Paradigm Shifts and Bike Doesn't Fits -- 25" Frames Now Too Small!
 

No build thread here, no I'm-making-friends-today strong opinion(s) to throw down, just perhaps an open discussion on what you've all done when, upon some event, fitting, or mental realization, you now know that whatever size range you've been riding is no longer ideal.

Many moons ago, I started with a 21"/52cm bike as it was given to me to restore (the couple couldn't take it with them in a cross-country move). At 6'5", yeah, it was too small, but I had a lovely 1985 Schwinn World Sport in baby blue! As the next couple of years went on, I found myself learning, and warming to, larger sizes more appropriate for my height, eventually settling on the oft-ubiquitous-enough 25"/63.5cm frame size offered my many a 1980's manufacturer. My 1985 Ross Signature 294S was that inaugural bike and set me on a course for years to come. A few smaller and a few larger than that framesets passed through my hands, but the 25" size was my "center" in the frameset world.

A recent bike fit, spurred by a nagging knee injury (from an innate bio-mechanical reality) and finally dealt with a year later (thank you illness and Coronavirus for the, uh, extra seven month delay), has fixed that knee issue while also raising my saddle height a literal inch. An inch! I had brought the height down over the recent years in trying to appease this not-yet-identified issue--at least 0.5" to 0.75" below what I had set it at five to seven years ago, and it was now too low.

As many of us know, and many of you (you can roll your eyes now/again) know about me, a bike has to fit and look good/the part doing it. Well, when you take 25" frames with previous exposed seat post amounts and jack them up another inch, not only do they look a bit funny (to me), but they also leave your bar/stem/hoods setting, so carefully crafted for the "race look" or the "sleek look" or the "classic look", for dead. That 2" saddle-to-bar/hood drop becomes a considerable 3", and that 3.4" saddle-to-hood drop (Allez SE) becomes an untenable 4.4" drop. Without Saint Nitto Technomic, my now-too-small frames are doomed to life without their rider, or if with their rider, life looking a bit awkward. What is (my) vanity to do???

My Davidson Impulse was the bike I took for the fitting/fit analysis (a well-respected and recommended fellow), and is thus "the mark" to which other (new) bikes/bike refittings will be measured against. It measures 64cm CTT, with a quill stem conversion and stem run right off the top of the headset. 3" bar to hood drop now (was 2" before), but with everything, it's been workable as I've ridden the new fit over the last few days. Saddle height may come down 5-6mm or it may not, but it's working pretty well so far as I get used to it. I mean, the lack of left knee pain now is HUGE. It means I can bike to a fatigue point and not to a pain/injury point!!!

So what's the fuss? Gotta get new frames? Cry us a river, right? :lol: I don't know. Though I do know, currently, that 64cm CTT frames are the low limit for frame size right now, and that 66cm is now the ideal for exposed seat post proportion and recouping the "lost" two-inch saddle-to-hood drop comfort. I can't bear to see my Prologue and Allez SE look like gawky giraffes, so they're going to be for sale soon. :/ I bought back my former 66cm Land Shark and am planning a bright future for it. My supposedly 25" '74 Paramount is actually a 64cm, but it looks pretty awkward at this stage. My now-modified (wider rim/inflated tire clearance in front, better/modern canti brakes) '83 Specialized Expedition, a luminary as expressed in my build thread, is on pause. You see how this goes....

My question to you all, who have gone from X size to larger, or X size to smaller, or had to adjust saddle or bar positions on everything (whether due to fit, age, injury, or preference)--did you fight it for a little while, or accept the realities quickly enough and adapt. Were you bummed out, and if so, how much? Or did you relish the opportunity to fit something new/better and keep on biking because dang, if biking isn't fun!

