@bikefitjames 5’10” and you ride a 52?! How about doing us a video how you got to your own fit and what lessons you learnt that you carry over to doing fits for others? Love the channel, and the explanations of the mechanics of bike fitting. 🤜
5’10” on a 52cm bike, very curious about your fit and why. It would be good content for a video. Go through the process and explain the decisions and trade offs if any.
I'm 6' 2" and ride a 61 cm frame. I have a 940mm inseam and my saddle height is 830mm above the BB. The top of my bars are 105 mm below the top of my saddle and that is with a 200 mm HT and 50 mm of spacers under the stem. The problem with going with a smaller frame for people like me, is you can't begin to get the bars high enough for a reasonably comfortable position.
@@robertthies9946 holy shit I'm 6'2 and have 87-88cm inseam and I don't have short legs. Your legs must be huge! I ride a 58cm and yeah the problem is the reach. My bars are about 10cm lower than saddle and I'm flexible but I think it contributes to slight trapezius/neck pain, probably won't be able to tolerate this drop in 10 years. But I had a 61cm and the reach was far too long and gave me lower back pain so it's hard to know what to compensate on.
I discovered recently l have been riding wrong sized bikes for 30 years. Now on smaller size frame than l thought l needed and I'm faster and way comfier. No more neck pain. Great video James
Hi. Mainly reach to be honest. I tried shorter stems etc to change reach but that made handling not as stable. As Nick says bike geometry has changed over the years but l never took that into consideration. At the moment the smaller frame def helps me rude for longer and less pressure on arms. Hope that helps🤔😊
Started riding in the 70's. Raleigh steel bike. Seat level with handlebars. Comfortable ride. When it came time to upgrade I got a proper bike fit. After all the measurements were done and put into the computer (a program with all currant bike brand measurements) The fitter looked at me and said "Custom" there was no market bike to fit😢 (long legs, short torse). Fortunately, I found a small, independent, woman owned bike company that made women's bikes and had one that fit perfectly😊
« You wouldn’t buy curtains without measuring the window » love this analogy and your comment on brand bike size charts which usually suggest that I should ride a larger bike than I should as they have nothing to do with body proportion.
Amen, James. I am a case study in starting out racing in the mid-80s and carrying through with my frame size since -- which led me to eventually start riding a frame that was simply too big. Until I was fitted by you, that is!
I really enjoy your content and it was you who encouraged me to get a Bike in a smaller size. Unfortunately your style and approach to bike fit is yet to become standard in the fitting world. I went to a top tier fitter in my area 5-star reviews, successful RUclips channel, all that stuff and he put me on a 56 3T racemax with a 566mm top tube, 100mm stem and he told me bar width doesn't matter. I'm 1,77m in height with a 86cm inseam and currently I'm riding a top tube of 526mm. I had horrendous neck pain the days after the fit and the feeling that I couldn't put power on the pedals. But all the numbers on his program were green, so I thought that this is my bike size. Afterwards I had two other fits, all quite expensive but in the end I managed to get my position by watching your channel and RCA. I hope someday your knowledge and approach will be standard but unfortunately today it isn't.
Given that your inseam is longer than average for your height, your current bike with a top tube of 526mm sounds just about right. I’m the same height as you but my inseam is 6cm shorter and my bike’s top tube is 535mm with a 120mm stem that I can ride all day.
I have the EXACT same mensuration as you and i currently have a 56 top tube bike. It doesnt feel right even with a 70mm stem. Does shrinking the bike frame worked ????
@@crooky340Yes it did and I also noticed that it shouldn't be longer as well. It's the 2024 Look 785 Huez with a 100mm stem and a Zipp xplr carbon bar with a 70mm reach. With long legs reach is much more a problem than stack, at least for me. But stack is still to taken into account since I'm just slightly under the maximum spacer stack height. Feeling stretched out was much worse for me.
You made a really good point here, James (as ever!) - the best fit I had was in a shop that sold bikes but they knew for certain I wasn’t going to by from them. It was for a Donhou frame. So everything focused on making sure Tom built something that fits me. Like a glove, btw.
Thank you for this video. I bought a gravel bike 2 and a half years ago. I am a 5'4 woman. Spent hours on the internet trying to understand this geometry thing and comparing sizes. And then it took me forever even find a bike to try that would be close to the size that would be right for me. Most bikeshops only had M or L... Finally found a Cannondale Topstone to try for a whole weekend and finally bought it just because it was the only one I could try... Did a bikefit afterwards (think it was mostly done in the spirit of someone wanting to do racing which is not what I am after at all and ended up with the handbard too low). I live in Paris and even there it is quite hard to find a bikefitter who would do a bikefit first before buying a bike. Love my bike but considering going for a custom build.
I work in a bike shop in the north of the UK, we get a lot of older people and generally men. When we advise them on size (I'm not a qualified fitter but I watch all of your stuff and other like that and I do all kinds of cycling). We were not commission based so we try and get the right bike for the person. However most of the customers will go straight to the race bike or be convinced they want a larger frame then they actually need, most listen when they get on our jig but a few just won't have it
The evolution of bikes are changing drastically these days ! I’ve been fitted to ride usually (3) sizes with the Cannondale brand, my favorite bikes. I started out riding a 58 cm bike since the year 2000 when I began my cycling journey. In 2005, I decided to go with an odd sized 57 cm, which turned out to be the perfect fit that I’ve been looking for. Then in 2009 with the CAAD 9 series, the manufacturer decided to do away with the odd sizes & offering even numbers only for sizing. Now I had to make a choice of going back to the 58 cm or dropping down to a size 56 cm, I chose the latter. After purchasing 3 additional Cannondales I wanted more of a comfortable ride, so I chose the alloy Synapse. The geometry at my size of a 56 cm felt more like a size 54, in which I felt extremely crammed when I tested it. I tried the 58 & it was spot on with the fit, just perfect. I then purchased my first carbon Cannondale Synapse with the Smartsense features & was again torn between what sizes were right for me. Again I tested the 56 & it just felt way too small for my 6 ft. frame. I tested the 58 size &it was absolutely perfect. In saying all of this, each manufacturer may differ from others when it comes down to finding the perfect size that suits every cyclist. The tale of the tape is to get fitted before you take the plunge in buying your next bike @Bikefit James 📌
Buying my first bike back in 2021 I emailed the brand's customer service to really get a human answering my fit questions because I had watched so many videos about people buying bikes that are too big. Even though I told them what I thought were slightly abnormal or uncommon body proportions, the entire time they insisted I buy the larger of the sizes I was considering due to their height to size chart. Now for the past 3 years I've had to fight to feel comfortable on my bike. Before I buy another bike I will 100% pay the cost for a proper bike fit with someone with at least a physio background so I can figure out what type of dimensions I should be looking at for my body.
I am a medium sized man and my medium Canyon Endurace fits me very well. It's the right length and the bars are the right height. The geometry charts for Canyon race bikes don't make sense to me. They're much longer, so I'd have to size down, but then the handlebars will be about +5cm lower than I like. I'm so grateful for the Endurace and it's sensible geometry!
Great content as always! I have a comment on the effective top tube length. I think it is misleading. If you take two identical bikes (A and B) in every single measure and then lower the stack of bike B by 20mm then the effective top tube of B will also reduce by 6+7mm but the bars will be further away from you because the stack is lower. The reason is that it is an horizontal measure from the top of the head tube to the point where it meets the seat tube. So if you make the stack higher, the distance becomes longer. This is affected by the head angle, of course. Also, a steeper seat tube would automatically make the top tube shorter but the position of the saddle with respect to the BB should in theory stay unchanged, hence, everything else being the same, a steeper seat tube does not mean a shorter bike. Wouldn't it be better to use the reach as a measure of how long the bike is? Clearly that's only the frame reach and does not consider the stem+handlebar+spacers. But at least is a direct comparison of how far the bars are away from you when the cockpit is kept unchanged.
Length of hoods is something not many people consider. Disc brake hoods tend to be longer than rim brake hoods, sometimes 3cm longer (that's a whole bike size!) So if measuring bikes, measure including where you spend most of the time putting your hands.
