Help! Carbon bike choices for me?

Hi, ladies! I need a new road bike.

I currently have an aluminum Giant OCR 1 size small. Turns out it is actually too big, so we've found a buyer for my bike and we're starting to look for the replacement, in carbon fibre, and exactly the right size.

I'm 5' 1 1/2" tall, with about a 28" inseam. With such a small torso and very small hands, I'm likely to do better with a WSD.

I'd be looking for 105 or Ultegra level components.

Are any of you close to my size? What size bike do you ride? Do any of you have any recommendations for me? I'm thinking I'll need a 47, which will likely limit my options. Does that seem like the right size? What should I be looking at?

Let me know!

Hugs and butterflies,
~T~

I would agree with the need for a WSD. Any of the models geared for the US should have frame sizes that would work for you, I'm sure that Trek does, their largest WSD frame just barely fits me and I'm 5'7" ish with a longer torso than most ladies. I fit a 54 Specialized Ruby, I know that they come in 48. I loved the bike and would suggest a test ride. I think it's a good value and you can get different component packages.

No clue LB, but have an OCR1 too! I'm 5'3" and I have an extra small! :eek: One thing I liked about the OCR is that it was full ultegra... Too bad it's not carbon. Do they make carbon bikes with triples AND ultegra? I don't ever seem to see any...

LBTC,

It sounds as though we are very close in measurements. For me, it came down to an XS Giant and the 48cm Specialized Ruby. The Ruby won out for me as "something" just felt better about it (couldn't put my finger on it exactly - I just knew). Anyway, I think I tried over 10 bikes before landing on the Ruby. I tried non-WSD as well as WSD. I did NOT like the Trek Pilot WSD, but I have heard of others who LOVE it. So, of course, everyone has their own preferences and even those with the same measurements will love and hate the feel of different bikes.

I look forward to hearing your experiences in trying out lots of bikes, and especially seeing photos of the bike upon which you finally decide! :)

We're almost twins! I have about a 28" inseam, and 5' 1.5" tall. I ride a Ruby Pro WSD and LOVE it. Awesome bike. The 48. Small hands here too, and it's no problem.

My story is that I had the Dolce Elite and found cracks in the head tube. Took it to the bike shop, and they replaced it with the Ruby Pro. :D :D

Good luck!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelownagirl

No clue LB, but have an OCR1 too! I'm 5'3" and I have an extra small! :eek: One thing I liked about the OCR is that it was full ultegra... Too bad it's not carbon. Do they make carbon bikes with triples AND ultegra? I don't ever seem to see any...

---

My 2007 Ruby Expert is a carbon triple Ultegra. The 2007 Cannondale Synapse Feminine came in a triple Ultegra as well, but I don't see any women's carbon triple Ultegra bikes by Cannondale this year! :eek: :confused: :eek:
If the 2007 Giant OCR Composite W I was looking at last year had felt just right, I would have had a triple put on it (it was a carbon Ultegra bike). This year, it doesn't appear as though Giant has any women's full Ultegra carbon bikes though (triple or otherwise). The OCR alu frame/carbon fork bikes don't even come in Ultegra anymore.

Why all the downgrades? I don't get it. :confused: :confused: :confused:

IMO, you probably need a bike with 650 wheels. Smaller bikes with 700c wheels are going to have steep seat tube angles (75-76 degrees), which will tend to put you in a more aggressive position that might not be comfortable.

A quick glance at the Trek & Specialized websites indicates they're not using 650 wheels in the small sizes. Felt is using 650 wheels on their small women's bike but for reasons inexplicable to me still have steep seat tube angles.

Not carbon, but the Merlin Camena (and Litespeed Bella) has a slacker seat tube angle and 650s on it's smallest sizes. You should at least ride one for comparison.

I'm 5'3" with legs on the short side and I ride a 50 cm Cannondale Synapse. The standover height of the top tube is just slightly tall for me, but it fits me otherwise (and I *can* stand over it, just not with as much space as CW recommends). The 47 would definitely have been too small. I demo'ed a 48 cm Specialized Ruby last year, and it fit okay, but I definitely could've gone up to the next bigger frame size. All of these bikes have 700c wheels and I don't find them the least bit twitchy. I hadn't been on a road bike in 12 years before I rode the Specialized. It was a few months before I felt comfortable riding close side-by-side or in a tight paceline, but I think that had much more to do with the fact that my handling skills were EXTREMELY rusty, rather than any characteristics of the bike(s).

No offense to the suggestion, but I'd highly suggest not going with 650 wheels! There's no reason you should work that much harder than everyone else on the road just because you're small! You'll spin your legs with more cadence (expend more energy) to get the same amount of speed as someone on 700 wheels.

The Ruby is a great choice (sorry to beat a dead horse). And, it comes in small sizes that are built really well. One of the girls that rides for Aaron's has a Ruby Pro that is a 44! I've never seen a bike so small for an adult! :p It's TINY...still has 700 c wheels and she LOVES it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NJBikeGal

No offense to the suggestion, but I'd highly suggest not going with 650 wheels! There's no reason you should work that much harder than everyone else on the road just because you're small! You'll spin your legs with more cadence (expend more energy) to get the same amount of speed as someone on 700 wheels.

---

Not particularly true. You'll have more variation in speed from a knobby tire vs a smooth one, or a low pressure tire vs a high pressure one than you will from a small tire vs a big one. It *is* more convenient to use the same size tires as everyone else, since it's easier to get tires and tubes if you run out at an event. For most riders, tire size just doesn't make a real difference in their speed. If it did, all bikes would still be specced with 27" wheels. Instead, we've got people on 16" wheel folders, 27" wheel vintage bikes, and everything in between :).

The geometry compromises that happen for a short legged rider on a bike with 700C wheels can make a big difference or no difference. It depends on the rider's preferences. So someone who has short legs should try smaller wheeled bikes and see what *they* think.

I'm barely 5'3" (I know I'm a little shorter) and am riding a Cervelo full carbon (granted, it's a tri bike, but they do make road bikes full carbon). I toyed with WSD, but in the end the 48 P2C is what won out. They make the Soloist and R3 which are the road bike versions in carbon.
I LOVE my bike. It has 650's and I absolutely LOVE the smaller wheels. I can accelerate much faster than on my Giant OCR1, have much better steering control, and in reality I'm not expending more energy or spinning that much more than someone on 700's. They are a better fit for me than my 700's. That's my opinion. Plus, on such a small frame, the 650's look more proportional to me thant he 700s. Again- my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NJBikeGal

No offense to the suggestion, but I'd highly suggest not going with 650 wheels! There's no reason you should work that much harder than everyone else on the road just because you're small! You'll spin your legs with more cadence (expend more energy) to get the same amount of speed as someone on 700 wheels.

The Ruby is a great choice (sorry to beat a dead horse). And, it comes in small sizes that are built really well. One of the girls that rides for Aaron's has a Ruby Pro that is a 44! I've never seen a bike so small for an adult! :p It's TINY...still has 700 c wheels and she LOVES it!

---

I have to agree with NJBikeGal here....You should fit a Ruby just fine. I ride a Ruby Pro, however a little bigger than most my size - a 51 cm and I am 5'2, 29 inseam, but I like the less cramped feeling. You should fit perfectly on one of the smaller sizes, 48 or 44 with 700 wheels. One reason not to go with 650wheels unless "absolutely" necessary is, if you are in a pinch, get a flat, and you may even just once need to borrow a tube, not many people ride a 650 wheel. Another reason they are just not as common.

If you find that is what fits you best fine, but try a WSD bike with 700's and see for yourself.

~ JoAnn

I am about the same size (height, inseam) and ride a Cannondale Synapse WSD, 47 cm. LOVE IT!! Although it has 700s I think it corners well with no toe overlap. She is also quite the little workhorse at climbing, I love how much stiffer she is than the inexpensive Fuji I used to have. Only downsize was the saddle that is comes with is a torture device, I had to swap it out quick. Mine is 105/Ultegra but it looks like this year it would be all 105. The next step up is all Ultegra but the website only list compact doubles. http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/08/c...el-8RWC3C.html

The Specialized Ruby is never a bad option and it looks like there is the comp with some mix of 105/Ultegra and the Expert with Full Ultegra.

Another happy Ruby rider here. 5-1 with a 27.5 inseam.

I ride a 44cm S-Works. I used to ride a 48cm, but it was too big. Sure, I could ride it somewhat comfortably but performance-wise, I needed a smaller, stiffer frame. Personally, I would NOT get a road bike with 650 wheels (TT bike is a different story), but it has a lot to do with the accessibility of different wheelsets.

