|frame sizing-standover clearance||dawgcatchr|
Jun 4, 2003 10:42 AM
|Hi. My girlfriend, who works at a shop, recently purchased a 47cm Lemond Alpe d'Huez on employee purchase. She is about 153cm tall (about 5 foot 1). It was the smallest size offered in that bike. It was built up last night, and with shoes on, she has no standover clearance (she can just clear the bar while standing flat-footed with shoes, but the frame is completely up to her crotch). Her torso is rather long (only 3 inches shorter than mine, I am 5 foot 9) so the top tube length isn't an issue-the TT is just about right.
Is the lack of standover height on this frame a problem? I didn't know if there was some concrete reason for the 1-inch guideline, as long as the top tube was of the right length. I don't have much standover clearance on my frame either, but I can't remember the last time I had to straddle my frame for any reason. She would be a great candidate for a custom frame, but it isn't an option financially at this point. Any thoughts on whether this frame will work for her (her shop is mostly a mountain bike shop, so she can't get help from her co-workers.)
|When you say she...||PsyDoc|
Jun 4, 2003 12:13 PM
|...has "no standover clearance" do you mean that it is uncomfortable for her to straddle the bike while wearing her riding shoes? The reason I ask is that standover clearance typically refers to the distance between the toptube and a person's pubic bone and not when the toptube just brushes the "soft tissues" so to speak. If your girlfriend experiences discomfort when straddling the bike, then I would believe the standover height would be problematic if she were to encounter an emergency situation.|
|When you say she...||dawgcatchr|
Jun 4, 2003 1:31 PM
|Basically, what I mean by "no standover clearance" is that with her riding shoes, she can comfortably straddle the bike, but she cannot lift the bicycle off the ground when straddling it (without pain) even just a few mm. She could stand over the top tube in an emergency situation, provided that is is careful not to bend her knees.|
|When you say she...||skvarken|
Jun 4, 2003 4:05 PM
|I just went through precisely the same thing with my wife. Opinions are varied on whether or not this would ever be an issue assuming the rest of the bike fits well. I think most would agree its not that big of a deal. If you were to actually get into a situation ( emergency ) where you landed on the top tube hard, and inch more clearance most likely wouldnt matter.
My wife has been riding the bike ( with no standover ) for about 60 miles a week for the last month, and is quite comfortable on it. Stopping at lights, etc have been a non issue. In fact, the taller frame affords her a more upright riding posture which she prefers...
|Sounds fine to me.||djg|
Jun 5, 2003 6:17 AM
|I think that the range of accidents that might be avoided by another inch of standover clearance is pretty darn narrow and unlikely to occur. Falling off your saddle, plunk down onto the top tube (and not forward into the stem or over the bars) is really not easy to do, and the odds of doing it in such a way that you'll get your feet out under you just in time to catch yourself without slipping seem to me to be miniscule). A significant NEGATIVE standover clearance might make it hard to mount and dismount the bike, especially on a slope (and at some point will compromise your getting the saddle in the right place).|
|re: frame sizing-standover clearance||Chen2|
Jun 5, 2003 3:09 PM
|I think the Lemonds are measured c-c. I just bought my 5'1" wife a 47cm Trek 5200 WSD. The Treks are measured c-top of seat tube. This makes a huge difference. My wife has good standover clearence and she loves the bike. The wheels on the 47WSD's are 650mm.|| |