Giant TCR composite 06 frame size S

lmk30 · #1 04-05.-2009

Hi there,
Have managed to get my hands on a v nice bike (the black version of the frame with only some magenta stripes, Ksyrium ES wheels, full Ultegra) but unfortunately I reckon it's a tad too big for me...

So therefore am considering selling the frame and keeping the rest of the stuff and getting a new smaller frame.
Wondering thus how much I could expect to get for the frame alone (good nick, riden by a girl, less than 200km of use, only some small cosmetic scuffs).

And also, what replacement frame would you suggest in the range $1500-2000 (£800-1200). Am a small woman (5'2, inseam 71.5cm) so it must come in a small size.

Cheers,

alfeng · #2 04-05.-2009

Just how much over-sized do you feel the SMALL frame is?

How long is the virtual top tube?

You can put a shorter stem on the bike (a "downhill" stem will place very close to the steerer) and/or a handlebar with a shorter reach (check TERRY).

Also, putting a Hi-Rise MTB stem on the bike will make the cockpit feel shorter.

lmk30 · #3 04-05.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfeng

Just how much over-sized do you feel the SMALL frame is?

How long is the virtual top tube?

You can put a shorter stem on the bike (a "downhill" stem will place very close to the steerer) and/or a handlebar with a shorter reach (check TERRY).

Also, putting a Hi-Rise MTB stem on the bike will make the cockpit feel shorter.

The main problem is the reach, I feel stretched out and despite taking all the spacers off the headset and stacking them on top I feel the handlebars are still too high (I'd ideally like to sit in a v low aero position but I realise that may be impossible for someone my height without changing to 650cc wheels...). I've thought about changing the stem but everyone I've spoken to have advised against less than 70mm because of impaired handling at shorter lengths. I guess compact or WSD handlebars may also help, but haven't been able to try that yet.

The virtual top tube (if I understand correctly, the horizontal distance from the steerer to the seatpost) is 51cm.
How much shorter do you think I can get using shorter reach bars and a stem of 70mm?

alfeng · #4 04-05.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmk30

The main problem is the reach, I feel stretched out and despite taking all the spacers off the headset and stacking them on top I feel the handlebars are still too high (I'd ideally like to sit in a v low aero position but I realise that may be impossible for someone my height without changing to 650cc wheels...). I've thought about changing the stem but everyone I've spoken to have advised against less than 70mm because of impaired handling at shorter lengths. I guess compact or WSD handlebars may also help, but haven't been able to try that yet.

The virtual top tube (if I understand correctly, the horizontal distance from the steerer to the seatpost) is 51cm.
How much shorter do you think I can get using shorter reach bars and a stem of 70mm?

While a changing the length of a stem will have some effect on the steering, I do NOT think that using a shorter stem will impair the steering ... the difference in leverage is also affected by the width of the handebars, and possibly more so ... and, IMO, the biggest problem with using a short/DH stem is the unusual appearance your bike would have.

IF handling were truly, adversely affected by using a shorter stem, then it would mean that you couldn't steer the bike with your hands on any part of the handlebar other than a specifically designated place (wherever THAT might be!?!) ... that is, it would mean that you could never adequately handle a particular bike if your hands were on the hoods OR on the drops if the ideal handling were someplace else on the bar, or vice versa.

The shortest top tube measurement that I can recall seeing was 50.5cm ... that doesn't mean that there aren't frames which use 700c wheels with shorter top tubes. So, while there may be some frames with that length top tube, I think that you would actually be hard pressed to find a frame with a shorter top tube if the 51cm you measured is c-c ... and, without seeing you on your bike, I would guess the fit is actually PRETTY CLOSE to being right & you only need to tweak the fit.

Not to state the obvious, but if your current stem is 100mm, then a 65-70mm stem will shorten the reach by ~30mm-to-35mm ... and, so on.

BTW. Simply rotating the bars so that the drops are LEVEL (bike shops seem to set the drops so that they are pointed toward the rear axle, more often than not) or the ends are pointed slightly UP resulting in a shallow-V on the drops AND (particularly) remounting the brake levers can shorten the reach of the bars by a couple of centimeters, or more (depending on how much you rotate the bars). If rotating the bar adequately adjusts the reach for you but the ends of the bars are now precariously close to your knees (!), then you can trim/shorten the end of the bars by as much as you need to ...

