Is my frame too small? (PICs added)

[mcallen]

I'd be much obliged if some cycling elders would weigh in about my frame fit.

Here's my deal: I have a nice road frame (which I received as a gift from my little bro) that might be too small for me. But I might just be making up a problem that isn't there. When I plugged my numbers into Competitive Cyclist fit calculator, I was told I need a bigger frame. I guess I'm looking for some other opinions. I've only been riding on the road for a few years so I don't have a wealth of experience to draw on.

Bike details: The frame is a 2007 Look 555 in size Medium. Sloping geometry with effective TT of 54.5 and c-t seat tube of 54. Full geo here: http://media.photobucket.com/image/look+555+geometry/mattharville/loo555geo.jpg

Rider details: I'm 30 years old, 175lb, with decent flexibility. I'm an aspiring Cat 4 racer. I'm 6'0" with a 34" real inseam, and here are my detailed measurements (this feels like a weird personal ad, but it might be relevant)
-------------------------------------------
Inseam: 86.5
Trunk: 67.4
Forearm: 36
Arm: 67.25
Thigh: 60.25
Lower Leg: 58.5
Sternal Notch: 150
Total Body Height: 183

Right now I run a 120mm stem and 175 cranks.

Thanks.

[AngryScientist]

can you get us a few pics of you on the bike, preferably on a trainer?

[veloduffer]

It sounds a bit small. FWIW, I'm 5'11" with 83cm inseam and ride 56-57cm top tube bikes (73 seat angle) with 175mm cranks.

But, how do you feel on the bike? Any pain?

[mcallen]

But, how do you feel on the bike? Any pain?[/QUOTE]

Sometimes: Hot foot after about an hour of riding, but I think that's because I have super high arches. But my neck does get pretty stiff sometimes, which sounds more like a fit issue. Otherwise, no real pain.

[mcallen]

can you get us a few pics of you on the bike, preferably on a trainer?

Here are a few pictures from a race last year. I'll try to get some more useful trainer pictures tonight.

http://shutterwideopen.com/#/gallery/lwv-cat-4-5-and-5-juniors/lawcat45-5j-155/

http://shutterwideopen.com/#/gallery/lwv-cat-4-5-and-5-juniors/lawcat45-5j-210/

http://shutterwideopen.com/#/gallery/lwv-cat-4-5-and-5-juniors/lawcat45-5j-218/

[gasman]

It's a bit silly to do this over the 'net. You really need to have a fitter look at you on the bike or at least post photos here of you on a trainer.
That being said I have the same inseam and am 1/2 inch taller.
I ride a 58 or 59 but can fit a 56 if it has a 13 cm stem but that's the smallest I can imagine riding. So to really feel good on your bike and to have the best handling you probably should consider a larger frame. I suspect you're a bit scrunched up.

[cmg]

can't open pictures due to firewall. Is the saddle jammed all the way back on the rails? do you have more then 3cm of spacers under the stem? more than an 11cm stem with it tilled to the sky? those are indicators that the frame is to small. any of those conditions apply?

[avalonracing]

Everyone is different but that does sound like a tight fit. I'm 6'0" 175lbs with a balanced torso, leg built and I right a size large, compact geometry Merlin with a 57.5 TT, 110 stem and 175 cranks. I could have made the M/L fit as well with a longer stem.

My Klein has a 57cm TT with a 120 stem but it has a steeper 74º STA vs. the 73.5ºSTA.

I am not stretched out on either of these bikes, I feel (and look) correct.

I would suggest a pro fitting or at least borrow a bike with a 56.5-58TT from a buddy and see how it feels. Take into account that bar height, bar width, saddle height and crank length will all make the bike feel different.

A correctly fit bike will make you a much faster rider than the latest & greatest superlight parts. (It will also not cause injury like an ill fitting bike)

EDIT: Holy crap, I just looked at the third picture of you racing. YOUR BIKE IS TOO SMALL! No doubt about it.

[mcallen]

It's a bit silly to do this over the 'net. You really need to have a fitter look at you on the bike or at least post photos here of you on a trainer.


I agree. Unfortunately there's no fitter nearby that I know of (I'm in small town Indiana) and I'm just curious to see what the general consensus is. Thanks for your feedback, btw.

