oddjob2

I'm 5'9" and prefer a 56 cm. So the 52cm is way too small.

sreten

Hi,

Go with the 54cm. Don't buy a 56cm if you can't standover it.

Bar height you can flip the stem, flip it back and drop through
the rings as you get fitter and want a more aggressive position.
Longer stem will also stretch you out more if its an issue.

rgds,sreten.

apetro3

Thanks for all of the help, everyone. Heading back to the lbs after work tomorrow. Leaning toward the 54cm based on this thread. But will try the other sizes as well.

chaadster

Ride that 52 again, and ask them to fit a lower rise stem with 10mm more extension, or at least flip the existing stem.

Either bike (i.e. 52 or 54; 56 seems off base) will work, so it's a question of ride quality to me. Shorter, sportier, or longer and more luxe? I think the Roubaix has the luxe part built in, so unless you need double icing on your cake, I'd squeeze more sporting nature out of the frame and go with the smaller 52. But as I said, this is a riding philosophy decision, as both bikes will work.

apetro3

It would be nice if he would invert the stem on the smaller frame, and maybe drop it down a spacer or two. I don't need double icing, but I do want something I can grow into.

megalowmatt

When someone says "I ride a 54cm" (or whatever size) frame, it doesn't tell the whole story. Many manufacturers - if not most - base their frame sizes off the seat post length, which can be confusing and sometimes misleading. This was something I did not completely understand when I got into commuting and eventually long road rides several years ago.

I think Lynskey does a good job of categorizing their frame sizes. Let's take the R230 for example:

Here's the R230 geometry chart.


^^As you can see, their size M is what other manufacturers would call a 50cm frame because of the seat tube length. Because of the combination of other measurements, Lynskey smartly calls that frame size a Medium.

In fact, they recommend that frame size for people up to 5'9":


...and the next size up overlaps a little, which makes perfect sense because bikes are adjustable.

My point in all this is if somebody who is 5'9" said they were considering a "50cm frame", most here would call them crazy. Just stating what manufacturers have deemed as a frame size doesn't mean much because other frame measurements should be taken into account.

apetro3

That's good to keep in mind. The Specialized top-tube length on a 54cm frame is 54.8cm, which puts it right in between the Medium and Medium/Large R230 frames.

EDIT: For me personally, I suspect that my leg length is shorter than average for someone my height (5'8 3/4") while my reach may be average or slightly longer than average.

sreten

Hi,

Ignore the waffle, the 54 looks better and is better. If you can't
stand over the 56 comfortably don't go there. The rest is just
whatever, your best bike fit will develop with your fitness.

Pretty much only proper seat height can be set and doesn't change.

rgds, sreten.

chaadster

What? Grow into old age? Because in my experience, as people grow into road cycling, they go lower, flatter, and more aggressive until they get too old, too fat, or injured.

apetro3

Lol, that's what I mean. Do I have it backwards? Smaller bike would give me room to get lower and more aggressive?

chaadster

Yes, and yes, theoretically.

fronesis

Let me be clear, I am a newbie, NOT an expert at all. But I've been trying to get myself properly fitted for 6 weeks now, so I've read online for 100s of hours about fit, and I've test-ridden more than 20 bikes. I've ridden 500 miles on my own new bike and tinkered with the setup a lot.

To my eyes, the 52 is definitely too small for you. If you are picking between these two bikes, go with the 54. But if you aren't settled yet, I'd very much like to see you try a 56 (obviously in a model you can stand over) and see how it feels/looks. As a newer rider who seems to want to be in a fairly upright position, I think you might really like a 56 with the bars/stem set up more like the 52 (some spacers, stem at a positive angle).

apetro3

Thanks for the reply. I'll see if I can find a 56 to try, just for comparison. However, although I still consider myself a beginner, this is my second season of what I would call somewhat serious riding. Right now I'm on a Trek FX. It's a hybrid bike, with a more upright posture. Over the course of 2,500 miles, I have flipped the stem and dropped down two spacers. So, I'm not afraid of finding a road bike with a comparatively more aggressive stance.

