|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Compact Aluminum Frames CONTINUED!!!
I am the original poster of the Aluminum Composite vs Steel Standard
message today, and I am in Seattle (someone was wondering). So the Fuji League that I am looking it at is a compact frame, Med 50cm. The size below is Sm 44cm, and the size above is Lg 56cm. I have been sized at 52cm. Will the compact frame 50cm Fuji League be able to accomodate me? I have ridden the bike, and it feels all right. Is it ok to get the bike below your size a bit, and have it adjusted to fit? Is that the point of compact frames? To be adjusted? What exactly do they adjust? I like the downtube shifters, and the cheaper component set (mainly due to the CHEAP replacement cost, I am very bike accident prone). I really wish there was a 2004 or 2003 Fuji League out there, it would make all this much easier. Eeek! What do I do? I will be making a lot more money in about a year, so I can get a better bike then. For the time being I am thinking I should just buy the cheapo Fuji League and roll with it? Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"abrown360" wrote in message ps.com... Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? My experience is that it's better to buy too big, as long as you can still stand over it. As you become acclimated, you tend to expand a bike: raise the saddle, extend the reach, move the saddle back. A too-small frame may not give you any room to do that. I have heard that newbies buying too-small bikes is a common mistake, and I believe it. RichC |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Rich Clark wrote:
I have heard that newbies buying too-small bikes is a common mistake, and I believe it. It's very common, but don't blame the newbies, blame the shops that are selling them too-small bikes. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does
it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? Buy a bike the right size. Period. There's nothing more important to your comfort and enjoyment than getting a bike that fits well. In many cases, that might mean selecting the shop more than it does the bike itself. Find a shop that takes fit seriously and will work with you on it... not just when you buy it, but even afterward (in terms of changing out the stem, making seat adjustments, etc). A shop that will willingly sell you the wrong size bike (assuming that someone other than yourself has determined that the bike you're looking at is too small) is probably not a shop to buy a bike from. --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com "abrown360" wrote in message ps.com... I am the original poster of the Aluminum Composite vs Steel Standard message today, and I am in Seattle (someone was wondering). So the Fuji League that I am looking it at is a compact frame, Med 50cm. The size below is Sm 44cm, and the size above is Lg 56cm. I have been sized at 52cm. Will the compact frame 50cm Fuji League be able to accomodate me? I have ridden the bike, and it feels all right. Is it ok to get the bike below your size a bit, and have it adjusted to fit? Is that the point of compact frames? To be adjusted? What exactly do they adjust? I like the downtube shifters, and the cheaper component set (mainly due to the CHEAP replacement cost, I am very bike accident prone). I really wish there was a 2004 or 2003 Fuji League out there, it would make all this much easier. Eeek! What do I do? I will be making a lot more money in about a year, so I can get a better bike then. For the time being I am thinking I should just buy the cheapo Fuji League and roll with it? Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Jacoubowsky wrote:
Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? Buy a bike the right size. Period. Good advice, but with compact frames, each size fits a wider range of riders than was the case with traditional geometry frames. The bicycle that the original poster is considering is a prime example, since from 2004 to 2005 they went from a traditional frame, offered in seven sizes, to a compact frame offered in small, medium, and large. So if he was sized at 52 cm for a traditional geometry frame, he probably would fit the medium size in a compact frame, with appropriate adjustments to the seat height and handlebar position. It's similar to the cheap shirts that come in S,M,L & XL, as opposed to twenty or so combination of neck sizes and arm lengths of the more expensive shirts. The former kind of fits okay, but aren't optimal; the neck may be a bit too tight or too loose, and the arms may bunch up or not extend to the wrist. The latter is more expensive for the manufacturer to produce and distribute, and more trouble for the retailer to stock, but better for the consumer. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
In article om,
