Notices
Classic and Vintage Sales Private Sales Only, no online storefronts. All prices must be quoted, we are not an auction site.

Lemond Sizing Question

Old 09-26-23, 02:35 PM
  #1  
cpsqlrwn
OldSchool
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked 28 Times in 20 Posts
Lemond Sizing Question

Looking at a few Lemond bikes on eBay and there is one where the description shows the size to be 53 c-t and 52 c-c. These are generally early 2000s bikes - Zurich, Buenos Aires, Maillot Jaune, Alpe D'Huez, etc.. I know most folks indicate that they tend to run large for their size. I always thought Lemonds were sized c-c on the seat tube, but the listing I am looking at indicates the size is 53 and it is c-t. That seems wrong to me. Can some one out there confirm how Lemond sized his bikes please, particularly in the late 90's to mid 2000s time period? Thank you!
cpsqlrwn is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 02:52 PM
  #2  
shoota 
Senior Member
 
shoota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 8,122
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1867 Post(s)
Liked 685 Times in 464 Posts
C-C. https://www.vintage-trek.com/Trek-Fis...1999lemond.pdf
__________________
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
shoota is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 03:26 PM
  #3  
delbiker1 
Mother Nature's Son
 
delbiker1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Sussex County, Delaware
Posts: 3,082

Bikes: 2014 Orbea Avant MD30, 2004 Airborne Zeppelin TI, 2003 Lemond Poprad, 2001 Lemond Tourmalet, 2014? Soma Smoothie

Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 832 Post(s)
Liked 1,379 Times in 781 Posts
I don't have a definitive answer, but I do think that the Lemond 853 frames were sized the same, except the Poprad CX bike. I have a labeled 2001 53cm Lemond Tourmalet, ST is about 51cm c-c and 54.5 c-t. I also have a labeled 52cm 2002 Poprad with the same measurements. The difference between the frames is the bb drop, with the Poprad having less drop. The Poprads are listed as 52 and 55, the the Tourmalet as 51, 53, and 55. I am guessing the size listing difference is due to the Poprad having less bb drop, ergo, the frame sits a bit higher.

Last edited by delbiker1; 09-26-23 at 05:43 PM.
delbiker1 is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 03:40 PM
  #4  
fishboat
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 1,868

Bikes: Lemond '01 Maillot Jaune, Lemond '02 Victoire, Lemond '03 Poprad, Lemond '03 Wayzata DB conv(Poprad), '79 AcerMex Windsor Carrera Professional(pur new), '88 GT Tequesta(pur new), '01 Bianchi Grizzly, 1993 Trek 970 DB conv, Trek 8900 DB conv

Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 743 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 788 Times in 460 Posts
Originally Posted by cpsqlrwn
Looking at a few Lemond bikes on eBay and there is one where the description shows the size to be 53 c-t and 52 c-c. These are generally early 2000s bikes - Zurich, Buenos Aires, Maillot Jaune, Alpe D'Huez, etc.. I know most folks indicate that they tend to run large for their size. I always thought Lemonds were sized c-c on the seat tube, but the listing I am looking at indicates the size is 53 and it is c-t. That seems wrong to me. Can some one out there confirm how Lemond sized his bikes please, particularly in the late 90's to mid 2000s time period? Thank you!
Probably want to check the spec manuals at:
https://www.vintage-trek.com/trek-fi...ein-lemond.htm

The "running big for their size" may or may not be true, depending on frame size.

Great bikes..you'll like them.
fishboat is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 04:43 PM
  #5  
Piff 
Senior Member
 
Piff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,567
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 753 Post(s)
Liked 678 Times in 375 Posts
They are known to be long in the top tube, hence feeling larger than their frame size. Lemond's fitting philosophy was 'long and low'.
Piff is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 06:05 PM
  #6  
cpsqlrwn
OldSchool
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Chesapeake, VA
Posts: 1,233
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 82 Post(s)
Liked 28 Times in 20 Posts
Thanks for the feedback. Several of the catalogs clearly show that the listed frame size pertains to seat tube length c-c.
cpsqlrwn is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 06:37 PM
  #7  
dmark 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: NJ
Posts: 637

Bikes: 68 SS, 72 Fuji Finest, 72 PX-10, 77 Pana Pro 7000, 84 Pinnarello Treviso NR, 84 Trek 520, 88 Project KOM, 90 Trek 750, 91 Trek 930

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 184 Post(s)
Liked 200 Times in 138 Posts
My '01 Zurich labeled 57 is 57 from center of BB to center of TT as measured along the ST.
(just went to the garage to measure)
dmark is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 08:51 PM
  #8  
top506
Death fork? Naaaah!!
 
top506's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: The other Maine, north of RT 2
Posts: 5,302

Bikes: Seriously downsizing.

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 552 Post(s)
Liked 608 Times in 269 Posts
Originally Posted by Piff
They are known to be long in the top tube, hence feeling larger than their frame size. Lemond's fitting philosophy was 'long and low'.
This. A reflection of Cyrille Guimard's philosophy on bike fit.
There's a 53 cm 2007 Tourmalet in the barn that rides like a 54cm ctt with a 54.5cm ctc top tube.

Top
__________________
You know it's going to be a good day when the stem and seatpost come right out.

(looking for a picture and not seeing it? Thank the Photobucket fiasco.PM me and I'll link it up.)
top506 is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 09:01 PM
  #9  
jamesdak 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Utah
Posts: 8,750

Bikes: Paletti,Pinarello Monviso,Duell Vienna,Giordana XL Super,Lemond Maillot Juane.& custom,PDG Paramount,Fuji Opus III,Davidson Impulse,Pashley Guv'nor,Evans,Fishlips,Y-Foil,Softride, Tetra Pro, CAAD8 Optimo,

Mentioned: 152 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2281 Post(s)
Liked 4,586 Times in 1,676 Posts
As someone who's had more than a few Lemonds over the years the link to the Trek Era bikes is a great source for those. Never had any that didn't match the charts.

The earlier Billato built ones I have/had match this geo:



The only exception was the Team Gan Lemond that was squarer than normal for a Lemond. The TT was shorter than expected. This one also had a number tab on it though so maybe is was custom sized for a team rider vs being a replica bike?
__________________
Steel is real...and comfy.
jamesdak is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 09:42 PM
  #10  
repechage
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 20,274
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3427 Post(s)
Liked 2,767 Times in 1,952 Posts
Originally Posted by Piff
They are known to be long in the top tube, hence feeling larger than their frame size. Lemond's fitting philosophy was 'long and low'.
yep.
repechage is offline  
Old 09-26-23, 10:48 PM
  #11  
Lascauxcaveman 
Senior Member
 
Lascauxcaveman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Port Angeles, WA
Posts: 8,016

Bikes: A green one, "Ragleigh," or something.

Mentioned: 194 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1627 Post(s)
Liked 628 Times in 355 Posts
Originally Posted by Piff
They are known to be long in the top tube, hence feeling larger than their frame size. Lemond's fitting philosophy was 'long and low'.
Ditto. I had one (a 2001 Zurich 56cm frame) that *almost* felt big enough to ride, though I'm usually on a 60+cm bike.
__________________
● 1971 Grandis SL ● 1972 Lambert Grand Prix frankenbike ● 1972 Raleigh Super Course fixie ● 1973 Nishiki Semi-Pro ● 1979 Motobecane Grand Jubile ●1980 Apollo "Legnano" ● 1984 Peugeot Vagabond ● 1985 Shogun Prairie Breaker ● 1986 Merckx Super Corsa ● 1987 Schwinn Tempo ● 1988 Schwinn Voyageur ● 1989 Bottechia Team ADR replica ● 1990 Cannondale ST600 ● 1993 Technium RT600 ● 1996 Kona Lava Dome ●

Lascauxcaveman is offline  
Old 09-27-23, 12:45 AM
  #12  
mhespenheide 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Burien WA
Posts: 571

Bikes: Cannondale Synapse, LeMond Victoire, Bianchi Campione d'Italia, Kona Hei Hei, Ritchey Ultra, Schwinn "Paramount" PDG, '83 Trek 640

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked 293 Times in 192 Posts
Originally Posted by Piff
They are known to be long in the top tube, hence feeling larger than their frame size. Lemond's fitting philosophy was 'long and low'.
At least in the larger sizes, that's not completely accurate. (I don't know about the medium or small sizes; I'm tall, and I've only really looked at the 59cm and 61cm models.)

Compared to other American frames from the same time period, LeMond bikes tended to have slacker seat tube angles. Once you put the saddle in its proper position relative to the bottom bracket, though, some of the length of the top tube is effectively removed. To put it another way, the stack and reach of Lemond bikes are fairly similar to other American bikes of the era.
mhespenheide is offline  
Old 09-27-23, 08:09 AM
  #13  
nlerner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,068
Mentioned: 476 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3758 Post(s)
Liked 6,384 Times in 2,530 Posts
I had a Buenos Aires for a long while, replaced with a Zurich, both 57cm frames, I believe, and neither felt too long in the top tube (I normally prefer around a 57cm top tube). If anything, they felt too small in the seat tube and stack, and probably would have been better off with a 59cm frame.
nlerner is offline  
Old 09-28-23, 07:01 AM
  #14  
RH Clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 828
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 459 Post(s)
Liked 425 Times in 230 Posts
I have a 2004 Croix De Fer 58cm. that seems to fit me perfectly. My other favorite bikes are 60cm and 62cm. Different geometry though so not necessarily definitive. I prefer out of the seat climbing on the Lemond. The bars feel farther forward giving me better balance and leverage when standing.
RH Clark is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.