Sizing up on a Charlie Gallop

[Mike Gillespie]

I’m considering a Charlie purchase for this round of frames.  At 5’11” and a PBH of 86.5cm I’m in the middle of the sizing range for the 57cm and just over the lower limit for the 61cm.  After seeing the attached photo of Grant’s ride on a Blue Lug blog, I’m considering going with the 61. According to the blog post, Grant’s PBH is 85cm, and he’s actually under the lower sizing recommendation of 86cm.

From the geometry chart it appears the greatest difference between the 57 and 61 frames is increased stack height (+4.9cm) with only minor increase in reach.  The effective top tube increase is only 1cm. Meanwhile, the reach calculation shows an actual decrease of 0.7cm. (This seems counterintuitive to me and I’m thinking it’s a typo, or am I wrong)? Regardless, I’m intrigued by Grant’s setup and wonder if there’s any downside that I’m missing. Any recommendations?

[Drew Fitchette]

Hey Mike,

I recently reached out to Grant about upsizing as someone taller with a shorter pbh. I’m 6ft tall and my pbh is right around 840mm. Roman suggested a 60cm Platy when I initially reached out to riv to get insight into a good frame for me, and I reached out to Grant after seeing his on the Blue Lug visit video. 

Now a proud owner of an upsized frame I’d say the only disadvantage is space between my saddle/stem and negative space one usually uses for bags. For instance, I wouldn’t be able to use the largest sackville rear bag because it’d be crammed between my wheel and saddle. And, my banana sack in the front attaches to my head tube. Both sacrifices I don’t mind, but I can see some being annoyed by. Otherwise I’d just say some people don’t love the aesthetic of the stem and seat post proportions, but I love my set up. 

[John at Rivendell]

Get the 61cm! 

[Max Faingezicht]

For me, the 61 Gallop prototype felt long even with Albatross bars. I’m 5’11” with long legs: 90.5pbh and I wouldn’t size up again.

I think it comes down to your proportions and your preferences (handlebars, handlebar height, etc). 

You’ll be able to make either work but sizing up isn’t always the answer.

Max

On Sep 27, 2025, at 9:51 AM, John at Rivendell <jo...@rivbike.com> wrote:

Get the 61cm! 

On Friday, September 26, 2025 at 9:12:19 AM UTC-7 Mike Gillespie wrote:

I’m considering a Charlie purchase for this round of frames.  At 5’11” and a PBH of 86.5cm I’m in the middle of the sizing range for the 57cm and just over the lower limit for the 61cm.  After seeing the attached photo of Grant’s ride on a Blue Lug blog, I’m considering going with the 61. According to the blog post, Grant’s PBH is 85cm, and he’s actually under the lower sizing recommendation of 86cm.

From the geometry chart it appears the greatest difference between the 57 and 61 frames is increased stack height (+4.9cm) with only minor increase in reach.  The effective top tube increase is only 1cm. Meanwhile, the reach calculation shows an actual decrease of 0.7cm. (This seems counterintuitive to me and I’m thinking it’s a typo, or am I wrong)? Regardless, I’m intrigued by Grant’s setup and wonder if there’s any downside that I’m missing. Any recommendations?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rbw-owners-bunch/tzjrP3_z2uI/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/620b3604-26de-4ed1-8fe9-8433d342481fn%40googlegroups.com.

[Zachary Cannon]

Looking at the geometry chart, I do believe there's a couple errors. For the two smaller sizes they have the same reach with different effective top tubes and the same seat angle. As you point out the 61 is indicated as having a shorter reach, despite a longer effective top tube and the same seat tube angle. The only time you should see this variance is when there's a different seat tube angle. 

The 61 will feel like a longer reach, because you wont need to bring the stem up as high, and it will be coming back as it goes up (2mm back for every 7mms up).

Maybe enter all the numbers in this stack/reach calculator with a favorite reference bike that you own and love:

https://www.bikegeo.net/

The standover could be another trade off depending on use. I don't mind a higher standover on a road bike I only ride in stretchy cycling clothes. I would mind it on a commuter that I ride in non stretchy jeans. Also, the seatpost is one of the better places for a  bike to provide compliance since it isn't triangulated, so a shorter seatpost can feel a bit harsher. 

Finally, I'd really recommend optimizing for the toptube length you prefer, rather than picking on any other factor/recommendation. Bikes that fit feel better to me, and I always tend to decide that my bikes that feel better look right in the long run. Grant seems to be something of a marvel of fitness and fit adaptability, so there could be other considerations besides pbh that could contribute to your relative sizing preferences. 

[Joe Bernard]

Also Grant just really likes big frames with the seatpost dropped low. I tend towards this, too, but it's not for everybody. 

[Bicycle Belle Ding Ding!]

I have an 81 cm PBH and I stand at 5’6”. I could have gone either 53 or 57, said Grant, but I went with 53, and I like it a lot. 

On Friday, September 26, 2025 at 12:12:19 PM UTC-4 Mike Gillespie wrote:

[Max S]

Bought a 57 from the previous run for one of my kids... who's 5'5"-ish, and "test rode" the bike myself a few times. Well, the kid can ride it and so can I! In fact, although I could see myself being able to ride a 61, I find the 57 to hit the sweetspot for me, too, when my hands land just behind the headtube. But I tend to prefer shorter reach frames, and on this bike I used a long stem and a bar with very generous back-sweep to accentuate the springiness of the frame.  (Photo below – rebuilt it with silver components recently and borrowed it for another test-ride / commute to work.) 

- Max "the bike is adjustable and the body is adaptable" in A2 

[Pat McCullar]

I went over to Walnut Creek in late February to test ride some of the new models, especially the Charlie. I have a PBH of just about 85cm, close enough to Grant's that I rode a few of his bikes. According to the geometry chart either a 53cm or 57cm Charlie would work for me. The 53 seemed a little cramped, but the 57 was great. Then Grant put me on his 61cm Charlie, with "don't pay any attention to the size, just ride it". It was just as good as the 57cm.. Grant basically says if you can comfortable straddle the bike, you can comfortable ride it. And the larger size comes with a quality that Grant can describe but I can't, that makes it more stable. 

I eventually went with a Homer frame, but only because I wanted more luggage carrying capacity that Charlie is recommended for. 

And, if I didn't live in a second floor walkup studio apartment, I would absolutely get the platypus giganticus, the 60cm. That bike has the most deluxe ride I can recall experiencing. 

Don't be afraid of the 61cm Charlie. 

Pat