# Size Up Or Size Down?



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

I'm shopping for a new road bike and the last couple of shops I've been to inform me that I'm "in between" sizes.

For example with the giant defy line, I could either go with the 53 cm tt small, or the 54.5 cm medium. 

With specialized, I can go with either the 52 cm/53.7 tt or the 54 cm/54.8 tt sizes. 

Generally speaking, I tend to prefer the feel (stock) of the larger size. I feel like I have the correct amount of top tube and stem reach. 

The two shops I visited are divided on whether I should size up or down. The giant shop suggests I size down and get a longer stem. 

The specialized shop recommends the larger size outright. 

*Which sizing philosophy is better?* My only (slight) reservation with going with the larger size is that standover is probably minimal: 1/2 to 1 inch or so in standard street shoes and shorts. The smaller size offers a lot more standover. Otherwise, I prefer the larger size bike.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Size down and adjust with a longer stem. The pros do this, and so should you.

The advantage to the smaller frame is you can make a larger adjustment to "go up in size", and you can also make an adjustment to go smaller if you decide to do so later.

With the larger frame, the limits of adjustability are less. You can only go so short on the stem until you give up some control. And...you're paying a weight penalty by riding more frame than you need.

The end results are the same.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

What I've been told by some fitters who work with some pro teams is that since the HT are relatively tall for them they size down to fit the HT. Longer stems are a a result not the goal.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Woodys737 brings up an important point about head tube length. The one caveat I would make to my recommendation for the smaller frame is whether the shorter head tube will be too low for you (depending on your flexibility) if you use up to 3cm of spacers to compensate (I wouldn't use more then 3cm). If you're answer is yes, then I'd suggest the larger frame.


----------



## robt57 (Jul 23, 2011)

roadrider21 said:


> Generally speaking, I tend to prefer the feel (stock) of the larger size.....
> 
> *Which sizing philosophy is better?*



I also lean larger for what ever reasons.

Which is better, I have to guess for someone who tends to like larger, the answer is clear. I also like compact geomtry so I can ride bigger with less stand over issues.

The only issue for me is if the head tube gets too big and the bars can not get low enough as a result. But that seems like two sizes to big usually.


As far as any advantage of sizing a smaller frame. I would rather be in a bigger center fore/aft CG window on a larger bike than a smaller one.


Of course, if you ever get a custom made frame, speaking as someone usually between sizes and had done exactly this, A Strong Racing Frames custom. I have found it easier to find off the peg stuff using the custom as a baseline since 2000 when I had it made.

For example, the 58CM Roubaix is the only 58 I feel that fits. Seems like every other bike/frame, a 60-1 seem to be the slight up size choice mostly.  Does the Roubaix fit large?? or is it just the bigger fore/aft CG window on it with a little longer chain stay and wheelbase.
I don't care if that is why, I just know it fits well for an off the peg frame for me. I say that to make a point which you may understand if you say things like 'I am between sizes'


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

woodys737 said:


> What I've been told by some fitters who work with some pro teams is that since the HT are relatively tall for them they size down to fit the HT. Longer stems are a a result not the goal.





tvad said:


> Woodys737 brings up an important point about head tube length. The one caveat I would make to my recommendation for the smaller frame is whether the shorter head tube will be too low for you (depending on your flexibility) if you use up to 3cm of spacers to compensate (I wouldn't use more then 3cm). If you're answer is yes, then I'd suggest the larger frame.


You mean using the TT length as the frame size selection that I've been told is not the way to go? :shocked:


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

bvber said:


> You mean using the TT length as the frame size selection that I've been told is not the way to go? :shocked:


No. You're not reading the posts correctly...or they're not clear.

When between sizes, the HT length is an important factor to consider. It may be too short on the smaller frame for someone who is not flexible enough to get into a "normal" road cycling position, or for someone who prefers to ride more upright. In that case, the larger frame with the taller HT will be more suitable.


