Mountain vs. touring bike sizing
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Mountain vs. touring bike sizing
Hey everyone, so I recently bought a touring bike that was built with a mountain bike frame but am confused about the sizing. When I was in the shop the employee measured the seat tube to be 54 cm which fits me and I test rode the bike and was comfortable. I later noticed the receipt said 19" bike and found the bike online (showing a friend as I haven't picked it up yet because they're making modifications for me) and it said it was a 49 cm frame. I tried researching this sizing discrepancy but haven't quite found the answer I'm looking for. But apparently my mountain bike size is 19 inches but my road bike size is 54 cm which are not the same. Can someone explain this to me? Will this converted mountain bike be big enough for me to tour with comfortably? Thanks in advance.
#2
Senior Member
Bike sizing has become confusing as frame geometry has made it so. If you tried the bike out and it is comfortable, then you should be fine after some tweaking.
maybe this article will help clear it up
The confusing world of bike sizing ? https://www.ten-point.co.uk/
maybe this article will help clear it up
The confusing world of bike sizing ? https://www.ten-point.co.uk/
#3
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,828
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12762 Post(s)
Liked 7,677 Times
in
4,073 Posts
Hey everyone, so I recently bought a touring bike that was built with a mountain bike frame but am confused about the sizing. When I was in the shop the employee measured the seat tube to be 54 cm which fits me and I test rode the bike and was comfortable. I later noticed the receipt said 19" bike and found the bike online (showing a friend as I haven't picked it up yet because they're making modifications for me) and it said it was a 49 cm frame. I tried researching this sizing discrepancy but haven't quite found the answer I'm looking for. But apparently my mountain bike size is 19 inches but my road bike size is 54 cm which are not the same. Can someone explain this to me? Will this converted mountain bike be big enough for me to tour with comfortably? Thanks in advance.
Here's pics of the 19" KHS I like tour on.
#4
Senior Member
I agree with Marcus.
Many touring and mountain bikes now have some degree of a slope to their top tube, others are level. This makes seat tube length relatively meaningless for sizing. A sloped TT will result from either a taller HT, a shorter ST or both. If the ST has been shortened to produce the slope then that dimension is no longer a constant that can be used for frame fitting.
For example my 16" (41 cm) seat tube touring frame with a sloped TT is equivalent in fit to my previous 20" (51 cm) frame with a level TT. They each have the same equivalent TT reach. They each have the same saddle height from the pedal...
current sloped frame... 16" seat tube + 8" seat post (24" BB to saddle rails)
old level frame............ 20" seat tube + 4" seat post (24" BB to saddle rails)
Many touring and mountain bikes now have some degree of a slope to their top tube, others are level. This makes seat tube length relatively meaningless for sizing. A sloped TT will result from either a taller HT, a shorter ST or both. If the ST has been shortened to produce the slope then that dimension is no longer a constant that can be used for frame fitting.
For example my 16" (41 cm) seat tube touring frame with a sloped TT is equivalent in fit to my previous 20" (51 cm) frame with a level TT. They each have the same equivalent TT reach. They each have the same saddle height from the pedal...
current sloped frame... 16" seat tube + 8" seat post (24" BB to saddle rails)
old level frame............ 20" seat tube + 4" seat post (24" BB to saddle rails)
#5
Senior Member
this is a very common source of confusion, I remember clearly not understanding the stated size numbers thing.
as said by others, the main distance that is important is the top tube dimension, and if that will work for the types of bars, flat bars or dropbars.
It very much helps if you already have a reference of a bike that works well for you, as you can measure the toptube, or specifically the ETT, the estimated top tube, because of the diff types of top tube slant and all that.
within reason, different handlebar stem lengths that can be changed out to shorten or lengthen the distance of bars to seat, can compensate for reasonable needs, and make all the difference for rider comfort.
As another example to add to what others have written here, I have one bike made for dropbars and I use a 90mm stem on the dropbars, and could even have a 100mm on it and it would be fine. It is officially a 54cm frame, toptube is about 54 or a bit more.
another bike is a sort of mountain bike frame, setup for mtb bars that sweep back a certain amount, so while its also a medium, the top tube is much longer than the other bike, so when I changed this bike to dropbars, I needed to put a short stem on it, about a 50mm stem, and the bike works great for me fit wise, similar to the other bike in terms of "seat to dropbars" distance.
yes, you have stem lengths that come into play, but also different dropbars have diff shapes, diff lengths of the "tops" of the bars to where the hoods are, and then you also get into the actual height of where the bars are, which makes a difference for comfort also.
than of course with mtb bars, you get into a lot of actual hand position differences from bar to bar, some are more straight, some angle back a lot and so bring the hands much closer to the seat......
lots of variables, but knowing the top tube and ETT estimated top tube , length, is the main important thing to know and to at least be aware of when looking at a new bike--and like I said, hopefully you have a reference of a bike that works for you or close to it, that you can compare a new bike to.
also, in general, for touring, its nicer to have a more relaxed position within reason, ie bars not too far forward, not too far down--but this is personal of course, but long days riding at an easy pace generally is more comfortable with a reasonable rider position--but its up to you to decide what is more comfortable for you and that only comes with riding, riding and more riding....
good luck with new bike and having it setup well for you as you ride it more and become more atune to how it fits you.
#7
Mad bike riding scientist
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 27,359
Bikes: Some silver ones, a red one, a black and orange one, and a few titanium ones
Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6218 Post(s)
Liked 4,216 Times
in
2,363 Posts
Hey everyone, so I recently bought a touring bike that was built with a mountain bike frame but am confused about the sizing. When I was in the shop the employee measured the seat tube to be 54 cm which fits me and I test rode the bike and was comfortable. I later noticed the receipt said 19" bike and found the bike online (showing a friend as I haven't picked it up yet because they're making modifications for me) and it said it was a 49 cm frame. I tried researching this sizing discrepancy but haven't quite found the answer I'm looking for. But apparently my mountain bike size is 19 inches but my road bike size is 54 cm which are not the same. Can someone explain this to me? Will this converted mountain bike be big enough for me to tour with comfortably? Thanks in advance.
But the problem I see here is that the mountain bike you bought is too big for you given your road bike frame size. A 54cm road bike is 21”. Mountain bikes should have sized about 3” to 4” smaller than road bikes. That’s so that you have more room to bail off on uneven ground so that you don’t hit the sensitive bits on the top tube.
Because of the smaller frame size, mountain bike proportions are different from road bikes. For example, the top tube on a smaller mountain bike is proportionally longer to fit a larger person. It’s actually even a bit longer so that the rider is better centered on the bike for off-road use. A 19” mountain bike is meant to fit someone who rides a 58cm or 23” frame. For a 54cm bike, you should be riding a 17” mountain bike to have a similar proportionality to your 54cm road bike. I hate to say this but your bike is too big. If you use drop bars on it, you will have a really long stretch to the handlebar. It won’t be all that comfortable for riding all day on tour.
__________________
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Stuart Black
Plan Epsilon Around Lake Michigan in the era of Covid
Old School…When It Wasn’t Ancient bikepacking
Gold Fever Three days of dirt in Colorado
Pokin' around the Poconos A cold ride around Lake Erie
Dinosaurs in Colorado A mountain bike guide to the Purgatory Canyon dinosaur trackway
Solo Without Pie. The search for pie in the Midwest.
Picking the Scablands. Washington and Oregon, 2005. Pie and spiders on the Columbia River!
Likes For cyccommute:
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,201
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3459 Post(s)
Liked 1,465 Times
in
1,143 Posts
Agree with everything Djb said.
Also, stems can be bought in different angles. I have one bike with a 17 degree stem angled down, so the stem is nearly horizontal, but I have two bikes with 35 degree stems angled upwards, and other bikes in between.
Some bikes only have a few stem spacers (or I call them steerer tube spacers), but some bikes have more giving you more up and down adjustment.
If the standover height is high enough that you can stand with both feet firmly on the ground while over the top tube, plus a bit of extra contingency might be useful if standing on uneven ground, as long as reasonable tweaks to stem length and angle, plus some spacers on the steerer tube to adjust height, you should be able to do the fine tuning you need.
But, you did not say if you have a quill stem. If you do, it is harder to adjust fit by changing stems. It can be done, but it is more work and takes more time to do so.
Also, stems can be bought in different angles. I have one bike with a 17 degree stem angled down, so the stem is nearly horizontal, but I have two bikes with 35 degree stems angled upwards, and other bikes in between.
Some bikes only have a few stem spacers (or I call them steerer tube spacers), but some bikes have more giving you more up and down adjustment.
If the standover height is high enough that you can stand with both feet firmly on the ground while over the top tube, plus a bit of extra contingency might be useful if standing on uneven ground, as long as reasonable tweaks to stem length and angle, plus some spacers on the steerer tube to adjust height, you should be able to do the fine tuning you need.
But, you did not say if you have a quill stem. If you do, it is harder to adjust fit by changing stems. It can be done, but it is more work and takes more time to do so.
