Birota

I need help with sizing. I am buying a jamis renegade this weekend and I am really struggling with the right size. I am 6’2” with a 34” inseam. I have ridden a 58 and 61 and I’m confused. I like how I feel on the 58, but the shop says I should buy a 61. It seems to have a long reach. Stand over is fine on both. I have back and neck issues, so I don’t really want a super aggressive position. Help! This will be my first brand new bike.

Joeyseven

I do not know much about the Jamis Renegade Series but I'm about the same size as you.What model are you looking at and why does the bike shop thinks A 61 cm would be better?

61 cm is big.I think you got it right with the 58cm. 620 stack / 396 reach is A good
geometry for A endurance bike.With your pains I would look for A shop with A good
bike fitter. Jamis are very nice bikes,but I would not pull the trigger to fast on this one.
And welcome to BF forums.


https://www.bikeforums.net/cyclocros...de-owners.html

Birota

Thank you. The LBS has a bike fit guy who looked at me and said that his first thought would the 61. He points out that I would have the seat higher on the 58, and therefore be more hunched over/cramped. Currently the 61 has the seat and drop bars even, supposedly giving me a more upright position. And he said I can easily change out the stem if the frame is right.

TrojanHorse

I'm 6'2" with a 34 inch inseam and I have 2 58cm bikes and a 57.5 AND a 60, and the 60 is too big. You can put a short little stem on it but that affects the handling in not great ways.

Standover height is a terrible way to size frames though, so discard that notion. You're not experienced enough to know whether what you're feeling now will be what you're feeling in 12 months but... that's all you have to go on.

Joeyseven

The stack is only about 3/4" higher on the 61cm.

Is the stem max height on the fork on the 58? Can they flip it or exchange it?

I just feel that 61cm is way to big for you,even though the handlebars are higher.
And you like how the 58cm feels.I'm kind of surprise they are suggesting the 61.
Also check out other LBS in your area.good luck

Kontact 

The stack is only 3/4" taller, but the TT is only 1/2" longer. What about the 1/2" makes the 61 objectionably larger?

I don't see why someone that tall with a back issue wouldn't want the tallest bike he can easily fit, and that 1/2" of additional reach doesn't seem like much of a hurdle.

SkyDog75

Since standover is fine on both bikes, the other fit dimensions we need to consider are reach and saddle-to-bar drop. Either one of those is adjustable via stem length/angle, steerer tube spacers, and saddle height. You can probably be fine on either, so go with whichever you prefer.

Wildwood 

I'm close to @Birota 's size (assuming 34 is a pant's inseam not a cycling measurement). There is no correct answer 58 or 61. The 58 has a shorter headtube (2cm), slightly shorter chainstays (.5cm), and shorter top tube (1.5cm). These differences can be made up for with stem and seatpost/saddle mods. The larger frame should be a bit more 'stable' while the smaller a bit more 'responsive'. But with adventure size tires 'responsive' is a nebulous word.

In road bikes, for a smoother rides I prefer a longer wheelbase, for faster/spirited rides a smaller frame. I run between 59cm and 62/63 roadies.

Personally, i'd go 61cm with a stem length and angle that put the bars in a comfort spot. Zero setback on the seatpost. But since i don't know Birona's trunk/arms/etc lengths maybe trust the shop to get the position right. Then the rider has to fine tune.

Birota

Thank you very much for all of this input. I’ve riden many used bikes, so I want to make this new bike purchase perfect. As I’ve read the sizing charts, it seems I am in a tricky spot between 58 and 61. I am so grateful for all of these considerations I can bring up at the bike shop.

Birota

Also, stable and responsive would be the two words I felt when I test road the 61 and 58 respectively. I just don’t want to regret buying a bike that is too big as I get older. I am 50 now.

one4smoke

I'm 6'3 and have been going through the same dilemma. My inseam is 34" also, so my legs contribute the most to my height, with my torso not so much.

I have found the 61cm frame works out best for me, with replacing the stem with one slightly smaller. With a 58cm, my knees are too far forward, and I can't afford that as it causes pain. The LBS is right when he said you'll need to have the saddle higher on the 58, therefore being more hunched over and cramped.

