Bike Fit leads to frustrating confusion.

Ezy Rider

I went to the bike fit this morning before work, fitter told me that I have above average torso length dimensions and shorter than average legs for my 5 ft 9 inches height. He calculated that the optimal frame size for me was 522mm and top tube length 543mm.

He made adjustments to my 56cm trek 1000 to ascertain the 655mm reach that he said I should have and I absolutely hate it, he said there is no doubt the 56cm is too big for me. He said the 175mm cranks were totally unsuitable too and i should be riding 170mm types as my inside leg is 29 inches.

Im caught between a new frame of size 53cm and 54cm.

If I select the 53cm frame, , the frame height from bottom bracket to seat tube will be 530mm or 8mm above the recommendation and the top tube will be 529mm, or 14mm below recommendation.

if I select 54cm frame, the frame height will be 540mm or 18mm above recommendation and the top tube will be 543mm which is exactly what was recommended.

I could sort out the top tube length issue with the 53cm frame with a longer stem, but am not sure if I should just buy the 54cm type

I cant afford a custom frame...............damn my short legs

If you were me, is the 53cm with longer stem a wiser choice than the 54cm or vice versa,please look at the dimensions I gave.

Ezy Rider

loads of views and nobody has any advice ?

Erudin

Go for the smaller frame if you want a bigger bar to saddle drop, or a bigger frame if you want the bars more level to the saddle.

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/html/fit/traditions_of_road_riding.html

http://www.rivbike.com/assets/payloads/271/original_Excerpt_Top_Tube_Ruse_Flash.swf

http://www.rivbike.com/article/bike_fit/choosing_a_frame_size

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/html/fit/traditions_of_road_riding.html

Secteur

Who did the fit?

Ezy Rider

a local bike shop, the way the 56cm finished up after it is horrid to be honest. i just want a new frame to be comfortable for long rides,not interested in saddle being way higher than handlebars at all , am very confused as to whether i go for the 53 or the 54,opinions here are worth weight in gold to me, please chime in guys.

rothers_bikeo

What changes did they make to your 56 ?

bianchimoon

go to different bike shops, ride some bikes, you'll soon find one that feels right for you, dont take a LBS fit as gospel

identikit

What's the time span on riding the new changes?

I'll notice the slightest change in my setup but will adapt into the changes in 7-10 days of riding. Give it time.

Also, get the 53 and change the stem.

merak

So what don't you like about the adjusted 56cm bike? You really need to give changes a chance for a 100 miles or more as things can feel weird at first even thiough they are better in the long run.

I don't see anything in the fitter's advice that I'd argue with. If you don't care about getting too aero, go for the 54cm frame - at least the reach will be reasonable without a stupidly long stem (which can cause handling problems). To get the right saddle height , the post will be down in the frame a little more than optimum so bars will be higher wrt to saddle than with a smaller frame but I bet you were going to use spacers under the stem anyway so you can take 10mm of spacers out. You get 5mm of height back by going to 170mm cranks which are the right crank length for your legs.

But I agree with bianchimoon who suggested to go try bikes in the LBSs - as you know, I was bit cautious about the idea of you buying a frame from China for just these reasons.

sloppyschleckonds

How old are you? Maybe you'll grow abit more?

Ezy Rider

where to start with what i dont like about the 56cm once the fitter made adjustments :x

in order to achieve 655mm reach, the bars feel way too low down and my arms are fully stretched with no bend at the elbows......i hate it

he lowered the saddle and because my cranks are 175mm instead of the 170mm i should be using, it feels like my knees are banging off chest bone.

he says the top tube on the 56cm trek is 570mm , whereas in his opinion, 543mm (the exact length of the 54cm bike) is optimum. in his opinion the 570mm top tube is far too big for me and causing a lot of problems.

which is more critical, seat tube length or top tube length ?

........................................................... seat tube.................top tube
his recommendation ...........................522mm...................543mm

53cm bike .......................................... 530mm ..................529.5mm

54cm bike ..........................................540mm......................543mm


which of the two bike sizes will get closer to what i need for
comfortable riding over long distance, the 540mm seat tube height on the 54cm bike concerns me.

chiark

What was the problem that made you get a bike fit? Not trolling, just wanting to know what you wanted to achieve / correct - or whether you had a bike fit with a view to buying a new bike.

It also sounds like a little bit of baffling with BS from him. 175mm cranks 'totally unsuitable'? How the devil have you been riding it up until now then? It sounds a bit like a plumber sucking through his teeth and asking, 'which twonk fitted this bathroom for you then? Totally wrong...' or the NTNON hifi shop sketch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxQqWSnsHoA

I know that removing 2 head spacers from under my bars completely changed the feel of the bike, but eventually I preferred it. Similarly, if magic formulae say you should have the reach you've got, stick with it as if you buy a new bike and set it up to the magic number, surely it'll feel the same? (I realise head tube length etc will also be different, but you can adjust this with spacers etc...)

