FG sizing vs geared road bike
#1
Dirty Heathen
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,273
Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033
Liked 984 Times
in
573 Posts
FG sizing vs geared road bike
Looking to add a 'proper' FG bike to the stable, for variety's sake. Don't want to spend a lot of money, so i'm looking at used bikes; Lots of 53-54cm (as advertised) in my area, although I usually ride a ~56cm.
Any benefits / pitfalls to going with a smaller-than-usual frame for the FG? Probably intend on mostly in-town and 'path' use, so no big-mile or high-speed stuff.
Any benefits / pitfalls to going with a smaller-than-usual frame for the FG? Probably intend on mostly in-town and 'path' use, so no big-mile or high-speed stuff.
#2
Guest
I wouldn't buy a smaller frame, no matter the purpose or style of the bike. Proper positioning will make the bike more controllable and the ride more comfortable; I'd want both on a fixed gear bike.
I also wouldn't go strictly by the "frame size"; compare the stack, reach, and standover heights of one of your current bikes to whatever FG you're considering. Sometimes a 53 is really a 55 (and vice-versa).
I also wouldn't go strictly by the "frame size"; compare the stack, reach, and standover heights of one of your current bikes to whatever FG you're considering. Sometimes a 53 is really a 55 (and vice-versa).
Likes For Rolla:
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: NWNJ
Posts: 3,704
Bikes: Road bike is a Carbon Bianchi C2C & Grandis (1980's), Gary Fisher Mt Bike, Trek Tandem & Mongoose SS MTB circa 1992.
Liked 353 Times
in
226 Posts
Looking to add a 'proper' FG bike to the stable, for variety's sake. Don't want to spend a lot of money, so i'm looking at used bikes; Lots of 53-54cm (as advertised) in my area, although I usually ride a ~56cm.
Any benefits / pitfalls to going with a smaller-than-usual frame for the FG? Probably intend on mostly in-town and 'path' use, so no big-mile or high-speed stuff.
Any benefits / pitfalls to going with a smaller-than-usual frame for the FG? Probably intend on mostly in-town and 'path' use, so no big-mile or high-speed stuff.
go smaller.
Likes For thehammerdog:
#4
Dirty Heathen
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: MC-778, 6250 fsw
Posts: 2,273
Bikes: 1997 Cannondale, 1976 Bridgestone, 1998 SoftRide, 1989 Klein, 1989 Black Lightning #0033
Liked 984 Times
in
573 Posts
I wouldn't buy a smaller frame, no matter the purpose or style of the bike. Proper positioning will make the bike more controllable and the ride more comfortable; I'd want both on a fixed gear bike.
I also wouldn't go strictly by the "frame size"; compare the stack, reach, and standover heights of one of your current bikes to whatever FG you're considering. Sometimes a 53 is really a 55 (and vice-versa).
I also wouldn't go strictly by the "frame size"; compare the stack, reach, and standover heights of one of your current bikes to whatever FG you're considering. Sometimes a 53 is really a 55 (and vice-versa).
I was more asking along the line of whether with regards to F/G if it's better to have a bike that's a little on the small side, than too large. I figured, since you can't stop pedaling, that it'd be preferable to have the clearance of a little smaller bike between your knees.
#5
Guest
I was more asking along the line of whether with regards to F/G if it's better to have a bike that's a little on the small side, than too large. I figured, since you can't stop pedaling, that it'd be preferable to have the clearance of a little smaller bike between your knees.
Likes For Rolla:
#6
Junior Member
I wouldn't buy a smaller frame, no matter the purpose or style of the bike. Proper positioning will make the bike more controllable and the ride more comfortable; I'd want both on a fixed gear bike.
I also wouldn't go strictly by the "frame size"; compare the stack, reach, and standover heights of one of your current bikes to whatever FG you're considering. Sometimes a 53 is really a 55 (and vice-versa).
I also wouldn't go strictly by the "frame size"; compare the stack, reach, and standover heights of one of your current bikes to whatever FG you're considering. Sometimes a 53 is really a 55 (and vice-versa).
OP: a slightly smaller size might work for you, but it's really dependent on how you plan on using this bike. If it's for shorter "in-town" types of rides, there's absolutely nothing wrong with going with a slightly smaller frame than what your road bike may be, especially considering that you can toss a longer stem on it. The only pitfall I can think of is a potential for toe overlap if the head angle is too steep, but you'll probably be able to discern that from test riding one of the used bikes you're looking at.
#7
Quixote
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: New York
Posts: 167
Bikes: Bianchi Pista Concept 05, Level 2014
Liked 83 Times
in
62 Posts
Hard question, stem length, bar reach and standover height change handling characteristics (what do you prefer?) many modern track or road bikes were designed to run a longer seat-post - which could change your maneuverability - on the other hand Japanese keirin bikes and manny vintage bikes were designed for a "French fit" (fist of seatpost) and might handle better with the seatpost length the maker intended. also handlebar choice and riding position matter here - are you planning on riding in a low stretched out position with deep or compact drop bars, or risers, bullhorns or townie bars, etc. If you like to ride with your torso more erect, so you can see over cars and maneuver in traffic or whatever you might want your handlebars a closer measured distance from your saddle than it would be on a road bike that fits you and if your looking to sprint a lot it might be the opposite.
So yeah I dunno
good luck with your quest
So yeah I dunno
good luck with your quest
Last edited by Bianchi pc; 07-09-22 at 12:26 PM.