#9
-
Your basic question may have been answered with the link in post #2 , but if you doubt the LBS salesperson and want a better understanding of the comparative geometry and fit of your bicycles, then take measurements, collect bike/frame geometry data and complete the first two columns of this table:
Stack and reach calculator
Even with stack / reach figured, you still have to make some inferences with regard to bike-specific posture and usage. For example, a drop handlebar offers three standard grip positions which significantly change posture/fit, which is hard to measure and represent numerically, graphically, or extrapolate to how it "feels" when actually riding a bike for several hours a day, day after day. Plain ole "flat" MTB bars are simpler to figure with their only-one-grip math.
Stack and reach calculator
Even with stack / reach figured, you still have to make some inferences with regard to bike-specific posture and usage. For example, a drop handlebar offers three standard grip positions which significantly change posture/fit, which is hard to measure and represent numerically, graphically, or extrapolate to how it "feels" when actually riding a bike for several hours a day, day after day. Plain ole "flat" MTB bars are simpler to figure with their only-one-grip math.
#10
Banned
Years ago I saw a post by a Canadian Machinist who rook a full suspension frame
somewhat , like this and turned it into a hardtail , that came apart
so as to make it a smaller package, to fly, to where they wanted to go tour..
....
somewhat , like this and turned it into a hardtail , that came apart
so as to make it a smaller package, to fly, to where they wanted to go tour..
....
#11
Newbie
Thread Starter
#12
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,828
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12762 Post(s)
Liked 7,677 Times
in
4,073 Posts
#13
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,828
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12762 Post(s)
Liked 7,677 Times
in
4,073 Posts
Traditionally Italians measured bikes from the center of the bottom bracket spindle to the point where the center of the top tube and the center of the seat tube meet. I think Bianchi measured their MTBs in centimeters at that time.
#14
Senior Member
hope it fits you and that you are happy with it. The most important thing is that you are comfortable riding it.
I'm originally from there, and one day will ride by that place if I am visiting and have a bike and time to go by, always like to visit a bike store.
#15
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,828
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12762 Post(s)
Liked 7,677 Times
in
4,073 Posts
I think that may be a 19". This guy says he measured this Grizzly from the same era as being 19" and certainly looks the same size.
Keep in mind that back in the day, MTBs often had shorter front center dimensions but had super long stems installed. So sizing isn't the same as a modern MTB. Replacing flat bars with a 140mm 10° stem with drops and a high-rise 90mm stem can often get you into a similar fit.
Keep in mind that back in the day, MTBs often had shorter front center dimensions but had super long stems installed. So sizing isn't the same as a modern MTB. Replacing flat bars with a 140mm 10° stem with drops and a high-rise 90mm stem can often get you into a similar fit.
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,201
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3459 Post(s)
Liked 1,465 Times
in
1,143 Posts
A few thoughts on the photo. Looks like an older friction bar end shifter (not a indexed one). Front fender looks a bit odd where I am not sure if it is attached at the fork crown or how. But the upper fender stays are much closer to the fork crown than is normal which is what caught my attention. These are not important issues, just a few things that drew my eyes to them as being unexpected.
#17
Senior Member
A few thoughts on the photo. Looks like an older friction bar end shifter (not a indexed one). Front fender looks a bit odd where I am not sure if it is attached at the fork crown or how. But the upper fender stays are much closer to the fork crown than is normal which is what caught my attention. These are not important issues, just a few things that drew my eyes to them as being unexpected.
I suspect that given how high up the mudflap is, and the fact that the front part of the fender is by no means overly long, I suspect these are fenders for a smaller sized wheelsize. The water coming off the wheel is certainly going to go all over the front chainring area, given the the fender bottom is so high up.....
I'll be straightforward, I saw the ad for this bike, and I am assuming the person here has purchased it already, but I find $650 for a 80s or early 90s mtb bike with most likely 7speeds to be a bit high frankly. I know its from a bike shop, and it should be in excellent condition with everything regreased etc, but I would expect indexed shifters that work flawlessly and properly fitting fenders for that price, and heck, a rear rack.
#18
Senior Member
Okay kids, don't try this at home as it is very approximate! Using high school arithmetic along with the posted photo it appears that the Bianchi has a 49cm (19") seat tube and a level 54cm (21") top tube.
I first expanded the photo on the screen until the crank measured with a ruler was 50mm. The seat tube measured 140mm and the top tube 155mm. Assuming a 175mm crank here's the arithmetic using cross multiplication...
50/175 = 140/X
50X = 24,500
X = 49cm seat tube length, center to top
50/175 = 155/X
50X = 27.125
X = 54.25cm top tube length, center to center
If it's a 170mm crank then each dimension is slightly shorter. Yes, I have nothing better to do on a boring cold drizzly day here in NH!
