May 20, 2003 8:25 AM
|Ok, bit of a newbie Q. I'm 6'4" and was just wondering what kind of frame size the average 6'4" guy rides (obviously it varies slightly from person to person) as I went for a test ride on a 58cm bike which i thought would be plenty big enough but did feel slightly cramped for arm reach (leg positioning was fine) and as I'm used to riding MTB's I wasnt sure if this was ok or not. Or is it just I may need a slightly longer stem rather than say a 60cm frame as a 60cm may be too big all round.
|Unless you're built like J. Fred Muggs, 60 is way too small.||cory|
May 20, 2003 8:39 AM
|There are minor differences to suit body types, but I'd be very surprised if a 60 came close to fitting you. I'm 6'4", too, with a 34 inseam (pants inseam, not the boys-to-ground bike measurement), and I ride a 64cm with a little too much seatpost showing. If I'd been able to find a 65, I would have bought it.
One of my mountain bikes is a 58 (biggest Bridgestone made at the time), and I have more than a foot of post exposed. That's sort of marginally OK for MB, but not on the road.
Two suggestions: At least try a 64 before you buy anything. They're hard to find, and I rode smaller bikes for years, but I'm so much more comfortable on the larger frame that I've become a fanatic about it. And find a sizing guide online (try www.rivbike.com; Grant Petersen at Rivendell has some good ideas about this) before you choose.
|Unless you're built like J. Fred Muggs, 60 is way too small.||brian n|
May 20, 2003 11:50 AM
i'm 6'4" with a 34" jeans inseam and I ride a 61cm bike, 58cm tt, and 11cm stem and fits me fine. i have a shorter torso proportionally.
i also ride an ibis 18.5" mtn frame with a synchros 425mm post. fits great with a 150mm stem.
i would advise getting fit at a reputable shop. but check out some online fitting resources (i think colorado cyclist has a good one) to arm yourself before you go.
|If you're happy, so am I. But...||cory|
May 20, 2003 12:21 PM
|Obviously everybody should ride what feels good. If you look around, though, you'll see an awful lot of people on bikes that, before the current craze for small frames, would have been considered too small. One old rule still works pretty well: Close your fist around the exposed part of the seatpost. If your hand doesn't cover the whole thing, your frame is too small by traditional standards.
Because frames bigger than 62cm aren't commonly stocked in shops, I rode 61s and 62s for about 20 years. The shops would give me a deal; they'd put on a longer post; small frames are stiffer and lighter; blah blah blah. I did thousands of miles and I was happy, if not completely comfortable (EVERBODY'S neck hurts...).
When I bought my Atlantis, though, I figured I'd follow Rivendell's advice on sizing. That called for a 65, which they didn't make at the time (they do now), so I bought a 64. It made an enormous difference. Plus I don't have a foot of geekpost sticking out of the seat tube like a BMXer.
|Still looking Trek?||TNSquared|
May 20, 2003 8:41 AM
|If so, all I can offer is that I'm 5'11" with a cycling inseam of around 33 inches, and I'm riding a 58cm. I probably could ride a 56cm but it felt a little cramped through the torso.
However, you need to try different sizes and get your LBS's input. You can also go to www.wrenchscience.com and use the frame sizing tool there to input you're measurements and get an idea what you need.
|Still looking Trek?||mindgam3|
May 20, 2003 8:58 AM
|This is what i thought, but my trek 7200 tourer is a 56cm and is perfect which is a little odd. The 58cm trek did feel a lil cramped for me, but a 58 R600 felt fine size wise but i didnt like the bike. Maybe its treks toptube geometry that makes it feel a little cramped but fine for the legs? But either way I think i'll try test a few 60cm and above before i buy...
O, and I just tried that sizing system at wrenchscience.com and it came out for frame size as 58/59 cm....
|That does seem odd..||TNSquared|
May 20, 2003 10:06 AM
|Wrenchscience put me on a 56 c-c or 58 c-t. Seems hard to believe we'd be within a cm or two of each other. (I'm assuming your 58 is c-c and 59 c-t.) Don't mean to insult you, but are you sure you used your cycling inseam and not your standard pants inseam? Inch or two on your input makes a big difference.
Well, I'm sure with all the resources you'll get the right fit. Good Luck with whatever you end up choosing!
|measure inseam first...||C-40|
May 20, 2003 8:53 AM
|Get an accurate measurement of your cycling inseam (not pants inseam) and follow the recommendations at www.cyfacusa.com.
A 58cm frame should have been much too small, unless you have very short legs and long torso.
Vertically, the frame should have a standover height that's 3-5cm less than your cycling inseam, if you have "normal" proportions. The appropriate top tube length and seat tube angle (horizontal fit) will depend on your torso length and femur length.
|re: Frame sizes.....||Mike Prince|
May 20, 2003 9:20 AM
|I understand that different folks have different sizing stratgies, but I'm the same height as you, my inseam is 92.1 cm and I ride a 60 cm c-c frame. I too have had bikes as large as 64 cm c-t, but the 60 works well for me. A 58 would be waaay to small for me. Top tube is a key for me - my primary bike has a 60 cm top tube and that is what works for me.
|re: Frame sizes.....||daCaT_|
May 20, 2003 12:02 PM
|You have the same inseam as I do. Im looking for my first road bike and you wouldnt believe how hard it is to find a 60 - 61 bike to even try out!
I have size 14 shoes and I have to raise the seat about an inch higher than the "heal on the pedal" method. I am worried about the seat being way higher than the handlebar causing great neck discomfort. I had lumbar spinal fusion 9 months ago and I am just l little less flexable than before, plus I am looking to take longer rides in the mountins near my home in Boulder.
I am talking with Dean bikes, just down the street, and they are measuring me up as a 60cm (61.4 seat tube 59.5 top tube) which seems pretty close to what you are riding.
|May want to check out the CYFAC site Fitting pages.........||abicirider|
May 20, 2003 9:31 AM
|The link is listed below you can click on the fitting paradigm once you are at the home page lots of good info but kinda complex in other words time consuming but should get you a good ideal of size and geometrey you need.
Hope this helps.
Be safe out On The Roads!!!!!!!
May 20, 2003 10:43 AM
|Yeah i ddint measure accurately and notice that an inch makes a lot of difference but I think the solution is to just go and test a 60cm frame, maybe a 62 and see which i feel most comfortable on, cheers for the help though|
|just me||Drone 5200|
May 20, 2003 2:43 PM
|Im 6' 3.25" with a 35.5" inseam bone to floor. I am very comfortable on a 62cm trek 5200 w/ a 130mm stem. I have about 1.5" standover in my cycling shoes and about 6" of seatpost. Works for me. I found the 64cm Felt bikes to be too big. just my 0.02|
|re: Frame sizes.....||al0|
May 20, 2003 1:09 PM
|Try www.wrenchscience.com to find your fit or ... just go to LBS and ask for fitting assistance (if you are ready to pay some additional bucks). I can guess that frame that would fit you has be betweenthen 60 and 64. It's very hard to be more precise without knowing of your measuremnt.|| |