Originally Posted by
wheelreason
Yes, but that applies to any way you want to measure the bike and label it, you still need to know what "size" will fit. In the old days, a single number did it, now you need something more discriptive, hence the geometry/size charts with all the columns. I liked it when bikes came in 1 cm increments, stems came in .5 cm increments and were easily adjusted for height to 1 mm, but now we live in a world were a lot of folks fall between sizes and we just adjust accordingly, per sloped top tubes and reaches and stacks.
There is still pretty much one “size” that fits. My wife’s Sirrus 2.0 is an extra small. It would be an inappropriate bike for someone who needs a small just as a “small” would be an inappropriate size for her. The proportions of a small are all wrong for her…a problem that we have had for 40 years.
As to size charts we have always had geometry charts since I started riding bikes seriously….almost 50 years ago now. I don’t recall bicycles ever coming in 1cm increments but more like 2” (or closer to 4 cm) increments. Common sizes were 19” (48cm), 21” (53cm), 23” (58cm), and 25” (63cm), perhaps even a 27” (68cm). Sizes now are 44cm, 48, 51, 54, 56, and 58 cm. Thankfully many manufacturers are offering smaller bike now days instead of sticking small people with a bike that is far too big.
As to stems, Thomson, to pick on example, offers 13 different stems ranging from 40 mm to 130 mm of which 3 are 0.5mm. And if you don’t stick with a single manufacturer, there are hundreds of stems from 31 to 130mm. There are far more lengths available now than even 20 years ago.