I have shorter legs, but have not found the steeper angles to be any less comfortable or responsive, whether sprinting or on hillier centuries. In fact, I have experienced no downside at all to this bike's geometry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ilima

IMO, you probably need a bike with 650 wheels. Smaller bikes with 700c wheels are going to have steep seat tube angles (75-76 degrees), which will tend to put you in a more aggressive position that might not be comfortable.

A quick glance at the Trek & Specialized websites indicates they're not using 650 wheels in the small sizes. Felt is using 650 wheels on their small women's bike but for reasons inexplicable to me still have steep seat tube angles.

Not carbon, but the Merlin Camena (and Litespeed Bella) has a slacker seat tube angle and 650s on it's smallest sizes. You should at least ride one for comparison.

---

Wow, thanks for the tip on the merlin. I wish I knew about it when I was buying. Do you know of any carbon bikes with slack STAs in smaller sizes? I assumed I'd need to go custom for that. I ended up with terrys with 24" front wheels in order to get a 73 degree seat tube angle together with a shorter top tube (but 700c rear for 'normal' gearing). The problem I have with all the bikes these gals love, is the seat tube angles are so steep I can't get set up properly, my knee will be too far forward of the pedal axle even with a super laid back seatpost. And, BTW, wheel size does not dictate speed, its a combination of the wheel size and gearing. To see, go to sheldon browns site and plug in different wheels sizes and gear combinations. It will take virtually the SAME ENERGY to push the same gear ratio, but it will take a diff. gears to have the same gear ratio on bikes with different sized wheels. Its true that smaller wheels have slightly more rolling resistance, but its very slight and made up for by the closer drafting advantages. To me the only down side of smaller wheels is the reduced availablity of wheels/tires, and non-standardness of tubes and wheels, if you race. But the FIT advantages for smaller people are tremendous. And if you don't race, there are plenty of good wheel/tire options in both 24" and 650c, just not as many very high end ones as in 700c (I love the schwalbe stelvio, comes in all the odd sized, 20" for a bike friday, 24" for a terry or airnimall, 650c, etc., very high pressure and light, rolls real nice).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelownagirl

No clue LB, but have an OCR1 too! I'm 5'3" and I have an extra small! :eek: One thing I liked about the OCR is that it was full ultegra... Too bad it's not carbon. Do they make carbon bikes with triples AND ultegra? I don't ever seem to see any...

---

My Trek 5000 has a triple with Ultegra RD and 105 on the front, and is carbon. Though I think the current version of it is called a Madone 4.something.

I ride a Blue Competition Cycles RC4. It is a unisex bike, but the XS size has the same top tube length as the Ruby 48 that everyone your size seems to be recommending, plus it is a compact geometry, so the standover shouldn't be an issue at all. You might want to try one out. I absolutely adore mine... It rides amazingly and is sooooo beautiful and distinctive. It's full carbon tubes with aluminum lugs. Frameset is 3.5 pounds. It is an awesome bike. I had mine put together with a 105 groupset except I did get the Ultegra short-reach levers. I bought the frameset on Ebay and put on the components that I knew I wanted. That way was much less expensive than a brand new factory-spec'd bike.

Check out http://www.rideblue.com/rc4.html and also http://www.rideblue.jp/product/rc4.html

That second site is in Japanese, but it has better pictures and geometry charts.

Blues are hard to find, but worth a long drive if necessary to try one out.

i am same size as you - ride the cannondale synapse fem 47cm on a triple - though would be happy with a double also-- fabulous - 700 wheels and no issues with toe overlap - full 105 and the shaimano's womens specific brake/shifters are ultegra inside. love it. can easily keep up with the boys :-)

bat

I'm the same size as you and I enjoyed my Aegis Swift. However, because of my short arms the head tube wasn't long enough. Aegis has a model called the Victory that might work better.

To get optimal fit I gave up on stock frames and bought a custom frame. I'm much happier because it solved some of the fit issues I have and the ride and handling of the bike is so much better.

Unfortunately, small, custom, carbon frames are tough to find and I'm not sure how custom they really are.

650c wheels are often not available in the trendy wheels that people ride. However, a 650c wheel is 25% stiffer than a 700c wheel of the same build. In most cases those trendy wheels are overbuilt for a small rider. The best thing you can do to get a good set of wheels is to find a good wheelbuilder to build a set of wheels appropriate for your weight.

On my custom frame I chose 650c's. I was told that the company probably wouldn't have put 700c on such a short tt, 48 cm.

Have you looked at Jamis? A 5'1 1/2" friend of mine rides one. It fits her very well. They go down to 48". The Xenith is their carbon bike.

