Smaller Riv sizing

[Andrew Huston]

I am curious if anyone in the group has had success opting for a smaller size frame than would be suggested by the folks at Rivendell.  I have had a difficult time finding comfort on my 56 Sam but the jump down seems rather large. Maybe my proportions are ill built for their methods but a bike that does not fit will not get ridden.  I am considering an Atlantis or 650b Hunq now due to the range of sizing options in my range.  Alternatively, if there are any of these sizes out there looking for a new home, I'm on the lookout.  

[iamkeith]

How tall are you, Andrew, and do you have a notion about your proportions? Long limbs / short torso, vice versa, long legs only, etc. And your PBH, of course. This would help give you better feedback.

[Michael Hechmer]

My daughter went down one size from their guidelines and got a perfect fit for her Cheviut.  She has short legs and a long torso for her size.  My wife has the exact recommended size on her Betty Foy and has very little seat post showing.  When I bought my Rambouillet I was inside the specs for a 64 but felt more comfortable on a 62.  I think the RBW guidelines are a good starting point but some personalization is  in order.  I think GP assumes the rider wants very high bars and his larger size makes hat easier, but if you are happy with bars at saddle height one size smaller may be better.

Michael

[George Schick]

Yes, this is a discussion that has been provocative in many respects on behalf of the "Riv sizing philosophy" and on this blog.  No two people are built the same and it's important to take all the factors mentioned by the responder above - "long limbs / short torso,  vice versa, long legs only, etc." - into consideration before making a decision.  When I first began serious cycling in the early 70's several bike shops over a period of several years talked me into 23" frames whereas I should have been riding a 21" all along (these were lower end bikes where a greater number of in between sizes were unavailable).  And I was miserable.  I could not stand across the top tube with both feet flat on the ground and I kept having to seek out shorter than usual quill stems to get the bars back to a somewhat comfortable position.  Finally, after almost 10 years of fooling around I dialed in on a higher end 54cm (about 21 1/4") and it all came together.  I have shorter than proportionate legs in comparison to my torso and arm length.

Since Riv makes models with slightly sloping top tubes, longer than usual head tubes, and higher than normal lugs, and sells longer stems, it seems that getting the bars high enough on smaller frames should no longer be an issue.  Still, if I were "fitted" at Walnut Creek I'm pretty sure I'd be walking away with a 56cm. 

[Andrew Huston]

Yes. My PBH is 84. I wear a 30 inseam in pants. Saddle height measured in my MB6 and Jonesis 70cm. I'm gauging that my saddle height may indicate longer torso than legs, 5'10" btw. I'm not sure if this all adds up but I've measured multiple times and this is what I get.

[René Sterental]

I'm 5'11", barely 1" taller, yet my saddle height is 77-78, depending on the shoes I wear. I guess my torso is shorter comparatively, yet I have long arms. My stock original Homer configuration from RBW had me on an 8cm stem on Noodles, which felt too far out no matter how much I raised the handlebars. I now use a 5 cm stem at about saddle height or slightly higher. 

When I bought my Betty, Keven insisted I get the larger 61 or whatever that size was, but I went with the 58 so my daughter's could also ride it. It fits me perfectly. 

The 61 Homer and Atlantis are fine vertically, but need the shorter stems for classic drop bars. I have a 6cm stem on the Atlantis now. Thankfully I could find those shorter reach Nitto stems. For upright rear-reaching bars, the sizing is perfect. 

Agree that fine tuning the sizing based on the intended configuration is needed in many cases and default RBW sizing recommendations are for upright riding handlebars. 

René

On Saturday, July 2, 2016, Andrew Huston <firsttolast...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes. My PBH is 84. I wear a 30 inseam in pants. Saddle height measured in my MB6 and Jonesis 70cm. I'm gauging that my saddle height may indicate longer torso than legs, 5'10" btw. I'm not sure if this all adds up but I've measured multiple times and this is what I get.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Gravel & Grind Espresso + Bikes]

Hey Andrew,  James here from Gravel & Grind.   Per our conversation, here's some pics of a Joe App 51 mocked up as we talked about.  The guy I used is 5 10 with a 83.75 pbh.  He described the position as 'groovy'.  That's a Nitto 10cm dirt drop stem, the saddle set to your height and the stem about 2-3 cm from fully extended.  The last pic is just for reference so you can see how much post is exposed.  Totally reasonable, per our conversation about mountain bikes.  

-James

On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 1:34:49 PM UTC-4, René wrote:

I'm 5'11", barely 1" taller, yet my saddle height is 77-78, depending on the shoes I wear. I guess my torso is shorter comparatively, yet I have long arms. My stock original Homer configuration from RBW had me on an 8cm stem on Noodles, which felt too far out no matter how much I raised the handlebars. I now use a 5 cm stem at about saddle height or slightly higher. 

