Sizing of the Specialized Tarmac (problem)

Gabbo

Hi guys,

I've recently purchased a Specialized Tarmac size XL (58cm) after a number of LBS employee's recommended that particular sized frame. I'm 6"1, have a 35" inseam so people would instantly assume that I am only compatible with that sized frame. However, a couple of employee's did suggest I try out the 56cm frame as it would be more responsive (something that is more ideal for a young lad like myself ;-)). He also suggested fitting a longer stem on it; however, another worker from a different LBS contradicted his statement, advising me to purchase a 58cm. He said fitting a longer stem onto a 56cm bike will only make handling into corners more difficult, thus making it less responsive. He also claimed that I was too upright on the 56cm bike.

So anyway, I decided to get myself professionally measured with my then measurements being submitted into the computer. This would show what size frame I was compatible with, which indeed was a 58 (XL) frame. Mind you, when trying both the 56 and the 58 I didn't feel a world of difference. The 58 felt fine, and the 56 maybe a little compact. Anyway, I decided to opt for the 58cm and order it online. Only yesterday I took delivery of it and started to assemble it. Now that is done, I'm trying to fit myself to the blasted thing! My seatpost is raised to 12.5cm but I have yet to move it forward/backward.

To be honest I feel stretched out on the bike. My arms are nearly in full extension when reaching for the shifters (on top) but in the drops I feel fine. The front hub is visible behind the stem. On the 56 I could see it in front of the stem. Where does the problem lie? It felt normal in the shop, and I'm sure the stem obscured the view of the front hub when I tried it out.

I fully understand that the Tarmac is not made for comfort, so I'm wondering if this is how the bike suppose to fit? It's encouraging me to lean forward and lower, opposed to that more upright and relaxed position.

Your views?

slowbike

Gabbo wrote:

Mind you, when trying both the 56 and the 58 I didn't feel a world of difference.

I had a bike fitting on the bike I already owned ... saddle came down and moved back - asked if that felt better I had to be totally honest and say I couldn't feel any difference ... so don't feel bad that you couldn't feel much difference between frame sizes ..

Grill

I sized down from a 56 to a 54 after a proper fitting. Best thing I ever did. On the 56 my seat was all the way forward (on an inline post) and I was down to a 100mm stem which made the bike feel super twitchy. After all that it still didn't feel right. My 54 is perfect and I wish I'd have done it right the first time as opposed to doing it twice (actually 3 times but that's a whole other kettle of fish). It's much easier to get a proper fit on a smaller frame than compromise it on a larger one. Every shop said I should be on a 56, but it took a shop that does proper fitting to notice that I don't bend at the lumbar and I pedal toe down make the smaller frame the only way to go.

jgsi

I have 58 and 56 frame bikes.. the 58 I remember came standard with a 130 stem and was far too long .. this I needed to swap for a 120... check yours
The 56 needs a 130 stem for me.. and yes is indeed twitchier.. but not a problem even when raced on tight circuits. On normal road circuits, I dont notice.

Gabbo

JGSI wrote:

I have 58 and 56 frame bikes.. the 58 I remember came standard with a 130 stem and was far too long .. this I needed to swap for a 120... check yours
The 56 needs a 130 stem for me.. and yes is indeed twitchier.. but not a problem even when raced on tight circuits. On normal road circuits, I dont notice.

Can I ask how tall you are and for the length of your inseam? It would be interesting to see how we compare.

jgsi

Very similar.. 6 1 34 inside leg.

Gabbo

JGSI wrote:

Very similar.. 6 1 34 inside leg.

Ok cool. Well a longer inseam would obviously indicate a shorter torso, thus more of a stretch. So if I'm your height, but with a slightly longer inseam then surely I'd be even more stretched on a 58 than you would be?

Hopefully the company I ordered from will exchange the bike. Oh and by the way, the stem is 110mm.

When I got myself measured I am sure the worker got it all wrong. I will post the dimensions of the necessary frame size later.

drlodge

Gabbo wrote:

So anyway, I decided to get myself professionally measured with my then measurements being submitted into the computer.