FYI. SALSA used to make a short-and-shallow handlebar ... so, I presume it is still available. I don't recall the difference in the reach & drop compared with a "typical" handlebar.

I don't know how much the difference in reach would be with either the TERRY or a so-called WSD handlebar ... As far as I know, Georgena Terry is less than 5'0" (she looks like she is only 4'10" to me BUT I have had one person say that she thought that 'I' was shorter 5'2" because she was 5'2" and she thought I was shorter than she was -- I'm 5'9"), and so her "stuff" is particularly well suited for the really small rider -- the Terry handlebar places the brake lever closer to the drops IF you place the levers in a specific region of the handlebar.

At 5'2", I would guess that you would only be considered to be a 'small' rider rather than a very small rider, so a WSD handlebar may-or-may not be a benefit.

lmk30 · #5 04-05.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by alfeng

While a changing the length of a stem will have some effect on the steering, I do NOT think that using a shorter stem will impair the steering ... the difference in leverage is also affected by the width of the handebars, and possibly more so ... and, IMO, the biggest problem with using a short/DH stem is the unusual appearance your bike would have.

IF handling were truly, adversely affected by using a shorter stem, then it would mean that you couldn't steer the bike with your hands on any part of the handlebar other than a specifically designated place (wherever THAT might be!?!) ... that is, it would mean that you could never adequately handle a particular bike if your hands were on the hoods OR on the drops if the ideal handling were someplace else on the bar, or vice versa.

The shortest top tube measurement that I can recall seeing was 50.5cm ... that doesn't mean that there aren't frames which use 700c wheels with shorter top tubes. So, while there may be some frames with that length top tube, I think that you would actually be hard pressed to find a frame with a shorter top tube if the 51cm you measured is c-c ... and, without seeing you on your bike, I would guess the fit is actually PRETTY CLOSE to being right & you only need to tweak the fit.

Not to state the obvious, but if your current stem is 100mm, then a 65-70mm stem will shorten the reach by ~30mm-to-35mm ... and, so on.

BTW. Simply rotating the bars so that the drops are LEVEL (bike shops seem to set the drops so that they are pointed toward the rear axle, more often than not) or the ends are pointed slightly UP resulting in a shallow-V on the drops AND (particularly) remounting the brake levers can shorten the reach of the bars by a couple of centimeters, or more (depending on how much you rotate the bars). If rotating the bar adequately adjusts the reach for you but the ends of the bars are now precariously close to your knees (!), then you can trim/shorten the end of the bars by as much as you need to ...

FYI. SALSA used to make a short-and-shallow handlebar ... so, I presume it is still available. I don't recall the difference in the reach & drop compared with a "typical" handlebar.

I don't know how much the difference in reach would be with either the TERRY or a so-called WSD handlebar ... As far as I know, Georgena Terry is less than 5'0" (she looks like she is only 4'10" to me BUT I have had one person say that she thought that 'I' was shorter 5'2" because she was 5'2" and she thought I was shorter than she was -- I'm 5'9"), and so her "stuff" is particularly well suited for the really small rider -- the Terry handlebar places the brake lever closer to the drops IF you place the levers in a specific region of the handlebar.

At 5'2", I would guess that you would only be considered to be a 'small' rider rather than a very small rider, so a WSD handlebar may-or-may not be a benefit.

Thanks a lot for that helpful and comprehensive answer! (I'm also chuffed that I might not be considered that small after all!) I'm taking the bike to my LBS tomorrow and hopefully they'll be able to help with the tweaking. If it really is beyond that then I'd love some advice on what frame to replace it with.
Cheers,

ianhargreaves · #6 04-05.-2009

Hi lmk30

I'd say sell the whole thing, start again with a new bike.

Go female specific! Please. Assuming you're not post op with male propotions! hehe... only kidding.

There are several things that may be wrong with your bike set up that you have currently.

Frame size
Frame geometry
Handlebar drop reach and width
Stem length
crank length
Saddle
Chain rings

Change the frame size and you've still potentially got the other problems to deal with!

