes. They measure I believe to the top of the seat collar so the 62 is built like a 60cm
re: I am 6' 2" and have a 62cmjmikeb
Jul 22, 2002 5:25 AM
thanks for the input (to all). btw on you 62cm, what length is your stem and does your seatpost have much offset.
thanks
jmikeb
re: I am 6' 2" and have a 62cmbigrider
Jul 22, 2002 12:05 PM
no offset on the seatpost but I have the saddle almost all the way back to getmy knees over the pedals but I use a 130mm stem. The stem is the way to set your reach. I don't keep my stem real low but prefer to stretch out.
I'm 6'1" and have a 60 cm 5200 which is tightMaartin
Jul 22, 2002 5:27 AM
My seat post is at max yet I sort of fit. The 62 also fit but my lbs said to go smaller when in between sizes. They claim a smaller bike is more comfortable and easier to handle.
sounds like they ...cdale02
Jul 22, 2002 7:16 AM
wanted to sell you a 60 off of the floor. A smaller bike is not necessarily more comfortable, also I find that I have better weight distribution on a bike that fits and it actually handles better as far as cornering goes. A smaller bike does climb a little better for me though.

I'm 6'3.5" and couldn't get the 62 trek to fit. I currently ride a true 61 c-c and it fits well. The "62" trek was more like a 58 c-c.
What about Bottom Bracket PlacementMeissen
Jul 22, 2002 7:54 AM
In the context of OCLV fitting I am wondering about the placement of the bottom bracket. From what I can see on pictures, it is not exactly in line with the seat tube. This would result in a seat angle that is different from that given in the Trek catalogue. I guess you would have to figure that in your sizing. Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
I believe the angle given by Trek is the virtual/real angleelviento
Jul 22, 2002 1:37 PM
from the seat collar to the BB, rather than the angle of the actual tube.
60 cm sounds smalllaffeaux
Jul 22, 2002 11:24 AM
Trek measures to the top of the seat clamp, so their frames run small. A 60 cm Trek is closer to 57 by other manufacturers. WIthout seeing you, I'd guess 62 cm at your height.
60 cm sounds smallbiggiecycles
Jul 22, 2002 6:34 PM
Agreed...

I rode an older ('96 or so) OCLV that was a 58cm... I looked like a circus freak with as much seatpost as I had showing....

I upgraded to a 2001 5900 recently.. I thought I wanted a 60cm till I rode a 62.. and it fit well...

maybe some of the best specs I can tell you about me are:
height 6'0"
inseam 34" (for real...not some rapstar crap baggy things)
wingspan (for comparing reach) is a little freakish at: 6'4"

best things I can tell you about my setup are:
frame 62c
seatpost (USE Alien) 14cm showing.. clamped a little more than half way back
stem 115mm deda ..flipped upside down to get a little rise
and 3cm of spacers under the stem
(sounds a little old man..but i'm getting old...and i do still have 14cm of post showing)

I'm pretty happy with how it fits... i'm happy on it for 80+ miles at a time...

i'm glad I didn't get a 60