# Concerned About 1st Road Bike Size (Specialized Allez)



## yem_icculus (Jun 28, 2009)

Well, I went down to my local bike shop yesterday and bit the bullet on a 2009 Specialized Allez Triple. 










The bike shop is run by two dutch guys who don't seem to offer the best customer service in the world. Anyways, they convinced me to order a 54cm fame, as opposed to the 52cm. I'm about 5'6", with a 29" inseam, I seem to be on the low end for a 54cm frame. Standover height was OK, but I have a feeling I'm going to want to set the seat higher than my legs will allow. Should I have gone with the 52cm instead? I'm really concerned, and I know this bike isn't nearly as expensive as some of the ones people ride around here, but this is kind of a big purchase for me, and I don't want to mess it up.  Any opinions? FWIW, I could sit on the seat where they had it set on the 54cm and touch the ground with both my tippy-toes. Top tube length feels about right, too, so maybe I made the right decision? I never thought I'd be this worried over 2cm.


----------



## B15serv (Apr 27, 2008)

Take it back. Im 5'6 with a 30.5" inseam and I ride a 52cm size on my Scott Speedster, Scott CX and IRO Robroy. There is no reason at all they should have sold you that bike. Take it back and if you can just get your money back and go to a different shop. Tell them you didnt ride the bike btw. No offense meant to anybody but it seems that alot of the euro's that own bike shops are just super shady. Im sure its just a culture difference but over here we call it shady. When I was looking for my road bike and cross bike everybody told me that a 52cm or 50cm is what i need. A 54cm is crazy for your inseam and height.


----------



## yem_icculus (Jun 28, 2009)

Yeah, I think I'm going to call them on Monday and tell them I'd prefer a 52cm if it's not too late to switch. Honestly, I was expecting a lot better out of a family owned shop, I could've easily hopped online and bought a Tommasso Imola with a Carbon Fork and saved about $400 in the process. Instead, I decided to support a local business, and I feel like I'm not being given the attention and service you might expect.


----------



## Cory (Jan 29, 2004)

B15serv said:


> Take it back. Im 5'6 with a 30.5" inseam and I ride a 52cm size on my Scott Speedster, Scott CX and IRO Robroy. There is no reason at all they should have sold you that bike. Take it back and if you can just get your money back and go to a different shop. Tell them you didnt ride the bike btw. No offense meant to anybody but it seems that alot of the euro's that own bike shops are just super shady. Im sure its just a culture difference but over here we call it shady. When I was looking for my road bike and cross bike everybody told me that a 52cm or 50cm is what i need. A 54cm is crazy for your inseam and height.


 I'm not sure I agree with this. I can't make a direct comparison because I'm 10 inches taller than you are, but the last two bikes I bought, a new Atlantis and shop-demo Rambouillet from Rivendell, were 2 and 3 cm. larger than what I thought for years was my correct size. They're much more comfortable and fit me better than an old bike I loved and have ridden on several centuries.
The "super shady" comments are just xenophobia, I think. It's lame to assume that because a guy comes from Europe, he's going to sell you the wrong size bike on purpose. He's a businessman; he wants you to be happy and come back. In the last 15 years or so, there's been a trend in America to smaller and smaller frames, to the point that half the riders I see seem to be crammed onto something that doesn't fit them, seat posts sticking up like masts and the bars down around their shins. At least give the dealer a chance to explain, and don't assume he's automatically wrong. he may know more than you do.


----------



## shanabit (Jul 16, 2007)

Im 29" inseam and Im on a 52 here, 5'8''. I just put a longer stem on it (100) and it fits like a glove, 54 felt like I was hanging off a cliff here.

To be fair though, my bike guy is a rider and sold me and my wife bikes that were TOO BIG for both of us. I sold the 56 and took over her 54, these are TREKS though. Bought her a 47CM which fit her perfect. Some guys who own shops cant size real well but know what fits them personally. Doesnt mean they are trying to stick it to ya. I buy EVERYTHING from this guy still to this day.


----------



## emoney (May 9, 2009)

Keep it mind, it's not JUST about inseam. Upper body/torso length has a LOT to do with it. My wife, who is just under 5'7", has a 30" inseam, was fit with a 54cm (it's a M/L, medium large for Redline) and she loves it. I was thinking a 52 myself, but the LBS insisted she get the larger one, and they were right. And, think about it, it doesn't make any other sense to get you to order a different size. If there was a 54 in stock, then I could see them 'pushing' you into something. But, if you had to order either one, then they probably know what they're doing. And, you picked a really nice bike so enjoy it when it comes in.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

From your post I get the impression you straddled the 54cm, and if the top tube felt ok, did you also ride the bike? I ask this because no matter what credentials a fitter has, how the bike feels to you, matters.