After reading your other thread about fit, I think I can relate to your dilemma. I have a long torso, with fairly average (i think) arms and shorter legs for someone my height (5' 8.75"). So, I think the trick is finding a long enough top tube while still being able to stand over the bike without getting a wedgie. So far, I'm finding the 54cm Roubaix to be a nice compromise. The only reason I have not pulled the trigger is because I'm waiting for the new models to come out. By then, maybe I will have a chance to try the 56.

apetro3

Finally took the plunge yesterday and picked up a new bike. A 2014 Specialized Roubaix SL4 Sport 105. I decided to go with the 54cm frame, based on the advice in this thread as well as several test rides on both sizes. So far I feel really good about the decision, although I still need to give it a proper test. In my opinion, it feels like a great fit, whether I'm on the hoods, in the drops or out of the saddle sprinting up a hill. Thanks again for all the great advice.

chaadster

Looks good! Many happy miles to you!

Phydiox

sounds like a bunch of women buying shoes....either frame can be adjusted to fit you. longer stem,taller seat post ,etc. the old way,before all the slope frames was 2inches of taint room. the problem here is your LBS. its your money,and he wants it. he has not gone to the trouble or just doesnt know how to set you up on a bike. there is no perfect set up and you will change as you learn to ride. hopefully you will progress in experiance and loose some wieght. this will change the fit intirely. git what feels good to you,not what looks good to the girls in the office. you wont ride an uncomfortable bike. if you arnt knowledgeable enuff to fit yourself,find someone who is. and that is willing to change a stem,or crank to help you find the right bike. and you will change things as you ride. depending on the bike the first will be the saddle. factory spec bikes dont come with pedals for a reason,and usely come with a generic seat. fide a cobb or fizik that fits you.

catonec 

the larger bike was the right choice for sure. it looks as if yu could stand to raise the seat a little more so your leg is straight but not locked when your pedal is at the bottom. actually a 56 may have worked better.

I am 5.9/5.10 and ride 55cm

erief0g

Now we can get down to business and talk about that specialty pizza and sub shop in the background of the first photo!

Congrats!

apetro3

Ahh yes, Marco's Pizza. Part of the reason I need to keep riding this bike! Speaking of which, now is a good time for a fit update. Since bringing the bike home, I have logged just shy of 200 miles. The fit must be pretty good because I really don't have any aches or pains to complain about, even when I'm using the drops. I also like the handling. I feel very balanced and stable on it, whether i'm blazing down a hill or crawling my way up a 17% grade. I've also noticed a pretty big difference in efficiency. The same effort on this bike yields a noticeable improvement in performance over my old bike (Trek FX). So as a result, I find myself going a little faster on average but feeling no more fatigued. I think I'll keep riding it exactly as I have it set up now. But next spring, I'd like to experiment with removing a spacer or two from the stem.

Phydiox

yeah,what he said. does not look like you are gittin full extension. most use a 35degree angle at stroke out. i like a 25 my self. and I have less off the seat time.

chaadster

The Marco's with the 'Pepperoni Magnifico'? Yeah, that damn pie keeps messing up my fit, too!

Blue Belly

I'd prefer to have a 110 to 120 mm stem, for best handling. Beyond that its up to you. I personally like a slightly bigger frame for stability & longer rides. A smaller frame for sprinting & climbing.

apetro3

You know, I kinda thought the same thing - regarding seat height. I'd like to try it just a little bit higher. The guy at the LBS set the seat height using some kind of protractor, so I think it's at least within the acceptable range. Granted, in the picture, I don't think I'm at the lowest point of the stroke.

I think I remember the LBS guy saying something about 33 degrees. That didn't really mean much to me at the time.

I feel like this frame is a fairly good comprise. We live in a relatively hilly part of the sate where no matter which direction you go, a 20-mile route will have close to 2,000 feet of climbing. Give or take.