So, how big is too big?
#26
Have bike, will travel
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Lake Geneva, WI
Posts: 12,284
Bikes: Ridley Helium SLX, Canyon Endurance SL, De Rosa Professional, Eddy Merckx Corsa Extra, Schwinn Paramount (1 painted, 1 chrome), Peugeot PX10, Serotta Nova X, Simoncini Cyclocross Special, Raleigh Roker, Pedal Force CG2 and CX2
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 910 Post(s)
Liked 288 Times
in
158 Posts
I'm also 5' 11" and I ride an identical 25 inch Peugeot PX10. I do use a shorter 100mm stem on this bike and need a stem this length on any large frame if the top-tube is nearly 60cm long. Cyclist who ride modern compact frames often tell me the bike is too big, but I ignore them. This bike fits and I like the taller head-tube that comes with a frame this size.
My ideal size is a 24 inch with a 59cm top-tube and a 110mm stem. Bike frames smaller than this usually can't be made to fit in my experience.
Below are some of my larger bikes;
My ideal size is a 24 inch with a 59cm top-tube and a 110mm stem. Bike frames smaller than this usually can't be made to fit in my experience.
Below are some of my larger bikes;
#27
The Huffmeister
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: The Le Grande HQ
Posts: 2,741
Bikes: '79 Trek 938, '86 Jim Merz Allez SE, '90 Miyata 1000, '68 PX-10, '80 PXN-10, '73 Super Course, '87 Guerciotti, '83 Trek 600, '80 Huffy Le Grande
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1227 Post(s)
Liked 3,561 Times
in
1,412 Posts
I'm also 5' 11" and I ride an identical 25 inch Peugeot PX10. I do use a shorter 100mm stem on this bike and need a stem this length on any large frame if the top-tube is nearly 60cm long. Cyclist who ride modern compact frames often tell me the bike is too big, but I ignore them. This bike fits and I like the taller head-tube that comes with a frame this size.
My ideal size is a 24 inch with a 59cm top-tube and a 110mm stem. Bike frames smaller than this usually can't be made to fit in my experience.
Below are some of my larger bikes;
My ideal size is a 24 inch with a 59cm top-tube and a 110mm stem. Bike frames smaller than this usually can't be made to fit in my experience.
Below are some of my larger bikes;
I just ordered a shorter stem last night, so I will be playing around with all this stuff. Someone earlier in the thread suggested that I set it up with the same saddle nose -to- handlebar length as my other well-setup bikes, but the thing is, I don't know if I have a single bike setup right now that is considered 'well setup'. They are all projects and all in process. Nothing is really set in stone. I keep waffling between cruiser bar setups and drop setups (honestly, I like both), and still trying to make my way around the fit.
I might just setup the PX10 as a cruiser bar style. I've already got my Zebrakenko with drop bars and that bike fills the need there, as it is very fast. Gliding around in upright comfort feels like it should be more French, anyway
#28
Smile a mile bike provide
At 5ft 10" i prefer larger sized bikes for sure , dont ask me why
I have a couple of 23" and bigger frames that i prefer riding over the smaller ones in the stable , this old 50's Raleigh is one of them
I have a couple of 23" and bigger frames that i prefer riding over the smaller ones in the stable , this old 50's Raleigh is one of them
#29
Calamari Marionette Ph.D
#30
Calamari Marionette Ph.D
#31
working on my sandal tan
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: CID
Posts: 22,629
Bikes: 1991 Bianchi Eros, 1964 Armstrong, 1988 Diamondback Ascent, 1988 Bianchi Premio, 1987 Bianchi Sport SX, 1980s Raleigh mixte (hers), All-City Space Horse (hers)
Mentioned: 98 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3871 Post(s)
Liked 2,568 Times
in
1,579 Posts
No bike shop would put me on this. Not quite a fistful of seatpost, but I have just enough clearance to stand over it.
57cm center-to-center square, I'm somewhere between 5'7" and 5'8", depending on time of day.
57cm center-to-center square, I'm somewhere between 5'7" and 5'8", depending on time of day.
#32
Banned
this looks too big ... https://i.imgur.com/nwxKmNZ.jpg
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seattle WA
Posts: 2,841
Bikes: 2009 Handsome Devil, 1987 Trek 520 Cirrus, 1978 Motobecane Grand Touring, 1987 Nishiki Cresta GT, 1989 Specialized Allez Former bikes; 1986 Miyata Trail Runner, 1979 Miyata 912, 2011 VO Rando, 1999 Cannondale R800, 1986 Schwinn Passage
Mentioned: 72 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 796 Post(s)
Liked 522 Times
in
367 Posts
I'm also 5'11" but that is because of an especially long torso, I have the legs of a 5' 8" person so the sizing thing is tricky for me, I can kinda sorta ride a 25" frame but like the fit of a 23", the stand over is um snug, but the top tubes fit right and I am going to be riding the bike not standing over it right? The now departed Schwinn Passage was a good fit. Although if I slammed the saddle and got a short stem maybe a 25 would work... nah that's crazy......but...hmmm
IMG_1732 by Ryan Surface, on Flickr
IMG_1732 by Ryan Surface, on Flickr
#34
Senior Member
#35
verktyg
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 4,030
Bikes: Current favorites: 1988 Peugeot Birraritz, 1984 Gitane Super Corsa, 1980s DeRosa, 1981 Bianchi Campione Del Mondo, 1992 Paramount OS, 1988 Colnago Technos, 1985 RalieghUSA SBDU Team Pro
Mentioned: 207 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1036 Post(s)
Liked 1,238 Times
in
654 Posts
All this talk about frame size and top tube length are meaningless compared to the most critical dimension: STAND OVER HEIGHT!
Unless someone enjoys rolling on the ground in exquisite agony after a close encounter between the family jewels and the top tube (applies to women too), for common sense and safety sake a rider should be able to straddle the top tube with both feet firmly planted on the ground after after an unexpected dismount.
When you come to an emergency stop, as you come off the saddle, your knees are going to flex a little as your feet hit the ground - natural shock absorbers.
I like to allow at least 1" of clearance standing over the top tube in riding shorts and shoes.
I was 5'11" at one time but I've been loosing the battle against gravity and I'm now 5'9". I have a very long torso with short legs and neck. I wear 28 1/2" inseam pants and have a bear of a time finding long shirts and extra long T-shirts.
I can still ride 54cm to 57cm frames but 55cm-56cm fit me best. I also like short top tubes with my seat all the way forward and 70mm to 80mm stems. This allows me to ride in a more upright position and also to be able to look through my glasses not over the top.
One thing that I noticed over the years is that my 57cm bikes are a little smoother riding than a comparably equipped 54cm frame.
verktyg
Unless someone enjoys rolling on the ground in exquisite agony after a close encounter between the family jewels and the top tube (applies to women too), for common sense and safety sake a rider should be able to straddle the top tube with both feet firmly planted on the ground after after an unexpected dismount.
When you come to an emergency stop, as you come off the saddle, your knees are going to flex a little as your feet hit the ground - natural shock absorbers.
I like to allow at least 1" of clearance standing over the top tube in riding shorts and shoes.
I was 5'11" at one time but I've been loosing the battle against gravity and I'm now 5'9". I have a very long torso with short legs and neck. I wear 28 1/2" inseam pants and have a bear of a time finding long shirts and extra long T-shirts.
I can still ride 54cm to 57cm frames but 55cm-56cm fit me best. I also like short top tubes with my seat all the way forward and 70mm to 80mm stems. This allows me to ride in a more upright position and also to be able to look through my glasses not over the top.
One thing that I noticed over the years is that my 57cm bikes are a little smoother riding than a comparably equipped 54cm frame.
verktyg
__________________
Don't believe everything you think! History is written by those who weren't there....
Chas. ;-)
Don't believe everything you think! History is written by those who weren't there....
Chas. ;-)
Last edited by verktyg; 05-17-18 at 04:00 AM.
#36
Calamari Marionette Ph.D
#37
Senior Member
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Hampshire, UK
Posts: 225
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 31 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I'd agree that big frames tend to feel better when you ride them. My main concern is being able to get at least a toe down when I pull up at a junction, so that I don't up arse over tit in a heap in the road.
I'm not too fussed about stand-over height, as I would be in the middle of crashing if that were a concern, and I'd be more worried about bouncing my face off the scenery or other traffic in that scenario.
I'm not too fussed about stand-over height, as I would be in the middle of crashing if that were a concern, and I'd be more worried about bouncing my face off the scenery or other traffic in that scenario.
#40
multimodal commuter
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,808
Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...
Mentioned: 584 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1908 Post(s)
Liked 574 Times
in
339 Posts
In my experience, people tend to like a slightly smaller frame size than they think they will. Many times I've heard someone say "I love this bike I just got, and it's not even my size! I just need to find one that's a little bigger, and it will be perfect!" I've had this thought many times. But I've never heard the corresponding story, that they got the bigger one, and it was perfect.
So, if your frame is near the maximum size that you can ride, I have a strong suspicion you'll be happier on a frame one or even two sizes smaller.
So, if your frame is near the maximum size that you can ride, I have a strong suspicion you'll be happier on a frame one or even two sizes smaller.
__________________
www.rhmsaddles.com.
www.rhmsaddles.com.
#41
Full Member
In my experience, people tend to like a slightly smaller frame size than they think they will. Many times I've heard someone say "I love this bike I just got, and it's not even my size! I just need to find one that's a little bigger, and it will be perfect!" I've had this thought many times. But I've never heard the corresponding story, that they got the bigger one, and it was perfect.
So, if your frame is near the maximum size that you can ride, I have a strong suspicion you'll be happier on a frame one or even two sizes smaller.
So, if your frame is near the maximum size that you can ride, I have a strong suspicion you'll be happier on a frame one or even two sizes smaller.
I've build similarly-appointed fixed gears from six or seven frames, including a 58cm Maxway, 60cm Treks (560, 400) and Centurions (Ironman!), but my favorite is this 63cm Super Strada:
I think that fit--especially stack height--is a big part of this effect. But something equally important is how the larger frames flex more. For a rider of modest wattage, this brings out both the liveliness and the forgiveness of the steel.
#42
Partially Sane.
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Sunny Sacramento.
Posts: 3,559
Bikes: Soma Saga, pre-disc
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 972 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 643 Times
in
468 Posts
My experience has been the opposite. At 6' with 36'' inseam, I started out on 58cm frames. My c&v addiction led me to test ride a lot of stuff I wouldn't otherwise have tried. The first time I straddled my 25'' Circuit, I thought "for the price, I will try to make this work." But the shakedown ride the next day was revelatory.
I've build similarly-appointed fixed gears from six or seven frames, including a 58cm Maxway, 60cm Treks (560, 400) and Centurions (Ironman!), but my favorite is this 63cm Super Strada:
I think that fit--especially stack height--is a big part of this effect. But something equally important is how the larger frames flex more. For a rider of modest wattage, this brings out both the liveliness and the forgiveness of the steel.
I've build similarly-appointed fixed gears from six or seven frames, including a 58cm Maxway, 60cm Treks (560, 400) and Centurions (Ironman!), but my favorite is this 63cm Super Strada:
I think that fit--especially stack height--is a big part of this effect. But something equally important is how the larger frames flex more. For a rider of modest wattage, this brings out both the liveliness and the forgiveness of the steel.
But since I ride aluminum now, there's pretty much no flex, so it's no longer an issue. It makes you think, though.
BTW, I ride 25", with less than a fistful of post.
#43
Mr. Anachronism
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Somewhere west of Tobie's
Posts: 2,087
Bikes: fillet-brazed Chicago Schwinns, and some other stuff
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked 256 Times
in
165 Posts
I'm 6' tall with short legs long torso. I could ride a 57cm if my back was a bit more flexible. 58cm is doable but a tad small. 59 and 60cm are my best fit. 61-62cm are a bit big but I like the way they ride. 63cm is too big but was a popular size back in the day and its rideable.
I have an odd body shape, so my legs are short and my torso is longer, so for me I think a bigger bike with a longer top would be nice for riding, but I hate getting on a bike I cannot stand over! I ride a 51/52cm bike, but tried a 56cm once that felt really good riding, but getting on was weird because I did not come close to standing over it.