Shimano STI added a few millimeters to hood length, and then the 11-speed series added a couple more. Did disc make them even longer? And don't forget handlebar reach. Those "ergo bends" from the '90s and early '00s were crazy deep and long, and now it's difficult to find a bar that goes any deeper than 128 mm.
I am 5’9” and on a size small (50cm) thanks to your videos. I can ride for 3 hours with no pain so I believe I'm in the ballpark. I would love to get a bike fit with you but the plane tickets from New Zealand would make it an incredibly expensive fit.
Perhaps a better way to explain sizing is stack and reach. The classic horizontal top tube design of yesteryear lends itself to a lot of contemporary size thinking. However frame design has moved on to compact, semi compact etc to advance frame design in terms of comfort, stiffness, lightness etc. This means stack and reach is far more important in assessing frame size relative to ride height, limb length etc. A bike fit would certainly help but not strictly necessary if you know the stack and reach from your favourite bike.
Stack and reach are ideal, but considering that within a given size and function range, head and seat angles and bottom bracket drop are very close. I still go by virtual top tube and head tube.
Fitting styles have changed over the decades. Some of this is brought on by equipment changes (compact handlebars, dual-control levers, shorter cranks), some of it by changed riding techniques (wider gear ranges), and some of it seems to be just fashion.
Excellent advice James. Thank you. I am about to collect a new TCR tomorrow in small, Im 5.8. Thanks to your advice, I got a fit before I purchased and they recommended the small size, even thought the charts etc said medium.
I really like long bikes, even being 183 cm, I ride a Orbea xl I am really happy about it. All my bikes are smaller than the orbea but I feel really good with the big one. If the bikes carry on getting smaller soon we will see children bikes in the tour the France
It's this aero trend of elbows at 90 degrees that is ruining the sizing, and then people recommend that nonsense. While a pro even with elbows bent at 90 degrees can have quite a long bike, because they lay their torso at angles that are 40 degrees and below, an average rider rides at angles of 45-50 degrees for torso but their elbows are not at 90 degrees so the length vs a pro kinda evens out.
I get your point, but I'm not sure about your 80's steel bikes analogy. On one hand the frames are bigger now, on the other hand the bars are much more compact and the hoods don't seat as deep on the bars. People used to ride most of the time on the drops, which effectively inscrease the size off the bike. Modern bars and hoods fit a lot nicer than the old school ones.
Most useful parameter to know is needed Top Tube TT length (+ standard 100mm stem) this dimension is comparable between all geometry charts (differs between road and mtb by some 25-30mm)
Both my bikes are old school (no slanted top tube). I'm 5'11" and my 56cm Cannondale fits me better than my 53cm Litespeed, because the Cannondale has higher stack...The Litespeed is doable, but I do lean over a little more than I would like.
Even within the same brand, different models - the sizing is all over the place. My last brand new drop bar bike was Trek Crossrip. After trying several sizes at the bike shop - I felt the most comfortable on size 58 frame. And this year I bought a Trek Checkpoint ALR 4, also size 58. It was WAAAAAAAAAAY too big.
Great informative video as always. Scenario, I’m looking to buy a Canondale Synapse. I get a bike fit done first, know exactly what my measurements are. Then a buy a Synapse in completely the wrong size due to their stupid sizing system. What should we be looking for when we go fit first, but later.
201 cm tall, 102-107 kilos (former basketball player), riding Giant TCR in XL size, but with saddle pushed forward and Ultegra pedals with 4mm extra stance.
if you are in between sizes you could get either or and change a few things, a size that's "too big" pretty much means you are way out of adjustment but bikes can be adjusted BIG time.
Im 198 cm and I orderd size 58 Specialized Crux despite the size chart states that Im almost out of it. Size 61 for someone 191 cm -198 cm tall. I work at quite big and recognized bike shop in my country and my co-workers were all crazy mad about it and kept telling me I should take size 61. Now Im happily riding my 58 Crux with only changing saddle and throwing away some spacers from under the stem.
I am 185, I am always advised to get 56CM (Large) Frames Road and MTB, but I always feel stretched out too long and end up with the seat forward and a 90MM Stem. My current main bike is a TCR 55CM (M/L) still with a 90MM Stem and it is much better. I am eyeing a Factor Ostro Vam and have been decided for some time that I am going 54CM when the time comes. I want my bike to be agile and reactive to my inputs, dont want to feel like a passenger 😂
I'm fat and I want to sit as upright as possible. I'm 183cm and switched from 55 pinarello to 58 Roubaix and FINALLY I have stack high enough to feel comfortable. May be all this trendy "small frames" stuff is actual for aggressive geometries, but for non shaped people and endurance geometry it doesn't work.
Our also don’t keep much road bikes in stock. We only have commuters, kids bikes, and some entry “mountain bikes”. We’re very ready to help you order what you need
How does one get into bike fitting? What certifications are there to become qualified? I've been in the bike industry for almost a decade now, and I'm constantly seeing riders come in with bikes far too big for them. While it's nice for my business to sell them the right size bike based on things I've learned from you, it's opened my eyes to a need in my local market for a proper bike fit professional (that is not part of a bike shop). Your videos on this channel and with Francis has improved my riding personally, and I've been happy to pass along this info to many of my customer's, and have made improvements in their cycling experience as well, but I'd love to be able to take it to the next level. Any advice you have would be greatly appreciated. Cheers!
It is difficult to know what is the correct size nowadays because bikes are sold by their "virtual" size rather than a measured dimension as was the case in the past. I am 177cm (just under 5' 10") with regular proportions of leg length to torso height. With a "classical" road frame from the 1980's, steel or titanium horizontal top tube, 57 cm from bottom bracket to intersection of seat tube with top tube is correct for me. (measured C to C with European frames, C to Top with U.S. frames) With Pinarello's "swoopy" geometry, my Grevel is a 530, (as the 540 size is skipped) with the seat post all the way up to the limit, and 4 cm of spacers under the stem. On my 2024 Dogma F, the 540 frame is perfect for me with 2 cm of spacers under the 120/440 Talon Ultra one piece handlebars/stem. Riding rental bikes in Italy, a 550 Dogma F was a bit too big, and a 530 Dogma X was too small. The reach on the Dogma X was too short to get in the drops when descending and I had to ride downhill on the hoods. So, either get a good independant bike fit before you buy, or ride the actual bike you are thinking of buying for many days under both steep climbing and descending conditions, as well as on the flat, to know what is size is correct for you, before making your $$$ purchase.
You can get a slightly undersized bike to fit you , a bike that's slightly too big may never fit you. Worst bit is it's common for people to size up if they're inbetween (never figured out why?)
Undersized bike not always can fit you - imagine a bike with steep seat tube, and you run out of saddle fore aft even with setback seatpost. The mantra that short bike is better than longer bike is not necessarily true, as always, it all depends. Generally speaking considering human geometry, a best starting point is 73 degree seat tube bike for typical endurance/normal rider. You can always go with saddle seatback either toward front or back, and with 73 degrees you should be right in the middle. Never understood why for example bicycles for shorter riders have steep seat tube angles, i know its because of limitations of 700c wheel based bike geometry and the limitations due to crank length, but this is really very unoptimal scenario. Proper crank length to height, proper seat tube angle and maintaining that across all sizes is the key. Basically a bike designer should always keep angle ratios at the same value when downsizing or upscaling the bike.
flawed logic since for example the smaller size might have a 10mm shorter reach but a 20mm lower stack... so why wouldn't the bigger bike fit you with 10mm shorter stem? if you size down the front end goes way lower
I think i've got lucky with all 3 of the bikes i bought. Long arms and torso probably suits these crazy sizings. Where i've not been so lucky is wonky feet which probably exposes how shoe size and cleat holes stem from a tradition of Italian giro heritage.