At 5' 6" and with a 29" inseam, sight unseen I'd probably size/ fit you to a 52cm, but with compact geo bikes the TT length becomes the focal point, because getting the reach right is more important than adjusting for saddle height (to a point). Also, reach is harder to adjust. 

Considering everything you've offered, it's apparent that you need assistance on sizing and fit. I don't know your situation with this LBS - as in, do you have a few days before the bike is in? If so, I'd take some time to go through CC's online fit calculator _and_ find another LBS to assist you. If that means canceling the order on the Allez, then (at least for now) I'd do so. Getting fit right matters more than the bike; there are always lots of bikes for sale.


----------



## yem_icculus (Jun 28, 2009)

I did not ride the bike. This has been part of my frustration with this shop, I feel like they're not taking me seriously. I wanted to support the local bike shop, so that's why I went there, but now I'm thinking maybe I should have taken the drive to the other one that's about an hour away. 

As far as fitting me to a bike, the first time I went, the guy threw me on a Trek 1.2, I straddled it, sat on the seat, didn't get to ride it, and he said, "Looks good to me."

Next time I went in, I told them I did a bit more research and the Specialized Allez seemed like a better buy, and the other guy at the shop threw me on a 54, had me straddle it, sit on the seat, and said, "Looks good to me." I even expressed my concern that maybe I would fit better on a 52, and he said, "Well I'm about your size and I ride a 54, so it should be good for you."

There were no measurements taken, no test rides, etc... Maybe I should just give up on this shop altogether, but I'm not sure if I can just cancel my order like that. FWIW, I didn't put any money down, so feasibly, I could just walk away, but I'm not that kind of guy.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

B15serv said:


> Take it back. Im 5'6 with a 30.5" inseam and I ride a 52cm size on my Scott Speedster, Scott CX and IRO Robroy.


Also disagree with this. Another 5'6" person riding 52 cm bikes means nothing. Inseams may have been measured /defined differently; nominal frame sizes are almost certainly defined differently—brand A's 52 cm bike could well be identical in size to brand B's 54 cm bike and brand C's 50 cm bike. The OP's ability to tippy-toe the ground while seated tells me that the saddle was set too low. Once it gets raised to where to where it needs to be, the 54 cm Allez might fit just fine.

It's also good to keep in mind that many bike shops put people on bikes too small because of the currently fashionable "racer" look—saddle way up high, bars way down low. Perhaps the Dutch guys are doing the OP a favor.

/w


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

yem_icculus said:


> I did not ride the bike. This has been part of my frustration with this shop, I feel like they're not taking me seriously. I wanted to support the local bike shop, so that's why I went there, but now I'm thinking maybe I should have taken the drive to the other one that's about an hour away.
> 
> As far as fitting me to a bike, the first time I went, the guy threw me on a Trek 1.2, I straddled it, sat on the seat, didn't get to ride it, and he said, "Looks good to me."
> 
> ...


IMO it's almost irrelevant whether or not the 54 Allez fits; something doesn't make sense here. The LBS has two bikes that you're interested in, but no test rides? Why? Did you ask? Did they offer? 

The only positive you've offered about this bike shop is that they're willing to order a bike with no deposit, but that isn't enough to save them, IMO. In fact, buying online will get you about the same level of (sub par) service.

Without knowing more and based on what you've offered, I'd contact them and say you've decided against the bike. If they ask why, tell them. Then go find a shop that sizes, then fits you, and sends you off on test rides.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

wim said:


> Also disagree with this. Another 5'6" person riding 52 cm bikes means nothing. Inseams may have been measured /defined differently; nominal frame sizes are almost certainly defined differently—brand A's 52 cm bike could well be identical in size to brand B's 54 cm bike and brand C's 50 cm bike. The OP's ability to tippy-toe the ground while seated tells me that the saddle was set too low. Once it gets raised to where to where it needs to be, the 54 cm Allez might fit just fine.
> 
> It's also good to keep in mind that many bike shops put people on bikes too small because of the currently fashionable "racer" look—saddle way up high, bars way down low. *Perhaps the Dutch guys are doing the OP a favor*.
> 
> /w


 
The shop has a bike in stock that the OP expresses interested in, does what appears to be a cursory fit and (apparently) doesn't see the value of test rides and they're doing the OP a favor??  

