Shadowjaxs

Hey, I been looking to up grade to a gear bike for the last few months. Right now I been riding a 55cm single gear for the last two years. I was told by friends and local bike shop owners. That a 57-58cm should work for me. I feel like their going just by my height too much. I keep telling them that my inseam is 29. I have google and Iam finding a lot of people with the same height and inseam riding a 54cm. And I feel like in order to get a good bike fit, I would have to buy a bike from the bike shop. Can someone steer me in the right direction?

awfulwaffle 

Hello, my stumpy-legged brother! I'm 5'8" with a 28.5" inseam, and a 57-58 is definitely too big for you. Can you even stand over the frame properly? When I was looking at road bikes, I ended up having to buy the only size available (XS) that I could stand over without nutting myself, and put a longer stem on the bike to make up for the shorter top tube. The wheel base is shorter so the bike feels kind of twitchy, but overall pretty comfortable ride.


EDIT: My frame size was a 43cm which, accounting for the nontraditional geometry, is in the 51-54cm range for a traditional frame.

lsberrios1 

Well, I am going to take a stab at this. They are right. at 5'11" with a 30.5 inseam I ride a 53.5" that has an effective top tube of 57cm. This means than in reality the bike a 57cm. All this because my torso is proportionately long when compared to my legs. You are more so than me. This means you should be ok with 57-58. However, for a more accurate depiction of your needs someone will chime in and talk about Stack and Reach which I suggest you become familiar with. Remember it is easier to adjust up and down than to upset the balance of the bike by moving back and forth. Up and down you just set the seatpost height, back and forth means fore and aft as well as stem length.

lsberrios1 

I dont think this would be a huge problem with the new sloped top tube bikes like specialized, giant etc. You could be right though. Standover height might become an issue at 29" inseam. Hanging low bro!

Crescent Cycle

Double check that is your cycling inseam. If it is 29", most XXS and XS frames will be touching or almost touching when it comes to standover clearance even with shoes on.

You would have an extraordinarily long torso, and you would need to get the best compromise that would allow you a 100-130mm stem when it comes to comfortable reach, a low enough stack that you are happy with saddle to bar drop, with an inseam of 29" on most frames you won't really get much more than 3 inches of bar drop even on XS frames, and a slack enough seat tube angle that you can feel balanced and not have too much weight on your hands probably around 74 with a setback post. KOPS will indicate you need a steep seat tube angle, the balancing method will probably indicate you need a substantially slacker seat tube angle.

Crescent Cycle

I found that any drop in the seat tube is compensated by raising the head tube. The center point of of the top tube where standover is measured, in front of the saddle isn't lowered much, if at all. Had a "43cm" frame that was a couple inches taller in the front than my traditional 48cm frame. Similar standover.

Also I hate sloping top tubes in XS sizes, they do it to fit a wider range of riders, but it reduced bottle clearance.

jyl

I also have short legs for my height. It is somewhat frustrating. I ideally need a 58cm or longer top tube, with a 56 cm or shorter seat tube, roughly. So I appreciate the issues.

You want to make sure the bike is "long" enough - distance from saddle to bars long enough, top tube long enough. But you also want to be able to stand over the bike with at least a little bit of crotch clearance - some manage with bikes they can't stand over, but I think that is inconvenient. Modern road bikes with sloping top tubes make this easier. If that isn't enough, you may have to compromise with a particularly small frame modified with a particularly long stem (140mm etc). I think it makes sense to find a good bike shop employee, who appears knowledgeable about and interested in getting you a good fit, and letting him/her help you.

Jseis 

I'm 5' 10" with a 31" inseam and I ride a 55 cm Colnago with 120mm stem reach (I've long arms and somewhat long torso and long feet). I've a 23" (='s about 58cm) Motobecane that I can ride (rode it cross country) but I run a much shorter stem at about 60mm. The long feet allow me to ride a taller bike if I stay slightly toe down & I don't have to mess with seat height but they actually all run the same, about 32.5" from crank arm center to seat back and parallel to seat tube However...straddling the top tube is a near nut ******* on the Moto B. On the Col, I've tried running the seat back say 20mm on its rails but that unloads the front end and messes the handling up.

awfulwaffle 

Mine IS one of the new sloped top tube bikes! Really, it made my size choice easier, since there was only one that had a small enough standover height for me . Ended up using the Wrench Science fit calculator to find my required overall reach, subtracted the effective top tube length from that, and got the according stem. Simple enough.

chaadster

Excellent post. I think that's the kind of info the OP needs.

stephtu

Only real way to know is to take a bunch of test rides. I'm 5'10", a bit over 30" cycling inseam (floor to crotch, not your pants inseam), and feel quite comfortable on a "54" with 54.5 effective top tube & 110 mm stem. But I can ride a 56 and even compromised and managed fine on a used 58 when younger although that was a bit too big. So take out 54s and 56s for a spin, decide if you feel your upper body is too cramped or not on a 54, how much saddle to bar drop you are most comfortable with, and estimate if the preferred bar reach & drop can be achieved with a stem swap if necessary.

With short legs on stock bikes one has to deal with near zero standover, it's just the way it is without going custom, just take care when dismounting, and maybe lean the bike over a little. It doesn't matter when actually riding when the rest of the fit is right. Sloping tube helps, but only a little; I agree with what Crescent Cycle said, the top tube rises pretty quickly to around the midpoint where one is standing.

