# Tarmac sizing question



## locomoto (Aug 28, 2009)

I'm 6' 2 3/4" with a 36 inch inseam and am looking at the Tarmac. I'm either a 58 or 61 I think, but the 61 seems really big with a 600mm top tube and a 230 head tube. The 58 has a 582mm top tube and a 205 head tube. Is there anyone out there with similar sizing to me that could chime in? Also not sure if it's recommended to go a little bigger with a shorter stem or to go smaller with a longer stem.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

locomoto said:


> I'm 6' 2 3/4" with a 36 inch inseam and am looking at the Tarmac. I'm either a 58 or 61 I think, but the 61 seems really big with a 600mm top tube and a 230 head tube. The 58 has a 582mm top tube and a 205 head tube. Is there anyone out there with similar sizing to me that could chime in? Also not sure if it's recommended to go a little bigger with a shorter stem or to go smaller with a longer stem.


If this is your first road bike, your best bet is to visit your LBS for sizing and subsequent fitting before you test ride some bikes. Even if someone is your height and close in inseam, proportions are most likely different as is fitness and rider preference - all affecting reach and stack (bar height) requirements.

If, OTOH, this isn't your first road bike, you can use your current bikes geo for a baseline to compare, but that's assuming a near optimal fit.


----------



## locomoto (Aug 28, 2009)

This is my first road bike. It can be kind of confusing because I was told based on my measurements that I could ride either a 58 or 61...or within that range. Then I go in another bike shop and they say I am definitely not a 58 and have to be a 60 or 61 for sure. I rode a 61 yesterday and felt a little too stretched out, but like how the bike felt when standing and pedalling hard. Maybe I just need to test ride more bikes in both sizes. I'm also told I have a shorter upper torso for my height and longer legs.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

locomoto said:


> This is my first road bike. It can be kind of confusing because I was told based on my measurements that I could ride either a 58 or 61...or within that range. Then I go in another bike shop and they say I am definitely not a 58 and have to be a 60 or 61 for sure. I rode a 61 yesterday and felt a little too stretched out, but like how the bike felt when standing and pedalling hard. Maybe I just need to test ride more bikes in both sizes. * I'm also told I have a shorter upper torso for my height and longer legs*.


Considering that it's your first road bike _and_ you're proportioned as you are, it makes it all the more important to work with some reputable shops with knowledgeable fitters. I could tell you that, given your proportions, a fitter may drop you down a size, but if your have a longer arm length (thus compensating for your shorter torso), they may not.

One thing to be aware of is that (especially with compact geo) frame sizing is somewhat arbitrary between brands, so you could be a 61 on brand x and a 58 on brand y. For this reason, it's better to narrow down your reach requirements by focusing on the effective top tubes of the bikes you're interested in. But unless (or until) you become well versed in bike geo, this is something you have to entrust to a fitter. And a good one (IMO) will get input from you after test rides to make any appropriate adjustments.


----------



## locomoto (Aug 28, 2009)

Good to know. I guess it really comes down to test rides and what feels right. I think I just need to test as many bikes as I can. I plan to test a Tarmac size 58 this week so I guess I'll see how it feels. I also want to get on a couple bigger bikes just to compare.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

locomoto said:


> Good to know. I guess it really comes down to test rides and what feels right. I think I just need to test as many bikes as I can. I plan to test a Tarmac size 58 this week so I guess I'll see how it feels. I also want to get on a couple bigger bikes just to compare.


I agree with you about test rides. Ideally you'd be lucky enough to find a 58 and 61 Tarmac at a shop with a knowledgeable fitter, but things are seldom that easy.


----------



## ukbloke (Sep 1, 2007)

Sage advice from PJ352 as always. 

I think you could go either way. This seems to happen a lot with the 3cm jump between the 58 and the 61. I was in the same dilemma so I'll give you my data-point, though of course your mileage may vary. I'm taller at 6'5" and 38" cycling in-seam. I'm also relatively long in the leg and short in the torso, but also long in the arms. I went with the 58cm and couldn't be happier. I use a 130mm stem at 84 degrees angled down and 15mm spacers but might go with fewer soon. I have a lot of seat-post showing, around 25cm and almost max out the post. I have around 12cm of saddle to bar drop.

Now this all at the extreme end of the fit spectrum - the 61cm is certainly the more natural choice for someone for my height. I'm sure I could have made the 61cm work too. For me the longer top tube and head tube length in the 61cm frame were the problems, and it just felt too upright and too stretched out for me. Of course, I could accommodate that simply by removing all the spacers and shortening the stem to 120mm. The other thing about the 61cm frame is that it looks like a really big bike, especially the length and girth of the head tube assembly. I have to admit that aesthetics was a part of my choice to go with the 58cm.


----------



## locomoto (Aug 28, 2009)

yeah, I'm betting the 58 is the correct size for me between the two. The head tube on the 61 is just massive and I think a 60cm top tube is just too long for me to be comfortable. I'm with you about the looks, that 61 is definitely not that appealing to the eye!


----------



## Gibby (Aug 3, 2005)

I was in the same situation, but a size down from you (between 56 and 58cm). I'm 6'1" and also have a shorter torso to longer legs. I went with the 58cm Tarmac, but I am running a 100mm stem, flipped up at +6* (I know, I know...but looks aren't everything!). I've been pretty comfortable, but may end up looking at a Roubaix next time. I am getting older, and never have had any aspirations of racing. I also have a history of neck issues, and I'm not quite as flexible as I once was.


----------

