# Short guy needs sizing HELP!



## FiveFooterDude (May 7, 2011)

Newbie dude here, and I'm short.... like really short.
But I wanna buy a bike on which to get outa shape (outa this 'round' shape and into something more aerodynamic).....
Pleeeease, help me to understand frame sizing that I might come close to finding something that fits me correctly. A little more about my 'size', and what I've learned/seen so far:

I just retired, 57 years old, 245 pounds of fat/large bellied muscles/dense bone structure/large joints. At 5' 1", you might say that I'm built like a Welsh coal miner crossed with a Hobbit. I have a 25" inseam as measured by a custom bike builder guy.

I think I've concluded that if I bought new, last year's model offered by REI in the guise of a touring Road Bike might be my best choice (albeit at $900, I question "best value"). 
* I understand that a good steel frame will isolate me from road vibration and afford me a more comfortable ride. 
* Touring wheels/spokes might be better suited for my mega 245 pounds.
* The less aggresive seating position might be better for my aging/stiff body

I've looked at "Hybrids", but drop-down bars offer the same hand position AND the option of a more aggressive riding position if I grow into this new hobby. 

Disc brakes/V-brakes, different shifting methods, Butterfly bars, drop-downs, steel -vs- aluminum, and I fully expect that the seat will be uncomfortable-as-hail until my butt adjusts to the abuse......

I hope to be visiting a "like new" 43cm Trek 1000 (asking price, $450) this morning, but I've discovered during my three weeks of shopping that frame sizes can vary from one brand to another..... and NOTHING seems to fit me perfectly (save for a custom made bike for $1,700).

If I buy used, should my 5' 1"ness, 25" inseam, and T-Rex arms be looking at Road Bikes in frame sizes of:
-- "XS" or "Small"?
---- 47cm or 48cm?
------ What is this "43cm" that creeps up from time to time?
-------- Should I avoid small bikes made for small women given as how I have VERY broad shoulders?

Okay....... long first post I know but,
 I really need some good help from somebody who KNOWS their stuff.


----------



## kbwh (May 28, 2010)

You obviously need a small (and sturdy) enough frame and wheels. 
There are lots of 5'1" women riding, so getting a small enough frame should not be a problem.
Nothing will fit perfectly out of the box. You could buy a "woman's bike" and swap the handlebars for something broad enough, but women's bikes are normally kitted out for their normally longer legs/shorter arms than the typical man.
That custom bike: What was the "horizontal top tube lenght"? That's the magic number.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Keeping things simple, and given your proportions (namely, 25" cycling inseam) I think your focus should be on standover of any bikes you're considering. It's not normally THE determining factor in bike fit, but because of your somewhat unique fit issues, it does take a more prominent role.

As but one example, the Felt ZW95 in a petite (you can call it a 43cm if you'd prefer) has a standover of 675mm's. Your 25" inseam converts to 635, but with cycling shoes you'd probably be able to straddle the bike. Of course, this being an internet discussion, it's only intended to give you a ballpark idea of fit, so you'll still need to visit some reputable LBS's and see what they can do to accommodate you.

Don't fret about looking at so called women's bikes. They're really designed for riders with longer legs/ shorter torsos, but in your case you might have to go this route (sizing down) to meet standover requirements. From there, the fitter will need to position the bars closer and possibly higher using stem length/ angle adjustments. And wider bars are an easy swap.

HTH...


----------



## FiveFooterDude (May 7, 2011)

Thank you.

How might I find and/or determine a "reputable LBS"? I will drive anywhere in the Central California region (I live in Stockton, 55 miles south of Sacramento).

The custom bike & frame builder (Bike Cafe' in Lodi, CA), has only looked at the specs of a couple different bikes I brought him and simply said.... "...this one would be better for you, but we would still hafta put a 7mm stem on...", etc. He's a busy guy with one of those $10,000 (CRUZ?) machines. If I'm not going to have a bike made, I had better not take any of his time, unless I pay him $85.00 to get fitted via that fancy machine....

