Frame size
03-20-22, 06:24 AM
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Frame size
After doing alot of fettling on the Dawes Galaxy I finally got take it for a test ride. I may have underestimated the size of the frame, which measures about 23-24" crank-to-top of seatpost depending on how you look at it. The top tube is probably too high, as it just touches the crotch. I'm starting to think re-framing this project might be good, especially since this frame isn't the greatest shape anyways.
It would be good to stick with English so that most parts will swap over. If I'm looking for a new frame, how should I expect it to be measured?
It would be good to stick with English so that most parts will swap over. If I'm looking for a new frame, how should I expect it to be measured?
Last edited by swampyankee2; 03-20-22 at 12:48 PM.
03-20-22, 07:55 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 3,302
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1143 Post(s)
Liked 1,742 Times
in
962 Posts
That would depend on on the origin and or manufacture. Some would measure bb center to top seattube, others measure bb center to toptube center. Toptubes are always measured center to center(ctc). English bikes are in inches center to top, most French are metric center to top, a lot of Italian are measured metric center to center, but I see many Roma ctt. Also there is the standover height. On to of that there is the sellers measuring, that can be all over the board on how they record.
03-20-22, 08:43 AM
#3
Full Member
Thread Starter
That's why I was limiting my query to English bikes. I know my selection would be limited, but at least the measurements might be more standard.
when I look for bikes online I generally look at the stem as an indication of frame size and assumed the Dawes would be about right.
But in my excitement and naiveté I neglected to check standover height which turns out to be a bit high for me.
The actual frame size seems to be 23". I would need a 21" as measured by this method:
when I look for bikes online I generally look at the stem as an indication of frame size and assumed the Dawes would be about right.
But in my excitement and naiveté I neglected to check standover height which turns out to be a bit high for me.
The actual frame size seems to be 23". I would need a 21" as measured by this method:
03-20-22, 08:50 AM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Menomonee Falls, WI
Posts: 1,834
Bikes: 1984 Schwinn Supersport, 1988 Trek 400T, 1977 Trek TX900, 1982 Bianchi Champione del Mondo, 1978 Raleigh Supercourse, 1986 Trek 400 Elance, 1991 Waterford PDG OS Paramount, 1971 Schwinn Sports Tourer, 1985 Trek 670
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 604 Post(s)
Liked 1,064 Times
in
535 Posts
When buying a vintage frame online, by vintage I mean horizontal top tube, I always look at the head tube only. Frame angles tend to affect the ride more then the fit. Too bad, nice looking bike.
Tim
Tim
Last edited by tkamd73; 03-20-22 at 08:55 AM.
Likes For tkamd73:
03-20-22, 08:52 AM
#5
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,798
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1393 Post(s)
Liked 1,326 Times
in
837 Posts
Agreed. With a 30" trouser inseam, my ideal frame size is 55cm C-T, which is why I collected the three Capos and the Bianchi and why I gave my 57cm Peugeot PKN-10 to my elder son, who is 3" taller than I am. My 21" Peugeot UO-8 also fits me, by virtue of its proportionately long top tube.
I just barely pass the "crotch standover test" on my 55cm road bikes.
1959 Capo with Nervar Star crank and Campag. 980 derailleur upgrades and new Brooks Pro saddle.
Having said this, I confess to having bought a 23" Nishiki Competition and ridden it 40K miles until the frame broke at the bottom bracket shell. It was a bit tall for me, but compensated with an extremely short top tube. (It was so short that I bought a long-reach stem for it. In contrast, the PKN-10's top tube was so long for me that I needed a close-coupled, minimal-reach stem.) Many people have advised that top tube length may be even more important than seat tube length in frame sizing, although both obviously count.
I just barely pass the "crotch standover test" on my 55cm road bikes.
1959 Capo with Nervar Star crank and Campag. 980 derailleur upgrades and new Brooks Pro saddle.
Having said this, I confess to having bought a 23" Nishiki Competition and ridden it 40K miles until the frame broke at the bottom bracket shell. It was a bit tall for me, but compensated with an extremely short top tube. (It was so short that I bought a long-reach stem for it. In contrast, the PKN-10's top tube was so long for me that I needed a close-coupled, minimal-reach stem.) Many people have advised that top tube length may be even more important than seat tube length in frame sizing, although both obviously count.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
Last edited by John E; 03-20-22 at 08:57 AM.
