# help a 163cm rider find a bicycle that fits.....



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

long story short (excuse the pun), i have never had a bicycle that fit me properly in my whole life.... being a small male 163cm, 72 inseam with short arms, bikes have always been either a lot or a little too big for me

my last bike, which was sold to me by a local specialneeds dealer and told me over and over again it was NOT too big, was a size 52 (small) tarmac elite..... great bike, fantastic snap and feel from the carbon but... wayyyyyy to big

i am in the market for another carbon bike..... has 99% decided to go with the super6 105 in size 48 but it still feels a tad big.... i am not sure if the top tube is too long on these bikes (i was told during a fitting for the bike that my top tube shoud be 49-50, all these bikes i am trying have 51.5-52 top tubes) or if the head tube is too low and aggresively angled, therefore accentuating the extra length on the the top tube

when i rode the super6, I rode an xs argon radon back to back and it was more comfy.... it actually had a longer top tube but a higher head tube and a different head tube angle, more relaxed (1 degree less head tube angle and more than a cm more heigth compared to super6)

when i rode the super6 in 48cm, i have to reach for that last bit to get my arms to the bars whether it be in the hoods or tops (drops seems fine when standing but when sitting i can never get the 90 angle in my elbow) and i am sure that is compromising my position and efficiency.... even the fitter immediately tilted the angle of the bars upwards.... so this little bit of reaching for the bars forces my body fwd and puts too much weight on my hands

any other short arrmed cyclists who can comment? should i get a womens frame? or would a bike like a 48cm synapse with a more relaxed head angle and heigth do the trick? is was also looking at the xs cervelo rs for its tall head tube heigth but this bike has 650cc wheels? 

any thoughts would be appreciated.... my last bike buying adventure was a disaster (52cm tarmac sold to me by a spec dealer who just wanted to unload the bike) and i want to make sure i get the right sized bike this time around

thanks


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

Look hard at bikes with 650C wheels. There's no real drawback. Tire availablity for that wheel size is not as good as for 700C, but it's good enough. You are far more likely to find a good-handling frame that fits you with the smaller wheels,


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

JCavilia said:


> Look hard at bikes with 650C wheels. There's no real drawback. Tire availablity for that wheel size is not as good as for 700C, but it's good enough. You are far more likely to find a good-handling frame that fits you with the smaller wheels,


thx for the reply.... thats the thing, i have total "cc" envy.... all the companies want to push 700cc wheels so they make me think that there is something wrong with 650cc

i will try the 650cc cervelo... maybe it is the ticket for me..... most other xs bikes look to have such serious toe overlap with 700cc wheels


----------



## tednugent (Apr 26, 2010)

How about looking at a Womens's specific bike? They'll have a frame a step (maybe 2) smaller than the 480mm size.

The women's paintjob is nicer than the "mens/universal" paintjob, when you compare the one with the green paint trim.

No shame in riding a women's geometry bike... because you don't have to tell people it is.

SUPERSIX WOMEN'S 5 105


----------



## renedelbarco (Mar 28, 2010)

I can relate to your issue as I am 164 and 72.8 inseam. I have tried different brands throughout the years but I have settled with the Scott Addict. I tried the 47 cm and the 49 cm. Both fit me fine. I can straddle the frame and there is some space left which I think is mainly due to the low bottom bracket and the headset. Both use 700C. I am using the 49 cm as I need a longer top tube/stem. The bike is very responsive and a joy to ride.


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

tednugent said:


> How about looking at a Womens's specific bike? They'll have a frame a step (maybe 2) smaller than the 480mm size.
> 
> The women's paintjob is nicer than the "mens/universal" paintjob, when you compare the one with the green paint trim.
> 
> ...


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

renedelbarco said:


> I can relate to your issue as I am 164 and 72.8 inseam. I have tried different brands throughout the years but I have settled with the Scott Addict. I tried the 47 cm and the 49 cm. Both fit me fine. I can straddle the frame and there is some space left which I think is mainly due to the low bottom bracket and the headset. Both use 700C. I am using the 49 cm as I need a longer top tube/stem. The bike is very responsive and a joy to ride.


thx for the post... i would love to check out the scott bikes but the only scott dealer in town is also the specialized dealer who sold me a 52 cm tarmac and tried to put a LONGER stem on it to fit me!!!! lol


----------



## JCavilia (Sep 12, 2005)

miker2012 said:


> thx for the reply.... thats the thing, i have total "cc" envy.... all the companies want to push 700cc wheels so they make me think that there is something wrong with 650cc
> 
> i will try the 650cc cervelo... maybe it is the ticket for me..... most other xs bikes look to have such serious toe overlap with 700cc wheels


Well, they're not quite telling the truth.

BTW, there's only one "C" in those wheel size designations. It's a historical oddity, related to old designations for tire widths, that aren't otherwise used anymore. Officially, in the new style designations, a 700c wheel is one with a 622mm bead seat diameter. A 650c wheel is 571mm.


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

JCavilia said:


> Well, they're not quite telling the truth.
> 
> BTW, there's only one "C" in those wheel size designations. It's a historical oddity, related to old designations for tire widths, that aren't otherwise used anymore. Officially, in the new style designations, a 700c wheel is one with a 622mm bead seat diameter. A 650c wheel is 571mm.


thanks... i am going to test the cervelo rs in xs... it has 650cc wheels

i always had a feeling that a properly fitted bike for me would have 650cc wheels and a 165mm crank but no dealer ever cared enough to try and fit me on one


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

miker2012 said:


> ... of all the shops i visited, only one shop mentioned womens frames.... my only concern will be the huge toe overlap on a tiny frame with 700cc wheels, i dont mind a bit of overlap but just not too much


Toe overlap is only an issue if your riding very slowly and position the pedal opposite (or outside) your direction of turn, forward. So, don't do that. 

But seriously, learn some basics of bike handling and it won't be an issue, especially when you get above ~ 8 MPH, because a bikes front wheel being somewhat like a gyroscope, above a certain speed we actually _lean_ into turns much more than _turn_ into them. 

FWIW, I think WSD bikes are worth a look. As one example, the Trek Madone WSD's come in smaller sizes.
Trek Bicycle


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

PJ352 said:


> Toe overlap is only an issue if your riding very slowly and position the pedal opposite (or outside) your direction of turn, forward. So, don't do that.
> 
> But seriously, learn some basics of bike handling and it won't be an issue, especially when you get above ~ 8 MPH, because a bikes front wheel being somewhat like a gyroscope, above a certain speed we actually _lean_ into turns much more than _turn_ into them.
> 
> ...


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

miker2012 said:


> thanks for the post.... i will look at the trek bikes as well.... the cervelo dealer that i am going to see next week is also a trek dealer..... i am also looking at the xxs argon 18 gallium as well.... whats great about the argon 18,* the colors are the same for all the bikes regardless of size so thats a plus as many of the women speific frame i want from other manufacturers are too cloroful for my tastes...* also, i have not heard a single bad thing about these bikes, the gallium looks like a solid offering.


On a (sorta) side note, this brings up my issue with WSD bikes. That being, the name itself. Marin called theirs natural fit, which IMO wasn't perfect, but was better than WSD. As you probably know, when done correctly, the geo of these bikes is (generally) a shorter effective top tube and taller head tube, the former to accommodate riders proportioned longer legs/ shorter torso. The WSD designation makes little sense considering both genders can be proportioned this way. 



miker2012 said:


> i am basically convinced by the fitting and research i have done that i will not really fit on anything except an xxs/womens frame with a 50cm top tube.... luckily there are lot of options for me in this size
> 
> *the only question is, go with the 700c wheels or the 650c ones?* this debate has been beat to death on this forum and others, so i dont want to go over that here.... i guess my only question on the wheel size, if a person is not really concerned about overlap (which i am not as my tarmac had a decent amount of toe overlap and i know its non-factor at riding speeds), all things being equal, is there any advantage to the 650c over the 700c for someone my size? i would prefer 700c wheels but there is so much negative said about big wheels on 44 sized frames that i owe it to myself to at least take a look..... hopefully the cervelo dealer will put together a xs in the rs for me to try
> thanks


I'm no expert on such matters, so take what I'll offer with a grain of salt, but I'd suggest going with 650c wheels. Reason being, with road bikes, f/r rider weight distribution is pretty important - _primarily_ to preserve a bikes handling characteristics. Just as minimal compromises in the geo design of smaller frame sizes to preserve handling results in more toe overlap (and _not_ making those compromises would adversely affect handling), 650c wheels allow for a better f/r rider balance in the smaller frame sizes.

Reason being, to accommodate the larger wheels, the wheelbase is stretched (longer chainstays/ more fork rake, but the main triangle can't be elongated, _proportionally_) which together has the potential to adversely affect handling, But as I say, I'm no expert. I'm simply applying what I know about bike geo/ bike fit and applying the principles to this topic.


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

PJ352 said:


> On a (sorta) side note, this brings up my issue with WSD bikes. That being, the name itself. Marin called theirs natural fit, which IMO wasn't perfect, but was better than WSD. As you probably know, when done correctly, the geo of these bikes is (generally) a shorter effective top tube and taller head tube, the former to accommodate riders proportioned longer legs/ shorter torso. The WSD designation makes little sense considering both genders can be proportioned this way.
> 
> 
> I'm no expert on such matters, so take what I'll offer with a grain of salt, but I'd suggest going with 650c wheels. Reason being, with road bikes, f/r rider weight distribution is pretty important - _primarily_ to preserve a bikes handling characteristics. Just as minimal compromises in the geo design of smaller frame sizes to preserve handling results in more toe overlap (and _not_ making those compromises would adversely affect handling), 650c wheels allow for a better f/r rider balance in the smaller frame sizes.
> ...


thx for the post..... yes the paint and graphics on the some of the wsd frames leave alot to be desired.... it is kinda the "in" thing for the makers to rename their smallest frames as women specifc in order to attract more female buyers

the argon frames have really nice paint jobs in all sizes

as for your input on the 650c wheels, i tend to agree that i would be better off with 650c wheels... but i cant find any manufacturers making a xxs (44cm) frame with the 650c wheels, unless i have missed someting

cervelo makes the RS with 650c wheels, but even in the xs, that frame is too large for me... cannondale and trek, it seems all their 44 cm frames use 700c wheels

i cant buy anything from specialized or scott, so basically i am limited for local dealers to the brabds mentioned above

thanks


----------



## AwfulQuiet (Mar 21, 2004)

Have you thought of going the custom frame route?

Italy has quite a few custom frame builders, they usually work in steel or titan (some speak English).


----------



## miker2012 (May 4, 2012)

AwfulQuiet said:


> Have you thought of going the custom frame route?
> 
> Italy has quite a few custom frame builders, they usually work in steel or titan (some speak English).


i had thought about custom, maybe down the road i will look at that option....

went to the argon/cannondale dealer today and test rode an xxs argon which would equate in size to the 44cm trek wsd models or the cannondale 44cm womens models 

bottomline, the xxs fit like a glove, the stock stem was a tad small (70mm stock on the xxs radon which was the only xxs model they had on the floor to test) so my knees tapped the bars just slightly when i really pushed myself exaggeratedly forward on uphill climbs but that will be fixed by putting on a longer stem..... even with the 70mm stem, i still felt super comfortable and aggresive while seated, all the hand positions were available to me, felt very natural

for the first time ever on a road bike, i could take my hands off the bars and not have all my weight shift forward and make the bike swerve... i could never ride no hands for more than a second or two on the tarmac, could never take my hands off the bars cause my weight was so improperly balanced... with this bike i can transition seamlessley b/t the bars and no hands, all the while my butt stay nicely planted on the seat, it was really confidence inspiring

even with the xxs size on the argon, there is just a normal amount of exposed seatpost, clearly this is the size for me, even in the radon model (alum/carbon mix) the bike felt surprisingly light and i felt like i could flick and manipulate the bike, was hard to notice the bike under me.... all in all, very happy with the fit of the xxs, i felt like i was putting down alot more power than with my tarmac but it really hard to tell till i get out there for some longer rides

so in the end i put a deposit down on the argon gallium with ultegra.... it was more bike than i was going to get but since i was so happy with the fit of the bike, decided to get it with ultegra and just go with the stock mavic askium wheels for the rest of the season rather than get the 105 bike with a wheel upgrade right away since the ultegra model was only 400 more

anyone haven ridden the gallium and the tarmac elite (8r carbon) that could comment on the difference in the stiffness between the two, i would appreciate it.... i am confident the gallium will be a fast snappy frame for me

i would have test ridden the trek wsd and the cannondale models but decided not too since the colors for most of the womens models did not suit my taste for the most part.... the geometry for the xxs gallium is almost identical to the trek and cannondale in the smllest sized so the fit would have been similar

thanks to everyone who gave me advice, much appreicated.... i will post my thoughts when i get my gallium and i will compare and contrast the cf on it versus the tarmac


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

miker2012 said:


> thanks to everyone who gave me advice, much appreicated.... i will post my thoughts when i get my gallium and i will compare and contrast the cf on it versus the tarmac


Sounds like a very productive day at your LBS. That 'fits like a glove' feeling says it all, so I can see why that ended your search. I did similarly back in '08 when (ironically) my Tarmac gave me that same feeling. 

By all means, please post some updates once you get some saddle time on the new bike. Pics are always appreciated as well (hint, hint).


----------