[snah]

After looking at the photos, I think the real problem you're having is the Purdue kit!! Go Big Red, IU, IU, IU!! :beer:

[mcallen]

After looking at the photos, I think the real problem you're having is the Purdue kit!! Go Big Red, IU, IU, IU!! :beer:

Yeah, it took me till I was an old grad student, but I'm finally a college athlete!! I don't race all that much with the club team, but it's fun to get some of the rivalries going. So, back at you: Boiler Up!!! :bike:

[Dave]

The things that would suggest that a frame is too small are discomfort due to an intolerably large saddle to bar drop and/or the need for a stem longer than a 130 or 140mm. Needing a high rise stem like +6 degrees and a bunch of spacers also indicates a frame that's too small.

Excessive knee to arm overlap would suggest a cramped fit. I don't want any knee to arm contact when I'm pedaling with my hands in the hooks and my upper back is at least close to horizontal.

The frame is on the small side, if your 86.5cm inseam equates to a saddle height around 76cm. I have a 73cm saddle height and ride a 51cm that has a 25mm shorter head tube. It works for me because I have a short torso and use a saddle to bar drop in the 9-11cm range. The large drop means I can ride keep my torso low and not have to bend my arms (which creates knee to arm interference). With my short torso (I'm only 5'-6.5" tall) I use a 110mm stem and short reach bars to keep the reach tolerable.

As for CC's fit suggestions, the big flaw in them is the lack of a seat tube angle to go with the TT length. Defining the frame reach requires a seat tube angle. They do suggest some saddle setbacks, but the average person has no idea what STA and seatpost setback might be needed to achieve those suggested values.

[Volant]

I don't know how much faith I'd put in CC's fit suggestions. I'm only slightly shorter than you, but my thigh is 60.5 and my lower leg is 54 and CC's fit calculator wants to stick me on a 53 top tube! I'm more comfortable in the 55.5 to 56 range unless it's on a bike meant for brevets (where I'll ride a shorter top tube, more setback and higher bars)

[AndrewS]

I'm 5'4" and fairly normally proportioned. I have one bike with a 53.5 TT and 110 stem. I can't imagine someone 8 inches taller than me being able to use a 54.5 TT.

Stems can do alot, but it would seem like a 56 TT would be closer to a minimum.

None of this is very scientific, but like most posters, I think you're at least two sizes off.

[endosch2]

I am 5'9" and 1/4 inch tall, short legs. I ride a 54 with a 55 cm top tube. I think your bike is at least one size too small.

[mcallen]

Excessive knee to arm overlap would suggest a cramped fit. I don't want any knee to arm contact when I'm pedaling with my hands in the hooks and my upper back is at least close to horizontal.



Now that you mention it, I do get knee arm contact and that bugs me. I've gone up to a 120mm stem, but I still touch. Based on what I'm hearing, it sounds like a longer TT would alleviate this issue. Thanks for all the feedback everyone.

[Dave]

Go on up to a 130-140mm stem. A lot of pros use these lengths. If you have a flipped-up stem to reduce the saddle to bar drop, then the 120 length is a lot closer to 110mm, horizontally.

Knee to arm contact can also result from a saddle that's too far forward. I have my knee 1-2cm behind a KOP position.

[avalonracing]

Go on up to a 130-140mm stem. A lot of pros use these lengths. If you have a flipped-up stem to reduce the saddle to bar drop, then the 120 length is a lot closer to 110mm, horizontally.

That would be a band-aid but if he is a 6'0" 175lbs guy that is a lot of weight to hang over the front of the bike. It isn't the best solution for a short TT.

As I mentioned I'm also 6'0" 175lbs and when I was discussing top tub sizes and stem lengths with a highly regarded frame builder he said to go with the longer TT and shorter stem to keep the weight balanced over the bike. It worked great!

Those six foot tall 140lb euro pros with the long stems are hanging bird chests and hollowed out shoulders over the front of the bike.

[RPS]

Now that you mention it, I do get knee arm contact and that bugs me. If a rider has very long femurs relative to his/her torso length it's hard not to have overlap when riding low. I overlap more than most so I don't even try to adjust my position to avoid it. If I do it just makes me too uncomfortable.

[woolly]

I'll second Dave's recommendations, at least to just give the fit changes a try. That frame looks like it has a pretty steep seat-tube angle, which effectively adds some length to the reach (assuming the same saddle-to-BB relationship, if you're comparing to other frames with less-steep STA's).

Pop a 140 stem on there, slam it down right on top of the headset, make sure you're working with enough saddle-setback on that steep seat tube. Give it a try - see what "too much" might really feel like. I know a lot of folks will recommend making super-small changes in position - like 5mm at a time max. Well, I think there's some validity there, if you've got your position reasonably dialed in - but I'm not sure you're quite there yet. I'm also not suggesting that you make this drastic change & then go right out & ride a century or a road race. But go out & ride it hard this way, at least long enough to get fully warmed up & get a real feel for how a fit like this affects you & the handling of the bike. If nothing else, you'll have a better frame of reference when comparing the smaller, fine-tuning changes later down the line.

YMMV, but this approached worked for me when I was trying to find my way to a good fit on the bike(s).

[Onno]

I'm 6 feet tall with a 35 inseam. I ride a 60 cm c-c bike with a 58.5 TT. I had a 58-58 before that I ditched after two years because it was too small.

You need a bigger bike, I imagine a 58-58 at least. You can sell your frame and ebay, and replace it with one of similar quality, virtually for free. Do it.

[Dave]

The way to know if there is a weight balance issue is to measure it, with the rider in his most aggressive position. If the weight on the front wheel is more than 45% of the total, the bike is front-heavy. Changing the stem length won't improve that. The saddle must be moved further back or the frame changed to one with a longer F-C.

The OP has not mentioned his actual saddle height yet. If it is 76cm, then the frame is small, but not two sizes too small.

For a rider with a long torso, most choose a frame on the large side, to get enough TT length, but that will often require a 73 degree stem and no spacers, just to get the bars low enough. Nothing wrong with that - it's a common pro rider setup.

[Peter P.]

According to the numbers you provided, and assuming you measured accurately, and looking at the photos, which aren't quite full side-on shots, I'd say you're frame is too small.

Your inseam measurement alone suggests a 58cm frame. Your overall height of 6'0" backs that up, and from the formulas I have, suggest a LOONG 61cm top tube. But I'd start with the 58cm frame, because that will at least get you a top tube longer than the one you've got now.

I've got a friend who's your height, with a similar inseam and he fits a 58cm frame fine.

To check yourself against a third method, try Dave Moulton's chart, which works for me. Don't forget to read the chart's instructions carefully. Dave Moulton's Frame Sizing Chart (http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm#FrameChart). Dave was a well respected frame builder; browse the rest of his site for more useful information.

[oliver1850]

.

[Bob Loblaw]

There are basically four measurements that affect your comfort on the bike.
1. Saddle height
2. Saddle setback
3. Distance from saddle-to-handlebars
4. Saddle height relative to handlebar height.

If those four things are working for you and you're comfortable, you don't NEED a bigger frame. If you were shopping for a new frame, I'd certainly suggest something in the 56-59cm range with a 55-58cm top tube for a 6 foot rider, but there's no law against running a longer stem and seatpost on a small frame. In fact, smaller frames are stiffer and lighter than larger frames, so there is some reason to keep what you have.

It sounds to me, however, like you inherited this bike from a shorter rider (your bro), and the handlebars appear too low relative to your saddle height. That would explain the neck pain. You could easily find yourself a longer stem with a rise to it, and that might alleviate the problem, but I'm just guessing. A fitting would be a good idea.

BL

[mcallen]

Thanks for all the suggestions and insights. Here are some pics:
http://i56.tinypic.com/jgmw49.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/2pq9cg8.jpg
http://i53.tinypic.com/imkzv4.jpg

[Dave]

For some reason I'm just seeing the latest pics.

The fit is waaaay too cramped. There are pros who might ride a frame that small, but they'd have a 130-140mm stem on it. I'd add another 20mm.

I'd disagree about the bars being too low. You've got long arms and your back is not all that low in the third pic. A lot of pro riders have so much saddle to bar drop that the upper back is horizontal, with no bend in the arms. I set my bike up with that in mind, so I don't need to bend my arms when my hands are in the hooks.

