UK and Europe · Public discussion

Sizing

Started by Saint · · Last activity · 6 posts · 453 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
UK and Europe
Published
9 July 2004
Last activity
10 July 2004
Original author
Saint
Posts
6
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
453
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–6 of 6
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake correct 'sizing'
    when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with. However the advice is
    a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my area
    with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them merely said
    that correct sizing involved my standing with slight clearance over the
    crossbar and having the saddle at a height where my toes were in contact
    with the ground.

    This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

    Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long standing, reputable
    dealers) have fitting machines/jigs etc so in the absence of these how on
    earth do I know what the correct size is?

    I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above criteria to both
    the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter having less seatpost pin
    out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and what,
    in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?

    And I thought cycling was just about riding your bike........

    Cheers

    S

  2. "Saint" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake correct 'sizing'
    when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with. However the advice


    is

    Quoted message said:

    a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my


    area

    Quoted message said:

    with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them merely said
    that correct sizing involved my standing with slight clearance over the
    crossbar and having the saddle at a height where my toes were in contact
    with the ground.

    This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

    Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long standing, reputable
    dealers) have fitting machines/jigs etc so in the absence of these how on
    earth do I know what the correct size is?

    I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above criteria to both
    the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter having less seatpost


    pin

    Quoted message said:

    out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and


    what,

    Quoted message said:

    in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?

    And I thought cycling was just about riding your bike........

    I've been through four bikes and thought I liked them all, but my current is
    the best. I have tried one of my old bikes since, and I hate it. It's a
    personal thing. Borrow bikes off friends etc ...

  3. In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

    Quoted message said:

    I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake correct 'sizing'
    when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with. However the advice is
    a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my area
    with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them merely said
    that correct sizing involved my standing with slight clearance over the
    crossbar and having the saddle at a height where my toes were in contact
    with the ground.

    This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

    Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long standing, reputable
    dealers) have fitting machines/jigs etc so in the absence of these how on
    earth do I know what the correct size is?

    I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above criteria to both
    the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter having less seatpost pin
    out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and what,
    in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?

    And I thought cycling was just about riding your bike........

    Cheers

    S


    Now there are others more qulified than I, however, as they all seem to
    be either down the pub or in bed, I will give you a starter[1] for 10.
    Bikes (or bicycles) come in many different flavours to do many diffrent
    jobs. Unsupprisinly, the sizing will be diffrent for each type. So,
    first question, what do you want to do on your new bike. Commute, if so,
    will that be a fast commute or a slow pootle commute. Will it be a train
    commute with a bit/some/a lot of riding at one/both ends? Race? ok, will
    that be on the road, or off the road, or perhaps a combination of the
    two? Tour? wil that be weekend tours or full blown round the world tour,
    so soemwhere inbetween. Enough. this isn't an exustive list but you get
    the picture. You mention a Trek, without looking I don't know whether
    the modle you looked at was a mountian bike a hybred or a road bike.
    However, one of the primary measurements you will be interested in is
    the distance between the saddle and the peddal when the crank is inline
    with the seat tube. There are mathematical formulea to work this out but
    a good starting point is with you sitting on the saddle, you should be
    able to comfortable rest your heel on the lower peddal with a slight
    bend in the knee. But as the seat post is normally adjustable in the
    seat post, this can be moved to suit you on a wide varity of frame
    sizes. Next up (and my personal starting point!) is the stand over
    hight. this is the distance between your dangley bits and the top tube.
    On a road bike this only needs to be confortably clear, (say a couple of
    cm), on a mountin bike, this distance can't really be to big, say a
    couple of feet for safety... ok, sensibly 10 to 15 cm, though bike
    manufactures have done alsorts to lower the standover hight these days
    igh all manor of bent top tubes (one way to look at this, is it's one
    les tube for you to bend 🙂 next up is the saddle to the handle bars
    distance. Starting point here is with your elbow on the noes of the
    saddle your fingertips should reach the bars. whether you want the
    saddle above the bars, in line with the bars or below the bars is
    personal prefference and depends on what your goals are, but you should
    considier this when you buy a frame. OK, got all that. Good. In summary,
    the for a saftey bike[2] you will have three contact points with the
    bike, your hands, your feet and the soft squigy bit between your legs.
    it is the relationship between these that is important to comfort and
    power[3] whether you can reach the floor while in the saddle is a safety
    issue, but is also important. A good bike shop would tell you this, and
    the advise you recieved is more akin to that which would be dished out
    to a parent buying a toy bike for a child.

