marqueemoon

Probably true.

I definitely fall into the camp of preferring the smaller size. I found this out quite by accident. After being vaguely unhappy riding bikes the "right" size for me I test rode a used bike that was smaller but set up bigger (with a 130mm stem).

I bought the bike and have owned it for 14 years. Now that I'm 14 years older my position is different and it's less than ideal. It happens.

hamster

Okay, I give up. OP, get whatever you makes feel right.

All I know is that I'm shorter than everyone who commented above, I just got a bike with a 54 cm frame and it was almost annoyingly short in stock config, resulting in a fairly upright, non-aerodynamic posture. (I actually measured my torso angle https://bikedynamics.co.uk/guidelines.htm and it was around 50 degrees.) I had to increase setback and to lose some spacers under the stem to get it right. A longer stem is on my list.

lazerzxr

I agree with this except the last paragraph.

Your first bike will always be a learning experience so I think go with what feels right now and accept that is likely to change. longer stems can easily be fitted. As a side point, moving the seat forward will often make the bar Feel further away.

elboGreaze

I would suggest to go with what feels best (54) , but you may want to start with a nice pre-owned bike to save some dough in case you gravitate towards something else after a year or so. And it will happen.

junglemoth

Wow, thank you for all of the replies! I really appreciate the input and I think I am going to follow my gut and get a 54 cm frame. The bike I was riding was a Specialized Allez Evo (which was out of my price range), but the guy at the shop wanted me to try two different sizes of the same bike.

I think it general I just prefer a more compact set-up. Weird analogy, but I play drums and have always liked my kit to be compact and really tight as opposed to spread out.

I'm going to go to another bike shop on Saturday and try riding a different brand to see how the sizing varies. This guy carries Felt bikes which is what I was actually planning on getting.

Again, thanks for the help. I'm sure you'll be hearing from me more as I dive deeper into the world of cycling!

photogravity

I, just as you, am 5' 9-1/2" and ride bikes ranging from 53 to 60 cm (BB center to top of seat tube) but find bikes around the 56 cm to be the sweet spot for me. Shorter frames make me feel somewhat cramped, while taller frames make me feel stretched out. With that said, so long as I can get the stem and seat adjusted to an acceptable level, I'm OK.

I concur with the guys in the LBS who who suggested going to a 56cm frame, unless you have very short legs.

bigfred 

A quick caution. One bicycle fit for a given size varies just as much as clothing sizing does. Because you're comfortable on one make and model 54 or 56 does not necessarily mean you'll be equally happy on a different make/model of the same declared size. To make an apples to apples comparison you need to look at saddle set back, effective top tube length and frame stack, all realative to the bottom bracket.

StanSeven

Take a look at the "aggressive" position pro's ride - a very small frame, lots of seat post showing, and a 130-140 stem. Seat fore/aft position doesn't get adjusted like that.

Mike F

5'10" and my 54 feels great. Then again I came down form a 58. Two sales persons (at different trips), the fitter and the website sizing chart agreed, but most of all my body agreed.

TDRILL

As a new rider, your fit / position will likely change especially over the first year or two. Don't sweat it, choose what feels right now. I'm 6'2 and any shop I walk into wants to put me on a 58. My first purchase was a 60 with normal stem length. I tried 58s that felt too cramped. I currently ride a 56 with setback seatpost and a long stem. You can fit a range of bikes man, just get supporting components to put you in the proper position.

As noted, set your seatback according to the bottom bracket position and then change stems until hand position is correct. You should know before you buy the bike that you can put your seat in the proper location relative to the cranks if anyone at the shop has any business working there. I don't want to start a debate over bike fit but as a general rule of thumb, pedals at 3 and 9, string with a weight on bottom, press string to front of your forward most knee, the string should pass through the spindle of the pedal.

Seat height, heels on the pedals, pedal without rocking hips with full leg extension. When you put ball of foot on pedal like normal pedaling, you are in the neighborhood of proper seat height while keeping knee bent at the bottom of crank rotation. Small adjustments from there

Good luck and have fun

Clipped_in

I agree with this. At 6'-3" many would consider me between sizes. I've owned bikes in both directions and definitely prefer the smaller option. It's like the difference between a full size sedan and a sportier model car. A so called "58cm" frame with 57.5 VTT outfitted with a setback seatpost and 120mm stem suits me just fine. A little less stable, but snappier handling works well for my CAT 6 racing.

Brandonub

I'm another one that could go a couple directions, but prefer the smaller bike fit. At 5'8", I'm on a 51, which sounded small to me when the LBS mentioned that I should give one a shot, but it felt great to me, so that's what I wound up with. Ultimately, buy what you're comfortable on, not what you think you should be comfortable on.

rogerstg

Especially if the mathematical model includes that they have 56s in stock and not 54s.

danvuquoc

Wait what? A more aggressive position is harder on a smaller frame? Seeing as that smaller bikes generally have smaller head tubes, seatposts can be swapped out for up to 60mm of set back + rail adjustment, and stems can regularly reach into the 140mm range... how the heck do you figure that?

hamster

OK, imagine two bikes, same geometry, same set back and same stem, one is 54 and the other is 56. Same rider. Set the saddle at the same height and remove some spacers under the stem from the 56 to bring handlebars down to the same height. What differences still remain?

* 56 has a higher top tube (as mentioned above, jewel clearance)
* 56 has a ~15 mm longer wheelbase than 54
* 56 has a ~15 mm longer horizontal distance from the saddle to the handlebars.

That's 15 mm that you'll always have in addition to whatever crazy long stem you want to buy.

And, with longer wheelbase and shorter stem, you get better weight distribution. (You're certainly free to buy a 140 mm stem if you want, but that will put your brifters well ahead of the axis of the front wheel, and that's not very stable or safe.)

Commodus

You need to get a fit. You can not correct your reach by changing your saddle setback.

CenturionIM

I (5'8") was buying my first road bike. all charts/calculators/online pages etc etc points me to 54cm. Now I know I need a 52cm..it really does take riding time to know what you want. That said seat post sizing(what 54/52 is refering to) doesn't matter that much. raising seat post is easy. top tube length is a way better determinator of fit and comfort. so check the geometry

Bonus link:
https://sheldonbrown.com/frame-sizing.html
https://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=FIT_CALCULATOR_INTRO

surgeonstone

Smaller is better than bigger, at least in this respect.

JayhawKen

This thread has aged about a week so you may have already bought your bike, but another decision point is your intended usage. If you expect to end up a bit more aggressive in your riding or have intentions of trying racing, you'll likely have a preference for the smaller frame.

And just to add another n+2 data points, at 5'9" I have a 53 LeMond and a 54 Tarmac, and was able to get them both to an identical setup.