Just how important is that 1 inch of clearance anyway?

So, I'm 5 1" and recently went to get fitted for a road bike. 1st shop recommended a 43-44cm as on the 47 there was not really an entire inch of clearance when standing up. To be honest, it was pretty close. The shop did not have a 43-44 in anything for me to sit on/try out. Went to a second shop who also recommended a 43-44...but again nothing to test out. Called about 5 shops close to me...nothing. (I could order something and pay deposits at most of these stores...I wanted to try to find something though)

A friend in a nearby state found a bikeshop near here that has a leftover 2005 43"...seems from the descriptions like it's a good enough bike for someone like me just starting out (it's a Trek 2100).

But...I guess it's important to have that inch clearance right? Also, the first bike shop guy was concerned that the pedal at the bottom of the spin would be too low (and he'd have to move the seat down too far...apparently you aren't supposed to lower the seat past a certain point on a bike?)...although there were no pedals on the bike at the moment.

Does anyone here ride on a bike that doesn't have an inch clearance

a lot of people believe that you need the biggest frame you can get into height wise, the problem with women isn't that clearance, it's the top tube.
There is an article on the Rivendell website about the frame size thing (not women issues though)
so if you can barely clear it, it's probably a fit... but then the top tube. are you stretching your back too far? how are your hands?

http://www.rivbike.com/html/101_pureopinions.html
ps rivendell makes very expensive custom bikes.


Fit and Sizing.
These are the most important aspects of any bike, and the most misunderstood. Most people buy bikes too small. If you’re over 6ft 4in, it’s a sure bet, because bikes don’t come big enough for you. Basically, bikes were originally designed for underfed Europeans, and the sizing hasn’t changed since, at least in the mainstream. But even normal-sized and small folks ride bikes too small.

Around here we joke that “we like to put people on bikes that are too big,” but what we really mean by that is “your bike shop and local fit guru may think it’s too big, but we know better.”

We have too much to say about fit and sizing to include it all here (see our print catalogue or elsewhere online). But basically it goes like this: You will be more comfortable if the handlebar is as high or higher than the saddle; and that relationship is hard to achieve on most bikes, because they were designed by folks who don’t think that’s important.

To determine your saddle height: see our print catalogue. You do not benefit from an in-person, hands-on, expensive and industrialized and gadget-dependent bike fitting session if the specialist is following a routing with a fundamental flaw or bi


as built right into it, and they all have that.

Is the Trek 2100 the WSD? If so, that's the same as my bike and several others on here. I _love_ that bike, and wouldn't consider it "entry level" at all!!

here's the rest:
http://www.rivbike.com/html/bikes_riv5.html


The road bike, for the most part, has devolved into a high tech, uncomfortable machine, and the proof is all around us. Look through any bike magazine or catalogue and you’ll see saddles up to 6 inches higher than the handlebars. It is impossible to be comfortable on such a bike. It forces you to lean forward, putting more weight on your genitals, hands, and arms. The lower part of the drops are out of reach. People ride these bikes with straight, locked-out arms and wake up with aching backs. They endure it, get used to it, or buy recumbents.

Hi GirlWonder,

I had the same dilema when I was bike shopping. I tried the 47 (WSD)and to me it felt too big because I didn't have much clearance over the top tube. So I went to another shop and they suggested I try the 44(WSD). I rode it around the parking lot but I was really scrunched on it. I felt like I was on a kid's bike. The sales person where I tried the 44 insisted that they could fit it properly but I didn't like the feel. I went back to the first store and tried the 47 (Trek Pilot WSD) again and the salesperson there (different person than first time) explained how the fit works. I ended up buying the 47 with a shortened stem, adjusted seat, and shims in the brakes. Not that I have a lot of experience but after 700 miles on it, I feel that it fits me just right.

This may work differently for you. I suggest you at least try out the 44 before jumping in.

Good luck,
Patty

Here's an article that tells how to measure your inseam and determine your saddle height. Use it as a starting point. Most bicycle companies websites will give you the standover height of the bike. Look at the geometry of the frame. You can also compare tt length, headtube height, etc.

http://www.active.com/story.cfm?stor...tegory=cycling

Another great article on how women's fitting,

http://www.active.com/story.cfm?stor...tegory=cycling

The clearance is kind of important - banging yourself on the top tube can be very very uncomfortable (I know this from experience - rode a silly race that involved sharing a single speed coaster bike with 3 team mates and it was waaaay to big for me - help I can't get down!!) and much more likely to happen if you don't have any clearance....., but more important if the bike is that big on you does it fit anywhere else either? If it is too long you'll be robbing yourself of power and creating an uncomfortable riding situation for the rest of your body too.