I'm also 5'11" but that is because of an especially long torso, I have the legs of a 5' 8" person so the sizing thing is tricky for me, I can kinda sorta ride a 25" frame but like the fit of a 23", the stand over is um snug, but the top tubes fit right and I am going to be riding the bike not standing over it right? The now departed Schwinn Passage was a good fit. Although if I slammed the saddle and got a short stem maybe a 25 would work... nah that's crazy......but...hmmm
This '92 Specialized Crossroads will be my touring rig. It has a stumpy 53cm seat tube (C2C) with a whopping 60cm top tube, has cantis, and it can fit 700x42 tires.
This '89 Centurion Dave Scott Expert isn't quite as elongated as the Specialized, but it does have 57cm seat tube and a 59cm top tube (also C2C). This one should be just about perfect for my particular body size.
__________________
"My only true wisdom is in knowing I have none" -Socrates
"My only true wisdom is in knowing I have none" -Socrates
Likes For Hudson308:
#44
Senior Member
So I resemble some of these sizing comments and am also in search of a better fitting C&V frame from which to start messing with reach and stack, etc.
I've got an 86 Centurion Elite RS which is ok for my physique. I'm curious about the reported measurements of the 89 Expert.
The data below shows it to be more squarish (cannot tell if the seat measurement is C-C or C-T; if it's C-T then at least the top tube is a bit longer).
Centurion Ironman Expert (1987-1989)
Does anyone know if the 89 DS Master was in some way a departure from the other Ironman frame geometries?
I've got an 86 Centurion Elite RS which is ok for my physique. I'm curious about the reported measurements of the 89 Expert.
The data below shows it to be more squarish (cannot tell if the seat measurement is C-C or C-T; if it's C-T then at least the top tube is a bit longer).
Centurion Ironman Expert (1987-1989)
Does anyone know if the 89 DS Master was in some way a departure from the other Ironman frame geometries?
#45
Mr. Anachronism
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Somewhere west of Tobie's
Posts: 2,087
Bikes: fillet-brazed Chicago Schwinns, and some other stuff
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked 256 Times
in
165 Posts
So I resemble some of these sizing comments and am also in search of a better fitting C&V frame from which to start messing with reach and stack, etc.
I've got an 86 Centurion Elite RS which is ok for my physique. I'm curious about the reported measurements of the 89 Expert.
The data below shows it to be more squarish (cannot tell if the seat measurement is C-C or C-T; if it's C-T then at least the top tube is a bit longer).
Centurion Ironman Expert (1987-1989)
Does anyone know if the 89 DS Master was in some way a departure from the other Ironman frame geometries?
I've got an 86 Centurion Elite RS which is ok for my physique. I'm curious about the reported measurements of the 89 Expert.
The data below shows it to be more squarish (cannot tell if the seat measurement is C-C or C-T; if it's C-T then at least the top tube is a bit longer).
Centurion Ironman Expert (1987-1989)
Does anyone know if the 89 DS Master was in some way a departure from the other Ironman frame geometries?
I'll try to verify the measurements with a photo.
__________________
"My only true wisdom is in knowing I have none" -Socrates
"My only true wisdom is in knowing I have none" -Socrates
Likes For Hudson308:
#46
Senior Member
One reason for this may be that Centurion was using center-to-top measurement for the seat tube. That's pretty standard, but I prefer center-to-center, to remove all the variations created by different seat cluster configurations.
I'll try to verify the measurements with a photo.
I'll try to verify the measurements with a photo.
https://www.bikeforums.net/19118661-post24.html
#47
Mr. Anachronism
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Somewhere west of Tobie's
Posts: 2,087
Bikes: fillet-brazed Chicago Schwinns, and some other stuff
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 526 Post(s)
Liked 256 Times
in
165 Posts
__________________
"My only true wisdom is in knowing I have none" -Socrates
"My only true wisdom is in knowing I have none" -Socrates
Likes For Hudson308:
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Menomonee Falls, WI
Posts: 1,834
Bikes: 1984 Schwinn Supersport, 1988 Trek 400T, 1977 Trek TX900, 1982 Bianchi Champione del Mondo, 1978 Raleigh Supercourse, 1986 Trek 400 Elance, 1991 Waterford PDG OS Paramount, 1971 Schwinn Sports Tourer, 1985 Trek 670
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 604 Post(s)
Liked 1,064 Times
in
535 Posts
I really can’t stand over this bike without touching, but it’s one of my favorites. Much rather too big, then too small.