I feel for you...I'm somewhat shorter but have longer legs/shorter torso than average for my height and suffered with a too stretched out position, initially aggravated years ago by buying a bike that was too large. I then got a custom steel frame made with 22" seat tube and shorter 21" top tube.

More recently I got fitted out at Rourke where he doesn't use computers or even a jig, he sits you on a real bike and plays around with the saddle, bars etc until the fit is right.

You can play around with the stem length to some degree, but it sounds like you ordered your bike off the internet and therefore don't have a LBS you can go back to to complain? I would always encourage getting a new bike fitted by an LBS to guarantee the fit will be correct, unless you know exactly the frame size/geometry that you want.

Gabbo

drlodge wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

So anyway, I decided to get myself professionally measured with my then measurements being submitted into the computer.

I would always encourage getting a new bike fitted by an LBS to guarantee the fit will be correct, unless you know exactly the frame size/geometry that you want.

Well I thought I did. I sat on both the 56 and 58 and he told me that the 58 was better. It wasn't a proffesional bike fit mind you, despite what they say. Not sure where I go from here...

Grill

Gabbo wrote:

JGSI wrote:

Very similar.. 6 1 34 inside leg.

Ok cool. Well a longer inseam would obviously indicate a shorter torso, thus more of a stretch. So if I'm your height, but with a slightly longer inseam then surely I'd be even more stretched on a 58 than you would be?

Hopefully the company I ordered from will exchange the bike. Oh and by the way, the stem is 110mm.

When I got myself measured I am sure the worker got it all wrong. I will post the dimensions of the necessary frame size later.

Not necessarily. Morphology is unique as is biomechanical function. You don't move the same as someone built identical to you as well as differences in flexibilities and comfort tolerances. No two people are alike this is why a decent bike fit is so important.

tiredofwhiners

5'10" tall and 30" Inside Leg (short legs!)

I ride a 56 Tarmac Pro SL3 with a 100mm stem and its very comfortable for me - I didn't have a fitting but I previously had a 54 PX SL Carbon Pro and always felt a little cramped on it.

the above is probably not much use but I thought I'd add it into the mix.

Gabbo

tiredofwhiners wrote:

5'10" tall and 30" Inside Leg (short legs!)

I ride a 56 Tarmac Pro SL3 with a 100mm stem and its very comfortable for me - I didn't have a fitting but I previously had a 54 PX SL Carbon Pro and always felt a little cramped on it.

the above is probably not much use but I thought I'd add it into the mix.

That's the difference - you have a long torso. Unlike you, my torso is short so am therefore stretched on the 58 frame. I could try a move my saddle forward though!

Ok, so here is one of their flaws in measuring me. The measurements had me raising the saddle so high that it is 802mm from the centre of the crank arm. This is too high in the extremes of things. My toes are barely touching the surface. Secondly, the required top tube length (virtual) should be 606mm. Again, this is far too long in the extreme. My TT virtual length is 58.2cm and even then I'm complaining that I feel stretched out on it.

I think I need a 2nd opinion, but from someone who'll pay attention to detail. Does anyone know of any decent bike fitters in and around the London area?

Tom Dean

The difference between the top tube lengths is only 17mm. If you fall between the two you can easily fit on either.

Have you ridden a road bike before? If not, you might find the position takes some getting used to.

siamon

As above, it depends how much cycling you have done before, on what bike, and how old you are. It might be that you will gain more flexibility, and suddenly the 58 will be spot on.

Bike fitters always seem to want to ram the saddle up as high as possible, so you are on frigging tip toes at the bottom of the stroke. This is a complete joke. Just watch the Vuelta, most of the pros have an amount of knee bend that any so called "professional fitter" would sneer at. The are a bunch of fooking con artist wonkers. They use scare tatics like threats of injury (like the great bare foot running con) unless you start handing over wads to fill their coffers.

What you need is someone like that Rourke bloke mentioned above. I had two "professional" bike fits before I bought my last bike, both of which put me slap bang in the middle of a ML Giant TCR. It felt ok but luckily there were some knowledgeable folk present who thought I looked a bit cramped, so I went for the large and thank God I did.

My inside leg is 33.5 and bike fitters wanted my saddle at 798mm. However this led to rocking and soft tissue damage and weeks off the bike. It is 785 (approx) now.

It is also interesting that the current science ridicule the bike fitters approach. It has been repeatedly demonstrated that you can move your normal saddle down by up to 10mm with no loss whatsoever. Unless the fitter gives you a range, say 780-790 they haven't got a frigging clue.

Nice bike by the way!

Gabbo

I've had to move the seat all the way forward. Feels better now but am still not convinced. Surely it means its too big for me? I'm going to attempt getting use to it. It may turn out to be a costly mistake but I don't know any better.

Does it matter that I can see the front hub behind the stem?

jgsi

Gabbo wrote:

I've had to move the seat all the way forward. Feels better now but am still not convinced. Surely it means its too big for me? I'm going to attempt getting use to it. It may turn out to be a costly mistake but I don't know any better.

Does it matter that I can see the front hub behind the stem?

Its a 'rule of thumb' so subject to many other parameters.
I'm struggling to understand how a 58 can be too big for you but without eyeballing your setup, no chance of an actual verdict.
If I could recommend something... access to a turbo trainer is very useful for sussing out if you have the bike setup correctly for yourself.
I have done a 4 hour ride on the trainer using the larger bike recently without any mishap.
I use the 56er for road racing for 2 hours plus at sometimes extreme exertion - again no issues of bike fit.
You have to know what type of rider you are - relaxed or able to use available flexibility to go lower on the bike, on the drops.
An experienced eye always helps.. software sometimes doesnt cut it.

cougie

Did you pay the shops for their help ? You seem to have been to a few to try out the bike and then you say you ordered online ?

What do you mean when you say your toes barely touch ? Touch what ?

siamon

Hub behind the bars doesn't mean a lot.

Saddle all the way forward doesn't mean a lot, you might have short femurs and long shanks but quite frankly (in my experience) knee over the spindle doesn't mean a lot either (another pro bike fit wind up).

6,1 34 inseam sounds like you are reasonably normal, why don't you get someone to take a pictures of you on the bike and post them here? Its not ideal but it's completely impossible to say at the moment.

gezebo

From what you say I would have thought a 58 is the right size. However as the frames get bigger the length of the standard stems gets longer too. The top tube difference between a 56 and 58 is 17mm so even if the stems remained the same length then it's still a noticable difference (imagine going from a 100mm stem to a 80)

The Tarmac is also deigned to be more aggressive than a roubaix for example, so will feel much more stretched.

One of the advantages of buying from a real shop is that they often let you try different stems to get the right fit. If I was in your position I would look at trying some different stems and see how you go.

What was your last bike?

Gabbo

gezebo wrote:

From what you say I would have thought a 58 is the right size. However as the frames get bigger the length of the standard stems gets longer too. The top tube difference between a 56 and 58 is 17mm so even if the stems remained the same length then it's still a noticable difference (imagine going from a 100mm stem to a 80)

The Tarmac is also deigned to be more aggressive than a roubaix for example, so will feel much more stretched.

One of the advantages of buying from a real shop is that they often let you try different stems to get the right fit. If I was in your position I would look at trying some different stems and see how you go.

What was your last bike?

My last bike was a mountain bike. I took the tarmac out this evening for a test ride. I thought I should quit complaining and just see how it actually feels on the road. Very twitchy, and more difficult to control than a mountain bike. I suppose it's that transition from one to another. Absolutely loved the ride though. Responsive and goes up hills effortlessly.

A few problems however. I believe the breaks are not properly centered. Tried to correct pre ride but found it a little difficult. The front wheel also appears to be slightly buckled. When I spin it you can see how uneven it is. The rear wheel is fine. Also the gear changing seem a wee bit off. When moving into the higher gears the chain tends to rub against the chain stay or whatever it is called which really makes an annoying sound. The crankset is a FSA Gossamer BB30 if this helps. Cassette is Tiagra and everything else is Shimano 105.

