Langster 54 or 56cm?

redvee
redvee Posts: 11,922
edited May 2009 in Commuting chat
Have ridden a Specialised bike in the past, an Allez in glorious 56cm red. This fitted me ok with approx 3" of seatpost exposed. Would a 54cm Langster or other spcialised frame be too small for my 5'10/32" leg frame?
I've added a signature to prove it is still possible.

Comments

  • itboffin
    itboffin Posts: 20,062
    redvee wrote:
    Have ridden a Specialised bike in the past, an Allez in glorious 56cm red. This fitted me ok with approx 3" of seatpost exposed. Would a 54cm Langster or other spcialised frame be too small for my 5'10/32" leg frame?

    Ah the 54 or 56 question, I'm in the same boat, it totally depends on the bike, I have 56 Trek which actually measures 53.5 :shock: and a Dolan which measures 54 and they both feel perfect, your gonna have to try b4 you bike old bean. I tried 5-6 different LBS before I bought the Trek and they opinion differed fat lot of use.
    Rule #5 // Harden The Feck Up.
    Rule #9 // If you are out riding in bad weather, it means you are a badass. Period.
    Rule #12 // The correct number of bikes to own is n+1.
    Rule #42 // A bike race shall never be preceded with a swim and/or followed by a run.
  • If it helps I'm 5'8'' with a 30ish inside leg and ride a 56cm langster. I've also stuck a longer (130mm) stem on to extend the reach a bit.
  • bratboy
    bratboy Posts: 82
    The usual standard formula used for sizing of horizontal racing bikes is 65% of your inside leg, but make sure you measure your inside leg carefully - one method is:

    - Stand straight up on your bare feet (do not wear any shoes).
    - Position the inside of your feet approximately 200mm apart.
    - Pull a tube with a diameter of approx 35mm (or the back of a book) firmly to your crutch until you can feel it against the bone.
    - Position yourself in the middle of the tube or book.
    - Measure the distance (in cm) from the feet to the top of the tube both in front of you as well as behind you (see image, right). Add those two sizes and divide the respective result by two. The result is your inside leg measurement.

    You can subtract 4cm for a compact sloping top tube, but check the manufactures recommendations.

    But the main difference between the frames is in the top tube length and thus how much stem length you need and how far you end up over/behind the front wheel, which affects the handling.

    Peronnally I prefer the small frames, as they are stiffer and more compact and thus a little lighter too. I'm 5' 9.5", and have ridden 54cm frames for the over 10yrs, after startiing on 22" in old money.

    Hope that helps. :)
    SC61.10a: FCN 3, with clip-on guards for winter
    Uncle John: FCN ?? knobblies, or 'fat' slicks n guards

    If you haven't tried these things, you should.
    These things are fun, and fun is good.
  • Stuey01
    Stuey01 Posts: 1,273
    I'd get the 54... with only 3 inches of seatpost exposed on a 56 you'll be fine on a 54. (reach dependant).

    I ride a 53cm Bianchi with about 7inches of seatpost exposed, but the reach on the 55cm was too far.
    Not climber, not sprinter, not rouleur
  • highwaymunky
    highwaymunky Posts: 124
    I'm the same height as you and about the same leg length. I went for the 54" and have the seat that little bit higher. It's perfectly comfortable.

    It's easier to stretch out a smaller bike than compress a big one! [adjusting the seat / stem]
  • Roastie
    Roastie Posts: 1,968
    I'd recommend a proper fit. Or at very least go to a good bike shop for fitting advice.
  • Bugly
    Bugly Posts: 520
    130 stem on a 56 and you are 5 foot 8? you must be so stretched out - to each their own but that does not sound comfortable. shock
    to the OP buy the 54cm it will be better fit. ::