Bike4Hunter

I recently had all my measurements taken for

MY MEASUREMENTS
Actual Inseam 33 In
Trunk 25.5 In
Forearm 13 In
Arm 27 In
Thigh 20.9 In
Lower Leg 22 In
Sternal Notch 58.5 In
Total Height 71.2 In

What are the differences with the Eddy Fit, Competitive Fit, and French Fit?

I currently do not have a bike. I will be buying my first bike very soon from BikesDirect, Craigslist, or Ebay. I very much want to buy a bike that fits me very well! I am most interested in buying a cyclocross bike to use a commuter-fitness bike. I am nervous to buy a bike from Craigslist or Ebay because I feel as if it will be a "shot in the dark". Unfortunately, there are not very many cross bikes on the Craigslist Market in New Orleans at this time. I am leaning very much towards buying a 54cm Gravity Liberty CXD from Bike Direct. I do not see myself competing in any cycling events.
I think I would want the bike to be set up like a touring bike rather than a racing bike because my understanding is that that setup will be more comfortable, less twitchy, more upright, etc.

Competitive Cyclist Bike Fit Calculator suggested these geometries for me.

The Competitive Fit
Top Tube Length

57.5 - 57.9 Cm

Seat Tube Range CC

54.3 - 54.8 Cm

Seat Tube Range CT

56 - 56.5 Cm

Stem Length

11.2 - 11.8 Cm

BB Saddle Position

86.5 - 88.5 Cm

Saddle Handlebar

53.3 - 53.9 Cm

Saddle Setback

1.7 - 2.1 Cm

Seatpost Type

Not Setback

The French Fit
Top Tube Length

58.7 - 59.1 Cm

Seat Tube Range CC

57.2 - 57.7 Cm

Seat Tube Range CT

58.9 - 59.4 Cm

Stem Length

10.3 - 10.9 Cm

BB Saddle Position

84 - 86 Cm

Saddle Handlebar

55.8 - 56.4 Cm

Saddle Setback

2.4 - 2.8 Cm

Seatpost Type

Setback

The Eddy Fit
Top Tube Length

57.5 - 57.9 Cm

Seat Tube Range CC

55.5 - 56 Cm

Seat Tube Range CT

57.2 - 57.7 Cm

Stem Length

10.1 - 10.7 Cm

BB Saddle Position

85.7 - 87.7 Cm

Saddle Handlebar

54.1 - 54.7 Cm

Saddle Setback

2.9 - 3.3 Cm

Seatpost Type

Setback

They seem rather large compared to bikes that I have had in the past.

I was sold a 55.6cm SE Draft Single Speed from an LBS. That bike fit fine. No complaints. LBS did not do a real bike fit. They just looked at me standing over the bike.
I had a cheapo Vilano Wave Freestyle 54cm that I rode the hell out off. That bike also fit fine. Never had a problem with fit.
I have a 55cm 80's Bianchi road bike that was uncomfortable. The bike was very twitchy. I was never comfortable on the bike on the hoods or the drops. I was somewhat comfortable on the top of the drop bars.
I also had a 2006 57cm Bianchi Axis. That bike felt too big and unwieldy. I had a lot of pain in my hands from riding the hoods, and discomfort in the saddle. This Bianchi Axis fit better than the previous 55cm from the 80's, but I was still no where near comfortable.
(https://www.bianchiusa.com/archives/2006/specialty/axis/)


What is your advice for me?
What fit should I choose?
Why should I choose the fit you recommend ?
Am I in the right "ball-park" with the 54cm Gravity Liberty CXD? (MSRP $1095 | Liberty CX Cyclocross Bikes : Gravity Bikes)
If I don't buy a bike from BikesDirect, how will I go about getting a bike that fits me well from Ebay or Craigslist?
When do cross bikes hit the used market? the end of the cx season?