----------



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

tvad said:


> Woodys737 brings up an important point about head tube length. The one caveat I would make to my recommendation for the smaller frame is whether the shorter head tube will be too low for you (depending on your flexibility) if you use up to 3cm of spacers to compensate (I wouldn't use more then 3cm). If you're answer is yes, then I'd suggest the larger frame.


What is the downside to using more spacers?


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

roadrider21 said:


> What is the downside to using more spacers?


First...safety. Most manufacturers I'm aware of allow up to 4cm of spacers. Beyond that, the rigidity of the steerer tube is compromised (or so they say).

Some cyclists will say the fork is less stiff the more spacers one adds, and that's probably true. Will you notice? Hard to say. If you're a Mark Cavendish style sprinter, you might. 

Finally, it just doesn't look cool to have too many spacers.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

This is a tough post. I would suggest you ride all the bikes in the different sizes and see which one feels most comfortable, and if possible ride it further than just around the parking lot, take them on a 15 minute ride or longer if they'll you. 

A lot of beginner riders and riders who ridden nothing but mountain bikes don't like larger frames because they don't feel as stable on them. However according to an article I once read on Rivendell, Grant claims that most road bikes are sold too small with the bars too low because the bike shop thinks that all roadies want to look like racers, which I think is true after 40 years of riding and watching how bike shops sell bikes.

You do have to pay attention to standover height, if the bike has a standard (or traditional) level top tube you want about an inch of clearance from your crotch; if the bike is a compact design (sloping top tube) you want at least 2 inches of clearance. You test this by standing over the bike and lifting it up till the frame hits your crotch (obviously don't let it hit your crotch real hard!) then check the clearance of the front wheel is off the ground.

Just to confuse the whole thing even further, here is a site that says top tube length, not the height, is important; see: Dave Moulton's Bike Blog: A Different Thought on Frame Sizing. I will say this, I don't race anymore so getting max power is not an issue for me, but I I have a bike that I use to race on that was sold to me based on top tube length, and I have several other bikes that I got just based on crotch clearance, so which is the most comfortable to me, top tube height or top tube length...frankly...I can't tell the difference! I can feel the difference in comfort of a racing frame vs a touring frame, or steel vs titanium, or larger tires vs skinny tires, but I can't tell the difference in tube height or length. I am however more flexible than most people, even to this day at age 60 I have no issues of riding bikes that are not exactly the right size, I have bikes ranging from 56 to 60 in size and none of the extremes bother me.

Again you need to ride each bike in both sizes for at least 15 minutes to get an idea of how you like each one.


----------



## ericm979 (Jun 26, 2005)

Pro racers often go smaller because in the last five years or so road bike makers have figured out that their customers are not 22 year old pro racers and have been putting taller head tubes on their frames. So the pros need the smaller frame and/or a negative rise stem to get the bars low enough.

Go smaller if the larger frame's HT is too long.
Go larger if the smaller frame's HT is too short- you can't get the bars high enough with the allowed spacers.

Go smaller if with the larger frame you'd need a too-short stem to get the correct reach.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

bvber said:


> You mean using the TT length as the frame size selection that I've been told is not the way to go? :shocked:


No HT.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

I would generally agree with the majority that say ride a lot of bikes, then decide on which you like best, then buy that one. But in your case there's a catch. The catch is you're comparing different frame geometries in the same bike, as well as different bikes designed for different results. Unless the same attention goes into fitting you in those different frame sizes, it will be really difficult to conclude on the better frame size.

The master fit tech I use states very clearly, anyone can be fit into two different frame sizes. There is that much flexibility in adjusting the position of the three contact points readily available in any modern bike. Where frame geometry matters is how far you can push the limits.

Along those lines I would suggest you need to know how you want to ride, and what your goals will be as you transition into road riding. All other things being equal (which they seldom are), if you want to go for speed and being more competitive, then go for the smaller geometry. If, on the other hand, you are more interested in longer, more relaxed rides, then go with the larger frame. 