Tim
1992 Waterford Paramount OS
Tim
1992 Waterford Paramount OS
#49
Senior Member
Here's a quick verification of the 57cm seat tube (center-to-center), and 59cm top tube on my '89 Ironman Expert. Yes, it's the same frame that I shared above. Please forgive the poor pictures. You're forcing me to reveal details of a project I'm not ready to unveil yet!
Last edited by KiwiMtnClmbr; 06-02-20 at 08:32 PM.
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Back in Lincoln Sq, Chicago...🙄
Posts: 1,609
Bikes: '84 Miyata 610 ‘91 Cannondale ST600,'83 Trek 720 ‘84 Trek 520, 620, ‘91 Miyata 1000LT, '79 Trek 514, '78 Trek 706, '73 Raleigh Int. frame.
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 685 Post(s)
Liked 370 Times
in
219 Posts
All this talk about frame size and top tube length are meaningless compared to the most critical dimension: STAND OVER HEIGHT!
Unless someone enjoys rolling on the ground in exquisite agony after a close encounter between the family jewels and the top tube (applies to women too), for common sense and safety sake a rider should be able to straddle the top tube with both feet firmly planted on the ground after after an unexpected dismount.
When you come to an emergency stop, as you come off the saddle, your knees are going to flex a little as your feet hit the ground - natural shock absorbers.
I like to allow at least 1" of clearance standing over the top tube in riding shorts and shoes.
I was 5'11" at one time but I've been loosing the battle against gravity and I'm now 5'9". I have a very long torso with short legs and neck. I wear 28 1/2" inseam pants and have a bear of a time finding long shirts and extra long T-shirts.
I can still ride 54cm to 57cm frames but 55cm-56cm fit me best. I also like short top tubes with my seat all the way forward and 70mm to 80mm stems. This allows me to ride in a more upright position and also to be able to look through my glasses not over the top.
One thing that I noticed over the years is that my 57cm bikes are a little smoother riding than a comparably equipped 54cm frame.
verktyg
Unless someone enjoys rolling on the ground in exquisite agony after a close encounter between the family jewels and the top tube (applies to women too), for common sense and safety sake a rider should be able to straddle the top tube with both feet firmly planted on the ground after after an unexpected dismount.
When you come to an emergency stop, as you come off the saddle, your knees are going to flex a little as your feet hit the ground - natural shock absorbers.
I like to allow at least 1" of clearance standing over the top tube in riding shorts and shoes.
I was 5'11" at one time but I've been loosing the battle against gravity and I'm now 5'9". I have a very long torso with short legs and neck. I wear 28 1/2" inseam pants and have a bear of a time finding long shirts and extra long T-shirts.
I can still ride 54cm to 57cm frames but 55cm-56cm fit me best. I also like short top tubes with my seat all the way forward and 70mm to 80mm stems. This allows me to ride in a more upright position and also to be able to look through my glasses not over the top.
One thing that I noticed over the years is that my 57cm bikes are a little smoother riding than a comparably equipped 54cm frame.
verktyg
Flat footing a motorbike from the saddle is confidence inspiring but in no way a requirement. In an emergency stop you squeeze the brakes and stop the bike. When it stops it will lean to one side or the other, and that’s the foot you put out. With practice you can even lean it to a preferred side with consistency.
I can’t for the life of me imagine a scenario that would require you to stop and leap off the saddle to flat foot over the top tube.
Maybe it’s a habit people get into, maybe I just have a different set of programmed responses from wrangling a motored bicycle, but that’s my 2 bits.
Verktyg, I enjoy all of your postings immensely and with the utmost respect to you, I disagree!
Likes For Chr0m0ly: