|
| Author |
Message |
Team Banana Spokesman
Joined: 09 Jun 2009
Posts: 26
 |
 Posted Sun Nov 8, 2009 5:56 pm |
i look at pros on thier bikes and then myself. it is obvious that my bike looks like a bigger % of my body IN COMPARISON to the pros so I thouight i had a bike too big but someone in a bike shop said that the pros use smaller bikes on purpose.
is this right? my bike feels right but the pros cant be wrong surely??
|
|
|
ShockedSoShocked
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 1675
Location: Middlesbrough, Jewel of the North-East
|
Posted Sun Nov 8, 2009 6:27 pm |
It's quite common for pros to ride a frame too small and stick a massive stem on. Probably saves a few grams in weight, that's about it.
"A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain" |
|
|
Brewsterwmb
Joined: 21 Oct 2004
Posts: 62
Location: Bath
|
Posted Sun Nov 8, 2009 6:31 pm |
Not sure this is true!? Lance is shorter than me, but heard that he rides at 58-60cm frame.
Also watching the start of the TT in Monaco the bikes did not look like they were smaller than they should be
Different stokes for different fokes... 
|
|
|
Pokerface
Joined: 29 Apr 2008
Posts: 1312
Location: UK
|
Posted Sun Nov 8, 2009 8:15 pm |
| Brewsterwmb wrote: | Not sure this is true!? Lance is shorter than me, but heard that he rides at 58-60cm frame.
Also watching the start of the TT in Monaco the bikes did not look like they were smaller than they should be
Different stokes for different fokes... |
Yes - Lance rides a 58cm Trek. And he's 5-9 I think? I'm 6 foot and ride a 56cm Trek!
But my bike seems to look TINY in photos - so maybe it's not just Pro bikes that look small when you see them on TV!
|
|
|
oldwelshman
Joined: 16 Oct 2006
Posts: 2416
Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted Sun Nov 8, 2009 10:16 pm |
personally I do not believe it makes much difference as long as you get your position the same.
I ride a 54cm, 56cm, 58cm and get same position on each.
I am 5'10" but have fairly long legs 33".
http://s290.photobucket.com/albums/ll245/oldwelshman/ |
|
|
Garry H
Joined: 14 May 2008
Posts: 354
|
Posted Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:00 pm |
| ShockedSoShocked wrote: | | It's quite common for pros to ride a frame too small and stick a massive stem on. Probably saves a few grams in weight, that's about it. |
Not sure you would save any really. Anything saved in a smaller frame would be made up by having a longer seatpost, stem. more spacers etc
|
|
|
whyamihereLost
Joined: 05 Apr 2003
Posts: 18233
|
Posted Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:34 pm |
Bike manufacturers have started using longer headtubes for their bikes so that they're more comfortable for sportive riders. Pros don't need the longer headtubes, they're actually a disadvantage as the rider can't get as aero. So they use a smaller frame which has a shorter headtube.
Simple as that.
|
|
|
Bhima
Joined: 07 Nov 2008
Posts: 1454
Location: Manchester
|
|
|
Headhuunter
Joined: 28 Nov 2008
Posts: 1334
Location: SE London
|
Posted Wed Nov 11, 2009 6:32 pm |
Smaller frames also have less flex in them, simply due to the fact that tubes are shorter, so when you really push a slightly higher percentage of your energy is transferred to forward motion...
My only love sprung from my only hate!
Too early seen unknown, and known too late!
Prodigious birth of love it is to me
That I must love a loathèd enemy |
|
|
steady rider
Joined: 08 Sep 2009
Posts: 231
Location: southport
|
Posted Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:44 pm |
depends on the geometry of the frame i suppose and if your used too it.. im only 6'1 or 6'2 and i ride a 58" frame peeps said it was too big for me but when i got it it fitted me like a glove!
GOT MY BIKE!!
i love it!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=barLaHrtvoM
epic song! |
|
|
|
Search
