# 5'5" 52cm 2010 Roubaix



## catnash (Feb 3, 2010)

I've migrated over here from the mtbr Specialized site and have made an order for the 2010 Roubaix elite UK triple.

I have had a few provisional words that I need a 52cm as I'm just 5'4 with 31" inseam, any other Roubaix riders there with my height?

Chhers


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

Without knowing your other measurements, which are more telling than inseam, I'm thinking the top tube might be a little long for you at your height.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

fontarin said:


> Without knowing your other measurements, which are more telling than inseam, I'm thinking the top tube might be a little long for you at your height.


I agree. As an example, I'm 5'6" with a cycling inseam just over 30 inches. I ride a 52cm Tarmac (fits the same as a Roubaix, BTW) with a 100mm stem. 

Your height seems to come more from your legs, so the shorter TT of a 50cm might be a better match. BUT... keep in mind these are guesses. Your LBS should be the one to determine sizing requirements.


----------



## catnash (Feb 3, 2010)

Yes going to have to travel to try the bike...

From the geo I have 4cm clearace in socks for the standover

for 5'5 I seem to have long legs an inseam of 80cm x that inseam rule(inseam x '67) gives me a frame of 53.7.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

catnash said:


> Yes going to have to travel to try the bike...
> 
> From the geo I have 4cm clearace in socks for the standover
> 
> for 5'5 I seem to have long legs an inseam of 80cm x that inseam rule(inseam x '67) gives me a frame of 53.7.


I suspect you're using the LeMond formula which, in general, is one of the better ones. But as was mentioned, proportions are more important than height or inseam, especially with todays compact geo. It's best to focus on ETT/ reach requirements because that's more important (and harder to tweak for fit if you size wrong) than accomodating saddle height.

I feel confident in saying a 53-54cm frame is too large for you.


----------



## catnash (Feb 3, 2010)

Great advice, from prevous road bikes I have had I can't remember what size used to have:mad2:


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

catnash said:


> Great advice, from prevous road bikes I have had I can't remember what size used to have:mad2:


As you posted earlier, you may have to travel to a shop to try the bike - well worth the effort, IMHO. I once drove 7 hrs (round trip) to test ride two bikes, then bought the one (Tarmac) that was 20 minutes from my home.  

Ya gotta do what ya gotta do to get it right. :thumbsup:


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

Yep - driving to test something, especially a major purchase like this, is always a good idea.

I also suggest doing the Fit Calc: http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=FIT_CALCULATOR_INTRO

Don't take it as gospel, but it should give you an idea of what you're looking for in general. Based on your height and inseam, I'd make a highly uneducated guess that you're going to want an effective TT length of between 50.5 and 52.5 CM.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

fontarin said:


> Yep - driving to test something, especially a major purchase like this, is always a good idea.
> 
> I also suggest doing the Fit Calc: http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=FIT_CALCULATOR_INTRO
> 
> Don't take it as gospel, but it should give you an idea of what you're looking for in general. Based on your height and inseam, I'd make a highly uneducated guess that you're going to want an effective TT length of between 50.5 and 52.5 CM.


Because I'm not a fan of online fit calculators I would emphasize _don't take it as gospel_. Some qualifiers.... IME.. at best.. when measurements are very carefully taken, then double checked, online calculators do a decent job of getting a rider in the ballpark. But realistically, you could accomplish pretty much the same thing in 15 minutes at your LBS, and without the level of guesswork. I'm not saying don't do it, more, do it as a kind of learning experience, but still get to the shop, get sized/ fitted and ride some bikes.

OTOH I think that's a good guess on the ETT range that the OP will need. Still, it's best to find that out at the LBS. Also, there's an off chance because of his proportions (long torso, probably relatively long reach) there's a possibility that he'll require a slightly longer stem - maybe a 110mm. But given his shorter inseam compact geo (sloping TT = minimal standover) will suite him well.

Bottom line though, we're doing a lot of guessing here.


----------



## steveandbarb1 (Dec 27, 2009)

When at a shop, for laughs jump on a Specialized Ruby. It just could work, women tend to have longer legs and shorter torso. I bet a 51 ruby would fit great, just a guess however.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

steveandbarb1 said:


> When at a shop, for laughs jump on a Specialized Ruby. It just could work, women tend to have longer legs and shorter torso. I bet a 51 ruby would fit great, just a guess however.


Stranger things have happened, but indications are that the OP has the opposite of what you describe (short legs/ long torso), so he's apt to benefit from a lower TT (sloping) and proportionally longer ETT. WSD bikes tend to have shorter ETT's.

But as we all mentioned, we're just guessing.


----------



## Rhino4Five (Nov 5, 2009)

I'm 5"10 and ride a 54. I think I'm more torso than legs (alas). Probably a 30" or 31" inseam.


----------



## Broomwagon (Mar 12, 2002)

I'm 5'6" and ride a 52cm SW Roubaix SL2 with a 90mm stem. What tipped the Roubaix in my favor was the taller HT (14.5cm for a 52cm). I was looking for a shorter and higher reach than my old Giant TCR. I used a 9cm stem on my old Giant, as well, but the taller HT on he Roubaix really makes a huge difference in comfort for me, particularly with my neck problems.


----------



## catnash (Feb 3, 2010)

Found this from the specialized site:

http://specialized.custhelp.com/cgi..._tbl=9&p_id=1119&p_created=1254344668&p_olh=0

On the cusp of both sizes, will see what stems come on both.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

catnash said:


> Found this from the specialized site:
> 
> http://specialized.custhelp.com/cgi..._tbl=9&p_id=1119&p_created=1254344668&p_olh=0
> 
> On the cusp of both sizes, will see what stems come on both.


Take those guidelines with a grain of salt. They're based strictly on height, but proportions (especially in your case) matter more. IMO it would be best to get to a reputable shop, pin down your sizing requirements and ride some bikes.


----------



## rollinrob (Dec 8, 2002)

I am 5'5 and ride a 48 cm Orbea Orca. 51 cm top tube with either a 9 or 10 cm stem works great for me. One reason I went with Orbea was that they have fairly shallow seat tube angle which actually decreases the length of the top tube.


----------



## catnash (Feb 3, 2010)

Yes I seem to have a long inseam for my height, in the end tried a 52 and with 1cm off the stem is a nice comfortable fit. Used to have a 49cm look and that was a tad too small.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

catnash said:


> Yes I seem to have a long inseam for my height, in the end tried a 52 and with 1cm off the stem is a nice comfortable fit. Used to have a 49cm look and that was a tad too small.


Seems that you now have your sizing question answered. Nothing like a test ride to help clarify things!! :thumbsup:


----------

