A Personal Question of Length?

[The History Man]

It's nice to reach a conclusion learning along the way. gardening today. Off to measure my ride heights and top tubes!

 

[Joe of Loath]

6'8" with a 38" inside leg. Realistically I can only ride 29ers and road bikes, on my retro MTB I look like a grasshopper with a hunchback.

I only size via top tube, though. My 29er has an effective top tube of around 63.5cm, and my road bike 60cm.

 

[Chopper the ex Copper]

I have to size by both really. While i physically be able to cram myself onto a tiddler, having 12 feet of exposed seatpost is rather disconcerting if you weigh 250lbs as you can see and feel it flexing, and it wouldn't be long before I broke a frame. I need a21-22" frame to combat this, and at that size I've never found one that didn't fit reasonably well length wise (oo-er!)

 

[Joe of Loath]

While i physically be able to cram myself onto a tiddler, having 12 feet of exposed seatpost is rather disconcerting if you weigh 250lbs as you can see and feel it flexing

Know dat feel. 220lb and three bent seat posts in 6 months. Using a Thomson now, no issues so far.

 

[The History Man]

I am also of rather portly stature so find reach more of an issue.

 

[gtRTSdh]

I have concluded from this that reach and bar height is more important as there is less adjustment without changing parts etc.

Inside leg varies greatly amongst similar heights but can be accommodated across a range of frame sizes.

Would I be wrong?

Yes exactly, there is one brand of road bikes, where the frame 'size' refers to top tube length rather than seat tube.

There's an interesting article from Cervelo here, where they show that as some frames get taller, they don't actually get longer.

Link included this time:

http://www.cervelo.com/en/engineering/t ... d-fit.html

 

[The History Man]

Thanks for that. I think. Another set of variables to consider!

 

[Major22]

A bit under 6'2" (187 cm) and 35.5" (90.5 cm) inside leg length (real, not trouser).

I ride 60 cm road bikes and 20" mtb's.

 

[Chopper the ex Copper]

35.5"? Do you have a torso?

 

[daugs]

I have concluded from this that reach and bar height is more important as there is less adjustment without changing parts etc.

Inside leg varies greatly amongst similar heights but can be accommodated across a range of frame sizes.

Would I be wrong?

Yes exactly, there is one brand of road bikes, where the frame 'size' refers to top tube length rather than seat tube.

There's an interesting article from Cervelo here, where they show that as some frames get taller, they don't actually get longer.

I've seen this with the Marins, while seat tube goes up by 1.5", top tube only increases by 0.5", seems alternative is smaller frames as we get older.......

has anyone done a list of makes where top tubes are shorter vs others, I know Marin are on long side.