Thanks a ton!

paladyr

Based on my own fitting experience I think you need at least a 56cm bike. I tried Fuji Cross bikes in 52, 54, and 56 and landed on a 54cm. You're taller than me, torso bigger, more evenly proportioned, longer arms. I wouldn't be surprised if you liked a 58cm. If you're set on not buying from a local bike shop, then go rent bikes somewhere in the different sizes to find out what you prefer. Make sure you adjust the seat correctly and evenly on each bike first. The calculator put me in a 52cm but I felt cramped so do not go based solely on the calculator. This chart did a better job fitting me in my opinion: https://i199.photobucket.com/albums/a...izingChart.jpg

[TABLE="width: 270, align: center"]
[TR]
[TD]Your Measurements[/TD]
[TD][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Inseam:
Trunk:
Forearm:
Arm:
Thigh:
Lower Leg:
Sternal Notch:
Total Body Height:[/TD]
[TD]34
23.5
13
25
23.75
21
57.5
69[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Bike4Hunter

That frame sizing chart is confusing me! I am 5'11.2 with an 33" inseam. Most shoes I wear in US M 10, but my running shoes are EU 43 M, my Doc's (boots, prob a size too big) are a US M 11.

paladyr

I think this link has the instructions:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/93309029/B...t-Dave-Moulton

Leisesturm

It is called the Competitive Cyclist fit calculator for a reason. It does serve a useful purpose, however, in that there isn't much else out there that is as interactive or as accessible. It is easy and cheap to finesse the CC calculator results to arrive at a comfortable bike I think. I'd get a shorter stem than they recommend and possibly a larger frame although the frame sizes recommended for the French Fit shouldn't need super sizing. If the o.p. intends to commute and set the bike up as touring platform... ... why not buy a touring frame?? The current craze for cyclocross frames as ersatz commuters has no valid basis IMO. A touring bike will be more stable, comfortable and will have every kind of eyelet and mounting hard-point for even the most avid gadgeteer. N+1 can always be a CX or RR for the nice days of spring and summer.

H

Bike4Hunter

According to this Dave Moulton's Frame Sizing Chart, I should ride a frame in between 54cm-55cm c to c, 56cm-57cm c to t.
Interesting. Thank you!

Bike4Hunter

I am having trouble understanding what you mean.
It is called the competitive cyclist fit calculator for what reason?
Do you believe that it is only intended for competitive cyclist?
A larger frame and shorter stem for you or I?
You are saying get a bigger size larger than recommended for the Eddy Fit that was suggested for me?
The French Fit won't need super sizing?
I can't find a touring bike with disc brakes for$500, besides I would like to be able to ride some light single track, gravel roads, etc.
Won't a CX bike be a better all-rounded anyway?

Leisesturm

Q: Do you believe that it is only intended for competitive cyclist?
A: Kind of, Eddy Fit is for Eddy Mercx, a famous competitive cyclist, Competitive Fit speaks for itself. The French Fit is the only non-competitive one in the bunch

Q: A larger frame and shorter stem for you or I?
A: You

Q: You are saying get a bigger size larger than recommended for the Eddy Fit that was suggested for me?
A: Yes

Q: The French Fit won't need super sizing?
A: No. It is already as big as is practical, maybe too big in some cases.

Q: I can't find a touring bike with disc brakes for$500, besides I would like to be able to ride some light single track, gravel roads, etc.
Won't a CX bike be a better all-rounded anyway?

A: Disc brakes are overrated. The mechanical discs are only slightly better than V-brakes and the hydraulics belong on 600cc motorcycles. I've put my touring bike next to CX bikes and the only difference is mine has fender and rack eyelets. If you find a CX bike you like you have my blessing to build it up.

Bike4Hunter

Thanks for being patient with me! I appreciate all your feedback.

Kopsis

The BD Liberty CX frames are more of a drop-bar hybrid than a true Cyclocross. That's probably fine for your planned use, but you need to be aware that the frame geometry is relaxed to the extreme. The top tube slopes dramatically, so the actual seat tube size is much smaller than the "effective". The effective size of the 46 is about 52cm, the 50 is about 54cm, the 54 is about 56cm. If that's the route you want to go, the BD sizing chart for that model is as effective as anything else for getting close to the right size. With frames sized in 4cm increments, you don't need anything as precise as the CC fit calculator to figure out what you need.

fietsbob

What are your cycling goals ?

Bike4Hunter

My cycling goals are to improve my fitness. I am do cardio and weight training. I want to use cycling as a form of cross training. I also plan to commute by bike. On occasional, I will ride some light hiking trails, dirt trails, gravel, etc. I don't plan on competing.

fietsbob

Mountain bike with a few different tires would do .. Hybrids the Trek FX 7 series is W/O a sus fork The Dual sport line is with ..

My LBS fits people on them in person, thats what I do .. put you on a bike and send you out for a test ride.