Other than that it was great! Probably needs some fine tuning though...

gezebo

Well that explains why you find it stretched!

When you buy online its a bit hit and miss if the bike comes in a true 'ready to go state'! Apart from the wheel it all sounds very simple to sort yourself...

Just don't go nuts when tightening bolts on the carbon frame. They really don't need to go as tight as you think!

The tarmac is a very responsive ride, I built one from scratch for a mate. It's really nice. Another mate has the roubaix, same groupset but rides completely differently, its relaxed and soaks the bumps up lovely.

Just enjoy your new bike, play with set ups (maybe change stem if required later). Unless you are riding seriously I'd forget about paying for a 'fitting'!

NewTTer

Where are you? sounds as if you need some hands on help. I doubt you will need a 56 it will be to small, I ride a Tarmac same body dimensions and guess what? Its a 58. Yes you can discuss trunk length but you have forgotten arm length!, you may just need a slightly shorter stem but after your last post regarding brakes needing centering etc I wouldnt like to give you any advice without seeing you as you clearly have limited knowledge, and it could only serve to compound the issue, as for the wheel buckle contact the supplier and ask them to contribute to the cost of having it trued.

Gabbo

NewTTer wrote:

but after your last post regarding brakes needing centering etc I wouldn't like to give you any advice without seeing you as you clearly have limited knowledge

It's barely rocket science to be fair. What would compound the issue are brakes that are unable to function efficiently. Disregarding the breaks would be a recipe for disaster as my braking distance has already been compromised by how poorly aligned they are.

I understand your concern, but one has to start somewhere.

Gabbo

gezebo wrote:

Well that explains why you find it stretched!

When you buy online its a bit hit and miss if the bike comes in a true 'ready to go state'! Apart from the wheel it all sounds very simple to sort yourself...

Just don't go nuts when tightening bolts on the carbon frame. They really don't need to go as tight as you think!

The tarmac is a very responsive ride, I built one from scratch for a mate. It's really nice. Another mate has the roubaix, same groupset but rides completely differently, its relaxed and soaks the bumps up lovely.

Just enjoy your new bike, play with set ups (maybe change stem if required later). Unless you are riding seriously I'd forget about paying for a 'fitting'!

I've tried a Roubaix and Tarmac both in 58cm. The Roubaix has a far more relaxed feel to it. You don't feel encouraged to drop lower like you do on the tarmac. Mind you, a ride on the tarmac will give you endless fun. I can feel absolutely every bit of detail beneath the wheel.. even a spec of dirt. That is how sensitive the tarmac is, but I prefer that!

Regarding the mechanical aspect of cycling, as someone has already mentioned, I clearly have limited knowledge but like yourself I am determined to be able to correct and adjust certain components myself without having to rely on a "professional" bike mechanic.

I'll continue to ride and become more compatible with the bike, then hopefully in a few months consider joining a cycling club. I use to be a competitive club runner so I always relish a challenge. For now, however, cycling will do! :-)

NewTTer

Gabbo wrote:

gezebo wrote:

Well that explains why you find it stretched!

I'll continue to ride and become more compatible with the bike, then hopefully in a few months consider joining a cycling club. I use to be a competitive club runner so I always relish a challenge. For now, however, cycling will do! :-)

So you dont view cycling as a challenge then! Guess you just pee'ed off a high percentage of guys here!

Hope the cycling "will do" until you find a real challenge

Gabbo

NewTTer wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

gezebo wrote:

Well that explains why you find it stretched!

I'll continue to ride and become more compatible with the bike, then hopefully in a few months consider joining a cycling club. I use to be a competitive club runner so I always relish a challenge. For now, however, cycling will do! :-)

So you dont view cycling as a challenge then! Guess you just pee'ed off a high percentage of guys here!

Hope the cycling "will do" until you find a real challenge

Sorry I believe you misunderstood what I said. Either that or I wasn't clear enough. By saying "just cycling," I meant that I'll build up my fitness and handling on the road before entering a cycling club. Of course cycling in itself is a challenge, but I've always pushed myself to the absolute limit. By "just cycling" for these upcoming months I should be able to provide myself with a decent level of fitness before I sign up to a cycling club and enter some events.