But, you also need to take into account what the frame was designed for. If you are going for a bike designed for endurance / longer distance riding that probably already has a frame designed for more upright relaxed riding, so bigger may be pushing it more than you want. 

Neither is right or wrong, they are just slightly different. The greater variable will be what you want, and how you want to ride. Given your age, size, and self-confessed competitive nature, yet plowing new ground, I would tend to lean toward and endurance road model, but in the smaller size as the compromise toward better performance.


----------



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

tvad said:


> First...safety. Most manufacturers I'm aware of allow up to 4cm of spacers. Beyond that, the rigidity of the steerer tube is compromised (or so they say).
> 
> Some cyclists will say the fork is less stiff the more spacers one adds, and that's probably true. Will you notice? Hard to say. If you're a Mark Cavendish style sprinter, you might.
> 
> *Finally, it just doesn't look cool to have too many spacers.*


Ha ha, got it!


----------



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

Thanks for the detailed, thoughtful responses, everyone.

So far, the bike I've enjoyed riding the most is the specialized secteur, in a 54 cm. I literally felt like riding home with it, and leaving my car in exchange. 

It's the elite model, at about $1200, which is a bit more than the $1K I had quoted as my price range. 

I also test rode the allez in a 54 and it felt a little too low (shorter head tube). It definitely had the aero position of a racing bike. However, for whatever reason, I felt less efficient pedaling in a slightly lower, more aero position. The bike was surprisingly comfortable for an aluminum, but then again, the roads around the shop were in near perfect condition for the most part. 

I've pored over geometry chart after geometry chart, focusing on tt length and standover in particular. 

I have to say that the bike that seems closest to the "ideal fit" is a bikesdirect bike, which has a 54 cm top tube, and 29.9" of standover height, which would be adequate. The bikesdirect bike is sold out however in my size, so I am definitely leaning specialized at this point. 

I want to make a buy in the next 2 weeks.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Buy from a shop and get fitted. Beyond that, go downsize... Raise the seat and slam the stem. It is better to look good than to feel good.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Don't buy anything you haven't ridden. You don't have enough experience to buy online based on published geometry, IMO.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

roadrider21 said:


> ...
> 
> So far, the bike I've enjoyed riding the most is the specialized secteur, in a 54 cm. I literally felt like riding home with it, and leaving my car in exchange.
> ...


That's your bike! You will want to ride it every day.


----------



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

tvad said:


> Don't buy anything you haven't ridden. You don't have enough experience to buy online based on published geometry, IMO.


Good point.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

You like the Specialized Secteur in 54cm. Go with that.


----------



## 768Q (Jun 23, 2012)

If you really like the Specialized Sectuer 54 why not take a peek in your local CL and see what is out there? My wife's 1st bike was that very bike but about 4 years old when she got it and I sold it recently for $100 more than I paid after she rode it 2 years and my constant cleaning and detailing, they are a great bike. Point is you will most likely get your money back out of it. My boss's son bought a new one (Secturer 54 as well) a few years back and now wants a carbon bike and this time of year not a lot of takers for his 50% of new asking price, deals are out there.


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

tvad said:


> No. You're not reading the posts correctly...or they're not clear.





woodys737 said:


> No HT.


This is one of the examples of what I've seen, which says, "_The most important considerations to make as you decide which frame to go for is the effective top tube length_" (scroll down past half way).


----------



## spdntrxi (Jul 25, 2013)

I always size down.. unless I have too much toe overlap with smaller frame...


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

bvber said:


> This is one of the examples of what I've seen, which says, "_The most important considerations to make as you decide which frame to go for is the effective top tube length_" (scroll down past half way).


To be clear, I did not recommend buying a bike based on head tube length. That was someone else. I simply said head tube length is a _consideration_ when choosing between two frame sizes if one is 'tweeners, like you.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

bvber said:


> This is one of the examples of what I've seen, which says, "_The most important considerations to make as you decide which frame to go for is the effective top tube length_" (scroll down past half way).


