Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
hi, Im 5'11.5'' and have a 56 09 tarmac elite. Im going to be using it for racing this year and training. However, Im a bit worried as to whether I should have gone for the 58cm, as I am sorta between the 56 and 58.

My old bike was a large 55cm gitant scr3.

Can anyone give me some feedback if they are my height and what frame size they have, cheers!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
No way, the smaller the better, stiffer and lighter.

I am 5'10.5 and ride a 54 and now way it's too big 54 is perfect, probably could push a 52 with a long stem.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
3,494 Posts
I'm 6'4.5" and very happily riding a Tarmac Pro SL 58cm. I have a 130mm stem and a lot of seat-post showing but the fit and handling is spot on for me. Saddle to bar drop is about 12cm or so, and I'm about in the middle of its range of adjustment (assuming different stems and spacer setups). You should only go with the bigger frame if you really really need the extra top-tube length or unusually high bars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Yeh Ive got a 120mm stem on atm so could always go longer if I wanted. Its weird how the tarmac feels so much more nimble than my giant, which has the same TT lenght but feels like driving a truck...
 

·
Cycling induced anoesis
Joined
·
13,006 Posts
ukwill said:
heres me on the bike, doe sit look ok?
Your arms are fully extended in both pics, possibly indicating excessive reach. I say possibly because many cyclist position themselves differently on a stationary bike than they do on the road.
 

·
So. Calif.
Joined
·
2,800 Posts
PJ352 said:
Your arms are fully extended in both pics, possibly indicating excessive reach. I say possibly because many cyclist position themselves differently on a stationary bike than they do on the road.
Yes, maybe looks a bit too long of a 'reach' to me, also.

I definitely would not have gone to a 58cm, in your circumstance.

I'm noting there's quite a large distance between your knee, near top of stroke, and your arms. I usually prefer to have knees within 2 inches of arm, in the drops ... you look closer to 4" ... but photos can be deceiving.

Unless you are flexible , like to ride with your arms more bent, and your back more horizontal than photos, a 100mm or 110mm stem (instead of 120mm) is an option.

FWIW, my particulars :

height: 5 ft 10.5 inches, +/- 0.25 inch
true cycling inseam: 34.0 inches
Tarmac SL2 frame size: 56cm (58 or 54 were obviously very wrong for me)
Stem length: 100mm or 110mm (6º pointing down).

I'm not done building yet, it will be one of these 2 stem lengths.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
32 Posts
ukwill said:
hi, Im 5'11.5'' and have a 56 09 tarmac elite. Im going to be using it for racing this year and training. However, Im a bit worried as to whether I should have gone for the 58cm, as I am sorta between the 56 and 58.

My old bike was a large 55cm gitant scr3.

Can anyone give me some feedback if they are my height and what frame size they have, cheers!

i'm 5'11" and i ride the 56.5 elite. i tried both the 58 and 56, riding them for about ten miles each, the 56 first and then the 58 and then back to the 56 . i knew instantly that it took a lot more to push the 58. i as well extended the stem to a 110.

do what you feel is right but i'd stay 56 and work with the accessories to get the fit better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
I'm 178cm (5'10.1"), 85cm (33.46") inseam and now I'm riding a 55cm bike (c-t) with 55.5cm top tube. Saddle is at 75.5cm height from BB and I'm using 11cm stem.
I'm looking for a new frame (Specialized Allez) and I doubt wich size choose: 54 or 56
I think 54 frame size it could be a bit small (50cm vertical tube, 54.8cm horizontal, and total bike lenght 1cm shorter than mine), +-21cm of seatpost exposed.
And I think 56 frame size it could be a bit large, 56.5cm horizontal.
¿What do you think? Thanks!
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top