# BIkes for Tall People



## microwavedh2o (Oct 16, 2009)

I've seen a few threads about this, but none of the suggestions are close to my budget. 

I'm looking into buying a bike and getting back into cycling. I rode for a couple of years in high school (nothing too serious, I think my greatest accomplishment was finishing the MS150 ride from Charlotte to Myrtle Beach). 

I'm 6-8 (36'' inseam), and I went into a shop just to see what the selection would be like. The guy said a 64cm frame would work (they didn't have any in stock, and mostly dealt Trek), but I sat on a 60cm frame flat footed, knees slightly bent. I'm worried he's going to try to sell me something that is going to be too small. Originally I was only planning to spend $1100, but after shopping around, I'd be willing to go up to $1500. This would just be a weekend bike for 20-40 mile rides, maybe a triathlon sometime if I ever get into it. 

Basically, are there any stock frames that would fit me, and is the budget unreasonably low? 

Thanks in advance!


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

There are bikes out there. I think Gunnar makes one, Soma makes a 64, and there are others. Don't get a 60. It will not work. I ride a 63 and it is really to small, and I'm a bit shorter than you. Just because a bike is advertised as a "64" doesn't mean that it will be big enough. Some companies measure to the top of the seat tube, not to the center or top of the top tube.


----------



## Britishbane (Mar 4, 2009)

I'm an inch shorter than you, but have the same basic inseam (I'm assuming you are talking pant inseam and not pubic bone to floor). In my search for a bike I basically found that a few off-the-rack bikes could be made to fit me, but none of them would do so very well. Cannondale makes a 63cm Caad frame, Trek and Specialized both do 64cm on some of their aluminum frames. I would have to compromise certain fit aspects and in the end did want to do that so I went custom. My bike as designed will end up with a 66.5cm seat tube and a 60.52cm top tube. Those dimensions are hard achieve on a stock bike. Don't despair though, give some builders a call. You could be surprised by the prices for a custom frame. For example, Paul at Rock Lobster can build a steel frame and fork for you at or around $1200. My advice would be to hold off, raise some additional funds, and then go custom. I think you'll be more happy in the end.


----------



## innergel (Jun 14, 2002)

I think the top tube is going to be the issue for you with most stock bikes. A 36" inseam isn't that long for a 6'8" guy. I'm 6'5" and have a 35.5" inseam, so I feel your pain as far as stock bikes go. You are going to have a difficult time finding anything stock that fits correctly. They might be able to make a big frame work with a long post and stem, but it will look wonky. I rode one like that for a long time. It rode fine but didn't look "right". 

If I were you, I'd look for an older steel bike. Maybe try and find a 64x60 or something like that, and build it up. Get a lightly used 105/Ultegra/Chorus group and slap it on. It will ride fine and be all you need for weekend 20-40 milers. Ride it for a year and then if you want to upgrade the frame, go get a custom frame built. There are some good builders who will build you a nice custom steel frame for $1000. Move the parts over from the other bike and sell the frame. Voila, custom bike that fits you like it should. 


I do have a 63cm Trek 2300 frameset that I'll sell you cheap. It's a 2001 model with a carbon fork. I rode it for a long time and it was a good bike. I upgraded to some nice steel and it's just hanging in my garage. I'd be happy to get it to someone who might use it. I've even got a set of 3T Forgie XL bars and a matching 13cm stem. That will get you dang close to the 64 the shop suggested. You'll just need a group, some wheels and someone to build it up. Should be easily doable for $1000 for the whole bike. 

PM me if you want to talk some more.


----------



## terbennett (Apr 1, 2006)

Britishbane said:


> I'm an inch shorter than you, but have the same basic inseam (I'm assuming you are talking pant inseam and not pubic bone to floor). In my search for a bike I basically found that a few off-the-rack bikes could be made to fit me, but none of them would do so very well. Cannondale makes a 63cm Caad frame, Trek and Specialized both do 64cm on some of their aluminum frames. I would have to compromise certain fit aspects and in the end did want to do that so I went custom. My bike as designed will end up with a 66.5cm seat tube and a 60.52cm top tube. Those dimensions are hard achieve on a stock bike. Don't despair though, give some builders a call. You could be surprised by the prices for a custom frame. For example, Paul at Rock Lobster can build a steel frame and fork for you at or around $1200. My advice would be to hold off, raise some additional funds, and then go custom. I think you'll be more happy in the end.