Frame size
When using t-shirt sizing S in men's bikes generally means a 52cm frame size. There are several ways a frame is measured but the 2 most common ways is centre to centre (from the middle of the bottom bracket to the centre of the seat tube cluster) and centre to top (from the centre of the bottom bracket to the top of the seat clamp). Since compact frames with sloping top tubes have become the fashion frame manufactures are measuring to a virtual top tube height instead. Some manufactures of sloping top tube frames measure to the actual top tube but suggest a compensation factor into the sizing guide for retailers and customers. So, for example, if you were to measure C to C on a TCR or OCR and it measured 48cm that would really be around 52cm if measured to the virtual top tube height (go ahead, try it).

I recon anyone of 52 height would fit anywhere from 47 to 49cm frame, but no bigger. That's XS in t-shirt sizing for most brands. 49cm men's frames are not that hard to come across but if you find yourself on the 47cm end of things then you may struggle in the male dept.

Frame Geometry
Giant really embraced the compact frame with the sloping top tube, now it's part and parcel of almost every frame geometry (even Trek with their wrong way sloping top tube soon followed).

Compact frames use smaller triangles with a backwards slopping top tube. They do this without changing handlebar reach. From an engineering POV, smaller triangles are stiffer than bigger ones. This allows for a frame builder to make frames as stiff as standard frames with less material. Another main benefit of compact frames is the sloping top tube allows for about 3-4cm more seat mast to be exposed. This allows for better vibration dampening due to seat mast flexion, while the bottom half of the bike remains stiffer due to smaller triangles. Make sense? Some other people suggested changing the stem, handlebars etc. to make this bike fit you. I think you're losing some of the benefits of a compact frame by using a bigger frame. There's another reason to go smaller and not keep the frame (or buy a new bike and start from scratch

Frame geometry is dramatically different between male and female orientated bikes. Females have, on average, shorter arms and longer legs than there male counter parts. They also, on average, weight 25% less than men of the same height. Because of this big bike companies change the geometry of the bikes dramatically to suit females. No, they don't just make the same bike with a shorter top tube - this is not true! They do make the top tube shorter (to allow for shorter arms) but this is just part of it. If we're to take the example of specialized. What they do is: make the top tube shorter to allow for shorter arm reach. They make the head tube slightly higher, this allows females with shorter arms to reach the drops more comfortably that a lower head tube height would. Often toe overlap is an issue on smaller frames (eg. if you had to go for a 47cm frame with 700c wheels). To get around this they make increase the trail for the front fork to pitch it further away from the pedals. They do this with minimal increase of wheel base as in the case of specialized (and most other frame builders with a brain) they decrease chain stay length. This decrease in chain stay length also allows for more weight to be put over the rear wheel for better traction (remember 25% less weight?). You loose that benefit on male fit frames. This means you'll have less traction - maybe.

Handlebar reach and drop
Female marketed handle bars accommodate for the (on average) narrower shoulder girth and shorter arms of females then that of males of the same height. They do this by offering narrower bar width (some as low as 38cm), I recon you MAY need 40cm. They also have shallower drop reaches, this is to accommodate for the shorter arms of females

Stem Length
This is often shorter on female bikes as standard. You can of course change this on your existing set up though

Crank arm length
If you've measured yourself correctly I think you'll need about a 160mm crank arm. I recon the stock standard crank arm on a small male bike is 165 to 170mm. To check you've measured your inseam accurately you really need to use a spirit level between your legs (metre long ones work best). When the spirit level if exactly horizontal you measure from the level to the ground. That's more accurate than the tailor's method.

Saddle
No need to mention the hip girdle widths of men vs. women? The ischial spine (sit bone) is obviously going to be wider (on average) in women then that of men.

Chain Rings
Ok, don't hit me for this statement. Women, on average, simply can't produce as much power as men. I bet you're running a 53/39 chain set. The bike industry has realised this in the male bike market and started producing bikes with 50/36 (or 50/34) compact chainsets. Us amateurs simply cannot produce as much power as a full time pro can. This being the case why would the amateur bike market produce bikes with 53/39 chainsets? This is more apparent in the female bike market. Go compact over triple, go compact over standard female or male (unless you have mega legsIn short if you change the frame for a smaller one, even a female specific one, you'll be left with all the old, ill fitting, parts of the previous bike that (I recon) you should change too. And if you total up the cost of new crank arm lengths, compact chain set, saddle, frame and mechanic's labour cost of stripping your old bike down and rebuilding your new frameset (about £100) you may as well fork out for a new bike.

