Forum home Road cycling forum Road buying advice

Wanting to try a bike for size - a dilemma

lettingthedaysgobylettingthedaysgoby Posts: 1,682
edited October 2016 in Road buying advice
I'm a newbie to all this, so apologies if I'm missing something obvious!

After a great deal of thought, confusion and reading of as much info as I can, I think I've settled on what I want to buy for my first road bike, a Cube Agree C:62 disc, 2016 model. It fits my budget, has the spec I was after and as a bonus I think it looks really nice too.

However, every bit of advice I've seen says it's really important to go have a sit on the bike first, check the size etc. This also seems important as a) going on the size charts on the Cube website I'm kinda on the border between two sizes and b) I've also read in various places that Cube sizing can err on the small size and people often go one size up.

(for what it's worth I'm 5'7", with short legs)

With this in mind I really want to try one out, but the only places I can find with 2016 models still in stock are miles away (I'm in Birmingham). I could go to a local shop and try a 2017 model but I'd be a bit uncomfortable doing that as I would effectively be wasting the shops time as I'd just then have to go and buy a 2016 model online form another retailer.

Any ideas/thoughts?

Posts

  • trek_dantrek_dan Posts: 1,366
    You could always haggle with the local shop, say you'd prefer to buy from a local shop but I've had £x price online. The 50cm seems tiny and the 53cm seems too long.
  • trek_dan wrote:
    You could always haggle with the local shop, say you'd prefer to buy from a local shop but I've had £x price online. The 50cm seems tiny and the 53cm seems too long.
    It's not a case of being able to haggle, as far as I can tell nowhere local has the older models in stock, just the 2017 ones...
  • slowbikeslowbike Posts: 8,498
    If in doubt - buy the smaller one - it can be made "larger"... it's difficult to make one that's too big much smaller.

    not a lot of choice if the only place that stocks the ones you want are miles away and you want to try then you'll need to travel to try them ... if they're online only then you're effectively stuffed ...
  • Slowbike wrote:
    If in doubt - buy the smaller one - it can be made "larger"... it's difficult to make one that's too big much smaller.

    not a lot of choice if the only place that stocks the ones you want are miles away and you want to try then you'll need to travel to try them ... if they're online only then you're effectively stuffed ...
    This is pretty much the conclusion I've come to...
  • trek_dantrek_dan Posts: 1,366
    trek_dan wrote:
    You could always haggle with the local shop, say you'd prefer to buy from a local shop but I've had £x price online. The 50cm seems tiny and the 53cm seems too long.
    It's not a case of being able to haggle, as far as I can tell nowhere local has the older models in stock, just the 2017 ones...
    Not just the same bike with a different colour scheme?
  • trek_dan wrote:
    Not just the same bike with a different colour scheme?
    Quite possibly, but the 2016 ones are going for several hundred pounds less...
  • daniel_bdaniel_b Posts: 10,149
    That is very tricky looking at the geometry, it has a fairly short top tube compared to a lot of bikes.

    What is your definitive inside leg measurement?

    Are you buying from CRC with BC Discount?
    Felt F70 05 (Turbo)
    Marin Palisades Trail 91 and 06
    Scott CR1 SL 12
    Cannondale Synapse Adventure 15 & 16 Di2
    Scott Foil 18
  • Daniel B wrote:
    That is very tricky looking at the geometry, it has a fairly short top tube compared to a lot of bikes.

    What is your definitive inside leg measurement?

    Are you buying from CRC with BC Discount?
    Just measured again and it's almost bang on 28".

    BC discount = ?
  • trek_dantrek_dan Posts: 1,366
    trek_dan wrote:
    Not just the same bike with a different colour scheme?
    Quite possibly, but the 2016 ones are going for several hundred pounds less...
    So you go to a local bike shop and say I can get last years models for £xxx online, can you do anything about the price? I'd definitely want to try them out for size, the 50 is essentially an extra small and the 53 a medium with nothing in between.
  • A shortlist of 1 is not really going to help you, you really need a few more on the list if you want a big that fits.
    However, a shorter or longer stem can usually bridge between sizes.
  • I am a similar height/size to you - 5'8" with 29 inch inseam. Personally, I would be going for a 53.
    The 50 is way too small, and with the 56cm - the bars/stack would be too high and the cranks too long-even though the reach shown is not excessive.
    The ideal reach for me is about 386mm, but this may well be different for you due to flexibility and arm length etc.
  • daniel_bdaniel_b Posts: 10,149
    I am a similar height/size to you - 5'8" with 29 inch inseam. Personally, I would be going for a 53.
    The 50 is way too small, and with the 56cm - the bars/stack would be too high and the cranks too long-even though the reach shown is not excessive.
    The ideal reach for me is about 386mm, but this may well be different for you due to flexibility and arm length etc.

    I would tend to agree with you there, the top tube length on these is pretty short it would seem.

    I was pondering the 56cm, but as you say the front end will then be pretty high, what with a shorter leg meaning the saddle will not be going up very far - comparitively.

    I am 5ft 10, and have a 34" inseam, so my problem has always been getting a bike that is the right size for my legs, but that has a short enough top tube so I am not too stretched out.
    My solution turned out to be, aside from becoming more flexible, to get a 'Sportive' bike with a shorter top tube, and I now know that pretty much bang on, a bike with a 545 top tube\90mm stem\compact bars\20mm layback seatpost is a good combo for me.
    So in laymans terms, and not taking into account flexibility, arm length etc, your upper body should be 3" (Nearly 8cm) greater than mine.

    In theory with your dimensions, a more racy bike setup should suit you pretty well, as you wouldn't need a huge amount of seatpost showing, and subsequently saddle drop to bars should be fairly normal.

    But as Paul mentioned, with a 53 it should be ok, but with only a 530mm top tube length, I would have thought you would need a big censored stem on it, maybe 120 or 130mm?

    Oh and if you are a member of British Cycling, you can get 10% monthly discount with CRC on purchases of more than £99.
    Plus there is cashback through topcashback - all adds up on a big purchase.

    If I were to buy this bike, I would be after a 56, as that has the 545 top tube, but part of me wonders if with your dimensions this is the wrong geometry of bike you are looking at - I wonder if you need it inverted the other way, ie a 54cm frame with a 56cm top tube?

    If you are a complete newbie, and have no prior bike sizing experience ot go on (?) then it seems like quite a gamble to me.
    Felt F70 05 (Turbo)
    Marin Palisades Trail 91 and 06
    Scott CR1 SL 12
    Cannondale Synapse Adventure 15 & 16 Di2
    Scott Foil 18
  • dj58dj58 Posts: 2,193
    You need to go to a shop and try the bike for size, as already suggested try the 2017 model, if the geo is the same, or travel to try the 2016 model if you are intent on that one. Better to do that than guess and end up with a bike you will not be happy with.
  • smudgeriismudgerii Posts: 125
    I have a cube peloton 53cm and at 5'7 1/2" it is just about right


    It's the 1/2" that makes all the difference
  • Daniel B wrote:
    I am 5ft 10, and have a 34" inseam, so my problem has always been getting a bike that is the right size for my legs, but that has a short enough top tube so I am not too stretched out.

    Eddy Merckx Milano 72
Sign In or Register to comment.