A final note before turning this novel over to the rest of you is, a 27" (68.5cm) frame is something that I can handle, having done it before. It's the top tube length that is the critical bit. Many manufacturers grow that top tube length considerably for the super tall humans among us, leaving at least a few of us in bike fit no-man's land. I'm looking forward to seeing what I can find, but it'll be a search for sure. Big bikes ride great, I just need to get a comfortable setup going on them! :)

:innocent:

Gotta give me more than that, man! :roflmao:

I am 6'2 and gradually realized that I like 25" bikes though it took a few years. I bought my first road bike in 1994. It was a 58cm Trek 1100. The folks at the bike shop said it fit me and it was definitely bigger than the mountain bikes I had ridden up to that point (obviously, they were too small too). I began to realize that it was a size too small as I read more and more from Rivendell/Grant on bike sizing. SInce I was basically broke and raising kids, I never bought a technomic stem, though it would have helped. Fast forward many years (sometime around 2005) I bought a 60cm 1984 Trek 500 (fell in love with steel) and really appreciated the easy to achieve higher handlebar. I also had more money so I was able to build with parts that fit better. I rode it all over and did my first century on it. It was my main road bike up until 2017 when I found a 60cm 1982 Trek 61x frame and bought that. About a month later my wife was at a yardsale and found a box of bike parts, a wheelset and 25.5" 1979 Raliegh Super Course. She brought them home. I built it up and discovered that I liked 25" or so bikes much better. I ended up selling the 61x and donating the 500 frame to the coop because I had beat the crap out of it. I now have three 25 inch roadbikes and I can't imagine going back though I have seen a few sweet 60cm frames that have tempted me. In the end though, I stick with the bigger bikes.

For the longest time I had thought that perhaps my inseam was a little short for being (nearly) 6'5" and why other people several inches shorter than me rode a 25" frame. Guess I have my answer! And yeah, smaller frames tempt me, but now, even these taller frames try but the reality is just not there. Time for a fleet overhaul I guess..

Pretty sure I blathered on about the big Merz and the big Paramount when I figured out pretty much the same, then again when I built the Strawberry even though it is not as tall since it will allow for shrinkage but was built off the big Merz and the smaller BG with the odd geo being a good case for having the builder do the fitting to work their magic.

Not being that strong of a rider really pointed out how much better the big ones ride for me over the longer haul, not that I do many of them but it was very apparent that the big ones leg out much better for me.

Very glad you figured this out and am not surprised. ;)

I'm only 5'-10" (178 cm) now, but have, apparently, long legs/high waist and I also prefer to pedal "toes down". I'm perfectly comfortable riding a 63 cm frame with a bare fistful of (Campy two-bolt) seat post exposed, especially since I like how I can use a normal stem and get the bars nearly level with saddle top. But that's just a preamble:

When I first built a "performance" bike back in the mid-80s, I was advised to get a 57 cm frame because that was what people my height should ride. I did that, and loved the ride of that frame -- but I realized slowly that I needed/wanted a higher saddle (and bars, even moreso as time wore on). So I adapted: got a Sugino "Crystal Fellow" seatpost to replace the Campagnolo Super Record that was shorter, and a Nitto Technomic stem (the ubiquitous 7-shape). That worked well, but I hated the looks of what I'd turned the bike into. The stem, in particular, was offensive. Then I bought a Nitto Dirt Drop stem (more an apostrophe shape), which, if one looks, is available in both 80 and 100 mm reach (though you can't be choosy about bar diameter). That made a much more satisfying presentation, which I have recommended to others who had the same issue.

Eventually, in buying vintage frames, where the availability of 63s is quite a bit better than 60s or 61s, I ended up where I am. I do have a few 60, 61, 62 cm frames, and even a 59.5, but (I seem to collect these things) have ended up with several 63s, one of which is my daily rider. (I'm somewhat ungainly mounting and dismounting, but stopping/starting is no problem at all.) I realize that, in order even to make one of the project frames in the 60-61 vicinity work for me, I'll need to use one of those Dirt Drops. I have no problem with that.

Long and short of it: suggest you work with what you have rather than starting over.

So what is your hard stop (PBH) inseam?

Mine is 38in out of 72 total. ;)

RoS, are you using 175 cranks on everything?

Inverted North Roads or mustache bars with a longer stem. Gets the riding position up in front very quickly without having to find taller frames, or going for the other extreme of a full upright riding position. Rather, the look of a speedy English club bike.