Bike fit and sizing is a evolving thing... I look back at my bikes I had made for me back in the 80's and 90's, 57 cm seat tube, 58.5 top tube 72 seat 74 head angles, 12 cm stem and 7.5 cm saddle setback. We thought it a bit much to have 10 cm saddle to stem height difference. Then again, I was 178 cm tall and 87 cm inseam. Fast forward to now, the years haven't been kind and I'm closer to 174 cm and inseam is 85 cm, Im on a 54cm "endurance" bike and it feels so big. The saddle height and set back don't seem to work and the reach is too long somehow, even with a shorter stem and saddle pushed forward 1.5 cm. It's all just wrong. A problem is I live in northern Thailand and although there is a very active cycling and racing scene here, trying to get a good bike fit if you're not Thai is difficult, body types just aren't the same, I have long legs and a shorter torso and long arms, instead of short legs and long torso. I went to two reputable cycle shops, to get measured and a rough fit, both put me on a 56 one a Cervelo, the other a BH. Biggest sizes they had in the place.. I thought they just wanted to off load the frames on some unsuspecting faring to get rid of them.... I feel I should be on a 52 as well, but sizes really are whacky, as you say
I'm tall but it's all in my legs. Therefore I have always run into bit fit problems as I get a bike that will be able to achieve the saddle height i want but then the bars are in a different postcode. Therefore i end up bringing the hoods back with short stems and short reach bars and slamming the saddle as far forward as possible. I have since come to a realiation that alot of my issue are caused by sloped top tubes. On a more horizontal top tube, I can achieve the desired saddle height on a smaller frame and I can run 'normal' components.
It would be better to get the smaller size. If the choice is either 550 or 530 when a 540 would be perfect for you, purchase the 530 size and raise the seat post and have more spacers under the stem to get your ideal fit. You can play around like this with adjustments on the smaller size which would not be possible with too big a frame.
The 51 cm is the measure of the seat tube height if the top tube was horizontal and not sloped. Since the top tube is compact the seat tube is smaller than an old standard.
I had a fit first at my local fitter. Long legs short torso 5’10 on a 52cm Edmonda, 90mm stem. 15mm spacers, shit load of seatpost. Most manufacturers have me on boarder line 54/56
Hi James, I'm from Quebec, Canada and there isn't a ton of choices when it comes to bike fitters. Most use the Retül system. Is that something you're familiar with? Worth giving it a shot? Love the videos btw, thanks for sharing all that knowledge!
So as a 6' guy getting recommended mostly a 56, i should go for a 54 ? Its all so confusing and i dont feel like we have any worthy bike fitting place in Qc from what i found
Great advice, but how do you know if the information you are receiving from your fitter is correct? I was recently in the market for a new Canyon Endurance, and because of the integrated cockpit (and your advice) decided to "Fit First and Buy Later". The bike fit was done by a local independent fitter with good reviews, and I was advised that I should reconsider the Canyon (because of the integrated cockpit) and consider something like the Specialized Roubaix SL8 in a size 54. Well, after doing some research and liking what I found out about the Roubaix, I purchased one in the recommended size 54. Long story short - I'm 5'6" and after replacing the 100mm stem with a 60mm stem, the 172mm crank with a 165mm crank, and the 20-degree setback seat post with a 0-degree seat post, I still feel like I'm overly stretched out on the size 54.
A lot depends on the proportions of torso to legs. I'm 5'7" and opted for a 52cm Vitus, I'd like to have gone for the 50cm for the ETT but the stack and head tube were getting so ridiculously small as I've got long legs, and the drop from seat to bars getting too much I'd have needed an uncut steerer. So on the 52cm I'm now on a 60cm "7deg+" stem with 12mm layback post, no issue with the stock 170mm cranks(33" inseam). I don't think I need a bike fit, I need a bike with an XS reach and an L stack/165-70mmHT, or jut call it a day and go back to flat bar bikes. Sounds like your fitter needs named and shamed, at 5'6" I'd never be considering a 54 regardless of brand. As for my 60mm stem, I don't worry about the aesthetics and as for being too twitchy that would only be on the tops which I'd never be in on any descent. (On my gravel bike (quite similar geometry really, a "S" Vitus Substance" ) I've even dropped to a 45mm stem for comfort, no problems off road my biggest concern with that is my huge feet and dangerous toe overlap!)
@@Bazza1968 Yep, I agree that a lot of depends on the proportions of the person and their fitness level (or their body's ability to adapt). The funny thing for me was that after all of reconfiguring of my size 54 Roubaix, I went to my LBS and test rode a size 52 - it felt way too cramped. For the Roubaix I think that I'm in-between sizes: so, it's The Age-Old Question - do you try and make a big bike smaller, or a small bike bigger. I know that the general agreed upon path is to make try and make a small bike bigger or find another bike.
Bicycle frame geometry 📐 is what needs to be improved in the bike industry head, seat angles, fork rake is what is most important, from there the tube lengths are adjusted, to meet the needs of a diverse pool of Body types. If bike manufacturers have the same geometry for bike x-small to c-large, that’s a red flag 🚩 to stay away.
As always, very interesting! Santa Cruz are in line and changed the sizing on the Stigmata (gravel bike) from centimeters to S, M, L, XL and XL. One question, is the angel on the hoods a personal preference or are there any rules? On your test bike it looks like app. 10°?
My road bike is a "52cm." Sure, the top tube and seat tube don't measure 52cm. However; if I measure 52cm from the head tube to the seat post, then measure from that point (on the seat post) down to the BB, sure enough -- 52cm. Essentially, the "virtual" TT and ST are 52cm, as was tradition. The reason why TT/ST are no longer the same as the stated length is because of sloping top tubes, which improve standover height while maintaining higher BBs (lower BB drop). I just think that James measuring the ACTUAL ST/TT to make a claim that bike sizes are arbitrary is misinformation -- especially since I'm SURE he knows what a virtual top tube/seat tube measurement is. I can't speak for all road bikes, but every road bike I've ever looked at, the bike's size in cms tends to correlate with the VTT and/or VST. No idea how the Cannondale Synapse's geo was designed, but this could be cherrypicking/selection bias.
it definitely only applies to certain small subset of bikes. Even comparing an endurance frame to a race frame, the endurance frame will always have a longer virtual seat tube and shorter top tube compared to an equivalent size race frame, right? A more aggressive fit will always call for a longer top tube and shorter seat tube by definition.
@@JShrimpma We're probably in agreement here, because that's exactly it. If a "size 52 bike" has a 53cm virtual top tube, I can infer the manufacturer is trying to increase reach, likely a racier bike. I would prefer that this still be called a 52 rather than a 53. Ideally, I ought to fit all "size 52s" within the same manufacturer. The idea that a seat tube and top tube should be the same lengths is just a dated design choice.
if your bike has 52cm effective top tube, then it is 52cm bike. What james was talking about bikes that have neither ETT and ST length that is as described by producer.
the real important message is not only the "fit first, bike latter" but mainly "a lot of the design cues were considered with just racing in mind " @49s The average consumer should avoid this kind of brands instead of wanting it just because their favorite winners is paied by this brand.
Bikefit. Check. He recommended a Cannondale superx size 56. He knew I had back problems. It was definitely too big and aggressive. Now I don't ride enough for trying another bikefit another place.
Totally agree. But what do you do if you live in a bike-fit "desert?" The nearest fitter to me is at least three hours away and is just a bike shop guy trained through Specialized to use their Retul system.
Once more for the people in the back Fit first, buy later Bike fits aren’t exactly cheap, but still more affordable than spending 1.5k+ on a bike that doesn’t fit and trying to brute force it to work for you or, even worse, one that creates pain for you.
Years ago, before I bought a new gravel bike, I went for a bike fitting. Unfortunately, the experience wasn't great. I'm 191 cm tall, and after consulting with the fitter, I ended up with a Canyon Grail in size XL, which was much larger than my road bike. I soon started experiencing issues I’d never had before. Eventually, I sold the bike at a considerable loss. I’d love to book a fitting with you, but it's not financially possible at the moment. Could you recommend a reputable bike fitter here in Belgium?