If all that I want is a correct fitting bike on which to ride and get my heart rate up for a couple hours every third day. How would you steer me in regard to choice of bike, i.e. how much should I spend, aluminum -vs- steel frame, Hybrid or drop bars, entry level components or mid-grade?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

FiveFooterDude said:


> Thank you.
> 
> How might I find and/or determine a "reputable LBS"? I will drive anywhere in the Central California region (I live in Stockton, 55 miles south of Sacramento).
> 
> ...


Reputable LBS's aren't as difficult to pick out as many think. They're the folks that take the time to discuss your cycling experiences (if any), intended uses/ goals, fitness/ flexibility, price range and they'll offer input on some types/ brands and models that might suite your needs. They'll size/ fit you to some bikes of interest and send you off on test rides - encouraging you to head out on the roads to get a feel for the fit, ride and handling of the bikes. 

Conversely, the folks that barely take any time with you, then pull a bike off the rack for you to straddle, then (maybe) let you test ride only adjusting the saddle height, are what I'd categorize as less reputable shops. Don't worry, as you visit shops, you'll get a sense of who's applying some effort/ shows a level of concern to get you on the right bike and those who aren't.

For the more casual rider, hybrids have some postiive attributes. They're generally easier to fit, are cheaper, have a more upright riding position and handle a little slower than race bikes, but you were right in your initial post that they can be somewhat limiting to cyclists who progress to more serious (longer) rides. 

I would still recommend you consider them in your visits to LBS's, but if you really are looking to ride a couple of hours 2-3 days a week, a drop bar bike might be better suited to your needs. Tough call, so I say try both, then decide. Which way you ultimately decide to go will dictate (and answer) your price range question.

EDIT: Assuming new, purchased from a LBS, very generally speaking, I'd say you could get a decent hybrid somewhere in the $500 range - a drop bar bike in the $750-$800 range.


----------



## FiveFooterDude (May 7, 2011)

Thanks!

I've agreed to meet with a gentleman Sunday afternoon who's selling his '07 Trek 1000 wsd with 650c wheels. He says that it has virtually no miles and has been sitting in a garage, it's in "LIKE-NEW condition"....

I punched Trek 1000 into a search engine and it seems to be a pretty decent bike...... I don't know if it's too serious a machine for me, or if it might be the perfect bike to grow in to...... 

It's a small bike, and I think it's a 43cm frame because Trek didn't seem to offer this in a 47cm..... he's asking $450 OBO, claims that he's a racer, and will be able to tell me if the little bike is correctly sized for me.

What do you guys think?

-= Pat =-


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

FiveFooterDude said:


> Thanks!
> 
> I've agreed to meet with a gentleman Sunday afternoon who's selling his '07 Trek 1000 wsd with 650c wheels. He says that it has virtually no miles and has been sitting in a garage, it's in "LIKE-NEW condition"....
> 
> ...


If the bike has the potential to fit and you think it'll suite your intended uses, it's worth considering, but 'like new' or not, $450 for a 4 year old bike that listed for $680 new is _way_ overpriced. I'm thinking $250 range, but prices vary somewhat by region.

When you get into looking at used bikes, it's best to take someone knowledgeable along. If they're knowledgeable in both mechanics _and_ fit, all the better. 

As far as someone saying they're a racer, so they know fit? Well, IME one doesn't necessarily follow the other. If interested, test ride the bike enough to get a feel for the fit, ride and handling. Go with your gut on fit, because if it's wrong your body will tell you so. 

Assuming the seller has the year right, here are the specs on the bike:
http://bikepedia.com/QuickBike/BikeSpecs.aspx?Year=2007&Brand=Trek&Model=1000+WSD&Type=bike


----------



## FiveFooterDude (May 7, 2011)

Cool..... PJ352,

Frankly, 
the aluminum Trek 1000 is not exactly what I've decided might be best for me, but I haven't had much luck finding used small bikes in my area..... and new ones are almost as rare.

His "asking price"/"OBO" didn't seem that impressive, and the other bike he's selling seems even more _over_priced. I agree, "racer" does not a trained eye make. But the more small bikes I can straddle will help to give me an idea of what I should be on....

I hope to see the 2010 Novara Randonee Touring Bike at my local REI go on sale from it's already reduced price of $899. I hear they have something called a "garage sale" where they clear out stuff cluttering the showroom floor. They have one in my size; with it's Chromolly frame, upper mid-grade components, wheels suitable for touring (or my 240 pounds), luggage rack, set up for fenders, etc. it seems like a suitable bike for me to get back into biking on......

But I'm still looking, and only JUST joined this site with good feedback like that which y'all are offering....


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

FiveFooterDude said:


> Cool..... PJ352,
> 
> Frankly,
> the aluminum Trek 1000 is not exactly what I've decided might be best for me, but I haven't had much luck finding used small bikes in my area..... and new ones are almost as rare.
> ...


Yes, availability of road bikes seems to vary by region and looking for the less common sizes compounds the problem. In my locale there are ~20 MTB's for sale on CL for every road bike.

I also agree with the bolded statements. The more bikes you check out and ride, the better you're apt to know what feels right and is going to work for you. Given what you've offered thus far, the Novara is certainly worth a look and as you progress, if you have other questions/ concerns just update your thread and members will assist.


----------



## BostonG (Apr 13, 2010)

It's not a large market so all those people selling a used bike with a smaller frame probably don't have many interested people either. So if you find one you like, there will most likely be room for negotiation.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

You're not that short. Dont get caught in a mindset that need some bizarre, super out of the ordinary sized bike. Most people over 5 foot, and under 6'6 ish can find off the shelf bikes that fit. 

You wont be very comfortable on a road bike because of your weight, initially. As you get more flexible and in better shape you'll need adjustments and you'll fit/feel better. 

Compacts are great for shorter riders.. they'll fit a larger range of people. 

Dont go off standover. Going off stand-over gives you bad stuff, like recommending 48cm bikes for people nearly 6 foot tall. 

43-46cm's should fit you. or "XS" sized bikes. You just wont find anything that feels fantastic until you drop some weight. Also make sure the bike fits at LEAST 25c tires! A steel touring bike wouldnt be a bad call.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

TomH said:


> You're not that short. Dont get caught in a mindset that need some bizarre, super out of the ordinary sized bike. Most people over 5 foot, and under 6'6 ish can find off the shelf bikes that fit.


Not sure where that statement is coming from, since the OP is looking at off the shelf bikes.



TomH said:


> Dont go off standover. *Going off stand-over gives you bad stuff*, like recommending 48cm bikes for people nearly 6 foot tall.


Stand over doesn't give anyone 'bad stuff'. What it gives them is the ability to straddle a bike for a myriad of reasons we all encounter when road riding. Conversely, the inability to do so will _never_ instill a feeling of full control. 



TomH said:


> *43-46cm's should fit you. or "XS" sized bikes.* You just wont find anything that feels fantastic until you drop some weight. Also make sure the bike fits at LEAST 25c tires! A steel touring bike wouldnt be a bad call.


The bolded statement is too vague to be accurate, and IMO untrue if standover exceeds the OP's 25 inch inseam by more than the combination of it and shoe/ cleat stack height.

As one example, the Felt Z95 in a Petite (43cm's STL measured c-t) has a stand over of 675 which _might_ work for the OP, but the small (45cm's STL measured c-t) with a stand over of 702 almost certainly would not, so... it depends on brand/ model/ size and yes, stand over.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

I know how you feel about standover, but you're in the extreme minority.. like when you recommended a 48cm bike for a guy who was 5'10, based on standover. Your numbers lined up, the geo you stated lined up, but thats just a terrible fit. Thats bad stuff, the guy needed a 56. How can you recommend a fit concept that puts guys at 5'10 on 48cm bikes? 

*Most* 43-46 or XS bikes from most manufacturers would fit him, I can confidently say that. He could even fit some smalls.Thats far better advice than going off standover and ending up with a tiny bicycle. 

My girlfriend is 5'1 and rides a 47cm trek, and she fits it very well, and can stand over it. Theres no possible way the OP cant ride a frame 20mm shorter, thats unrealistic. That 45cm felt is shorter in height and reach.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

TomH said:


> I know how you feel about standover, but you're in the extreme minority.. like when you recommended a 48cm bike for a guy who was 5'10, based on standover. Your numbers lined up, the geo you stated lined up, but thats just a terrible fit. Thats bad stuff, the guy needed a 56. How can you recommend a fit concept that puts guys at 5'10 on 48cm bikes?
> 
> *Most* 43-46 or XS bikes from most manufacturers would fit him, I can confidently say that. He could even fit some smalls.Thats far better advice than going off standover and ending up with a tiny bicycle.
> 
> My girlfriend is 5'1 and rides a 47cm trek, and she fits it very well, and can stand over it. Theres no possible way the OP cant ride a frame 20mm shorter, thats unrealistic. That 45cm felt is shorter in height and reach.


It doesn't matter if I'm in the extreme minority, because as you say "the numbers (I offered) lined up". Numbers don't lie, and when we find a geo that works for us, it's precisely because the numbers accommodated our fit requirements. 

I can't comment on your girlfriend being 5'1" and being able to straddle a 47cm Trek, other than to say she isn't the OP and is likely proportioned longer legs/ shorter torso. Also, you're getting too hung up on frame size alone. The 45cm Felt 'Z' has a standover of 705mm's and the OP's inseam is 635mm's. _That matters_, and the numbers _don't_ 'line up'. 

What you're offering defies logic, because one of the functions of road riding (along with going and turning) is stopping. Unless someone wants to unclip, slow, then (because they can't straddle the bike upright) tilt it to one side, then awkwardly start up at an angle, I see no reason to make such a compromise.

I'm not suggesting that the OP or anyone else in a similar position compromise all other important aspects of fit to attain adaquate stand over. Rather, I'm suggesting that along with reach (ETT) considerations, they also consider standover. 

As far as the example of my recommending a 48cm to someone 5'10", I don't recall. If I did, it was based on their proportions and the frame size I suggested was the best compromise (that's basically what fit is all about anyway). I do recall someone around that height with a short inseam and (I think) I recommended something in the neightborhood of a 52cm, which running a longer stem would have worked (again, a compromise because he couldn't afford custom). A moot point, because It turned out that he measured his inseam incorrectly.

Bottom line is that there are three main aspects to fit: Reach, drop and stand over, usually in that order of importance. When a rider has somewhat unique proportions (which matters more than just height), an experienced fitter recognizes the need to consider them. The_ really _'bad stuff' happens when they don't.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

At your size, the LBS will have to special order the bike. I have enough problems at 5'6", so I personally wouldn't fuss with trying to find something used.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> As far as the example of my recommending a 48cm to someone 5'10", I don't recall. If I did, it was based on their proportions and the frame size I suggested was the best compromise (that's basically what fit is all about anyway). I do recall someone around that height with a short inseam and (I think) I recommended something in the neightborhood of a 52cm, which running a longer stem would have worked (again, a compromise because he couldn't afford custom). A moot point, because It turned out that he measured his inseam incorrectly.


He measured wrong. He measured himself as having _my_ inseam, in which you came up with the 48cm standard and recommended bikes with ~510mm top tubes! Your measurements would still be suggested for my inseam and they're horribly off.

I ride 50cm compacts with a mile of post showing (52-54 standard) with 550 top tubes. How do you figure your numbers line up? My girlfriend has short legs for her size, your method just doesnt work. It ends up sizing people way way way smaller than necessary.

Even giant recommends 49cm standards for people *4'11*, or an XS (rated 4'11 to 5'2, 49-51cm). They do this because this fits 90% of people. For someone taller, you recommend nearly 3 sizes down. He probably wouldnt be able to find a seat post long enough to fit in the frame.

Giant. http://www.giant-road-bike.com/index.php/bike-fitting-issues/ just one reference.. theres a LOT out there though.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

TomH said:


> He measured wrong. He measured himself as having _my_ inseam, in which you came up with the 48cm standard and recommended bikes with ~510mm top tubes! Your measurements would still be suggested for my inseam and they're horribly off.
> 
> I ride 50cm compacts with a mile of post showing (52-54 standard) with 550 top tubes. How do you figure your numbers line up? My girlfriend has short legs for her size, your method just doesnt work. It ends up sizing people way way way smaller than necessary.
> 
> ...


There are so many inaccuracies in your post that I don't know where to begin, so I won't. 

Members can decide for themselves which fit methodology might work best for them.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

What parts inaccurate? The fact that I ride a bike way outside of the range your system suggests, or the fact that giant recommends sizes way outside of the range you recommend (as does every manufacturer who lists height vs size charts)?

These are pretty tangible things and can easily be referenced. People who are 5'7-5'8 shouldnt be on 48cm standard frames like you suggest, theres no way to make that work.

The people who ask about fit dont know who to trust.. im saying trust the manufacturers, 5'10 people dont fit on 48's.

http://bicycling.about.com/od/howtoride/a/bike_sizing.htm

Thats a great reference. Nearly everyone will fit those sizes, one up or one down.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

TomH said:


> *What parts inaccurate? *The fact that I ride a bike way outside of the range your system suggests, or the fact that giant recommends sizes way outside of the range you recommend (as does every manufacturer who lists height vs size charts)?
> 
> These are pretty tangible things and can easily be referenced. People who are 5'7-5'8 shouldnt be on 48cm standard frames like you suggest, theres no way to make that work.
> 
> The people who ask about fit dont know who to trust.. im saying trust the manufacturers, 5'10 people dont fit on 48's.


Almost all parts are inaccurate, and you're continuing here implying I generally recommend 48cm bikes to riders 5'7", 5'8", 5'10" in height. I don't. But when their proportions dictate that there are special fit considerations, they need to be addressed, not ignored. 

As far as any charts are concerned, once someones proportions stray outside of what's considered a 'norm', the charts are useless - as are online fit calculators. The _chart _doesn't know that an individual might have mitigating circumstances (injuries/ anatomy, fitness/ flexibility) that dictate sizing/ fit outside of what's offered 'off the shelf'. That's why there are custom builders, building custom frames.

We're certainly not going to change each others minds on this issue, so this'll be the last time I address it with you here. As I stated, members can decide for themselves which fit methodology might work best for them.


----------



## FiveFooterDude (May 7, 2011)

OP here.....!
having a rather heated discussion while I've been away huh(?).

Five days later, 
and I'm still short, still 250 pounds heavy, still bikeless.

I went to look at that Trek 1000, and it's beautiful! The mother rode it 40 miles then "bonked". WHAT?, "bonked"?? They hadda 'splain it to me.... I guess it means something like 'hitting a wall'. So it's a new four year old bike, blue, gray ghost flames, and dare I suggest that it's..... 'cute'. 

The kid selling it for his mother will be using the money to buy parts for his race bike. He is being sponsored by the local custom frame/bicycle builder. The kid said it fits me; I rode it a few yards and it felt tiny, small, diminutive, verrrry small. With smaller wheels and the smaller crank best suited for me, I must admit that peddaling it seemed 'right'. But honest to Dog, I felt like Trek riding a bicyle with the wheel-base of a unicycle!
- - - I looked at it with no money in hand, told him/them that I was advised not to pay more than $250 for it, but that I was in no position to make an offer (w/o money to flash). He's written me back and suggested that his mother will take $400 for it rather than $450.....

Fact is, the little thing just feels tooooo fragile beneath me. I'm still under the impression that a steel frame touring bike might be best for my weight. REI has a couple of good $1,000+ touring bikes that I have my eye on, and I'll be calling all REI stores within a 100 mile radius and checking for a prior year model at a reduced price.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

FiveFooterDude said:


> OP here.....!
> having a rather heated discussion while I've been away huh(?).
> 
> Five days later,
> ...


You're new here, but rest assured these discussions are fairly commonplace. When people are passionate about a topic, thngs can get heated. No biggie.

Nothing wrong with going with your gut on this, and far be it from me to dissuade you from buying a steel bike. I've ridden steel for the better part of my life and think it's a great frame material.

I would think your REI store would do the searching for you, but that's JMO since they don't have any stores in my area. 

Good luck in your hunt, and if you have settled on a steel touring bike, there are other brands/ models to choose from, so don't be afraid to branch out some and check out Raleigh and Jamis, to name just two.


----------



## TomH (Oct 6, 2008)

Modern alu bikes, even kinda low end ones, are very lightweight. 250 is on the high side, but theres some 300lbs guys on road bikes these days. Just make sure you're on strong wheels and you'll be good. 

Id swing by a bike shop and get their opinion on what you should be riding. In all fairness, its a good practice to buy something from the shop that fits you (gear, shorts, if not a bike itself). Before you buy a bike, you should know what feels too big, and what feels too small.


----------