When I bought my Betty, Keven insisted I get the larger 61 or whatever that size was, but I went with the 58 so my daughter's could also ride it. It fits me perfectly. 

The 61 Homer and Atlantis are fine vertically, but need the shorter stems for classic drop bars. I have a 6cm stem on the Atlantis now. Thankfully I could find those shorter reach Nitto stems. For upright rear-reaching bars, the sizing is perfect. 

Agree that fine tuning the sizing based on the intended configuration is needed in many cases and default RBW sizing recommendations are for upright riding handlebars. 

René

On Saturday, July 2, 2016, Andrew Huston <firsttolast...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes. My PBH is 84. I wear a 30 inseam in pants. Saddle height measured in my MB6 and Jonesis 70cm. I'm gauging that my saddle height may indicate longer torso than legs, 5'10" btw. I'm not sure if this all adds up but I've measured multiple times and this is what I get.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.

[iamkeith]

I don't have any Rivs with the 6 degree top tube (other than the clem which is different because it only comes in three sizes which are thus meant to take a HUGE range of riders for each), but my gut says that 56 would indeed be too big for you.   That size is directly comparable to the 61cm, 3 degree frames that René mentions, in terms of top tube length and ideal fit.  It'll just have a lot more standover clearance. (For reference, I'm 6'2" with a long torso, and the 56 is the size I'd get - and I prefer bikes on the "big" side.  In fact, it would be perfect because it would give me the length I need for my upper body, with the low straddle height I need for my short legs.)  

Similarly, a 52cm Hillbourne might be equivalent to about a 57cm Homer or Atlantis, if they existed.

Here's a link to the old geometry tables for comparison, which still have those old Sam Hillbourne sizes:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gfiN1kOxVrthdc6eScUF9fP5n-BvRBILbBMYiEg5LM4/edit?pref=2&pli=1#gid=0

Also,  here's a thread in which Grant talks about the Hillbourne sizing conversion:   https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/rbw-owners-bunch/_pGj9VCTu0E/JB3_bX-YOr4J

On Saturday, July 2, 2016 at 11:34:49 AM UTC-6, René wrote:

I'm 5'11", barely 1" taller, yet my saddle height is 77-78, depending on the shoes I wear. I guess my torso is shorter comparatively, yet I have long arms. My stock original Homer configuration from RBW had me on an 8cm stem on Noodles, which felt too far out no matter how much I raised the handlebars. I now use a 5 cm stem at about saddle height or slightly higher. 

When I bought my Betty, Keven insisted I get the larger 61 or whatever that size was, but I went with the 58 so my daughter's could also ride it. It fits me perfectly. 

The 61 Homer and Atlantis are fine vertically, but need the shorter stems for classic drop bars. I have a 6cm stem on the Atlantis now. Thankfully I could find those shorter reach Nitto stems. For upright rear-reaching bars, the sizing is perfect. 

Agree that fine tuning the sizing based on the intended configuration is needed in many cases and default RBW sizing recommendations are for upright riding handlebars. 

René

On Saturday, July 2, 2016, Andrew Huston <firsttolast...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes. My PBH is 84. I wear a 30 inseam in pants. Saddle height measured in my MB6 and Jonesis 70cm. I'm gauging that my saddle height may indicate longer torso than legs, 5'10" btw. I'm not sure if this all adds up but I've measured multiple times and this is what I get.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.

[Jon in central Colorado]

My pbh is 88. I have a 58 Sam with a 111 stem. Short legs long torso.
Stradling the top tube of my Sam,I'm just touching the top tube.Very comfortable on my Sam.
Would I be better off with a 55 Cheviot or a 60??

[Lungimsam]

I have a 52 Sam and a 53 Bleriot. Both fit great but the Sam pushes the limit.
I had a 55 Bleriotwent to the 53.
Small jump so both bikes fit.
I think the main thing is knowing your reach and standover to know if a frame will fit.

Fo me I use standover and TT length to size the bike, regardless of TT slope because I use drops. I know 80 standover is max and 55 TT c-c is max for me.

[Bill Lindsay]

In my opinion, 88 PBH would do better on a 60 Cheviot.

[islaysteve]

It seems like there have been a number of Rivs listed for sale here by owners who indicate that they a just a bit too large. Personally, I am small; 5'5 and I believe my PBH is about 79, I haven't measured in a while. According to the published chart, I should be on a 53 Bleriot. However, my 51 Bleriot fits perfectly IMO (drop bars). I can just comfortably stand over it. I would not want to buy a particular model Rivendell without riding it first. Fortunately, there are some dealers around the country now. Cheers,
Steve

[iamkeith]

Funny - it might be my selective memory but I kind of recall that, in years past, it was the exact opposite:  I seem to remember lots of people saying "Riv told me to get a bigger size than I'm used to, and now I wish I would have listened."  I think the shift to the "expanded sizing" & more sloped top tubes has made a big enough difference that it's harder to gauge without trying in person.   I know it does for me - even (or especially) with fewer sizes to choose from.  Was the Bombadil the first to use the new system, or was the Sam Hillbourne? - can't remember, but I've been unable to make the leap, despite wanting to at a couple of times.  

[Joe Bernard]

I'm on the "go big" side. At 5'-7" with a 71cm saddle height, I never would have predicted I could ride a 51 Appaloosa with drops, but the one I rode at RBW was perfect. So I bought it!

[Steve Palincsar]

On 07/02/2016 09:57 PM, Joe Bernard wrote:
> I'm on the "go big" side. At 5'-7" with a 71cm saddle height, I never would have predicted I could ride a 51 Appaloosa with drops, but the one I rode at RBW was perfect. So I bought it!
>

I'm confused. Since when is a 51 cm bike "big"? Sounds to me like
you're saying "Go small."

[René Sterental]

The first Bombadil I had was too large for me. Ended with a 58 Hunqapillar of the gray version. It was a 60cm frame.

René 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.

[Andrew Huston]

So much good input, seems like nothing can beat throwing a leg over one. Any Michigan Riv folks in this size range willing to offer test rides? I'm likely to make a trip to MD soon. James has been great offering his time to help me figure it out. This forum is really a great resource with vast knowledge. Kudos to you all for the help. Quite a group.

[Benz, Sunnyvale, CA]

Something is off. I have a PBH of 81.0 cm and am 5'10" tall (yeah, short legs; Grant measured PBH twice). My saddle height is between 70 and 70.5 cm, and this range is essentially what a few different calculators (including Riv's) recommend. You either measured a parameter differently from norm, you use super-long cranks, or your saddle height is way too low.

[Joe Bernard]

Steve, "51" for an upslope Riv is kind of deceiving. Back in the day of level-ish toptubes, Grant would have put me on a 53/54/55 bike. The 51 Appaloosa has a virtual toptube of 56.5cm, which, in my opinion, is the better way to list its size. Sizing upslope frames by actual seattube length doesn't tell you anything but standover height.

[Matt B.]

It's probably better to go by reach, stack and STA nowadays if you know what you like. But on more traditional bikes with levelish top tubes like Riv used to do, or especially vintage bikes i.e. with no HT extension, it's PBH - 25cm for a fistful of seat post and if you want the bars anywhere near saddle height. It does say this somewhere on Riv's website but I can't find it.

[pb]

On Sunday, July 3, 2016 at 3:14:36 AM UTC-7, Matt B. wrote:

PBH - 25cm for a fistful of seat post and if you want the bars anywhere near saddle height.

That's precisely consistent with my own experience.  For anybody who wants another source of data, I have a lot of respect for the Competitive Cyclist fit calculator.

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/Store/catalog/fitCalculatorBike.jsp

That calculator refers to three fit styles - competitive (contemporary race), Eddy (traditional race), and French.  I would think that the French fit would suit many Riv riders (as it does me).  Even for those who want high bars, it should get the frame size relative to saddle height about right, and should get top tube length about right.  Upright bars with back sweep, I have no idea.     

~pb

    

[Garth]

   Above all you really have to know yourself as no one else can.  Sure, someone can measure your body in all sorts of ways but this omits the most important thing of all , the riders sense of themselves: balance on and within the bike is but one example.  Call it intangibles if you will, and they are infinite.  Two bodies can be the exact same measurements but that's just superficial and further inquiry would always reveal differences/preferences of varying degrees from "similar" to "night and day".  

  Riv and every other bike seller do what they can to steer you in a direction as it's in their best interest of course but just remember it's by no means absolute, it's merely as suggestion based on their preferences which is the best anyone can offer another.

   With production bikes they can never fit everyone all the time and certainly not the same way. It is what it is :)  Fortunately there are lots of bikes to choose from and customs too.  Even these days you can get full custom frames for quite a reasonable price comparable to that of a Sam.

[Shoji Takahashi]

Hi Andrew,

Can you elaborate on what's uncomfortable for you on the 56 Sam? 

I agree with Benz that some measurement is off. I'm 170cm (5'7"), PBH 81cm and ride SH a few mm under 70cm.

I ride a 56 AHH, which has just a wee bit clearance for pelvic bone, and 48 Hunqapillar. The Hunqapillar is sized down-- providing a little more stand-over clearance in the woods and a lower head tube to get the bars lower. Could probably use a less tall stem to get them down a little more.

I've found that the bikes are quite different with different handle bars. I really like the AHH with albatross. The Hunqapillar with albatross was ok-- but probably too close. Drops work fine on both bikes, but the position of the tops and hoods feels very different (with same stem).

Good luck,

shoji