I could be wrong, but based on what I've learned thus far, I'd say you would need to get fitted properly on the saddle FIRST with correct leg length, fore/aft, tilt ...then adjust to the reach after that. I think if you do that you'll find the 61cm is the way to go.

Clem von Jones

When in doubt always go smaller. I'm about the same size and would even consider 56cm because I love lots of bar drop. You have an enormous variety of stems to choose from but if the frame is too big your options are gone.

Wildwood 

Hey kiddo, if riding a new adventure bike motivates you to ride more/farther - your strength, endurance and flexibility (on the bike at least) will increase and allow you to enjoy the 61cm frame. (In crude terms the larger frame has a slightly larger sweet-spot, relative to the rider's ideal center of gravity between the wheels on varied terrain.) Conversely, riding more usually helps your bike handling skills, so the 58cm frame is also more enjoyable for its' "nimbleness". Catch22 = ride more, enjoy both aspects - also the reason for N+1.

Which model?

Wildwood 

I could possibly agree with you on road bikes in many people's fitting options. But this is an adventure bike.

one4smoke

Yeah, true road bikes tend to have a longer top tube making for a longer reach. So, I can possibly see going a size smaller if the crux of your height isn't in your torso. Endurance road bikes generally have shorter top tubes.

Again, from what I am understanding lately.

Paul Barnard

The fit guy doesn't sound like a fit guy at all. While the bars may be lower on the 58 as it sits, the reach is also likely to be shorter which will negate some of the hunch. Most riders can ride within a size range. I have ridden 58 and 56 perfectly comfortably. Stems can be adjusted up and down, angles changed and lengthened and shortened. Seats can be raised and lowered and moved fore and aft. Nose up and nose down adjustments can be made too. I suspect either can be adjusted to fit you just fine.

GailT

That's exactly correct. You should not be moving your saddle up and down or backward and forward to adjust stack, reach and drop. It's better to set the saddle position for the correct leg length and angle first, and then adjust the stem for stack, reach and drop.

Joeyseven

What one4smoke and GailT posted sounds like best way to start your bike fit.


Birota what model Jamis Renegade and frame material are you looking to buy?

I sent Jamis A email asking about their seat tube lengths on their size 58 and 61.I believe they list
the effective seat tube lengths looking at the top tube slope of the Renegade frame.

With your back and neck issues your going to have to find/trust your LBS fitter.

Birota

I really appreciate all of this info. I am looking at the Jamis Renegade Expat. It is a Reynolds 520 steel bike with a carbon fork. As I read all this wisdom, I am thinking that perhaps the 61 may be best. I go to the shop tomorrow to try them out again.

Brob2

I'm with Trojan on this. I am exactly 6' 2" and have a 31 3/4" inseam, and a 35 3/4 sleeve, so I'm a little apish. I'm generally in between sizes too, but my 61 cm Norco was too big for me and I'm much happier on my Opus 59cm. I rode each for years. Because I'm apish the experts say I should go bigger in off sized bikes, but that is not what I'm comfortable on. Test ride that bike for as long as you can and if it feels good with the stock stem then that bike is your ticket. If you are comfortable on the 59, (I'm guessing your arms aren't freakishly long eg over 36") I think it's a mistake to be talked into the bigger bike. It's like the guy at Harry Rosen who ordered me a pair of size 13' wides from Allen Edmond's 'cause that's what the chart said, when my heart knew the 13's I tried at the store were too small.

I'm 55, have degenerative disk disease, ride a somewhat relaxed position, and hated my 61cm. I didn't ride it enough before I bought it. Know in your head you're comfortable with whichever one you buy, or make sure you can return it after a week or whatever.

bruce19

According to the old fashioned (LeMond) method that I have used for many years, a 58 is pretty much your sweet spot in the range of frames that can work for you. And, of course, you can get the right reach with stem length and angle. I have a 32" inseam and am 5'9". I have a 58 Masi and a 55 Guru. I've got the Masi set up nicely but the Guru is perfect. You get the idea.