Results 1 to 20 of 20
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9

    WTB 21" Schwinn polished S[9five] or Moab

    Hello,

    I bought a 19" S[9five].6 and it is too small ( yes I bought it a few years ago from dealer ).
    Like everything about it except the size - I have a 31 to 32 inseam.
    Looking for either a larger frame for same bike or one of the Moab frames which I think were the same.
    Don't need fork or any other components ..

    thank you,
    robert
    Last edited by kc_bob; 06-03-2009 at 12:17 PM.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    You have a 31/32" inseam, and the 19" is too small? I have a 34" inseam and I ride a 19".

    How did you decide on your seat height? When pedaling while seated, do your hips rock side to side? Are your knees locking at the bottom of the pedals stroke?
    Last edited by bad mechanic; 06-03-2009 at 01:01 PM.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    bad_mechanic,

    I think you have wrong measuring here. I am 6' and wear dress shirt of 34/35.
    I kind of thought people would read 31/32 and think between 21" and 32" inches - not 31 divided by 32.
    my road bikes have been either 58cm or 60cm depending on C to C or C to Top.

    I do not think you have an inseam of 2 feet and ride a 19 inch schwinn - you would all sorts of standover issues.

    My 300 mm seatpost is extended all the way and I could take it out another 25-30 mm.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    Quote Originally Posted by kc_bob
    bad_mechanic,

    I think you have wrong measuring here. I am 6' and wear dress shirt of 34/35.
    I kind of thought people would read 31/32 and think between 21" and 32" inches - not 31 divided by 32.
    my road bikes have been either 58cm or 60cm depending on C to C or C to Top.

    I do not think you have an inseam of 2 feet and ride a 19 inch schwinn - you would all sorts of standover issues.

    My 300 mm seatpost is extended all the way and I could take it out another 25-30 mm.
    I made a typo in my previous posted, plus I think we're having some communication problems.

    I have a 34" inseam, not a 24" inseam. I've since fixed this. I also know you mean a 31" to a 32" inseam, I just abbreviated it as 31/32.

    Now that's out of the way, back to my questions: How did you decide on your seat height? When pedaling while seated, do your hips rock side to side? Are your knees locking at the bottom of the pedals stroke?

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    My knees would be fully flexed if the seat were another 2 to 3 inches taller.
    I will take a photo and load it up.

    The owner of the bike shop said I could buy a 400mm seatpost, a angled up and longer stem and bars that were elevated up instead of flat. This would essentially extend all the body contacting parts and make my little frame have longer and taller parts. Kind of like something from the circus.

    The distance from the center of the bottom bracket to the direct line on saddle is 29.5 inches. Saddle is 40 inches off ground. Which is a bit below my navel. Stand over height is about 29 inches too.

    I think this bike is too small
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by kc_bob; 06-03-2009 at 08:16 PM.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    Quote Originally Posted by kc_bob
    The distance from the center of the bottom bracket to the direct line on saddle is 29.5 inches. Saddle is 40 inches off ground. Which is a bit below my navel. Stand over height is about 29 inches too.

    I think this bike is too small
    I'm sorry, but things aren't adding up here. The rule of thumb for saddle height is .883 * inseam which, in your case, would be 28.25" from the bottom bracket centers to the lowest point on the top of the saddle. That distance drops to 28" if you're using clipless pedals, which it looks like you are. I'd say, unless the measurements you're giving me are off, your seat is about 1.5" too high.

    Make sure that your hips stay level when you're in the seat. People unconsciously rotate their hips to extend their leg, and this is a no-no on a bicycle. When you're pedaling, your hips should stay level, and you should still have a bend in your knee at the bottom of your stroke.

    I'd suggest lowering your seat 1" to 1.5", putting some riser handlebars on there (they'll also be wider), and putting a new 3" travel fork on there. The fork will raise your front end about 1" without affecting your geometry too much, plus it will work much better than the Quadra (?) you have on there now.

    Don't take my word for it:
    http://www.coloradocyclist.com/bikefit
    Last edited by bad mechanic; 06-05-2009 at 10:53 AM.

  7. #7
    CTB
    CTB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    965
    I had never seen that 0.883 ratio before. So I did some quick math, and with my 30" inseam, that puts my seat at 26.5". I just went out and measured my bike that I set by feel for seat height, and it's at...drumroll please...26.5", almost exactly. Cool. Seems like CO Cyclist's bike fit page has merit.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    I believe the .883 figure originally came from LeMond.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    The purpose of this thread was to ask about a larger frame or bike.
    I appreciate the math - it reinforces what I am saying - my bike is too small .