+1. The only way you will really get a bike that truly fits you at that height is a custom build bike. One of my riding buddies is 6'4" and he rides a 62 cm Trek Madone. The bike fits him but it's one of those if they offered a larger size, it would fit me better. Go custom. You'll be getting it right the first time around and many aren't that much more than off the shelf.


----------



## velojon (Mar 8, 2006)

A 6'6" friend of mine just got the 64cm Trek 1.5 (alu frame 105 group) for about $1500. Should fit him reasonably well after some stem & seatpost fiddling but I was disappointed to see the crank length of only 175mm without much ground clearance to increase it with new cranks. He could easily use 180+ cranks.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

I've been making due with small bikes (63's) for far too long.

I'm guessing his pants inseam is 36", just like mine. His cycling inseam is more like 39", but that's speculation.


----------



## nightfend (Mar 15, 2009)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> I'm guessing his pants inseam is 36", just like mine. His cycling inseam is more like 39", but that's speculation.


My street clothing pant inseam is 38" and I'm only 6' 5". So he's probably closer to 38" to 40".

I still think going by a headtube height is the way to go. The headtube height determines ultimately how high up your handlebars will be, and how many spacers you will need to use. 

You might look at the Trek 2 Series aluminum bikes. They are fairly inexpensive (compared to carbon) and the 64cm frame has a headtube of 250mm. That's about the tallest headtube you'll find in pre-made bikes.

Another thing to note is that standard road forks only have a steerer tube length of 300mm, so no headtube on a bike will be longer than this measurement unless they use a specialty fork like an Alpha Q Z for large riders.


----------



## Dr. Placebo (May 8, 2007)

Covered


----------



## microwavedh2o (Oct 16, 2009)

*summary*

Yeah, the 36'' inseam is for pants. I haven't done a pubic bone measurement in a while, but I think its 38 or 39 (maybe more). 

So in summary what I'm gathering is that I should save for a "relatively" inexpensive custom steel frame, and that a 64cm 2.x Trek would work ok, but will look a little off?


----------



## microwavedh2o (Oct 16, 2009)

also, how much clearance should there be when you straddle the top tube?


----------



## gormleyflyer2002 (Sep 12, 2005)

nightfend said:


> My street clothing pant inseam is 38" and I'm only 6' 5". So he's probably closer to 38" to 40".
> 
> I still think going by a headtube height is the way to go. The headtube height determines ultimately how high up your handlebars will be, and how many spacers you will need to use.
> 
> ...


i'm a little over 6'6" and ride a stock 64cm Trek....it has a tall head tube and longer steerer......you'll need a bike with more than a 300mm steerer thats for sure. I also built up a pretty cheap Cannondale crit bike.....Cannondale still make a 66cm Caad 5, they have the tubing and will build as per order.....I bought a 450mm Alpha Q fork and cut it to suit......some nice end of season deals at PBK on Shimano 105mm group.....ebay for wheels, some Rival 180mm cranks and you'll be rocking on a pretty quick bike for a big guy. 

my cycling inseam is around 99/100cm depending on who's measuring.....pants are 
37"/38" I'm more legs than torso, both bikes have shorter stems 110/120. Beware of bike shops......most will sell you just about anything.

good luck.......you do find some huge custom bikes on e-bay every now and then.


----------



## Britishbane (Mar 4, 2009)

microwavedh2o said:


> also, how much clearance should there be when you straddle the top tube?


Thats not really an important measurement. Doesn't mean very much in regards to fit and ride characteristics of a given frame.


----------



## joe2ker (Aug 4, 2009)

Soma makes a 66cm steel frame.

http://www.somafab.com/extrasmoothie.html


----------



## rook (Apr 5, 2009)

Leonard Zinn is a tall guy. I hear he makes good frames for tall guys.


----------



## schnee (Jan 27, 2006)

Have you looked into custom?

Curtlo makes a steel, single-color powdercoated frame for an amazing price, and he's very reliable. You'll wait a couple months, but being tall also (although only a mere 6'-3") I know that bad biomechanics are much more punishing on us bigger dudes so it might be worth it.