CenturionIM

This. You can always lower/raise the seatpost, but you cannot change the length of top tube.

1. choose a frame that makes your torso comfortable (You can still fiddle with stem length)
2. Then make sure you have some (~1inch) clearance from the toptube.
3. Done.

Leisesturm

That may be the problem. If I measured from the ground to you know where I might get 29". I'm only 5'10" but my Team U.S.A. has a standover of 31.5". French Fit don't you know. But I'm not worried. My cycling inseam as another poster mentioned is floor to pubic bone and that gives most guys another 2"... some, another 3", whoa... in this crazy world of sloping top tubes its all good. If you ride vintage iron then maybe its a concern. I could be wrong but I'm thinking the o.p. is measuring their inseam by tailors guidelines not by bike-fit guidelines.

H

hamster

+1 for "probably incorrectly measured". At 5'11" height, 29" cycling inseam would be very unusual and may look visibly wrong.

With a 29.5" inseam, I have close to zero standover clearance on a 54 cm Cannondale Supersix road frame (zero to negative without shoes, but shoes raise me enough to make this livable). If the OP is indeed 5'11"/29", he'd be unable to go higher than a 54 Supersix, and he'd have a 15 cm longer torso+head than me, and probably longer arms too, which would make fitting on the bike lengthwise pretty awkward. There obviously isn't enough range in stem & setback length values to cover 15 cm difference between him and me.

A compact triangle frame (e.g. Specialized Roubaix) would help a bit with standover, but would present a different problem. At constant inseam, bigger frames don't become longer: they become taller. Take extreme example: size 58 Specialized Roubaix. That's probably the biggest size that a person with 29" inseam would be able to ride at all, with the seatpost all the way in and saddle resting on top tube. Compared to size 54 Supersix, size 58 Roubaix would have the saddle further back 5 mm (because of the difference in seat tube angles), reach 392 mm vs 384 mm, and stack 622 mm vs 544 mm. So, with respect to the saddle, top of the head tube is only 13 mm further forward but 78 mm higher. Going with 58 Roubaix barely makes a dent in dealing with the extra 150 mm of upper body length that we somehow have to accommodate, but moves the handlebars so high that you can forget about aerodynamics.

P.S. If 29" is correct, the best course of action is to find a manufacturer that makes long (high reach) bikes. There isn't much choice, unfortunately, most manufacturers have geos in a very narrow range. You want to go for "racing" rather than "endurance" (racing geos are slightly longer and lower than endurance geos). The aforementioned Supersix is "racing" and it would be better/longer than most. Among Specialized models, Tarmac would be, all else equal, longer and lower than Roubaix. Trek used to do a sub-series of Madone frames called "pro fit" which would work too. One of the longest new mass-production bikes now is Felt F-series.

fietsbob

people read the label on their Levis, for inseam but that does not include your feet .

lsberrios1 

Good post. Your best bet would be a 58cm specialized tarmac or a Large Giant TCR. Low headtube + longer top tube + low stand over height.

RaleighSport

o.O We have somewhat close measurements as it turns out, and I tend to ride a 55-56 which is quite snug for the jewels but wonderful for riding position(french fit)... does it feel weird having so much standover?

hamster

I called 58cm Roubaix "extreme example", meaning that he can probably ride it, but he can't realistically live with it because he can't stand over it. 58cm Roubaix has 32.6" standover height (middle of the top tube). Even if it's a bit less near the saddle, it's still going to be very uncomfortable. 58 cm Tarmac is 32.5".

A 56cm Tarmac could be worth a try.

awfulwaffle 

It's actually not all that much, maybe half an inch to an inch. Like I mentioned before, my road bike is one of them there new fangled sloped top tube ones, and the 51-54cm was just the equivalent provided on the sizing chart.

5Krunner

hey Shadowjaxs. maybe you can update us about this post.
I realize this thread started 2 year ago.
I have the same issue 5' 11” with 29 inseam.
Seems like I should be on a 46 cm or 18 inch frame.
I think that would be the right size for me, maybe with a longer stem.
I've noticed how bikes have different size stems and there is no cohesion.
i was reading an article about the seat / saddle, and how that can make a big differace on how the bike will feel/fit.
I'm going to recomend that you test ride a 46 cm and let us know what you thought are about it.
I'm going to do the same.

Shadowjaxs

I went with a 58cm Cannondale the stem is 4 and a half inches, But I just got a new bike that is a size 56cm with the same length stem. And the size 56cm bike feels good.

mawashi

I'm 179cm with an inseam of 85.5cm so I'm quite a bit different. However, even with my long legs the fitting procedure at the shop based the frame on my inseam not my height which resulted in a frame size of 54. I currently have a 56 cm frame but I think 54 or even a 52 would be better.

oldbobcat

Stumpy legged riders, go with a frame small enough to straddle comfortably, and then swap for a longer stem (and slide the saddle back to offset the change in balance). There is no rule that says you have to keep using the stem that comes with the bike. In the end, it's about stack and reach, but stumpy guys need to start with comfortable standover, while lanky guys need to start with top tube and head tube lengths they can manage.

Mawashi, with legs that long you could straddle a 62, but I'm in total agreement with your selection of a 56. Ride on.

TenSpeedV2

Everyone is different. I am 6'0" with a 29/30" inseam and I ride a 19" mountain bike and 58cm road bike and fixed gear bike. I had a 56cm CX bike and it was too small for me.