Leebo

Jamis make some new steel mt bikes, small sizes too. Check them out.

Altair 4

My daughter has this bike (well, actually the model before they went 1x10 gear setup) and it's really quite nice. It comes with 700x23 tires, but will fit up to a 32.

Even though I can stand flat-footed over the top tubes on my bikes, I do the tilt thing as well. Left foot is flat on the ground, right foot still on the pedal, and the bike tilted, I dunno, may 20 degrees to the left.

Altair 4

That's a nice bike for $400. Wonder what it would cost in Montreal, Canada? Does BikeIsland ship there? Same problem with the Islabike I previously mentioned.

cyccommute 

Sorry but a 29er is about the worst bike you could suggest for the tiniestbike. First there's the issue of the bike standing 2 inches taller than a "normal" 700C if you use mountain bike tires. Then there is the issue of a small person trying to ride a frame that is designed around wheels that are too big to begin with. A regular road bike with 700C wheels is going to be too tall for someone 4'11" tall. Sizes small enough with that size wheel are bad designs at best and aren't designed for a petite person to begin with...go watch the Terry video that blackieoneshot's post 25.

A 26" wheel mountain bike probably isn't going to be that great of a bike for a small person either. There are exceptions...women specific design bikes, for example...but generally, mountain bikes have proportionally longer top tubes for small frames which may not fit all that well. Tiniestbike would need a mountain bike in a sub 12" frame which and 26" wheel which are exceedingly rare, even as a used bike.

I would suggest staying as far away from steel as possible. A small, relatively light, rider doesn't need the durability of steel. But, more importantly, small steel frames are heavier relative to larger frames because they use shorter butts in the middle of the tubes so the bike ends up with more metal instead of less. The end butts need to be just about as long as a "normal" sized bike to manage the heat of welding or brazing.

An aluminum frame doesn't have the same problem. In fact, my wife's aluminum Symmetry was about 2 to 4 lbs lighter out of the box than her steel small wheeled Symmetry that it replaced. That's a significant weight savings for a small light rider.

What is really needed for small riders is carbon fiber bikes but I doubt if they are going to be coming anytime soon. A sub 14 lb bike for a 100 lb rider would be very nice but I just don't see it happening.

The Isla looks like a great idea with one major flaw. Small riders with their low power to weight ratio would greatly benefit from a wider range of gearing. The Isla would be a good place to start but it would need some modifications to make it better. That would be doable but it could get costly. A mountain bike triple with 44/32/22 chainring set would be ideal but that modification would cost about half again what the bike goes for.

Still it would be a good place to start.

RubeRad

I
LIKE
BIG
BUTTsandIcannotLie

A smaller bike has butts the same size...

(somebody else can finish the song)

(Are the butts are the middle thin parts or the thicker end parts)

ModManZZZ

Folding bike, 16" to 20" wheeler.

TenSpeedV2

I think that you took what I said slightly off. I have plenty of stand over room waiting at a light. What I tend to do is half crouch and rest the butt on the top tube, staying clipped in on the right side. I can stand there, or just kind of half sit if it is a longer light. The bike fits me like a glove and I have it dialed in perfectly. I am 6'0" and it is a 58cm track bike with a 90mm stem. I am all torso with short short legs.

2017 - 482 miles so far this year
2016 - 3246 miles on it.
2015 - 2910 miles on it.

zze86

I just put together a Trek ST 820 for a lady of the same height as the OP. Forget, what size it was but I believe it was the 13" size since the seat post was almost maxed out but reach was comfortable. Swapped out the tires for some thinner slicks and it was much more enjoyable to ride on the road. She decided to use the stock flat bars since she wanted to remain more upright but I didn't see any issues with reach should she want to switch to drop bars. I did suggest swapping out to some different bars should the flat bars prove too much on the wrists.

jimmie65

Standover - flat-footed over the frame.
A 32" inseam is exaggerating for me; closer to 31". My brother, who is 2" taller than me, has legs that are 5" longer than me, and he isn't particularly long-legged. I have a long torso and short legs. I think my Giants are 21"; anything smaller is uncomfortable. In fact, I have 120mm stems on both to extend the reach a little. I loved the reach on an old 22" Specialized I had, but standover height was an inch too high for me.


