# Women riding men's geometry frames



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

Ladies, please help me to figure out this.

If you are a woman and are riding a men's geometry frame ....

1. How tall are you ?
2. What is your inseam ?
3. Frame Size ?
4. Stem Size ?
5. Seatpost seatback ?

Thank you


----------



## Trek2.3 (Sep 13, 2009)

The frame has to fit* YOUR *body. Unfortunately for bike manufacturers, everyone is different. For example, I'm a male riding what the manufacturer bills as a "woman's" bike. The bike is gender neutral b-u-t it is nicely sized for a person of smaller stature. 

Get a professional sizing from someone NOT associated with a particular LBS (it's worth the $200). Such persons are available in most larger metro areas.


----------



## Ventruck (Mar 9, 2009)

Trek2.3 said:


> The frame has to fit* YOUR *body. Unfortunately for bike manufacturers, everyone is different. For example, I'm a male riding what the manufacturer bills as a "woman's" bike. The bike is gender neutral b-u-t it is nicely sized for a person of smaller stature.
> 
> Get a professional sizing from someone NOT associated with a particular LBS (it's worth the $200). Such persons are available in most larger metro areas.


I don't think Salsa_Lover (who I assumed to be male  ) was asking whether such a combination is actually right or wrong, but was just curious to how it works out for female riders - probably spot a trend or two.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

5'4"
30.25" (I think)
xs (LOOK)
90mm
I use a Campy Chorus seatpost.


----------



## sokudo (Dec 22, 2007)

There is no women or men geometry. There is reach and stack. Or top tube size, head tube size, and seat tube angle.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

I just want to see how are women fitting their men's bikes.

my friend is riding a men's bike and she has to use a 80mm stem to have a good fit due to the long legs and short torso.

However in my own experience, a too short stem affects the bike handling. ideal stem lenght for me is 110mm.

How are you ladies doing ?

Is it better to have an small frame with a long seatpost and fliped-up stem ?

or to have a very short stem on your bike ?

How did you solve your fitting problems ?

And by "Frame Size" I mean TT/ST length not what says on the sticker.


----------



## Becky (Jun 15, 2004)

I don't think you're going to find the answer you seek with the information you've requested in your original post. Too many variables to consider...head tube height, seat tube angle, the handlebar selected, etc... Even rider flexibility plays into it.

I have 2 road bikes with very different geometries, but they both fit well. One is a classic steel bike with a very traditional geometry. The other is a compact geometry. They're both in the 49-50cm range, they both use zero setback seatposts, and the stems are 100-110. Oh, and I'm 5'4" with a ~33" (cycling) inseam.

If your friend fits well on her bike with an 80cm stem, and she's comfortable with the handling, then so be it.


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

5'4"
31"
49 cm w/ 52cm TT
80mm
Use a straight Thomson seatpost


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

jorgy said:


> 5'4"
> 31"
> 49 cm w/ 52cm TT
> 80mm
> Use a straight Thomson seatpost


This is a very good example.

I am 5'11" with a cycling inseam of 32"
I ride a nominal 57 that has a 49cm ST c-c and 54cm TT c-c
With a 20mm SB seatpost and a 120mm stem I have exactly 56cm reach ( center of bars, tip of saddle ). 

If I setup my same bike with a 0 SB and 80cm stem I would have a reach of 51cm.
Or in your case as you have 2 cm less TT then your reach should be 49cm, and checking the geometry chart your bike "size" should be a 50


How does it feel and perform for you the fit you have now ?

Wouldn't be better if you had a bike size 50 ( with a ~49 cm TT ) and a 20mm SB and a 110 or 120 stem ?

Have you tried such a bike ? I guess there would be a long seatpost showing and you'd need more spacers or a flipped up stem in that case.


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

Salsa_Lover said:


> However in my own experience, a too short stem affects the bike handling. ideal stem lenght for me is 110mm.


Not sure how that is—stem length doesn't have much of an effect on bike handling. The steering arm is fork steerer-to-hands dimension, which changes without noticeable effect on handling by about 100 mm when moving the hands from the tops to the hoods.

Also keep in mind that stem length and frame size should be in proportion. So for a very small frame, a 90 mm stem could well be be too _long_ for comfort and proper weight distribution.


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

You have a good point there wim


----------



## jorgy (Oct 21, 2005)

Salsa_Lover said:


> This is a very good example.
> 
> I am 5'11" with a cycling inseam of 32"
> I ride a nominal 57 that has a 49cm ST c-c and 54cm TT c-c
> ...


I like the fit of my bike very much. The steering feels responsive, and not twitchy at all. I have read where the stem length should be proportional to the bike size. So, a smaller bike does well with a smaller stem, and vice versa. A lot of smaller bikes end up with 75 or high STA, so that would make a difference as far as stack and reach go.

The only way I can fathom getting a size 50 bike with a 49cm TT is to go custom or get a tri bike. A tri bike is out of the question because it would have other geometry changes. A custom would probably have 650 wheels to get that geometry.

When I bought my bike, I debated whether to get the 49 or 51. The shop owner recommended the 49, and I trusted his judgement. The STA on my bike is 74. My stem is 10 degrees and I currently have it flipped down with 20mm of spacers. I didn't want a big saddle-to-bar drop and that was one reason I was considering the 51cm.

Looking at where my seatpost's rails are, I'd say it's back about 1.5cm from center. From the tip of my seatpost to the center of my bars (where they attach) to the stem is 46cm. That's measured on the diagonal down, not straight across. My saddle is a Aspide Glamour. It has a fairly long nose so you need to factor that in, as well, i.e., measuring from the tip of the saddle really doesn't account for where you actually sit.

It's funny that my suggested reach "should" be 49cm. Maybe that's a pure racing setup, which I don't want. My arms are pretty long given my height (shirt sleeves are frequently too short) and I'm plenty flexible (can tough my palms to the floor).

One more thing...I use short reach bars. Easton EC90 Equipe Pro. Reach = 75mm, Drop = 130mm.

My bike is a Merlin Atreus, and even though it's an old (2005 only) model, the geometry is still up on the site. http://www.merlinbike.com/2005/bikes/geometry.aspx?b=atreus&k=rd


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

thank you great information there.

Yes, the 49cm reach would be a quite agressive racing position with a lot of saddle to handlebars drop.

How about the 0 SB ? I tried it once on my road bike and felt it was way too in front, the 20 SB works well for me , but as you say the steeper seat angle ( 74° or 74.5° ) on a 49cm bike would have a similar effect than setting up a 0 SB on a 54cm bike

The short reach compact bars would sure compensate with 2 cm less effective reach on the hoods and drops


----------