(though I have to disagree with Riv's fitting philosophy too - I had a shop recommend and put on a longer stem on my old old bike to try to relieve some shoulder pain I was experiencing. Well sitting more upright did nothing for the shoulder and made my back and butt hurt too. They make beautiful bikes, but it annoys me that they seem so adamant that their way is the only way....fit the bike to the person riding it - not the way you like to ride)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nanci

Is the Trek 2100 the WSD? If so, that's the same as my bike and several others on here. I _love_ that bike, and wouldn't consider it "entry level" at all!!

---

First of all...thanks for all of the advice/opinions...you girls are great! Keep them coming

And yes, it's a 2005 2100 WSD...with a discounted price so if I can get it I will...it did "read" nice anyway.

(Some back history, I just did my first duathlon on a mtb a couple of weeks ago and did not like getting passed by all of you roadies ;) ...so I'm hoping to shave 10 minutes off my bike time by riding a fancy new road bike. With only 4 training rides I did 17 miles in about an hour on the mtb....but that was saving my legs a little for the 5K afterwards)

I guess I really dont want a bike that's too big. Is the first shop guy right...if I need to lower the seat "too much" that's bad (again, another issue besides the bar was that he didn't think my feet would reach all the way down on the down stroke).

why don't you just make him put some pedals on the bike so you can see whether or not you can reach the bottom of the pedal stroke?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mimitabby

why don't you just make him put some pedals on the bike so you can see whether or not you can reach the bottom of the pedal stroke?

---

Well, at the time I didn't think of it and thought he just "knew"...but at the next store this weekend I will. He just eyeballed it and felt it was way too long a reach for me. I can also go back there as well....maybe he was just a new guy....

If you have a bare 1 inch of standover clearance, you'll be OK mounting and dismounting on flat ground. It's on hills where that clearance gets smaller and
maybe your body and the top tube meet. For years I rode a bike with a 23 inch
seat tube, and my inseam is 32 inches, leaving me with about 1/2 inch of clearance.
You can learn to be careful on the hills and tip the bike further to mount and dismount,
but occassionally you'll make contact. For me it was never hard contact or enough
to cause real pain. I suggest taking the bike to a steep hill and practicing there to see if you have really enough clearance. Try both with 2 feet on the ground and with one foot on pedal/one foot on ground. Of course, other frame dimensions are important too, and you might be prepared to compomise down to 1/2 inch of standover to get the other dimension right if you are confident in the dismounting on hills.

I know bike fitting can be tricky and there are a million theories. My experience with it though is that the method of using the top-tube height as the primary factor in fit - isn't right.

Ask yourself this question - during your average ride, what will be more important - your body/shoulder/torso/hand/pedal position or being able to stand over the top tube? How often are you going to put both feet down and straddle the bike down the exact center of your lower body?

For me anyway, I'd rather have a bike that fits my upper body and pedal position first, and have the top tube height be a secondary factor. Remember that this (height) is also an issue with motorcycles and many people happily ride with no problem even when the seat (or top tube in a bicycle's case) is a bit high.

i had less than 1" of clearance with my dolce... but i also had to shorten the stem way back... cuz we found out the bike was too long...

what i've been reading lately.. is to buy the SMALLEST that bike that fits... then add a longer stem if you need it... or at least.. that's what they claim the big guys do????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caligurl

i had less than 1" of clearance with my dolce... but i also had to shorten the stem way back... cuz we found out the bike was too long...

what i've been reading lately.. is to buy the SMALLEST that bike that fits... then add a longer stem if you need it... or at least.. that's what they claim the big guys do????

---

how did they shorten the stem? Do you mean the top tube?

no.... i mean the stem.... shortened it to this little bitty thing with a sharp upturn (you can't shorten the top tube of a premade bike! lol!!!)

even with my ruby... i got a size smaller (still good for leg extension... etc) but still had to shorten to a 90cm stem! part of that, though, was the additional length of the dura-ace hoods over the ultegra short reach!)

Rereading my first post made me realize somehow I cut out the part where I said I was worried about getting a bike "too small". I do want to get the good deal on the 2005 salebike...but really want to make sure I'm getting the right fit. And it seems that by reading more threads a lot of women my height are getting things bigger than 43-44.

Also, the smaller (43") comes with the 650 wheels....

I have no idea why I don't want smaller wheels as a new road bike rider. It just somehow seems. Wrong. ;)

In any case it just seems like there are so many opinions out there. In the end I'm not sure how much difference 3-4cm will make...going the smaller route anyway.

You know this is all stemming from me feeling short to begin with and wanting the biggest possible bike to avoid that "shortie" feeling I typically have :D

i'm 5'3" and my ruby is a 48... and, as i said... i still had to shorten the stem on her to a 90....

I had a very similar fear to yours!

I'm 5'4" but I have quite short legs. My first bike was a 49cm men's model and it was way too big (but I didn't know any better). When it was time for a better fit, I was told by my LBS 'fit guy' that I needed a 44cm in the Specialized WSD I was admiring. I test rode a 51cm model and had plenty of standover clearance due to the compact frame, but the reach was too long. I kept thinking that a 47 would be better than a 44 because I have short legs but a long torso. I even brought this up when we were placing the order and he re-did the calculations. If I'd gotten the 47, he'd barely be able to make the reach right with the shortest stem available (I guess I have a long torso but short arms). With the 44, it was right as is. I agreed and ordered the 44 (I test rode another 44cm model in the store).

Now, well over 1000 miles later, I'm VERY glad I listened to him. We rode 75 miles this past Sunday and I felt NO pain. NONE. My bike really, truly fits me. Yes, I hate that I can't fit two water bottles on the frame and yes, I hate that the guys make fun of my tiny bike...but you better believe that I LOVE the fit. Love it! Moral of the story: don't be turned off by a small bike!

I'm 5'1.5" with a 28" inseam. My 47" WSD Trek fits perfectly.

Why wouldn't you like 650's, though? They seem more proportional on small bikes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GirlWonder

In the end I'm not sure how much difference 3-4cm will make...going the smaller route anyway.

---

it can make a LOT of difference in comfort!

Go ride it and see how it feels! That's the only way to really know. Either it will feel perfect, or something will be not quite right or lacking or outright bothersome.

Nanci

I will definitely try both the 43 and 47s on Saturday. Thus far I have yet to sit on a Trek at all...and I know it varies by model/make.

So, I guess I should start a new thread if I want recommendations on wide (but small) biking shoes?

I have pretty severe bunions that cause my shoes to need to be wide in the toe box (although everywhere else I'm narrow). I'm thinking I'll be a 37 or 38 in a biking shoe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eden

(though I have to disagree with Riv's fitting philosophy too - I had a shop recommend and put on a longer stem on my old old bike to try to relieve some shoulder pain I was experiencing. Well sitting more upright did nothing for the shoulder and made my back and butt hurt too. They make beautiful bikes, but it annoys me that they seem so adamant that their way is the only way....fit the bike to the person riding it - not the way you like to ride)

---

Well, there is variation amongst different individuals and their recommendations I guess. Was your old bike a Rivendell, or just a bike that you were trying to improve to ease your shoulder pain? The Riv bikes do have their own special frame proportions that are different from most others. I'll be picking up my new Rivendell Rambouillet by July 29th- my salesman is being very careful about making sure it fits me exactly right before I take it home. They will put the right length stem on while i'm there, before they tape the bars. I'm 5'5" and getting the 54cm (Rivendell measurements). 700c 37 tires.
I'm very hyped, and can't wait!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lisa S.H.

Well, there is variation amongst different individuals and their recommendations I guess. Was your old bike a Rivendell, or just a bike that you were trying to improve to ease your shoulder pain? The Riv bikes do have their own special frame proportions that are different from most others. I'll be picking up my new Rivendell Rambouillet by July 29th- my salesman is being very careful about making sure it fits me exactly right before I take it home. They will put the right length stem on while i'm there, before they tape the bars. I'm 5'5" and getting the 54cm (Rivendell measurements). 700c 37 tires.
I'm very hyped, and can't wait!!!

---

no the old bike was not a Riv - but personally I am very flexible forwards - much less so backwards (can put my palms flat on the floor, but can't do a back bend to save my life) and am actually much more comfortable in a more agressive position. It sounds backwards, but my neck and shoulder problems went away when I flipped my stem to position my upper body lower. Just goes to show there is no one fit fits all.

I am 5'2.5" with a 28.5" inseam. My 46 cm Aegis Swift has a rather high bottom bracket, and as a result, I have very little standover (like 1/4"). It has never been a problem for me. The top tube is quite short (19.1") so it fits me perfect from that perspective - and that is probably the most important component of fit, as others have said. I have a 9 cm stem and 650c wheels and don't mind them one bit. I think they're cute. ;-) I have a small amount of toe overlap with them (I wear a size 7 shoe), so I would have a huge amount of toe overlap with a 700c front wheel - that's dangerous. So, that is something to consider when choosing between a 650c and a 700c bike. Since you have smaller feet, it may not be a problem for you.

Also, bike handling will be sacrificed the shorter your stem is. There is a reason that "stock" stems are 10cm. I have read that 9cm-11cm is good, and any shorter or longer can cause problems. I know I experienced some front-end twitchiness and difficulties climbing out of the saddle on my Terry Isis (44 cm frame), which came with a 6.5cm stem.

There are a lot of factors to keep in mind. I do agree with what several posters have said, though, that all things considered, a smaller frame is more desirable than a larger one, if you could potentially ride either. With a smaller frame, you can use a longer stem, for better handling. And, it's slightly lighter. 650c wheels are also lighter than 700s!

