# Smaller frame and higher seat position or vice versa? What is better?



## James_16v (29 Aug 2013)

Hello all,

I am looking at buying my first serious road bike to join my friends in some long distance cycling and I am confused about what bike size to get as i keep getting conflicting info.

I am a shorty at 5ft 7 and inside leg 29" All the internet calculators say i should be aiming at 50-51 inch frame a couple of shops have recommended me 52 and the last one i went to said 54 would be fine??

I would like to know what would give me a better posture, a smaller bike with a high seat position or a a larger bike with a lower one, or would both these options be ok?

And advice appreciated.

James


----------



## HLaB (29 Aug 2013)

A 51inch frame would be mahoozive, I think you mean 51cm 
A smaller frame is usually the safer bet as it can generally be adjusted to suit the height/ reach of the rider, a large frame might not but you are better to actually test ride than trust internet calculators alone.


----------



## SquareDaff (29 Aug 2013)

As HLaB says! I'm not that different from you (5ft 6 not 7 - same inside leg). I really love my Boardman CX in Medium (I just feel completely comfortable when riding it).

Like you I went on the various measurement sites and they all said 50-51 which is either a small or x-small. Took the measurements from my boardman and compared the geometries of other makers and, like has been recommended to you, some came out at 54cms!

I've tried "a few on for size" since then and on some 51-52's I just feel "compressed". Have tried the 54's. They feel great. This isn't always the case though. Personally I prefer to feel slightly "stretched" when I ride so I go for the bigger size. The motto: like clothes bikes vary from designer to designer. The only way to be sure is to try!


----------



## fossala (29 Aug 2013)

Small is normally recomended because of stiffness and weight (racing mentality taking over most of road biking again). I think that a slightly larger frame is better, you get better toe clearance for mudguards and less chance of pannier bags catching on your heel!


----------



## Born2die (29 Aug 2013)

I feel better on a bigger bike I have back problems so I don't like high saddle low bars. im 5'8" 32" leg and I have just bought a 55cm boardman race ok I tend to have the saddle all the way forward but I really like to be stretched out and I love the feel of the bike.


----------



## Linford (29 Aug 2013)

You can always adjust the reach of the stem by swapping it out for another one. Most seat posts have enough adjustment to get the seat height right - bum on saddle, and heel on one pedal at its lowest point.


----------



## User6179 (29 Aug 2013)

I always go for the biggest frame if im between 2 sizes , I would say to you if you want a more relaxed ride it will be the size of the head tube that matters , larger head tube will mean higher bars , the seat height never changes it will always be same distance from the pedals regardless of frame size so you could have in theory a 51cm bike with more relaxed geometry than a 54cm bike depending on the size of the head tube.


----------



## vickster (29 Aug 2013)

Riding a flat bar bike (but fast style) game me chronic tennis elbow that has required two operations. I'd always go a little smaller and add a longer stem, wider bars, longer crank etc

But that's my expereince, Better just to get the bike that fits in the first place


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (29 Aug 2013)

If I based bike size on inside leg, I'd be riding a 62cm frame - on which there is zero chance of ever getting the fit correct.

Reach is more important, seat height can go up, but you can't shorten a top-tube


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Aug 2013)

Virtual/horizontal top tube length is the most important measurement!


----------



## James_16v (29 Aug 2013)

Wow what a response! Thanks for your advice everyone it's great to hear all your opinions.

Yea i meant cm 

So a 54cm would give me a longer top tube and longer head/stem tube? and this would give me longer stretch and more of an upright position?

Thanks,


----------



## User6179 (29 Aug 2013)

Rob3rt said:


> Virtual/horizontal top tube length is the most important measurement!


 
Agreed but would say head tube just as important if you don't want a large drop between seat and saddle.


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (29 Aug 2013)

Eddy said:


> Agreed but would say head tube just as important if you don't want a large drop between seat and saddle.


Maybe I should take a picture of mine, being perfectly comfortable and due to be dropped further


----------



## User6179 (29 Aug 2013)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Maybe I should take a picture of mine, being perfectly comfortable and due to be dropped further


 


T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Maybe I should take a picture of mine, being perfectly comfortable and due to be dropped further


 
I bet you have got limbs more in proportion with a daddy long legs than your average cyclist tho


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (29 Aug 2013)

Eddy said:


> I bet you have got limbs more in proportion with a daddy long legs than your average cyclist tho


Yep and short torso hence riding a 56cm ETT


----------



## Edge705 (29 Aug 2013)

My Two penneth for what it’s worth I bought a small frame 52cm last year I have always been medium generally 54 I’m almost a carbon copy of the OP in terms of measurement apart from being half inch taller. I measured myself Head to toe and then arms outstretched finger to finger across the width. I’m longer width wise than length wise. I noticed on the small frame I did not get a comfortable feeling and I’m not talking back or any other pain. I felt less stable cornering on the smaller frame I felt much more crunched up even though I extended the stem I did not suit the frame geometry at all I soon reverted back to 54 or medium in the end. In conclusion if you’re in between sizes and your width is longer than head to toe I guess the larger of the two sizes was the better fit for me


----------



## musa (29 Aug 2013)

Tbh you need to jump on a few bikes. It differs from manufactures. Specialized medium is cannondales large


----------



## User6179 (29 Aug 2013)

T.M.H.N.E.T said:


> Yep and short torso hence riding a 56cm ETT


 
There must be a foot between your seat and your bars , my knees would be hitting my shoulders if my gut wasn't in the way of my thighs


----------



## T.M.H.N.E.T (29 Aug 2013)

Eddy said:


> There must be a foot between your seat and your bars , my knees would be hitting my shoulders if my gut wasn't in the way of my thighs


Never measured it, pretty big step down though


----------



## Boon 51 (29 Aug 2013)

musa said:


> Tbh you need to jump on a few bikes. It differs from manufactures. Specialized medium is cannondales large


 
+ 1


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Aug 2013)

I also have a big saddle to bar drop due to my Froom-esque proportions, it is also the reason that despite being low on my TT bike when in aero position, when I get up on the outriggers to corner or brake I am too upright.

If I was to choose a frame according to inside length or any other singular measurement my bike would be unbearable to ride!


----------



## Chris S (31 Aug 2013)

I'm 6 foot and I used to ride a bike with a 20'' frame and high seat. Not only did I look like a circus clown but I was hunched up (it had a shorter crossbar) and I also kept banging my knees on the handlebars when I turned. I now ride a bike with a 24" frame, it's 2kg heavier but a lot more ergonomic. I can pedal more efficiently, faster and for longer.


----------

