# 6 feet tall and a 54 cm frame



## maxw87 (Aug 24, 2010)

Will I be ok riding a 54 cm frame when I'm 6", and have a 33cm inseam? The stem on the bike is about an inch longer than a typical stem.

I'm getting the bike at next to nothing -- a hand me down from a friend, a 1990 colnago sprint, only costing about $120 total to tune and ship.


----------



## TnFeltRider (Jul 27, 2008)

I am 6' riding a 54cm Felt, with a 33" inseam and no problems


----------



## fa63 (Aug 16, 2007)

I am 6*'* tall with a 33*-inch* inseam, and I fit well to all three of my bikes: a 54cm (54.5cm eff. top tube) with a 130mm stem, a 55cm (54.9cm eff. top tube) with a 120mm stem, and a 56cm (56cm eff. top tube) with a 110mm stem. The saddle to bar drop is generally greater on a smaller bike, but if you are flexible this is not that big of an issue.


----------



## onespeed (Mar 21, 2002)

*The police have always told me I was 6 feet tall.*

I have never ridden anything less than a 56cm. Tried a 55cm once and it didnt feel right at all. 

I am a size 32 length for the legs, trying to get the waist back there.


----------



## gr8blues (Nov 20, 2009)

Can't hurt to give it a try, you can always sell it on ebay if it is too much drop for you. I am your size and ride a 58, but I am old and that size bike is not comfortable for me.


----------



## martinrjensen (Sep 23, 2007)

Just a hair over 6 ft with a 33in plus inseam and I ride both a 58cm and 60cm frame. 58cm is a better fit but I was able to make the 60 fit. I am surprised that a 54 would fit but it appears that a number of people here think it will. I had a 57cm Trek (1978 model) and needed a extended seat post just to make it fit (and a 130cm stem)


----------



## ZoomBoy (Jan 28, 2004)

Well at that price it won't hurt to try it. You could always flip it. FWIW I am about the same height and have about the same inseam as you do. I ride a 57cm Colnago. IMO this bike is probably a wee bit on the small side for you even with the long stem.


----------



## mimason (Oct 7, 2006)

If it the same sizing as current Colnagos then the 54 will fit more like a 56 or 57. For the money what do you have to lose? If it does not work out you won't lose any money selling it.


----------



## maxw87 (Aug 24, 2010)

The issue with selling is that I can't -- he used that bike to ride two ironmans in the 90s, and theres some sentimental value to it.

Is it worth the $100 or so to give it a try, or save towards something thats a little bigger?


----------



## SeaBass67 (Aug 16, 2010)

Don't waste your time and money.
If it's so sentimental, let him hang it on his wall and reminisce......


----------



## martinrjensen (Sep 23, 2007)

So he will essentially give you the bike ($100 bucks is "giving" it to you), but you can't sell it if you don't like it eh? How about just trying it on for size and telling him you will buy it if it fits? If you can't get it for a ride or 2, take it to a bike shop and telling them you can pick this up for almost free and you want a quick cheap fit to see if it's possible to set it up for your size. Not a 3 hour custom fit, but something that they can do for $20.00 bucks or so. I would think that a competent shop person should be able to at least tell you, that with this or that, yes (or no) this will be a good fit for you.


maxw87 said:


> The issue with selling is that I can't -- he used that bike to ride two ironmans in the 90s, and theres some sentimental value to it.
> 
> Is it worth the $100 or so to give it a try, or save towards something thats a little bigger?


----------



## maxw87 (Aug 24, 2010)

martinrjensen said:


> So he will essentially give you the bike ($100 bucks is "giving" it to you), but you can't sell it if you don't like it eh? How about just trying it on for size and telling him you will buy it if it fits? If you can't get it for a ride or 2, take it to a bike shop and telling them you can pick this up for almost free and you want a quick cheap fit to see if it's possible to set it up for your size. Not a 3 hour custom fit, but something that they can do for $20.00 bucks or so. I would think that a competent shop person should be able to at least tell you, that with this or that, yes (or no) this will be a good fit for you.


I'm not buying it from him, smart guy, if you read the initial post -- I'm just paying to have it shipped to where I lived, and then having to get it tuned -- i.e. a cost of about $100. He is getting zero money for the bike. He's not offering it to me just so I can turn around and sell it, but so I can get into cycling.


----------



## Cpk (Aug 1, 2009)

fa63 said:


> I am 6*'* tall with a 33*-inch* inseam, and I fit well to all three of my bikes: a 54cm (54.5cm eff. top tube) with a 130mm stem



Wow that's exactly what I ride and I am 5' 9.75" with probably an inch shorter inseam and I think my bike fits great but I wouldn't want to go an smaller!


----------



## RJohn (Mar 24, 2009)

I'm 5'11" with a 32" inseam and a 56 is my size. I think it's to small for you although it appears to work for some. Is your friend loaning it to you to use and then he will want it back at some time because of the sentimental value? What if it gets stolen or wrecked? I would let him keep it. Buy a bike you know will fit and preserve your friendship.


----------



## martinrjensen (Sep 23, 2007)

Oh, OK. How about checking out a local similar sized bike? That possible?


maxw87 said:


> I'm not buying it from him, smart guy, if you read the initial post -- I'm just paying to have it shipped to where I lived, and then having to get it tuned -- i.e. a cost of about $100. He is getting zero money for the bike. He's not offering it to me just so I can turn around and sell it, but so I can get into cycling.


----------



## OldEndicottHiway (Jul 16, 2007)

Huh. I'm assuming that since this is an older bike, and a Colnago, it is traditional geometry. 

I would think, a 54 in traditional geometry would be too small for you.


----------



## Andy69 (Jun 14, 2008)

I would think that's too small.

I'm a hair over 6' with around a 33" inseam, and my 55 was too small. I have a 57 now and I'm much happier.


----------



## Keeping up with Junior (Feb 27, 2003)

*56cm*

I am 6'0" with a 32" pants inseam and all my bikes are 56cm and fit very well.


----------



## mmoose (Apr 2, 2004)

Differnet bike manufacturers use different sizeing. And the older traditional geometry is measured different than today's compact stuff.

6', 33' inseam here, my 1989 bike is a 58, my 1999 is a 61. Today, the bike shop always starts off with a 55/56 when they try to sell me something. 

So be very careful. 

Is your friend (the bike owner) the same proprtions as you? Would you like an undersized bike with an extra long stem? 

I wouldn't and I wouldn't suggest to someone just starting out to go with such a setup.


----------



## bwhite_4 (Aug 29, 2006)

I'm 5'10" with a 32" inseam and I ride a 55.5 effective TT with a 120 stem.


----------



## slimjw (Jul 30, 2008)

Your particular measurements and flexibility will be the issue here. There are plenty of 6 foot pros riding bikes with a 54cm TT and long-ass stems. The head tube height and overall stack height with spacers/stem will probably be the bigger issue. It's up to you to figure out if you have the flexibility to run that setup without needing 3-4 cm of spacers, which looks goofy and sort of negates the aerodynamic benefit gained from riding a smaller frame with a lot of seatpost to bar drop.


----------



## Guest (Oct 5, 2010)

Im 5'-11'' and i ride a 58cm, feels great. The shop owner tried getting me into a 60cm bike and didnt like the feel. If your happy with the way it feels thats all that matters. Being comfortable when you ride is important.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*probably not*

We don't know enough to deal with certainties. We don't know the exact measurements of the bike. We don't know how the bike is currently set up, with steerer tube length, seat post length, stem angle, etc. We don't know how important the look of the overall package is to you. Based on the most common measurements, this bike will likely be significantly too small.
A lot of bikes can be manipulated with different sized parts to fit, but wind up looking awful, with a spacer stack that looks like it's designed to lift fire fighters to the 43rd floor to fight a high rise blaze, and seats slammed back so far the clamp is fudge-packing the saddle nose placing your rear is over the back tire ala Schwinn Stingray.


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

I'm 5'4", and I'm more likely to be comfortable on a traditional 54cm then someone 6 foot.

You're going to find that the handlebars are too low and close to you and the ride will seem twitchy. $120 is too much for a bike you are essentially renting that doesn't fit.

Would you go on an interview in a suit that is a size too small, even if it is a Gucci?


----------



## maxw87 (Aug 24, 2010)

rx-79g said:


> I'm 5'4", and I'm more likely to be comfortable on a traditional 54cm then someone 6 foot.
> 
> You're going to find that the handlebars are too low and close to you and the ride will seem twitchy. $120 is too much for a bike you are essentially renting that doesn't fit.
> 
> Would you go on an interview in a suit that is a size too small, even if it is a Gucci?


touche


----------



## cs1 (Sep 16, 2003)

bwhite_4 said:


> I'm 5'10" with a 32" inseam and I ride a 55.5 effective TT with a 120 stem.


I'm pretty close at 5' 9.5" with a 32" inseam. All my bikes have about a 56CM TT. I just can't see all the love for tiny frames. How much weight are they actually saving?


----------



## ZoomBoy (Jan 28, 2004)

On Colnago tradional geometry frames the listed size is the TT length. So this bike will have a 54cm TT. It's great that your friend is letting you borrow his bike but IMO without any other details to go on this bike will be too small as is....