Video idea: fitting for people with long legs and arms (and short torso). Sometimes it get's mentioned that those are hard to fit and should check out inline seat post, but not many details about it. Wouldn't this put more stress on the hands? How would you avoid this?
You once said that people with long legs and short torsos are the hardest ones to fit. Do you have some strategy advice in this cases? 196 cm and 96cm inseam, which usually leads me to a 60 cm bike with the saddle height almost maxed out, but having to use 60mm stems. Like... the length of a 56cm aeroad was nice, but I cant get the saddle high enough and the handlebar is too low
Assuming I have done a bike fit in the past, I have recommendations for various measurements my bike should have, how do I now find the right bike? Even going through the measurement sheets of different manufacturers I can't seem to find any bike fitting my needs (and I'm quite average in most parts). Which measurements do in prioritize? Is there even something like an individual "calculator" that I can feed with my measurements and that will give me recommendations? Or is the only real way to go back to the bike fitter?
SO what would you recommend if someone doesnt have a bike fitter local? I'm 5'9ish, ride a "med/54" but based on your videos and cade media videos, it seems like I should be on a smaller bike.
In past videos here and on the Cade Media channel, I've heard James recommend going down a size from what the brand suggests, so if they say a Large, go for the Medium. In one video, I'm sure James said that it's easier to make a bike "bigger" than it is to make it smaller.
As a non bike fitter I'd say a lot depends on leg and torso length... You'll get away with a bigger size I reckon if you have a long torso, and if short torso like me you are looking at endurance geometry (and forget about the "aero/race" models unless super flexible). I'd love to get a DEXA scan to see if I've got the right amount of vertebrae, I'm sure I'm a couple short lol!!!
I've posted before about me and my son. Same height 180 cm. I have longer legs than average for our height, he has shorter. I always rode 22" and 56 cm frames representing centre of BB to centre or top of a notional or actual horizontal top tube from stem to seat post centre. I found a perfect bike for him - a white Raleigh in a shop window in Barkingside a few years after Raleigh had stopped selling road bikes. It could have been custom built for him with his short legs and long torso. It looked weird it was so long in the horizontal top tube for such a small frame (can't remember the size but maybe 20"). With that body shape, no surprise that he was extremely good at football and swimming. He could never ride my bikes. I was very uncomfortable on his bike.
Is stack and reach a good indicator if that bike is close to your size. Or effective top tube length? With sloping top tubes on many road frames these days, is that a reliable number. Is there no standard for these measurements or just fudging by manufacturers?
It's hard to find a good fitting frame with long legs. 60cm seat tube and 56cm top tube would be perfect for me. I get by with a 56cm frame but the seat post looks a bit weird as it's so long. Most modern bikes have a shorter seat tube than top tube, vintage bikes are the opposite.
James. you've commented on how many 'modern' bikes are seemingly designed for whippet like young pros (long, low & narrow) yet flogged to 'not young' riders of more normal body shapes & often with considerably less flexibility, etc. Do you feel that *part* of that pitch by manufacturers is due to cycling journalists/reviewers responding postively to these sort of bikes, while themselves being outliers in the broad spectrum of people who make up modern bike riders? That is aside from the ridiculous sizing structure.
I had a custom Ti bike made yet they still didn't get it quite right for me and I've had to mod quite a bit. Not all builders are great fitters. Just saying.
I'm also about 5 10. If I or anyone else my size got the Synapse one size down from the "51" they'd be hitting the ground every few seconds. The bottom bracket drop was 8 cm.
You gave my confidence back, I did a bikefit on a jig before buying (size 44 Roubaix, I'm 165 cm), and then in a Specialized shop their fitter said, It is extreme for me I should buy size 49 one, but he couldn't say anything against the size 44, while after these videos and a bikefit I told him a lot of pros. I said I have bit longer leg and shorter torso. "Oh then it is even biger reason to buy a bigger bike and solve somehow else the front end. I got and 80 mm stem on my Trek Domane size 52 and wanted to kill me. 90 mm was better more STABLE but on high speed still a bit sensitive. The 100 one is the best but it is big. I was so angry and he wanted to give me a bikefit throught a phone call from height and inseam. Tell me I'm not wrong, the size 44 was so good on that jig 🙂. Ul. I will talk to them about the purchase on monday.
I used to lead beginner rides and it was so frustrating that the vast majority of shorter people, usually women, were on bikes that were too big for them, and had all kinds of problems including twitchy steering due to short stems. They missed out on so much bike-riding joy. I hope you get it sorted. x
Bicycle frame geometry 📐 is what needs to be improved in the bike industry head, seat angles, fork rake is what is most important, from there the tube lengths are adjusted, to meet the needs of a diverse pool of Body types. If bike manufacturers have the same geometry for bike x-small to c-large, that’s a red flag 🚩 to stay away from that brand.
Love the content James, but mostly here to play devil’s advocate after you saying your height. I’m also 177cm. I feel like very average proportions. I had a fit from a very reputable and tenured fitter in the area, fit focused on comfort for longer gravel and gran fondo type riding. Now I understand the numbers mean nothing… but for reference, I came in on a 54 Scott speedster that we ended up making longer with stem and seatpost. The fitter was recommending that I should be looking at bigger (56 cervelo for example) if I was shopping for a new bike. I’m young and was quite thin at the time of fit. Just since this seems so opposing to the content of this video, would you attribute that to my body type and age? Or more to some old school notions of bike fitting science?
Does the oversizing of bike tend to occur equally across size ranges? I noticed that in the size range shown for the Synapse Alloy, the 51 size's top tube was 54.4cm but the 58 had a 58cm top tube.
@bikefitjames 5’10” and you ride a 52?! How about doing us a video how you got to your own fit and what lessons you learnt that you carry over to doing fits for others? Love the channel, and the explanations of the mechanics of bike fitting. 🤜
5’10” on a 52cm bike, very curious about your fit and why. It would be good content for a video. Go through the process and explain the decisions and trade offs if any.
Yes please very please !!!
Feels about right to me. I’m a smidge under 6ft and ride a 55. An actual 55.
I'm 6' 2" and ride a 61 cm frame. I have a 940mm inseam and my saddle height is 830mm above the BB. The top of my bars are 105 mm below the top of my saddle and that is with a 200 mm HT and 50 mm of spacers under the stem. The problem with going with a smaller frame for people like me, is you can't begin to get the bars high enough for a reasonably comfortable position.
@@robertthies9946😂
@@robertthies9946 holy shit I'm 6'2 and have 87-88cm inseam and I don't have short legs. Your legs must be huge! I ride a 58cm and yeah the problem is the reach. My bars are about 10cm lower than saddle and I'm flexible but I think it contributes to slight trapezius/neck pain, probably won't be able to tolerate this drop in 10 years. But I had a 61cm and the reach was far too long and gave me lower back pain so it's hard to know what to compensate on.
So true. Most in house bike fitters just want you got buy what they have in stock.
I discovered recently l have been riding wrong sized bikes for 30 years. Now on smaller size frame than l thought l needed and I'm faster and way comfier. No more neck pain. Great video James
Hi Adam- what is it about the smaller bike that made it more comfortable? Less reach? Did your saddle to bars drop decrease?
Hi. Mainly reach to be honest. I tried shorter stems etc to change reach but that made handling not as stable. As Nick says bike geometry has changed over the years but l never took that into consideration. At the moment the smaller frame def helps me rude for longer and less pressure on arms. Hope that helps🤔😊
Started riding in the 70's. Raleigh steel bike. Seat level with handlebars. Comfortable ride. When it came time to upgrade I got a proper bike fit. After all the measurements were done and put into the computer (a program with all currant bike brand measurements)
The fitter looked at me and said "Custom" there was no market bike to fit😢 (long legs, short torse).
Fortunately, I found a small, independent, woman owned bike company that made women's bikes and had one that fit perfectly😊
« You wouldn’t buy curtains without measuring the window » love this analogy and your comment on brand bike size charts which usually suggest that I should ride a larger bike than I should as they have nothing to do with body proportion.
Amen, James. I am a case study in starting out racing in the mid-80s and carrying through with my frame size since -- which led me to eventually start riding a frame that was simply too big. Until I was fitted by you, that is!
