Frame size for a new bike... Can anyone offer some advice?

dannyjames1

I'm on the market for a new bicycle. Very interested in the Rose Xeon RS and Canyon Ultimate Al 9.0, but I'm having a great deal of trouble selecting my frame size as apparently my body is weirdly proportioned.

I am 170cm tall, and I have an 83cm inseam. Long legs apparently, and I guess a short torso in proportion to this.

I currently ride a 53cm Cube Peloton Race. Here is the geometry of the Cube Peloton frame:

I've measured the stem from the center of the bar clamp to the center of the steerer tube (I assume this is the correct way), and it is 100mm.

I feel that I am over-reaching on my cube a bit, I get discomfort in my elbows a fair bit or the time and it sometimes feels like my arms are a little bit straightened out. If I consciously pull them back on the bars or lower them, I feel more comfortable but then I either can't cover my brakes or the position is harder to maintain for the latter.

here is the rose geometry:


Based on just my inseam measurement.. Rose recommend the 55cm frame. Is it just me, or does that seem a bit extreme considering how I feel about reach on my Cube bike? I can always customise the stem length.... but do I really want to be running a 60-80mm stem? Actually considering ordering 2/3 sizes DOWN then messing with stem length.

Canyon suggest XS but I then fear that is TOO small and should go for the small, but I do prefer the rose I think after hearing many horror stories about Canyons customer service or lack thereof. I have little faith in them and I've never even made a purchase.

Can anyone give any advice on what might work?

yes. I'm a freak of nature!!!!!!!

0ced0

recommended sizes based on sole inseam is BS. looks like you could ride a 51 or 53 Rose depending on what you're after.

mshow1323

Are you sure that is your correct inseam? It sounds to me that may be your jeans size, or you have giant legs. FWIW, I 5'10" with a 30" inseam and I sit on a 56cm. Based on your inseam length alone, it sounds like 53cm is too small. Without seeing your actual positioning, I would bet that it is more of the issue. How long have you been riding? How flexible are you? One of the things I noticed when I started, my hands and elbows would either go numb or hurt fairly quickly. I would bet that your elbows are locked most of the time. Concentrate on pinching your elbows in and bending them with their natural hinge. A lot of people, myself included, when we get tired we lock our elbows, or flare them out like we're on a hybrid. Both will put strange pressure where it doesn't belong.
Aside from fit, the most important things in cycling are, positioning, flexibility, and core strength. You don't need a six pack, but you should be able to get into the hoods, then drop your hands and bad able to hold that position for a reasonable amount of time before your core strength fails you.

People also look at the size of the bike, and the tube length as the sole determining factor. Effective Top Tube Length and Stack are much better numbers to look at. Two bikes with the same top tube may fit drastically different because of the seat tube angles. Two of my bikes, a Trek Domane and Cannonade Supex, are very close to the same geometry, which is why I picked up the SuperX, but the SuperX is much longer and has a more aggressive seat tube angle. It's very noticeable.

drlodge

Find a bike that fits you, and measure the effective/horizontal Top Tube measurement, then base the size on that.

dannyjames1

0ced0 I couldn't agree more, I just cannot trust these calculators and sizing guides on websites as they seem to throw out all kinds of suggestions that vary HUGELY from one brand to the next.

Looking for something more sprightly and aggressive than my cube (which is more geared towards sportive) but with a balance between both.

That is my correct inseam, measured using a block of wood pressed against my crotch at approximate saddle pressure to the floor. I wear 30-32" trousers. I've been riding for 2 years however have gave up and done just about no riding over the winter. Got back into it a few weeks ago but I feel I'm still in good shape. Able to ride 70/80 mile no problem apart from the discomfort mentioned. Don't ride my elbows locked, there is a bend there but not much. I weigh 135lbs and consider myself to be fairly well conditioned. Flexibity could maybe be worked on. Gym twice a week.

My uncle, a cyclist of over 30 years who used to race seems to think I may be over reaching after looking at me on the bike.

I should try and get a photo of me sitting on my bike

gethinceri

If you really are interested in the Rose go to their video fitting guide on the website and follow it. It will give you the exact details that you will need, you can also (as I did) telephone them for further detailed advice, their English is better than most English native speakers'.

dannyjames1

I'm going to borrow a higher quality tape measure from work today and have someone assist in measuring me up. I'm pretty sure I got height and inseam accurately but there may be slight discrepancies with the tailors measure I've used.

So if I measure myself up as per all the areas they list on this video they are able to recommend a size?

My main concern with a larger frame is the shorter stem leaving less weight and control over the front end.
Is this the correct page? https://www.rosebikes.com/content/help/ ... ight-size/

And how do you like your Rose bike? Provided you went for it.

drlodge

Let me provide some guidance based on the dimensions you posted above:
- Your current bike (Cube) has an eTT of 535mm and STA of 74 degrees, and this feels a "bit stretched".
- The Rose 53cm is the exact same, it has an eTT of 530mm but a STA of 74.5 degrees. 1/2 degree STA equates to 5mm eTT, roughly. hence the Rose 53cm is near enough bang on like for like with your current bike, however the head tube is 10mm shorter so will have a larger drop from saddle to bars and a more aggressive position.
- The Rose 51cm has an eTT of 520mm and STA of 75 degrees, this puts it around 5mm less reach than the above, and another 5mm more drop.

