56cm frame at 6'1 34' Inseam?

TheJefu

I went to my local bikestore today looking for my first road bike in the Wilier Montegrappa Sora which was going cheap.

I was shown to a large model, to which I asked was this a 58cm and was told 'kind of' (actually a 56cm). Besides I took a seat and had reasonable clearance over the top tube and the bike felt good, if a little compact, but not in a bad way. He gave me the 'can you see the front hub' in the riding position test, which I've heard is a very very 'rough' technique, but the hub was totally hidden by the bars. I tried a 58' Trek a day or so before and the reach on that definitely felt a little bit of a stretch, but I understand this can have a lot to do with the size of the stem.

http://www.wilierbikes.co.uk/2012/detai ... No=12MONTS

When I generally read articles regarding frame fitting, the consensus for my height of 6.1feet and my in-seam of 34' is that a 56' frame would be too small for me, that I'd need something more of 58-60. However, I find posts of much higher end wilier bikes which state that the 'large' 56cm frames of similar geometry to the Montegrappa Sora is fine for my size?

The bikes pretty much waiting for me to collect it, but I was wondering what you're thoughts were given a bike seemed (to my totally inexperienced body) a good fit. Is this possible or am I having stock shoved down my throat?

ALaPlage

Hard to judge really on here. I'm 5'11" with 32" inseam and on all bikes I've tried (not Wilier) I fit a 56cm frame bar Cube where I needed a 58cm frame.

Manufacturers have different geometries so what may fit in one brand size wise may not in another.

To me it sounds like you should be on a 60cm frame but like you have read yourself this is based on articles and forum posts I have come across although my own experience of test riding bikes pre a purchase has always matched this guidance. My height and inseam always recommend a 56cm frame and aside from Cube that is what I have found I fit.

jibberjim

It'll depend on your position I'm 6' with 34" in seam and anything bigger than a 56 is too big for the position I like to ride. Given that the 56 was close enough for you to be happy then I'd go for it over a 58 as if it's slightly too small a longer stem and more seat post showing is a lot easier to do and impacts the bike less than making a larger frame fit smaller.

Actual frame sizes are generally rubbish for deciding if a bike fits, one bikes 56 is often completely different to another.

Grill

As everyone else has said, bike fits are personal. I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam and I need a 54 (or to be more precise I need a toptope that's 55cm or less). This has to do with the fact that my lower 4 vertebrae don't move (it's as if they're fused) giving me the flexibility of a Ken doll. Before a proper fit I had always ridden 56s (including Trek) but never in much comfort.

From what you're describing the 58 Trek was too big and this was with the stock stem (110mm) which would put you on a 56. A few things to keep in mind: Stand-over height doesn't really mean anything, it's easier to get a smaller frame to fit than a bigger one, longer stems are preferable to shorter ones (short stems have a tendency to make handling super twitchy), and finally each person is unique. Seriously you could take your twin and your bike fits would be different.

andyoh

I am 6 foot and have a 33 inch inseam. I have two Wiliers, a Gran Turismo and a La Triestina (the winter bike) and both are 56cm.

It's all down to personal choice. My son is 15 and is your height and inseam and I'm buying him a 58cm Cannondale CADD10, as the 56 is too small.

izza

6' 2", 34" inseam here. I go with a 58cm frame having been measured up as part of a bike fit.

It is personal based on flexibility, favoured riding position, etc. etc.

alihisgreat

Sounds about right.. obviously its personal -> reach and flexibility has a part to play.

at 6ft and 33" I'd ride a 56.