Long legs short arms
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Long legs short arms
Hi all-
I ride an old Technium trilite pro 59 cm which has an old non-standard seat post size that I can't find a replacement for. Unfortunately I can't quite get my seat high enough and I keep straining by quad tendons. So I decided it might be a nice time to upgrade and was wondering about sizing, cause I'm a long leg short arm guy... Appreciate any advice.
I measured myself for various online calculators: inseam is 89 cm barefoot, height 184 cm, arm 68 cm, trunk 65 cm, forearm 35.5 cm, lower leg 58 cm, thigh 62 cm, sternal notch 151.5 cm. Fairly consistently they recommend a seat tube in the 59 cm range, but effective top tube of around 560mm. For one of the bikes I'm looking at, the le champ from bikesdirect (https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...i-disc-geo.gif), this would give me two totally different sizes - e.g. a 59 cm would address my legs but the top tube would be a bit long according to these calculators, a 53 cm would address my arms but not my legs...
(BTW measurements on my old bike are 59 cm seat tube, ~570-572 top tube)
What do you think?
I ride an old Technium trilite pro 59 cm which has an old non-standard seat post size that I can't find a replacement for. Unfortunately I can't quite get my seat high enough and I keep straining by quad tendons. So I decided it might be a nice time to upgrade and was wondering about sizing, cause I'm a long leg short arm guy... Appreciate any advice.
I measured myself for various online calculators: inseam is 89 cm barefoot, height 184 cm, arm 68 cm, trunk 65 cm, forearm 35.5 cm, lower leg 58 cm, thigh 62 cm, sternal notch 151.5 cm. Fairly consistently they recommend a seat tube in the 59 cm range, but effective top tube of around 560mm. For one of the bikes I'm looking at, the le champ from bikesdirect (https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...i-disc-geo.gif), this would give me two totally different sizes - e.g. a 59 cm would address my legs but the top tube would be a bit long according to these calculators, a 53 cm would address my arms but not my legs...
(BTW measurements on my old bike are 59 cm seat tube, ~570-572 top tube)
What do you think?
#2
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,536
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3889 Post(s)
Liked 1,938 Times
in
1,383 Posts
Go with the effective top tube measurement and look for an endurance type bike which will have a slightly longer head tube. Looks to me like the 56 would do it - ETT only ~1cm longer than perfect, easy to make up in the stem.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#3
Senior Member
You can look up a fair few models on this site and compare their geometries, you can even upload geometry charts yourself: https://bikeinsights.com/home
For example, here are a couple models in my size, including another motobecane that I uploaded the geometry chart for:
https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geo...315c00144448d3
I'm in the same boat as you with long legs and short arms (and torso). The endurance and all road/gravel categories tend to have what is now called "relaxed" geometry, with tall stacks and short reaches (which are fair new to me terms as a returning rider after more than 20 years off). What this translates to for me is "regular" geometry.
I happened to have also had a technium tri-lite (no extra monikers, mine was the gray one with yellow and turquoise accents, if memory serves) that I bought new in the late 80s and was screwed up when a car pulled out in front of me and I went over the hood.
For example, here are a couple models in my size, including another motobecane that I uploaded the geometry chart for:
https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geo...315c00144448d3
I'm in the same boat as you with long legs and short arms (and torso). The endurance and all road/gravel categories tend to have what is now called "relaxed" geometry, with tall stacks and short reaches (which are fair new to me terms as a returning rider after more than 20 years off). What this translates to for me is "regular" geometry.
I happened to have also had a technium tri-lite (no extra monikers, mine was the gray one with yellow and turquoise accents, if memory serves) that I bought new in the late 80s and was screwed up when a car pulled out in front of me and I went over the hood.
#4
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 37
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
You can look up a fair few models on this site and compare their geometries, you can even upload geometry charts yourself: https://bikeinsights.com/home
For example, here are a couple models in my size, including another motobecane that I uploaded the geometry chart for:
https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geo...315c00144448d3
I'm in the same boat as you with long legs and short arms (and torso). The endurance and all road/gravel categories tend to have what is now called "relaxed" geometry, with tall stacks and short reaches (which are fair new to me terms as a returning rider after more than 20 years off). What this translates to for me is "regular" geometry.
I happened to have also had a technium tri-lite (no extra monikers, mine was the gray one with yellow and turquoise accents, if memory serves) that I bought new in the late 80s and was screwed up when a car pulled out in front of me and I went over the hood.
For example, here are a couple models in my size, including another motobecane that I uploaded the geometry chart for:
https://bikeinsights.com/compare?geo...315c00144448d3
I'm in the same boat as you with long legs and short arms (and torso). The endurance and all road/gravel categories tend to have what is now called "relaxed" geometry, with tall stacks and short reaches (which are fair new to me terms as a returning rider after more than 20 years off). What this translates to for me is "regular" geometry.
I happened to have also had a technium tri-lite (no extra monikers, mine was the gray one with yellow and turquoise accents, if memory serves) that I bought new in the late 80s and was screwed up when a car pulled out in front of me and I went over the hood.
#5
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,536
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3889 Post(s)
Liked 1,938 Times
in
1,383 Posts
Bikes are sized proportionally for the average human, so shorter seat tube, top tube, and head tube. So a 53 is just too small for you, more drop than you'll probably like to get that shorter TT. The 59 is too long for you, so you'll have to use a very short stem, might not feel quite right. Thus I though the 56 would be a good compromise: a good bit of seat post showing, fine, a slightly shorter stem than usual, fine, a bit more drop than usual, also fine. See if you can order the stem uncut. All that said, there might be a more suitable frame out there somewhere.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
#6
Senior Member
https://99spokes.com/compare?bikes=f...6c-carbon-2020
One of those would fit you pretty well. There are other models priced cheaper. Carbon bikes.
You may need to switch out the seatpost for a longer one, depending on your saddle height / max. seatpost length for frame size spec.
That BikesDirect frame proportions does not suit you (too low at the front).
You can still find new horizontal top tube road bikes out there, but they're not that common these days, and I've never seen a 59/56cm in an off-the-shelf frame.
The bikes I listed will still have a decent enough seat tube length to fit your saddle height.
Those frames are short reach with tall stack.
Fuji frame will have the higher tech.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit:- You're in luck if you'd like to build up a frame and have the cash. See post #4450 :- https://forums.thepaceline.net/showt...32021&page=297 (Jeff Lyon blue frame).
One of those would fit you pretty well. There are other models priced cheaper. Carbon bikes.
You may need to switch out the seatpost for a longer one, depending on your saddle height / max. seatpost length for frame size spec.
That BikesDirect frame proportions does not suit you (too low at the front).
You can still find new horizontal top tube road bikes out there, but they're not that common these days, and I've never seen a 59/56cm in an off-the-shelf frame.
The bikes I listed will still have a decent enough seat tube length to fit your saddle height.
Those frames are short reach with tall stack.
Fuji frame will have the higher tech.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edit:- You're in luck if you'd like to build up a frame and have the cash. See post #4450 :- https://forums.thepaceline.net/showt...32021&page=297 (Jeff Lyon blue frame).
Last edited by tangerineowl; 05-11-20 at 05:04 PM. Reason: txt