Sizing

[Saint]

I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake
correct 'sizing' when purchasing a bike, which of course I
agree with. However the advice is a bit hit and miss in
that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my area with
the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them
merely said that correct sizing involved my standing with
slight clearance over the crossbar and having the saddle at
a height where my toes were in contact with the ground.

This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.

Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long
standing, reputable dealers) have fitting machines/jigs etc
so in the absence of these how on earth do I know what the
correct size is?

I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above
criteria to both the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the
latter having less seatpost pin out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a
bit) tall - which is the correct size and what, in practical
terms, are the criteria for correct size?

And I thought cycling was just about riding your
bike........

Cheers

S

[Elyob]

"Saint" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:ccn6k8$j4q$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake
> correct 'sizing' when purchasing a bike, which of course I
> agree with. However the advice
is
> a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable
> dealers in my
area
> with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if
> them merely said that correct sizing involved my
> standing with slight clearance over the crossbar and
> having the saddle at a height where my toes were in
> contact with the ground.
>
> This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.
>
> Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long
> standing, reputable dealers) have fitting machines/jigs
> etc so in the absence of these how on earth do I know what
> the correct size is?
>
> I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above
> criteria to both the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with
> the latter having less seatpost
pin
> out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the
> correct size and
what,
> in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?
>
> And I thought cycling was just about riding your
> bike........
>

I've been through four bikes and thought I liked them all,
but my current is the best. I have tried one of my old bikes
since, and I hate it. It's a personal thing. Borrow bikes
off friends etc ...

[Paul]

In article <ccn6k8$j4q$1@sparta.btinternet.com>,
me@privacy.net says...
> I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake
> correct 'sizing' when purchasing a bike, which of course I
> agree with. However the advice is a bit hit and miss in
> that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my area with
> the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them
> merely said that correct sizing involved my standing with
> slight clearance over the crossbar and having the saddle
> at a height where my toes were in contact with the ground.
>
> This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.
>
> Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long
> standing, reputable dealers) have fitting machines/jigs
> etc so in the absence of these how on earth do I know what
> the correct size is?
>
> I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above
> criteria to both the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with
> the latter having less seatpost pin out. I am 5 feet 11
> (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and what, in
> practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?
>
> And I thought cycling was just about riding your
> bike........
>
> Cheers
>
> S
>
>
>
Now there are others more qulified than I, however, as they
all seem to be either down the pub or in bed, I will give
you a starter[1] for 10. Bikes (or bicycles) come in many
different flavours to do many diffrent jobs. Unsupprisinly,
the sizing will be diffrent for each type. So, first
question, what do you want to do on your new bike. Commute,
if so, will that be a fast commute or a slow pootle commute.
Will it be a train commute with a bit/some/a lot of riding
at one/both ends? Race? ok, will that be on the road, or off
the road, or perhaps a combination of the two? Tour? wil
that be weekend tours or full blown round the world tour, so
soemwhere inbetween. Enough. this isn't an exustive list but
you get the picture. You mention a Trek, without looking I
don't know whether the modle you looked at was a mountian
bike a hybred or a road bike. However, one of the primary
measurements you will be interested in is the distance
between the saddle and the peddal when the crank is inline
with the seat tube. There are mathematical formulea to work
this out but a good starting point is with you sitting on
the saddle, you should be able to comfortable rest your heel
on the lower peddal with a slight bend in the knee. But as
the seat post is normally adjustable in the seat post, this
can be moved to suit you on a wide varity of frame sizes.
Next up (and my personal starting point!) is the stand over
hight. this is the distance between your dangley bits and
the top tube. On a road bike this only needs to be
confortably clear, (say a couple of
cm), on a mountin bike, this distance can't really be to
big, say a couple of feet for safety... ok, sensibly 10
to 15 cm, though bike manufactures have done alsorts to
lower the standover hight these days igh all manor of
bent top tubes (one way to look at this, is it's one les
tube for you to bend :) next up is the saddle to the
handle bars distance. Starting point here is with your
elbow on the noes of the saddle your fingertips should
reach the bars. whether you want the saddle above the
bars, in line with the bars or below the bars is personal
prefference and depends on what your goals are, but you
should considier this when you buy a frame. OK, got all
that. Good. In summary, the for a saftey bike[2] you will
have three contact points with the bike, your hands, your
feet and the soft squigy bit between your legs. it is the
relationship between these that is important to comfort
and power[3] whether you can reach the floor while in the
saddle is a safety issue, but is also important. A good
bike shop would tell you this, and the advise you
recieved is more akin to that which would be dished out
to a parent buying a toy bike for a child.

HtH

1. It is only a starter, theres a whole scince out there
specialisingt in thsi stuff.
2.A safety bike is what you probably consider as a 'normal
bike' with a dimond frame. there is of course no such
thing as a normal bike and everyone in this ng knows
(whether they'll admit it or not) that the the continume
of refinement goes from Ordenaries (penny farthings)
through safety bikes all the way to recumbents
3.Again, as is known by all of this parish, the dark side is
he only true place of comfort and power availale to the
pedal cyclist.
--
.paul

If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
the sport for you.