    HtH

    1. It is only a starter, theres a whole scince out there specialisingt
    in thsi stuff.
    2.A safety bike is what you probably consider as a 'normal bike' with a
    dimond frame. there is of course no such thing as a normal bike and
    everyone in this ng knows (whether they'll admit it or not) that the the
    continume of refinement goes from Ordenaries (penny farthings) through
    safety bikes all the way to recumbents
    3.Again, as is known by all of this parish, the dark side is he only
    true place of comfort and power availale to the pedal cyclist.
    --
    ..paul

    If at first you don't succeed...
    Skydiving is probably not the sport for you.

  4. Saint said:

    I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake correct 'sizing'
    when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with. However the advice is
    a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my area
    with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them merely said
    that correct sizing involved my standing with slight clearance over the
    crossbar and having the saddle at a height where my toes were in contact
    with the ground.

    This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

    Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long standing, reputable
    dealers) have fitting machines/jigs etc so in the absence of these how on
    earth do I know what the correct size is?

    I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above criteria to both
    the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter having less seatpost pin
    out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and what,
    in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?

    And I thought cycling was just about riding your bike........

    Cheers

    S


    Top tube and stem length are generally more important than seat tube
    size - especially for MTB and compact road frames, where standover
    height is not an issue.

  5. "paul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] says...

    Quoted message said:

    I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake correct


    'sizing'

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with. However the


    advice is

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my


    area

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them merely


    said

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    that correct sizing involved my standing with slight clearance over the
    crossbar and having the saddle at a height where my toes were in contact
    with the ground.

    This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

    Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long standing, reputable
    dealers) have fitting machines/jigs etc so in the absence of these how


    on

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    earth do I know what the correct size is?

    I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above criteria to


    both

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter having less seatpost


    pin

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and


    what,

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?

    And I thought cycling was just about riding your bike........

    Cheers

    S


    Now there are others more qulified than I, however, as they all seem to
    be either down the pub or in bed, I will give you a starter[1] for 10.
    Bikes (or bicycles) come in many different flavours to do many diffrent
    jobs. Unsupprisinly, the sizing will be diffrent for each type. So,
    first question, what do you want to do on your new bike. Commute, if so,
    will that be a fast commute or a slow pootle commute. Will it be a train
    commute with a bit/some/a lot of riding at one/both ends? Race? ok, will
    that be on the road, or off the road, or perhaps a combination of the
    two? Tour? wil that be weekend tours or full blown round the world tour,
    so soemwhere inbetween. Enough. this isn't an exustive list but you get
    the picture. You mention a Trek, without looking I don't know whether
    the modle you looked at was a mountian bike a hybred or a road bike.
    However, one of the primary measurements you will be interested in is
    the distance between the saddle and the peddal when the crank is inline
    with the seat tube. There are mathematical formulea to work this out but
    a good starting point is with you sitting on the saddle, you should be
    able to comfortable rest your heel on the lower peddal with a slight
    bend in the knee. But as the seat post is normally adjustable in the
    seat post, this can be moved to suit you on a wide varity of frame
    sizes. Next up (and my personal starting point!) is the stand over
    hight. this is the distance between your dangley bits and the top tube.
    On a road bike this only needs to be confortably clear, (say a couple of
    cm), on a mountin bike, this distance can't really be to big, say a
    couple of feet for safety... ok, sensibly 10 to 15 cm, though bike
    manufactures have done alsorts to lower the standover hight these days
    igh all manor of bent top tubes (one way to look at this, is it's one
    les tube for you to bend 🙂 next up is the saddle to the handle bars
    distance. Starting point here is with your elbow on the noes of the
    saddle your fingertips should reach the bars. whether you want the
    saddle above the bars, in line with the bars or below the bars is
    personal prefference and depends on what your goals are, but you should
    considier this when you buy a frame. OK, got all that. Good. In summary,
    the for a saftey bike[2] you will have three contact points with the
    bike, your hands, your feet and the soft squigy bit between your legs.
    it is the relationship between these that is important to comfort and
    power[3] whether you can reach the floor while in the saddle is a safety
    issue, but is also important. A good bike shop would tell you this, and
    the advise you recieved is more akin to that which would be dished out
    to a parent buying a toy bike for a child.