    I have taken my bike to the store owner that sold it to me and they are recommending a 4" longer seat post, an elevated stem and raised handle bars.

    This seems to indicate that the bike as it is today is too small for me and it will cost me 25% of original price to make it fit correctly. The attached picture is after I got home from a ride, I think it is pretty obvious it is wrongly sized.

    If you have information about a larger frame or bike please feel free to help me in my search otherwise I request that you not add more information that does not help my post. these are great discussions but just not for my thread.
    If you have contributed postings that are off topic would you please delete them from this thread.

    Thank you,
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by kc_bob; 06-05-2009 at 04:22 PM.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    kc_bob, this is the internet. Welcome.

    If you're going to post a question on a public forum where the information you're giving us isn't add up (and it's not adding up) then don't expect people to just keep their mouths shut. You asked for help, and you're getting it, though it might not be what you expected. You should be happy that someone has taken in interest in your question.

    None of the posts in this thread are off topic, and I'm not deleting any of them

    To continue on, if the measurements you gave me at, indeed, accurate, then your seat is probably too high. Looking at the picture you posted is doing nothing to convince me otherwise, since I'm looking at your foot and see you're standing on your toes. You should be reaching or stretching for the pedal in any way at the bottom of the stroke. It's actually a fairly common problem, riders raising their seat too high.

    Yes, I know what your bike shop told you as I've already read it in your previous post. However, bike shops are not always right, and some bike shops are most frequently wrong. Don't take what they say as gospel, but do your research and find answers for yourself. Do the research on the formula I gave you, and you'll see it's widely endorsed. Hey, if it will make you feel better, I worked in a bike shop for 7 years.

  11. #11
    CTB
    CTB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    965
    Seeing the pictures, I think a set-back seat post and a riser bar would help you a lot. That shouldn't break the bank and might be easier to find than a 21" frame. I'm a short s*it, but even I have a 1" set-back on my seat posts, though I tend to favor a stretched-out riding position.

    In the meantime, 21" Moabs float through Ebay reasonably often, but not S[9five]'s. Those are pretty rare. If I stumble onto something that might fit your bill, I'll note it.

  12. #12
    CTB
    CTB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    965
    This was the best I can do for you tonight, KC Bob. The frame-only white one didn't give a size, but it didn't look like a small 17", either. Tough to find just frames, though, so two of these are bikes, but in big sizes.

    http://salem.craigslist.org/bik/1160217999.html
    http://losangeles.craigslist.org/sgv...207050440.html
    http://oklahomacity.craigslist.org/bik/1176827614.html

    This frame is gorgeous and will probably go for a high price.
    http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...lenotsupported

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    Thank you bad_mechanic for your advice - I have been an Internet users since .... 300 baud acoustic modems attached to my televideo vt terminal so I have had the pleasure of getting all sorts of useless feedback for the last 20 years.

    CTBs reponses were good - thank you CTB I will look at those. I used to live in Indy so Fishers was not very far and I might have a friend or two to pick it up and hold it. It is a higher priced area in the city.

    BM - you are reminding me of that lady on the yogurt commercial who keeps insisting that the pants need to be let out and the customer keeps saying "no, in".

    My inseam of 32 inches * .883 gives the approximate 28" which is what CTB and Colorado Cycles show ... Great .. however to get that measurement on MY bike ( and every other bike in the world may be different - but I am talking about MY bike ) I have to raise my 300mm seat post 1 inch PAST the "do not raise beyond this point mark".
    I now have a seat that is 41 inches off the ground with my handle bar 36 inches off the ground.). I kind of imagine Schwinn built this bike with a 300mm seat post because they felt that it was the maximum anyone should need with corresponding sizing and geometry.

    My 5' 4" daughter has a Trek 820 that the stand over height is 1/2 inch shorter than mine.
    Her seat is 36 inches off the ground and her handle bar is 38" off ground.

