seanpatrick76

Hey all, I'm curios as to what you'd all recommend. I've always had a slight problem with bike fit. I can ride just about anything, BUT usually I'm not completely comfortable. I'm 5'9 1/2" tall, but an inseam of 32 1/2 inches with short arms. I used to ride 54's, but found the drops always too aggressive (I have a rode bike that I'm fine with in an aggressive position for 2 hours or so) however for commuting / long distance (100 km +) rides it becomes problematic. Sizing up to a 56 brings the handlebars up, which is great, but then the reach is too long. I can shorten the stem a bit but it never seems quite right. What usually ends up happening is I go for optimal leg extension, but my handlebars (even after flipping the stem up) are about 2" below my saddle height.
Any suggestions?

Thanks!

tangerineowl

So, are you riding a 56cm Synapse now, and intending on keeping it?

JerrySTL

Next time that your in the market for a new bike, consider a woman-specific model. Most of them have a shorter top-tube compared to men's bikes.

jyl

Get a higher rise stem, or a steerer extender, to raise your bar up, and possibly a shorter stem.

seanpatrick76

I am, and I am

I'd never thought of that - I'll run it by the guys at the shop next time I'm in.

Well I ended up going for a bike fitting. As I thought the fitter mentioned I had unusual proportions, with a long femur. We WERE able to dial in the measurements that being said. We used the Guru fit machine, and had to bring the handlebars in a ways, and the seat forward a bit. We needed to attach a shortened stem, he actually got one off a woman's synapse - but it didn't quite match (it wasn't glossy) so I had him order one for me. I also switched up the handlebars for ones that had a more ergonomic curve in the drops - and the results seemed good. It's still at the shop as I'm waiting for the new stem to come in, but will report back on how I feel after a few rides.

Interestingly enough after the fit the handlebars were actually dropped lower by a few spacers. It certainly didn't feel that way, but I guess by bringing the bars in, and moving my position up I was able to get into a more aerodynamic position, as I wasn't stretched way out (bum way back, reaching way forward = no power and bad positioning, or so it was explained).

Last up is a new seat, but I'll wait to get the bike back before fiddling too much in that respect. Another upshot is now that I've got my ideal (ish) measurements written down I can reference them when buying my next bike.

dfrench52 

I, too, fall into the long legs (36" cycling inseam)/short torso category @ 6 feet tall. I suppose a bike such as a vintage LeMond or similar geometry might not be a good idea. What do you think?

Wrench science and other fit calculators have me at a 59cm C-C/61cm C-T frame with a 65-66cm reach. I don't own a bike yet ... but I'd like to find a vintage ride.

JohnJ80

Ah, this is my problem too. I almost always wind up on a frame that is too big (too long of a top tube) with a stem that is too short in order to accommodate my inseam. That means I don't have good weight distribution on the wheels with too little on the front that can make it a little skittish in handling. That gets really tiring on a long ride.

I finally gave up and had a custom frame built. Perfect fit. My average speed went way up, and other fit issues (some foot and neck problems) vanished. I should have done it years ago. Would have saved a lot of money (less bikes and components) and had a lot less discomfort over the years. Comfort = speed, at least for me.

In particular, a lot of the Lemond geometries exacerbate this problem according to the designer of my frame. They are very short on trail and their bottom bracket drop is very very shallow compared to a lot of other bikes. When you combine this with the longer than needed top tube that is driven by the long seat tube from a long inseam, it really tends to make the bike skittish. For example, no handed riding is tricky.

The bike I was replacing was a 2006/2007 LeMond Versailles. So I can tell you that from that bike to my new custom compact geometry bike, there is a world of difference. My wife is getting really tired of hearing from me about how much I like this new bike.

practical

I agree with this advice.

practical

I agree with this observation and advice.

dfrench52 

Thanks for all of the suggestions... a bike fitter suggested a custom build might be one solution. She just happens to work at an LBS that has a working relationship with a couple of builders. Still ... that's a lot of money. Might be money well-spent, though.

I've considered steerer extenders and a shorter stem. I'm not sure how short is too short of a stem before handling might be affected. A 57cm top tube might mean a 9cm extension. And not many bikes I've seen on Ebay have 57cm TT and (what would seem to be) the requisite 59 cm seat tube. A more typical 58cm top tube would possibly mean an 8cm stem.

WSD is something I haven't considered. It might work if custom looks to expensive.

JohnJ80

I did the route with raising the bars - I was able to do it with a stem at a higher angle which also brings the bars in a bit. All of that was helpful.

That said, the custom frame was still an order of magnitude better fit. While that is going to matter on a case by case basis, it sure worked for me. As far as expense goes, it meant buying only one bike instead of two or more.

J.

fietsbob

The long leg-short torso is what a Womans specific design is offered to help. as it is often the Gender's Proportions. Terry.

Of course small wheel Bike Fridays cure the short reach and Toe clip overlap issues..

Shimagnolo

I'm 6'1", but have the legs of someone at least 6'4".
The first thing I do on every bike is use a zero-setback seatpost.