abrown360 wrote: I am the original poster of the Aluminum Composite vs Steel Standard message today, and I am in Seattle (someone was wondering). So the Fuji League that I am looking it at is a compact frame, Med 50cm. The size below is Sm 44cm, and the size above is Lg 56cm. I have been sized at 52cm. Will the compact frame 50cm Fuji League be able to accomodate me? I have ridden the bike, and it feels all right. Is it ok to get the bike below your size a bit, and have it adjusted to fit? Is that the point of compact frames? To be adjusted? What exactly do they adjust? Bike fitting should be based on the type of riding you do, how fit you are, how flexible your joints, neck and back are as well as your normal cadence output. As that all will be determined by a very experienced bike fitter, it's important to find a shop that will spend the time fitting you to any bike that falls within your budget, and not just a brand of bike. David. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Rich Clark
wrote: "abrown360" wrote in message ps.com... Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? My experience is that it's better to buy too big, as long as you can still stand over it. As you become acclimated, you tend to expand a bike: raise the saddle, extend the reach, move the saddle back. A too-small frame may not give you any room to do that. I have heard that newbies buying too-small bikes is a common mistake, and I believe it. RichC It all depends on what you mean by a common mistake by buying too small of a bike. You have to understand that many newbies buy bikes when they are rarely as fit or flexible joint wise as we more experienced cyclists are accustomed to. So, their start riding position will always be upright or some super upright. The bike shop isn't going to sell this newbie rider a super long top tube and stretched out ride (typical of a larger frame), even it he or she might end up with one in a long distant future. He's going to sell what the customer needs at that point in time, which can be a smaller frame plus a stem extender. Ofcourse, when this person rides more and more and more, he or she becomes more flexible and be able to bend down more and more to get more leverage and push bigger gears. But because the bike was set up to ride upright, the cockpit becomes tight as your butt scoots back and the upper body lean forward and low, assuming a more aero position. What to do then? Like most people do. Buy a seatpost with a certain setback. Titec makes one for triathlon events that gives a long forward or rear setback. Secondly. You can switch to a longer stem OR slap on clip-on aerobars. Don't confuse this as a mistake. It's a function of our body getting more flexible as we ride more. David. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
abrown360 wrote: Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? I didn't _buy_ a bike a bit smaller, but I ride one frequently. Here's my story: In 1974, I was quite poor. I couldn't even afford to _dream_ about a Raleigh International, but I thought that someday, someday I could save enough to buy a Raleigh Super Course. Someday. And after years of wishing, I learned that my guitar teacher had one languishing in his basement. It had very low miles, but it needed _lots_ of attention. I traded a perfectly tuned cheap German ten speed for that bike. It was too small - a 21.5" frame. I fit better on a 22.5" I'm still commuting to work on that Raleigh, all these years later. At first, I just put up with the handlebars being a little too low. Later I put a taller stem on the bike. And yes, I have more than a fistful of seatpost showing. (Before compact frames, that was one way to evaluate bike size.) And yes, some people have told me the bike was actually too small for me. But it's served me well over the years. It's done multi-hundred-mile loaded tours, and thousands and thousands of miles commuting. I'm more comfortable on my larger Cannondale, but I do fine on the Raleigh too. It's better to get a properly fitting bike, no doubt. If you're buying new, you should certainly do that. But a frame a _little_ small isn't a disaster. - Frank Krygowski |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Steven M. Scharf" wrote: Mike Jacoubowsky wrote: Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? Buy a bike the right size. Period. Good advice, but with compact frames, each size fits a wider range of riders than was the case with traditional geometry frames. The bicycle that the original poster is considering is a prime example, since from 2004 to 2005 they went from a traditional frame, offered in seven sizes, to a compact frame offered in small, medium, and large. So if he was sized at 52 cm for a traditional geometry frame, he probably would fit the medium size in a compact frame, with appropriate adjustments to the seat height and handlebar position. It's similar to the cheap shirts that come in S,M,L & XL, as opposed to twenty or so combination of neck sizes and arm lengths of the more expensive shirts. The former kind of fits okay, but aren't optimal; the neck may be a bit too tight or too loose, and the arms may bunch up or not extend to the wrist. The latter is more expensive for the manufacturer to produce and distribute, and more trouble for the retailer to stock, but better for the consumer. The difference, of course, is that your local couturier usually doesn't also stock the