Just some random thoughts from past experience with small WSD road bikes...good luck, and let us know what you decide!

Emily

I agree with others that the most important component of fit in selecting a frame is the top tube length, and also the seat tube angle. It is obvious why top tube length is important, as it is one of the main determinants of reach. STA is a much overlooked determinant of reach, but an increase of only 1 degree in STA increases the reach by 1 cm, assuming a constant KOP position. A common problem in small sized bikes built around 700cc wheels is the top tubes are proportionally too long to fit the large wheel, hence the reach is too long. So, you need to figure out what reach you need and work back from there. While you can deal with a too long top tube by using a short stem, if the stem gets too short the handling becomes twitchy. I think seat tube length is one of the least important factors in selecting a frame, provided you have enough clearance to comfortably mount, dismount, and not be hurt in a fall. In the old days having too much seat post showing was a problem cuz you couldn't get your stem high enough (the problem rivendell cites), but there are now stems readily available that angle up as an alternative way to get enough height. You can easily swap out seat posts and stems, but you can't change your seat tube angle or top tube length. Also be careful when comparing frame sizes between manufacturers, as bottom bracket heights vary, as do whether the seat tube is being measured from center to center vs center to top. I can fit into bikes ranging from 44-51 cm depending on model. To determine your size in any given bike, you need to look at the published geometry, choose the frame with the reach parameters based on the published STA and TT length that are desirable for you, and then look at the standover height to see if its in a range you can fit with available seat posts and stems. I also look at the published fork trail, as they indicate the handling. I like a trail value in the 5-5.5 range. Many small framed bikes have trail values exceeding 6, which makes for sluggish handling (in an attempt to avoid toe clip overlap, they sometimes put on a fork with large rake or increase the head tube angle, which pushes the front wheel away, but gives awful balance over the bike). So, without even test riding a bike, by looking at these tables I know if it can be made to fit me and how it will handle. BTW, I am 5'4", 30.5" cycling inseam, and I ride a 44 cm (center to center) Terry Titanium Isis with a 73 degree STA, 48 cm TT, 24" front whee, 700cc rear wheel, angled stem that projects ~10 cm forward, and nitto noodel bars. My 44 cm Terry Classic touring bike is set up the same, but with a 49 cm TT and 9 cm stem. I like having the 700cc rear wheel since casettes are designed to give optimal gearing for a 700cc wheel, but the 24" front wheels let me get the reach I want without any compromises in bike handling or toe clip overlap.

I just got my new custom bike. My Aegis was a 44cm and I had lots of clearance over the tt, the new bike is a 48cm and I have almost no clearance.
It doesn't bother me at all, what matters is how perfect the fit is and how well she handles.

I probably wouldn't have looked at the clearance but I remembered your post so I made a point of checking it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kathi

I just got my new custom bike. My Aegis was a 44cm and I had lots of clearance over the tt, the new bike is a 48cm and I have almost no clearance.
It doesn't bother me at all, what matters is how perfect the fit is and how well she handles.

I probably wouldn't have looked at the clearance but I remembered your post so I made a point of checking it.

---

Kathi, when your clearance is that tight, be careful mounting and dismounting on hills. You always stand vertically relative to gravity, your bike's tt height is relative to the road. The effective standover height becomes greater by the reciprocal of the cosine of the slope angle (sorry to be so nerdly). One seldom starts and stops on steep hills anyway for other reasons, just be aware, as this is the one situation where it might matter.

Thanks Deb,

Another reason not to stop on hills!

I'm a little surprised that the standover is so tight, however, I do have to tilt the frame slightly sideways to clear the saddle. My legs either aren't long enough or I'm not flexible enough to go over the saddle without tilting the bike. Then I clip in to my pedal and push off so I guess that's why I didn't notice the standover being so close.

I just wanted to thank all of you lovely ladies for advice. I wound up going for the 43cm 2005 WSD Trek 2100. The LBS guy suggested a smaller stem (from 100cm to 90cm) as he thought I was a smidge streched out...but otherwise a great fit. He had to order the stem but recommended I ride some without the change to see how I feel once they swap it out. I took her for her first "real" ride today. Not for speed....just to test her out...

First of all...coming from a mountain bike...she's soooo fast. I'm so excited to get back out there again. I have just about an inch of clearance and have the 650 tires. My SO's brother said, "that's just the tiniest bike I've ever seen". But, he felt it was a great purchase and a great bike.

I'm very happy! And, I'm glad I have the clearance..especially since I'm getting used to the clipless pedals. I think clearance is a good thing :)

Thanks again and happy riding!

Congratulations! Sounds like a great choice for you, a good fit, and a lovely bike. Please post a photo when you can - we'd all love to see it! :)

Emily

Here she is....

probably not the best picture.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...d/68a3db9b.jpg