Likes For John E:
03-20-22, 08:56 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 3,302
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1143 Post(s)
Liked 1,742 Times
in
962 Posts
I don't think you want a frame 2" smaller than the Dawes. Is the saddle position correct for you? How is the standover now? Are you actually on toptube in standover? Try standover and lift the bike to the pelvis how far are the wheels of ground? I would think that you would want about 3/4"- 1 1/4" clearance, I think 1/2" gap would be considered French fit.
03-20-22, 09:05 AM
#7
Full Member
Thread Starter
Granted, I've only straddled the bike while in casual clothes (and commando) so the standover height might be better in cycling garb. The only other traditional frame bike I have to go by is my Raleigh Sports, which measures 21" C to T and has a very comfortable 31" standover height.
Last edited by swampyankee2; 03-23-22 at 06:36 PM.
03-20-22, 09:17 AM
#8
Wheelman
Join Date: Aug 2021
Location: Putney, London UK
Posts: 845
Bikes: 1982 Holdsworth Avanti (531), 1961 Holdsworth Cyclone
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 298 Post(s)
Liked 676 Times
in
341 Posts
FYI, my 1982 Holdsworth Avanti is 22" top tube (centre to centre) and 22" seat tube (centre bb to seat tube top).
I just measured the standover at 31.5".
I just measured the standover at 31.5".
03-20-22, 09:34 AM
#9
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,808
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2440 Post(s)
Liked 3,129 Times
in
1,968 Posts
I would imagine your comfort zone should be around 54-55cm. Maybe someone has a frame to trade/sell on here.
23" is 58 cm, which for me at 5'11" is a no go.
23" is 58 cm, which for me at 5'11" is a no go.
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
03-20-22, 09:49 AM
#10
ambulatory senior
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Peoria Il
Posts: 5,998
Bikes: Austro Daimler modified by Gugie! Raleigh Professional and lots of other bikes.
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1955 Post(s)
Liked 3,661 Times
in
1,679 Posts
For my taste I prefer a frame that many would call too tall. I never actually stand over the bike so it's not an issue. I ride 23-23.5 usually and like 24. My take on it is that when you stop you have one foot on a pedal and one on the ground. Top tube length and stem reach + handlebars make so much difference for fit that seat tube length doesn't account for.
Likes For 52telecaster:
03-20-22, 10:16 AM
#11
Thrifty Bill
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Mountains of Western NC
Posts: 23,526
Bikes: 86 Katakura Silk, 87 Prologue X2, 88 Cimarron LE, 1975 Sekai 4000 Professional, 73 Paramount, plus more
Mentioned: 96 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1236 Post(s)
Liked 964 Times
in
628 Posts
I have negative stand over on some of my bikes. I focus on top tube length instead. Plenty of top tube length sizing guides out there on Google. I always tell people "you don't ride a bike like the Flinstones drove their cars." I came from the era (1970) where a small Schwinn was 22 inch ST, medium was 24 inch ST, and large was 26 ST. Wow, those were the days.
I've had smaller ST bikes with super long top tubes, like a 52 cm CTT ST, 58cm TT CTC, that was too big due to the silly long top tube. I use stem length to fine tune TT sizing. I've seen XL bikes with short stems, and small bikes with long stem. I would not use stem length to represent sizing. Realize these bikes are 50 years old, so even if they originally came with a long stem, over the years, riders could have swapped them out to better fit them. Heck, sometimes they didn't leave the original dealer without a stem swap.
I've had smaller ST bikes with super long top tubes, like a 52 cm CTT ST, 58cm TT CTC, that was too big due to the silly long top tube. I use stem length to fine tune TT sizing. I've seen XL bikes with short stems, and small bikes with long stem. I would not use stem length to represent sizing. Realize these bikes are 50 years old, so even if they originally came with a long stem, over the years, riders could have swapped them out to better fit them. Heck, sometimes they didn't leave the original dealer without a stem swap.
Last edited by wrk101; 03-20-22 at 10:22 AM.
03-20-22, 11:02 AM
#12
Shifting is fun!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: South Holland, NL
Posts: 11,006
Bikes: Yes, please.
Mentioned: 280 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2198 Post(s)
Liked 4,601 Times
in
1,764 Posts
Likes For non-fixie:
03-20-22, 12:54 PM
#13
Full Member
Thread Starter
I don't think you want a frame 2" smaller than the Dawes. Is the saddle position correct for you? How is the standover now? Are you actually on toptube in standover? Try standover and lift the bike to the pelvis how far are the wheels of ground? I would think that you would want about 3/4"- 1 1/4" clearance, I think 1/2" gap would be considered French fit.
i can stand over the toptube but there is zero clearance between it and the tender parts. I'd consider that a French fit by your description.
03-20-22, 01:41 PM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 3,302
Mentioned: 39 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1143 Post(s)
Liked 1,742 Times
in
962 Posts
On reach, you do have some minor adjustments that can draw your reach closer. I though your saddle set height and tilt looks great to the size of frame. Could pull that forward a tiny maybe. If you were to reposition the brake levers higher on the curve of the bar. Which will take pressure off your wrists. Another would be to rotate the handlebars up, both of those can put you a touring position as opposed to race. Other things can be done but this changes no parts. Experiment, back and forth, being comfortable makes so much difference.
03-20-22, 02:02 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Fredericksburg, Va
Posts: 9,579
Bikes: '65 Frejus TDF, '73 Bottecchia Giro d'Italia, '83 Colnago Superissimo, '84 Trek 610, '84 Trek 760, '88 Pinarello Veneto, '88 De Rosa Pro, '89 Pinarello Montello, '94 Burley Duet, 97 Specialized RockHopper, 2010 Langster, Tern Link D8
Mentioned: 73 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1608 Post(s)
Liked 2,216 Times
in
1,103 Posts
@swampyankee2 - Your brake levers are waaaay to far down on the HB. If you take a straight edge and align it with the flats of the drops, the ends of the levers should be touching or slightly above the straight edge. You could also rotate yourbars.
1983 Colnago Superissimo on Flickr
1983 Colnago Superissimo on Flickr
__________________
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
Bikes don't stand alone. They are two tired.
Likes For SJX426:
03-20-22, 02:20 PM
#16
Old bikes, Older guy
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Fiscal Conservative on the Lefty Coast - Oregon
Posts: 843
Bikes: A few modern, Several vintage, All ridden when weather allows.
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 251 Post(s)
Liked 167 Times
in
115 Posts
One issue that I've had with seat tube measurement and stand over is BB height. Acquired a few frames that had the "right" size seat tube, but the BB height made the stand over tight.
Cheers,
Van
Cheers,
Van
__________________
Remember: Real bikes have pedals.
...and never put a yellow tail on a Red, White and Blue kite!
Remember: Real bikes have pedals.
...and never put a yellow tail on a Red, White and Blue kite!
Likes For Senior Ryder 00:
03-20-22, 07:26 PM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Baton Rouge La
Posts: 1,214
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 394 Post(s)
Liked 346 Times
in
230 Posts
Keep in mine that with a smaller frame you would not be able to raise your handlebars as high in relation to the seat. Adjusting your brake levers as SJX426 & Mr66 said will help shorten reach a lot. Judging by saddle height, I wouldn't call that French fit. French fit usually results in the top of the bars being almost level with the saddle, without the stem being too high (there should always be at least 2" of stem inside of the fork, 2 1/2" is better). You should check yours - it looks like it may be too far out of the fork. Once you adjust the bars & brake levers, if you still wanted a shorter reach, you could get a stem with less reach, and maybe more height.
03-20-22, 07:57 PM
#18
Happy With My Bikes
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,187
Bikes: Hi-Ten bike boomers, a Trek Domane and some projects
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 884 Post(s)
Liked 2,307 Times
in
1,117 Posts
FWIW, one my most comfortable bikes to ride just touches my crotch. But I spend more time riding it than I do standing over it. I would take the suggestions offered above to correct the brake lever position before giving up on this frame. You may find with tilting the saddle that you still have issues reaching the brakes and now have another issue with sliding forward and thus having to hold yourself more with your palms.
__________________
"It is the unknown around the corner that turns my wheels." -- Heinz Stücke
"It is the unknown around the corner that turns my wheels." -- Heinz Stücke
03-20-22, 09:19 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 17,159
Mentioned: 481 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3810 Post(s)
Liked 6,705 Times
in
2,613 Posts
IMO, stand over height is the least useful measurement you can use. How much time does one spend standing over the top tube with two feet on the ground, anyway? And I agree the OP’s brake levers are set up too far forward. I try to achieve a level surface between bars and the tops of the hoods.
Likes For nlerner:
03-20-22, 09:36 PM
#20
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 909
Bikes: 1964(?) Frejus Tour de France, 1967(?) Dawes Double Blue, 1979 Trek 710, 1982 Claud Butler Dalesman, 1983 Schwinn Paramount Elite, 2014 Brompton, maybe a couple more
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 310 Post(s)
Liked 679 Times
in
331 Posts
IMO, stand over height is the least useful measurement you can use. How much time does one spend standing over the top tube with two feet on the ground, anyway? And I agree the OP’s brake levers are set up too far forward. I try to achieve a level surface between bars and the tops of the hoods.
