inseam and height
horizon1967
Posts: 55
does this seem right my height is 5 foot 9 1/4 my inseam is 32 1/4 do i have long legs or am i measuring my inseam the right.I was on the competitive cyclist website and they said to stand up with a gap of 8 inches between my feet.Then place a sprite level where you you would sit on the saddle and measure to the ground.Of coarse do this bear foot.On the wiggle site 5 foot 9 is in between medium an large but my inseam is in the large range,the large range being 30 to 33 inches.The medium being 27 to 30.if anyone could shed some light i would be grateful :oops:
0
Comments
-
You have long legs and shorter upper body.Good luck0
-
-
I'm wondering where you get your sprites from and worried about your bear feet more than your inside leg. Is it difficult getting shoes to fit?
EDIT: I'm sorry, that didn't help. :oops:
If you have longer legs for your height, you most likely need the smaller frame. It's sounds counter intuitive but long legs mean that you probably have a shorter torso than average for someone your height and therefore need the shorter reach that the smaller of the 2 will provide. So I'd agree with Reddragon. I'm 6ft 2 and have an inside leg not much bigger than yours but I ride a 60cm or XL frame because of my long torso. With compact geometry frames, inside leg measurement is a fairly redundant way to measure yourself for a bike.0 -
Hi
I have a similar problem. I'm 175cm height (5' 9") and an inside leg of 83cm (32 1/2").
I have a summer bike, which is a condor italia, which is a size 52 seat tube, and has a 53.7 top tube, and ride it with a 100mm stem. The fit is excellent, and comfortable. This frame would be the same size as the 52/small from Wiggle.
I also have a winter bike, which has a 54 seat tube, and 54.7 top tube, and ride this with a 90mm stem. Again the fit is great, and very comfortable.
I think you could go with either a small or a medium and adjust the reach with stem length. I wouldn't go for the large as it has a longer top tube, and having to fit a shorter stem can affect handling.
Hope this is of use, good luck.
PS I use 170 cranks on both bikes.0 -
I'm 5 9 1/2 (having shrunk the usual nearly an inch with age!), inseam remains 33". Most modern bikes are, if size seat tube length by trad means, too long in the top tube. Older stuff, road or mtb, fits me better. Or a steeply sloping top tube with a relatively long head tube. Stuff that is the "right" length tends to be too low at the front.
So what System says is IMO/E spot on.d.j.
"Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."0 -
thaks for replies i emailed wiggle they recommend a 56! maybe because of my inseam.i am thinking of geting a focus bike.As far as i know focus bikes dont have a compact frame like the giant bikes do.I have a scr2 in a large it is too big.But giant bikes have very big sizes.I am more confused than ever.Once again the advice here is first class and gives me somthing to really think about :?0
-
thaks for replies i emailed wiggle they recommend a 56! maybe because of my inseam.i am thinking of geting a focus bike.As far as i know focus bikes dont have a compact frame like the giant bikes do.I have a scr2 in a large it is too big.But giant bikes have very big sizes.I am more confused than ever.Once again the advice here is first class and gives me somthing to really think about :?0
-
I'm 6' 2" and have an inseam of 35.5 inches and ride a 58 in most major manufacturers frames, and a 56 for my Ribble winter trainer if that helps. I found my odd proportions meant I had to go and test ride more bikes than usual.0
-
Sized as in above comment, not sure that "giant bikes have very big sizes". I find their "Mediums" (at least in TCRs, SCRs and XTCs) a good fit. Never tried their more recently introduced (I think) M/L size(s).
And I've always considered myself sort of "medium", altho' I guess my legs are RELATIVELY long!d.j.
"Cancel my subscription to the resurrection."0 -
I am 5'9" with 33" leg.
My opld bikes 531 old geometry are 22.5" which is 58cm.
The trouble with the newer bikes is a 58 would be ok with you for leg but may be too long for reach.
My new bike is 55.5cm and I was measured in Pinarello factory for that!!.
They put longer cranks on the bike and a longer stem but I find with the newer frames the hed tube is way too small so this makes it very low on the front so I had to put a spacer there.
My track bike was worse and felt as if the bars were next to the wheel bearing
For that I turned over my stem so it's better now.
I reckon a 56 will be ideal for you without having to mess too much to fit your self to it.
I guess it also depends what you want to use it for.
My 2 winter bikes are 58cm and my racing bike 55.5.0 -
I'm 5' 9 i/2" with 31" inside leg and find a 54cm Cannondale racing frame just right.0
-
i have a similar problem too. i've looked at a friends giant tcr (medium) and had a little test ride.
the the guy whos bike it is said it looks a bit small for me, (i'm 5ft 10" and inseam of 32.5)
but it felt comfortable fotr the limitied time i rode it.
should i get all tangled up in the numbers reccomended for my size? or should i just go for what feels good despite the numbers??
cheers
Alex
0 -
Alex_Gill wrote:i have a similar problem too. i've looked at a friends giant tcr (medium) and had a little test ride.
the the guy whos bike it is said it looks a bit small for me, (i'm 5ft 10" and inseam of 32.5)
but it felt comfortable fotr the limitied time i rode it.
should i get all tangled up in the numbers reccomended for my size? or should i just go for what feels good despite the numbers??
cheers
Alex
The thing is you don't really get a good feel for the fit of a bike until you do a reasonable number of miles in the saddle. I made this mistake with a road bike I 'tested' around Central London for 45 minutes, stopping and starting every 200 yards. The first 2hour ride was a painful experience... I spent the next few years tweaking seat posts, saddles, stems etc etc and have ending up compromising with quite a short stem which has problems of it's own. So either do a long ride or trust the numbers, IMHO.0
