Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Click the "Create Account" button now to join.

To disable ads, please log-in.

Shop at TeamEstrogen.com for women's cycling apparel.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Far from home
    Posts
    373

    To disable ads, please log-in.

    I am lucky enough to have a custom bike builder in the house, so my road bike was WSD before anyone came up with the term. It has all the features here the ladies are talking about: shorter relative top tube, short-reach brake levers, narrow handlebars. I love, love, love it !

    One thing no-one has brought up is short cranks. I know Trek is spec'ing "shorter" cranks on their WSDs, though I don't know what length. I have 165cm cranks on both my road and mt. bikes. For the record, I'm 5'3" and have size 6.5 feet. I bring up foot size, because that is a part of the total leg length that you use to get the pedals around. I experience greater efficiency in turning a smaller circle. When I have ridden a longer crank (since being on 165s) I feel a loss of power and efficiency, like my leg has to go too far and gets out of its power zone. Not exactly a scientific explanation, but it is something I have perceived. Just another thing to consider if you do wind up with a *men's* frame which you then customize to fit you.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    socal
    Posts
    1,852
    my dolce has shorter cranks: 167.5....

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Mrs. KnottedYet
    Posts
    9,152
    fixedgeargirl notices "One thing no-one has brought up is short cranks."

    my first road bike got customised with 165 cm cranks.

    my road bike now has 170 cm.

    I never had both bikes at the same time I have not compared the two. According to my shop and builder with 170 I get more power on flats and downhill, with 165 the cranks turn over quicker, may be easier spinning up hill.

    What is odd is on my old bike, a Trek 420 when I switched to 165 cm I felt an imediate sense of "Aww, not it fits!". But I did not even notice that I had 170 cm cranks now till Adventure girl pointed it out to me on a ride. She's about my height, I'm 5'1" and she has 165 cm. But on this bike 170's's felt "right" to me.

    Would I be faster uphill (or at least GET uphill) on 165's? Probably.

    Would it fit me less well on this frame? Probably.

    It's part of what makes this sport so fascinating, eh?

    PS: Happy Birthday Spazzdog
    Fancy Schmancy Custom Road bike ~ Mondonico Futura Legero
    Found on side of the road bike ~ Motobecane Mixte
    Gravel bike ~ Salsa Vaya
    Favorite bike ~ Soma Buena Vista mixte
    Folder ~ Brompton
    N+1 ~ My seat on the Rover recumbent tandem
    https://www.instagram.com/pugsley_adventuredog/

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sunny California
    Posts
    1,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Trek420
    But I did not even notice that I had 170 cm cranks now till Adventure girl pointed it out to me on a ride. She's about my height, I'm 5'1" and she has 165 cm.
    I rarely get to ride any other bikes that come close to fitting me. So when Trek420's bike called my name, my (almost) 5'0" body answered! Her bike is SOOOOOOOOOO different from mine. Her bike is a steel bike with Campy Record and 700 wheels. Mine is a carbon bike with Shimano DuraAce and 650's.

    I only rode it around a little on the flats. But one of the first thing I noticed was the crank lengths. All my bikes have 165's (road and mountain). So that feels "right" for me. It doesn't seem like I should be able to tell the difference in 5mm per crank (10mm overall), but they definitely felt different.

    I think the bottom line of WSD or not is get what fits your body. Women with longer legs, shorter torso blah blah blah is just generalization. I bought a WSD bike only because they didn't make my bike in a "MSD" (aka "man bike") in my size. The smallest "man frame" for that bike was 50cm. I ride a 47cm.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Mrs. KnottedYet
    Posts
    9,152
    Adventure Girl "I rarely get to ride any other bikes that come close to fitting me. So when Trek420's bike called my name, my (almost) 5'0" body answered!"

    Called your name? She almost followed you home

    And silly me not trying your OCLV

    those of you 5'4" or over may not understand the almost irrational need to try or even buy anytime you see a bike your size it's "I'll never find one again!"
    Fancy Schmancy Custom Road bike ~ Mondonico Futura Legero
    Found on side of the road bike ~ Motobecane Mixte
    Gravel bike ~ Salsa Vaya
    Favorite bike ~ Soma Buena Vista mixte
    Folder ~ Brompton
    N+1 ~ My seat on the Rover recumbent tandem
    https://www.instagram.com/pugsley_adventuredog/

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Twin Cities, MN
    Posts
    95
    Quote Originally Posted by Trek420
    those of you 5'4" or over may not understand the almost irrational need to try or even buy anytime you see a bike your size it's "I'll never find one again!"
    Well, we do, but for another reason. When I find a pair of size 11 shoes, footwear of any kind, I do indeed feel a quite irrational need to buy them. At least shoes are usually a little less expensive than bikes. However, currently I'm on the hunt for snowboard boots. They may end up costing as much as my Trek 7200FX!

    So, while my 5'9" long-legged short-bodied, long-armed frame may never need a WSD bike, I do sympathize, and I am glad that the industry is adapting.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •