Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Fitting Your Bike
Reload this Page >

Advice Needed - I Was Told My Bike Is Too Small

Fitting Your Bike Are you confused about how you should fit a bike to your particular body dimensions? Have you been reading, found the terms Merxx or French Fit, and don’t know what you need? Every style of riding is different- in how you fit the bike to you, and the sizing of the bike itself. It’s more than just measuring your height, reach and inseam. With the help of Bike Fitting, you’ll be able to find the right fit for your frame size, style of riding, and your particular dimensions. Here ya’ go…..the location for everything fit related.

Advice Needed - I Was Told My Bike Is Too Small

Old 01-02-19, 11:20 PM
  #1  
fusero
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Advice Needed - I Was Told My Bike Is Too Small


Good evening cyclists! I really need your help.

A little background. I'm 220lbs and 5' 10".

Last year I invested in a nice surly pacer purchased at a very nice bike shop where the owner spent a very long time dialing it in by having me pedaling on a trainer, changing stems, adjusting the saddle, etc. He recommended a 52cm pacer with the shortest stem possible. The bike is small, but I feel great riding it. (I have a belly and short arms.)

Two weeks ago I bought a used Surly Disc Trucker on craigslist. Beautiful bike. The bike is a 52cm frame with 26" wheels. The top tube length is similar in length to my pacer, but the standover is 3 inches shorter.

I was very happy with my purchase until someone mentioned the bike looks small on me.

It's stupid, but this changed the way I feel about the bike.

My questions are as follow: How much is too much standover height? Is it possible that 3" is too much? Since I was told my bike is too small for me I feel cramped, but I think it's just psychological. The obvious thing is for me to ride it a bit more to get a better feel, but I still need to know your take.

I'm including a couple pictures. Let me know what you think.














Last edited by fusero; 01-02-19 at 11:36 PM. Reason: Photos
fusero is offline  
Old 01-02-19, 11:37 PM
  #2  
Mitkraft
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Posts: 116
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 41 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Subscribed because I want to see others replies. I’m of the understanding that if the seat height, fore aft position, reach and bar height can be adjusted to suit you then it should be fine. My road bike has a compact frame so I have a decent bit of standover height but it fits me pretty well as far as I can tell. I don’t think standover height means all that much.
Mitkraft is offline  
Old 01-03-19, 03:04 PM
  #3  
phughes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,125
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by fusero View Post

Good evening cyclists! I really need your help.

A little background. I'm 220lbs and 5' 10".

Last year I invested in a nice surly pacer purchased at a very nice bike shop where the owner spent a very long time dialing it in by having me pedaling on a trainer, changing stems, adjusting the saddle, etc. He recommended a 52cm pacer with the shortest stem possible. The bike is small, but I feel great riding it. (I have a belly and short arms.)

Two weeks ago I bought a used Surly Disc Trucker on craigslist. Beautiful bike. The bike is a 52cm frame with 26" wheels. The top tube length is similar in length to my pacer, but the standover is 3 inches shorter.

I was very happy with my purchase until someone mentioned the bike looks small on me.

It's stupid, but this changed the way I feel about the bike.

My questions are as follow: How much is too much standover height? Is it possible that 3" is too much? Since I was told my bike is too small for me I feel cramped, but I think it's just psychological. The obvious thing is for me to ride it a bit more to get a better feel, but I still need to know your take.

I'm including a couple pictures. Let me know what you think.













First and foremost is how you feel on the bike, and if you have any pain. For me, I will say that I am 5' 10 1/2" and ride a 56cm LHT with 26 inch wheels. At the moment I have a 100mm stem. I could easily ride a 54cm, but I would not go to a 52cm. The 56cm frame rides nice for me, and is extremely stable with a load, any load I have had on it, including a large flight case, the largest allowed by airlines without being charges an oversized fee, on top of the rear rack that put the total bike/load weight to over 85 pounds, much of it up high in the back. I rode that in the Ozarks in the hills, with speeds that hit 40mph downhill and it was stable. There is no way I would do that with a 52cm, at my size.

In the one picture, your foot is midfoot on the pedal, I'm not sure if that is a product of the fit, or just something you do naturally. I would say it is probably slightly undersized for you, but, once again, fit is a personal thing. The stem does look rather short, and you can easily change that if necessary. If you are comfortable, don't worry about it. If not, you could make small changes to the fit of the bike and be fine. It doesn't rally matter what anyone else thinks about how it looks. What matters is that it is comfortable for you, and rides the way you like. A 54cm would probably fit better as it comes from Surly, but you found one used, probably got a decent deal on it, and there is no reason why you can't make it it if it doesn't feel right. Standover doesn't matter as long as you have some. Having plenty isn't a bad thing.