While you’ll always come across stupid people who say, women’s bikes are pointless as they are based on averages of women’s metrics and not all women fit this category. This is true, duh, but bare in mind it’s average because most people fit that bill. Most people are, after all, average (or at least close to average). Therefore the average women will fit the female bike better than the non average woman. You’ll struggle, and I really mean struggle, to find a woman and man of the same height that have the same leg length and arm length as each other! Even women who think they have shorter legs than average will still probably still have longer legs than men of the same height.

Try this link below (full carbon 105 ruby elite) in 48cm.

http://www.evanscycles.com/products/specialized/ruby-elite-2008-womens-road-bike-ec001404

You'll ride a well fitting bike with 105 gruppo faster than a poor fitting bike with ultegra!

Best of luck

alienator · #7 04-05.-2009

Sell the frame, and get another. When getting a new frame, focus on the fit. A cheap frame isn't a bargain if it doesn't fit properly. As for getting low, it seems you're limited, right now, by head tube length, and that will be the limiting factor for you, in terms of getting low. In the end, you might need to put a stem with negative rise on whatever frame you choose.

As for WSD frames, there's no blanket statement that can be made. Some companies just label small frames WSD. Others actually follow some model for the feminine form when they design the WSD frames. With the variation in the human form, WSD might not mean anything anyway.

650 wheels offer no real advantage except in cases where toe overlap is a problem. They are slightly, ever so slightly more aero than 700 wheels, but for a given width, 650 tires wear faster and have higher rolling resistance.

In the end, if you just can't find a frame that butters your muffin, you may have to consider a custom frame.

ianhargreaves · #8 04-05.-2009

I think if you bare alienator's statement in mind then you should get a female specific frame that does account for the female form (you may need to do some homework). P.S. WSD is the Trek name for women's specific design (as is D4W - designs for women - in spesh).

Also, he suggests getting a new frame. What do you suggest she does with the potentially poorly fitting crank arm length, handlebars, stem and saddle, alienator?

He suggests custom frame built frame too! I think custom frame are, in this day and age, a pointless waste of time and money. With frames being built at 2cm intervals, for most people, they can find a custom fit with a stock frame. I'd personally ignore that advise. Also how do you know if a frame set butters your muffin untill you've ridden it? Try riding a frameset without its wheels, gruppo, saddle and finishing kit? You can always get a frame set, pay for a mechanic to build it then find it does not fit... waste of your time and money, not the shop's... they'll be fine with it. This problem is more apparent on custom frames where you pay upfront and pay more for it too!

Bike fitting and customer frame building is based on a table of 'norms' that do not take into account the rider's own expirience. Get a custom frame and you will not know how it rides untill you've bought it and had it build up. Same goes for a built up frame. You'll know how a built up bike feels before you buy it, you'll get to ride it.

Even pros don't ride custom frames (for the most part). There are only a few example of riders that do. Boonon, for example, won the paris roubaix on a custom Spesh roubaix bike (lower head tube than the off the shelf version), while the rest of his quickstep team mates rode the of the shelf bikes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by alienator

Sell the frame, and get another. When getting a new frame, focus on the fit. A cheap frame isn't a bargain if it doesn't fit properly. As for getting low, it seems you're limited, right now, by head tube length, and that will be the limiting factor for you, in terms of getting low. In the end, you might need to put a stem with negative rise on whatever frame you choose.

As for WSD frames, there's no blanket statement that can be made. Some companies just label small frames WSD. Others actually follow some model for the feminine form when they design the WSD frames. With the variation in the human form, WSD might not mean anything anyway.

650 wheels offer no real advantage except in cases where toe overlap is a problem. They are slightly, ever so slightly more aero than 700 wheels, but for a given width, 650 tires wear faster and have higher rolling resistance.