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

maxw87 said:


> touche


Not really; the comparison just begs the OP's question, in that it presumes that the bike is too small. There's just no way to tell from what we know. I'm just a fraction of an inch shorter than the OP, with legs that are slightly longer, but with relatively long femurs. Multiple well-respected fitters have put me on 54cm frames. I invariably need to use spacers under the stem, but never a crazy stack of them.


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

Undecided said:


> Not really; the comparison just begs the OP's question, in that it presumes that the bike is too small. There's just no way to tell from what we know. I'm just a fraction of an inch shorter than the OP, with legs that are slightly longer, but with relatively long femurs. Multiple well-respected fitters have put me on 54cm frames. I invariably need to use spacers under the stem, but never a crazy stack of them.


I really don't see why, unless the next larger size is too great a jump.

Frame sizes traditionally come in 2cm increments, and top tubes only get longer by 1.5cm per size (small bikes are long, tall bikes are short, 56's are roughly sqare). Given the farily small increments of top tube length, why would someone that height benefit from riding a frame that is usually sized to someone around 5'8"? Even if your upper body is short, your legs put you up high enough that a traditional 54's head tube is going to make for a large drop to the bars. But a 56 only has to have a stem that's 1cm shorter to make up for the size difference and bring the bars up closer to where they are useful.

I don't know why your femur length matters - KOPS fitting is only a starting point and has little to do with frame size.

My 5'11" girlfriend was recently "fit" to a 53 cm Orbea Diva. I think the main thing that got her fitted to it was that it cost $3000 and she liked the color more than the Orca. She returned the ill fitting bike the next day.

Generally, too small bikes are more of a headache than too large bikes. A 56 would be a smallish bike for 6 footer, unless the guy was built like a spider with a very short torso and long upper arms to reach down to the bar.

This is, of course, assuming that we are talking about traditional frame sizing, and not wacky compact sizing where its really a 57 geometry wise, but the seat tube is 54, so that's what they call it.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

Maybe I am that spider. For me, it comes down to choosing a couple of cms of spacers on a 54 vs. a stem that crosses the line (IMHO) from short to too-short on a 56. KOPS or no KOPS, I have a lot of setback (and a torso that is relatively short for my height, but arms that are relatively long). My last two fittings were with independent fitters who don't sell bikes, so I don't think they were trying to steer me anywhere in particular. For what it's worth, I spend about 800 hours a year on bikes with this fit (which has only changed in small ways over the past few years). I did ride a larger frame when I was a newer racer (which was fit to me by the shop that sold it!), so I do have some comparative experience. But it's just me.


----------



## Speed_Metal (Feb 9, 2004)

i've got an idea
first off, find out how much steerer tube length there is. and if the stem can be raised up at all? or if the steerer tube is cut off at the top of the stem clamp
then get all of the dimensions of the bicycle
go to a bicycle shop that has an adjustable fit-bike. pay their fee to have them size up the fit-bike with the measurements
if its too small, find out if there's any way to compensate (ie: longer, set-back seatpost, longer, angled stem)

edit:
if its a matter of not enough steerer tube to raise the stem up high enough (you don't want the stem TOO high off of the top of the head tube), you could always just buy a new fork
it'll still be less expensive (and probably higher quality) even if you have to buy a new seat post, stem and fork, than buying an entire bicycle


----------



## 56cbr600rr (Sep 24, 2009)

it might...

I'm 5.10 1/2 with a 34 inch inseam. I ride a tarmac with a 56.5 cm effective tt and love it! lots of drop too.


----------



## rx-79g (Sep 14, 2010)

Undecided said:


> Maybe I am that spider. For me, it comes down to choosing a couple of cms of spacers on a 54 vs. a stem that crosses the line (IMHO) from short to too-short on a 56. KOPS or no KOPS, I have a lot of setback (and a torso that is relatively short for my height, but arms that are relatively long). My last two fittings were with independent fitters who don't sell bikes, so I don't think they were trying to steer me anywhere in particular. For what it's worth, I spend about 800 hours a year on bikes with this fit (which has only changed in small ways over the past few years). I did ride a larger frame when I was a newer racer (which was fit to me by the shop that sold it!), so I do have some comparative experience. But it's just me.


You have just beautifully explained why some people need to buy custom. It's cool that you can make a 54 work (hopefully without a dangerous amount of spacers), but a custom build would really make the most of your body type.


----------



## Undecided (Apr 2, 2007)

rx-79g said:


> You have just beautifully explained why some people need to buy custom. It's cool that you can make a 54 work (hopefully without a dangerous amount of spacers), but a custom build would really make the most of your body type.


When I get a team deal on a custom bike (or stop racing), I'm there!


----------

