# Bike size 54cm 5ft6



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

Just wondering how many people here are about 5ft 6inches riding a size 54cm bike.
I currently have a size 54cm caad 10 5 cannondale bike, with an 80mm stem angled up.
I tried the 52 cm and felt it was too much of a drop.


----------



## SauronHimself (Nov 21, 2012)

What do you mean when you say it's too much of a drop? Do you feel too far forward or too far backward?


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikechickieny said:


> Just wondering how many people here are about 5ft 6inches riding a size 54cm bike.
> I currently have a size 54cm caad 10 5 cannondale bike, with an 80mm stem angled up.
> I tried the 52 cm and felt it was too much of a drop.


It's too big for you. It's not just the size of the frame, it's the rest of the geometry as well. If you think the 'correct' size frame for you has too much drop, you need to find a frame w/ a taller head tube, not a bigger frame that's too long. 80mm stem? Too short. Try a frame w/ a taller head tube in a 50-52cm.

As an example, I'm 5'8", long torso, average arms, average femurs, good flexibility. I ride a 52cm Madone H2 w/ a 120mm stem.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

I felt a little bit compressed. also did not like bending more lower. the top tube on 52 cm is 2 inches shorter than that of 54cm and i had to put the seat higher.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

I felt better on the 54cm as opposed to the 52 cm. 
BTW: I also have a cannondale flashy alloy 29er size M mountain bike.
I test drove a few other bikes with higher head tubes and always seemed to prefer the 54cm. I have long arms. Curious to see what height and size bikes some of you riders have.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

bikechickieny said:


> I felt a little bit compressed. also did not like bending more lower. *the top tube on 52 cm is 2 inches shorter* than that of 54cm and i had to put the seat higher.


No, it's not. It's 1 cm shorter.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

When I checked the geometery specs. It said head tube for Size 52 is 12 while headtube for 54 is 14. Sorry I meant 2cm shorter.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

bikechickieny said:


> I felt better on the 54cm as opposed to the 52 cm.
> BTW: I also have a cannondale flashy alloy 29er size M mountain bike.
> I test drove a few other bikes with higher head tubes and always seemed to prefer the 54cm. I have long arms. Curious to see what height and size bikes some of you riders have.


5'9". 56 Felt F series frame. 13cm stem which is an 84 degree angled "down". Not home at the moment but the setback is around 5cm. Top of saddle to BB center is 75.5cm. Tip of saddle to center of bar is 57cm.

Edit: My last frame was a 52 Colnago CX-1 set up very close to ^^^. I had a 14cm stem and more setback on the post to get into the same position. 

Point is, saying I ride a 54, etc...is just one aspect of frame sizing. With all the various lengths and angle of stems, variety of setback posts, and spacer options most can ride the same position on potentially two to three different frame sizes.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

bikechickieny said:


> When I checked the geometery specs. It said head tube for Size 52 is 12 while headtube for 54 is 14. Sorry I meant 2cm shorter.


.....any you meant head tube apparently (you said top tube).


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

Yes I meant to say head tube. Sorry for the confusion.


----------



## mtrac (Sep 23, 2013)

I'm 5'6". Bike's particulars are 761mm standover, 510mm seat tube, and 545mm top tube. Stem is 90mm. Might be objectively big for me but it's comfortable enough.


----------



## TheSame (Jun 29, 2014)

54cm is probably too big for you. I would go with 52cm and adjust it properly.


----------



## Lindy B. (Jun 20, 2013)

I'm 5'9", long legs and arms. I ride a 54cm CAAD 10. Fits perfect.


----------



## scottma (May 18, 2012)

I'm 5'8" with long torso, short legs. I ride a 54 Specialized Roubaix with a 100mm stem. 5'6" I would think a 52. If a 52 has too much saddle/bar drop, look at bikes with taller head tubes.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

That's interesting.
This is the mtb bike (2012 Cannondale Flash Alloy 29'er 3 | Mountain Bike Components and Reviews) I have. I am about 5ft 5 and have been riding this for 2 years with an 80mm stem.

I just recently purchased the CAAD 10 5 and while its hard to find a perfect fit, I guess I was just wondering about fit in general as I hear so much diff. opinion.

woodys737 - yes what you said makes total sense about the total frame and customizing it. 

I look ok on the bike but when i tell people its size 54 particularly guys who are my height or shorter they are like "no that's too big".


----------



## SkiNutIan (Sep 18, 2011)

Just to throw in my 2 cents, I'm 5'6" and ride a 52. Both of my neighbors have 54 CAAD 10's and they both feel too large for me (they are each set up a little different). Could I fit on them, sure, but the frame geometry feels too large.


----------



## pmf (Feb 23, 2004)

Does the 54 cm not fit you? Kind of hard to understand what you're getting at. 

Its hard to compare fit between men and women. Body proportions are different. Most bikes, unless designated like Trek's WSD series, are designed for a man's body type. My wife it 5'5" and rides a 51 or 52 cm bike. Her stem is 9 cm, which is about as short as you should go. These would be men's bikes (Colnago, Litespeed, Merckx). 

You might try a 52 cm bike with a longer stem, seat pushed back further, more spacers on the fork, or a steeper angled stem.


----------



## GearDaddy (Apr 1, 2004)

I find it more useful to size things based on "cockpit" length dimension, i.e. the distance from the center of the seat to your hand position at the hoods. I've found that all of my bikes (road, cyclocross, and mtb) are nearly identical in this dimension.

So, take into account stem length and the particular handlebars you're using, as they obviously affect this dimension. IMO, a general rule of thumb is if you're using a stem 120mm or greater you're on the edge of a frame that's too small. If you're using a stem of 80mm or shorter you're on the edge of a frame that's too big.

I'm 5'9" with average leg length and I generally like a 54cm Colnago or Trek frame, which both have 54.5cm top tube, and I would be using a 100mm stem usually. A Lemond or Look frame would probably be more like a 52cm or 53cm to get something similar. Handlebars do make a difference too though.

Usually if you get the "reach" setup right and aren't playing weird games with really long or short stems, then that's the frame for you.


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

I'm 5'6" and a half, and I've always been most comfortable on a 52 or 53. I did have a 54 once, but it was one of Grant Peterson's Rivendells, and Grant just likes to put folks on larger frames. Anyway, the 54 always felt big and clumsy. As for my preferred top tube length, anywhere between 52 and 53 is okay. I believe my measurements are fairly normal, too. Good luck in finding your perfect fit.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

Well I already am riding the CAAd 10 5, 54 cm. It's about preference I suppose. I will give it a few months to see how well i do on the bike. But with 52 CM the drop was lower for me. Also I really do like how it feels when I ride it that's why I bought this bike.


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

An 80 mm will give twitchy steering. A smaller frame with a 100 mm stem will feel a lot more stable.

I'm 5'7" and ride a 46.5 sloping frame, 100 mm stem and love it.


----------



## stanseven (Nov 9, 2011)

Try some of the online fit calculations. Competitive Cyclist has one that produces three different style fit. You take several body dimensions and plug the data into their models.


----------



## Guod (Jun 9, 2011)

bikechickieny said:


> Well I already am riding the CAAd 10 5, 54 cm. It's about preference I suppose. I will give it a few months to see how well i do on the bike. But with 52 CM the drop was lower for me. Also I really do like how it feels when I ride it that's why I bought this bike.


If you just purchased it, I'd see if you can go back and try a 52 set up correctly just to see.

I'm 5'10", long arms and legs, shortish torso, and I'd probably be on a 54. Although I'd have a much longer stem. Just for comparison, I'm on a 54 Tarmac with a -17 120mm stem, no spacers.

I don't know if you've had bikes prior to this (it sounds like this might be your first road bike), but they're meant to have a bit of drop from the seat to the bars. Also, putting the seat up higher isn't a bad thing. There will be a minimum insertion mark on the seatpost, if you're below that you're good.

Running an 80mm stem is pretty indicative that it's too large. I'd see if you can't swap it for a 52, have them fit you on it correctly, and go from there.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Please see my first post. It's partially the size of the bike, because if you're on a bike that requires an 8cm stem you probably have too much weight biased to the rear of the bike. If you're riding that size bike to get a tall enough head tube to be comfortable, you should be on a different style of bike, one that has a taller head tube on smaller frames. The CAAD is a race style frame, you pretty obviously can't fit comfortably on something like that. 

You should probably look at the Synapse, or something like a Trek Domane, or Specialized Roubaix. Like another poster said you can probably fit on 3 or 4 different sizes of frames depending on geometry, but really only one fit will *be correct for you. * At your size, on that size bike, you're not experiencing that right now.

To sum it up, you need a 50 or 52cm frame, and the correct type of frame for your fit needs. Not all 52cm frames are going to fit the same. You need to understand this.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

There are a few things to consider here:

1) Your correct frame size should give you a stand over difference at least 2 inches between the top tube and your crotch, no less! If it is more than this, the frame size is fine. If it is less, the frame is too large!

2) The CAAD10 has an aggressive race geometry so the "drop" you mention is by design. The Synapse has a more upright endurance geometry which you may be better with. It would be much more comfortable on long rides too.