Done right, you can bring the bars up as little as 2", and a lot more if you just want to go upright. I recently put conventional North Roads on a Raleigh Pro, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that I wasn't lacking for speed, Even with my body supposedly creating enormous extra drag, I found myself cruising the neighborhood at a solid GPS-calculated 16mph. I can see this being a problem for speed in windy situations, of course.

Speaking of upright bars, even I have found myself in a similar case as RiddleOfSteel with these aforementioned upright bars. Long ago, I started jacking my saddles higher and higher. It worked. Only my bars can only go so far. Compare the saddle-to-bar position of my 1951 Raleigh - built about 13 years ago with a saddle height that was gradually raised to its present position - to what I'm aiming for on my more recent, 1980 Raleigh Sports build:

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...57e673e1d6.jpg

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...bb3832b873.jpg

Note how I'm trying to hide that long stem on the '80 Sports with the high-mounted headlight. The visual illusion works too!

All things considered, these adjustments make it look like I need that aforementioned 25" frame, and not the 23" frames I'm presently riding.

-Kurt

I wondered if you were going to say something like that. :) That or "go custom." It's one of the reasons I pinged the buyer of the Land Shark soon after the fitting. Frame decisions aren't going to get smaller!

Yup! The fitter said I could get away with 180mm cranks, and I've tried them. They are quite long! I can't spin with the speed I can with 175s, nor am I super pumped about the angle range my knees go through--it feels considerable (I mean, it is, but you know).

I joke that my height is in my neck as it's a touch longer than the average bear, which is perfect for looking forward when riding super aero in the drops. ;)

PBH, as just measured by myself, properly trying, is about 920mm. So about 36.25" out of 76.5" total. Don't know how keen I am trying it again, kinda feeling it. :/

@RiddleOfSteel, I got bad news for you Dan; you're getting taller. Who knows how long this growth spurt will last?

But seriously, I always thought it was kinda nuts that you and I prefer the same size frame, when you have 5" on me :lol:

I was fitted for a 56 back in the mid-90s. It proved too small. I never got comfortable on that bike. Jump ahead a few years and I'm settled in at 58 cm. I was happy there, through several bikes. Then my grail at the time came along, at 62 cm. I bought it and made it work. Every bike I've bought since has been 60 cm, or 24 ", which is sometimes 61. I don't plan on buying any more. I still have that grail bike, a '92 Panasonic built Paramount, and a couple 24" Treks. A 59 cm top tube is too long; 58 is ok. I'm 182 cm tall.

@cudak888 yeah, I've been looking into putting some Nitto B602AA or very similar bars onto the Paramount after doing so for my brother a few years ago. The upright position feels excellent, much as I like and ride the race-oriented setups. It engages the super fun/don't care portion of my brain. :)

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...32d5bbf334.jpg

The 602 vs 603 that Nitto also sells is a couple of things, but important to me is the straight grip/brake lever section that is longer on the 602s vs the 603s. The bar I have on my brother's '83 Fuji Supreme may be a 602 or something essentially the same, but in steel/from some other manufacturer. I'd keep the saddle height similar to what I have set up as regular shoes do not equal cycling shoes in position, thickness, or stiffness. Or purpose. I have 35mm Paselas on the Paramount right now, so would have to drop to 32s to be able to put on fenders because that is the correct thing to do. :)

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8501936944.jpg

You and a couple other guys I have 3-5" in height on, I've thought, "How do they get to ride frames in my size range?" That's reserved for tall, tall guys. Looks like I have not yet begun to French Fit! :roflmao:

That time we rode up to Hurricane Ridge, I looked over at your Schwinn and said to myself, "Lower that seat post an inch, and that's my bike, basically."

French fit; sounds fancy, but it's pretty simple.

For selfish reasons, I kinda like where this is going.

The first bike I bought, back in the mid-70s, was a 23” Azuki. It took a couple of years to realize it was too small and do something about.

I bought a nice 25” frame in 1978. I still have it and just repainted it for the second time, but I haven’t been using it lately because the low BB causes pedal strike with my platform pedals. That was never an issue back when I was running racing pedals with toe clips.

