# Sizing Advisory Warning on Cross Bikes - Ridley X-Fire



## pharding

The stand over heights are quite tall and can be problematic. I ride a size 59.5 or size 60 road bike. Yesterday I took delivery of a size 58 Ridley X-Fire and it appears that it is one size too tall for me. When I straddle the bike I just barely clear the top tube. When I mount and dismount I have a hard time clearing the saddle with my leg.


----------



## filtersweep

Pardon my ignorance, but don't most cross bikes have higher BBs to improve clearance? But I have to ask, how will decreasing framesize help you in clearing the saddle when dismounting, since I presume your saddle will be the same height above the ground, so to speak, when you use a smaller frame?



pharding said:


> The stand over heights are quite tall and can be problematic. I ride a size 59.5 or size 60 road bike. Yesterday I took delivery of a size 58 Ridley X-Fire and it appears that it is one size too tall for me. When I straddle the bike I just barely clear the top tube. When I mount and dismount I have a hard time clearing the saddle with my leg. I am now offering my brand new, size 58 X-Night frameset for sale at $1100 including continental US shipping and insurance.


----------



## pharding

Good point. A smaller frame will only improve my stand over height concern. It will also impact other dimensions without addressing leg clearance issues over the saddle.


----------



## IKnowYouRider

Just out of curiosity how tall are you and did you pick a 58 based on the Ridley sizing chart?

http://data.ridley-bikes.com/sizes/sizes-en.pdf


----------



## shomyoface

Perhaps this thread should be more appropriately named "Everyone should buy bikes that fit rather than based on brand name or cool factor." Just a thought......


----------



## andrew9223

Stand over height is probably the least important measurement, how does the rest of the bike fit?


----------



## Salsa_Lover

I ride a 57cm road Bianchi, It has a 56.5 TT.

When I bought my X-Fire, I followed all the advice about sizing down, the reseller told me, you need a 52, otherwise you'd have clearance problems.

I got the 52. Good clearance. But it was indeed to small. Even with the saddle seatback 35mm maxed out and a 12mm stem the reach was too short.

I sold it and bought a 54, this one fits much better, I have less standover, my balls touch the top tube if I am standing flat on it, but there is no problem at all when riding, mounting or dismounting.


----------



## lithuania

it sounds like you just need to work on your remount. standover height is such a minor detail. i have no clearance when i stand over my ridley but it fits me really good and I have no remounting issues.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

shomyoface said:


> Perhaps this thread should be more appropriately named "Everyone should buy bikes that fit rather than based on brand name or cool factor." Just a thought......



nonsense,

you can allways buy a bike based on name or cool factor.

You just have to pick the size that fits right


----------



## backinthesaddle

So it's Ridley's fault that you don't know how to size a bike properly. 

A cursory search on this sie would have yielded the info you needed to make the correct decision. It's pretty common knowledge that Ridley cross bikes size out big.

What's the bet that your road bike is too big as well....?


----------



## shapelike

Let's see if there's the identical post across multiple sites ... yep. Settle down, pharding. No need to be Guardian of the Internet all the time.


----------



## IKnowYouRider

shapelike said:


> Let's see if there's the identical post across multiple sites ... yep. Settle down, pharding. No need to be Guardian of the Internet all the time.



Yeah I thought some of the replies were a little harsh...but after seeing the same topic on multiple boards it's probably justified...Instead of "Sizing Advisory..." maybe a mass internet blasting of "Know What Size bike you need before buying a $1500 frame"...

wayne


----------



## ZoomBoy

IKnowYouRider said:


> Just out of curiosity how tall are you and did you pick a 58 based on the Ridley sizing chart?
> 
> http://data.ridley-bikes.com/sizes/sizes-en.pdf


Ridley's sizing is confusing to me. According to this doc I would fit on a 52 but when I refer to the model specific geo chart I would prefer the 54 due to the TT length. Weird. 

Jeff


----------



## Dan Cas

High bottom brackets are stupid.


----------



## krisdrum

Sorry to hear about your troubles, but if you had gone custom steel as others originally suggested, this wouldn't be an issue.