I first expanded the photo on the screen until the crank measured with a ruler was 50mm. The seat tube measured 140mm and the top tube 155mm. Assuming a 175mm crank here's the arithmetic using cross multiplication...
50/175 = 140/X
50X = 24,500
X = 49cm seat tube length, center to top
50/175 = 155/X
50X = 27.125
X = 54.25cm top tube length, center to center
If it's a 170mm crank then each dimension is slightly shorter. Yes, I have nothing better to do on a boring cold drizzly day here in NH!
#19
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,828
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12762 Post(s)
Liked 7,677 Times
in
4,073 Posts
A few thoughts on the photo. Looks like an older friction bar end shifter (not a indexed one). Front fender looks a bit odd where I am not sure if it is attached at the fork crown or how. But the upper fender stays are much closer to the fork crown than is normal which is what caught my attention. These are not important issues, just a few things that drew my eyes to them as being unexpected.
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 11,201
Bikes: 1961 Ideor, 1966 Perfekt 3 Speed AB Hub, 1994 Bridgestone MB-6, 2006 Airnimal Joey, 2009 Thorn Sherpa, 2013 Thorn Nomad MkII, 2015 VO Pass Hunter, 2017 Lynskey Backroad, 2017 Raleigh Gran Prix, 1980s Bianchi Mixte on a trainer. Others are now gone.
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3459 Post(s)
Liked 1,465 Times
in
1,143 Posts
I mis-spoke, in that era when the Suntour bar ends that most people referred to as ratchet shifters, I was using Shimano bar end shifters that had a return spring and adjustable friction. So I was thinking of the word friction when I was also thinking Suntour.
#21
Newbie
Thread Starter
I'll be straightforward, I saw the ad for this bike, and I am assuming the person here has purchased it already, but I find $650 for a 80s or early 90s mtb bike with most likely 7speeds to be a bit high frankly. I know its from a bike shop, and it should be in excellent condition with everything regreased etc, but I would expect indexed shifters that work flawlessly and properly fitting fenders for that price, and heck, a rear rack.
#22
Newbie
Thread Starter
Picked up the bike yesterday and measured myself and those estimates were bang on. Impressive!
#23
Senior Member
Picked up the bike yesterday and it's 9 speeds, looks to be in excellent condition. The shifters are friction but they work great. I'm not too concerned about the fenders and I have my own rack that they put on for me so overall I'm happy with it. Thanks for the input though!
I also ride sti "brifter" shifters, as well as mountain bike trigger shifters, but still find the type of shifters on your new bike to work great for touring.
on another positive note (apologies for the negative angle I wrote before) I have ridden a lot loaded up on frames very similar to this bike, my old 90s mtb and a 90s hybrid, and both behave very well with two heavy rear panniers--and looking at this frame, I am sure that it will be the same.
going the front rack and pannier route to spread out the weight really is a good idea though, the bike will ride and handle better, and it very much makes life easier on the rear wheels spokes, just cuz less weight is on it.
happy riding.
#24
cowboy, steel horse, etc
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: The hot spot.
Posts: 44,828
Bikes: everywhere
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12762 Post(s)
Liked 7,677 Times
in
4,073 Posts
Picked up the bike yesterday and it's 9 speeds, looks to be in excellent condition. The shifters are friction but they work great. I'm not too concerned about the fenders and I have my own rack that they put on for me so overall I'm happy with it. Thanks for the input though!
With a 54cm top tube that definitely can't be compared to modern MTBs, even MTBs that came out 5 years after that one. My 1996 16" Mongoose has a 56cm effective top tube. And 1997 19" KHS has a 60cm effective top tube.
#25
Senior Member
Yeah, those aren't really full coverage fenders but if they happened to put the L bracket in front of the fork, you could move it to the back of the fork to get a tad more coverage. Then add a mudflap for even more protection for your feet and drivetrain.
With a 54cm top tube that definitely can't be compared to modern MTBs, even MTBs that came out 5 years after that one. My 1996 16" Mongoose has a 56cm effective top tube. And 1997 19" KHS has a 60cm effective top tube.
With a 54cm top tube that definitely can't be compared to modern MTBs, even MTBs that came out 5 years after that one. My 1996 16" Mongoose has a 56cm effective top tube. And 1997 19" KHS has a 60cm effective top tube.
I use a 90mm stem on the 54cm bike, and on the Troll, a short 50 or 60mm stem, and they both work for my 5'10ish" height.
the one reality of a quill stem is that its more time consuming to change to a diff length stem, quite a lot more, but hopefully this stem is going to work properly.
The upside of course on quill stems is the fast and easy height adjustment, but it is what it is.