3) Going by your screen name, I am assuming you are a woman. I don't know about your proportions specifically, but generally, women have longer legs and a shorter torso than men do. Womens specific frame designs address this issue with a shorter top tube/longer seat and head tube. Many women are OK with mens or unisex frames, but if your proportions fall toward that extreme, a womens specific frame may be right for you. 

4) When you bought the bike, did the shop put you and the bike on a trainer and adjust your fit? Any good reputable bike shop worth their weight should do this.

Some things to think about.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

I understand that the geometry of all frames are different etc. I just went by how I felt when I test rode it at the bike shop and liked how the caad10 5 felt. When I rode 52, I felt a bit cramped in the cockpit.
I do have a short torso than mens, but long arms and legs.

I will check to see if standover height is over 2 inches.


----------



## silkroad (Jul 8, 2011)

Im about your height, 5'6 ish with 29.75 inseam and I ride a 50cm (52.5tt) Caad10. I really like how it feels compared to my previous 51cm road bike with 53.5tt. I felt more stretched out before, getting back pains and numb palms.  That isn't the problem now. 

How long is your torso? What do you mean by too much of a drop?


----------



## crit_boy (Aug 6, 2013)

Lombard said:


> There are a few things to consider here:
> 1) Your correct frame size should give you a stand over difference at least 2 inches between the top tube and your crotch, no less! If it is more than this, the frame size is fine. If it is less, the frame is too large!


Stand over height is the least important frame measurement.

I am 5'8" height with a 30.5 inch inseam. 

By your 2" rule, both a 49 cm venge and/or a CAAD10 48 are way too big. That my friend is crazy talk perpetrated by lazy bike shop "fitting" - e.g. "Stand over it and let's see if it fits". 

I don't even have 2" on my mtb - a small niner rip 9 rdo.


----------



## skitorski (Dec 4, 2012)

Cinelli 82220 said:


> An 80 mm will give twitchy steering. A smaller frame with a 100 mm stem will feel a lot more stable.


Never thought about the stem affecting anything but - weight. Thanks Cinelli


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Lombard said:


> There are a few things to consider here:
> 
> 1) Your correct frame size should give you a stand over difference at least 2 inches between the top tube and your crotch, no less! If it is more than this, the frame size is fine. If it is less, the frame is too large!


Standover clearance? Please...any chance of this post being taken seriously just went out the window. As long as you can clear the frame you're good.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

skitorski said:


> Never thought about the stem affecting anything but - weight. Thanks Cinelli


A short stem won't change the way a bike handles all by itself. The fact that the short stem, in this case, puts a majority of the riders weight over the rear wheel will have an effect because it's reducing the amount of weight on the front wheel. A smaller person on a smaller bike would be fine w/ an 80mm stem, so the stem itself isn't the problem...it's what it does to weight distribution. 
The bike steers the way it does because of the head tube angle and fork rake...the 'trail'. Shorter or longer stems don't necessarily change that. Changes in weight distribution can change the way the bike feels, but it always steers the same. It won't make a sharper turn at any given lean angle.


----------



## krisdrum (Oct 29, 2007)

Wow. I'm 5-6, 28" inseam. I typically ride a stock 48-50cm frame. Road geo = 75 STA, ETT length 51.5. 100mm stem. That geo came out of a professional 3 hour fitting and I've used it for all other bike set-ups since with minor adjustments and my fitness and activity on the bike changes. I'd be very uncomfortable on most stock 54cm frames. I could probably MAKE it fit, but it would be nowhere near ideal and I'd be making alot of trade-offs to make it work. If I HAD to have a bike and this was the only one available, fine. If I had other options, I'd explore those.

OP - Did a local bike shop sell you this bike? Looks like you are in NYC. If it was a shop, it would be great to know who to avoid, as it sounds like they are either lazy, poorly trained or just could care less.


----------



## 74extiger (Jan 29, 2011)

In my experience, it is impossible to say. I am 5'10" and ride a 54cm. I was measured for it and a custom frame made by a London (England) bike builder. I you are like the majority and have a routine anatomy, the bike is right for you if you can swing your leg over the top bar and reach the handlebars with small seat adjustments. Having the seat post extended about 4" is considered a good index. 

My bones are weird. If you would look at my frame, you would see that the seat tube comes within 1/3" of the rear tire. The angles are peculiar. They don't make standard bikes with crazy angles.

So if you are a regular shape, try a 54cm and adjust the seat post, bar stem and possibly the crank arms and you'll be safe. With experience, you can see folks riding down the road and tell just by their body position, tell if the frame is good and the adjustments right.


----------



## Guod (Jun 9, 2011)

bikechickieny said:


> I understand that the geometry of all frames are different etc. I just went by how I felt when I test rode it at the bike shop and liked how the caad10 5 felt. When I rode 52, I felt a bit cramped in the cockpit.
> I do have a short torso than mens, but long arms and legs.
> 
> I will check to see if standover height is over 2 inches.


You seem to be ignoring the (good) advice given. The standover doesn't mean anything.

If you felt cramped with the cockpit of the 52, then swap out for a longer stem or adjust saddle position (if that's the reason you felt cramped). It doesn't sound like any good attempt was made to get you on the right bike the right way. The 54 is just too big. You might even be good to go on a 50 if flexibility weren't an issue.

If it were me, I'd return it and start over.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

Guod said:


> You seem to be ignoring the (good) advice given. The standover doesn't mean anything.


At the time i replied to that post someone had spoken about standover height.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

@74extiger
Thanks for the advice.

I'm going to ride it a few more times and see how I feel. I can technically return this bike but they don't have a 52. But they said I can ride it for a bit to see if its truly a bad fit.

My inseam is about 32 to 33 inches. 
Also it is not unusual to have a shorter stem for road bike. On my mountain bike I have 80mm stem. On many women's specific frames, the stem lengths range in 90mm range.

I tried the synapse and some treks. I liked how the caad 10 5 rode over all.

When i measure myself according to competitive cyclist fit. For Eddy and Competitive cyclist fit I got 53cm. For French Fit I got in the 54 cm range.

I think I fall in between sizes. I can go a little smaller or a little bigger and I choose a little bigger.
Has anybody fell in between sizes and if so what do they choose.

Women's specific frames are not always that great. They oftentimes do not have a good selection of nice looking frames. Also they assume women have short arms. I have long arms. Just because it says its womens fit does not mean that it will fit that great.

Also as mentioned this is my first road bike. I have riden mainly mountain bikes before. I have a size Medium Flash Alloy 29 er.
This is how I look on the mtb bike.
Instagram

I will post pictures of how I look on the road bike when I have a moment.


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

bikechickieny said:


> @74extiger
> Thanks for the advice.
> 
> I'm going to ride it a few more times and see how I feel. I can technically return this bike but they don't have a 52. But they said I can ride it for a bit to see if its truly a bad fit.
> ...


The Competitive Cyclist fitting system is great if you don't have access to a person that actually knows how to fit you to a bike. It sounds to me like several things are happening.

1. The shop is trying to sell you the bike size they have in stock. I realize this is conjecture on my part, but if they don't have a 52 in the same bike, how do you know it feels cramped? Did you ride a bike with the exact same geometry in a 52?

2. Since this is your first road bike, you might need a little guidance from someone that really knows how to fit you to a bike. They should put you on a bike in the correct size, then adjust the saddle, seatpost, stem (including changing out to longer or shorter stems), and handlebars. I haven't heard that they did this with you. Did they?

I will share that I have had two professional fittings. They came out slightly different, but both were a huge improvement on the guy that told me to stand over the top tube and then said the bike fit. With my most recent mountain bike purchase, the shop employee took the exact measurements from my old bike and set up the new bike in the exact same settings. I then rode the bike and we adjusted based on fitting and changes in bike geometry. 

3. Considering that you are asking about the fit on here suggests that something isn't quite right. I would definitely try to get a good bike fitting. 

Finally, cxwrench really knows about anything bikes. I would try to listen to this advice.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

jspharmd said:


> 1. The shop is trying to sell you the bike size they have in stock. I realize this is conjecture on my part, but if they don't have a 52 in the same bike, how do you know it feels cramped? Did you ride a bike with the exact same geometry in a 52?


I Rode a 52 with the stem angled up and also a 54 cm. they sold out of the 52 this week. But I rode both frames a few weeks ago. I spent about 20 min. on each bike and went by what I felt ok on.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Unless the misfit is clearly bizarre, I don't think it's really possible to say if a certain frame size is too big or too little for a person. Some people chose to ride the largest possible frame for them, others like to be on the smallest possible frame, and others yet choose the middle path. All good advice here. But given the numbers here, I think the "clearly too big for you" and the "LBS screwed up" remarks need to be taken with a grain of salt.


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

bikechickieny said:


> I Rode a 52 with the stem angled up and also a 54 cm. they sold out of the 52 this week. But I rode both frames a few weeks ago. I spent about 20 min. on each bike and went by what I felt ok on.


One last comment, then I'll leave it alone. For me, small changes in stem length can dramatically change the feeling in the cockpit. A small increase in the stem length might make the 52 feel better. 

Also, if you feel better on the 54, why post in here?


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

jspharmd said:


> Also, if you feel better on the 54, why post in here?


Because I wanted to see what others experiences are etc are with regard to frame size and inbetween sizes.

If cannondale made size 53cm in caad10 5 i'd take it.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

74extiger said:


> In my experience, it is impossible to say. I am 5'10" and ride a 54cm. I was measured for it and a custom frame made by a London (England) bike builder. I you are like the majority and have a routine anatomy, the bike is right for you if you can swing your leg over the top bar and reach the handlebars with small seat adjustments. *Having the seat post extended about 4" is considered a good index*.
> 
> My bones are weird. If you would look at my frame, you would see that the seat tube comes within 1/3" of the rear tire. The angles are peculiar. They don't make standard bikes with crazy angles.
> 
> So if you are a regular shape, try a 54cm and adjust the seat post, bar stem and possibly the crank arms and you'll be safe. With experience, you can see folks riding down the road and tell just by their body position, tell if the frame is good and the adjustments right.


Only on a frame w/ a horizontal top tube (which very few frames have these days) and only on certain sizes. This won't work on smaller or larger frames.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

crit_boy said:


> Stand over height is the least important frame measurement.
> 
> I am 5'8" height with a 30.5 inch inseam.
> 
> ...


That is fine if you don't mind feeling like you're being castrated when you dismount the bike. For me, I like a bit more room in case I need to dismount quickly! I stand by my "at least 2 inches" rule though there is nothing wrong with a smaller frame if that fits better otherwise.


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

bikechickieny said:


> Because I wanted to see what others experiences are etc are with regard to frame size and inbetween sizes.
> 
> If cannondale made size 53cm in caad10 5 i'd take it.


In that case, I'm 5'6" with a clothing inseam of 29-30" and a inseam to floor with shoes of about 31-32". I've was told by both bike fitters that I have a long torso. I've had three road bikes one is a 52 and two were small (basically a 50). The TT for all three were ~52.5 cm and the seat tubes were ~50-52cm. I will say that if I had an 80mm stem, my bikes would feel cramped. With 100-110mm stems, they feel great. 

Hope this helps! Good luck with your bike!


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

bikechickieny said:


> Because I wanted to see what others experiences are etc are with regard to frame size and inbetween sizes.
> 
> If cannondale made size 53cm in caad10 5 i'd take it.


So trick question here. If the 54cm feels better than the 52 did, what is the problem? What matters is not what others think you should be riding. What matters is what feels right to you and doesn't cause you pain on long rides.

As you can plainly see, you will get dozens of opinions in here. From what I can see, the 54 suits you just fine.

And I still come back to did your bike shop put you and your bike on a trainer and do measurements to adjust seat post height, cleat position, handlebar position (changing stem if necessary) in order to get you a good fit? This is the main difference between an excellent bike shop and a terrible one.

When I was new to road cycling, a bike shop sold me a 58cm and told me either a 56 or 58 would fit me. OK, so riding around the parking lot, it felt OK, there was marginal clearance over the top tube and though I had to be careful, it was OK. Longer rides proved otherwise as the 58 was starting to feel stretched out not to mention the care when dismounting was getting old. As I became more experienced and found a few better bike shops and one exemplary one which I now use exclusively, I realized what a bunch of jerks those guys were who sold me that bike. My correct size turns out to be a 56 (a 54 feels too hunched over, 58 too big). I am a 5' 10" male with a 32-33 inseam.


----------



## crit_boy (Aug 6, 2013)

Lombard said:


> That is fine if you don't mind feeling like you're being castrated when you dismount the bike. For me, I like a bit more room in case I need to dismount quickly! I stand by my "at least 2 inches" rule though there is nothing wrong with a smaller frame if that fits better otherwise.


You missed the point. With your 2 inch rule, one would have to have a inseam larger than 31 inches to ride the smallest available cannondale road frame. I am not sure how tall someone has to be to have a >31 inch inseam. But, I would guess it is somewhere between 5'8" and 6'. There is no way that cannondale does not make a bike to fit people who are at and smaller than about 5'8". 

In other words, your rule means a person has to be taller than about 5'10" to ride a 49 cm road frame. That hypothesis is incorrect. 

I have been riding mountain and road bikes for more than 20 years. I have a kid and the ability to make more - in other words, no castration. I do like some clearance - hence the small rip 9 vs medium. But, your statement about stand over is misguided. Stand over height is the least important dimension - especially for road bikes. 

If you just parking lot queen your bike and want people to see how cool you look standing over your bike, then stand over height may matter.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

Lombard said:


> So trick question here. If the 54cm feels better than the 52 did, what is the problem? What matters is not what others think you should be riding. What matters is what feels right to you and doesn't cause you pain on long rides.


I just posted on this forum as part of the discussion for I wanted to talk.
What do you define as a long ride?
I just want to be 100% sure this bike a the right fit but since this is my first road bike (i have 2mountain bikes) and i just got it, I don't know immediately how i will feel on super long rides.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikechickieny said:


> I just posted on this forum as part of the discussion for I wanted to talk.
> What do you define as a long ride?
> I just want to be 100% sure this bike a the right fit but since this is my first road bike (i have 2mountain bikes) and i just got it, I don't know immediately how i will feel on super long rides.


Ok...the majority of people w/ current fit experience are saying they think the 54cm is probably too big. None of us can really tell for sure because we can't see how you look on the bike. 

There has been some out-dated advice (4" of seat post showing means the frame fits, and random stand over height opinions) and some incorrect advice about how stem length affects handling. 

It sounds like the shop did very little if anything at all to fit the bike to you. We normally make sure that saddle height, set back, reach, and drop are at least very close for a normal test ride. If your shop didn't do any of this, then we really don't have any idea how that frame size can or will work for you. 

I'm more of a mechanic that a fit specialist but I've got a lot of years in the industry. I'd bet w/ 80-90% certainty that the 54 is a size big for you. It might not even be the correct model frame for you. 

Your next step needs to be: 
Find a shop that knows how to fit bicycles and have them look at you on your bike. What happens from there is up to you.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> Ok...the majority of people w/ current fit experience are saying they think the 54cm is probably too big. None of us can really tell for sure because we can't see how you look on the bike
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds like the shop did very little if anything at all to fit the bike to you.


i went to more than one shop. At one shop I rode both 52 54 , w 54 shorter stem angled up. Felt better on it

went to another bike shop where they said I fall in between and can do 52 and 54


bought 54 at final shop that said I can return it for full refund if after a while I don't like it



Makes no sense to return it now as I have not spent enough time w it to feel I don't like it. If I buy 52 at another shop I wouldn't be sure either and can't return it.



Again I ask how long does it take to be comfortable on a road bike?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Are you buying from a reputable shop? Most reputable shops will make sure you're on the right size bike. A crappy shop will cut ya a deal on something that's not your size and might try to get it to work with a two minute fit job. 

I'm surprised there are so many of us shortyz here. I'm 5'6" with a ~29" inseam and have been riding Bianchi 51cm frames. I have very short arms, so a slightly higher stem. 

How long to be comfortable? Depends on a lot of things. I was somewhat miserable my first 3 years trying to fix little things that would start to hurt on long rides.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

spade2you said:


> Are you buying from a reputable shop? Most reputable shops will make sure you're on the right size bike. A crappy shop will cut ya a deal on something that's not your size and might try to get it to work with a two minute fit job.
> 
> I'm surprised there are so many of us shortyz here. I'm 5'6" with a ~29" inseam and have been riding Bianchi 51cm frames. I have very short arms, so a slightly higher stem.


My inseam is 32to 33 inches w long arms. It was my pref to ride 54 as it seemed I could go either way. What is your definition of a long ride


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

bikechickieny said:


> My inseam is 32to 33 inches w long arms. It was my pref to ride 54 as it seemed I could go either way. What is your definition of a long ride


50-60 miles or so.


----------



## akamp (Jan 14, 2009)

I am 5'9" and have always ridden a 53/54. My current BMC is a 51 but they tent to run a bit longer than most. I have a 120 Stem on the BMC


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

akamp said:


> I am 5'9" and have always ridden a 53/54. My current BMC is a 51 but they tent to run a bit longer than most. I have a 120 Stem on the BMC


Sizing does really vary w/ brand. I've normally been a 52 in most bikes. Cervelo, Trek, etc. The BMC I had was a 49. I rode a 120 stem on all of those bikes.


----------



## bradkay (Nov 5, 2013)

It seems that most people on this thread are ignoring the OP's listing of her inseam length: 32-33" with long arms. From this the 54cm frame might just be the right fit - those are long legs for a 5'6" woman (and extremely long legs for a 5'6" man). As mentioned earlier, without seeing her on the bike it is impossible for us to discern whether the bike fits or is too big - but to see all the condemnation of the shop and OP that I see here is rather disturbing.


----------



## thejurgy (Aug 9, 2012)

A 54cm bike seems like it would be too big for someone who is 5'6. I'm 5'11 with an average upper and lower body proportion and ride a 54 (road with a 110mm stem and cyclocross with a 100mm stem). My townie is a 56 but had to make some serious fit adjustments (i.e. drop the seat height big time, get a shorter stem, and replace the drop bars with mtb bars) to get it to the comfort level that I wanted. With that being said, everyone's body measurements are different. If you happen to have a long torso with long arms, the reach may not affect you as much at your height. It also depends on what kind of riding you're wanting to do, the more serious you are the more you should care about finding the right size frame. I'd say your best option is to go to you LBS and ask for a quick floor fit. Without actually seeing how you fit on the bike as is, no one can really give you a "correct" answer.

Also, a good rule of thumb is to always size down on the frame and size up on components. You loose a lot of bike control on something that is too big.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

bikechickieny said:


> Because I wanted to see what others experiences are etc are with regard to frame size and inbetween sizes.
> 
> If cannondale made size 53cm in caad10 5 i'd take it.


You know stems can be flipped or totally replaced, right? You said the 52 felt cramped and later said the stem was pointing up. The solution isn't a bigger bike (like the mistake you already made) but an appropriate stem length and angle.


----------



## 74extiger (Jan 29, 2011)

It's the angles, by the angles. Tube angles plus tube length comprise correct fit. 
Can't talk about one without the other, in some cases. Luckily, for the vast majority of body types, only the length is relevant. I myself am not one of the lucky. Had to get fitted and have a custom frame built. It wasn't to impress the neighbors, either.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

akamp said:


> I am 5'9" and have always ridden a 53/54. My current BMC is a 51 but they tent to run a bit longer than most. I have a 120 Stem on the BMC


I'd love to get a BMC if I didn't have such short arms. I'm sure something could work, but it might look dorky.


----------



## Guod (Jun 9, 2011)

bradkay said:


> It seems that most people on this thread are ignoring the OP's listing of her inseam length: 32-33" with long arms. From this the 54cm frame might just be the right fit - those are long legs for a 5'6" woman (and extremely long legs for a 5'6" man). As mentioned earlier, without seeing her on the bike it is impossible for us to discern whether the bike fits or is too big - but to see all the condemnation of the shop and OP that I see here is rather disturbing.


Long legs perhaps, but that only dictates seat height. The rest of the equation (even with long arms) indicates a too small setup. If she's 5'6" with a 33" inseam, that means a really short torso. A shorter top tube and possibly a taller head tube would help. She's basically on a similar size bike to me except that I'm a lot taller, have a taller inseam, and (I'm sure) way longer arms (6'2" fingertip to fingertip).

If you have to go to an extreme (80mm stem) to get fit, it just really sounds like the shop missed the mark when fitting her. But, I agree that actually seeing her on the bike would be a much better indicator of fit.

Seeing the pics of the MTB though, along with her description of the CAAD10 setup and her issues, makes me wonder if she's trying to replicate the fit of that.


----------



## .je (Aug 25, 2012)

You make a valid point, #55, but I also have a 32-33" inseam and long arms, and am 2" _taller _than OP, and all data - trials, bike shop employees, _every single_ online fit calculator, RETUL, all put _me_, with 5cm more torso, on a "54" that has a 54.5cm top tube (and 73 degree STA, with reach of 386mm or very close), and TBH it almost feels long for me. 

I'd suggest the next lower size for OP as well, but if she really feels good on 54, then go for it, some people like a longer bike.

IMO, a stem flipped up looks funny, and tho maybe it's better for me, _I_ don't, just for that reason.  I've seen a lot of women's bike fits ... and the way they're set up seems more variable than it does for men.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

*Here are pix of me on the bike.*

Instagram
Instagram
Instagram
Instagram


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikechickieny said:


> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram


I'm sticking w/ my opinion. One size too big, AND it's not the correct type of frame if that's the kind of fit you need. Your bars are pretty high, you'd be better off w/ a size smaller in a frame that has a taller head tube.

Hard to tell about much else because you're not clipped in and the photos aren't that good (in terms of evaluating fit).


----------



## SwimCycle09 (Apr 22, 2014)

+1 As long as you can comfortably stand over the bike I think its fine. The 2" requirement seems to be a dated concept I think. Fit is more about the contact points on the bike. And also how much time do you actually spend standing over your bike??....way less than riding I hope.

I'm 5"8" with a longer torso and picked the 54 CAAD 10, I was really in between the 52 and 54 but felt better on my test ride on the 54, went with it and haven't looked back. It would have been interesting liked to try the 52 with a 120mm stem compared to the 100 stock with the 52/54 but I didn't get the chance. The 54 still handles nice and quick but is not twitchy to me. I also think fit evolves as you contine riding over time. When it comes time to replace my frame/new bike I might consider going down a size.


----------



## Guod (Jun 9, 2011)

bikechickieny said:


> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram


Yeah... I'm going with too big as well still. You're VERY upright as well as being stretched out. I agree that not being clipped in might be affecting your position, but all things considered it is too big. I'd go see about the 52 or possibly a different model altogether if you're needing the bars set so high.

Really though, your bars appear to be above your seat. If that is the case, I'm not sure a road bike is what you need at all. Even with a properly sized frame with a taller head tube, you'd still need alot of spacers to achieve that. Unless you're able to have some flexibility, you might want to stick with a different type of bike. Just my thought, you might be able to make it work though.


----------



## silkroad (Jul 8, 2011)

bikechickieny said:


> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram


Frame too big, seat height a bit low.


You're supposed to look upright with those stack of spacers. You look leaned forward even with that setup in these pics. I would suggest going with 52 or even 50. But then again I am no bike fitter.


----------



## milkbaby (Aug 14, 2009)

bikechickieny said:


> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram
> Instagram


You look positioned a little like this guy who's leading the Tour de France right now... except he has much more saddle to bar drop.











You do look like you have long arms and legs for your height. I am 5'6" and relatively long arms and legs for my height though a little less than yours and I am comfortable on a Cannondale CAAD9 size 52 (100mm stem) though I could do a size 50 too. A 54 would be too stretched for me.

If you can do all the riding you want to do, are comfortable, and are not compromising bike handling in any situations, then no worries. I think it only matters if you are uncomfortable or are looking to maximize performance.


----------



## Red90 (Apr 2, 2013)

For point of reference, I'm 5'7" and I ride a 52cm frame with a 535mm horizontal top tube and 100mm stem. I have shorter legs than you do and wear pants with an inseam of 30". This means my torso is longer than yours. To me, it looks like this bike is too big for you. The handle bar looks like it's stacked up high with the bars bent upwards so you can reach it more easily. 

It doesn't look like the bike has been setup to make you fit properly on it. I think the seat should be slightly higher, frame should be a bit smaller so you won't be so stretched out when the handlebars are setup properly. This is just from the pictures, that that can be a bid deceiving. From the way your riding, it looks like you prefer a more relaxed fit, more upright. The CAAD 10 is a race geometry bike, you should be more suited to a synapse. The CAAD 10 has just been setup such that your more relaxed.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Guod said:


> Yeah... I'm going with too big as well still. You're VERY upright as well as being stretched out. I agree that not being clipped in might be affecting your position, but all things considered it is too big. I'd go see about the 52 or possibly a different model altogether if you're needing the bars set so high.
> 
> Really though, your bars appear to be above your seat. If that is the case, I'm not sure a road bike is what you need at all. Even with a properly sized frame with a taller head tube, you'd still need alot of spacers to achieve that. Unless you're able to have some flexibility, you might want to stick with a different type of bike. Just my thought, you might be able to make it work though.


I see no problem w/ riding a road bike positioned like that, lots of people do. It's just a bunch easier when you start off w/ the correct type as well as size bike. 

Hint: taller headtube/shorter top tube.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

I know that I have to raise the seat higher. That is true indeed.
As for being upright, I am so used to my hybrid bike (here is a pix of me on it: Instagram) and my mountain bike cannondale medium flash alloy 29er (here is a pix of me on it:Instagram ).

So naturally when I went on the road bike, I felt like I wanted a more upright position until I gradually get used to the whole road biking position.

I did a 75 mile ride the other day. I feel more comfortable being completely upright like on my hybrid but I feel that is something I need to get use to.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikechickieny said:


> I know that I have to raise the seat higher. That is true indeed.
> As for being upright, I am so used to my hybrid bike (here is a pix of me on it: Instagram) and my mountain bike cannondale medium flash alloy 29er (here is a pix of me on it:Instagram ).
> 
> So naturally when I went on the road bike, I felt like I wanted a more upright position until I gradually get used to the whole road biking position.
> ...


It sounds like at this point you'll be keeping this bike so I'd concentrate on finding a good fitter and having him look at you on the bike. If you decide to do an actual fitting it can be fairly expensive, so be ready for that. We charge $200.00 for the full deal. It takes between 2 and 3 hours and is very thorough. Obviously there are usually less expensive alternatives depending on your needs and level of commitment. 

You should also seriously consider going to clipless pedals of some type if you're going to be riding lots of miles. No idea whether you use them on your mtb or not, but there are some very good reasons that the overwhelming majority of cyclists use them.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

I have until Sept. to return the bike if I feel that its not a good fit.

When you say stretched out, am I not sitting on the road bike properly. I thought you are supposed to have a 45 degree from your back to the top tube. 
When I test drove the syapse vs the Caad10, I liked Caad10 better.

The head tube in Caad10 is 2cm shorter the next size down. I don't like being so bent over.

Dude - I just got the bike and still shopping for clipless pedals and shoes.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Bikechickieny,

Not to say, but I really think you are over analyzing the situation. I still come back to how does the bike feel to YOU? It does not matter what anybody else thinks. As long as 1) You enjoy rding it and 2) It doesn't hurt, it's all good!

So what are you still doing here? Get off the computer and go out and put some miles on your new bike!


----------



## silkroad (Jul 8, 2011)

bikechickieny said:


> *When you say stretched out, am I not sitting on the road bike properly. I thought you are supposed to have a 45 degree from your back to the top tube.
> *
> 
> The head tube in Caad10 is 2cm shorter the next size down. I don't like being so bent over.
> ...


 Stretched out( or in your case, leaning forward to reach the cockpit) with low seat, flipped up stem and stack of spacers underneath, to me is not a good fit, specially when you're on a race bike like CAAD10.


----------



## Red90 (Apr 2, 2013)

It's great that you are comfortable and your enjoying yourself, that will make you continue to bike. I think what most people here are advocating is getting yourself on the right size bike that is properly fitted and see how that feels to you. Often times we don't know any better. I rode a 54cm bike for a good half a year and thought it was completely fine. I was stretched out, but thought that position was normal. It wasn't until a bike shop owner measured me up and said I should go one size down that I tried a smaller bike. It felt cramped at first, but once I got used to it, I wouldn't go back to a 54cm. My arms and shoulders are relaxed and bent.

Keep in mind that there are only general rules to bike fitting. Specific angles change depending on the person's geometry, how flexible they are and any issues they have with their body. That's why a good bike fitter will be able to spot how your riding and assess the movement and make corrections such that your comfortable, efficient and won't have any pain.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikechickieny said:


> I have until Sept. to return the bike if I feel that its not a good fit.
> 
> When you say stretched out, am I not sitting on the road bike properly. I thought you are supposed to have a 45 degree from your back to the top tube.
> When I test drove the syapse vs the Caad10, I liked Caad10 better.
> ...


So they're fine w/ letting you ride the bike for 3 MONTHS and then taking it back if you don't like it? 
The relationship between your back and the top tube means nothing. A fitter will look at the angles between certain parts of your body, but the frame/body angles as you're talking about mean nothing. I won't even go into what we look at, but it's not the frame. 

I KNOW the head tube is shorter on the next size smaller CAAD. I'm saying the CAAD isn't the right bike for you. The Synapse would be better. 

You come on a public forum seeking advice, don't get all fluffy when people give you advice you don't like. It is not possible to do an effective fitting unless you're clipped in. 



Lombard said:


> Bikechickieny,
> 
> Not to say, but I really think you are over analyzing the situation. I still come back to how does the bike feel to YOU? It does not matter what anybody else thinks. As long as 1) You enjoy rding it and 2) It doesn't hurt, it's all good!
> 
> So what are you still doing here? Get off the computer and go out and put some miles on your new bike!


It's quite obvious to most of us that the OP doesn't know anything about how bikes are supposed to fit, thus all she knows is that this bike feels ok, better than the other ones she tried. She really has nothing to judge 'ok' against, i.e.: a bike that is the right size and has been properly fit. Right now she _thinks_ this bike fits well, but she's really not a great judge of that. Not trying to slam the OP at all, just saying that she doesn't have the experience to know what a proper fit feels like. 
Advising her to not over analyze is great, but asking how the bike feels to her is kinda meaningless. Your #2 above is bordering on stupidity. If people went by this advice no one would ever get a fitting. It's not just about feeling ok, it's about many other things that you obviously have no clue about.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

@cxwrench hmmm paying 200 to get a "bike fitter" like you to yell at me does not make sense.


----------



## SundayNiagara (Apr 17, 2014)

bikechickieny said:


> @cxwrench hmmm paying 200 to get a "bike fitter" like you to yell at me does not make sense.


Post of the week!


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

bikechickieny said:


> @cxwrench hmmm paying 200 to get a "bike fitter" like you to yell at me does not make sense.


Our fitter is a bigger asshole than I am but he's constantly busy doing fits. It's all about how you present yourself. You've asked for opinions and you've got them. Then you come back again and again seemingly ignoring the advice you've been given. I don't have the patience to do fitting, I'd rather just fix stuff. 
Do you want good advice or not? I know I'm a bit too direct for a lot of people, but I don't like messing around and sugar coating stuff. I've told you more than once that I not only think you're on the wrong size bike, but the wrong type of frame. Others have said the same thing. You need to get someone w/ experience to check you out on that bike and see what they have to say. It's very hard to say via cell phone pics but it's obvious there are some things that need to be fixed. Bear in mind that if you get 5 fittings you'll end up w/ just that...5 somewhat different fittings. If they people you work with are good and know what they're doing chances are they'll be very close. Maybe 1.0cm difference at most for the 4 important parameters:
saddle height
set back
reach
drop
How much you pay for it depends greatly on where you live and how in depth the process is. I'm not going to bore you w/ details, but this is an important part of how much you enjoy your riding. You obviously think your comfortable now, but you don't have any idea how good it can be. You may be off far enough that you'll start having problems down the road...a year, 5 years...whatever. Since you're just starting out on the road, your fit is going to change over the next couple of years, so if you bother doing any of this find someone that will work w/ your over time and not bleed your wallet dry.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Bike=wrong size.

75 miles on the wrong size frame and without bike shoes sounds painful.


----------



## config (Aug 16, 2002)

cxwrench said:


> Our fitter is a bigger asshole than I am but he's constantly busy doing fits. It's all about how you present yourself. You've asked for opinions and you've got them. Then you come back again and again seemingly ignoring the advice you've been given. I don't have the patience to do fitting, I'd rather just fix stuff.
> Do you want good advice or not? I know I'm a bit too direct for a lot of people, but I don't like messing around and sugar coating stuff. I've told you more than once that I not only think you're on the wrong size bike, but the wrong type of frame. Others have said the same thing. You need to get someone w/ experience to check you out on that bike and see what they have to say. It's very hard to say via cell phone pics but it's obvious there are some things that need to be fixed. Bear in mind that if you get 5 fittings you'll end up w/ just that...5 somewhat different fittings. If they people you work with are good and know what they're doing chances are they'll be very close. Maybe 1.0cm difference at most for the 4 important parameters:
> saddle height
> set back
> ...


Listen to this guy. ...or just ignore all of it and keep your bike as it is. Your body knows best, right?


----------



## 9W9W (Apr 5, 2012)

Bike looks long on you. If I see you in the park I'm going to pull up next to you and say "woman. dat bike be too big". I'm kidding, I'll probably just roll by. 

IIRC, I did close to 600 miles on wonky fits years ago. Then things were moved, and around not necessarily where I would have put them. The bars came closer and lower, seat went up, bar drop increased and the bike became so comfortable that it disappeared under me. 

If you ever wanted to bump your seat up a bit - which it looks like you may as you ride more and become more flexible - even if that height bump comes with a fwd move of a mm or two, you'll really be really stretching to reach an 80mm stem...not good. 

Be honest, did anything ache after that long ride? lower back maybe? 

Lastly, my woman is on a 56 Synapse women's specific, which I believe has top tube closer to that of a 54 men's, but she's 5'9". Though the different geo's of these two bikes render comparison moot.


----------



## jspharmd (May 24, 2006)

I can end this thread for everyone.

bikechickieny, please *ignore* the guy (cxwrench) with over 8,000 posts and more reputation bars than I can count. Not to mention that he works in a bike shop and knows bike fitting pretty well. Don't mind that he hasn't given you any absolutes, but has suggested you get with someone in person to see if your bike fits (even though numerous people have suggested it doesn't or it looks like it doesn't fit). Disregard the numerous people that are your exact same height and ride considerably smaller frames (even those with similar builds). 

Ride your bike and enjoy! If/when you have issues with your bike/body, post back here and we can address the issue then.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

spade2you said:


> Bike=wrong size.
> 75 miles on the wrong size frame and without bike shoes sounds painful.


Overtaking cyclists with bike shoes and decked w bike costumes on long climbs was quite amusing for me.


----------



## 9W9W (Apr 5, 2012)

I'll add to what CX said, by reiterating that there's no reason for you to be on this type of a frame. There's a reason the Synapse exists. It exists for gorgeous days and fifty mile ride up the Hudson river with your friends at a pace that doesn't leave you gasping for air or have you grabbing your ankles on the bike. This type of frame is more red hook criterium then west side highway bike path. Synapse leaves you more upright, and with the right length stem, just as comfortable. Being upright opens up your hip angle and allows for increased power into the pedals and increased efficiency, instead of hacking away from behind the BB, but that's a whole another topic. We're all just armchair fitters at this point going just by those pics but the takeaway here is: we think you should start over.


----------



## Alfonsina (Aug 26, 2012)

bikechickieny said:


> Overtaking cyclists with bike shoes and decked w bike costumes on long climbs was quite amusing for me.


 LOL, then you check strava you find out they have already ridden 65 miles and done 3000k of climbing, but sure, you chicked THEM LOL.


----------



## 9W9W (Apr 5, 2012)

Alfonsina said:


> LOL, then you check strava you find out they have already ridden 65 miles and done 3000k of climbing, but sure, you chicked THEM LOL.


This post is too funny! As I've actually had this exact thing happen on the exact route OP was on. I blew by a very fit and well equipped looking guy on a climb, giving him my best Fred show. I was like damn, I'm getting better fast! Time to finish up this 25 miler and crack open a beer. Then after getting home I discover the guy was on his 78th mile of a 114 mile ride. Doh!


----------



## LVbob (Mar 24, 2014)

Really no need for people to post anything more - she seems to have it all figured out for herself. Not sure why she posted in the first place since she is not really interested in any of the advice she has received that does not conform to her belief that the bike is a great fit for her. She strikes me as an attention-seeker at this point rather than someone who is serious about getting a properly-fit bike.

Also, would love to know where she bought a bike that can be returned in the first ninety days.


----------



## LVbob (Mar 24, 2014)

SundayNiagara said:


> Post of the week!


Clueless as usual.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

deleted


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

crit_boy said:


> You missed the point. With your 2 inch rule, one would have to have a inseam larger than 31 inches to ride the smallest available cannondale road frame. I am not sure how tall someone has to be to have a >31 inch inseam. But, I would guess it is somewhere between 5'8" and 6'. There is no way that cannondale does not make a bike to fit people who are at and smaller than about 5'8".
> 
> In other words, your rule means a person has to be taller than about 5'10" to ride a 49 cm road frame. That hypothesis is incorrect.


Crit Boy,

I really don't see how this can be. I am 5' 10", have a 32" clothing inseam, 31" true inseam without shoes on. I take a size 56 frame Cannondale frame and there is plenty of room (more than 2") between the top tube and my junk even on a straight top tube bike, even more so on a relaxed top tube bike.

Unless you are using the seat tube measurement rather than top tube measurement for frame size (Cannondale uses top tube measurement), this throws your measurements right out the window. Something doesn't add up with your calculations.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

Alfonsina said:


> LOL, then you check strava you find out they have already ridden 65 miles and done 3000k of climbing, but sure, you chicked THEM LOL.


New to cycling, wrong sized bike, no clipless pedals, and on a 75 mile ride dropping guys in kits. Riiiiiiiight.


----------



## David Loving (Jun 13, 2008)

Just my 2-cents, but I like a bike frame as small as possible. I'm 5'5" and the best fitting bike I have is a 50cm GIOS Compact Pro with a 90 stem and 170 cranks. I bought a XS Pedal Force crayon that also is set up great for the way I ride, again 90 stem and 170 cranks.


----------



## LVbob (Mar 24, 2014)

spade2you said:


> New to cycling, wrong sized bike, no clipless pedals, and on a 75 mile ride dropping guys in kits. Riiiiiiiight.


In fairness, I think she did say that she rides MTB and has a hybrid or something. I think she just doesn't know how a road bike should feel (if she plans to truly use it as it is intended). Some of the claims are certainly questionable but not beyond belief. I do think she likes attention.


----------



## bikechickieny (Jul 1, 2014)

Some of you have been helpful in this forum. I wanted to see what size bikes/heights etc. you ride. Did not expect to be condemned.

Some of you have been whiney boys that have obviously never seen a girl on a bike before and I bet don't ride when its below 30. 

So before you go dish out 3x for wheels, and hundreds on your bike costumes with slogans, just remember its not the bike that makes the rider its the rider that makes the bike!

As for attention seeker. Hmm... That reminds me, check out clips of my public access tv show here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN8EvuT9Iec
Feel free to leave your nice comments of course at my site Ms. Divine's Short Comedy One-lady Film Sketches and Surrealistic Performance Art


----------



## SundayNiagara (Apr 17, 2014)

Wow, we sure have a lot of bike Mavens around here. If she is comfortable on her bike, I say, leave her alone.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

The plot thickens.


----------



## SundayNiagara (Apr 17, 2014)

bikechickieny said:


> Some of you have been helpful in this forum. I wanted to see what size bikes/heights etc. you ride. Did not expect to be condemned.
> 
> Some of you have been whiney boys that have obviously never seen a girl on a bike before and I bet don't ride when its below 30.
> 
> ...


+1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

bikechickieny said:


> As for attention seeker. Hmm... That reminds me, check out clips of my public access tv show here:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN8EvuT9Iec
> Feel free to leave your nice comments of course at my site Ms. Divine's Short Comedy One-lady Film Sketches and Surrealistic Performance Art


That answers some questions.

Good luck to you.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

bikechickieny said:


> Just wondering how many people here are about 5ft 6inches riding a size 54cm bike.
> I currently have a size 54cm caad 10 5 cannondale bike, with an 80mm stem angled up.
> I tried the 52 cm and felt it was too much of a drop.


Glancing through this thread, I'm not in the mood to read whatever conflict happened with the rest, so I'll just answer this. 

If it is a CAAD 10 Feminine, then a 54 would probably fit. Without looking at the geometry chart, those typically have a TT around 52.5ish, and a higher head tube than the equivalent mens. (unless you meant CAAD 105 components?). I have looked at all of these geometry charts quite thoroughly, but don't have them memorized.

Since you mention too much of a drop, I suspect you needed the CAAD8, which has less aggressive geometry and a higher head tube than whatever equivalent CAAD10. 

If it is a CAAD10 mens, then it is too big, and you went with a too large size because the next size up would have a higher head tube, which would be a false way of shortening the cockpit. In that case, you probably needed something like a size 50 mens with a horizontal TT of about 52.5 (again, not looking it up). That would have an aggressive HT, but fit you. It's possible the bike is both too large and too aggressive, in that case, a CAAD8 mens in around size 50, with a higher head tube, etc, would work. 
(Or a women's size 54is CAAD8, high head tube).

The 80 mm stem is another indication that the bike is too big, as is the short, steep stem. That will affect handling, making it more squirly. You are trying to create a higher head tube with that. An angled stem also shortens the cockpit. 

I'm 5'7'' with longer legs, shorter torso, and long arms (so long reach), and the mens 51 CAADX fits me. It has an effective TT of 53.5. The head tube is high, like the CAAD8's, so has a shorter reach, (arms). I'd be better off with a shorter Head Tube, but I wanted a cyclocross, and I love that bike. My regular road bike (not Cannondale) has a 53.5 TT with a longer reach, which my arms like, and shorter head tube (more aggressive). But both bikes work.

I should note that I typically can ride a larger bike than expected because I have short femurs, and ride a zero offset seat post. This puts me forward by several centimeters.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

You have until September to return it? Weird. But good.

Okay. Just looked it up.

The men's CAAD 10 size 54 has an effective tt of 54.5. It would be best to have a stem around 100 cm for handling. (well, 100 to 110). This means a tt of 52.5 would give you the equivalent of your 54.5 plus 80 mm stem. 

But, the head tube (for the 50 with 52.5 TT) is only 11.5 cm's. That is very short. For comparison, my aggressive (so short head tube) racing bike has a 53.5 TT, with a 13 cm HT. Basically, the larger the bike, the proportionately higher the head tube. CAAD 10's are full out racing bikes. Not really designed for beginners. 

A CAAD 8 men's size 54 has a TT of 54.5, and a head tube of 15.5. So much less of a drop. But, far too big for you.

A men's CAAD8 size 51 has a TT of 53; a head tube of 14. That is getting closer. Depends on several factors, like leg length, proportion of femur length to tibia length, etc. Maybe the next size down, the 48, would work. You could be between these sizes, though, which brings us to the women's models. 

A women's CAAD 10, size 51, TT 52.3, and HT of 13.4 may be good, and is certainly a typical size for a 5'6" female. 

Without other information, I would say the men's CAAD 8 size 51 or Women's CAAD 10 size 51 are good possibilities. The next size up for the women's CAAD 10 is probably too big. If you have short arms, I'd say the next size down for either. 

If you need a seat post with a lot of offset to get your knees properly over the pedals, then you will need a shorter top tube than if you needed a zero offset seat post. A seat post with a lot of offset brings your position to the rear, lengthening the cockpit. But, offset or lack is only to correct position over pedals. Not to change cockpit length. 
If your femurs are long in proportion to your overall leg length, the size 51 in either style would be too large. 

Since the men's has a higher head tube, my guess is you would be the most comfortable on a men's CAAD8 size 51.

Are your legs long in proportion, shorter, or about even to your torso length? How about your arms? Long or short?

Did you have a fitting? Did they measure your arm and inseam length?

I can't imaging you had a fitting if you are on a too large bike.

Confusing.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

SundayNiagara said:


> Wow, we sure have a lot of bike Mavens around here. If she is comfortable on her bike, I say, leave her alone.


You certainly are the head of the OP's fan club. I'm pretty sure you couldn't get further up...well, we won't go there. 
She asked for opinions, she got them. From lots of people. She didn't like what she heard, so that became an issue. You, who obviously don't know squat about fitting but love defending the OP's honor and virtue have continuously come to her rescue but haven't offered any actual advice other than 'if it feels good, do it'. 
Now that I've wasted 2-3mins of my life clicking on those links to her sites, it's pretty obvious she's just another attention starved wannabe 'performer'. It would be pretty entertaining to have her come into the shop, I won't lie about that.


----------



## SundayNiagara (Apr 17, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> You certainly are the head of the OP's fan club. I'm pretty sure you couldn't get further up...well, we won't go there.
> She asked for opinions, she got them. From lots of people. She didn't like what she heard, so that became an issue. You, who obviously don't know squat about fitting but love defending the OP's honor and virtue have continuously come to her rescue but haven't offered any actual advice other than 'if it feels good, do it'.
> Now that I've wasted 2-3mins of my life clicking on those links to her sites, it's pretty obvious she's just another attention starved wannabe 'performer'. It would be pretty entertaining to have her come into the shop, I won't lie about that.


You guys have gone beyond giving her advice to what looks like, beating her up.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

SundayNiagara said:


> You guys have gone beyond giving her advice to what looks like, beating her up.


If that's the way you see any of us advising her repeatedly that the bike is not the right one for her needs, you can call it whatever you want. Those of us w/ a firmer grasp of reality will see it for what it is.


----------



## SundayNiagara (Apr 17, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> If that's the way you see any of us advising her repeatedly that the bike is not the right one for her needs, you can call it whatever you want. Those of us w/ a firmer grasp of reality will see it for what it is.


It's counter-productive.


----------



## LVbob (Mar 24, 2014)

aureliajulia said:


> You have until September to return it? Weird. But good.
> 
> Okay. Just looked it up.
> 
> ...


Or she could just consider a Synapse in the right size.


----------



## LVbob (Mar 24, 2014)

cxwrench said:


> You certainly are the head of the OP's fan club. I'm pretty sure you couldn't get further up...well, we won't go there.


The post to which you responded was certainly much more pleasant then the NSFW PM I got from him.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

LVbob said:


> Or she could just consider a Synapse in the right size.


Think she said she didn't like the Synapse.

The CAADS are awesome bikes. I had a Synapse (carbon) a few years back. Too much flex for me.

OP, your proportions sound similar to mine, I think you would need something overall about a size smaller than me (assuming overall bike size difference is 1 cm taking HT, HT angle, Eff TT, stack and reach into consideration). That means a TT of about 52.5, but with a higher HT and stack, and a shorter reach.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Unfortunately, it's impossible to determine from the OP's responses if this thread is a genuine request for help, a Sociology class project, or a Performance Art piece.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

tvad said:


> Unfortunately, it's impossible to determine from the OP's responses if this thread is a genuine request for help, a Sociology class project, or a Performance Art piece.


^ Nailed it ^


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

LVbob said:


> The post to which you responded was certainly much more pleasant then the NSFW PM I got from him.


Maybe he meant it for me Apparently giving advice that isn't what the OP and her 1 man fan club want to hear is 'counter productive', so I'll just bow out at this point.


----------



## Rob-c (Jul 4, 2014)

Well for what it's worth I'm around 5'6"ish and I have a Giant OCR I rode for years and is " m " which I t think is around 54? And I just got fitted for and bought a Cannondale CAAD 54 which through the fit got a shorter stem with a slight rise, only done about 200km on it so far but handles well and fit us just right


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

aureliajulia said:


> I had a Synapse (carbon) a few years back. Too much flex for me.


That was the Synapse of a few years back. I just got a 2014 Synapse Carbon 5 105 and it is NOT flexy! Really nice and stiff or at least much stiffer than my older Trek OCLV frame. Very impressive response!


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

tvad said:


> Unfortunately, it's impossible to determine from the OP's responses if this thread is a genuine request for help, a Sociology class project, or a Performance Art piece.


In all fairness, this seems to happen in many posts I have seen. The OP asks for opinions or advice. People reply, often with many conflicting viewpoints. The OP comes back with "But I don't think so, that doesn't seem right" which in fairness is human nature as long as the OP has some independent thought and isn't a sheep. People replying get angry that the OP didn't take the helpful or not so helpful advice so they take to flaming the OP. Someone comes to the OP's defense. A virtual testosterone fest takes place. Then all the people replying argue that their advice is better than the others even though the OP isn't convinced that any of them are right. They take to flaming each other as well as the OP.

Sure beats bar fights.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Lombard said:


> In all fairness, this seems to happen in many posts I have seen. The OP asks for opinions or advice. People reply, often with many conflicting viewpoints. The OP comes back with "But I don't think so, that doesn't seem right" which in fairness is human nature as long as the OP has some independent thought and isn't a sheep.


In this thread, excellent advice has been provided by a cyclist with decades of experience, and the advice has been supported by a few others with strong experience as well.

If you read the thread carefully, you will see it has not been scattershot with a hodgepodge of conflicting advice, although there have been differing opinions expressed.

Also, the OP has posted a link to her website and performance pieces, thus raising the question of credulity. Is the post's subject genuine, or a device to provoke?


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

Lombard said:


> That was the Synapse of a few years back. I just got a 2014 Synapse Carbon 5 105 and it is NOT flexy! Really nice and stiff or at least much stiffer than my older Trek OCLV frame. Very impressive response!


It was a 2008, and come to think of it, they did redesign extensively even in 2009.

That said, it was the women's model, and may have had more flex than the men's. One reason I prefer men's bikes. It's assumed that women need more flex because they aren't as strong. Really not an issue with me, though I'm not a strong or fast as experienced male cyclists, I'm still pretty strong. My geometry allows me to ride either, depending. Though women's bikes are often more relaxed than I want. Even the bikes like the CAAD 10.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

aureliajulia said:


> It was a 2008, and come to think of it, they did redesign extensively even in 2009.
> 
> That said, it was the women's model, and may have had more flex than the men's. One reason I prefer men's bikes. It's assumed that women need more flex because they aren't as strong. Really not an issue with me, though I'm not a strong or fast as experienced male cyclists, I'm still pretty strong. My geometry allows me to ride either, depending. Though women's bikes are often more relaxed than I want. Even the bikes like the CAAD 10.


Just curious, but why would someone less strong need more flex in their frame?

It is true in the carbon frames of yesteryear, that a stiffer frame meant a trade-off in road compliance. However, the newest carbon frames with shaping of tubes and stays give you the best of both worlds - good lateral and bottom bracket stiffness with vertical compliance.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

Lombard said:


> Just curious, but why would someone less strong need more flex in their frame?
> 
> It is true in the carbon frames of yesteryear, that a stiffer frame meant a trade-off in road compliance. However, the newest carbon frames with shaping of tubes and stays give you the best of both worlds - good lateral and bottom bracket stiffness with vertical compliance.


You're probably right. But the very small women's bikes tend to be inherently more stiff because that's what happens with smaller lengths of tubing. It appears the bikes have more flex across the line in all sizes than the mens. (Big generalization here, of course). The women's bikes I test ride, even now, don't feel as strong through the bottom bracket as comparable mens. I'm 5'7", a mesomorph, and don't need the flex. The women's bikes in the same model as mens just don't feel sturdy to me.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

bikechickieny said:


> I understand that the geometry of all frames are different etc. I just went by how I felt when I test rode it at the bike shop and liked how the caad10 5 felt. When I rode 52, I felt a bit cramped in the cockpit.
> I do have a short torso than mens, but long arms and legs.
> 
> I will check to see if standover height is over 2 inches.


Y'know, reading this thread, I'm thinking you're comfortable on that big frame because you say you have long arms. Those would make up for a shorter upper body, wouldn't it? About half the women who buy road bikes fit the standard frames where the top tubes are longer. It dawned on me this could be because women who have long legs also have long arms. :yesnod:


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

bradkay said:


> It seems that most people on this thread are ignoring the OP's listing of her inseam length: 32-33" with long arms. From this the 54cm frame might just be the right fit - those are long legs for a 5'6" woman (and extremely long legs for a 5'6" man). As mentioned earlier, without seeing her on the bike it is impossible for us to discern whether the bike fits or is too big - but to see all the condemnation of the shop and OP that I see here is rather disturbing.


You hit the nail squarely on the head. I'm thinking the same thing. OP feels comfortable on the 54, cramped on the 52. Case should be closed. She fits the 54 better than the 52.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

Fredrico said:


> You hit the nail squarely on the head. I'm thinking the same thing. OP feels comfortable on the 54, cramped on the 52. Case should be closed. She fits the 54 better than the 52.


Except, then why post?

The CAAD 10 is too aggressive for her. That's why she went up a size.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

She felt the bike that was most comfortable was the bike closest to her MB or hybrid. She has made a CAAD 10 into a hybrid geometry. If she can get that to work long term, more power to her. Of course, the odds of that are slim... But if she contorts the CAAD 10 enough to feel like her MB then so be it. Why get a road bike though? Why would you want to do that? Just stick to the other bikes? Sitting bolt upright on a racing spec bike is kind of weird. Setting it up with the seat lower than the handlebars? Why? I read the whole thread and I'm not sure the question, "did you actually get a real fitting" was answered?


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Fredrico said:


> You hit the nail squarely on the head. I'm thinking the same thing. OP feels comfortable on the 54, cramped on the 52. Case should be closed. She fits the 54 better than the 52.


You don't know much about this fitting thing either. She's riding the bike w/ an 80mm stem...
This means that she does not have her weight evenly distributed on the bike. Her saddle height is too low. Her bars are pretty high, which takes weight off the front end of the bike. The 54 has a top tube that is too long which forces her to use the short stem. 

What she most likely needs is a frame w/ a shorter top tube, a taller head tube to get the bars at the height she needs and a longer stem to have proper weight distribution. It's definitely not just about how the rider feels. You can get the same contact points on lots of different frames, that doesn't mean that they're all 'right' in the fit. I could ride a frame 2 sizes too big no prob. I'd be on the verge of either a wheelie or a front end slide most of the time, but I could ride it. Doesn't make it right.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

aureliajulia said:


> Except, then why post?
> 
> The CAAD 10 is too aggressive for her. That's why she went up a size.


The pix shows she's a bit stretched out, but the bars are about the same height as the saddle, so she's able to make her back flat (good) and have a very slight bend in the elbows (good for shock absorption). She also looks comfortable in the pictures, not surprising if she can do a 75 mile ride without problems. She's used to sitting upright seen in the pix of her on the hybrid and mountain bike.

"The Eddy fit" came to mind viewing the pix. Eddy looked just like that on his bike, well, close.  Adding to discussion on weight distribution between the wheels, OP's probably ok, upper body well over the crank, enabling the use of arms steadying the bike while climbing and avoiding things like dreaded front wheel wobble (too much body mass over front wheel). Also making the bike scribe around corners with weight on both tires, not all in the back.

If OP raises the saddle as a few suggest, that would place the bars an inch maybe below saddle height, which would rotate a little more body mass forward. That will put more weight on the hands and shoulders, which would translate to the sensation of being too stretched out, like falling forward. 

Racers can ride all day with backs almost horizontal, but they're supporting very little weight on the hands. They're using the back and core muscles. The shoulders, neck, and back are very strong muscles. Not surprising as humans evolved from mammals who walk on all fours. If cramped up, as you felt on the smaller frame, it becomes awkward to hold position. The back and shoulders can't assume the angles it needs to work efficiently with the pedaling action and control of the bike.

Yes, one size smaller bike with a longer stem would "fit better." Eventually, OP, you'll be comfortable with slight handlebar drop. It takes weight off the butt, and if you can keep the back flat and elbows "supple", you'll be as comfortable as now, probably more so. Do you get shoulder pain being stretched out like that? A smaller frame would solve that problem.

If I may contribute to stem lengths, an old school thought was choosing a stem the right length to place the tops of the bars right over the front wheel axle. In retrospect, this was probably "don't place the tops of the bars in front of the front wheel axle, as this would put weight off the front and contribute to instability. I have a 135 mm stem on a one size too small bike I've ridden for 30 years to get the fit the same as the bike I'm comfortable on, and have to slide back on the saddle when descending to prevent wheel wobble. The stem provides a long steering lever, though, so is smooth. But you don't steer around corners, so much as lean the bike into the turn, so the pleasures of long stems are subtle.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Fredrico said:


> "The Eddy fit" came to mind viewing the pix. Eddy looked just like that on his bike, well, close.  Adding to discussion on weight distribution between the wheels, OP's probably ok, upper body well over the crank, enabling the use of arms steadying the bike while climbing and avoiding things like dreaded front wheel wobble (*too much body mass over front wheel*). Also making the bike scribe around corners with weight on both tires, not all in the back.


Confusion everywhere. _Less_ weight on the front end makes a bike more prone to wobble, not even weight distribution. Among many other possible causes.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

cxwrench said:


> You don't know much about this fitting thing either. She's riding the bike w/ an 80mm stem...
> This means that she does not have her weight evenly distributed on the bike. Her saddle height is too low. Her bars are pretty high, which takes weight off the front end of the bike. The 54 has a top tube that is too long which forces her to use the short stem.
> 
> What she most likely needs is a frame w/ a shorter top tube, a taller head tube to get the bars at the height she needs and a longer stem to have proper weight distribution. It's definitely not just about how the rider feels. You can get the same contact points on lots of different frames, that doesn't mean that they're all 'right' in the fit. I could ride a frame 2 sizes too big no prob. I'd be on the verge of either a wheelie or a front end slide most of the time, but I could ride it. Doesn't make it right.


Well said. :thumbsup: 

You'll get only agreement from me that one size smaller frame with longer stem, and ok, even taller head tube, would be a better fit. Placing the bars at saddle height, however, has always hurt my butt, eventually. I also like to be able to transfer weight to the front occasionally, to control the bike, and found it awkward with the bars so high. Hinault recommended 1-2 " handlebar drop, which has always given me great fore aft balance. Hinault's philosophy is basically "the Eddy fit." After I strengthened the neck and back muscles by supporting upper body weight, I went through two stem extensions, feeling more comfortable stretched out a bit. This was when builders like DeRosa, picked up by LeMond, continued by Pegoretti, were adding a centimeter to the top tubes, spreading the rider's weight out a bit fore-aft in the interest of comfort, a flat back, and control over both wheels.

Yes, there are ideal contact points, bars, hoods, drops, reach, saddle height and setback, and then as you say, weight distribution over the machine so it handles predictably, "disappears beneath the rider" working in perfect harmony. And you're also right noting riders can ride several sizes duplicating the same ideal contact points.

For a more precise assessment of OP's fit, we need to know more about the little aches and pains she's coming home with after a long ride. That'll tell the tale. OP says she's comfortable on the bike and she looks comfortable. She found "the Eddy Fit" came up with 54 cm. frame, due to her 33 inch inseam no doubt, but also long arms. So maybe putting that 10 cm stem back on and lowering the bars an inch or two, would be all it takes.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

PBL450 said:


> She felt the bike that was most comfortable was the bike closest to her MB or hybrid. She has made a CAAD 10 into a hybrid geometry. If she can get that to work long term, more power to her. Of course, the odds of that are slim... But if she contorts the CAAD 10 enough to feel like her MB then so be it. Why get a road bike though? Why would you want to do that? Just stick to the other bikes? Sitting bolt upright on a racing spec bike is kind of weird. Setting it up with the seat lower than the handlebars? Why? I read the whole thread and I'm not sure the question, "did you actually get a real fitting" was answered?


You're showing the racer's opinion. Don't forget, touring bikes with drop handlebars are considerably more upright than racing bikes. :yesnod: Not to mention the latest marketing gimmick: "Grand Fondo" bikes. The ones with tall head tubes and shorter top tubes providing the same positioning as a hybrid or MTB, with the plus of drop handlebars, so you can move around in the cockpit and stay "supple" on long rides.

OP is not "bolt upright," either. She's quite stretched out, positioning much touted by the likes of Bernard Hinault and many others since.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

cxwrench said:


> Confusion everywhere. _Less_ weight on the front end makes a bike more prone to wobble, not even weight distribution. Among many other possible causes.


Yeah, confusion. 

That's what I'm talking about, weight distribution. Too much over the front wheel induces wobble. :idea: That is less likely to happen on a big frame, more likely to happen on a smaller frame, with the same rider. Take it from me. I have both. 

Too little weight on the front wheel lightens up the front end and could cause wobble from any number of reasons, wheels not in the same track, out of true, headset too tight, but not a bad as heavily loading it up, IME. Wobble would be reduced by the slacker head tube angles, and putting the front wheel further out in front, like on beach bikes. I bet the OP's bike has 73 or 72 degree head tube angle, very stable with hands off the handlebars. :yesnod:


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Fredrico said:


> Yeah, confusion.
> 
> That's what I'm talking about, weight distribution. Too much over the front wheel induces wobble. :idea: That is less likely to happen on a big frame, more likely to happen on a smaller frame, with the same rider. Take it from me. I have both.
> 
> Too little weight on the front wheel lightens up the front end and could cause wobble from any number of reasons, wheels not in the same track, out of true, headset too tight, but not a bad as heavily loading it up, IME. Wobble would be reduced by the slacker head tube angles, and putting the front wheel further out in front, like on beach bikes. I bet the OP's bike has 72 or 71 degree head tube angle, very stable with hands off the handlebars. :yesnod:


73* w/ 56mm of trail. Doesn't get much more run of the mill than that. I'm not talking about 'heavily loading' the front, I'm talking about proper weight distribution. 55/45, 60/40...'normal'.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> If OP raises the saddle as a few suggest, that would place the bars an inch maybe below saddle height, which would rotate a little more body mass forward. That will put more weight on the hands and shoulders, which would translate to the sensation of being too stretched out, like falling forward.


I'm not a bike fitter, but even I know very well that changing the saddle height or fore/aft position is NEVER a good way to compensate for handlebar reach! Saddle adjustments should be done solely in order to achieve correct pedal position - 20-30% knee bend at the most extended position and vertical line of knee cap over cleat position in the 3 o'clock pedal position. Otherwise, you could wreck your knees down the road.


----------



## Lombard (May 8, 2014)

Fredrico said:


> For a more precise assessment of OP's fit, we need to know more about the little aches and pains she's coming home with after a long ride. That'll tell the tale. OP says she's comfortable on the bike and she looks comfortable. She found "the Eddy Fit" came up with 54 cm. frame, due to her 33 inch inseam no doubt, but also long arms. So maybe putting that 10 cm stem back on and lowering the bars an inch or two, would be all it takes.


From her pics, she looks young and flexible and probably won't get aches and pains from a slightly off fit like middle aged folks like me. But she may find out about those sooner or later. Only time will tell.


----------