On a lighter note, one of the bikes I regret selling most was a Javelin Primitivo cross frame. I built it up and it fit great, except for the standover. It was light, stiff, comfortable and fast. I wish I had known about RBR and been smart enough to ask the question about standover back then, because I would have kept it. Instead I gave in to the "generic fit" formula. Now I am training and racing on a frame with a sloping top tube and it is serviceable for my meager fitness level, but not nearly as much fun to ride and difficult to carry except in a suitcase fashion. Lesson learned for me.


----------



## Corndog

As others have said, standover height means basically nothing. Only times you are standing over you bike is before a race, one the line. If the rest of the bike fits, don't worry about it. I have a Ridley and had a similar issue... but it was never a problem. 

You shouldn't have any issue with dismounts, at least none that you wouldn't have with any other bike, since the distance from the BB to the saddle is the same. 

Remounts can be hard on a tall BB bike. You just have to learn to leap a bit more


----------



## jroden

Gosh what an obnoxious forum that has become. To the original poster, I do feel that standover height matters or whatever dimension makes the Ridley so tall because a) you have to jump higher to get on it and b) the center of gravity is raised for no good reason.

The sizing chart would put me on a 56 which would not be the right size given my desire for a 59 top tube. 

I owned a 56 ridley a few years ago for about 3 miles and had to sell it on ebay for exactly this reason. Even in a too small size it was very tall.

I'd just sell it before you beng it up too much or live with it for the season and look to ditch it this winter. There's lots of nice inexpensive frames out there that will fit you better.


----------



## JayZee

Salsa_Lover said:


> my balls touch the top tube



Too much information!


----------



## pharding

I appreciate everyone's comments, both helpful and sarcastic. The Ridley X-Fire is a fine cross bike. However Ridley is unique in nomenclature of their frame sizes. Couple this with the high bottom bracket, high stand over height, and compact geometry, and confusion reigns supreme. Cyclocross bikes are cool bikes well suited to other things besides cyclocross racing. Confusing sizing is bad for the market place.


----------



## argylesocks

sorry to hear that man.
ridleys are a bit tough. I own one now, but am selling it. On paper, it should fit me...and it is certainly close...but just "not quite right"

i went back to the drawing board and looked for a frame that close resembled the geometry of my pegoretti road frame.

if you don't think you can get it to work, cut your losses and sell it quickly. many people race on Ridleys, so they obviously fit well on some people....just not all people.


----------



## jerry_in_VT

um, the x-fire has the low BB, 61mm of drop. Its the X-knight with the "Euro" high BB with a drop in the 50's (I think they tweaked it this year?). Regardless, its not the drop, 60 is pretty standard. 65 is "low" isn't it? Any bike lower than 65? It would be a road bike!

High BB is great if you are a pro and stuff it so hard into corners that you bang pedals and such. 

Ridley's have a tall head tube and horizontal TT. This makes shouldering the bike, especially in the smaller sizes, alot easier. My Sachs shoulders really nice, my Blue is pretty hard to get "into". I am little though.

Bottom line, its a Cross RACE bike, its alot of parameters, not just BB height.

And as said before, stand over? Like, so what? And remounting? A single centimeter (classic hi BB vs low BB) is the deal breaker on making it onto the saddle? Ok, if you say so.

God I get sick of these "Ridleys are tall" threads. Then I have Gewilli in the other ear always saying he can't get one big enough! Dlask rides one...

Sigh.


----------



## pharding

shomyoface said:


> Perhaps this thread should be more appropriately named "Everyone should buy bikes that fit rather than based on brand name or cool factor." Just a thought......


Thank you for your thought. I have back issues and I need a lightweight carbon bike that I can easily get in and out of my trunk with the rear seats down. My back, tail bone, leg in two places were all broken plus numerous other injuries occurred on July 5 when a car going 55 mph struck me on my tri bike from the rear.


----------



## pharding

jerry_in_VT said:


> um, the x-fire has the low BB, 61mm of drop. Its the X-knight with the "Euro" high BB with a drop in the 50's (I think they tweaked it this year?). Regardless, its not the drop, 60 is pretty standard. 65 is "low" isn't it? Any bike lower than 65? It would be a road bike!
> 
> High BB is great if you are a pro and stuff it so hard into corners that you bang pedals and such.
> 
> Ridley's have a tall head tube and horizontal TT. This makes shouldering the bike, especially in the smaller sizes, alot easier. My Sachs shoulders really nice, my Blue is pretty hard to get "into". I am little though.
> 
> Bottom line, its a Cross RACE bike, its alot of parameters, not just BB height.
> 
> And as said before, stand over? Like, so what? And remounting? A single centimeter (classic hi BB vs low BB) is the deal breaker on making it onto the saddle? Ok, if you say so.
> 
> God I get sick of these "Ridleys are tall" threads. Then I have Gewilli in the other ear always saying he can't get one big enough! Dlask rides one...
> 
> Sigh.


The primary issue here isn't that Ridleys are tall. The issue is that their sizing nomenclature is unique in the industry and creates confusion in the marketplace. I certainly am not the first cyclist that has happened to.


----------



## OnTheRivet

Dan Cas said:


> High bottom brackets are stupid.


Tell that to Sven Nys, Bart Wellens, Zdenek Stybar, etc.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

pharding said:


> The primary issue here isn't that Ridleys are tall. The issue is that their sizing nomenclature is unique in the industry and creates confusion in the marketplace. I certainly am not the first cyclist that has happened to.


Bingo !!!!

Ridleys are great bikes, with a geometry suitable for European Cross racing.

The only problem is that you got confused by their sizing terminology.

it is seat tube center-to-center. Not Top Tube like most use to size it.

If my 57cm bianchi was sized that way it would be a size 53 ( sloping tube ) 

You just had to check out the geometry diagrams and test ride it before you buy.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

JayZee said:


> Too much information!


sorry about that, 

it is more "the top tube caress my balls when standing over"


----------



## krisdrum

pharding - Did you test ride any of the bikes you were considering before plunking down your cash? Not trying to be a jerk, but I have to say you seem to have very specific needs due to your injuries. It also seems like you jumped in on this bike after the Nago didn't show up in a timely manner. A purchasing mistake is a purchasing mistake, sorry for the tough love, but this is hardly Ridleys fault.


----------



## Coolhand

OnTheRivet said:


> Tell that to Sven Nys, Bart Wellens, Zdenek Stybar, etc.


In fairness they would probably happily ride low BB bikes _if the check cleared_. Hence the "Professional" part of professional bike racer.

Ridley's do fit a bit funky- but its not a surprise. Tons of information about the high BB, insanely long ST, short TT fit of Ridley's. If you are long legged and shorter torso'ed- perfection. Normal proportion- probably be fine with a careful reading of the sizing chart and a longer stem. Long torso, long arms, shorter legs- go elsewhere.


----------



## pharding

krisdrum said:


> pharding - Did you test ride any of the bikes you were considering before plunking down your cash? Not trying to be a jerk, but I have to say you seem to have very specific needs due to your injuries. It also seems like you jumped in on this bike after the Nago didn't show up in a timely manner. A purchasing mistake is a purchasing mistake, sorry for the tough love, but this is hardly Ridleys fault.


The bikes that I considered were not available for test rides in my size or even close to my size at any dealer in the Chicago area. I actually did a professional fitting at Get-A-Grip Cycles in Chicago. Unfortunately the frame size label with Ridley is unique to the cycling industry. You are right that ultimately I am finacially accountable. Others have been financially accountable in similar situations with Ridley cross bikes.


----------



## krisdrum

pharding said:


> The bikes that I considered were not available for test rides in my size or even close to my size at any dealer in the Chicago area. I actually did a professional fitting at Get-A-Grip Cycles in Chicago. Unfortunately the frame size label with Ridley is unique to the cycling industry. You are right that ultimately I am finacially accountable. Others have been financially accountable in similar situations with Ridley cross bikes.


I could be way off the mark, but their geometry charts seem to have all the pertinent information on them, including standover height, for you to assess their appropriateness. Looks pretty detailed to me. Did you directly compare the fit data and body measurements you received to the geo chart?


----------



## the mayor

pharding said:


> The bikes that I considered were not available for test rides in my size or even close to my size at any dealer in the Chicago area. I actually did a professional fitting at Get-A-Grip Cycles in Chicago. Unfortunately the frame size label with Ridley is unique to the cycling industry. You are right that ultimately I am finacially accountable. Others have been financially accountable in similar situations with Ridley cross bikes.


I feel your pain.
I have bought a lot of bikes over the years.
Some fit....some were not even close ( including custom builds and going by geo charts)
I've even test rode bikes that...when ended up not working out in the real world.
There is no such thing as industry standard when it comes to fit and geo...some times the sum does not equal all the numbers


----------



## velociped jones

had a similar experience with my 56cm ridley crossbow. i ride a 56cm colnago road bike and should have probably sized down to the 54cm for 'cross but otherwise the bike fits me perfect. the high top tube hasn't been a problem and the frame is now well into it's second season of racing. there's probably always gonna be some compromise when buying a bike off the shelf, but there's also a reason so many ridleys are seen at the races.


----------



## lithuania

im kind of shocked someone would spend so much money on a frame based solely on the "size". 

As the mayor said there really isnt an industry standard when it comes to fit so you should always be checking out the geometry specs before you order a bike.


----------



## pharding

I could not agree more. I still like the X-Fire a lot and the build quality and finish is beautiful. It may end up on E-Bay. I would not be the first cyclist to do that with a new frameset.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

For what I've seen on ebay recently the X-Fires have a quite high resale value ~$700-900 for used frames, and chances are you could get another on the right size out of ebay too.

But let me tell you, I think if you ride a 60cm road bike, the 58 should fit you right. Off course with very little or no standover clearance, but the top tube should be right for you.


----------



## mike6108

Look at the bright side - at least you didn't get the X-Night. :eek6: 

As another poster mentioned, Ridley's geometry charts are fairly detailed and have all the relevant information. There have also been a plethora of posts/threads mentioning that Ridley's run "tall," for lack of a better term. With that said, your assertion that their sizing leads to "confusion in the marketplace" is unwarranted IMO. You seem to have done an awful lot of research and contemplating before your purchase, so I am a bit surprised by the outcome. Hope you find whatever works for you - I really do. FWIW, I ride a 58cm road bike and a 56cm Crossbow and couldn't be happier. :thumbsup:


----------



## shapelike

I'm just amazed that people still buy bikes based on some nominal size sticker.


----------



## pharding

I appreciate the feedback. Yes, I did not pay enough attention to the sizing charts. I am long waisted so my body proportions are not ideal for a European cross bike. I probably should get a custom sized Parlee cross bike, however I do not have that kind of money right now. I'll take a few days to sort through this. It will either be keep the current size 58 X-Fire or sell it and get a size 56 X-Fire. The commentary here has been helpful.


----------



## IKnowYouRider

pharding said:


> I appreciate the feedback. Yes, I did not pay enough attention to the sizing charts. I am long waisted so my body proportions are not ideal for a European cross bike. I probably should get a custom sized Parlee cross bike, however I do not have that kind of money right now. I'll take a few days to sort through this. It will either be keep the current size 58 X-Fire or sell it and get a size 56 X-Fire. The commentary here has been helpful.



Just went throught the same thing in choosing a new cross bike. I have a fairly long torso in relation to my short legs and while the Ridleys are nice they're short in the top tube for their height (size)...Even on my fuji cross pro thats has a relatively low and long geometry I have virtually no standover and it's not a problem...trust me. I ended up getting a 52cm Stevens carbon team...it has a little more BB drop and a little longer in the top tube. Haven't raced it yet but so far it feels good...

wayne


----------



## pharding

Stevens Bikes have done well at the professional cyclocross level. Katie f Compton and Niels Albert both are having great success on Stevens cyclocross cross bikes this year. Their geometry approaches that of a road bike.


----------



## atpjunkie

*I ride a 60-61 road bike*



Salsa_Lover said:


> For what I've seen on ebay recently the X-Fires have a quite high resale value ~$700-900 for used frames, and chances are you could get another on the right size out of ebay too.
> 
> But let me tell you, I think if you ride a 60cm road bike, the 58 should fit you right. Off course with very little or no standover clearance, but the top tube should be right for you.


am longer torsoed and shorter legged (6'4" and change 34-35" inseam)
I had one of the first Ridleys across the pond (1999) it was a 58 and it fit
standover was tight but never an issue


----------



## tyro

I'm 6'1" with a 36" inseam and ride a road bike with a 57.5 top tube. For someone like me, the Ridley size chart seems to make sense. The tallness would be fine and possibly welcome.


----------



## JayZee

Salsa_Lover said:


> sorry about that,
> 
> it is more "the top tube caress my balls when standing over"


You must be wearing shorts instead of bibs. That slingshot action of the bibs keeps everything high and tight.


----------



## hooligan

I'm a little shocked at your situation. Ridley has a size chart and all the geometry on their website. You could have checked,double checked, asked questions of other owners yet you chose to come on the web and post a " which really expensive bike should I buy for rehab " thread. Your title comes very close to blaming Ridley for the fact that their geometry doesn't fit you.

The X-Fire is actually 1cm taller than the X- Night for standover . Its very easy to read that on Ridleys site.

The thing is standover height is so irrelevant to riding a bike. You should consult a good bike fitter before selling your bike. More important to you should be things like top tube reach, seattube length. The fact that the top tube tickles your package when your at the coffee shop doesn't count.

The other thing is work on your fitness and remount skills before you sell. Getting back on to the saddle also can be solved by a little bit of work on your part

I really don't want to come across a harsh here. I feel badly that you got hit by a car and I am happy your riding again.


----------



## pharding

In my opinion the stand over height on the Ridley X-Fire is a flaw in an otherwise fine cyclocross bike. What is the point of such a high stand over height? It does absolutely no good other than limiting the number of cyclists that might purchase the bike or adding discomfort to others that purchase the bike. It does give a bike with a high center of gravity an even higher center of gravity, which is not desirable. The 58 X-Fire stand over height is 880. The 58 Stevens Carbon Team stand over height is 824. Colnago doesn't publish theirs for some reason. For a company, like Ridley, that is obviously committed to producing a high quality cyclocross frameset at a moderate price, $1,500, this purposeless high stand over height is out of character. 

In spite of the uncomfortably high, for me, stand over height, the X-Fire fits me well in the top tube dimension which is more critical for a good fit. Other than stand over height, it is a high quality bike that is beautifully made, rides well, and represents a fine value. It fits my current needs well. I am going to keep it, ride it a lot, and revisit this a year from now.

I am impressed by cyclocross bikes because you do a lot with them. It is amazing how well they can transverse unpaved terrain and crushed limestone trails. In my opinion they have a great future. Ridley makes fine bikes.


----------



## OnTheRivet

Hilarious, you buy a "race" frame after many people try to dissuade you from doing so, and because you have no clue how to size this particular brand of frame with it's known peculiarities (which just so happen to work fine for the best racers in the world...it's a RACE frame after all) and you post on every forum you can find announcing that said manufacturer doesn't know what they are doing, priceless.


----------



## colinr

pharding said:


> In my opinion the stand over height on the Ridley X-Fire is a flaw in an otherwise fine cyclocross bike. What is the point of such a high stand over height? It does absolutely no good other than limiting the number of cyclists that might purchase the bike or adding discomfort to others that purchase the bike. It does give a bike with a high center of gravity an even higher center of gravity, which is not desirable. The 58 X-Fire stand over height is 880. The 58 Stevens Carbon Team stand over height is 824. Colnago doesn't publish theirs for some reason. For a company, like Ridley, that is obviously committed to producing a high quality cyclocross frameset at a moderate price, $1,500, this purposeless high stand over height is out of character.
> 
> In spite of the uncomfortably high, for me, stand over height, the X-Fire fits me well in the top tube dimension which is more critical for a good fit. Other than stand over height, it is a high quality bike that is beautifully made, rides well, and represents a fine value. It fits my current needs well. I am going to keep it, ride it a lot, and revisit this a year from now.
> 
> I am impressed by cyclocross bikes because you do a lot with them. It is amazing how well they can transverse unpaved terrain and crushed limestone trails. In my opinion they have a great future. Ridley makes fine bikes.


I love freds getting upset that their high-end, status symbol bike to ride on the bike path is too _racey_. 

A high standover height means a bigger main triangle, which definitely makes shouldering the bike easier, and arguably makes the bike stiffer by letting you run a shorter seatpost/shorter headset stack. No wait, in your expert opinion it's puposeless.

This is like complaining on a car racing forum that the suspension on your Ferrari is too stiff.


----------



## pharding

colinr said:


> ....A high stand over height means a bigger main triangle, which definitely makes shouldering the bike easier, and arguably makes the bike stiffer by letting you run a shorter seat post/shorter headset stack.


I appreciate your insight. However if the above statement were true, why are the Stevens cross bikes doing so well on the professional cyclocross circuit? Those professional athletes are shouldering those bikes quite well. There are more sophisticated ways to stiffen specific areas of a carbon frameset than just making the triangle larger. 

Ridley does not market this $1,500 frame set as a high end cross bike. The founder of the company calls it mid-level. Ridley is happy to sell the X-Fire, or any of their bikes for that matter, to anyone that wants to buy it. If bicycle manufacturers relied only cyclists that race their cross or road bikes to purchase their bikes, they would all be out of business.


----------



## towerscum

how bout' those Yankies?


----------



## OnTheRivet

pharding said:


> I appreciate your insight. However if the above statement were true, why are the Stevens cross bikes doing so well on the professional cyclocross circuit? Those professional athletes are shouldering those bikes quite well. There are more sophisticated ways to stiffen specific areas of a carbon frameset than just making the triangle larger.
> 
> Ridley does not market this $1,500 frame set as a high end cross bike. The founder of the company calls it mid-level. Ridley is happy to sell the X-Fire, or any of their bikes for that matter, to anyone that wants to buy it. If bicycle manufacturers relied only cyclists that race their cross or road bikes to purchase their bikes, they would all be out of business.


Because you can buy it doesn't mean you should. It's called being an informed consumer....you should try it some time.


----------



## wunlap togo

pharding said:


> Ridley does not market this $1,500 frame set as a hybrid bike. The founder of the company calls it a mid-level racing frame.


Fixed it for you.


----------



## cosmo333

pharding said:


> I appreciate your insight. However if the above statement were true, why are the Stevens cross bikes doing so well on the professional cyclocross circuit?


Neils Albert has won World Championships on an X Fire (U23) and a Stevens (Elite). The rider might have something to do with this.


----------



## Salsa_Lover

OnTheRivet said:


> Hilarious, you buy a "race" frame after many people try to dissuade you from doing so, and because you have no clue how to size this particular brand of frame with it's known peculiarities (which just so happen to work fine for the best racers in the world...it's a RACE frame after all) and you post on every forum you can find announcing that said manufacturer doesn't know what they are doing, priceless.


Now I realise this, he was who came asking advice about buying a Colnago or an X-Night.

I agree, he should have bought a more touring oriented off-road bike, given his injury and the intended purpose of the bike.

the X-Fire is a racing frame, it is intended to be performant on rough CX races, not to be comfortable on limestone trails.


----------



## velorick

I just bought an X-Fire. It is by far one of the best frames I have owned, and definitely the best cross frame out of the 3 frames I have owned (two were custom steel). I think the OP probably bought a frame too large. If you look at the way a cross bike not a gravel road bike is to be set up you will see that you need an extra short top tube. Which means you need to size down compared to a road bike. I was not able to ride the frame before I road it, but I looked at the web site and they had perfect guidelines based on height. If you look at the 48 and 50 you see only a 0.5 cm difference in top tube, but 2 cm difference in stand over height. Now I have 3 races on it and some good training. It rides super smooth, handles amazing well, and is 2 lbs. lighter than my last steel frame.


----------



## mwills

larger frame triangle == stiffer??


----------

