The most aesthically pleasing frame size
12-01-19, 11:32 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,568
Bikes: 1971 Fuji Finest, Royale, S-10-S, 1976 Motobecane Mirage, 1989 Trek 330, 1100, 1970 Raleigh Sport, and more
Mentioned: 48 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 742 Post(s)
Liked 132 Times
in
97 Posts
The most aesthically pleasing frame size
I have been considering the most aesthically pleasing bike frames for larger wheeled bicycles. My conclusion is that 58cm to 59cm frames are the most pleasing to the eye. That is only my opinion of course, but the frame geometry pleases my eye.
I would like to hear other opinions on the subject.
I would like to hear other opinions on the subject.
__________________
"The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain
"The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain
Likes For dweenk:
12-01-19, 11:40 AM
#2
With a mighty wind
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 1,559
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 604 Post(s)
Liked 303 Times
in
178 Posts
I really don't like long head tubes. I would say 54-56 in steel and 56-58 in something wide.
I think a lot of super small ones look really cool, like a vintage 42-46. I can't say I've ever seen a 60+ that looks good, fortunately I can't ride anything that big anyway.
I think a lot of super small ones look really cool, like a vintage 42-46. I can't say I've ever seen a 60+ that looks good, fortunately I can't ride anything that big anyway.
12-01-19, 11:51 AM
#3
Bianchi Goddess
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Shady Pines Retirement Fort Wayne, In
Posts: 27,248
Bikes: Too many to list here check my signature.
Mentioned: 142 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1906 Post(s)
Liked 691 Times
in
434 Posts
59 but that just happens to be my size. I think this an eye of the beholder thing.
__________________
Bianchis '90 Proto, '90 Campione del Fausto Giamondi Specialisma Italiano Mundo, '91 Boarala 'cross, '93 Project 3, '86 Volpe, '97 Ti Megatube, '93 Reparto Corse SBX
Others but still loved; '80 Batavus Professional, '87 Cornelo, '?? Jane Doe (still on the drawing board), '90ish Haro Escape SLX Bertoni "Speckled Trout"
Bianchis '90 Proto, '90 Campione del Fausto Giamondi Specialisma Italiano Mundo, '91 Boarala 'cross, '93 Project 3, '86 Volpe, '97 Ti Megatube, '93 Reparto Corse SBX
Others but still loved; '80 Batavus Professional, '87 Cornelo, '?? Jane Doe (still on the drawing board), '90ish Haro Escape SLX Bertoni "Speckled Trout"
Likes For Bianchigirll:
12-01-19, 11:53 AM
#4
Senior Member
I don't want to cut it too finely.
Raleigh used to make 21 1/2", 23 1/2" and 25 1/2" frames. Of those, the 23 1/2" frames were the most aesthetically pleasing. The small one was too "crunched" up front. The tall one was too tall.
Raleigh used to make 21 1/2", 23 1/2" and 25 1/2" frames. Of those, the 23 1/2" frames were the most aesthetically pleasing. The small one was too "crunched" up front. The tall one was too tall.
Likes For Bad Lag:
12-01-19, 11:55 AM
#5
The dropped
Aesthetically on steel, I've noticed after looking at thousands of bike images that 56-58cm frames 'look' faster. I think it's because quite a few bikes had semi-fixed top tube lengths, and the longer seat tube made the rear triangle taller. Taller than that and there's too much room on the head tube. It's too bad I ride 53-55cm frames.
)
12-01-19, 12:19 PM
#7
Hump, what hump?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SC midlands
Posts: 1,871
Bikes: See signature
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 324 Post(s)
Liked 198 Times
in
127 Posts
I think it would be interesting to compare catalog photos, to see if there is a common size for advertising aesthetics. To me, it's a matter of proportions. Head tubes on 50-52cm frames just don't look right. I'm partial to 55-56 cm myself.
__________________
2010 AB T1X ** 2010 Cannondale SIX-5 ** 1993 Cannondale RS900 ** 1989 Bianchi Brava ** 1988 Nishiki Olympic ** 1987 Centurion Ironman Expert(2) ** 1985 DeRosa Professional SLX ** 1982 Basso Gap ** 198? Ciocc Designer '84 ** 198? Ciocc Competition SL ** 19?? Roberts Audax ** 198? Brian Rourke ** 1982 Mercian Olympic ** 1970 Raleigh Professional MK I ** 1952 Raleigh Sports
2010 AB T1X ** 2010 Cannondale SIX-5 ** 1993 Cannondale RS900 ** 1989 Bianchi Brava ** 1988 Nishiki Olympic ** 1987 Centurion Ironman Expert(2) ** 1985 DeRosa Professional SLX ** 1982 Basso Gap ** 198? Ciocc Designer '84 ** 198? Ciocc Competition SL ** 19?? Roberts Audax ** 198? Brian Rourke ** 1982 Mercian Olympic ** 1970 Raleigh Professional MK I ** 1952 Raleigh Sports
12-01-19, 12:25 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 192
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
Originally Posted by rosefarts
I really don't like long head tubes. I would say 54-56 in steel and 56-58 in something wide.
I think a lot of super small ones look really cool, like a vintage 42-46. I can't say I've ever seen a 60+ that looks good, fortunately I can't ride anything that big anyway.
I think a lot of super small ones look really cool, like a vintage 42-46. I can't say I've ever seen a 60+ that looks good, fortunately I can't ride anything that big anyway.
I guess it’s a ‘form follows function’ cultivated taste.
Wheel size? Whatever rolls.
12-01-19, 12:40 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NEPA
Posts: 1,420
Bikes: '70's Humber, '73 Raleigh Super Course, '75 Raleigh Tourist, '79 Motobecane Grand Sprint, '82 Colnago Super, '86 Miyata 912 (927), '87 Ironman Expert, '89 Puch Mistral Leader
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 418 Post(s)
Liked 811 Times
in
415 Posts
To me, the really large frames always look like the wheels are too small, and the really small frames look like the wheels are too big.
57-59 cm bikes seem well proportioned all around.
But once it's underneath you, the glide overrides the look.
57-59 cm bikes seem well proportioned all around.
But once it's underneath you, the glide overrides the look.
12-01-19, 01:40 PM
#10
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 20,164
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 905 Post(s)
Liked 272 Times
in
205 Posts
55cm C-T 
The Bianchi and all three Capos are this size, and they definitely fit me well.
I'll bet my sons, at 5'11" and almost 6'3", think taller frames look better.
The Bianchi and all three Capos are this size, and they definitely fit me well. I'll bet my sons, at 5'11" and almost 6'3", think taller frames look better.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
12-01-19, 02:39 PM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 7,450
Bikes: '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '90 De Rosa Professional, '91 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8
Mentioned: 51 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 858 Post(s)
Liked 472 Times
in
302 Posts
12-01-19, 02:44 PM
#12
weapons-grade bolognium
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Across the street from Chicago
Posts: 5,329
Bikes: Battaglin Cromor, Ciocc Designer 84, Schwinn Superior 1981
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 652 Post(s)
Liked 673 Times
in
337 Posts
54-56 seem the most balanced to my eye.
I've also seen examples at both ends of the spectrum that look great, so I'm not sure what I key on.
here's a smaller frame that looks "right" to me.
I've also seen examples at both ends of the spectrum that look great, so I'm not sure what I key on.
here's a smaller frame that looks "right" to me.
Last edited by thinktubes; 12-01-19 at 02:47 PM.
Likes For thinktubes:
12-01-19, 02:57 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 6,935
Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci/Ti x3, Gordon, Fuso/Moulton x2, Bornstein, Paisley,1958-74 Paramounts x3, 3rensho, 74 Moto TC, 73-78 Raleigh Pro's x5, Marinoni x2, 1960 Cinelli SC, 1980 Bianchi SC, PX-10 X 2
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2073 Post(s)
Liked 1,116 Times
in
776 Posts
Being long of leg I like em bigger, the setup, colorway and much else is a "big" part of it.
Some look great, some not so much as with all.
The taller frames when set up right make the slim tubes look elegant to me, love that aesthetic.
All that being said, most of mine are set up with bars and seat jacked up at unattractive placements so.......
Some look great, some not so much as with all.
The taller frames when set up right make the slim tubes look elegant to me, love that aesthetic.
All that being said, most of mine are set up with bars and seat jacked up at unattractive placements so.......
12-01-19, 03:07 PM
#14
Senior Member
I'll counter what most are saying, I think taller looks better. Perhaps it's an acquired taste or due to the trend of wider and wider tires, but something 60cm+ looks more pleasing to me. By being taller the bike looks more compact horizontally and quicker, sporty. I say this as someone who can ride a max 58cm.
Likes For smallpox champ:
12-01-19, 03:16 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ventura County ,California
Posts: 1,388
Bikes: 1973 Windsor Profesional,1976 Kabuki diamond formula with full Campy, 1977 Raleigh Competition GS , 1971 Stella original Campy equip. 1978 Raleigh Super Grand Prix, 1972 Italvega Gran Rally ,1972 Super Mondia Special,Medici Pro Strada,Colnago
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 296 Post(s)
Liked 426 Times
in
286 Posts
Most of my bikes are 60-63cm and I like the way they look. I like tall bikes ‘cause I can ride em!
12-01-19, 03:20 PM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Henderson, NV, USA
Posts: 1,077
Bikes: Litespeed (9); Slingshot (6); Specialized (2); Kestrel (2); Softride (2); Centurion (2); Cervelo (1); FELT (1); Cannondale (1); Fuji (1); Trek (1); Schwinn (1)
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 260 Post(s)
Liked 585 Times
in
274 Posts
This one. Hands down. Wins every time.
__________________
WTB: Slingshot road model (1990s era; 18" L or 20" XL frame size)
WTB: Slingshot promotional documents (catalog, pamphlets, etc).
WTB: Bicycling! issue Oct 1969
WTB: Bike World Issues Feb - Sep 1972; Jun 1974; Mar-Apr 1978.
WTB: ZIPP 500 front wheel (650c clincher)
WTB: Slingshot road model (1990s era; 18" L or 20" XL frame size)
WTB: Slingshot promotional documents (catalog, pamphlets, etc).
WTB: Bicycling! issue Oct 1969
WTB: Bike World Issues Feb - Sep 1972; Jun 1974; Mar-Apr 1978.
WTB: ZIPP 500 front wheel (650c clincher)
Likes For SpeedofLite:
12-01-19, 03:22 PM
#17
Senior Member
Originally Posted by thinktubes
54-56 seem the most balanced to my eye.
I've also seen examples at both ends of the spectrum that look great, so I'm not sure what I key on.
here's a smaller frame that looks "right" to me.
I've also seen examples at both ends of the spectrum that look great, so I'm not sure what I key on.
here's a smaller frame that looks "right" to me.
Likes For repechage:
12-01-19, 03:22 PM
#18
Senior Member
54-57 in my eyes. The head tube is the key for me and I like nice separation between the top and down tubes without the head tube being too long. I also like the proportion of the chainstay length to the top tube.
__________________
N = '96 Colnago C40, '04 Wilier Alpe D'Huez, '10 Colnago EPS, '85 Merckx Pro, '89 Merckx Century, '85 Moser, '86 Tommasini Professional, '04 Teschner Aero FX Pro, '05 Alan Carbon Cross, '86 De Rosa Professional, '82 Colnago Super, '95 Gios Compact Pro, '95 Carrera Zeus, '84 Basso Gap, ‘89 Cinelli Supercorsa, ‘83 Bianchi Specialissima, ‘85 Pinarello Record
N = '96 Colnago C40, '04 Wilier Alpe D'Huez, '10 Colnago EPS, '85 Merckx Pro, '89 Merckx Century, '85 Moser, '86 Tommasini Professional, '04 Teschner Aero FX Pro, '05 Alan Carbon Cross, '86 De Rosa Professional, '82 Colnago Super, '95 Gios Compact Pro, '95 Carrera Zeus, '84 Basso Gap, ‘89 Cinelli Supercorsa, ‘83 Bianchi Specialissima, ‘85 Pinarello Record
12-01-19, 03:32 PM
#19
Senior Member
Originally Posted by Spaghetti Legs
54-57 in my eyes. The head tube is the key for me and I like nice separation between the top and down tubes without the head tube being too long. I also like the proportion of the chainstay length to the top tube.
Likes For seypat:
12-01-19, 04:08 PM
#20
Bike hoarder.
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: 700 Ft. above sea level.
Posts: 2,393
Bikes: Just as many as there were awhile ago.
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 340 Post(s)
Liked 359 Times
in
200 Posts
I'd be pleased if people would quit reacting to my 25 In./62cm bikes like they belong in a circus sideshow.
__________________
".....distasteful and easily triggered."
".....distasteful and easily triggered."
12-01-19, 04:12 PM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 3,247
Bikes: '18 Redline Zander MTB, '14 Surly Pugsley, '97 Trek MultiTrack 750, '70 Peugeot UO-18 Mixte
Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1106 Post(s)
Liked 340 Times
in
261 Posts
I'm too big to ride 'em, but I have long thought that smaller frames look nice (at least with conventional diamond frames with horizontal top tubes). I think it's because the top tube is lower and the bike has a longer look to it. I think the wheelbase looks longer in proportion to the frame size than on taller bikes.
12-01-19, 04:26 PM
#22
7-speed cultist
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 20,082
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)
Mentioned: 87 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2791 Post(s)
Liked 728 Times
in
511 Posts
For me, the lower bound on a 700C frame is 56cm, but only if the fork has a lugged crown. A unicrown forces the head tube to be a little shorter.
And Surly bikes look badly-proportioned in any size!
And Surly bikes look badly-proportioned in any size!
__________________
RUSA #7498
Originally Posted by chandltp
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
12-01-19, 04:49 PM
#23
Senior Member
C'mon now. The best looking frame size is the one that fits you correctly.
Likes For Salamandrine:
12-01-19, 05:19 PM
#24
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 27,246
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 378 Post(s)
Liked 1,355 Times
in
874 Posts
Originally Posted by Spaghetti Legs
54-57 in my eyes. The head tube is the key for me and I like nice separation between the top and down tubes without the head tube being too long. I also like the proportion of the chainstay length to the top tube.
Proportional balance = 56cm square.
IMHO
12-01-19, 05:21 PM
#25
A Roadie Forever
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,100
Bikes: (2) ti TiCycles, 2007 w/ triple and 2011 fixed, 1979 Peter Mooney, ~1983 Trek 420 now fixed and ~1973 Raleigh Carlton Competition gravel grinder
Mentioned: 102 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2573 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1,023 Times
in
705 Posts
Originally Posted by merziac
...
Ben