parts to easily change the neck and arm size of their garments (well, maybe they do if they have a tailor on site; there's a sweet spot of tailoring where the garment is expensive enough to be worth the cost of alteration). As Sheldon has pointed out, long seatposts are an innovation that mountain bikes brought to cycling at about the same time as they introduced low-standover (effectively, compact) frames. Combined with a wider variety of stems (and, in those cases where the steer tube is left at a proper length, vertical adjustability) on the market, a single frame can fit a vastly wider range of riders. There are limits, and there are some riders who will almost always need custom frames for an ideal fit, owing to quirky bodies. Moreover, threaded stems, besides being a lousy joint and marginally heavier than threadless setups, also have a funky failure mode: moisture (sweat) can drop down the stem and corrosively bond the quill into the steer tube. This very thing has happened to a pretty 80s-vintage steel frame ridden by a club-mate of mine. Now, I like traditional-geometry and steel as much as the next guy: I raced a wildly outdated steel Pinarello for a few years. I am presently exploiting its horizontal dropouts and cold-settable frame to build a really nice road fixie. But understand the tradeoffs: a really light, very expensive steel frame will hit 3.5 pounds (about 1500g). 1500-2000g aluminum frames cost $120-500 new (Nashbar's Frame is the archetypal example). Light, expensive aluminum frames are 1000-1300g, and zany race-grade cf and stupidlight aluminum frames are now below 900g. These are marginal advantages. But the inexpensive end of decent modern aluminum frames will cost more and weigh more than any decent steel frame (ask not about the evil that be low-end "hi-ten" steel and department-store aluminum bikes). Repairability, for most riders, is all hype. You can buy another aluminum frame for less than the cost of most repairs. An exception is made for world travelers, but only a small exception. If you're not racing, my standard recommendation is to scour garage sales. I don't do as much scouring these days, but in the last two years I pulled a variety of frames from garage sales and dumpsters. $10 at various garage sales bought me a really nice Mikado touring frame, a Bianchi which still serves as my commuter, and an early-70s Motobecane. The Nishiki which I sold to a friend after some upgrades (brakes and rear cogs, mainly). These bikes are all serviceable, durable, and (it goes without saying given their age) steel. Racers have different priorities, and few of them are likely to be really happy with the compromises in a $10 garage-sale bike . I have a lot of bikes in my shed, but the race bike (my "serious" road bike, but one of three I normally keep around) is a cheap 1500g aluminum frame that, with a bunch of stuff I bought cheaply, built up into something like a 19-pound bike (my conservative estimate after some preliminary weighing) for relatively little money. I wouldn't recommend this approach for a first bike, because it took me months to assemble the parts from my various deals, and you have to ride in the meantime. Moreover, I had a pretty good idea of what I needed, and was able to fit it up on my own. http://wiredcola.blogspot.com/2005_0...html#111786997 317601208 http://tinyurl.com/89dl5 In conclusion: buy a bike that fits. The cheapest good used bikes are likely to be steel. The cheapest good new bikes are likely to be aluminum. The lightest bikes tend to be carbon fibre or aluminum. The most wildly indestructible bikes are probably made of Ti. For that trip across Africa, go for the steel frame. Horses for courses, -- Ryan Cousineau http://www.wiredcola.com/ "I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
I submit that on or about 2 Jun 2005 14:37:16 -0700, the person known
to the court as "abrown360" made a statement . com in Your Honour's bundle) to the following effect: Anyone out there buy a bike a bit smaller than their ideal size? Does it work out OK with the adjustments? Whaddya think? What have you experienced? Go to a proper bike shop and use their bike fit system. For a reasonable approximation in the comfort of your own home, try http://www.wrenchscience.com/WS1/Sec...ing/Height.asp And don't get too hung up on it, because unless you are riding thousands of miles a year or competing seriously, an inch out in the frame size is honestly no big deal. Think of all those kids who ride the same bike for two or three years, while putting on multiple inches in height. Guy -- May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk 85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Compact Aluminum Frames BAD??? | abrown360 | General | 31 | June 4th 05 09:02 AM |
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 | Mike Iglesias | General | 4 | October 29th 04 07:11 AM |
Imported custom aluminum frames? | Chalo | Techniques | 2 | October 10th 04 02:19 PM |
steel, carbon, aluminum | Bob Anderson | Techniques | 61 | August 20th 04 04:46 AM |
handlebar height | n crowley | General | 35 | April 19th 04 07:12 PM |