Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3

    Cyclocross sizing

    I'm looking into cross and having a hard time deciding between a 54 and 56 frame sizes. I ride a large SC LT Blur that I love and usually when I get on a med frame I am glad that I ride a large. I am 5'10 and a 32 inseam. Any insights out there?

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    199
    54 seems a tad small for your size. I''m 5'11" with a 32.5" inseam, I ride a 58cm frame with a 58cm top tube and that's perfect for me.

    I think that top tube length is the more important value of the two though so maybe base your decision on that rather than seat tube length.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nakedbabytoes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    858
    I have found that CX bikes will have pretty tight SO compared to their MTB counterparts, probably closer to roadish SO. I have a Salsa roadie that has a 51cm TT and my AC is actually a 52cm TT(even though the size is listed at a 46cm frame). The SO for both is right at 29" and I have an inseam of 29". Closer than I would prefer for SO I am used to in MTB geo but anything smaller and the cockpit would feel tiny and cramped for the kindof riding it is intended for.
    I agree with Hogdog.
    2010 Surly Conundrum
    2012 Pugsley
    2012 Felt Brougham
    2013 Salsa Colossal
    2013 All City Nature Boy
    2014 Big Dummy

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    513
    My old Lemond book with sizing chart appendixB says 52.8cm frame for a 32" actual inseam (28.3" from center of bb to top of saddle, the Ned book agrees with that bb to saddle top measurement).

    You are measuring actual barefoot inseam?, not pantsize, right?

    I ride same size road frame and cx frame, but: I have a sloping top tube frame (specialized tricross) that gives slightly higher handlebars than a horizontal top tube bike, and I find it to be very comfortable at speed in the rougher stuff.
    You will find you standover very little on a cx bike, -just at the start line, all your mounts and dismounts are to the side. So long as you have a standover gap, even if small, I wouldn't worry much about standover.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    134
    you really need to know what top tube size is a proper fit for you on a road bike. Thats the size you need to go with...

    you'll hear 2 schools of thought; some people will 'size down' for a cross bike. I dont know why. Some cross bikes (like my Ridley X-fire) will have tall bottom brackets (for clearance), tall seat tubes (easier shouldering) and tall head tubes. Like mentioned, this reduces your standover clearance. Which means very little. My nuts rest on my tob tube while standing and its not been an issue.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    3
    Thanks for all the great advice! I'll be letting you know how it works out!

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    513
    I don't know if this help, but the distance from my seatpost clamp to bars is about the same on both my cx bike and my xc bike, I reach further forward on the cx bike but the hoods are narrower than the grips on the xc bike. Can you take the dimensions of your xc bike with you when you go shopping?

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    2,094
    Quote Originally Posted by hammy56 View Post
    you really need to know what top tube size is a proper fit for you on a road bike. Thats the size you need to go with...Like mentioned, this reduces your standover clearance. Which means very little. My nuts rest on my tob tube while standing and its not been an issue.
    I have no idea why people are always hung up on stand over height. Go with a proper ETT fit and you'll be happy. Unless you like straddling your TT a lot.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by jimPacNW View Post
    I don't know if this help, but the distance from my seatpost clamp to bars is about the same on both my cx bike and my xc bike, I reach further forward on the cx bike but the hoods are narrower than the grips on the xc bike. Can you take the dimensions of your xc bike with you when you go shopping?
    I havent compared my xc and cx fits...but my reach is shorter on the cx bike than the road bike. By maybe a full cm. I think the last thing you want is to be stretched out when trying to re-mount...And I dont see any advantage in much of an aero position in cx. Speeds are relatively low...
    Quote Originally Posted by phsycle View Post
    I have no idea why people are always hung up on stand over height. Go with a proper ETT fit and you'll be happy. Unless you like straddling your TT a lot.
    yep.

  10. #10
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    14,142
    OP, do you have a road bike to compare to? My fits are near-identical between 'cross and road - I really just change the amount of drop to the bars.

    Between XC and 'cross, I ride a 18" mountain bike and a 52cm 'cross bike. ('13 Kona Hei Hei and '09 Kona Jake.)

    Hope that helps.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    376
    I ride a 56cm Super Six, and I just ordered a 54cm CAADX today. Cross Bikes run big I guess, because the 54cm CAADX fits perfect, like my 56cm SuperSix.
    Climbing Builds Character

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    454
    I am your size and ride a 56.
    Perfect size for me.
    Rocky Mountain Element
    Orbea Lobular CX

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    1,531
    I always wondered about proper fit on cyclocross, I once heard you should go with a slightly shorter top tube in cross over road. I'm 6', 33" inseam, ride a 56 cm cannondale super six with a 120 mm stem, been riding the same dimensions for years(5th cannondale) should I go with a smaller frame or a 56 with a shorter stem?
    BTW, I've been fit onto the 56cm, tried a 58, but the 56 always felt better, I tend to run my saddle lower than what some would recommend, 29.5" center of bb to top of saddle, totally works for me, have tried lower and higher, after 30+ years of riding/ racing, don't think I'll change much.

  14. #14
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    14,142

    Re: Cyclocross sizing

    I switched my 'cross bike to road duty a while ago. I initially went up a stem size and lowered it a spacer or so. Ended up switching back to the same stem I'd been using for 'cross, but keeping the extra drop.

    So I could see going either way. If the 54 has more than a 10 mm difference, though, maybe stick with the 56.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Poncharelli's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    2,197
    I'm also 5'10" with 32 inch inseam.

    I've gone with slightly smaller sizes: 54cm Ridley X-Fire. Now currently on a Medium Giant TCX (52.5). I ran 100mm stem on the ridley and currently 110 on the Giant.

    The general rules I've read says the CX handlebar setup should be 1-2 cm closer and/or 1-2 cm higher than your road bike setup. While also rotating the handlebar up a bit.

    I've read that Adam Myerson, who is 5'10", runs a 52cm Ridley with a super long stem (130mm?). I imagine he likes more weight on the front wheel.

    EDIT: another thing I like about a smaller frame is that you have more seatpost exposed to clamp bike onto bike stand. With the bigger ridley (and how these CX bikes have high top tubes, for easier shouldering) I had little seatpost exposed. It will depend how long your legs are and how comfortable you are with a high seat height. I raced with a lower seat height to get less pounding on the butt; it rode lots more comfortable and didn't tire my low back as much. Some trial and error definitely involved with seat height, which I adjust by race course.
    Last edited by Poncharelli; 01-09-2014 at 03:20 PM.
    Head Coach, Ben Lomond HS MTB Team
    www.utahmtb.org
    Cycling Team and local Club:
    http://www.roostersbikersedge.com/

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    53
    How did you like your 54 x-fire from the sizing perspective? I am your same height just with 33" inseam.

  17. #17
    Dirt Huffer
    Reputation: AC/BC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,450
    Probably not what you want to hear but you gotta test ride before you buy. I road 14 different CX bikes and fit anywhere from a 55cm to a 57cm depending on the manufacturer

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    53
    absolutely agree. Just don't have many options to try before I buy where I live. (brasil)

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9
    Help needed.

    Iīm looking for Kona Rove for commuting. But sizing is my question. I have rode Kona Jake 2014 size 56 bike and it felt a bit too long.

    Have compared Rove and Jake geometry and it seems like that Rove would be better in size 53 than Jake 56? And I may have to buy online, no Kona shop nearby.

    -Rove 53 TTH 550mm & Jake 56 TTH 565mm
    -Rove 53 reach 380mm & Jake 56 reach 389mm
    -Rove 53 SO 809mm & Jake 56 SO 823mm
    -Rove 53 HT 145mm & Jake 56 HT 155mm
    -Rove 53 stack 574mm & Jake 56 stack 594mm

    My height is 176cm (5ī9) and inseam is 83,5cm (32,8 inch).
    I did Competitive cyclist measuring thing...
    Actual inseam 83 cm
    Trunk 62 cm
    Forearm 35 cm
    Arm 68 cm
    Thigh 60 cm
    Lower leg 53 cm
    Sternal notch 147 cm
    Total height 176 cm

    The Eddy Fit:
    top tube length
    54.3 - 54.7 cm
    seat tube range CC
    55 - 55.4 cm
    seat tube range CT
    56.6 - 57.1 cm
    stem length
    10.1 - 10.7 cm
    BB saddle position
    70.2 - 72.2 cm
    saddle handlebar
    54.1 - 54.7 cm
    saddle setback
    6.9 - 7.3 cm
    seatpost type
    setback

    Kona Jake KONA BIKES | 2014 BIKES | CYCLOCROSS | JAKE
    Kona Rove KONA BIKES | 2014 BIKES | ROAD: FREERANGE | ROVE
    Last edited by FiTe; 06-21-2014 at 11:36 AM.

  20. #20
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    14,142
    Bit of a dredge.

    I think the online fit calculators are kinda dumb. But what you were doing to begin with - sizing by comparison - makes a lot of sense to me.