Post your actual saddle height and/or your saddle to bar drop.

How have you set the saddle fore/aft position? If your knee is ahead of the pedal spindle, then try moving the saddle back, in addtion to a longer stem.

[gasman]

You looked too scrunched up.
try a longer stem and maybe move your saddle back. see how you feel.
I still think you'll be happier and faster on a bigger frame.

[mcallen]

The fit is waaaay too cramped.

Yeah, once I saw this photo I felt like I'd answered my own question. I'm surprised at how squished I am. I guess I've just gotten used to riding like this.


Post your actual saddle height and/or your saddle to bar drop.



177.5 saddle height from spindle to top of saddle

[RADaines]

Yeah, once I saw this photo I felt like I'd answered my own question. I'm surprised at how squished I am. I guess I've just gotten used to riding like this.



177.5 saddle height from spindle to top of saddle

This would be 5 ft 10 in! Am I missing something?

[mcallen]

Yikes--quite the inseam I must have. That would be 77.5cm.

[RPS]

Now that you mention it, I do get knee arm contact and that bugs me. I've gone up to a 120mm stem, but I still touch. Based on what I'm hearing, it sounds like a longer TT would alleviate this issue. Thanks for all the feedback everyone.
Based on latest pictures this shouldn't be a problem for you as it is for me. Your torso is much longer compared to your femurs.

It's hard to scale from a picture, but I think that if you are already using a 12 CM stem you'll probably be happier with a longer frame.

[Dave]

A 77.5cm saddle height is high for the head tube length, but not totally out of the question. You've got 45mm more saddle height than I do, but only 25mm more head tube length. That could produce a saddle to bar drop as large as 13.5cm with a 73 degree stem and no spacers. While that may sound large, I use 11cm of drop and I'm only 5'-6.5" tall. With your long arms, a 13-14cm drop is not out of the question. I've read of tall riders using 16cm.

One other thought is that you have 14cm more height than I have, but only 4.5cm more saddle height, so you don't have an overly short torso.

I'd like to know what type of seatpost you have and how far back the saddle nose is from the BB. Placing the saddle to far forward is another common mistake.

I don't think that adding only 20mm of stem length is really going to fix your fit. Maybe if you had another 20-30mm of saddle setback plus the longer stem the fit would start to look normal.

Also consider what happens if you buy a frame that's two sizes larger, like a new LOOK 586 in the XL size. While the TT is 30mm longer at 575mm, the seat tube angle is more relaxed. The relaxed STA may be good if you need to move the saddle back further, but it also reduces the reach increase to only about 22mm - about the same as you'd get with the longer stem on your current frame. The head tube is actually about 35mm taller since the new frame has a 30mm taller head tube with a different headset that adds more height. You can probably duplicate that on your current bike too, since I see a bunch of spacer on top of the stem. What I'm saying is that you can probably duplicate the fit of the larger bike, just with a longer stem and slamming the saddle all the way back. If your seatpost doesn't have much setback, an FSA model can be had with 32mm of setback (that's what I use). Altering the fit of your current bike will at least give you an idea of what you can expect with a larger frame.

http://www.lookcycle.com/media/catalog/product/l/o/look_geometry_2011_35.pdf

[Bob Loblaw]

Actually I don't think your stem length is your problem. It's your forearm length, from what I can tell. You and Sean Kelly have the same problem.

http://www.cyclinghalloffame.com/riders/rider_bio.asp?rider_id=49

Also, those handlebars are about 2 inches too low.

I'd recommend a longer stem with a rise and more seat setback. Or a bigger bike.

BL

[Dave]

A stem rise is not needed with all those spacers on top of the stem.

[LiteFM]

You should be on the L size. I'm just under 5'8" with a 31" inseam and rode a 2008 585 Ultra in medium with 170mm cranks and a 90mm stem with short reach ergo bars and it fit me like a glove. If you have a 34" inseam then you must certainly have a longer reach than me. The Look was my first modern bike with a sloping TT so I was hesitant but the TT length is what made me decide. Prior the the Look I was on an SLX Merckx bike from the 90's with a 54cm TT running 170mm cranks and a 100mm stem and I used that as a guide. I was never professionally fitted but I learned by trial and error and what felt best. Hope this helps.