I've been riding for several years, usually over 100 miles a week and often 60+ mile rides on the weekend. While my choice of frame may not be "technically" correct, it has worked for me. (Of course, this is bikeforums and I'm sure there are plenty of posters itching to tell me how what I should be doing instead.)

cyccommute 

Both.

cyccommute 

What you are describing isn't even remotely related to the problems petite people have with standover. You "sit" on the top tube because you want to. Too many petite people are placed on bikes that require them to sit on the top tube. There's a huge difference. Try riding a bike that is a 62cm and see if you like the experience to get a feel for what small people have to deal with all the time.

Altair 4

Agreed on the steel frame comment. My daughter's Islabike weighs about 22 lbs, which is close to 10 lbs less than her previous smaller steel-framed bike. Her Luath model came with 36/46-tooth chainrings, with a SRAM 11-32t cassette. The shifting is all Shimano Claris. I'll have to ask her how the range feels to her but it may take time to get an answer - we're both recovering from knee injuries (hers from skating and mine from a bike crash ).

tbo

+1 on steel.

I love vintage steel bikes (as does my wife), but her steel bike weighs 45 lbs. There's no reason for a more petite person to carry around that much bike weight.

I don't think you need to be an absolute nut about weight (read: carbon fiber everything), but one advantage of being smaller is that you can go pretty light, probably aluminium.

On a commuter bike, the only CF part that I would like (not a requirement, but a nice-to-have) is a carbon fiber fork. It can take some of the vibration out of the bike that can resonate to one's forearms. This is not a weight issue at all.

Then again, if you fall in love with a steel bike that's less than 25 lbs, have a blast with it.

BikeTales 

I happen to have a nice pink Terry Chrom for sale. It has a 700c rear wheel and 24" front. My gf bought it a few years ago, but it turned out to be too small for her. It's been hanging in the garage ever since.

This isn't it, but it looks like this:


You'd want to get new tires, and do some customizing probably but you'd have plenty of $ left in your budget to do so. Let me know if you're interested

noglider 

My ex-wife (about 5'1") has one of those Terry bikes with the 24" front wheel. It's a really good bike.

I helped my daughter's girlfriend (5'0") acquire a Centurion of the same design.

cyccommute 

The additional information is helpful. You are talking about mountain bike frames not road bike frames. No wonder you can't stand flat footed on a 21" mountain bike. That's a very large frame and was meant for someone from 6'1" to about 6'5"...yes, I'm telling you that you are doing something wrong.

In my experience, it takes a lot of effort to convince someone that a wrong sized bike is, well, the wrong size but once convinced, the person ends up happier and more comfortable. I've done it myself a couple of times.

Altair 4

I think the fact that the OP is in Montreal Canada is going to make a lot of our purchase suggestions moot. BikeIsland says they'll ship to the lower 48 states. Islabikes website makes no mention of Canada, either. In either case, it might be worth a call to confirm, if the OP's interest runs high in either direction.

OP, take a look at Norco bikes. https://www.norco.com/

They have a nice range of sizes in various styles. A quick check of their website shows that some models, like https://www.norco.com/bikes/city/urba...indie-4-forma/ come in XXS sizes.

This brand might be your ticket. Whether you can find your size in stock, well, that's another question. Looks like they have a good dealer network in your city.

Barabaika

This is an awful bike for commuting.
It has absolutely no clearance for fenders.
It also has a plastic fork.

It also looks too nice, it's a magnet to thieves.





I would search for a junior bike. If you get it cheaply, you can replace the seat post and handlebar with light aluminum ones.
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vi...roadbikes.html

Darth Lefty 

I sense a slapfight coming

Barabaika

Here is my argument for the fight.