I was talking about pro riders which was mentioned in post #2 first sentence. The long stems are not the goal. They are a result of needing to fit a shorter HT on smaller frames to get in an aero position w/o having to use some ridiculous -30 stem. The ETT may very well be the most important consideration for you, but, not the pros. That's all...


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

woodys737 said:


> I was talking about pro riders which was mentioned in post #2 first sentence. The long stems are not the goal. They are a result of needing to fit a shorter HT on smaller frames to get in an aero position w/o having to use some ridiculous -30 stem. The ETT may very well be the most important consideration for you, but, not the pros. That's all...


Talking about the OP here. Couldn't he go with a taller head tube (larger frame) and get bars with a deeper drop to achieve an aero position? Kind of "best of both worlds".


----------



## bvber (Apr 23, 2011)

tvad said:


> if one is 'tweeners, like you.


Actually, I'm trying to find out if I really am. I'm fitting fine with 52cm frame but the saddle has to be pushed back to the max on 32mm setback seat post (due to my longer than average femurs) with 100mm stem. I was just wondering if I should go with 54cm and that's why this thread caught my attention.


----------



## Clipped_in (May 5, 2011)

tvad said:


> Don't buy anything you haven't ridden. You don't have enough experience to buy online based on published geometry, IMO.


I disagree with this. Newbs don't have enough experience to know what it should feel like. Riding them is pretty much a waste.

I do agree with the premise the they should buy from a reputable LBS who can evaluate their needs and goals and guide them into an appropriate bike. You're gonna have to trust someone on this because you just don't have enough experience. Trust the bike shop you feel most comfortable with.

As far as size, I'm a 'tweener as well, and after owning multiple bikes and riding a lot of miles I definitely prefer to size down. Less weight and snappier feel. What's not to like unless you're going to add panniers or a rack to haul a load.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

redondoaveb said:


> Talking about the OP here. Couldn't he go with a taller head tube (larger frame) and get bars with a deeper drop to achieve an aero position? Kind of "best of both worlds".


That depends on the op. Most hobbyist/week end warrior types I see just need to bend their elbows a bit to be honest. Or lose the gut. Or work on flexibility. Or some of each...


----------



## redondoaveb (Jan 16, 2011)

woodys737 said:


> That depends on the op. Most hobbyist/week end warrior types I see just need to bend their elbows a bit to be honest. Or lose the gut. Or work on flexibility. Or some of each...


I guess it kind of depends what type of riding the OP does. I do mostly endurance riding so I prefer a longer head tube instead of stacking spacers or a positive stem.


----------



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

Some observations on sizing. I test rode giant defy's in both small and medium.

With the small, I had nearly 3" of standover clearance in street clothes. With the medium, I still had at least 1.5" of standover clearance. So, maybe 1.75" (M) vs 2.75" (S) of standover. 

Despite the difference in top tube length, my reach was surprisingly similar on both bikes. 

The smaller bike put me in a more aero position, was more maneuverable, lighter (well, not a fair comparison since the small was carbon and the medium alu), and generally racier.


----------



## Jay Strongbow (May 8, 2010)

Get the most appropriate size. If you truely need to go "up" or "down" from what is correct don't get either and look at another brand.

Pros don't "size down" from what they should be riding. Their fitting reqirements are just different so they generally benefit from the shorter head tube on a smaller size and use a longer stem to add the length.


----------



## obed (Jan 12, 2014)

you will ride the one that feels good....buy the one that the test ride made you want to take it home...


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Jay Strongbow said:


> Get the most appropriate size. If you truely need to go "up" or "down" from what is correct don't get either and look at another brand.


amazing this should take so long to surface  
plenty of frames around, find one that fits from the beginning.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Clipped_in said:


> I disagree with this. Newbs don't have enough experience to know what it should feel like. Riding them is pretty much a waste.
> 
> I do agree with the premise the they should buy from a reputable LBS who can evaluate their needs and goals and guide them into an appropriate bike. You're gonna have to trust someone on this because you just don't have enough experience. Trust the bike shop you feel most comfortable with.