    HtH

    1. It is only a starter, theres a whole scince out there specialisingt
    in thsi stuff.
    2.A safety bike is what you probably consider as a 'normal bike' with a
    dimond frame. there is of course no such thing as a normal bike and
    everyone in this ng knows (whether they'll admit it or not) that the the
    continume of refinement goes from Ordenaries (penny farthings) through
    safety bikes all the way to recumbents
    3.Again, as is known by all of this parish, the dark side is he only
    true place of comfort and power availale to the pedal cyclist.
    --
    .paul

    If at first you don't succeed...
    Skydiving is probably not the sport for you.

    Having just purchased a new bike I can honestly say there is no better way
    to determine the correct size than trying the bike. I read all the sizing
    stuff I could find on the web and had a size in mind (19"😉 before I went to
    the shop. On trying various bikes I nearly gave up having found that the
    saddle to handle bar distance was too short for me, even on the biggest
    frames. In the end I tried a 17.5" Trek 6500 which turned out to be perfect.
    Basically it's down to the geometry of the frame and having tried various
    makes and models this turned out to be the best option in my price range.

    So get down to a shop where they will let you try the bikes. My LBS were
    great as they had various models in their hire fleet and they let me ride
    them round the country park, where they are based, so I could get a good
    feel for the thing.

    Hope this helps.

    Cheers,
    Dave

  6. in message <[email hidden]>, Saint

    (') said:

    I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake correct
    'sizing'
    when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with. However the
    advice is a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable
    dealers in my area
    with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them merely
    said that correct sizing involved my standing with slight clearance
    over the crossbar and having the saddle at a height where my toes were
    in contact with the ground.

    This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

    This is not wholly bollocks. Most bike shops want to sell you a bike,
    take your money, and get you out the door. And most people who buy
    bikes are not going to seriously ride them very many miles - most bikes
    live permanently in garden sheds, waiting for idyllic summer weekend
    afternoons that never come. And beginners tend to like being able to
    put their feet down.

    However, is doesn't do anything about reach, bar height, and the
    relative heights of saddle and bars, and for many people (certainly for
    me) it will end up with a seat height which is substantially too low.

    There are a number of bicycle sizing calculators online. Here's a list
    of relevant stuff:
    <URL:http://www.cyclemetrics.com/Pages/FitLinks/bike_fit_links.htm>

    However what it really comes down to is what's comfortable. There have
    been a number of (different) theoretical ideas about how to calculate
    the exact geometry for someone over the years, but people are just
    different. Sit on a number of bikes, ideally road test them, see what
    feels right.

    Quoted message said:

    I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above criteria to
    both the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter having less
    seatpost pin
    out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and
    what, in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?

    How wide are you across the shoulders? What is the ratio between your
    inseam and your torso length? How long are your arms? There's no one
    magic measurement which will size a bike right for you.

    Furthermore, with modern compact designs (and particularly with mountain
    bikes with higher bottom brackets) frame sizes are not comparable
    between different designs. A 21" frame in one model may be right for
    you, and a 14" frame in another may also be right.

    --
    [email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
    ;; "If I were a Microsoft Public Relations person, I would probably
    ;; be sobbing on a desk right now" -- Rob Miller, editor, /.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.