Experiment with larger frame, any thoughts – bike forums gas in california

#

I’m always put in a 58 cm frame when I go to bike shops. But I think they only initially look at your height. They miss the fact my legs are longer than my younger son that is 6′-3". I’m 5′-11" with about a 35" inseam depending on how you measure. I’ve always felt better on larger frames. I miss the size of my 26" varsity which equates to a 66cm frame. Ideally I think it was 1 inch to large for me. I probably would have been better on a 25" fram.

I added the metric conversion to the frame size that was given in inches then. As well I realize that bike geometry has changed somewhat since back then, so todays 60 cm frame might have tubes lengths and angles that make it fit like the sizes of bikes in my youth.

But I believe that bike sizing today is still has the same issue as then. Different people have different arm, leg and body lengths. But the sizing systems were built toward an assumed average. As well the calculators that supposedly take those measures and more into account base their size on a particular geometry or two which might not be what you are looking at in the store.

I’m always put in a 58 cm frame when I go to bike shops. But I think they only initially look at your height. They miss the fact my legs are longer than my younger son that is 6′-3". I’m 5′-11" with about a 35" inseam depending on how you measure. I’ve always felt better on larger frames. I miss the size of my 26" varsity which equates to a 66cm frame. Ideally I think it was 1 inch to large for me. I probably would have been better on a 25" fram.

I added the metric conversion to the frame size that was given in inches then. As well I realize that bike geometry has changed somewhat since back then, so todays 60 cm frame might have tubes lengths and angles that make it fit like the sizes of bikes in my youth.

But I believe that bike sizing today is still has the same issue as then. Different people have different arm, leg and body lengths. But the sizing systems were built toward an assumed average. As well the calculators that supposedly take those measures and more into account base their size on a particular geometry or two which might not be what you are looking at in the store.

I only have one bike shop fit experience to share, but it was essentially the same. "How tall are you?" "About 6 feet" "K, you’ll need a 58" There was a laminated paper chart on the wall, height vs. frame size, evidently this was all the more thought they could put into it.

Joseph, the Fuji frame looks a little too big for you. It looks like you can make it work by having the saddle low and the stem almost on top of the headset. But that doesn’t give you much wiggle room to adjust either up and down. With your longer inseam to height, you are on the right track in choosing a frame that has a little longer seat post length than top tube length.

If I were you, I would first set the saddlle position. Start with ~83% of total inseam (floor to crotch) for the height. Assuming its 34.25" then try 28.5". Then use knee over pedal spindle (KOPS) to get an idea of saddle fore/aft placement. Hold the string below your kneecap (not on it) and see if you can get the weight at the end to be over or close to the pedal spindle and ball of your foot. You might need someone else to help check it. Pedal should be in the 3 o’clock position. After that the saddle stays where it is. Adjust the angle a little up or down depending on what you like after riding on it a bit.

Then stem length is whatever you feel comfy with without being too stretched out. I like a top tube length short enough to let me have around a 140mm stem. When I’m on the brake hoods or in the drops, I see my front hub if it matters. But the top tube, torso and arm length will dictate that, not the saddle fore/aft (after its set).

Edit: Forgot to mention that I like the stem not much lower than the seat. I used to have it lower, but was having some lower back pain and am not as flexible as when I was younger. So I recently flipped my stem to raise the bars a bit. It solved the lower back pain issue for me.

Edit 2: I mention 140mm stem above but I actually have a 120mm stem on one bike and a shorter (110mm?) on another. So had a senior moment and got the length wrong. Oh well. I think the takeaway here is that I like to be a little more over the front wheel.

No pics yet, but I tried rolling my hips forward. At first, it was crushing my testicles and I couldn’t breathe, but I moved the saddle backward and tweaked the angle until that didn’t hurt anymore and I was able to move my testicles out from underneath and off to one side. Is that common, moving them to the side? To maintain that posture, I have to pull back on the bars a little when accelerating while seated to resist sliding off the back of the saddle. Does that sound right, or maybe went too far? I’ve always either had to push down and/or forward on my handlebars, so pulling is counterintuitive. If I didn’t mention earlier in the post, I’m still pretty new to riding a road bike. It seems like it might be helpful for me to pick up a cheap trainer.If you can briefly lift your hands off the bars, you have it back far enough, no further. Pulling on the bars when going hard is normal, usually up on the downstroke side and a bit back. Pushing forward on the bars is a sign you’re not back far enough.

Tighter shorts should fix the balls issue. You know they’re tight enough if you can barely get them over your butt. Your balls should be pulled up and held out of the way by your shorts. I usually reach down there and yank them up just before I ride. Kinda hard to be inobtrusive about it though. I probably have 10 pair which I cycle through, choosing the short according to the ride. Just the right shorts may take a bit to find.

If you can briefly lift your hands off the bars, you have it back far enough, no further. Pulling on the bars when going hard is normal, usually up on the downstroke side and a bit back. Pushing forward on the bars is a sign you’re not back far enough.

Tighter shorts should fix the balls issue. You know they’re tight enough if you can barely get them over your butt. Your balls should be pulled up and held out of the way by your shorts. I usually reach down there and yank them up just before I ride. Kinda hard to be inobtrusive about it though. I probably have 10 pair which I cycle through, choosing the short according to the ride. Just the right shorts may take a bit to find.I rode the bike at a local park today for I guess somewhere between 5-10 miles and did a couple more little tweaks to the saddle but I am pretty satisfied. When I was crouched as low as I could go in the drops my knees were almost hitting my elbows. I do think I could go for a 120mm stem eventually. I measured the top tube again and its 60cm, 23 1/2". So the frame is really tall (64cm) but not all that long. With the 100mm stem it’s still pretty upright while I’m on the hoods. FWIW I have the saddle and bars adjusted to be comfortable primarily on the drops, and since the bars are comparatively high I think that’s fine. The Raleigh I’ve been riding has a 57cm top tube for comparison. It would be very strange to think that a longer reach is what I should have been working toward but I was trying to sit on my butt before, like on an upright bike, so that sure would limit my reach. It sure is confusing, though, the bike shops put me on a 58 with an ETT of 56-57, the fit calculators all seem to want me on a 56-57 ETT w/120mm stem but I seem to be comfortable on a 60 TT w/100mm stem, maybe longer. That’s a remarkable reach disparity.