Language needs to be very precise in internet forums. No shortcuts. I guess mine wasn't, so to be clear (yet again), the intent of the advice in my post to which you referred in your comment above was as you correctly expanded upon...which is to ride bikes offered by local bike shops under their expertise and guidance.

This as opposed to buying "blind" (without expert guidance) from an online source.

K?


----------



## Clipped_in (May 5, 2011)

tvad said:


> Language needs to be very precise in internet forums. No shortcuts. I guess mine wasn't, so to be clear (yet again), the intent of the advice in my post to which you referred in your comment above was as you correctly expanded upon...which is to ride bikes offered by local bike shops with their expertise and guidance.
> 
> This as opposed to buying "blind" (without expert guidance) from an online source.
> 
> K?


Yeah, I was not so clear in my clarification. We're pretty much on the same page.


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Clipped_in said:


> Yeah, I was not so clear in my clarification. We're pretty much on the same page.


Kumba-ya.

Happy New Year.


----------



## SwimCycle09 (Apr 22, 2014)

obed said:


> you will ride the one that feels good....buy the one that the test ride made you want to take it home...


I did this and came home with the larger size.


----------



## SwimCycle09 (Apr 22, 2014)

OP, I am in the exact same boat as you when looking at bikes. For most major bike brands I have to decide between 52 and 54. Ultimately its up you to decide but most people can ride at least 2 different frame sizes without fit problems. 

I went with with what felt best on the test ride and ended up with the 54 and so far I have been quite happy. Yes the head tube is taller, and if you are newer to road riding, you will probably appreciate this starting off. I know I will be removing a few spacers this spring for a more aggressive position. And my next bike will probably be a 52 with a longer stem so I can gain a bit more standover clearance(I only have about 1 inch right now) and keep the current top tube length I have. 

Jay mentioned a really great idea for people like us too in looking at other brands. Several of the non US bike brands use the odd sizing numbers. A 53 from say Bianchi or another foreign company might be another option to explore. 

Ultimately, work with a good LBS that will help you correctly fit a bike to your body proportions. Most shops offer a pretty solid fitting free with the purchase of a new bike. My LBS did this when I bought my bike and in several conversations about fit with them since, they mentioned a lot of people who start road riding seriously, end up going down a frame size after riding for 1-2 years. One of my friends went from riding a 58 when he started to a 54 now. Fit changes over time and with how you ride. Good luck!


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

SwimCycle09 said:


> I did this and came home with the larger size.


Good for you, the larger size is most of the time more comfortable. When I use to race back in the mid 70's to mid 80's the thought was to go smaller because the frame would flex less and it was lighter, but when you have to ride all the time the smaller bike just made me feel to cramped so later I got a larger size which my fellow teammates thought I was nuts, maybe I was, but I was a much more comfortable nut then they were!

Anyway thats why test riding a bike is important, once you know what size works for you you no longer really have to test ride bikes. I got my last bike by mail order and never rode it before having it shipped to my house and it fits perfectly.


----------



## robt57 (Jul 23, 2011)

den bakker said:


> amazing this should take so long to surface
> plenty of frames around, find one that fits from the beginning.



Except if the appropriate size IS the one upped size. It ALMOST ALWAYS is for me. I doubt I am alone in this. Getting to understand what constitutes 'fit' in the beginning, as opposed to 10k miles later of evolved riding posture and position is two different definitions. At least was for me...


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

froze said:


> This is a tough post. I would suggest you ride all the bikes in the different sizes and see which one feels most comfortable, and if possible ride it further than just around the parking lot, take them on a 15 minute ride or longer if they'll you.


This is absolutely the best advice, since the OP really was honestly split between two sizes. Go with the one that feels best to you.



> A lot of beginner riders and riders who ridden nothing but mountain bikes don't like larger frames because they don't feel as stable on them. However according to an article I once read on Rivendell, Grant claims that most road bikes are sold too small with the bars too low because the bike shop thinks that all roadies want to look like racers, which I think is true after 40 years of riding and watching how bike shops sell bikes.


I think so too. One of the earliest responses to this thread suggested going down a size rather than up (assuming either is within 'range'), because that's the way the racers do it. That's just not a good reason for a recreational rider to choose a size - what the racers do... unless that's your goal in riding, to train your body to work well on a bike that is purpose-fitted to get maximum power rather than maximum enjoyment (not that they're exclusive, but for most of us they are).




> You do have to pay attention to standover height, if the bike has a standard (or traditional) level top tube you want about an inch of clearance from your crotch; if the bike is a compact design (sloping top tube) you want at least 2 inches of clearance. You test this by standing over the bike and lifting it up till the frame hits your crotch (obviously don't let it hit your crotch real hard!) then check the clearance of the front wheel is off the ground.


I agree in that very minimal standover is needed on a road bike and most newbies, especially mountain bikers, often think they need more standover than they really do.

The only thing I'd add is when you do the ~1 inch test, be sure you're wearing your bike shorts and bike shoes (whatever they are). typical bike shorts really gather and hold tight the parts you don't want the top tube to crunch, so you'll find more standover clearance wearing bike shorts than your jeans and boxers. For me, this makes an obvious difference between a bike that worries me in standover vs. feels very comfortable. Shoe sole thickness is also an important factor.

An inch is plenty, but plenty of people ride perfectly comfortably with even less - because on a road bike you rarely if ever straddle a fully upright bike. When I stop, I leave one foot on a pedal, and lean over putting the other foot on the ground. This makes standover clearance almost irrelevant.



> Again you need to ride each bike in both sizes for at least 15 minutes to get an idea of how you like each one.


To the OP: just know that the difference in opinion you've experienced (sizing up vs. sizing down) is a very common difference of opinion. Although I tend to size up (just because it just seems to feel better to me), you just have to decide for yourself and give it a go.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

Pardon this, I mean no snarkyness... But in the increments most road bikes come in, with all of the adjustable components, from saddle rails to stems... Can you actually be "between sizes?" Really?


----------



## tvad (Aug 31, 2003)

Camilo said:


> One of the earliest responses to this thread suggested going down a size rather than up (assuming either is within 'range'), because that's the way the racers do it.


That's an unfair paraphrase of my post. I offered concrete reasons why sizing down offers more benefits. If pressed to choose between a smaller or larger frame, I would still recommend the smaller frame.

That said, an inexperienced buyer should absolutely, without question ride the frame size that feels best once experienced advice has been offered by a sales person who knows what they're doing and has narrowed the options to a few frames that "fit", whether smaller or larger than the ideal frame size if the ideal frame size isn't an option in the shop.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

PBL450 said:


> Pardon this, I mean no snarkyness... But in the increments most road bikes come in, with all of the adjustable components, from saddle rails to stems... Can you actually be "between sizes?" Really?


Repeating myself, the master fit tech I use states very clearly, anyone can be fit into two different frame sizes. There is that much flexibility in adjusting the position of the three contact points readily available in any modern bike. Where frame geometry matters is how far you can push the limits.


----------



## g-dawg (Jan 30, 2009)

PBL450 said:


> Pardon this, I mean no snarkyness... But in the increments most road bikes come in, with all of the adjustable components, from saddle rails to stems... Can you actually be "between sizes?" Really?


Thank you.


----------



## froze (Sep 15, 2002)

g-dawg said:


> Thank you.


Yup, and this is why I can fit from a 56 to a 60 size bike, though a 56 is sort of pushing the small end of the spectrum but I did get it to work, my idea size for me is 58 to 60 and there is no in between size because you can adjust it to fit just as I did on the smaller side for the 56.