In the end, if you just can't find a frame that butters your muffin, you may have to consider a custom frame.

alienator · #9 04-05.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianhargreaves

Also, he suggests getting a new frame. What do you suggest she does with the potentially poorly fitting crank arm length, handlebars, stem and saddle, alienator?

Golly, I don't know. I guess you win. Congratulations.

lmk30 · #10 04-06.-2009

Many thanks for the VERY exhaustive answers! I've measured c-c and that's 52cm on my bike.
I'm not very versed in the art of determining what crank length goes with what inseam, my current ones are 17cm, could someone perhaps explain? I also looked on the spesh website and even the Rubies have crank lengths of 167.5mm up to 170 (167.5 on the smallest sizes 44-48cm). Would that also be too long given my inseam?

I agree on the head tube length, this appears to be the limiting factor in how low I can go on most bikes. Looking at the Giant size chart, the measurements seem identical for both the men's and the women's versions.
And yes, the current setup is a 53-39 (I previously rode a standard triple). I've not really had too much trouble with this though but perhaps I'd notice the difference if I lived somewhere hillier.

With regards to moving the stuff over to a new frame, agree that it'd be a bit of a faff if I were to change cranks, casette and so on. I was planning on getting a new stem and handlebars at any rate but I really don't want to part with the wheels, which I really like (and the nice spesh that was recommended above has IMHO less good wheels).
Therefore, assuming I sell everything BUT the wheels, how much would you guess I'd get? (This dictates how much I've got left to spend on another bike).

ianhargreaves · #11 04-06.-2009

The C-C guide I gave you may be wrong! Sorry. If C-C is 52cm then it's definately way too big. I've had a look at giant's own sizing guide and their xs frame are recommended for 5'3 to 5'6 (approx), this means their small is bigger still. I'm 179cm (5'10) and most guides say I'd fit 54cm to 56cm.

Generally speaking it's safest to trust the manufactures of the bikes with crank length. This means if they pair a 167.5mm with a 48 then that's right for the average rider. They've put alot of effort into researching this. Obviously this is not right for everyone but it's safe to say most people fit the average bill. Basically if you know that you're not massively dissproportioned in anyway then go with the manufactures recommendations, they know (despite what people think) best (usualy). If you're to trust the manufactures on this then, yes, you do need to shorten your crank length. I'm sure if you look at a couple of ladies bikes vs. males bikes this would confirm that the crank length is often smaller on ladies bikes of smaller sizes.

You've looked at the top tube length of giant, have you looked at the geometry for other brands? I know that most of the mainstream brands shorten the top tubes of ladies bikes a little. It's worth looking into.

If you're fine on a 53/39 then stick with it. But try some hills on it first. If you find that the (probably lowest) ratio of 39 - 25 to high still then it's worth changing to a compact (as comes on most bikes sub £1500 now). I don't like triple on road bikes, I'd choose compact over triple. You're not going to know untill you take it in the hills. If you can maintain good cadence up v.steep hills then you're fine with it.

If you can't bare to part with the wheels and you wanted to buy the spesh (for example). The best way to do it is to: buy the spesh, swap the wheels and sell the giant with the spesh's wheels on there. I recon you'll get about £500 for the bike with the cheaper spesh wheels on there. maybe a little more if it's ultegra sl instead of ultegra 6600. I'm assuming it's 6600 though. This means, if you wanted to Ruby for example, you'll have to shell out £600. Yes it's 105 not ultegra but you'll notice a bigger improvement in fit then that off the downgraded gruppo.

A whole new bike is more likely going to fit you much better and all the components are suited to fit the average riding. Again, if you know for sure you're not average then swap and change the parts to suit. 9 times out of ten a bike's finishing kit fits it's the rider off the peg, but not always. That's why it's important to test ride, test ride and test ride some more. This is one benefit you get when buying a complete bike. You don't get that on custom builds with off the shelf frames.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmk30

Many thanks for the VERY exhaustive answers! I've measured c-c and that's 52cm on my bike.
I'm not very versed in the art of determining what crank length goes with what inseam, my current ones are 17cm, could someone perhaps explain? I also looked on the spesh website and even the Rubies have crank lengths of 167.5mm up to 170 (167.5 on the smallest sizes 44-48cm). Would that also be too long given my inseam?