I am 5'1", 28-inch inseam, riding a Ruby Expert with full Ultegra...Love, love, love it! I was riding a Cannondale WSD with 650c wheels before that and noticed a distinct difference in my ability to stay with the pack on our club rides when I upgraded to the Ruby. Don't know if it was the change in wheel size or just the overall geometry and 1-pound weight loss of the bike that made the difference, but I feel like it was a match made in heaven :)

I think LeMond makes an aluminum/carbon that has a 74 degree STA in the smallest size. It's just baffling to me that bikes that are made with 650 wheels don't have the STA slackened up a bit. What's the point?

Custom steel is an option that isn't necessarily a wallet buster.

I did notice on Independent Fabrication (which does only custom now) has some 'reference' traditional geometries, and the three sizes with 650c have STAs of 73.

Another thumbs up from me on the Schwalbe Stelvio; they're light but not too delicate. I bought a set of the pink ones from teamestrogen to match my pink King headset. I always get (positive) comments on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl

Wow, thanks for the tip on the merlin. I wish I knew about it when I was buying. Do you know of any carbon bikes with slack STAs in smaller sizes? I assumed I'd need to go custom for that. I ended up with terrys with 24" front wheels in order to get a 73 degree seat tube angle together with a shorter top tube (but 700c rear for 'normal' gearing). The problem I have with all the bikes these gals love, is the seat tube angles are so steep I can't get set up properly, my knee will be too far forward of the pedal axle even with a super laid back seatpost. And, BTW, wheel size does not dictate speed, its a combination of the wheel size and gearing. To see, go to sheldon browns site and plug in different wheels sizes and gear combinations. It will take virtually the SAME ENERGY to push the same gear ratio, but it will take a diff. gears to have the same gear ratio on bikes with different sized wheels. Its true that smaller wheels have slightly more rolling resistance, but its very slight and made up for by the closer drafting advantages. To me the only down side of smaller wheels is the reduced availablity of wheels/tires, and non-standardness of tubes and wheels, if you race. But the FIT advantages for smaller people are tremendous. And if you don't race, there are plenty of good wheel/tire options in both 24" and 650c, just not as many very high end ones as in 700c (I love the schwalbe stelvio, comes in all the odd sized, 20" for a bike friday, 24" for a terry or airnimall, 650c, etc., very high pressure and light, rolls real nice).

---

Orbea just announced that the 2008 WSD line up will now include a 46cm size with 650 wheels. I believe they have 2 CF models. Im so excited, I already want to test ride one. I feel your pain in the bike search. I'm an hair under 5' and ride a 44cm Dolce. It was neigh impossible to find a bike in stock in my size anywhere :( I can't even fit two bottles on the frame. However, she does fit in my compact car with the front wheel off so she can always ride in the car with me :)

I can't wait to test ride a Orbea Diva...I think Im in love

http://www.orbea-usa.com/fly.aspx?mi...duct&taxid=524

My custom frame has a 74.5 sta. Why? because I have a short femur and ideally could use a 76 sta. Even with the steeper sta I need a zero degree seatpost and my saddle as far forward as it can go to get the proper positioning over the pedals.

A steeper sta will put you closer to the center of the bike, I have a mtn bike with a slack sta 72 degrees and I feel like I'm on a recumbant bike. The power that I have closer to the center of the bike is not there on the mtn bike.

Maybe by using a steeper sta the companies can fit a wider range of riders. It is also used for optimal geometry and to prevent toe overlap.

BTW, when I was looking for a new bike I demoed a bike with 700c wheels. I was able to take it on a 10 mile ride with hills. I didn't descend or climb any faster on 700's nor did I ride the flats any faster. I ride my custom bike faster because it handles better on downhills and corners better. 650's accelerate faster than 700's. I keep running into my so when we slow down and accelerate. Riding faster is often the engine, not the machine.

I think manufacturers make these bikes with super steep STAs to fool people that don't understand the relationship between STA and TT length, making them think they are getting a bike with a shorter reach if the person is only comparing the TTs on two bikes, and not correcting for differences in STA. You are right, supposedly they started steepening the STAs in order to fit a 700c rear wheel, but heck, I have three terry bikes with 700c rear wheels and 73 degree STAs in sizes 44-48 cm! It should be eaiser with 650c. Furthermore, those same bikes they make with 76 degree STAs in small sizes come with 73 degree STAs in big sizes (look at a madonne geometry chart, for example). What's up with that? If the steeper angle was critical for performance you can be sure the guys would get it! I am maxed out at 73, even 74 is too steep for me, but its about balance on the bike. I need a slack STA to feel balanced, but I can see how someone with a shorter femur would be better balanced on a bike with a steeper STA. Lets not even talk about what they can do to HTAs on smaller bikes........ Lets just say I love my terrys.