----------



## roadrider21 (Dec 29, 2014)

SwimCycle09 said:


> OP, I am in the exact same boat as you when looking at bikes. For most major bike brands I have to decide between 52 and 54. Ultimately its up you to decide but most people can ride at least 2 different frame sizes without fit problems.
> 
> I went with with what felt best on the test ride and ended up with the 54 and so far I have been quite happy. Yes the head tube is taller, and if you are newer to road riding, you will probably appreciate this starting off. I know I will be removing a few spacers this spring for a more aggressive position. And my next bike will probably be a 52 with a longer stem so I can gain a bit more standover clearance(I only have about 1 inch right now) and keep the current top tube length I have.
> 
> ...


Thanks for your great post, and I, too, went with the 54 rather than the 52. The 54 is definitely the correct size for me. 

There is a big difference, stock, in how the 52 and 54 handle and ride. I am really happy with my decision. I am doing a cleat fitting and sizing this weekend, and other than that, I'm pretty much set.


btw, I test rode a bianchi brava and loved it. It was a 2013 in a size 53. It rode great. It was well built and just dialed in every way. Standover was very modest. A half inch, or maybe an inch. 

The only reservation I had was pricing. It was a 2013, listed at $1K, and the shop wanted $950. A lot of shops discount at least 10% for a previous model year bike, some discount 20% or more for a previous model year's bike. This bike is 2 model years old and they only discounted 5%. The shop owner seemed less than happy to discuss discounts even on accessories, and I got the impression he was not interested in discounting the bike further than 5%. 

There were a few other reservations, such as the gearing. The low gear is a 32/25 on a triple. Not very generous gearing, especially for a triple. 

The shop's service policy is a bit tight, too. One 30 day tuneup and that's it. That may be sufficient, and pretty much standard for the area I live in, but it would've been nice to know that I could come in after 30 days and maybe get a minor adjustment. 

Truth be told, however, most every test bike I test rode felt really good. Bicycle riding in general, is just really enjoyable.


----------



## SwimCycle09 (Apr 22, 2014)

Glad to hear it worked out for you! I am surprised by the shop only offering a 30 day tune up though, but the amount of free services with a new bike does vary at different shops.


----------



## SwimCycle09 (Apr 22, 2014)

This sounds very much like the Peter White fitting article I read last spring when trying to pick a frame size. He basically said most people can fit 2 or even 3 frame sizes and then make adjustments with stem, crank length, saddle position...etc. It really makes a lot sense and allows people to cater their bike(s) to their riding style(s).


----------



## robt57 (Jul 23, 2011)

roadrider21 said:


> The shop's service policy is a bit tight, too. One 30 day tuneup and that's it.



Seems like the shop I worked in with lifetime tuneups included was just to make sure folks would keep bringing the bike back in so we could up sell them on worn or better stuff after the fact. The owner would get pissed at me for using to much soap and doing to good a job cleaning the bike which was part of the 'free tune up' Do that math. 


I know 4 LBS owners personally. One sell bikes he has had in stock for 5 or more years for MSRP, never less. Newer and newest bikes goes over MSRP.

He know what he has to do to keep the doors open in his market I can tell you is all. He got himself a Vette well after 60 years old and 30 years in the biz, and felt guilty about it not just driving junk around. Conditioned by more lean years than not. We all told hem he deserved it and to enjoy it. Just don't let the customers see it! 

Enjoy your bike and piling some miles on it!!

May you 'KEEP THE RUBBER SIDE DOWN' !!


----------



## mrwirey (May 30, 2008)

roadrider21 said:


> Bicycle riding in general, is just really enjoyable.


Hills much?


----------



## Shuffleman (Sep 4, 2013)

I prefer to size up myself. I have no reason to say this other than it appears to be what is most comfortable for me. This only applies to road bikes though. On the MTB, I would size down over up.
I think that it just boils down to personal preference. We all have them and there is nothing wrong with that. Ride that which makes you the most comfortable would be my advice.
There is no one size fits all when it comes to this question.


----------