[Zog The Undenia]

Saint wrote:
> I have read a lot lately about the necessity to undertake
> correct 'sizing' when purchasing a bike, which of course I
> agree with. However the advice is a bit hit and miss in
> that, today, I visited 5 reputable dealers in my area with
> the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if them
> merely said that correct sizing involved my standing with
> slight clearance over the crossbar and having the saddle
> at a height where my toes were in contact with the ground.
>
> This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.
>
> Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long
> standing, reputable dealers) have fitting machines/jigs
> etc so in the absence of these how on earth do I know what
> the correct size is?
>
> I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the above
> criteria to both the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with
> the latter having less seatpost pin out. I am 5 feet 11
> (and a bit) tall - which is the correct size and what, in
> practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?
>
> And I thought cycling was just about riding your
> bike........
>
> Cheers
>
> S
>
>
Top tube and stem length are generally more important than
seat tube size - especially for MTB and compact road frames,
where standover height is not an issue.

[David Barnes]

"paul" <paul.coombs@btinternetSPAMSOFF.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1b5946cf10ef58fb989779@news.btinternet.com...
> In article <ccn6k8$j4q$1@sparta.btinternet.com>,
> me@privacy.net says...
> > I have read a lot lately about the necessity to
> > undertake correct
'sizing'
> > when purchasing a bike, which of course I agree with.
> > However the
advice is
> > a bit hit and miss in that, today, I visited 5 reputable
> > dealers in my
area
> > with the intention of buying a bike. Every single one if
> > them merely
said
> > that correct sizing involved my standing with slight
> > clearance over the crossbar and having the saddle at a
> > height where my toes were in contact with the ground.
> >
> > This, I was told, was the correct way to ascertain size.
> >
> > Now, not many shops that I know (and many are long
> > standing, reputable dealers) have fitting machines/jigs
> > etc so in the absence of these how
on
> > earth do I know what the correct size is?
> >
> > I tried a Trek 1500 today and was able to apply the
> > above criteria to
both
> > the 56 and 58 cm frames, of course with the latter
> > having less seatpost
pin
> > out. I am 5 feet 11 (and a bit) tall - which is the
> > correct size and
what,
> > in practical terms, are the criteria for correct size?
> >
> > And I thought cycling was just about riding your
> > bike........
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > S
> >
> >
> >
> Now there are others more qulified than I, however, as
> they all seem to be either down the pub or in bed, I will
> give you a starter[1] for 10. Bikes (or bicycles) come in
> many different flavours to do many diffrent jobs.
> Unsupprisinly, the sizing will be diffrent for each type.
> So, first question, what do you want to do on your new
> bike. Commute, if so, will that be a fast commute or a
> slow pootle commute. Will it be a train commute with a
> bit/some/a lot of riding at one/both ends? Race? ok, will
> that be on the road, or off the road, or perhaps a
> combination of the two? Tour? wil that be weekend tours or
> full blown round the world tour, so soemwhere inbetween.
> Enough. this isn't an exustive list but you get the
> picture. You mention a Trek, without looking I don't know
> whether the modle you looked at was a mountian bike a
> hybred or a road bike. However, one of the primary
> measurements you will be interested in is the distance
> between the saddle and the peddal when the crank is inline
> with the seat tube. There are mathematical formulea to
> work this out but a good starting point is with you
> sitting on the saddle, you should be able to comfortable
> rest your heel on the lower peddal with a slight bend in
> the knee. But as the seat post is normally adjustable in
> the seat post, this can be moved to suit you on a wide
> varity of frame sizes. Next up (and my personal starting
> point!) is the stand over hight. this is the distance
> between your dangley bits and the top tube. On a road bike
> this only needs to be confortably clear, (say a couple of
> cm), on a mountin bike, this distance can't really be to
> big, say a couple of feet for safety... ok, sensibly 10
> to 15 cm, though bike manufactures have done alsorts to
> lower the standover hight these days igh all manor of
> bent top tubes (one way to look at this, is it's one
> les tube for you to bend :) next up is the saddle to
> the handle bars distance. Starting point here is with
> your elbow on the noes of the saddle your fingertips
> should reach the bars. whether you want the saddle
> above the bars, in line with the bars or below the bars
> is personal prefference and depends on what your goals
> are, but you should considier this when you buy a
> frame. OK, got all that. Good. In summary, the for a
> saftey bike[2] you will have three contact points with
> the bike, your hands, your feet and the soft squigy bit
> between your legs. it is the relationship between these
> that is important to comfort and power[3] whether you
> can reach the floor while in the saddle is a safety
> issue, but is also important. A good bike shop would
> tell you this, and the advise you recieved is more akin
> to that which would be dished out to a parent buying a
> toy bike for a child.
>
> HtH
>
> 1. It is only a starter, theres a whole scince out there
> specialisingt in thsi stuff.
> 2.A safety bike is what you probably consider as a 'normal
> bike' with a dimond frame. there is of course no such
> thing as a normal bike and everyone in this ng knows
> (whether they'll admit it or not) that the the continume
> of refinement goes from Ordenaries (penny farthings)
> through safety bikes all the way to recumbents
> 3.Again, as is known by all of this parish, the dark side
> is he only true place of comfort and power availale to
> the pedal cyclist.
> --
> .paul
>
> If at first you don't succeed... Skydiving is probably not
> the sport for you.

Having just purchased a new bike I can honestly say there
is no better way to determine the correct size than trying
the bike. I read all the sizing stuff I could find on the
web and had a size in mind (19") before I went to the shop.
On trying various bikes I nearly gave up having found that
the saddle to handle bar distance was too short for me,
even on the biggest frames. In the end I tried a 17.5" Trek
6500 which turned out to be perfect. Basically it's down to
the geometry of the frame and having tried various makes
and models this turned out to be the best option in my
price range.

So get down to a shop where they will let you try the
bikes. My LBS were great as they had various models in
their hire fleet and they let me ride them round the
country park, where they are based, so I could get a good
feel for the thing.

Hope this helps.

Cheers, Dave