I agree on the head tube length, this appears to be the limiting factor in how low I can go on most bikes. Looking at the Giant size chart, the measurements seem identical for both the men's and the women's versions.
And yes, the current setup is a 53-39 (I previously rode a standard triple). I've not really had too much trouble with this though but perhaps I'd notice the difference if I lived somewhere hillier.

With regards to moving the stuff over to a new frame, agree that it'd be a bit of a faff if I were to change cranks, casette and so on. I was planning on getting a new stem and handlebars at any rate but I really don't want to part with the wheels, which I really like (and the nice spesh that was recommended above has IMHO less good wheels).
Therefore, assuming I sell everything BUT the wheels, how much would you guess I'd get? (This dictates how much I've got left to spend on another bike).

lmk30 · #12 04-07.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by ianhargreaves

If you can't bare to part with the wheels and you wanted to buy the spesh (for example). The best way to do it is to: buy the spesh, swap the wheels and sell the giant with the spesh's wheels on there. I recon you'll get about £500 for the bike with the cheaper spesh wheels on there. maybe a little more if it's ultegra sl instead of ultegra 6600. I'm assuming it's 6600 though. This means, if you wanted to Ruby for example, you'll have to shell out £600. Yes it's 105 not ultegra but you'll notice a bigger improvement in fit then that off the downgraded gruppo.

Ouch, £500, is that really all...? I've seen bikes with similiar specs for quite a bit more than that, and even managed to sell my GT ZR4 -03 (complete aluminium, Tiagra front/105 rear, Mavic CXP11 wheels) for £270...

alienator · #13 04-07.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmk30

Ouch, £500, is that really all...? I've seen bikes with similiar specs for quite a bit more than that, and even managed to sell my GT ZR4 -03 (complete aluminium, Tiagra front/105 rear, Mavic CXP11 wheels) for £270...

If your intent is to sell your bike, then the most profitable way to do that is to sell it in parts.

As for the rest of your fit issue, I think you'd be better off getting a good fit done at an LBS so that what you need can be better quantified. Getting fit advice via internet forum is going to get you nowhere. Without a good, in person, live fit, everything else is moot.

lmk30 · #14 04-07.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by alienator

If your intent is to sell your bike, then the most profitable way to do that is to sell it in parts.

As for the rest of your fit issue, I think you'd be better off getting a good fit done at an LBS so that what you need can be better quantified. Getting fit advice via internet forum is going to get you nowhere. Without a good, in person, live fit, everything else is moot.

True, but it's sometimes interesting to hear what others have to say who are not specifically asked with the potential of being able to sell something and make some ££s if you see what I mean.

Actually did go to my LBS (quite well known in the area, specialises in road bikes) yesterday, put the bike in the trainer and they somehow reckoned it would be possible to fit it by shortening the stem and changing the handlebars... Not entirely convinced but I'll give it a try. If I can't get more than £500 for my current setup minus wheels then there's no way I'll be able to afford getting a new one this season (and now we're talking a nice one that'll last me a while).

Next season I'll try the spesh ruby and if it fits I'll get the ruby expert frame, keep my wheels, bars (3T ergo sum), stem (70mm or 90mm, have both) and rear mech, change the cassette( to a 12-27 or 12-25) and chainset (to a 50-34, 165mm crank arms) and the total will land somewhere around £1300 as I've worked out. This is cheaper than the ruby expert and with a better spec (wheels and utegra gruppo). And the sizing of the setup will be virtually identical to the factory stuff so shouldn't be noticeably different.

alienator · #15 04-07.-2009

Quote:

Originally Posted by lmk30

Actually did go to my LBS (quite well known in the area, specialises in road bikes) yesterday, put the bike in the trainer and they somehow reckoned it would be possible to fit it by shortening the stem and changing the handlebars... Not entirely convinced but I'll give it a try. If I can't get more than £500 for my current setup minus wheels then there's no way I'll be able to afford getting a new one this season (and now we're talking a nice one that'll last me a while).

The variation in reach between handlebars can be up to 2 cm's or so, so it's entirely possible that a change in handlebars will give you the reach you want/need.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode