emailsfh

Hello everyone, I'm just finishing up this touring bike build. I am about 5'6-1/2" with a PBH around 81cm (so long legs, short torso). This frame is a 51cm (C-T) with a 53cm TT. I am coming from a Trek 520 21" that was far too stretched out for me with a 55.5cm TT (purchased in 2004 when I didn't know how to properly size a bike and just stood over it, which with my long legs means I end up with a bigger bike than is comfortable).

Because of the long legs / short torso, I have struggled in the past with fitting a bike because seat has to go way up on bikes with a comfortable length top tube, but then I have a hard time getting the handlebars high enough to be comfortable (especially if the steerer was cut).

The bike is mostly set up properly in this pic as far as saddle height and position (I'm trying to get a more upright position than my road bike, and shorter cockpit than my looooong Trek). I may likely lower the handlebars a cm or two. The stem is a 90mm +6*. My main question with this frame is whether I should have gone for the 53cm frame (54 TT). Is there too much seat post showing? Partly this is just aesthetic because I know I can dial in the fit on either frame without any crazy component choices as far as stem, etc. But a taller frame would have made it easier to have saddle and handlebars more or less level without so much seatpost and steerer showing. (At 76cm standover, the frame feels pretty far below me, ~5cm.)

I haven't had a chance to ride it much because I'm having the fork replaced, but I can say this has been the easiest of all my bikes to be on the hoods and feel relatively comfortable. Sorry I don't have any pics of myself on the bike right now. (Obviously the bike is built and I can't return the frame, but I may be up to trade or wait for a used frame on eBay if I decide I'd be happier with a bigger size. For now, it will be ridden as is for the foreseeable future.)

Here's a pic as it is currently set up. To help with perspective, from the top of the TT to the top of my saddle is 21cm (total from BB is 72). Also note that the kickstand is down so back end is elevated. Any initial thoughts?

andr0id

Your seat height is fine even by old standards.

Your handle bar arrangement makes me go but if it works for you, more power to you.

emailsfh

Tell me more. I don't take offense.

deapee

53mm top tube at your height is on the large side already -- but again it's all about people's individual geometry. You *had* a 55.5, and it must have felt about an inch too long for you, so you dealt with it. You know better than us there.

Your stem has a lot of rise, but your bars are angled down to kind of negate the rise. Of course those bars are a little oddly shaped compared to what I'm used to. The way I see it (and I'm no pro), one would angle their bars down if they didn't feel like purchasing a lower stem...or they would angle their bars up to not have to buy a taller stem -- but it seems like you bought a taller stem then angled your bars down to negate the taller stem.

Again, I'm no pro -- I get my LBS to do all that stuff for me and just take their word for it, it's just what I've observed over the years. My above statements are just based on my unprofessional visual valuation of the corresponding pieces on the bike.

EDIT: just realized the back end is about 3-4 inches off the ground -- that could be throwing it off a lot.

emailsfh

The handlebars are called "dirt drops" and are kind of a niche thing among some mountain bikers and gravel bikes (Soma Portola bar for anyone interested). "Properly" set up they don't really function or fit like normal road drop bars. I wanted to try something a little different with this bike since it would be both a "gravel" style bike capable of some minor off road trails, as well as just a touring and commuter bike. They are a little tricky to set up and I'm not sure I have it dialed in yet as far as the angle. I'm planning to make them a little more level on the tops and angle the drops down slightly. Here is a picture of another touring bike with the same bars: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/479703797785695945/

My main question was about seatpost, not the handlebar setup which I know is not conventional. If I went with the 53cm frame (54TT), I'd probably have to be on a 80mm stem but wouldn't have to raise the bars or seat as high.

caloso

Even in the old style, that's not a crazy amount of seat post. I think it looks fine.

emailsfh

To help with perspective, from the top of the TT to the top of my saddle is 21cm measuring along the seat tube axis (total saddle height from BB is ~72).

Miele Man

I tried to look at the image on Flickr but it's private.
why do people post images that others can't view? That makes it very hard for us to help.

Cheers

emailsfh

Thanks for the heads up. I just fixed the link so it should be viewable by anyone.

Miele Man

Yes, I would have gone with a bigger frame. That junction of the head, toptube and downtube is a weak point on a frame that size because of twisting froces. It'd probably be okay but I'd have bought a frame with a taller headtube and thuse some separation of the toptube and downtube at the headtube. That is one of the advantages of a sloping toptube = you can have a taller headtube but still have decent standover height.

A lot of mountain bikes have a lot of exposed seatpost but the stack under your stem looks really high. Check that the fork steerer tube isn't flexing when you ride. That's an advantage threadles forks have over quill stems = a really tall quill stem like the height you requir would be pretty flexy because the wedge of the quill is below the top of the steerer.

I hope you get a lot of enjoyment out of your ride. If it fits YOU and is comfortable that's what's important.

Cheers

emailsfh

Thanks for the thorough analysis. The headtube strength wasn't something I'd heard of or considered before. I am also concerned about the amount of flex I might get with this combo, but hopefully if I lower the handlebars/quill adapter a bit it won't be as bad. We'll see.

Otherwise, after I get it finished I'll ride and see how I feel about it. I like the frame and wish someone with a 53cm would be up for a trade, but that might be pretty difficult to come by. I'll ask VO to give me a heads up if they get any customers who would be up for a trade because they purchased a 53 that was too big for them.

Miele Man

Hi again.

I couldn't tell in the image until I enlarged it that it was a quill to threadless adapter you had on it. The enlargement showed that the stem isn't as tall as I thought it was when I made my other post. Just make sure that the stem is at least two inches inside the steerer not just inside that top locknut on the fork. I would wrap a piece of tape around the stem right at the locknut then remove the stem and place it beside the headtube and then look to see if there's two inches of stem below the headtube where it meets the bottom of the top headset cup.

I'd also check and make sure there is at least two inches of seatpost below the top of the toptube not the top of the seattube which is an inch or so above the top of the toptube. I've seen seattubes get broken there when there wasn't enough seat post inside the seattube to stop the torquing that ridings causes.

Cheers

emailsfh

I'm pretty sure that both seat post and threadless adapter (this one) are several inches into the tubes as you say. The seat post is pretty long, and The threadless adapter has a minimum insertion line 7cm from the bottom and I have it slightly below that. Thanks again.

Miele Man

You're welcome. I only told you those things because I've seen frames that were broken because the seatpost was too high. I stopped helping a guy fix bikes for charity because he'd have a stem set above the minimum insetion mark by quite a bit. One had only about 1/2 inch inside the steerer tube itself and when i lowered it to the mininum insertion mark he raisded it again and said that the guy getting that bike needed the bars higher. Now I check every used bike I buy or work on to be sure both the seat and the stem are afely inserted. I didn't know how much experience you had with bikes and wantedto be sure that your bike was safe for you.

Happy riding and cheers

1855Cru

I like the bike, I'm actually thinking about building up a Campeur frame.

Your seatpost looks completely normal to me. Dirt drops are designed to be used by riding primarily drops. If you like to ride the hoods a lot, these are not the bars for you.

emailsfh

If you are a size 51-55 Campeur, you'll have to wait until August when they get the next shipment. If you're a 51cm, you can get in touch and we can work something out if I decide this size doesn't work for me. I think it is reasonably close though.

Yeah, I realize I am trying to use the dirt drops in a completely unconventional way. I feel like they could provide good options for commuting and touring once set up right. But it is tricky because you're right that the position on the hoods is hard to get right, and I do like the hoods. We'll see if they work out or not. I always felt most drop bars just drop too far for me because of the long legs and where my saddle is set.

oldbobcat

Sharp bike. If that's your correct saddle height, then you sized the bike perfectly. The shorter top tube is the right way to go, and long legged types usually end up with more seat post showing.

Regarding handlebar height, look at your arm length. If they are proportional to your upper body (short, that is: the T-Rex build), lower your handlebar cautiously or even not at all. If your arms are more proportional to your legs (long), then lower away, but do it in stages. Remember that you are trying to keep your spinal column straight, your elbows slightly bent, and your weight generally over your feet. You can figure this out yourself if you proceed cautiously and pay attention to your body.

jyl

I probably would have used a larger frame with shorter stem. But the bike you built looks fine.

emailsfh

Thanks, long arms here. That's why I think I'll be lowering the bars at some point.

1855Cru

I'm 5' 11" so I'm looking at the 55 and 57 (probably the latter)

As long as the standover height is not an issue for you, the 53 may work out better. It gives you an extra 20mm stack height but only increases reach by 4mm. I do find their geometry chart a bit odd. They use a 72.5deg HT angle for all their Campeur frames from 47cm to 63 cm except for the 51 and 53 which are slacker 71 deg. This has the odd effect of giving the 51 and 53 cm frames a longer wheelbase than the 55cm frame. It's another reason why I'm looking more at the 57cm as I think toe overlap may be an issue with the 55cm frame.

In terms of your Portola bar, it looks like you have it set correctly for it's intended use. If you try to level up the hoods, the drops will be pointing almost straight down and be almost unusual. If you like to have some flare look for one of the randonneur bars, they will allow much more natural use of both the hoods, bar and drops.

emailsfh

Yeah, standover is really low on these because of the low BB, so no issue there. This one is a good 5cm+ below my PB. I used a stem reach calculator and got the same 4mm number. I do think I could fit on both reasonably well, and the 53 might have offered some advantages. It might not be enough to be worth the trouble though unless I happen upon an easy trade or deal. I'll have a better sense after I've ridden it a while.

I noticed that about the wheelbase also, and thought there was an error until I saw the angles. Looks like they had to make some compromises to keep 700c wheels on those smaller sizes and still put the wheel far enough out for toe overlap and fenders, etc. They also gave the smaller frames a longer rake to keep the trail numbers in the mid range where they want them.

Thanks for the rando bar suggestion. I'll check it out. Whatever tweaks I make on the Portola at this point will be very minor as it feels almost right, maybe push the brakes further out slightly and I might want to give the drops a nudge more angle down (it is just about pointing to the rear hub now, which is about right).

ThermionicScott 

There seems to be a trend toward long top tubes (or is it lower top tubes relative to the other dimensions...) on production steel frames that results in builds with tall stems and lots of seatpost (see also: Surly.) And that will be exacerbated when the bike needs to suit someone like you with long legs and a short torso. Aesthetically, I hate it, although functionally these builds end up working out.

I'm on the fence about whether going a size up on the frame with a shorter stem would make you happy, though. Having your hands over the front wheel's axle seem to make the steering easier, while the bigger frame with shorter stem (while subjectively looking better) would move the front axle out, making the steering fight you a little.

Women's specific design (WSD) bikes might be something to look into, since women typically have longer legs and shorter torsos and arms relative to men of the same height. Or if you've got the bucks, a custom frame. Good luck.

oldbobcat

That's one more reason you should not have selected a larger frame. The capability to lower the handlebar will become apparent.

Loose Chain

The saddle height looks normal to me, we are all different though but I like my bar tops a little lower but as you say, you have long legs and short torso so what you have there makes perfect sense to me.

emailsfh

Thanks for the feedback everyone. My replacement fork arrives Friday so hopefully I can have this built and ready to ride this weekend. I feel a little better about my size choice. We'll see how it feels after a few rides and some fine tuning of the fit.