Oh, and really nice looking bike. Looks like you got a nice one. Enjoy it.
phughes is offline  
Old 01-03-19, 06:39 PM
  #4  
Brian25
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 649

Bikes: Road, mountain and track bikes and tandems.

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 237 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
A surly is a touring bike. I do not know if you have any intention of touring on it? 99% of bicycle tourists are riding on too big a bike. They simply neglect to consider that when they put things on the rear rack, they have to get use to putting their foot over the top tube. (to mount). So a bike with a lower top tube (even a ladies type of frame) has advantages, while a high top tube actually has no advantages. Another basic rule of thumb is that you should have more seat post showing than the size of the head tube.
Brian25 is offline  
Old 01-03-19, 08:57 PM
  #5  
phughes
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,125
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 220 Post(s)
Liked 12 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian25 View Post
A surly is a touring bike. I do not know if you have any intention of touring on it? 99% of bicycle tourists are riding on too big a bike. They simply neglect to consider that when they put things on the rear rack, they have to get use to putting their foot over the top tube. (to mount). So a bike with a lower top tube (even a ladies type of frame) has advantages, while a high top tube actually has no advantages. Another basic rule of thumb is that you should have more seat post showing than the size of the head tube.
I actually believe the opposite. I see too many on bikes smaller than they probably should be on for touring, since it is nice to have a larger frame to allow you the option to get the bars up higher when you use a larger frame vs a smaller one. As for mounting, I have no issues mounting mine when fully loaded and I don't have three inches of standover. However, that too is simply opinion based on my likes. I do understand your point on that matter though. Bikes with a sloping top tube can be nice for that reason. I still like the traditional top tube design of the LHT.

I have on occasion thought about switching to a 54cm frame, but it would be pointless since in the end, I would end up with the same fit, since I would end up with the same seat height, and would set the reach with a different stem. I would simply end up with a more compact frame, more seat post showing, and more spacers under the stem.

I forgot to post this earlier, here is a spreadsheet from the Long Haul Trucker group that shows various setups by LHT owners, including their measurements. You will find others who are also 5' 10" who are on 52cm LHTs as well, so it is not unusual. And once again, if the bike is comfortable for you, that is the most important consideration.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...BGQ/edit#gid=0

Last edited by phughes; 01-03-19 at 09:02 PM.
phughes is offline  
Old 01-04-19, 12:01 PM
  #6  
woodcraft
Senior Member
 
woodcraft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 4,135
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 988 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 12 Times in 6 Posts
Think of it as giving you a pro look, as pros often ride way small frames.

I find the limiting factor to be knees hitting the bars, & especially bar end shifters, when standing climbing.

Stand-over doesn't matter much, unless it's too little, & you can easily use a longer stem if you start to feel cramped.
woodcraft is offline  
Old 01-04-19, 12:37 PM
  #7  
Dave Mayer
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,766
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 574 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
I recommend ignoring nominal bike sizes as quoted by manufacturers. You have to obtain the frame dimensions, and then ride it.

There is one critical measurement on a bike, and that is the length of the top tube - measured horizontally - center to center. Also referred to as effective top tube (ETT). Other bike dimensions can be changed by swapping parts, but not the inherent frame size, as measured by the ETT.

For someone around 5'10", my first rough estimate is that you need a ETT of somewhere between 55 and 57cm.

The stem length and rise comes next. For an averaged size road frame, stem lengths in the 90-110mm range make sense. If you have to install something outside of that range, then you've picked the wrong bike.

you do look cramped on the Surley. But you are running a super-short stem and a zero-setback post. You can stretch the bike out somewhat by swapping these parts out.
Dave Mayer is offline  
Old 01-04-19, 03:21 PM
  #8  
FrenchFit 
The Left Coast, USA
 
FrenchFit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,681

Bikes: Bulls, Bianchi, Koga, Trek, Miyata

Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 314 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by fusero View Post



I'm including a couple pictures. Let me know what you think.

Yep, you could easily ride a 54cm frame, or 56cm if you gain some flexibility. But...it doesn't really matter as long as you are comfortable for distance. I ride a 60cm frames (5'11.5"), but have ridden a 54cm fixie & cross bike, and a 18" MTB - no problems.

Ride your ride, not someone's else's opinions.
FrenchFit is offline  
Old 01-04-19, 06:02 PM
  #9  
exmechanic89
Senior Member
 
exmechanic89's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Richmond VA area
Posts: 2,725

Bikes: '00 Koga Miyata Full Pro Oval Road bike.

Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 474 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Sorry to say, way too small in my opinion. Good fit is very important, that is not a good fit.
exmechanic89 is offline  
Old 01-06-19, 01:24 AM
  #10  
tangerineowl
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Oz
Posts: 548

Bikes: Curve Grovel v2 ti

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 133 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
If your riding style is going to remain upright like that, then I'd say its fine.

I'm 5'9.5" and ride a 52cm. My arms are a little on the shorter side and I have a 34" inseam.
A shorter-reach with taller-stack is what I look for in a frame.
tangerineowl is offline  
Old 01-09-19, 01:08 PM
  #11  
BrocLuno
Senior Member
 
BrocLuno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Kalifornia Kollective
Posts: 353

Bikes: K2 (Marzocchi/Fox), Trek 6000 (red) MARS Elite up front, Specialized Hardrock Sport -> eBike (R7 Elite up front), lastly TREK 820 loaner. Recently sold Peugeot du Monde Record and 1956 Schwinn (owned since new).

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 75 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Firstly, congrats on having two bikes. It's nice to have a change now and then. Second, 26" wheels often look small now days. A low stand-over, yeah. It has benefits. Your leg angle looks OK. Your arm stretch looks OK. You feel good.

So some jerk made a comment who is not you and does not ride like you, so what !!

I have three bikes and they all have different top tubes and different stand-overs, but they all have the same saddle to crank center and the same reach. They have the numbers I find most comfortable. That's what matters.

If the stem and the seatpost would not get you where you need to be, yeah it might make a difference. But having a lower CG and load height are good things. You are doing fine

A lot of folks go for the biggest frame that will work with short seatpost extension (showing). And that is what was cool, back in the 1970's. I think those look awkward ...

Then came MTBs with low stand-over and dropper seatposts and BMX bikes with similar geometry. Now, some gravel bikes are leaning the same way. There are plenty of times where a low stand-over is a really cool thing.

Just make it your adventure bike with some cool Schwalbe Marathon Cross tires for the odd adventure off pavement and add a little front mud fender to the bottom of the down tube and you'll be there

Last edited by BrocLuno; 01-09-19 at 01:23 PM.
BrocLuno is offline  
Old 01-09-19, 01:54 PM
  #12  
wphamilton
Senior Member
 
wphamilton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 14,386

Bikes: Nashbar Road

Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2429 Post(s)
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
I agree that it does look small. Your position riding it looks OK to me. I'd say that if it doesn't bother you, don't worry about it but if you do change the bike, or can without too much hassle, size up a little.
wphamilton is offline  
Old 01-12-19, 03:27 PM
  #13  
Carbonfiberboy 
just another gosling
 
Carbonfiberboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 14,800

Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004

Mentioned: 82 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1722 Post(s)
Liked 14 Times in 12 Posts
Yep, way, way too small. Looks like a toy under you.
__________________
Results matter
Carbonfiberboy is offline  
Old 01-28-19, 02:02 PM
  #14  
fietsbob 
coprolite
 
fietsbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NW,Oregon Coast
Posts: 40,923

Bikes: 8

Mentioned: 182 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6558 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 64 Times in 57 Posts
Cool N-1, n+1

Straddle test flat footed standing over the bike ahead of the saddle, put 1 hand on the stem, and the other on the saddle


lift the bike as far as you can ... how much air space is under the tires? more than 3" ?


Im 5'10, OI have a 56, a 57, and a 58 cm frame size bike ..

good thing is the LHTD will be easy to resell ..






if you want the racks remove them before you sell the bike , and refit them on a larger size of the same.. they did not come stock, someone added them..







....

Last edited by fietsbob; 01-28-19 at 02:10 PM.
fietsbob is online now  
Old 02-20-19, 02:31 AM
  #15  
ArmChairRider
Senior Member
 
ArmChairRider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 217

Bikes: 630 Beach Bike Schwinn Hurricane ATB

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Put some ape hanger handlebars on it. That way you'll be able to straighten out your back for leisure riding and the bike will look bigger.
ArmChairRider is offline  
Old 02-20-19, 08:48 AM
  #16  
DaveSSS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 5,196

Bikes: Look KG461, Colnago C-RS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 65 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
One thing that makes the bike so small is the short, high rise stem. A longer stem with less angle to it will make it fit larger. Anyone who has a belly to deal with isn't going to want a the bars real low. Just about any bike can be made to fit the same as the next size larger, just using a different stem. Moving the saddle back can also help. A lot of bike shops use KOP to set the saddle position. IME, that's usually too far forward.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 02-20-19, 09:07 AM
  #17  
Lemond1985
Sophomore Member
 
Lemond1985's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Posts: 1,268
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 684 Post(s)
Liked 66 Times in 55 Posts
Bike shops seem to love putting people on frames that are (IMO) too small. I'm 5-10" and prefer a 56-58 cm frame. I can't explain, it just "feels right". This, after years of riding 54's and 55's. YMMV.

Some people just prefer smaller frames, but I'm not one of them. I get that a small frame is much more "flickable", but I just loathe the feeling of riding a frame that's a size too small, or feels like it is. And I'm not convinced that longer stems and seatposts can ever correct this.
Lemond1985 is offline  
Old 02-21-19, 11:26 AM
  #18  
Clem von Jones
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 90 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Surly bikes are long and low relative to other bikes, especially to vintage bikes. It's easy to become temporarily fixated with the idea your bike is too large or too small, I've done that with every bike I've owned. Eventually you'll get over it.
Clem von Jones is offline  
Old 03-01-19, 12:26 PM
  #19  
indyfabz
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 21,876
Mentioned: 156 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8212 Post(s)
Liked 99 Times in 73 Posts
Shoot. My ex-GF is 5' even and rides a 44cm LHT with 26" wheels. I am 6'2" and ride a 60cm with 700c wheels. I could do a 58cm LHT, but I like a little more bike under me when I tour.
indyfabz is online now  
Old 03-03-19, 07:44 PM
  #20  
AnthonyG
Senior Member
 
AnthonyG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Queanbeyan, Australia.
Posts: 3,828
Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1534 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Could you ride a larger frame? Definitely yet I don't see this bike as being excessively small.

For a horizontal top tube bike you do have a bit of seatpost exposed yet I don't think its that excessive.
The main difference between your current frame or a larger frame would be the balance between handlebar height and handlebar reach. Your current small frame has a shorter handlebar reach yet a lower handlebar height. A larger frame would nominally give you a longer reach to the handlebars yet a corresponding higher handlebar height.

I'm talking average differences here. Different brands and models have different relationships between heigh and reach built into their frames.
AnthonyG is offline  
Old 05-14-19, 12:48 AM
  #21  
larsbb
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
It looks a bit small. Are you able to put the seat up, more than it is already? More importantly: Does it feel to small?
larsbb is offline  
Old 05-18-19, 08:13 AM
  #22  
Loose Chain
Senior Member
 
Loose Chain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,902

Bikes: 84 Pinarello Trevisio, 86 Guerciotti SLX, 96 Specialized Stumpjumper, 2010 Surly Cross Check, 88 Centurion Prestige, 73 Raleigh Sports, GT Force, Bridgestone MB4

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 5 Posts
I am 5-11 (and shrinking), so maybe 5-10, 146 pounds. I ride a Surly CC at 54cm. I prefer an aggressive saddle to bar positioning and prefer the smaller side of my fit range, coming from a competitive back ground. You are a big guy OP. You appear to have a long torso, shorter legs and arms, I would say the bike fits you but is on the smaller side of your fit range. Fit range, what do I mean by that, well, bicycles are not all the same and neither are people and most bicycles and people can accommodate one another over a range of size due to adjustability of the frame and preference on the part of the cyclist.

As long as you have full and proper extension of your legs without over extending the seat post, are not scrunched up on top and can get aero (since it does have drops), then you are okay.
Loose Chain is offline  
Old 05-18-19, 08:19 AM
  #23  
Loose Chain
Senior Member
 
Loose Chain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,902

Bikes: 84 Pinarello Trevisio, 86 Guerciotti SLX, 96 Specialized Stumpjumper, 2010 Surly Cross Check, 88 Centurion Prestige, 73 Raleigh Sports, GT Force, Bridgestone MB4

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 203 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by Clem von Jones View Post
Surly bikes are long and low relative to other bikes, especially to vintage bikes. It's easy to become temporarily fixated with the idea your bike is too large or too small, I've done that with every bike I've owned. Eventually you'll get over it.
This is a true statement. If you normally ride a 56cm "classic" fit or "square" fit being 56cm ST and 56cm eTT, both center to center, then with a Surley Cross Check or LHT you should consider sizing down to a 54cm and likewise for the other frame sizes. The 54cm Cross Check has a long top tube and a high bottom bracket since it is technically a cycle cross bicycle. Go by the eTT length for frame sizing as long as you can get full and proper leg extension.
Loose Chain is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

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