Question on Ritchey Outback Fit...

hundredwaters · #1 04-30-2021, 11:42 PM

I am looking to buy a Steel Ritchey Outback Steel Breakaway for my girlfriend so that we can travel and am a little confused on fit. She is 5'5" and not a big cyclist, so probably doesnt like an aggressive position. She found my small 1st Gen Outback a little stretched out with a 90 mm stem (Reach 385/stack 531). It looks like she would be best on a Xsmall which has an effective Top Tube of 526 mm (Reach 373/stack 532), but I have a hard time believing she fits the table of "XSmall" and I know this bike is supposed to be run with a shorter stem. Would I be better getting a small with an ETT of 540 mm (Reach 378/Stack 548) and run a short stem? Overall, both have a pretty long wheelbase of more than 1040.

We will be running 650B tires and doing much more trails and fire roads than road

Any thoughts...?

coffeecherrypie · #2 04-30-2021, 11:49 PM

373 to 378 may not seem like a big difference but remember that if you add spacers to get the x-small’s bars up to where the small’s bars would be the bars will be moved a ways back.

hundredwaters · #3 04-30-2021, 11:59 PM

thanks for the reply.... because of the slacker head tube, staking it up moves it back?

I am just getting back into biking and I dont have a sense of sizing, so I'm trying to make the best guess.

I was assuming that the loss of 10 mm from the first gen Small Outback and longer wheelbase would be best most likely compromise. But I am wary of it saying "Xsmall" and I am missing something, since I would assume that would fit someone 5'2" or similar...

tctyres · #4 05-01-2021, 12:02 AM

Fwiw, I would use the competitive cyclist calculator to figure out a starting point for a bike for her: https://www.competitivecyclist.com/S...ulatorBike.jsp
Then, I would mess around with bikegeo: http://www.bikegeo.net/

My gut feeling is that she needs a 50-52 ETT, so the XS, but taking her measurements and using the calculator will give you better insight. You can also mess around with stem length and angle in the bikegeo calculator.

hundredwaters · #5 05-01-2021, 12:28 AM

thanks for the reply. 50-52 was my assumption as well, but is there something diff with the outback and the TT is longer and the stem is supposed to be shorter, so that an XSmall is really closer to 48-50 in a road Frame and thus too small for the ride its supposed to provide? I dont know gravel bikes so Im not sure if this is a reasonable q.

joevers · #6 05-01-2021, 07:12 AM

X small is likely. I'm 5'10" and on a medium (Swiss Cross, so similar geometry but different). My 5'9" coworker sold his medium to get a small. My 5'1" partner is too small to ride any of the drop bar Ritchey's. Stack and reach is just too much. Especially on the drop bar off road bikes.

It's much easier to make a too small bike fit than a too big bike.

And take a look at handlebar reach. Most modern compact and flared bars have reach around 70mm, which is much shorter than bars from years past. Really, look it up or measure, there's potentially several cm of reach that could be saved just by swapping bars. Something like the Salsa cowbell is a really affordable way to see if changing the bars is much of an improvement before deciding on a new frame.

Dave · #7 05-01-2021, 09:04 AM

Anyone who has ridden very much should have some idea of their preferred stack and reach, plus a bar reach and stem length that all work together. In this case, if spacers were used to equalize the stack, then the reach on the smaller frame would be reduced by 5mm.

I'm only an inch taller, but my legs are probably a lot longer, with an 83cm cycling inseam and 73cm saddle height. For a road bike, I use a large 10cm saddle to bar drop. I get that with about a 525mm stack, only the 15mm headset top cover and a -17 stem. A -6 stem will reduce the drop by about 2cm a flipped up +6 will reduce the drop about another 2cm. If the stack is 509mm like my current 46cm Cinelli, I use a 30mm headset top cover to increase the stack.

Another question is if the stack is measured to the top of the head tube or top of the headset bearing, like integrated headsets. I assume to the top of the head tube, so the headset would add 15-20mm.

I use 80mm reach bars and a 110mm stem, if the reach is in the 368-373 range and a 100mm if it's up to 383mm.

pbarry · #8 05-01-2021, 09:33 AM

Are you considering version 1 or version 2 frames? You’re probably looking at this already..
https://specials.ritcheylogic.com/co...tback-frameset

V2 is very different from V1, with slacker angles, longer wheelbase; more of an adventure focused bike. V1 is a pretty much road+ geometry, IMO, with generous tire clearance. Geometry charts below: V1 then V2

jc031699 · #9 05-01-2021, 09:51 AM

I’m 5’9” and have the previous gen carbon outback breakaway (with another geometry entirely from the gen 1 outback steel and the new outback steel breakaway). I picked the small in that iteration due to the ETT length. The typical complaint against that series of frames was insufficient stack, and indeed that is what I found and needed 3cm spacers to get good fit. Even still I ended up with an 80mm stem. I can’t handle a more stretched out position due to neck hyperextension discomfort.

All things considered, I would think your mate needs a XS based on my experience. If you knock 1cm off the reach to account for the shorter intended stem length, the reach is very comparable to the prior version. However the stack is ~20mm higher, which is a big improvement. There is mention of 5’1” individuals, but I just don’t see how standard frames designed to accept 700c wheels could reasonably work for that body type even in XS. So XS would seem to be the right one for your friend.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

prototoast · #10 05-01-2021, 10:21 AM

Just remember, that 90% of all Ritchey frames in the wild have at least 30 cm of spacers under the stem. You should pick the right geometry accordingly.

coffeecherrypie · #11 05-01-2021, 06:34 PM

My gut concurs with everyone else that x small is the way to go. I understand your feeling that 5’5” seems like it shouldn’t take the smallest size, but remember that they only have 5 sizes and most of the people buying the bike are men. You could consider xxsmall with an effective top tube of 50 to be a hidden nonexistent size if it makes you feel better.

Make sure you check standover btw, it’s possible that would just rule out small anyway.

But if you can, best thing to do is borrow or buy a cheap bike and play around with spacers and stems until she’s comfortable—then look at which size would easiest replicate that setup.