Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Classic & Vintage
Reload this Page >

The most aesthically pleasing frame size

Notices
Classic & Vintage This forum is to discuss the many aspects of classic and vintage bicycles, including musclebikes, lightweights, middleweights, hi-wheelers, bone-shakers, safety bikes and much more.

The most aesthically pleasing frame size

Old 12-01-19, 11:32 AM
  #1  
dweenk 
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
dweenk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,268

Bikes: 1971 Fuji Finest, Royale, S-10-S, 1976 Motobecane Mirage, 1989 Trek 330, 1100, 1970 Raleigh Sport, and more

Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 632 Post(s)
Liked 46 Times in 29 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.
__________________
"The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read." –Mark Twain
dweenk is offline  
Likes For dweenk:
Old 12-01-19, 11:40 AM
  #2  
rosefarts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 849
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 339 Post(s)
Liked 87 Times in 44 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.
rosefarts is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 11:51 AM
  #3  
Bianchigirll 
Bianchi Goddess
 
Bianchigirll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Fort Wayne, In
Posts: 26,234

Bikes: Too many to list here check my signature.

Mentioned: 127 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1492 Post(s)
Liked 230 Times in 150 Posts
59 but that just happens to be my size. I think this an eye of the beholder thing.

__________________
Bianchis '87 Sport SX, '90 Proto, '90 Campione del Fausto Giamondi Specialisma Italiano Mundo, '91 Boarala 'cross, '93 Project 3, '86 Volpe, '97 Ti Megatube, , '90 something Vento 603,

Others but still loved,; '80 RIGI, '80 Batavus Professional, '87 Cornelo, '09 Motobecane SOLD, '?? Jane Doe (still on the drawing board), '90ish Haro Escape
Bianchigirll is offline  
Likes For Bianchigirll:
Old 12-01-19, 11:53 AM
  #4  
Bad Lag
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: So Cal, for now
Posts: 1,143

Bikes: 1975 Bob Jackson - Nuovo Record, Brooks Pro, Clips & Straps

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Liked 42 Times in 30 Posts
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.
Bad Lag is offline  
Likes For Bad Lag:
Old 12-01-19, 11:55 AM
  #5  
Unca_Sam
The dropped
 
Unca_Sam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 684

Bikes: Pake C'Mute Touring/Commuter Build, 1989 Kona Cinder Cone, 1995 Trek 5200

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Liked 140 Times in 113 Posts
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.
Unca_Sam is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 12:01 PM
  #6  
Wildwood
Veteran/Pacifist/Resister
 
Wildwood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 9,165

Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?

Mentioned: 208 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2013 Post(s)
Liked 293 Times in 209 Posts
I'm w/ @Bianchigirll - 59cm (or 60cm )

Wildwood is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 12:19 PM
  #7  
horatio 
Hump, what hump?
 
horatio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SC midlands
Posts: 1,811

Bikes: See signature

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 299 Post(s)
Liked 122 Times in 90 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
horatio is online now  
Old 12-01-19, 12:25 PM
  #8  
bgross
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by rosefarts View Post
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.
Being tallish, a nice 63-64 always catches my eye. Okay, maybe the occasional 62.
I guess it’s a ‘form follows function’ cultivated taste.

Wheel size? Whatever rolls.
bgross is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 12:40 PM
  #9  
BFisher
Senior Member
 
BFisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NEPA
Posts: 761

Bikes: '61 Schwinn Klunker, '68 Hercules Klapprad, '71 Peugeot UO8, '73 Raleigh Super Course, '78 Motobecane Grand Jubile, '79 Motobecane Grand Sprint, '87 Ironman Expert, '89 Puch Mistral Leader, '92 Trek 930

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 199 Post(s)
Liked 206 Times in 135 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.
BFisher is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 01:40 PM
  #10  
John E
feros ferio
 
John E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 19,632

Bikes: 1959 & 1960 Capo; 1982 Bianchi; 1988 Schwinn KOM-10;

Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 757 Post(s)
Liked 88 Times in 75 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.
__________________
"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
Capo: 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
John E is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 02:39 PM
  #11  
SJX426 
Senior Member
 
SJX426's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 6,494

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: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 518 Post(s)
Liked 48 Times in 36 Posts
I agree with BFisher and yes it is what your accustomed to see. I also think that the colorway treatment of the HT makes a difference with they type of lugs. @John E example looks good to me too.
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
SJX426 is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 02:44 PM
  #12  
thinktubes 
weapons-grade bolognium
 
thinktubes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Across the street from Chicago
Posts: 4,935

Bikes: Battaglin Cromor, Ciocc Designer 84, Schwinn Superior 1981

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 514 Post(s)
Liked 239 Times in 145 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.


Last edited by thinktubes; 12-01-19 at 02:47 PM.
thinktubes is offline  
Likes For thinktubes:
Old 12-01-19, 02:57 PM
  #13  
merziac
Senior Member
 
merziac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: PDX
Posts: 5,020

Bikes: Merz x 5 + Specialized Merz Allez x 2, Strawberry/Newlands/DiNucci x2, 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: 123 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1441 Post(s)
Liked 284 Times in 222 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.......






merziac is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 03:07 PM
  #14  
smallpox champ
Senior Member
 
smallpox champ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 148

Bikes: '84 specialized expedition, '87 specialized sirrus, '84 specialized stumpjumper sport

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20 Post(s)
Liked 15 Times in 7 Posts
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.
smallpox champ is offline  
Likes For smallpox champ:
Old 12-01-19, 03:16 PM
  #15  
Kabuki12
Senior Member
 
Kabuki12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ventura County ,California
Posts: 642

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

Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 140 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 83 Times in 65 Posts
Most of my bikes are 60-63cm and I like the way they look. I like tall bikes ‘cause I can ride em!
Kabuki12 is offline  
Likes For Kabuki12:
Old 12-01-19, 03:20 PM
  #16  
SpeedofLite 
Senior Member
 
SpeedofLite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Henderson, NV, USA
Posts: 684

Bikes: Litespeed (9); Slingshot (6); Specialized (2); Kestrel (2); Softride (2); Cervelo (1); FELT (1); Cannondale (1); Fuji (1); Centurion (1); Schwinn (1)

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 181 Post(s)
Liked 107 Times in 72 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! Issues Oct 1969 and Jan 1973.
WTB: ZIPP 500 front wheel (650c clincher)
SpeedofLite is offline  
Likes For SpeedofLite:
Old 12-01-19, 03:22 PM
  #17  
repechage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 13,834
Mentioned: 88 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1135 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 141 Times in 118 Posts
Originally Posted by thinktubes View Post
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.

for a long while, during the level top tube era, a typical bike at a trade show was a 22".(56cm) frame.
repechage is offline  
Likes For repechage:
Old 12-01-19, 03:22 PM
  #18  
Spaghetti Legs 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 3,551

Bikes: Numerous

Mentioned: 82 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 960 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 155 Times in 92 Posts
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
Spaghetti Legs is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 03:32 PM
  #19  
seypat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,586
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1243 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 256 Times in 183 Posts
Originally Posted by Spaghetti Legs View Post
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.
+1 to this. Away from those sizes, the angles look wonky. Puegoet frame angles always look wonky no matter the size.
seypat is offline  
Likes For seypat:
Old 12-01-19, 04:08 PM
  #20  
Murray Missile 
Bike hoarder.
 
Murray Missile's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: 700 Ft. above sea level.
Posts: 2,071

Bikes: Just as many as there were awhile ago.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 250 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times in 81 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."
Murray Missile is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 04:12 PM
  #21  
hokiefyd 
Senior Member
 
hokiefyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Northern Shenandoah Valley
Posts: 2,677

Bikes: 2018 Redline Zander, 1997 Trek 750, 1970 Peugeot UO-18

Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 903 Post(s)
Liked 161 Times in 128 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.
hokiefyd is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 04:26 PM
  #22  
ThermionicScott 
7-speed cultist
 
ThermionicScott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 19,537

Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers)

Mentioned: 83 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2522 Post(s)
Liked 420 Times in 304 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!
__________________
Originally Posted by chandltp View Post
There's no such thing as too far.. just lack of time
Originally Posted by noglider
People in this forum are not typical.
RUSA #7498
ThermionicScott is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 04:49 PM
  #23  
Salamandrine 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5,299

Bikes: 78 Masi Criterium, 68 PX10, 2016 Mercian King of Mercia, Rivendell Clem Smith Jr

Mentioned: 114 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1889 Post(s)
Liked 144 Times in 110 Posts
C'mon now. The best looking frame size is the one that fits you correctly.
Salamandrine is offline  
Likes For Salamandrine:
Old 12-01-19, 05:19 PM
  #24  
RobbieTunes 
Half drunk? Finish!
 
RobbieTunes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Very Southern Indiana
Posts: 26,752
Mentioned: 34 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 366 Post(s)
Liked 670 Times in 437 Posts
Originally Posted by Spaghetti Legs View Post
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.
+2
Proportional balance = 56cm square.
IMHO
__________________
Robbie ♪♫♪...☻
I have unfinished business.

RobbieTunes is offline  
Old 12-01-19, 05:21 PM
  #25  
79pmooney
A Roadie Forever
 
79pmooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 7,439

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: 97 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1870 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 255 Times in 187 Posts
Originally Posted by merziac View Post
...






Rowena Crest? (Rowena Crest is a scenic overlook halfway between Hood River and the Dalles, Oregon. This view is looking east up the Columbia River Gorge.)

Ben
79pmooney is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.