Edit: whoa, rook, good find. Didn't know Somas went that big. I owned a Soma Rush, fantastic bike, I can recommend them too.


----------



## microwavedh2o (Oct 16, 2009)

*update*

Ok, I've done some shopping around, and I think I'm going to go with a 63cm cannondale caad9 or 64cm trek 1.5. 

While they might be a little small, its hard to find anything else within my budget (originally a grand, now upped to $1200). Also, I am just starting back into cycling so I have a hard time justifying paying much more. I sat on the cannondale the other day and it felt pretty good (although I'm not sure if I'd be saying that after a 50 mile ride). 

Its really frustrating shopping because the guys always throw out bikes that are way out of my price range just because I'm tall.


----------



## bikesdirect (Sep 9, 2006)

microwavedh2o said:


> I've seen a few threads about this, but none of the suggestions are close to my budget.
> 
> I'm looking into buying a bike and getting back into cycling. I rode for a couple of years in high school (nothing too serious, I think my greatest accomplishment was finishing the MS150 ride from Charlotte to Myrtle Beach).
> 
> ...


You could be happy on a traditional frame in 64cm; is my guess

and there are lots of complete bikes under $1100 in 64cm

If you can not find something; shot me a PM and I can find you a 64c under $1000


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

microwavedh2o said:


> Ok, I've done some shopping around, and I think I'm going to go with a 63cm cannondale caad9 or 64cm trek 1.5.
> 
> While they might be a little small, its hard to find anything else within my budget (originally a grand, now upped to $1200). Also, I am just starting back into cycling so I have a hard time justifying paying much more. I sat on the cannondale the other day and it felt pretty good (although I'm not sure if I'd be saying that after a 50 mile ride).
> 
> Its really frustrating shopping because the guys always throw out bikes that are way out of my price range just because I'm tall.



It is frustrating. I've been there. Try a few more bike shops. Someone out there will help you. Seriously, look at the Soma, and Gunnar. Both of those have off-the-shelf options that should work for you.

I rode a Cannondale 6 in the largest size they make, and its still too small.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

bikesdirect said:


> You could be happy on a traditional frame in 64cm; is my guess
> 
> and there are lots of complete bikes under $1100 in 64cm
> 
> If you can not find something; shot me a PM and I can find you a 64c under $1000



How tall are you? Your advice would be like me suggesting to you that you could be happy on a 52 if you are about 6' tall. Some of us don't like 5 inches of drop between the saddle and handlebars, and don't want 14" of seat post showing. That's the way my 63 is.


----------



## microwavedh2o (Oct 16, 2009)

I've checked out gunnar and soma, but the frame/fork alone maxes out my budget (1200 fully equiped -- sans shoes and pedals and all)


----------



## gormleyflyer2002 (Sep 12, 2005)

you'll be pretty close on that 64cm Trek.....is the steerer tube 33cm ? 
maybe not ideal but for sure it will get your started and you can sell it easy. The good things about big bikes, they seem to hold their value a little better for some reason......anyway, my point, even if its not ideal it will help you gain some insight to exactly what size bike you do need or want. Trust yourself, if it feels to small..........probably is.


----------



## hepcatbent (Aug 19, 2009)

I have found over the years that frame sizing has as much to do with the style of bike as the dimensions of the rider. I'm 6'5" tall with a 38" (clothing) inseam. With the touring frame I just built up for myself, I built up a 60cm frame with a fairly short stem and trekking bars, and it fits my riding style amazingly well. I probably could have done with a 62cm frame, but the 60cm fits ok. Further, all 60cm frames aren't the same; tube angles, and other tube lengths also vary and change the fit. Further the 'stuff' you hang on it, stems, seatposts, crank length... will also change the fit.

So... I guess my advice initially isn't to be so hung up on the actual dimensions of a frame further than that being a starting point, and then then customize it appropriately to make it fit. It's tough to do if you're just starting out again, but it's worth while undertaking.


----------



## bikesdirect (Sep 9, 2006)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> How tall are you? Your advice would be like me suggesting to you that you could be happy on a 52 if you are about 6' tall. Some of us don't like 5 inches of drop between the saddle and handlebars, and don't want 14" of seat post showing. That's the way my 63 is.



I understand your point for a long term investment bike; especially for someone who may need a custom bike at some point -- but what I was trying to say was; OP could get a nice bike at even $400 to $800 in a 64cm and get the feel for what he likes -- later he could easy move up and be more clear on sizing after a season or so. And with the right bike he could always flip it later at very little out of pocket. Mainly, I was thinking this as he stated 'nothing too serious'.

And to answer your question: I am 5'8" - most 'experts' in shops would put me on a 52cm or even 50cm -- I ride a 54cm but find a 56cm more comfortable than a 52cm in a traditional frame. Sizing is personal; no one can tell you exactly what you will like; and you can not even know yourself until after lots of experience. Luckily, most riders can have lots of fun and be comfortable within a range of sizes.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

bikesdirect said:


> I understand your point for a long term investment bike; especially for someone who may need a custom bike at some point -- but what I was trying to say was; OP could get a nice bike at even $400 to $800 in a 64cm and get the feel for what he likes -- later he could easy move up and be more clear on sizing after a season or so. And with the right bike he could always flip it later at very little out of pocket. Mainly, I was thinking this as he stated 'nothing too serious'.
> 
> And to answer your question: I am 5'8" - most 'experts' in shops would put me on a 52cm or even 50cm -- I ride a 54cm but find a 56cm more comfortable than a 52cm in a traditional frame. Sizing is personal; no one can tell you exactly what you will like; and you can not even know yourself until after lots of experience. Luckily, most riders can have lots of fun and be comfortable within a range of sizes.



Before you give advice on what size of bike a tall person needs, maybe you should go get a 42 (traditional, not compact) and ride it for a few thousand miles. You can put any seat post and stem you want on it, but you have to use the stock fork. Then you would understand where I come from. Would you know if you like cycling or not after that?

You simply don't know what you are talking about on this one.


EDIT:: How about this. If you can make it to Tucson in two weeks I'll loan you my son's old bike. I'll pay you entry and you can ride El Tour De Tucson with me, on his bike. This is a 43, with 650c wheels. Relatively, that's about the same as the bike you are suggesting the OP ride. If you want, I'll even pick you up at the airport, and let you ride it around a bit before the event. What do you say?


----------



## bikesdirect (Sep 9, 2006)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> Before you give advice on what size of bike a tall person needs, maybe you should go get a 42 (traditional, not compact) and ride it for a few thousand miles. You can put any seat post and stem you want on it, but you have to use the stock fork. Then you would understand where I come from. Would you know if you like cycling or not after that?
> 
> You simply don't know what you are talking about on this one.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the offer; but I have plenty of bikes in 42c, 43c, and 44c in stock
Also have lots in 64cm {our sales in 64cm are higher than industry norms due to the fact that we stock them at all times}

I have sold thousands of bikes that are 64cm over the years; and many that were over 64cm also. I do not think a person has to be tall to 'size' a tall rider; nor does a person need to be short to size a small rider.

From my experience a guy 6'8" with a 36" inseam can be happy on a production traditional framed bike in 64cm -- but in time if he becomes eaten up with cycling [like we are] he will want a custom frame. That is what I have observed in over 30 years of selling riders of all sizes bikes.

I think OP can find out if he likes a 64cm by taking a spin on one to start with. Even a 5 or 10 mile test ride would give him a good idea.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> Before you give advice on what size of bike a tall person needs, maybe you should go get a 42 (traditional, not compact) and ride it for a few thousand miles. You can put any seat post and stem you want on it, but you have to use the stock fork. Then you would understand where I come from. Would you know if you like cycling or not after that?


I'm not following the math. You are suggesting that bikesdirect should try a bike 10cm smaller than his bike size, implying that the 64cm that he recommended is 10cm too small for the OP? Do you seriously think the OP needs a 74cm bike?



> Some of us don't like 5 inches of drop between the saddle and handlebars, and don't want 14" of seat post showing. That's the way my 63 is.


I'm also not understanding this math. If you have a 63cm frame (center BB to top ST?), 14" of seat-post (35cm), maybe 1.5" of extra height in the saddle (4cm) and say 175mm cranks, that is a grand total of 120cm or 47" of height from the saddle to the pedal when in the lowest position. Something doesn't add up here!

Perhaps you are throwing exaggerated numbers out there to make a point?

For the record I'm 6'5" and have 2 bikes - a 62cm bikesdirect bike and a 58cm Tarmac. The sizing of the bikesdirect bike was an educated guess and it was not too far off the right sizing for me. I built the 58cm up from parts myself, and it fits me like a glove. I will admit to large amounts of seat-post and drop - this position works for me, may not work for others. This is why the OP needs to throw his leg over some bikes and see what works.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

bikesdirect said:


> Thanks for the offer; but I have plenty of bikes in 42c, 43c, and 44c in stock
> Also have lots in 64cm {our sales in 64cm are higher than industry norms due to the fact that we stock them at all times}
> 
> I have sold thousands of bikes that are 64cm over the years; and many that were over 64cm also. I do not think a person has to be tall to 'size' a tall rider; nor does a person need to be short to size a small rider.
> ...


I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. I have experience riding a bike that's too small. You don't. Which one of us knows what they are talking about?


----------



## bikesdirect (Sep 9, 2006)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> I think we're going to have to agree to disagree. I have experience riding a bike that's too small. You don't. Which one of us knows what they are talking about?


I have riden very size of bike - too big and too small {please do not tell me I have riden a bike that is too small - I have done that on purpose to learn the effects}

My guess is we both know what we are talking about; but just disagree

It is very common that two individuals know a topic well; buy do not agree on a given point. This is especially true in subjective matters {like music, art, and bike sizing}

I think we can agree; it would be good for OP to try a stock 64cm out and see if he can enjoy it.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

bikesdirect said:


> I have riden very size of bike - too big and too small {please do not tell me I have riden a bike that is too small - I have done that on purpose to learn the effects}
> 
> My guess is we both know what we are talking about; but just disagree
> 
> ...


You've ridden a bike that's built for someone a foot shorter than you, and put thousands of miles on it? Somehow I doubt that.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> You've ridden a bike that's built for someone a foot shorter than you, and put thousands of miles on it? Somehow I doubt that.


Do you think that 64cm bikes are built for 5'8" individuals? This makes no sense to me.


----------



## My Own Private Idaho (Aug 14, 2007)

ukbloke said:


> Do you think that 64cm bikes are built for 5'8" individuals? This makes no sense to me.



Of course not, but that's what he'd have to ride to get the forced handlebar drop that big guys have to live with. 5" is too much for most of us, but that's what I'm stuck with if I ride a bike with a 300mm steer tube.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

My Own Private Idaho said:


> Of course not, but that's what he'd have to ride to get the forced handlebar drop that big guys have to live with. 5" is too much for most of us, but that's what I'm stuck with if I ride a bike with a 300mm steer tube.


There's a decent number of frames with longer head tubes available today than ever before (eg. 25cm). My Tarmac frame came with an outrageous amount of excess steerer tube - I think I've lopped off around 8cm of it. Also, other than aesthetics, what's so wrong with choosing a stem angle that gets the bars where you need them? 

I certainly agree that large frames are hard to come by. bikedirect keeps bikes stocked in the full range of sizes, and LBS's often don't stock them at all. I also think that off-the-shelf large frames simply don't seem to scale up in quite the same way that people too (typically too long top tubes). Custom is surely the way to go if you want a perfect fit. But in the OP's price range, an off-the-shelf 64cm is probably the only (new) option, and he doesn't really have the budget for aesthetics. Trying the bikes out and getting a good fit are critical.


----------



## phoeve (Jul 27, 2009)

*2 words*

LONG CRANKS !

I am 6'8" with a 40" cycling inseam. (36" jeans). I ride a Seven with 205mm cranks. The cranks make all the difference. Now I know how normal sized people feel when they ride a bike. I rode the bike for a while with 175mm. When my eBay 205mm's came in I could not believe the difference. After a few weeks my spin came back. Now I'll never go back. 

Sure they cost more. But it's cheaper than having your legs shortened 

The climbing rides are much easier now!

BTW: I'm running 200mm on my mountain bike.

I ride Zinn 205mm cranks on my road bike and these on my mountain bike http://www.customcranks.de/en/produkte.html
The 200mm German cranks are 110/74mm (compact) spider. $200US.

I do all the wrenching myself.


----------