Ok, who are you and what did you do with wim?!?!


----------



## Loraura (Jun 30, 2008)

In my experience, the top tube length is most important. You can raise or lower a seat by a good bit, but there is only so much you can do to bring the brifters closer to you. You can buy a shorter stem, you can buy shorter bars that bring the controls closer to you. You can buy short reach shifters (but they aren't cheap).

If you're locking your elbows to brake and shift, or putting too much weight on the hands becuase you're stretched out too much, the bike is going to be painful on long rides.

I personally like a bike on the bigger end of the spectrum of what fits me. Smaller bikes feel like toys to me for some reason. But I rely on a pro-fitting to dial it in for me to be comfortable. Not just the fitting the bike shop does when you make a purchase, but an hour long session with a pro for a seperate fee. That has been what works for me.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

PJ352 said:


> Ok, who are you and what did you do with wim?!?!


LOL, pretty funny. It's me, I swear to you.  

By "doing the OP a favor" I meant that they might be keeping him off a bike too small.

As to the test ride and the fitting: In my view, test rides don't tell you much unless you can get a bike for a day or more. Also in my view, extensive fittings _always_ benefit the shop, but only _sometimes_ benefit the rider. At this point in the OP's cycling career, even just a cursory fit to get him on the road now seems more productive than agonizing over 2 cm of nominal frame size. Save the so-called pro-fit for later.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

wim said:


> LOL, pretty funny. It's me, I swear to you.
> 
> By "doing the OP a favor" I meant that they might be keeping him off a bike too small.
> 
> As to the test ride and the fitting: In my view, test rides don't tell you much unless you can get a bike for a day or more. Also in my view, extensive fittings _always_ benefit the shop, but only _sometimes_ benefit the rider. At this point in the OP's cycling career, even just a cursory fit to get him on the road now seems more productive than agonizing over 2 cm of nominal frame size. Save the so-called pro-fit for later.


Points taken, but for the record, I wasn't promoting that the OP invest in a pro fit. Where we part is on the value of a cursory fit and the importance (or lack thereof) of test rides. But I also think 2 cm's of nominal frame size is noteworthy. 

IMO a little more effort on the part of the LBS regarding sizing (never got to the fitting part) would have benefited the OP, especially given his trepidation on size. Put the bike on a trainer, then him on the bike. Set saddle height, check KOPS. Have him position his hands on the top/ hoods/ drops and based on his input and your observations (yes, cursory) make adjustments as needed. Now, as I see it, he's ready to head out on a test ride.

And regarding those test rides, even though some noobs will offer that they can't tell much from them, if you notice, when something _doesn't_ feel right or they _don't _like something (in other words, something negative that they've picked up on) then they _do_ notice. I don't have to be a runner to try on shoes that are too big to know they _feel_ to big, just as I don't have to be a seasoned rider (notice that 'O' word was avoided) to notice a bike feels too big (or small, for that matter). Sure, a longer ride would tell more, but I've ridden a fair number of bikes that I knew in 20 minutes weren't going to make the cut.

Bottom line, though. This appears to be a shop that sells bikes. Period. You could get nearly the same service from BD or another online 'store'. So I think the OP would benefit by moving on.

I'm glad you're OK, BTW. Gotta watch for those pod people, though


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

See your points, PJ352.

What got me going on this thread is that the OP is comfortable horizontally but can also reach the ground with his feet when seated. To go _smaller_ under those circumstances doesn't make sense. Perhaps something got lost in translation here. I can't imagine anyone tip-toeing the ground seated on a bike too large.

Thanks for the 'seasoned' instead of the other word, appreciate it!


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

wim said:


> See your points, PJ352.
> 
> What got me going on this thread is that the OP is comfortable horizontally but can also reach the ground with his feet when seated. To go _smaller_ under those circumstances doesn't make sense. Perhaps something got lost in translation here. I can't imagine anyone tip-toeing the ground seated on a bike too large.
> 
> Thanks for the 'seasoned' instead of the other word, appreciate it!


Also valid points. I always thought the possibility existed that the OP would fit on a 54 (or maybe the 52), but IMO the fundamental issue became the LBS's mode of operation. Granted, we have one side of the story, but I don't think a shop should take such a casual approach to sizing/ fit. 

I'll stop beating the dead horse now. I am, after all, 'seasoned' and as such have sapped all the available energy from my mind.


----------