I’m currently using a late 80s 25” Schwinn frame that I actually bought for one of the kids (but it ended up being too big.)

I’m definitely not opposed to switching my road frame to something better than the bottom of the line Schwinn frame of its day, assuming the BB height will work.

So, a really nice 25” frame with enough BB height would see a lot of miles around here!

Otto

Meanwhile, here is how I dealt with a vintage 22” MTB frame that (though the largest size in this model) is rather small for me. Answer: very tall stem and swept bars with 2” of rise. This bike is a hoot to ride. Looks a bit of a sight at the moment.


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...627553d14.jpeg

For decades my magic number was 62cm. Last November as I was approaching the turn of the page past that same number chronologically a 64cm I couldn't say no to appeared and danged if it doesn't feel like I've had it forever. As good as it is my Mercian still feels better than anything. But yeah, 64/25.5 is a thing. Never too late.

And therein lies the rub, most people struggle with doing it properly as it is "uncomfortable" so it is often not accurate when it can be the key number in the equation.

That's funny, but I like your honesty. I'd think the same thing, too! :lol:

There is a 25" 1985 Schwinn Peloton built up for sale here in Seattle. I know the guy because I sold the frameset to him, hahaha. My lovely Prologue is generally in the looking-for-a-new-home category, but I'm test fitting pieces on the Land Shark, so I can't build it up again. Not enough spare parts! At least I get to say the Prologue is sorta too small now in addition to the likely-unwise statement that the Davidson is the fiercer road bike and took its parts--and there can be only one top dog...maybe... Prologues are gems, I just wish they could be 66cm gems. Most any mid- to late-'80s Schwinn will have the standard BB drop amount of 70mm. Older Paramounts were 76mm (3"), Cannondales at 66/67mm, my Allez SE somewhere in that range, too. As long as you aren't pedaling through sharp corners or have the inside pedal at bottom dead center through a good curve (easy to do), you'll never strike a pedal the rest of your life, and BB drop won't matter. :)

I'm partial to the North Road inspired BB302AA, but it seems as if most manufacturers cut the straight sections on North Road bars too short - even if they point backwards similar to the Albatross. I don't get it - it's as if they expect these bars to be used with the smaller brake levers and shifters of the North Road's golden era.

At any rate, I find the North Road bend usually doesn't feel as cramped as the sweep back bars, at least in my experience. The sweep forward of the North Road allows for the use of a shorter top tube or stem. Unfortunately, I can't really share many aftermarket examples, as I usually go OEM with these, and dig up oddballs. Also, the examples below are on the extreme side in regards to stem length (or lack of it).

1951 Raleigh Sports:
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...775d0d22f1.jpg


Inverted Soma Sparrows (They're supposed to be used as mustache bars as labeled. I removed the graphics with Goof Off):
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...29cdb387cd.jpg


Generic Taiwanese 490mm bars off eBay - these actually have a fair amount of grip and shifter space:
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...f71db45489.jpg


Bars off a 1975 Raleigh Sports (with brakes from a 1980 Sports):
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...ca79636d9e.jpg

Incidentally, I once had a 25" Nishiki here. The higher drop bar position was perfect for me. There's something to be said for "French fit" - or even more than that.

-Kurt

The short stem I put on my brother's Fuji, combined with the shorter-than-60cm top tube length makes very-low-speed, tight turning awkward (bar into knee), requiring a flaring out of the knee or just dropping a foot to the ground. With the Paramount's 60cm top tube, I'd use an 80mm stem and go from there. It'd give me just that extra couple of cm while still allowing me to sit bolt upright.

The avian nature of the North Road bars is quite elegant, but since I have the aforementioned top tube length to give me space, I like the bar to not 'waste time' going forward before sweeping back to me. I guess I just like the more longitudinal nature of those B602AA-style bars. The flare looks great, I'm just a bigger fan of the nearly-straight-back. You and I both agree on having enough shifter and brake lever space. Why that gets shorted on some bars is a bit baffling. The long levers only add grace and elegance!