    A Marin Bayview Trail frame I have in my garage when held up against the Schwinn - is identical within sub millimeters. But wait. It is marked 17"

    Lets go check over at BikesDirect here, and I'll copy the relevant text - http://www.bikesdirect.com/products/...ne_600HT07.htm
    "17" (sm/md) standover 29" fits most riders 5'5" to 5'8" //daughter
    19" (medium) standover 30" fits most riders 5'8" to 5'11" //short me
    21" (medium/large) standover 31" fits most riders 5'11" to 61 // me
    I am 6' tall. ... kind of possibly in the last category ... certainly at least in the 2nd

    Hmm, my daughters bike standover is 29" and it is a 17" and she is actually a wee bit shorter than the recommended size. My 17" Marin matches my Schwinn and it is for shorter people too. My Schwinn has under a 29" stand over.

    I do not know how many ways I can say MY 19 Schwinn is too small for me - it may be that instead of there being a 19" label on the frame it should say 17" or .126 furlongs ... but it doesn't matter - it is too small or I am too tall. I can't fix number 2, I can fix number 1 but I don't want to add parts that are effectively twice as long as originally stock. If I am cleaning 2nd floor windows for 2 hours a day I dont want to use a step ladder with a 12' extension - I want a 24' ladder with a hand held squeegee - if the 24' ladder and step ladder were both approximately the same weight and original cost.

    So when I ask for a Schwinn 21" frame or bike I am going ...hmmm... my 19" bike seems to be perhaps small for what others think of a 19 ... so lets spend $100 or so and get the next larger size that was available in my model at the rough same time of manufacture making the assumption that if mine is "small" for the marking that others of the same time were as well.

    I have compared another Schwinn S[9five].6 that is for sale in my city and it too is marked 19" and seems to be a small 19" so I think I am safe in looking for the next size up that was built in the same time frame with probably the same common specs.

    Really, I am 48 years old and have owned a bike or two over the years and have some idea of what a proper fit FOR ME is. And this 19" Schwinn is too small - it might fit YOU just fine but it does not fit ME.
    I still have my Sutherlands Handbook for Bicycle Mechanics 3rd edition from 1980 which I think may pre-date your biking experience so I am not quite wet behind the ears. ( It is is mint condition as are all of my tools and shop manuals - I never throw things away ).

    We can argue math that .883 * inseam and that should be "X" inches or "Y" standover or "Z" clearance. Doing the inseam trig gives a 124 degree angle at my knee ( .883 is the sine of 62 degrees). Dropping my seat 1" will change the angle to 110 degrees which is fast approaching a right angle which is really kind of uncomfortable - oooh, especially if 10 years ago I fell while skiing and skipped having the orthoscopic surgery so I really don't want to put heavy "torque" down while pedaling - others may want to crank versus spin - I wanna spin.

    Bike is too small and your posts do nothing to change that.

    Please start a "I know how to fit people I have never met over the Internet and put them on bikes I don't own or can not see" and I will have the opportunity to skip reading the posts there because you really aren't helping my thread.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    Thank you,
    I would like to not move my weight back much .... I ride with stuff in a back pack or on the racks and it make the weight distribution whacky although I have not put a scale under the front and rear wheels to determine the actual ratio ....
    I do at times move my butt backwards which does have the effect of giving me a longer reach to the bottom bracket but I am really kind of reaching to the bar.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    7,696
    kc_bob, I have not been condescending in my posts, I have not attacked you personally, all I have done is given advice which you didn't want to hear, yet was relevant to your question. Quite honestly, I'd expect a 48 year old to act more, well, grown up.

    Again, what you're telling me isn't adding up. This is all I've been saying this whole time. A 19" Schwinn frame can easily do 28" from seat top to bb center with only a moderate amount of post showing. I think you currently have a 17" frame, not a 19" frame like you think you do, especially if it matched up "within sub millimeters" of a 17" frame. I think going with a 21" frame might be quite a big bigger than you were hoping for. But hey, you already have all the answers you need, and there's no way you can be wrong.

    Oh, by the way, you'll need a new fork.

  16. #16
    CTB
    CTB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by bad mechanic
    Oh, by the way, you'll need a new fork.
    He brings a great point, KC Bob. Easy way to tell what size frame you actually have is to measure the head tube. No two sizes had the same tube length once you get above 17. Measuring your head tube will tell you exactly what size frame you actually have. It's easy and there isn't any real variation in how to do it, unlike the top tube. Here's your decoder ring:

    17" = 90mm head tube
    19" = 120
    21" = 160

    As you can see, Bad Mech is right about the fork if you don't already have 30-40mm of extra steer tube on it.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    CTB,

    I measured it. Its 120mm. So too however is my 17" Marin frame. The Trek 820 is 16.5 and has a head tube of 90mm. All Nashbar mountain bike frames from 14" to 20" share head tube lengths of 120mm so I don't think the 90/120/160 rule is golden.

    I think you folks have finally got my drift. I have a small 19" bike so I would like to try to find a similarly small 21" with the assumption that if the Schwinn 19" is semi-equivalent to other makers 17" then perhaps the Schwinn 21" would be similar to other makers 19"

    I give up. I have a small 19" ... I know that. I have been saying that. You keep seem to be arguing that my bike should fit someone of my size ... if it were a Trek 19" I would agree - I have tried a 19" Trek 8000, I have tried a 19" Gary Fisher Wahoo, disc & vbrake. I have tried two Jamis bikes, have tried a sweet Felt Pro on sale for $500 off and a Felt RXC ... all are 19" and all fit great ....
    Mine Schwinn 19" does not fit the same way ... it is far smaller than the other makers 19"

    Somehow you seem to think that if it said 19" it is the same as the ones in your house/apt/buddies garage ... it is not ... it is smaller ... Schwinn make this frame differently then the ones you are familiar with. Maybe they changed it after this year ... I don't know but this is the smallest 19" I have sat on - remember the stand over height is the same as my daughters 16.5 ( I checked it again and I thought it was 17" - hers is 16.5 )

    My bike having the same stand over height as the bike that my 8 inch shorter daughter rides just does not seem to be the right size.

    I work in medical IT and a few weeks ago when we were rolling out a new component to our EMR apps two of our application security staff and IT Director told me that it is not possible for a non-trusted/elevated user to log in to a EMR application more than once - it is a vendor restriction and a HIPPA limit. Otherwise they could sign in two or three times and leave a room with the app running and the patients could screw around with live data - not only their own. Two days later I am in an office with a doctor who is telling me how they start work in the morning. They go into a room, login to this application and go to the next room and login again and then go to the third, forth, fifth, ...
    I tell them they are mistaken, They must be thinking that logging into Windows is the same thing as the app ( what do end users know). I just asked this question and was told "No".
    Guess what ? The doctor was right. She can log in multiple times - she showed us. Is there something special about her account ? Something different about her computers ? Something weird about her network segment ?

    Don't know. All I do know is the the 3 people whose job it is to know how the application security works were all wrong and this plain old doctor had found out how it really works.

    Thank you Yogi Berra for the following quote - "In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is."
    In theory my 19" bike should fit fine. In practice it does not.

  18. #18
    CTB
    CTB is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: CTB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    965
    Quote Originally Posted by kc_bob
    so I don't think the 90/120/160 rule is golden.
    I'd say it's pretty golden when I'm reading it to you directly from the Schwinn catalog specs page for your bike. I'm not pulling this out of my butt here.

    You keep seem to be arguing that my bike should fit someone of my size ...
    Somehow you seem to think that if it said 19" it is the same as the ones in your house/apt/buddies garage ... it is not ... it is smaller ... Schwinn make this frame differently then the ones you are familiar with.
    Who is "you?" I gave you objective specs to be able to determine with 100% certainty what your current frame is, which is good information to have nailed down before moving to a new frame. I once bought a frame that the owner said was a 17...turns out it was a 19 when it arrived. So it pays to be sure. I've got four Schwinn frames in my garage, hardtails included, so your frame is EXACTLY what I'm familiar with.

    As for the rest, you're on your own. I don't get into pissing contests. Good luck with your search and enjoy your ride. Post a pic when you have it completed over in the "pics" thread.
    Last edited by CTB; 06-06-2009 at 02:00 PM.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    I know what the frame is ... it is a 19" Schwinn. That is smaller than any other makers 19" frames. As a result an individual who bought one without a lot of time test riding - me - will end up with a bike that is smaller than if they had instead gone to the Trek dealer and bought a 19" bike.

    If I look at the current line up of Schwinn bikes - http://www.schwinnbike.com/usa/eng/P...MESD-Mesa-Disc and compare stand over height to what mine is. According to current models I am smaller than the "S"mall and my head tube length ( 120mm ) is "M"edium.

    1995 S[9five].6 was an aberration in size and my model compares to current Small to Medium with both the numbers you have and the numbers currently published.
    Either way it ain't a bike for a 6' person.
    Last edited by kc_bob; 06-06-2009 at 02:50 PM.

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    9
    Thanks for the help.

    I bought a used motobecane fly pro. Under 20 lbs. sweet.
    I'll keep the schwinn for my 5'9" friends

Posting Permissions

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