I really enjoy your content and it was you who encouraged me to get a Bike in a smaller size. Unfortunately your style and approach to bike fit is yet to become standard in the fitting world. I went to a top tier fitter in my area 5-star reviews, successful RUclips channel, all that stuff and he put me on a 56 3T racemax with a 566mm top tube, 100mm stem and he told me bar width doesn't matter. I'm 1,77m in height with a 86cm inseam and currently I'm riding a top tube of 526mm. I had horrendous neck pain the days after the fit and the feeling that I couldn't put power on the pedals. But all the numbers on his program were green, so I thought that this is my bike size. Afterwards I had two other fits, all quite expensive but in the end I managed to get my position by watching your channel and RCA. I hope someday your knowledge and approach will be standard but unfortunately today it isn't.
Had a bike made for me by a reputable bike builder and its never felt right.
Given that your inseam is longer than average for your height, your current bike with a top tube of 526mm sounds just about right.
I’m the same height as you but my inseam is 6cm shorter and my bike’s top tube is 535mm with a 120mm stem that I can ride all day.
"all the numbers on his program were green" is an immediate red flag tbh.
I have the EXACT same mensuration as you and i currently have a 56 top tube bike. It doesnt feel right even with a 70mm stem. Does shrinking the bike frame worked ????
@@crooky340Yes it did and I also noticed that it shouldn't be longer as well. It's the 2024 Look 785 Huez with a 100mm stem and a Zipp xplr carbon bar with a 70mm reach. With long legs reach is much more a problem than stack, at least for me. But stack is still to taken into account since I'm just slightly under the maximum spacer stack height. Feeling stretched out was much worse for me.
You made a really good point here, James (as ever!) - the best fit I had was in a shop that sold bikes but they knew for certain I wasn’t going to by from them. It was for a Donhou frame. So everything focused on making sure Tom built something that fits me. Like a glove, btw.
Thank you for this video. I bought a gravel bike 2 and a half years ago. I am a 5'4 woman. Spent hours on the internet trying to understand this geometry thing and comparing sizes. And then it took me forever even find a bike to try that would be close to the size that would be right for me. Most bikeshops only had M or L... Finally found a Cannondale Topstone to try for a whole weekend and finally bought it just because it was the only one I could try... Did a bikefit afterwards (think it was mostly done in the spirit of someone wanting to do racing which is not what I am after at all and ended up with the handbard too low). I live in Paris and even there it is quite hard to find a bikefitter who would do a bikefit first before buying a bike. Love my bike but considering going for a custom build.
I’m 5’7” and ride a CAAD 10 52cm with a 100mm stem and it feels great.
I work in a bike shop in the north of the UK, we get a lot of older people and generally men. When we advise them on size (I'm not a qualified fitter but I watch all of your stuff and other like that and I do all kinds of cycling). We were not commission based so we try and get the right bike for the person. However most of the customers will go straight to the race bike or be convinced they want a larger frame then they actually need, most listen when they get on our jig but a few just won't have it
The evolution of bikes are changing drastically these days ! I’ve been fitted to ride usually (3) sizes with the Cannondale brand, my favorite bikes. I started out riding a 58 cm bike since the year 2000 when I began my cycling journey. In 2005, I decided to go with an odd sized 57 cm, which turned out to be the perfect fit that I’ve been looking for. Then in 2009 with the CAAD 9 series, the manufacturer decided to do away with the odd sizes & offering even numbers only for sizing. Now I had to make a choice of going back to the 58 cm or dropping down to a size 56 cm, I chose the latter. After purchasing 3 additional Cannondales I wanted more of a comfortable ride, so I chose the alloy Synapse. The geometry at my size of a 56 cm felt more like a size 54, in which I felt extremely crammed when I tested it. I tried the 58 & it was spot on with the fit, just perfect. I then purchased my first carbon Cannondale Synapse with the Smartsense features & was again torn between what sizes were right for me. Again I tested the 56 & it just felt way too small for my 6 ft. frame. I tested the 58 size &it was absolutely perfect. In saying all of this, each manufacturer may differ from others when it comes down to finding the perfect size that suits every cyclist. The tale of the tape is to get fitted before you take the plunge in buying your next bike @Bikefit James 📌
Buying my first bike back in 2021 I emailed the brand's customer service to really get a human answering my fit questions because I had watched so many videos about people buying bikes that are too big. Even though I told them what I thought were slightly abnormal or uncommon body proportions, the entire time they insisted I buy the larger of the sizes I was considering due to their height to size chart. Now for the past 3 years I've had to fight to feel comfortable on my bike. Before I buy another bike I will 100% pay the cost for a proper bike fit with someone with at least a physio background so I can figure out what type of dimensions I should be looking at for my body.
I am a medium sized man and my medium Canyon Endurace fits me very well. It's the right length and the bars are the right height. The geometry charts for Canyon race bikes don't make sense to me. They're much longer, so I'd have to size down, but then the handlebars will be about +5cm lower than I like. I'm so grateful for the Endurace and it's sensible geometry!
Great content as always! I have a comment on the effective top tube length. I think it is misleading. If you take two identical bikes (A and B) in every single measure and then lower the stack of bike B by 20mm then the effective top tube of B will also reduce by 6+7mm but the bars will be further away from you because the stack is lower. The reason is that it is an horizontal measure from the top of the head tube to the point where it meets the seat tube. So if you make the stack higher, the distance becomes longer. This is affected by the head angle, of course. Also, a steeper seat tube would automatically make the top tube shorter but the position of the saddle with respect to the BB should in theory stay unchanged, hence, everything else being the same, a steeper seat tube does not mean a shorter bike. Wouldn't it be better to use the reach as a measure of how long the bike is? Clearly that's only the frame reach and does not consider the stem+handlebar+spacers. But at least is a direct comparison of how far the bars are away from you when the cockpit is kept unchanged.
Length of hoods is something not many people consider. Disc brake hoods tend to be longer than rim brake hoods, sometimes 3cm longer (that's a whole bike size!) So if measuring bikes, measure including where you spend most of the time putting your hands.
Shimano STI added a few millimeters to hood length, and then the 11-speed series added a couple more. Did disc make them even longer? And don't forget handlebar reach. Those "ergo bends" from the '90s and early '00s were crazy deep and long, and now it's difficult to find a bar that goes any deeper than 128 mm.
I am 5’9” and on a size small (50cm) thanks to your videos. I can ride for 3 hours with no pain so I believe I'm in the ballpark. I would love to get a bike fit with you but the plane tickets from New Zealand would make it an incredibly expensive fit.
Perhaps a better way to explain sizing is stack and reach. The classic horizontal top tube design of yesteryear lends itself to a lot of contemporary size thinking. However frame design has moved on to compact, semi compact etc to advance frame design in terms of comfort, stiffness, lightness etc. This means stack and reach is far more important in assessing frame size relative to ride height, limb length etc.
A bike fit would certainly help but not strictly necessary if you know the stack and reach from your favourite bike.
Stack and reach are ideal, but considering that within a given size and function range, head and seat angles and bottom bracket drop are very close. I still go by virtual top tube and head tube.
I’d definitely get a bike fit from you if I lived closer and had the funds 👌🏾
Fitting styles have changed over the decades. Some of this is brought on by equipment changes (compact handlebars, dual-control levers, shorter cranks), some of it by changed riding techniques (wider gear ranges), and some of it seems to be just fashion.
Custom bike build is the way to go. It resolved lower back issues for me.
Excellent advice James. Thank you. I am about to collect a new TCR tomorrow in small, Im 5.8. Thanks to your advice, I got a fit before I purchased and they recommended the small size, even thought the charts etc said medium.
S is right size (TT 535mm), M would be for 5.11, + you get 170mm crank
@@redauwg911 what size was that? I’m guessing medium?
@@redauwg911 do you think a small would have worked better for you?
You wont regret getting a TCR - had mine since 2018 fantastic bike, wife is on a liv Langma (girl TCR) that is also an amazing bike !
I really like long bikes, even being 183 cm, I ride a Orbea xl I am really happy about it. All my bikes are smaller than the orbea but I feel really good with the big one. If the bikes carry on getting smaller soon we will see children bikes in the tour the France
It's this aero trend of elbows at 90 degrees that is ruining the sizing, and then people recommend that nonsense. While a pro even with elbows bent at 90 degrees can have quite a long bike, because they lay their torso at angles that are 40 degrees and below, an average rider rides at angles of 45-50 degrees for torso but their elbows are not at 90 degrees so the length vs a pro kinda evens out.
I get your point, but I'm not sure about your 80's steel bikes analogy. On one hand the frames are bigger now, on the other hand the bars are much more compact and the hoods don't seat as deep on the bars. People used to ride most of the time on the drops, which effectively inscrease the size off the bike. Modern bars and hoods fit a lot nicer than the old school ones.
Love the Hampsten poster. I have a Hampsten Strada Bianca custom I ride during the summers.
Most useful parameter to know is needed Top Tube TT length (+ standard 100mm stem)
this dimension is comparable between all geometry charts
(differs between road and mtb by some 25-30mm)
James is the best 👌
Succinct and clear sound advice 👍
Both my bikes are old school (no slanted top tube). I'm 5'11" and my 56cm Cannondale fits me better than my 53cm Litespeed, because the Cannondale has higher stack...The Litespeed is doable, but I do lean over a little more than I would like.
Even within the same brand, different models - the sizing is all over the place. My last brand new drop bar bike was Trek Crossrip. After trying several sizes at the bike shop - I felt the most comfortable on size 58 frame. And this year I bought a Trek Checkpoint ALR 4, also size 58. It was WAAAAAAAAAAY too big.
Great informative video as always. Scenario, I’m looking to buy a Canondale Synapse. I get a bike fit done first, know exactly what my measurements are. Then a buy a Synapse in completely the wrong size due to their stupid sizing system. What should we be looking for when we go fit first, but later.
Would love to see some fits on extremely tall people, 190cm+
Fewer big guys need fits
201 cm tall, 102-107 kilos (former basketball player), riding Giant TCR in XL size, but with saddle pushed forward and Ultegra pedals with 4mm extra stance.
@@tombladon8064why is that?
190 here, 91 inseam now on a canyon endurance L 170mm crank 110mm stem 42cm bar
193cm here, but only 86cm inseam, so I fit between 56cm and 58cm framesets. Started on 61cm and what a streeeetch.
if you are in between sizes you could get either or and change a few things, a size that's "too big" pretty much means you are way out of adjustment but bikes can be adjusted BIG time.
Im 198 cm and I orderd size 58 Specialized Crux despite the size chart states that Im almost out of it. Size 61 for someone 191 cm -198 cm tall. I work at quite big and recognized bike shop in my country and my co-workers were all crazy mad about it and kept telling me I should take size 61. Now Im happily riding my 58 Crux with only changing saddle and throwing away some spacers from under the stem.
I am 185, I am always advised to get 56CM (Large) Frames Road and MTB, but I always feel stretched out too long and end up with the seat forward and a 90MM Stem.
My current main bike is a TCR 55CM (M/L) still with a 90MM Stem and it is much better.
I am eyeing a Factor Ostro Vam and have been decided for some time that I am going 54CM when the time comes.
I want my bike to be agile and reactive to my inputs, dont want to feel like a passenger 😂
I'm fat and I want to sit as upright as possible. I'm 183cm and switched from 55 pinarello to 58 Roubaix and FINALLY I have stack high enough to feel comfortable. May be all this trendy "small frames" stuff is actual for aggressive geometries, but for non shaped people and endurance geometry it doesn't work.
Our also don’t keep much road bikes in stock. We only have commuters, kids bikes, and some entry “mountain bikes”.
We’re very ready to help you order what you need
How does one get into bike fitting? What certifications are there to become qualified? I've been in the bike industry for almost a decade now, and I'm constantly seeing riders come in with bikes far too big for them. While it's nice for my business to sell them the right size bike based on things I've learned from you, it's opened my eyes to a need in my local market for a proper bike fit professional (that is not part of a bike shop). Your videos on this channel and with Francis has improved my riding personally, and I've been happy to pass along this info to many of my customer's, and have made improvements in their cycling experience as well, but I'd love to be able to take it to the next level. Any advice you have would be greatly appreciated. Cheers!
It is difficult to know what is the correct size nowadays because bikes are sold by their "virtual" size rather than a measured dimension as was the case in the past. I am 177cm (just under 5' 10") with regular proportions of leg length to torso height. With a "classical" road frame from the 1980's, steel or titanium horizontal top tube, 57 cm from bottom bracket to intersection of seat tube with top tube is correct for me. (measured C to C with European frames, C to Top with U.S. frames) With Pinarello's "swoopy" geometry, my Grevel is a 530, (as the 540 size is skipped) with the seat post all the way up to the limit, and 4 cm of spacers under the stem. On my 2024 Dogma F, the 540 frame is perfect for me with 2 cm of spacers under the 120/440 Talon Ultra one piece handlebars/stem. Riding rental bikes in Italy, a 550 Dogma F was a bit too big, and a 530 Dogma X was too small. The reach on the Dogma X was too short to get in the drops when descending and I had to ride downhill on the hoods. So, either get a good independant bike fit before you buy, or ride the actual bike you are thinking of buying for many days under both steep climbing and descending conditions, as well as on the flat, to know what is size is correct for you, before making your $$$ purchase.
Lets gooo!! New sub James!! 🎉🎉🎉
I can understand your point. But what if I hate the brand you advise me? 😅
You can get a slightly undersized bike to fit you , a bike that's slightly too big may never fit you. Worst bit is it's common for people to size up if they're inbetween (never figured out why?)
Never figured out why that's the case too. Why buy the bigger size. You can make a small bike bigger but you usually can't make a big bike smaller.
Undersized bike not always can fit you - imagine a bike with steep seat tube, and you run out of saddle fore aft even with setback seatpost. The mantra that short bike is better than longer bike is not necessarily true, as always, it all depends. Generally speaking considering human geometry, a best starting point is 73 degree seat tube bike for typical endurance/normal rider. You can always go with saddle seatback either toward front or back, and with 73 degrees you should be right in the middle. Never understood why for example bicycles for shorter riders have steep seat tube angles, i know its because of limitations of 700c wheel based bike geometry and the limitations due to crank length, but this is really very unoptimal scenario. Proper crank length to height, proper seat tube angle and maintaining that across all sizes is the key. Basically a bike designer should always keep angle ratios at the same value when downsizing or upscaling the bike.
Depends on what kind of bike mtb/road bike. If you're in between for mtb go for the larger one. If for road bikes go with the smaller one
flawed logic since for example the smaller size might have a 10mm shorter reach but a 20mm lower stack... so why wouldn't the bigger bike fit you with 10mm shorter stem? if you size down the front end goes way lower
I think i've got lucky with all 3 of the bikes i bought. Long arms and torso probably suits these crazy sizings. Where i've not been so lucky is wonky feet which probably exposes how shoe size and cleat holes stem from a tradition of Italian giro heritage.
Bike fit and sizing is a evolving thing... I look back at my bikes I had made for me back in the 80's and 90's, 57 cm seat tube, 58.5 top tube 72 seat 74 head angles, 12 cm stem and 7.5 cm saddle setback. We thought it a bit much to have 10 cm saddle to stem height difference. Then again, I was 178 cm tall and 87 cm inseam. Fast forward to now, the years haven't been kind and I'm closer to 174 cm and inseam is 85 cm, Im on a 54cm "endurance" bike and it feels so big. The saddle height and set back don't seem to work and the reach is too long somehow, even with a shorter stem and saddle pushed forward 1.5 cm. It's all just wrong. A problem is I live in northern Thailand and although there is a very active cycling and racing scene here, trying to get a good bike fit if you're not Thai is difficult, body types just aren't the same, I have long legs and a shorter torso and long arms, instead of short legs and long torso. I went to two reputable cycle shops, to get measured and a rough fit, both put me on a 56 one a Cervelo, the other a BH. Biggest sizes they had in the place.. I thought they just wanted to off load the frames on some unsuspecting faring to get rid of them.... I feel I should be on a 52 as well, but sizes really are whacky, as you say
Would love a video on what equipment you use, what jig in house software
I'm tall but it's all in my legs. Therefore I have always run into bit fit problems as I get a bike that will be able to achieve the saddle height i want but then the bars are in a different postcode.
Therefore i end up bringing the hoods back with short stems and short reach bars and slamming the saddle as far forward as possible. I have since come to a realiation that alot of my issue are caused by sloped top tubes. On a more horizontal top tube, I can achieve the desired saddle height on a smaller frame and I can run 'normal' components.
You wouldn't buy curtains without measuring the window first 😂😂😂 quality content as usual James 👌
Nice infomercial. Legit, too!
the worst is - in most of the shops they are offering too big bikes, or if you are in-between sizes - you will mostly hear ''get the size bigger''
Wow you've been in most bike shops? Amazing. Tosser.
Agreed , i've just left a similar comment before i saw yours.
Absolutely 💯 That was my case as well
It would be better to get the smaller size. If the choice is either 550 or 530 when a 540 would be perfect for you, purchase the 530 size and raise the seat post and have more spacers under the stem to get your ideal fit. You can play around like this with adjustments on the smaller size which would not be possible with too big a frame.
Really interesting. I am curious James, what is your TT length and stem.length?
I do think that a fit on a static trainer is very slightly different to the real deal. I feel very comfortable on the road, but less good indoors.
The 51 cm is the measure of the seat tube height if the top tube was horizontal and not sloped. Since the top tube is compact the seat tube is smaller than an old standard.
Still a stupid way to size the bike. About time all brands used XS to XL tyoe sizing or maybe S1 , S2 S3 etc
I had a fit first at my local fitter. Long legs short torso 5’10 on a 52cm Edmonda, 90mm stem. 15mm spacers, shit load of seatpost.
Most manufacturers have me on boarder line 54/56
Great video
All shops tell me to buy 55/56 bike. After consult with bike fitter ended on 58 TCR and it is perfect! #fitfirstbuylater
I have a medium Trek Wahoo(2012) and a Poseidon X (2022) X-Large. They are almost identical in length and height.
Hi James, I'm from Quebec, Canada and there isn't a ton of choices when it comes to bike fitters.
Most use the Retül system. Is that something you're familiar with? Worth giving it a shot?
Love the videos btw, thanks for sharing all that knowledge!
Checkout @physiovelo in Longueuil they are probably the best in the province
Hey from quebec also... I am 5.8-5.9 and every one said i should have a medium 54. Thats too big for me.
So as a 6' guy getting recommended mostly a 56, i should go for a 54 ? Its all so confusing and i dont feel like we have any worthy bike fitting place in Qc from what i found
@@alsav3404 How old are you? whats your weight? inseam length. flexibility ? And what brand bike?
@redauwg911 30, 200lb, 84cm, average?, looking at a BMC roadmachine
Great advice, but how do you know if the information you are receiving from your fitter is correct? I was recently in the market for a new Canyon Endurance, and because of the integrated cockpit (and your advice) decided to "Fit First and Buy Later". The bike fit was done by a local independent fitter with good reviews, and I was advised that I should reconsider the Canyon (because of the integrated cockpit) and consider something like the Specialized Roubaix SL8 in a size 54. Well, after doing some research and liking what I found out about the Roubaix, I purchased one in the recommended size 54. Long story short - I'm 5'6" and after replacing the 100mm stem with a 60mm stem, the 172mm crank with a 165mm crank, and the 20-degree setback seat post with a 0-degree seat post, I still feel like I'm overly stretched out on the size 54.
A lot depends on the proportions of torso to legs. I'm 5'7" and opted for a 52cm Vitus, I'd like to have gone for the 50cm for the ETT but the stack and head tube were getting so ridiculously small as I've got long legs, and the drop from seat to bars getting too much I'd have needed an uncut steerer. So on the 52cm I'm now on a 60cm "7deg+" stem with 12mm layback post, no issue with the stock 170mm cranks(33" inseam). I don't think I need a bike fit, I need a bike with an XS reach and an L stack/165-70mmHT, or jut call it a day and go back to flat bar bikes. Sounds like your fitter needs named and shamed, at 5'6" I'd never be considering a 54 regardless of brand. As for my 60mm stem, I don't worry about the aesthetics and as for being too twitchy that would only be on the tops which I'd never be in on any descent. (On my gravel bike (quite similar geometry really, a "S" Vitus Substance" ) I've even dropped to a 45mm stem for comfort, no problems off road my biggest concern with that is my huge feet and dangerous toe overlap!)
@@Bazza1968 Yep, I agree that a lot of depends on the proportions of the person and their fitness level (or their body's ability to adapt). The funny thing for me was that after all of reconfiguring of my size 54 Roubaix, I went to my LBS and test rode a size 52 - it felt way too cramped. For the Roubaix I think that I'm in-between sizes: so, it's The Age-Old Question - do you try and make a big bike smaller, or a small bike bigger. I know that the general agreed upon path is to make try and make a small bike bigger or find another bike.
I am 5'5" and want to buy size 44 Roubaix.
Also steeper seat tube angles for larger sizes. Please
This!
Bicycle frame geometry 📐 is what needs to be improved in the bike industry head, seat angles, fork rake is what is most important, from there the tube lengths are adjusted, to meet the needs of a diverse pool of Body types. If bike manufacturers have the same geometry for bike x-small to c-large, that’s a red flag 🚩 to stay away.
As always, very interesting! Santa Cruz are in line and changed the sizing on the Stigmata (gravel bike) from centimeters to S, M, L, XL and XL.
One question, is the angel on the hoods a personal preference or are there any rules? On your test bike it looks like app. 10°?
Top tube - head tube, you should get the reach dialed in.
My road bike is a "52cm."
Sure, the top tube and seat tube don't measure 52cm. However; if I measure 52cm from the head tube to the seat post, then measure from that point (on the seat post) down to the BB, sure enough -- 52cm. Essentially, the "virtual" TT and ST are 52cm, as was tradition.
The reason why TT/ST are no longer the same as the stated length is because of sloping top tubes, which improve standover height while maintaining higher BBs (lower BB drop).
I just think that James measuring the ACTUAL ST/TT to make a claim that bike sizes are arbitrary is misinformation -- especially since I'm SURE he knows what a virtual top tube/seat tube measurement is.
I can't speak for all road bikes, but every road bike I've ever looked at, the bike's size in cms tends to correlate with the VTT and/or VST. No idea how the Cannondale Synapse's geo was designed, but this could be cherrypicking/selection bias.
it definitely only applies to certain small subset of bikes. Even comparing an endurance frame to a race frame, the endurance frame will always have a longer virtual seat tube and shorter top tube compared to an equivalent size race frame, right? A more aggressive fit will always call for a longer top tube and shorter seat tube by definition.
@@JShrimpma We're probably in agreement here, because that's exactly it. If a "size 52 bike" has a 53cm virtual top tube, I can infer the manufacturer is trying to increase reach, likely a racier bike. I would prefer that this still be called a 52 rather than a 53. Ideally, I ought to fit all "size 52s" within the same manufacturer.
The idea that a seat tube and top tube should be the same lengths is just a dated design choice.
if your bike has 52cm effective top tube, then it is 52cm bike. What james was talking about bikes that have neither ETT and ST length that is as described by producer.
the real important message is not only the "fit first, bike latter" but mainly "a lot of the design cues were considered with just racing in mind " @49s
The average consumer should avoid this kind of brands instead of wanting it just because their favorite winners is paied by this brand.
I'm 5 11 and ride 54. Perfect 👌
Excellent.
A visit to BFJ, best bang for buck. 🎉
Bikefit. Check. He recommended a Cannondale superx size 56. He knew I had back problems. It was definitely too big and aggressive.
Now I don't ride enough for trying another bikefit another place.
4:00 Do not mislead your viewers. That 51 size is the effective seat tube measured through the horizontal or effective top tube.
So which is it oh knowledgable one?
@Bikefitjames Effective seat tube.
And that's how it's so easy for the average bike shop to recommend a bike thats too big for the rider. Baffling the consumer with jargon
as if the toptube would be straight, its that simple
@kmmntrls novice cyclist to shop mong .." but the top tube is straight, what are you talking about "
Totally agree. But what do you do if you live in a bike-fit "desert?" The nearest fitter to me is at least three hours away and is just a bike shop guy trained through Specialized to use their Retul system.
Wish I found your channel before buying a $4k bike that is too big! Oh well i’ll have to make do with a 7cm stem…
Once more for the people in the back
Fit first, buy later
Bike fits aren’t exactly cheap, but still more affordable than spending 1.5k+ on a bike that doesn’t fit and trying to brute force it to work for you or, even worse, one that creates pain for you.
or buy cheap used bike first, to test bike fit
Would be good to know how fit would vary across the different drop bar types, for example road, endurance, all road and Gravel.
Years ago, before I bought a new gravel bike, I went for a bike fitting. Unfortunately, the experience wasn't great. I'm 191 cm tall, and after consulting with the fitter, I ended up with a Canyon Grail in size XL, which was much larger than my road bike. I soon started experiencing issues I’d never had before. Eventually, I sold the bike at a considerable loss.
I’d love to book a fitting with you, but it's not financially possible at the moment. Could you recommend a reputable bike fitter here in Belgium?
Can you fit for flat bar bikes ?
Filming an animated subject, it is good to keep your camera still.
You're 5'10 on a 52! What brand/model bike? Love your vids btw.
Video idea: fitting for people with long legs and arms (and short torso). Sometimes it get's mentioned that those are hard to fit and should check out inline seat post, but not many details about it. Wouldn't this put more stress on the hands? How would you avoid this?
Thank you. James. This is _very_ helpful.
Fit first, buy later!
I remembered!
More bike companies need to offer choices of stem lengths, handlebar widths etc, you have to buy a bike then buy parts that fit
You once said that people with long legs and short torsos are the hardest ones to fit. Do you have some strategy advice in this cases?
196 cm and 96cm inseam, which usually leads me to a 60 cm bike with the saddle height almost maxed out, but having to use 60mm stems.
Like... the length of a 56cm aeroad was nice, but I cant get the saddle high enough and the handlebar is too low
Assuming I have done a bike fit in the past, I have recommendations for various measurements my bike should have, how do I now find the right bike? Even going through the measurement sheets of different manufacturers I can't seem to find any bike fitting my needs (and I'm quite average in most parts). Which measurements do in prioritize? Is there even something like an individual "calculator" that I can feed with my measurements and that will give me recommendations? Or is the only real way to go back to the bike fitter?
Get on a Jig , jolt down the ### for future purchases.
SO what would you recommend if someone doesnt have a bike fitter local? I'm 5'9ish, ride a "med/54" but based on your videos and cade media videos, it seems like I should be on a smaller bike.
In past videos here and on the Cade Media channel, I've heard James recommend going down a size from what the brand suggests, so if they say a Large, go for the Medium. In one video, I'm sure James said that it's easier to make a bike "bigger" than it is to make it smaller.
As a non bike fitter I'd say a lot depends on leg and torso length... You'll get away with a bigger size I reckon if you have a long torso, and if short torso like me you are looking at endurance geometry (and forget about the "aero/race" models unless super flexible). I'd love to get a DEXA scan to see if I've got the right amount of vertebrae, I'm sure I'm a couple short lol!!!
I've posted before about me and my son. Same height 180 cm. I have longer legs than average for our height, he has shorter. I always rode 22" and 56 cm frames representing centre of BB to centre or top of a notional or actual horizontal top tube from stem to seat post centre. I found a perfect bike for him - a white Raleigh in a shop window in Barkingside a few years after Raleigh had stopped selling road bikes. It could have been custom built for him with his short legs and long torso. It looked weird it was so long in the horizontal top tube for such a small frame (can't remember the size but maybe 20"). With that body shape, no surprise that he was extremely good at football and swimming. He could never ride my bikes. I was very uncomfortable on his bike.
Can you please open a store in New York City?
Sure, you paying?
Is stack and reach a good indicator if that bike is close to your size. Or effective top tube length? With sloping top tubes on many road frames these days, is that a reliable number. Is there no standard for these measurements or just fudging by manufacturers?
It's hard to find a good fitting frame with long legs. 60cm seat tube and 56cm top tube would be perfect for me. I get by with a 56cm frame but the seat post looks a bit weird as it's so long. Most modern bikes have a shorter seat tube than top tube, vintage bikes are the opposite.
James. you've commented on how many 'modern' bikes are seemingly designed for whippet like young pros (long, low & narrow) yet flogged to 'not young' riders of more normal body shapes & often with considerably less flexibility, etc. Do you feel that *part* of that pitch by manufacturers is due to cycling journalists/reviewers responding postively to these sort of bikes, while themselves being outliers in the broad spectrum of people who make up modern bike riders? That is aside from the ridiculous sizing structure.
I had a custom Ti bike made yet they still didn't get it quite right for me and I've had to mod quite a bit. Not all builders are great fitters. Just saying.
Nobody has ever told me 'it's too big.'
Same 🥲
I'm also about 5 10. If I or anyone else my size got the Synapse one size down from the "51" they'd be hitting the ground every few seconds. The bottom bracket drop was 8 cm.
You gave my confidence back, I did a bikefit on a jig before buying (size 44 Roubaix, I'm 165 cm), and then in a Specialized shop their fitter said, It is extreme for me I should buy size 49 one,
but he couldn't say anything against the size 44, while after these videos and a bikefit I told him a lot of pros. I said I have bit longer leg and shorter torso. "Oh then it is even biger reason to buy a bigger bike and solve somehow else the front end. I got and 80 mm stem on my Trek Domane size 52 and wanted to kill me. 90 mm was better more STABLE but on high speed still a bit sensitive.
The 100 one is the best but it is big. I was so angry and he wanted to give me a bikefit throught a phone call from height and inseam. Tell me I'm not wrong, the size 44 was so good on that jig 🙂.
Ul. I will talk to them about the purchase on monday.
I used to lead beginner rides and it was so frustrating that the vast majority of shorter people, usually women, were on bikes that were too big for them, and had all kinds of problems including twitchy steering due to short stems. They missed out on so much bike-riding joy. I hope you get it sorted. x
Bicycle frame geometry 📐 is what needs to be improved in the bike industry head, seat angles, fork rake is what is most important, from there the tube lengths are adjusted, to meet the needs of a diverse pool of Body types. If bike manufacturers have the same geometry for bike x-small to c-large, that’s a red flag 🚩 to stay away from that brand.
James, do you know anyone in California that uses that exact same Jig and is reputable/good?
would love to know if bike fitting only works for road bikes - does it work for hybrid bikes as well?
Bit of foot numbness when doing 3.5-4 hour rides. Is this just normal?
Love the content James, but mostly here to play devil’s advocate after you saying your height. I’m also 177cm. I feel like very average proportions.
I had a fit from a very reputable and tenured fitter in the area, fit focused on comfort for longer gravel and gran fondo type riding.
Now I understand the numbers mean nothing… but for reference, I came in on a 54 Scott speedster that we ended up making longer with stem and seatpost. The fitter was recommending that I should be looking at bigger (56 cervelo for example) if I was shopping for a new bike.
I’m young and was quite thin at the time of fit. Just since this seems so opposing to the content of this video, would you attribute that to my body type and age? Or more to some old school notions of bike fitting science?
That’s interesting, I’m in almost exactly the same situation as you and had the same advise, bigger not smaller.
Does the oversizing of bike tend to occur equally across size ranges? I noticed that in the size range shown for the Synapse Alloy, the 51 size's top tube was 54.4cm but the 58 had a 58cm top tube.