You could spend a lot of money trying to chase the 'perfect fit', but being frank I couldn't tell whether something was better or worse until I'd got used to it for a while. Plus it depends whether I want more comfort or more of a feeling of a workout

Sorry, rambling post, but it sounds like this bike fit has been no help and you need to try more bikes if you're looking for something new to ride.

I think bianchimoon summed up everything I've waffled on about in 2 sentences

Ezy Rider

chiark wrote:

What was the problem that made you get a bike fit? Not trolling, just wanting to know what you wanted to achieve / correct - or whether you had a bike fit with a view to buying a new bike.

It also sounds like a little bit of baffling with BS from him. 175mm cranks 'totally unsuitable'? How the devil have you been riding it up until now then? It sounds a bit like a plumber sucking through his teeth and asking, 'which twonk fitted this bathroom for you then? Totally wrong...' or the NTNON hifi shop sketch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxQqWSnsHoA

I know that removing 2 head spacers from under my bars completely changed the feel of the bike, but eventually I preferred it. Similarly, if magic formulae say you should have the reach you've got, stick with it as if you buy a new bike and set it up to the magic number, surely it'll feel the same? (I realise head tube length etc will also be different, but you can adjust this with spacers etc...)

You could spend a lot of money trying to chase the 'perfect fit', but being frank I couldn't tell whether something was better or worse until I'd got used to it for a while. Plus it depends whether I want more comfort or more of a feeling of a workout

Sorry, rambling post, but it sounds like this bike fit has been no help and you need to try more bikes if you're looking for something new to ride.

I think bianchimoon summed up everything I've waffled on about in 2 sentences

you make good points, its just that both the 53 and 54 cm have good pointsand bad, i need toknow which has more good than bad

thescouselander

My bike has a 53.5 cm frame - its a Giant defy. I'm sure it cant be the only bike with this size frame. As someone else has said, maybe you should go and ride some different bikes.

Ezy Rider

its not a complete bike im looking for, just the frame.

thescouselander

Here you go:

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/GIANT-DEFY-FR ... 991wt_1141

Not all frames are measured the same though - I'd recommend sitting on one first.

Evil Laugh

You haven't really given enough information to make the choice. The frames sound in the right ballpark and neither size would present any insurmountable issues, I'd imagine.

What's your saddle height? Whats your saddle to bar drop? What size stem are you using on your trek and what is the tt length?

The 170 crank length sounds right for you. I'm 5 11 with longer legs than torso, so i have the opposite problem to you, but anyway, 175 cranks felt horrible to me, really strained my thighs. 172 are much better. Would rather be on smaller cranks if any.

In all honesty I'd get the fit right before buying a new bike. Get the cranks changed and you should be able to get your contact points sorted on your bike that's too big. You'd need to do that first to establish your saddle position and then fit the bike from there. Maybe the bars would be too high on your trek but that doesn't sound a problem from what you've said. You can buy some second hand cranks, as long as you get the same type, compact or standard, it's just a straight swap, easy to do yourself.

How did the guy fit you? Sounds like he plucked some numbers from somewhere. Did you ride the bike on a turbo as he adjusted stuff?

Ezy Rider

sorry , its frame and forks which carbon zone supply , my mistake :oops:

ChrisSA

What was the bike fit; Retul, Bikefitting.com, another? Please let us know.

I had a bikefitting bike fit, and there were 3 different setups for a road bike: comfort, sport and competition. Where you given any choices like this?

Ezy Rider

it was a pro bike shop and i selected the racing comfort fit, turns out it is anything but comfortable and i think the fit was a waste of my money to be honest.

ride_whenever

Sounds like your fit was a load of tosh and someone was trying to part you from your money.

Also top tube length is much more critical as the saddle height is far easier to vary, providing you're flexible enough to sustain the position on the bike if you end up with a severe drop.

Ezy Rider

ride_whenever wrote:

Sounds like your fit was a load of tosh and someone was trying to part you from your money.

Also top tube length is much more critical as the saddle height is far easier to vary, providing you're flexible enough to sustain the position on the bike if you end up with a severe drop.

totally agree, i think the fit turned out to be useless and introduced more questions instead of supplying answers. the 54cm has the recommended 543cm top tube, but would a surplus of 18mm above the recommended seatpost tube length be a critical factor ?
Also , I could negate the 53cm top tube defecit of 13mm with a longer stem and only have 8mm defecit in seatpost tube

so which should i go for, 53 or 54 ?

Bozman

Just sounds like common sense and what were you doing with a 56cm frame! Halfords wouldn't sell a 56 frame to someone that's 5'9".
I'm 5' 9/10 i know that a 53/54 frame is roughly the right size and i guess that most folk of my height will have a frame of that size, frames of that size come with 170 cranks(maybe 172.5), put me on a frame with a top tube more than 54 and i know that i'm starting to feel uncomfortable.

Ezy Rider

Bozman wrote:

Just sounds like common sense and what were you doing with a 56cm frame! Halfords wouldn't sell a 56 frame to someone that's 5'9".
I'm 5' 9/10 i know that a 53/54 frame is roughly the right size and i guess that most folk of my height will have a frame of that size, frames of that size come with 170 cranks(maybe 172.5), put me on a frame with a top tube more than 54 and i know that i'm starting to feel uncomfortable.

yep, i was greener than snot and that shop sold me a bike they shouldnt have :evil:

b@st@rds, so much for looking after customers.

Ezy Rider

how logical is this idea for my situation,

buy the 53cm frame and forks and get a slightly longer stem, say 110mm to make top tube length circa 543mm. the seat tube height will only by 8mm over the recommended 522mm, surely this wouldnt be a deal breaker

would it ?

my worzel logica lhead is saying you can add , ie top tube, but you cant take away :idea:

Evil Laugh

I really would let go of these ideal tt and st numbers you're mentioning. They're useless without you being comfortable on the bike first. Get your contact points right and then think about what frame to get.

Nobody on here is going to be able to tell you what frame to get unless you can give a reference of a bike and measurements with which you are comfortable. It's crazy you're trying to base a purchase on info provided from a fit you say yourself was garbage and some vague opinions of people on the Internet who aren't being given any useful information.

If youre anywhere near London, go and see the Bike Whisperer. He will sort you out.

lfcquin

Ezy Rider wrote:

Bozman wrote:

Just sounds like common sense and what were you doing with a 56cm frame! Halfords wouldn't sell a 56 frame to someone that's 5'9".
I'm 5' 9/10 i know that a 53/54 frame is roughly the right size and i guess that most folk of my height will have a frame of that size, frames of that size come with 170 cranks(maybe 172.5), put me on a frame with a top tube more than 54 and i know that i'm starting to feel uncomfortable.

yep, i was greener than snot and that shop sold me a bike they shouldnt have :evil:

b@st@rds, so much for looking after customers.

Sorry. Confused? Was the bike fit at the same shop that sold you the 56 Trek? Was it a new bike or have you had it a while? If it was the same shop why didn;t you get a bike fit when you bought it? I'm not sure I agree that the bike fit was a load of tosh and would like more information, like maybe a pic of you riding the bike? It doesn't sound right if your arms are at full extension and you don't feel comfortable, but why are you looking to match the frame requirements he gave you if think it wasn't right?

I had a fit earlier this year with Adrian Timmis, when he had finished I was more comfortable on the bike, but didn't like how it rode. I ended up with a 130mm 6 degree stem upturned. Bike looked and rode like a dog. After a lot of work (and cash) this year tweaking and changing bikes and parts I'm getting close. I got told something I didn't want to hear (not trying to say you did btw)r, but I don't think it was a bad fit.

What I would say is don't take everything so literally from what you were told, as others have said try some bikes and use the 2nd hand markets to buy cheap parts to tweak your position. If you want to follow their advice with a new frame than try and match the top tube measurements, the seat tube can be more easily adapted by a higher or lower saddle. Oh, and don't ignore the headtube size as well. That was my undoing that forced me into a bike fit.

Ezy Rider

upon closer inspection of carbon zones size chart , when i look at the spec for their 52cm bike it comes out at

top tube 534mm .......fitter advised 543mm, stem resolve this ?
,
seat tube 520mm.........fitter advused 522mm

could this be a better match than either the 53 or 54, i had it in my mind a 52 would be too small for me :?

some people just set their @rse on a bike and all is fine, just doesnt happen to me

smurfylicious

I spent about a month or more considering frame sizing before buying my new bike. My advice is to prioritise getting the reach correct (top tube + stem length) and then adjust the seat height to get the right leg extension.

Just my 2p worth!!!

Evil Laugh

Just pick one and buy it. People are trying to help you but you don't seem to be listening.

:?

Yes a stem can resolve a 10mm discrepancy but you dont seem to know what top tube and stem length you actually need and are ignoring headtube length and saddle/bar drop altogether. So yes both frames could fit perfectly well if you know you're in the middle of the two sizes but you don't actually know that.

You are not providing enough information for anyone to advise you reliably.

I give up.

smurfylicious

Ezy Rider wrote:

stem resolve this ?

You can only tweak the stem so far before the handling/feel will be adversely affected. That's why I said to prioritise top tube length. After you've done that, you get whatever you get in terms of seat tube length. Unless you're a total freak in terms of leg-length then the seat height should have enough adjustment available to get the leg extension right. You said you wanted 'racing comfort fit', getting the reach correct will be key to that.

Just my 2p worth!!