    Can you try a Jake (or other bike with 380 mm reach) in a 53? To my mind, reach and stack should pretty much tell the story about fitting your body. Handling is a little more complicated, but fitting your body would be a good start.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrwSwitch View Post
    Bit of a dredge.

    I think the online fit calculators are kinda dumb. But what you were doing to begin with - sizing by comparison - makes a lot of sense to me.

    Can you try a Jake (or other bike with 380 mm reach) in a 53? To my mind, reach and stack should pretty much tell the story about fitting your body. Handling is a little more complicated, but fitting your body would be a good start.
    Thanks for reply.
    No, I canīt try Jake in 53 size. Bike shop is so far, but not impossible to drive there. But my job is taking so much time at the moment. But if I drive there, I would try directly Rove in 53

    I have asked our local forum that if anyone has around 53-56 sized bike near me, but no answers so far.

    edit: My first post has an error. Jake 56 has 594mm stack. And Rove 53 TTH 550 (FIXED).

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Eric Malcolm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    525
    Do you have a bike that you ride presently that fits you real well?

    If so, measure it out and draw it up on paper. Draw out the other setups and overlay them and 'see' which one can conform to your requirements. A visual picture lets you see the variations much more clearly than a table of numbers, just takes a bit of time to do.

    Eric
    If I don't make an attempt, how will I know if it will work?

  23. #23
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    77
    I'm going through the same process right now, looking at CX bikes. I'm 5'10" and 32" inseam and ride a 53cm Raleigh Furley, which is a touch small but not much.

    I'm using bb2stem to compare bikes using stack and reach, and most of the other bikes are 1-2cm longer/taller in a 52. I've no idea how people my size fit on a 54, which means a 3-4cm increase in stack/reach. I'm really confused about what sizes I should be looking at, but I guess I just have to ride more bikes....

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Malcolm View Post
    Do you have a bike that you ride presently that fits you real well?

    If so, measure it out and draw it up on paper. Draw out the other setups and overlay them and 'see' which one can conform to your requirements. A visual picture lets you see the variations much more clearly than a table of numbers, just takes a bit of time to do.

    Eric
    Yes, a MTB Trek X-Caliber 7 in 17,5" size X-Caliber 7 - Trek Bicycle. I donīt ever own a drop bar bike, so even that make this dilemma even harder.
    But I have though about drawing paper bikeīs geometry and I definitely going to draw them. What I have read that mtb vs CX is that CX is about few cm shorter.

    Quote Originally Posted by tychoseven View Post
    I'm going through the same process right now, looking at CX bikes. I'm 5'10" and 32" inseam and ride a 53cm Raleigh Furley, which is a touch small but not much.

    I'm using bb2stem to compare bikes using stack and reach, and most of the other bikes are 1-2cm longer/taller in a 52. I've no idea how people my size fit on a 54, which means a 3-4cm increase in stack/reach. I'm really confused about what sizes I should be looking at, but I guess I just have to ride more bikes....
    I looked Raleigh 53 geometry and it is slightly smaller to comparing Rove in 53. Rove has tall SO heights comparing to others. I must look that bb2stem site. Thanks!

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    9
    I did the bb2stem measurement between Rove 53 and Jake 56. And it looks like that there is slightly only slightly difference. Which is good thing that there is not huge difference. It looks like that stack remains almost the same and reach is slightly smaller in Rove.
    But I havenīt found any info about stem length, but I would think that Rove 53 has 90mm and Jake has 100mm. But I just put same measurements in bb2stem calculator.

    I did compared those Rove 53 measurements by bb2stem and it seems like that those are almost identical than my Trek mtb. I would think that Rove in 53 would be great on me. Any thoughts about comparing Trek vs Rove? Because I would like to have Rove drop bar "tops" to be same as my mtb bike flat bar.

    Here is picture of Rove 53(bike 1) vs Jake 56(bike 2). Please not that stem and spacer will be likely wrong, but not by much.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Cyclocross sizing-rove-53-vs-jake-56.jpg  


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Big Elm Cyclocross Challenge
    By iceboxsteve in forum Massachusetts
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-17-2013, 10:43 AM
  2. I can't get enough cyclocross
    By AlliKat in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 11-10-2012, 09:31 PM
  3. Want to Try Cyclocross
    By lextek in forum Cyclocross
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-04-2012, 04:36 PM
  4. NM Cyclocross - where are you?
    By teleguy03 in forum New Mexico
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-18-2012, 08:00 PM
  5. MTB tires for cyclocross
    By i.a.n. in forum Wheels and Tires
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-10-2011, 12:27 PM

Posting Permissions

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