I'll start by saying I'm 6' with a 34" inseam, so my problems were nothing like the ones you present. But I absolutely LOVE my 2007 Trek Madone 5.0! I've only had it a week and love it more every day. I had to have the 56 men's frame and swapped out narrower handlebars and stem. But the WSD version comes in a 47 if you can still find one. The 2008 has been completely redesigned, so the 2007's are going at great savings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mixie

I can't even fit two bottles on the frame.

---

Side loading cages will allow you to put two 24 oz. bottles on that frame:

http://www.cycleco.com/index.asp?Pag...ROD&ProdID=145

Sorry to interrupt this thread

Bluetreeeeeeee :) So nice to see you!!!!
C

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazycanuck

Sorry to interrupt this thread

Bluetreeeeeeee :) So nice to see you!!!!
C

---

Hey CC, how're they hangin'? ;)

BTW, it may be out of most price ranges, but Colnago makes 45cm frames with a sloping top tube and 700c wheels. I was looking at their Cristallo but the eff TT was a tiny bit long for me.

You can ask the shop you buy from to swap your crank to a triple. I think you can on the new cannondales. ( I thought the compact double thing was weird, too) I absolutely love my Synapse (carbon 2). I am having a hard time deciding between the Six13 and the Synapse this year. We'll see how much i get out of my current bike. I know that the Six13 will be available in really small sizes. Also, Felt's womens bikes go down to 43 cm and they have a carbon ultegra/ dura ace for $2600 this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triskeliongirl

I need a slack STA to feel balanced...

---

Yep, for me it's about balance. I owned a tri bike with a steep seat tube angle and short top tube (sold it to fund my current ride, a Merlin). To me a steep STA = too much weight on my hands. That didn't matter when I was riding in the tri position, but it was horrible to ride when not in the aero position.

One 'test' I use is whether I can ride no handed. I can't do it on a bike with a steep STA; my weight falls forward. It's much more comfortable when my weight is on my bum.

Today we stopped in a BS in a nearby city and found an XS 2005 Argon Krypton (full CF) 105 groupo with American Classic CR 420 wheels.....for $2K. Since the wheels new would be around $900, it seems like a good deal. I didn't want Grandma to wait while I test drove it, so I don't know how exactly she *feels*, but she looks very sexy, and standing over her, she seems like a good size for me. Two potential downsides: she's got a 9 speed cassette, not 10; and she's blue. All of my bikes are black. hmmmmmmm

Any thoughts on Argon bikes?

H&B
~T~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rij73

I ride a Blue Competition Cycles RC4. It is a unisex bike, but the XS size has the same top tube length as the Ruby 48 that everyone your size seems to be recommending, plus it is a compact geometry, so the standover shouldn't be an issue at all. You might want to try one out. I absolutely adore mine... It rides amazingly and is sooooo beautiful and distinctive. It's full carbon tubes with aluminum lugs. Frameset is 3.5 pounds. It is an awesome bike. I had mine put together with a 105 groupset except I did get the Ultegra short-reach levers. I bought the frameset on Ebay and put on the components that I knew I wanted. That way was much less expensive than a brand new factory-spec'd bike.

Check out http://www.rideblue.com/rc4.html and also http://www.rideblue.jp/product/rc4.html

That second site is in Japanese, but it has better pictures and geometry charts.

Blues are hard to find, but worth a long drive if necessary to try one out.

---

I, too, have a Blue, and I absolutely adore her! Light, fast, responsive. I got mine on eBay, too!

All nice bikes referenced here.

Any reason you are not looking at going custom? My Luna Eclipse is fantastic. It's steel (Columbus Ultrafoco) with carbon fork and seat stays , very light, extremely comfortable (like riding a cloud). Nothing like having a bike that no one else has, not to mention one that is made just for you.

I have a Trek WSD 5200 from a few years ago. It has a carbon frame with ultegra components. My inseam is 28" and ended up with the 47 and it fits well. All the bike shop guys recommended the 50, but it always felt too big. The 650 wheels should not be an issue. They will have more rolling resistance, but less wind drag. Many tri bikes have 650 wheels and triathletes like to go fast.