# Giro riders and small bikes



## Oversane (Mar 31, 2007)

Is it just me or are the Giro riders, and pro's, I guess, on the smallest frames they can manage to ride? I'm looking at still shots from various stages and it just seems to me that the bikes are soo small under the riders. What's with?

Just another noob question.


----------



## tcruse11 (Jun 9, 2006)

smaller frame = lighter weight


----------



## FondriestFan (May 19, 2005)

That point might actually be valid if people weren't adding weight to bring their bikes to the weight limit.


----------



## jpap (Jun 21, 2006)

tcruse11 said:


> smaller frame = lighter weight



smaller frame = stiffer frame


----------



## I am The Edge (Jul 27, 2004)

FondriestFan said:


> That point might actually be valid if people weren't adding weight to bring their bikes to the weight limit.



lol etc.


----------



## Oversane (Mar 31, 2007)

If I remember this correctly, the weight limitation is 7kg or about 14.7lbs. So, if a 54cm frame comes in below that weight, then you would have to add weight to bring that frame up to specs. And let's say, for the sake of discussion, that the other frames would be okay weight-wise. But if you were a big guy and rode a 58cm or bigger but you could fit on a 56cm or smaller, would it be of any benefit to drop to the smaller frame and/or are they even doing it? How much weight would you save?

It just seems to me that these pro's look so huge on their bikes but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are on the smallest of possible frames. They could, in reality, just look huge on their frames because they are huge and by comparison their frames are small.


----------



## jukebox (Sep 6, 2005)

Small bike has a smaller head tube which gives your more drop. Pair that with a 140mm stem and you have enough reach.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*you'be obviously never seen a pro cyclist*



Oversane said:


> It just seems to me that these pro's look so huge on their bikes but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are on the smallest of possible frames. They could, in reality, just look huge on their frames because they are huge and by comparison their frames are small.


they are all tiny. even the 'big ones' (like Hushovd)
are average by laymans standards


----------



## magnolialover (Jun 2, 2004)

*As someone else said...*

As someone else said, most pro riders are small. Very tiny men out there, and hence, they ride very small bikes.

For instance, look at how they talk about "big" George Hincapie. Sure, he's tall, but he weighs in at like 170 pounds soaking wet, which for someone who is what? 6 foot 3 or 4 ain't too much weight at all. 

And as some other posters said, most race bikes from major bike manufacturers now make it under the weight limit very easily, in say, a 56cm frame. 

They ride small frames, mostly because they are small.


----------



## terzo rene (Mar 23, 2002)

With the prevalence of non-custom monocoque frames now I think the head tube length has become much more of a factor. If you want a low position in the drops on most frames now it's about impossible without getting a very small size. You also hear about more than a few guys getting custom 14-15cm stems now too which was never done before.


----------



## Clevor (Sep 8, 2005)

I've heard it said that the smaller frames (triangles) are stiffer. But I think another reason is that spinning is such a fad these days (due to LA), a smaller frame facilitates this (rather than shorten crank length, drop the saddle height, etc.). That being said, I dunno, looks to me like these guys run a big gear and crank it for as long as they can - that's how you win. Let the EPO do it's thing.

The smaller frames may also allow a more aerodynamic profile: it's known the pros like a real big saddle to bar drop. The real short pros on small frames have to use really negative rise stems and no spacers.

While being sized for a conventional frame at a respectable Pinarello LBS, I was between sizes on the frame. The guy at the store told me it's OK to go with the bigger frame for recreational riding (I barely had standover height). He recommended the smaller size for racing.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

> _Is it just me or are the Giro riders, and pro's, I guess, on the smallest frames they can manage to ride? I'm looking at still shots from various stages and it just seems to me that the bikes are soo small under the riders._


Some of this is an illusion. Many close-up shots are taken with a wide-angle lens, which miniaturizes objects not in close proximity to it. In relation to a photographer standing at the edge of the road, the closest thing to the lens is the rider's body. The bike is far below him, and tiny the way a wide-angle lens sees it.


----------



## soulsurfer104 (Jun 30, 2003)

*my two cents.*

while it's valid that most pro's are small guys, a 54 or 52 frame wouldn't LOOK small underneath one of them....a small frame under a small guy would look normal. seems like we're missing that concept.

but anyway....my ex-coach once told me that pro's will often ride frames just slightly larger than is "normal" for them in order to give them room to stretch out and thus breathe more easily. for example, a guy who is a perfect fit for a 56 might instead ride a 58. anybody heard of that?


----------



## rogger (Aug 19, 2005)

Judge for yourself: 

http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/probikes/


----------



## Oversane (Mar 31, 2007)

rogger, that's a great link.

So how small is Bettini? Must be tini. (Just couldn't resist that) 

But really how small is he to ride a 49cm frame?


----------



## rogger (Aug 19, 2005)

Oversane said:


> rogger, that's a great link.
> 
> So how small is Bettini? Must be tini. (Just couldn't resist that)
> 
> But really how small is he to ride a 49cm frame?


He's 1m68cm, pretty small for a guy. 

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/cy/profiles/274.html


----------



## Clevor (Sep 8, 2005)

rogger said:


> Judge for yourself:
> 
> http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2007/probikes/


Funny how there are three bikes in that article (two ATB bikes and one road bike) that utilize triangulated tubing on the frame - just like the discontinued Douglas Fusion and Precision Ti frames of yore :idea:. Yeah, I think if kinda stiffens frames a bit . . . The Ti tubing on Geoff Kabush's $$$ Litespeed frame looks exactly like that on my $866 Douglas Ti I bought on closeout two years ago. McEwen's frame uses triangulated tubing on the down tube.


----------



## gormleyflyer2002 (Sep 12, 2005)

*yikes*

all of these bikes seem to missing something, a head tube, it's a like a midget race up da mountain.........barely enough room for top and down tubes to join. I think it's more that the riders are more jockey sized than say an NFL build.

I have room to spare, 25cm head tube on my bike.


----------