I cannot help sell you a Bikes direct choice . the fans of those will be your peers .

make that your second bike, buy the 1st one in person in a Shop.

what size bike do you have and how does it feel is the next question..

meanwhile

French fit if you go for a drop bar - and get a cyclocross bike. But as suggested, an all rigid MTB may be better.

meanwhile

Good suspension forks cost serious money that Trek doesn't spend on these bikes. Bad suspension is just a marketing feature.

Also: the OP hasn't said how heavy is he, but that he does do weights. So he might easily be 250lbs. The toughness of a real MTB is valuable insurance when people who are athletic and heavy ride offroad.

Lots of shops - most - are cynical and/or incompetent and BDs prices are much better. Buying a BD bike and then giving a local mechanic $50-$100 to assemble tweak and check it can be a very good move.

meanwhile

This statement is inherently garbage. Better at WHAT??? You haven't said. I use vees myself, but discs are vastly better in muddy conditions, and have a considerable advantage on long descents because they overheat less. CONTEXT, das kinder, CONTEXT.

Well, they work for them.... That doesn't mean they don't work for an MTB. Although I'm fine with vees for the riding I do and think the OP would be too.

And if you have x-ray vision so you can see how thick tubes are on the frames and check the welds, then this means something about the bikes. Otherwise it just means you are making silly assumptions...

(Crossers and tourers are both pretty large categories: some bikes are both. Assuming that all tourers and all crossers are the same because The Eyeball Says So is, however, just silly. For a start, some crossers have lifted BBs for agility.... and some tourers have theirs dropped for stability. The Eyeball may not think this is a big thing, but it is!)

meanwhile

To the OP:

- What's your weight and how fit are?

- How far is your commute and over what sort of roads? How is the traffic?

- What sort of weather will you ride in?

FrenchFit 

I think the Frenchfit is similar to the Rivendell fit, at least to my reading of Grant's fit philosophy. Although I enjoy a long top tube, on long rides (especially using the drops) the Ff result is neck and shoulder pain. Over the years I've gone smaller and smaller reach wise. I guess I need to change my handle....

meanwhile

A Rivendell fit generally has the bars higher and the effective reach reduced compared to French Fit. Probably more so again, if you opt for Mustache Bars.

But again, I'm not saying to the OP "Buy a Rivendell!" but "You need an unconventional fit, and you should base everything around this."

fietsbob

maybe a title like JRA fit will be better .. casual is not the customer Competitive cycle is targeting .



yea hybrid an low end MTBs wont have 'good' suspension forks the Premium cost of a good fork is more than the whole bike is, for most buyers.

Doc V

I am with Sheldon Brown in advocating that you pick a frame size based on top tube length not seat tube length especially given modern slope tube designs. Dave Moulton's guide predicted the right fit for me.

chaadster

I think all this fussing over fit is too much. OP, walk into a couple of bike shops and see what sizes they suggest; I'd be it will be a range of sizes, because the reality is, fit adjustments can be made across a very wide range using seat post (setback), stem, and bars.

Your sizing is easily 54-56, size M...don't worry about it. Also, err on the smaller side when in doubt, as it affords more adjustability, because if a bike is radically too tall, there's nothing you can do to shrink it, although you can extend a seat post and bars quite a long way.

Take a look around the streets and you'll see a lot of people riding a lot of different positions, the point being this is not a big deal, and the level of precision you're trying to hit is, to be honest, unobtainable, since you don't have the experience based information you need to complete the equations.

Dfrost 

I would disagree about erring on the small side. The OP talks about a bike useful for touring, non-competition, more upright. All of those strongly suggest that higher handlebars would be preferred, and getting the bars up near saddle height should be a goal that is easier on a larger bike.

ofgit

The fit, according to Competitive Cyclist, of my bikes (racer, tour/sport tour) is mostly Eddy with small variations (Riv-ish fit) for comfort. I do not compete or 'ride hard'. Fitness and pleasure riding only.

Leisesturm

Of course it would be easier, but not impossible. It is however, impossible to do much about a frame that is radically too big, hence the advice to err small if one must err. Really, its not so much of a disagreement. My main commuter is a 52cm. I'm 5'10". I should be on a 54, maybe 56. In the co-op you don't get much choice. It has an adjustable quill stem. The head tube is so short that the minimum insertion mark just barely disappears when the stem is bottomed in the HT. Opened up to 125* It puts the bars just below saddle (on a 350mm seatpost) height. A larger frame wouldn't fit any better, it would just look better doing it.

H