Frame size query

rsmaybury

Hi

Just new to road cycling and bought a Claude
Butler san remo 2013 bike. I'm 1.8 m 5 ft 10 inches tall
I tried both a 53 and 56 cm frame and went
For 56cm frame. However a local bike
Retailer thinks the frame is too big and should
Have gone with the 53cm frame.
The lbr thinks the handle bars are too
Far away which may cause back
Problems.

Can I buy a shorter stem ? to bring the
Handle bars a bit closer thanks ?

Grill

Should have gone for the 53. You can get a shorter stem and inline post, but the fit will always be compromised.

Sawilson

Ditto Grill
Brought a cheap bike to use on turbo, offer was only on that size, fitted straight seat post and shorter stem, still didn't feel right.
Then brought better bike which included body fit, and it's different as chalk and cheese, one fits perfectly and the other one will be getting a smaller frame very soon !

Moonbiker

I think from 52cm to 54cm size would be right.

Proabably either 52 or 53 being better than 54 if you want it more racer than relaxed touring.

rafletcher

Not all 56cm frames are alike. I'm 5'10", and ride my 56cm frame quite happily. I have a 33" inseam, and good flexibility with (crucially) long arms, so the total reach is fine.

Anonymous

You are quite right, frames vary a lot and the numbers do not mean much.

The thing is that the op tried 2 sizes and went with the bigger of the 2.
He now has no option but to fudge the stem and poss seat post too.

So many people seem to end up with too big a frame.
I think this is partly due to them not being wiling to put a bigger stem or seat post on a smaller frame....... which is a bit ironic when that would give them a well fitting bike as opposed to ending up spending the money anyway only to have a badly fitting one :shock:

When buying jeans you get the ones that are too big, not too small.
When buying a bike it's the other way round.

giant_man

hmm I'm not sure a comparison with clothing is relevant, but this just proves a bike fitting could have come into its own, because as already stated, no two frames are the same.

rafletcher

Carbonator wrote:

You are quite right, frames vary a lot and the numbers do not mean much.

The thing is that the op tried 2 sizes and went with the bigger of the 2.
He now has no option but to fudge the stem and poss seat post too.

He does have an option. He could choose to believe the place that sold him the bike originally (after all he tried it and presumably felt ok on it) rather than the LBR (from whom he didn't buy it) who says it "might" cause back problems.

As I've mentioned elsewhere, fashions in bike sizing change. My first "proper" bike (I was 29) was a 60cm frame with a 12cm stem. Now the bike fitting wisdom (at age 57) is I should have a 56cm frame with a 10cm stem. That's 6cm shorter reach. I've not changed shape, nor has my flexibility decreased.

As Giantman says a basic bike fit (£35 or so) would possibly have helped. But maybe not - mine threw up a pedal to seat height of 88cm (for an 83cm inseam and foot length of 27cm). I actually ride and feel comfortable with a pedal to seat height of 92cm. Of course that might not be the most efficient height...

rsmaybury

Thanks all
for interest is the stem and handlebars
bigger on the 56cm frame than the 53cm
frame or just the same ?

littledove44

Be careful with numbers if you change manufacturer. I have two bikes that are almost identical (less than 10mm) on all measurements.

One is "56" the other is a "52"!

cougie

rsmaybury wrote:

Hi

Just new to road cycling and bought a Claude
Butler san remo 2013 bike. I'm 1.8 m 5 ft 10 inches tall
I tried both a 53 and 56 cm frame and went
For 56cm frame. However a local bike
Retailer thinks the frame is too big and should
Have gone with the 53cm frame.
The lbr thinks the handle bars are too
Far away which may cause back
Problems.

Can I buy a shorter stem ? to bring the
Handle bars a bit closer thanks ?

Why did the local bike retailer comment on your bike ? Did you ask for their opinion ? And why not ask them about the stem - seeing as they mentioned the size ?

I'd not worry too much - you tried both sizes and felt the 56 was better.

arran77

cougie wrote:

rsmaybury wrote:

Hi

Just new to road cycling and bought a Claude
Butler san remo 2013 bike. I'm 1.8 m 5 ft 10 inches tall
I tried both a 53 and 56 cm frame and went
For 56cm frame. However a local bike
Retailer thinks the frame is too big and should
Have gone with the 53cm frame.
The lbr thinks the handle bars are too
Far away which may cause back
Problems.

Can I buy a shorter stem ? to bring the
Handle bars a bit closer thanks ?

Why did the local bike retailer comment on your bike ? Did you ask for their opinion ? And why not ask them about the stem - seeing as they mentioned the size ?

I'd not worry too much - you tried both sizes and felt the 56 was better.

I would think that any decent shop would offer advice, after all the OP says he's new to road bikes.

As others have said I'd be inclined to ask them what stem length they recommend if you're not comfortable making the choice yourself.

cougie

So you buy a bike from somewhere - and then take it to another shop and they critique your choice ? Seems odd to me.

John.T

Grill wrote:

Should have gone for the 53. You can get a shorter stem and inline post, but the fit will always be compromised.

An in-line post is never the answer. A smaller frame with the same saddle height will give the same saddle position. An in-line one could bring it too far forward. No problem with a shorter stem down to about an 8 cm. I would not recommend shorter. A smaller frame can bring problems with bar height. The things I look for in a frame are virtual TT length (coupled with seat angle) and head tube length. Better still stack and reach if quoted.

Grill

John.T wrote:

Grill wrote:

Should have gone for the 53. You can get a shorter stem and inline post, but the fit will always be compromised.

An in-line post is never the answer. A smaller frame with the same saddle height will give the same saddle position. An in-line one could bring it too far forward. No problem with a shorter stem down to about an 8 cm. I would not recommend shorter. A smaller frame can bring problems with bar height. The things I look for in a frame are virtual TT length (coupled with seat angle) and head tube length. Better still stack and reach if quoted.

Which is why I said that fit will be compromised...

John.T

Grill wrote:

John.T wrote:

Grill wrote:

Should have gone for the 53. You can get a shorter stem and inline post, but the fit will always be compromised.

An in-line post is never the answer. A smaller frame with the saOme saddle height will give the same saddle position. An in-line one could bring it too far forward. No problem with a shorter stem down to about an 8 cm. I would not recommend shorter. A smaller frame can bring problems with bar height. The things I look for in a frame are virtual TT length (coupled with seat angle) and head tube length. Better still stack and reach if quoted.

Which is why I said that fit will be compromised...

Only if he fitted the in-line post you recommend. You can get the saddle position right on any frame with the same seat angle with a long enough post. May not look good but it will fit. Saddle position is the first thing to get right. The problems come from TT and head tube length. TT can be sorted within reason with stem length. Head tube less so.
I am 5'10" as well and ride 56 cm frames now. I had a 53 some years ago. It was not perfect but I had my only RR win on it.