So by going for the Rose 51, you get 5mm less reach (which you'll like) but also 15mm more drop (that you may not).

amrushton

Something to read before you press click

http://cyclefit.co.uk/a-canyon-wide-divide

dannyjames1

Seeing a professional that can hook me up to a computer is tempting, Cyclefit Manchester is close, I'm in Liverpool, but £250 for Cyclefit is a lot of money, and I'm a poor man. I've saved hard for my new bike. I've thought about seeing Dolan but they can only recommend what frame size you need if purchasing their bikes, AFAIK.

daniel_b

Sounds like you have a similar 'issue' to me.

I am, to use metric to match your stats, 86cm inseam, and am 178cm tall.

That's 5ft 10 and 34" in old money.

FWIW I find I tend (Frame geometries clearly differing) to need a 54cm frame with around a 545mm top tube (My Scott is 545, my Dale is 542), and usually run with a setback seatpost, the usual amount, and a 90mm stem - this is comfortable for me on a sportive bike, but on a race orientated bike I find I have to flip the stem, though will be trying it the conventional way around this summer.

When I started, my flexibility was rubbish, and I used to run an inline seatpost, but as that has improved I have swapped to a setback one, much better now, but only happens with time in the saddle imho.

The first bike I bought second hand, based on my height, and it was a 56cm Felt, beautiful bike, but way too big with a 100mm stem, far too stretched out, and used to get arm pain after everyride.

Currently I am in love with my Synapse, which is a much more upright geometry technically, but due to my long inseam I have oodles of seatpost showing, so the drop from saddle to bars is still pretty healthy, and I am now starting to wonder if this IS the kind of bike geometry I need long term.
There is also plenty of room to slam the stem if need be.

amrushton

dannyjames1 wrote:

Seeing a professional that can hook me up to a computer is tempting, Cyclefit Manchester is close, I'm in Liverpool, but £250 for Cyclefit is a lot of money, and I'm a poor man. I've saved hard for my new bike. I've thought about seeing Dolan but they can only recommend what frame size you need if purchasing their bikes, AFAIK.

It is a lot of money but punting out £1000s on a bike that isn't right is a bigger waste of money. They have a jig that all those measurements can be put into and you'll see the results via motion capture and power output.

dannyjames1

Extended commute and some extreme scrutiny as to how I'm sitting on the bike... maybe I do need to think about postur. I seem to be tensing up a bit and if I let my body loosen up my elbows naturally drop in a more comfortable bend and everything feels a little bit easier on me without jarring my body.

Going to get the high speed camera out soon and try to get a few fly by shots to analyse my posture on the bike... but you may be right mshow... this may be a case of posture...

gethinceri

It's not rocket science, no matter how much the bike fit specialists try to make out. You want a bike and you want it to be the right size for you. Yes, you can spend many pounds on having a full dimensional assessment and then buy the appropriate frame, bars, cranks, stem, spacers; but you can also do that once you've bought a bike that allows all the minor adjustments to be made.
For a Rose bike I measured inseam (spirit level & tape measure), shoulder width and arm length. Then I phoned them to get their opinion based on the frame I wanted, my age/fitness and the type of cycling I do, I spoke to Udo who confirmed that all my choices were correct based on my measurements but recommended an additional 5mm spacers to allow adjustment based on my first few weeks' rides.
The only regret I have is that I didn't swap out the saddle sooner for one that doesn't really hurt my arse.

dannyjames1

Kinda what I've been thinking regarding these expensive computer analysis systems. Did riders find them necessary 20/30 years ago? NO! Because I'm sure they didn't exist. I'm probably going to order the 51/53 Rose. Probably the 53 after DrLodge mentioned it is very similar dimensions to my Cube. Must also add I've dropped 15mm of spacer on the cube which feels fine so that accounts for the drop on the 53cm Rose.

Getting my measurements and calling rose tomorrow I hope, just depends when I am home from work.

I was thinking about saddle today on my bike... I think I need one slightly narrower at the rear. I noticed it REALLY digging into my sitbones.

letap73

The stack reach figures give a good indication of potential fit. If you feel a little stretched on the cube then you will fill a little more stretched on the Rose as it is slightly more aggressive in its stack and reach figures - less stack, more reach. You would have slightly greater drop and increased reach on the Rose in comparison to the Cube.
Daniel above has suggested the Synapse which is ideal in fit for somebody who has a shorter torso and longer legs.

amrushton

dannyjames1 wrote:

Kinda what I've been thinking regarding these expensive computer analysis systems. Did riders find them necessary 20/30 years ago? NO! Because I'm sure they didn't exist. I'm probably going to order the 51/53 Rose. Probably the 53 after DrLodge mentioned it is very similar dimensions to my Cube. Must also add I've dropped 15mm of spacer on the cube which feels fine so that accounts for the drop on the 53cm Rose.

Getting my measurements and calling rose tomorrow I hope, just depends when I am home from work.

I was thinking about saddle today on my bike... I think I need one slightly narrower at the rear. I noticed it REALLY digging into my sitbones.

They weren't available because they weren't invented just as powermeters and gps didn't exist. If you are happy with guesswork/ popular opinion and a majority verdict that's good. Hope it works for you.