Likes For albrt:
03-21-22, 05:44 PM
#21
Edumacator
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Goose Creek, SC
Posts: 6,808
Bikes: '87 Crestdale, '87 Basso Gap, '92 Rossin Performance EL-OS, 1990 VanTuyl, 1980s Losa, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 1987 PX10, etc...
Mentioned: 59 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2440 Post(s)
Liked 3,129 Times
in
1,968 Posts
Looking more closely now that it is not on a small phone, that is a perfect size bike for you if the seat is in the right position. A smaller frame is going to necessitate a significant jump (2cm) in seatpost height from seat tube. And then the corresponding stem (Technomic zone)
Maybe get a shorter stem reach, and I agree with everyone here, move the levers around and up until you find a comfortable zone, looks be darned. Neal has a nice rule of thumb I am going to use for quick adjustments...
Maybe get a shorter stem reach, and I agree with everyone here, move the levers around and up until you find a comfortable zone, looks be darned. Neal has a nice rule of thumb I am going to use for quick adjustments...
__________________
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
1987 Crest Cannondale, 1987 Basso Gap, 1992 Rossin Performance EL, 1990ish Van Tuyl, 1985 Trek 670, 1982 AD SLE, 2003 Pinarello Surprise, 1990ish MBK Atlantique, 1987 Peugeot Competition, 1987 Nishiki Tri-A, 1981 Faggin, 1996 Cannondale M500, 1984 Mercian, 1982 AD SuperLeicht, 1985 Massi (model unknown), 1988 Daccordi Griffe , 1989 Fauxsin MTB, 1981 Ciocc Mockba, 1992 Bianchi Giro, 1977 Colnago Super
03-21-22, 05:44 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: San Jose (Willow Glen) Ca
Posts: 9,847
Bikes: Kirk Custom JK Special, '84 Team Miyata,(dura ace old school) 80?? SR Semi-Pro 600 Arabesque
Mentioned: 106 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2338 Post(s)
Liked 2,824 Times
in
1,541 Posts
Remember a proper fitting bike will be one that you have to get off the seat at stops, typical answer to a close to uncomfortable top tube is to lean it over a bit when stopped.
how are you setting saddle height? My go to is to do an initial set based on heel on pedal axle with knee locked, from there if you hips don't rock when pedaling, keep raising until they do, and then lower a bit.
Looking at the amount of seat post you have, i thinks this is probably not a bad fit and you probably don't need to go down a size
how are you setting saddle height? My go to is to do an initial set based on heel on pedal axle with knee locked, from there if you hips don't rock when pedaling, keep raising until they do, and then lower a bit.
Looking at the amount of seat post you have, i thinks this is probably not a bad fit and you probably don't need to go down a size
__________________
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)
Life is too short not to ride the best bike you have, as much as you can
(looking for Torpado Super light frame/fork or for Raleigh International frame fork 58cm)
03-21-22, 06:52 PM
#23
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 20,305
Mentioned: 130 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3464 Post(s)
Liked 2,830 Times
in
1,996 Posts
Top tube length and handlebar position also play a roll.
when I was young and 5'-7"
I bought a 59 ctt framed bike, everyone thought I would grow... I did but not eneough.
I sold it off for. 56 cm ctt frame when I was 5'-9". I gained some height but gravity struck back. I still have that 56cm bike but truthfully it is now a tad long.
if I wanted my bars level with the saddle a 58-59 cm would work.
but most often those bikes have a top tube too long.
I am not discussing seat tube angle or as some note "setback".
I think the Dawes is on the middle- longer side.
a 22.5" top tube might be what it has, if so, can be made to work with a shorter stem.
consider what you need and go from there.
Dawes I think went 19, 21, 23... maybe even add a 1/2" to each size.
Sometimes even the 21" frames had long top tubes... easier to avoid toe clip overlap.
when I was young and 5'-7"
I bought a 59 ctt framed bike, everyone thought I would grow... I did but not eneough.
I sold it off for. 56 cm ctt frame when I was 5'-9". I gained some height but gravity struck back. I still have that 56cm bike but truthfully it is now a tad long.
if I wanted my bars level with the saddle a 58-59 cm would work.
but most often those bikes have a top tube too long.
I am not discussing seat tube angle or as some note "setback".
I think the Dawes is on the middle- longer side.
a 22.5" top tube might be what it has, if so, can be made to work with a shorter stem.
consider what you need and go from there.
Dawes I think went 19, 21, 23... maybe even add a 1/2" to each size.
Sometimes even the 21" frames had long top tubes... easier to avoid toe clip overlap.
03-21-22, 07:10 PM
#24
Junior Member