Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I want to pull the trigger on one, but I am a bit wooried about the posted standover heights.

The only bike I have that has a traditional TT is my SCOTT. It's a 54cm with a standover height of 30.8 and I just have enough room.

The Madison in MED is listed 32.9 with the same TT I need.

To get the same standover I have to go to a XS which is 30.7.

It seems like there SO number are crazy. The small might work @ 31.5 but this would give me ZERO room as my cylcing inseam in 31.5.

Anyone know if Schwinn SO numbers are off? I can't find any locally to try.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Dave Hickey said:
I've never measured one but remember that track bikes have a higher bottom bracket than road bikes so to get the same SO will require a smaller frame when compared to a road bike..... That being said, a XS sounds way too small. I'd go S or M
Ahh. So it's has track geomertry? I guees small with a longer stem might do.

So if I look at other track bikes, maybe I go go with a 49cm bike if the TT is right? or 52cm? Both have the same seat tune measurment as my SCOTT. C-T
 

·
duh...
Joined
·
9,749 Posts
standover is over-rated... look at your tt (effective/horizontal) and also sta since that can affect the effective tt (never mind if the sta's are the same on both bikes)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
Dave Hickey said:
My inseam is 1" smaller than yours..I could probably get away with a 52cm but I'd get a 49cm...


Both of my track bikes measure 49.5cm ctc seat tube while my road frames are usually 51cm ctc...
That's hozrizonal TT right?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
FatTireFred said:
standover is over-rated... look at your tt (effective/horizontal) and also sta since that can affect the effective tt (never mind if the sta's are the same on both bikes)
Sure, but I enjoy my nuts! :eek:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
78 Posts
You need to go try them. They have a higher SO and a shorter top tube than a "normal" road bike. I guess that's track geometry, although I don't know if the angles are comparable. I'm 6' and own a large Madison (never bothered to measure my bicycling inseam).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,000 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
FatTireFred said:
how so? never mind, don't answer...
Yeah, I listened to that TT advise when getting my SCOTT. Well I ended up having like 2cm of clearance, just stradaling the bike in bike shorts.

If I need to get off a bit quickly, I need to make sure I don't crush the boys.
I could have gone with a 52cm, gained an extra 2cm of room and only need a stem 1 cm longer. Better fit IMO.

I used the TT measurments form my compact frame to go with the 54cm.
In the end, I should have gone a bit small er with a 52cm.

Looking back at my first road bike in years, I was fitted on a 52cm TREK which had the same angles as the SCOTT measurments. That fit like a glove!
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top