If anything I think cycling can be as gruelling if not more so than running, hence why I've decided to opt for it as my primary sport.

BikeDynamics

Hi Gabbo

Professional Bike Fitter here. I don't post that often but it looks like you need some help.

At 48% your inseam to height ratio is on the long legged end of the spectrum, but not excessively so.

The suggested 802mm saddle height is too high for you. From observations of my customers I have developed a 'Sanity Checker' which suggests Saddle height= 0.876(inseam) +10.

This would put you at 789mm. If your saddle height is too high and / or you have tight hamstrings your pelvis will be inhibited from leaning forwards, placing more emphasis on your back to reach forwards far enough.

As you say, long legs implies a short torso, so the reach may be long anyway.

I would not be tempted to shove the saddle too far forwards as this may just transfer too much weight onto your hands.

My recommendation would be to drop the saddle down to somewhere around 785-789, stick the saddle in the middle of it rails and get the bars as high as possible rather than a shorter stem. Look for a height differential between saddle and bars of around 60mm, you can always go lower in the future as you get more used to the bike. This may mean flipping the stem over so it sticks up rather than down, which will be met with howls of derision from many on this forum, but you need to get comfortable first and worry about aesthetics later.

Hope this helps but hey, according to Simeon I'm just a 'fooking con artist wonker' so what do I know.

Mike at BikeDynamics Ltd

ben@31

Gabbo wrote:

Hi guys,

a couple of employee's did suggest I try out the 56cm frame as it would be more responsive.

Your views?

At this point I would be questioning the LBS as it sounds like typical sales speak bull carp, using key words such as "responsive". I can see how a sports car is more responsive that a bus but not two near identical pushbikes. If they were any difference in the pushbike performance surely it would be microscopic and not instantly turn you from a fat middle age pie eater into a TDF winner. The difference between frame sizes would be in comfort and ergonomics.

Grill

ben@31 wrote:

Gabbo wrote:

Hi guys,

a couple of employee's did suggest I try out the 56cm frame as it would be more responsive.

Your views?

At this point I would be questioning the LBS as it sounds like typical sales speak bull carp, using key words such as "responsive". I can see how a sports car is more responsive that a bus but not two near identical pushbikes. If they were any difference in the pushbike performance surely it would be microscopic and not instantly turn you from a fat middle age pie eater into a TDF winner. The difference between frame sizes would be in comfort and ergonomics.

Stem length and to a certain extent frame size do have an impact on responsiveness, especially when limited reach is involved. Having tested the same frame in different sizes I can say this with absolute certainty (both using 110mm stems). Of course just shortening the stem on the bigger bike will make it more "responsive" but usually to a point where it's nervous.

newcycle

Grill wrote:

I sized down from a 56 to a 54 after a proper fitting. Best thing I ever did. On the 56 my seat was all the way forward (on an inline post) and I was down to a 100mm stem which made the bike feel super twitchy. After all that it still didn't feel right. My 54 is perfect and I wish I'd have done it right the first time as opposed to doing it twice (actually 3 times but that's a whole other kettle of fish). It's much easier to get a proper fit on a smaller frame than compromise it on a larger one. Every shop said I should be on a 56, but it took a shop that does proper fitting to notice that I don't bend at the lumbar and I pedal toe down make the smaller frame the only way to go.

I have the exact same problem !! What is your height and inseam ??

seanorawe

I felt the same when I owned an Allez. The stretched out more aggressive position really just didn't suit my body and flexibility. I changed to a Sectuer and all my problems vanished. Now I only ever buy bikes with a relaxed geometry. Like bikedynamics said though, the best thing you can do is get as comfortable as you can. And I adjust everything in this order:

Saddle height - I seem to know how much bend I like at the knee
fore/aft - I move it back until my left knee pain goes away, and pedaling feels smooth Is my knee dodgy? I dont know
Bar height - As high as that sucker goes


Everyone is different though.

Another option is to buy a cheap smaller stem from ebay to try, if it works out, happy days. If not, you just lost a tenner.