I would put fenders and an IGH or a 7-8 speed cassette and modern brake shoes.
It's comfortable, relatively light, reliable, beautiful.



The original item.
It weighs 24.5lb with all steel components that can be replaced while the Terry weighs 22-25lb. I don't understand, aluminum frame and plastic fork plus modern components should weigh much less, but they don't.

cyccommute 

More like a smack down.

I have nearly 20,000 (mostly) commuting miles on a "plastic" fork over the last decade and I weigh more than a 4'11" person of any gender weighs. I put a lot more stress on the fork than they would and I'm not worried about my old, well used "plastic" fork breaking at any time in the near or distant future.

And, while I agree that it has limited room for fenders, I personally think that the need for fenders is highly overrated. If you ride in the rain, you are going to get wet so you will likely be wearing rain protection anyway. The bike won't melt if it gets wet so it doesn't care. There are also way of fitting fenders to bikes with limited fender clearance.

However, you seem to be missing the forest for the trees. The point is not to have the "perfect" bike for commuting, especially considering the limitations that the rider has. The point it getting thetiniestbike on a bicycle that can be ridden by a person of small stature. That's far more difficult than most people realize. One shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Every new bike is a possible magnet for thieves. You rolls your dice and you moves your mice.

Several problems with your idea. First, the bike you've posted is 34 years old. Peugot bicycles were rare to begin with in the US and finding a used 24" wheel mixte bike is something of a fools errand. It's not like they are making them anymore. I see literally thousands of used bikes come into my local bike co-op (about 3000 bikes per year in donations and I've been working for them for 5 years). We seldom see a regular sized Peugot much less a petite one like the M46 you are suggesting.

Secondly, the claimed 24.5 lb weight of the M46 should be taken with a grain of salt equivalent to the entire annual output of fluer de sel for France. I've seen way too many bikes to believe that a mixte framed bike with extra steel tubing, steel rims, steel cranks, steel handlebars, steel seatpost and only the smallest touch of aluminum parts would weigh anywhere within a country mile of 24 lbs. What I don't believe is how someone could look at a bike with enough steel on it to make a French battleship could believe that it would weigh that little.

I could, however, believe a translation error. I would suspect that the bike weighs closer to 24.5 kilograms than pounds, although that's a bit too high but still more believable than 24 lbs.

There is the issue of size. Look closely at the brochure page you posted. The "size" is listed as an 18". Yes, it has small wheels but that seatpost is way up in the air and I'm not sure that it could be pushed down far enough for a small person to ride.

Bikeforumuser0019

See Post #31
I'm 5'4" and I ride the bike in the back of the picture, which is all aluminum and weighs considerably more than this Peugeot.

Barabaika

I wonder what is the weight of your Peugeot.
It's actually newer than the M46 - 1989.
If you change the steel handlebar and the steel seat post, you can save 2lb more.

You can invest $300 in new parts like a new swept-back handlebar, a Brooks saddle, fenders, racks, panniers... for the price of the BikesDirect Terry https://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...road-bikes.htm.

Barabaika

There should be some French bikes in author's French Montreal.

I accept that it's difficult to find such bikes, but it's also difficult to get rid of them. They were bought for juniors, who are 34 years older now. So, the bikes are mostly unused.
You may have to travel a long distance to get one.

See, College3.0 offered the thread author her junior bicycle with 0 miles. I don't expect any problems with it. I accept that the components are outdated. But this fact detracts thieves. Also, thieves don't like mixtes. It's also 16".
https://www.bikeforums.net/classic-vi...lee-mixte.html

I accept that you need mechanical skills to update an old bicycle instead of getting a new shiny one every 3 years.

rhm

As interesting as this discussion is, it's a couple weeks since @thetiniestbike posted; not sure s/he has stuck around to absorb our collective wisdom. Whatever; I hope it helped!