Clem L Sizing for Wife with 87.5 PBH

[tc]

Hey, 

The 52 and 59 Clem L's sizing overlaps quite a bit.  Does anyone out there with a 52 Clem L and an 87-88 PBH wish they'd gotten a 59?  Or vice-versa?

My wife is considering one.  We'll talk with the Riv folks, but I'd love to hear of any experience you all have if you're in the same PBH range with either size Clem L.  If you have a pic showing how much saddle post is showing that'd be even better - thanks.

Tom

[Mark in Beacon]

I don't exactly know my PBH, but my saddle is usually set around 74, so I can infer that I'm a centimeter or two shy of 87.  I' am five ten. I am very happy with this size for me, although recently having spent some time on my friend's 55cm Cheviot, I would go 59 with that bike. I would think it depends a little on her riding style, but I would say definitely moving more into the 59 camp with 87-88. Consider the smaller size if the bike will be portaged up and down stairs frequently or the smaller wheel size is appealing for slightly more nimble handling (not a fan of 700c tires much over 40mm)--both were factors in my decision. Those are the only real issues since standover is eliminated and the Boscos go back lots. I imagine the incredible wheelbase of the 59  is even more Caddy plush, and I imagine Riv is leaning heavily this way, and I would go with their recommendation without hesitation (whatever it might be), as they have so much experience and so many data points.  Good luck. I suspect either way she is going to love the ride of this bicycle. It is a true pleasure.

With the 52, her saddle will likely be set a good inch higher than mine here.

[adam leibow]

I have an 87.5 pbh exactly and I would go with the 59. Less exposed seatpost, a more elegant look IMHO, and no worries that standover will be a problem. On the blug post a few weeks back, my green 60cm cheviot with cream tires might give you an idea of the fit it could look like. 

[tc]

Thanks, Adam! Will take a look again; I remember your Chev - very nice bike indeed.

[tc]

Yeah Mark I need to compare 60 Chev geo to 59 Clem. We know she fits a 60 Chev.

Her issue is looooong legs (femurs) and shortish
torso - so reach if often an issue if she gets a frame large enough for her leg length. But she’ll likely get Boscos to mitigate reach.

Thanks for your input!

Tom

[Mark in Beacon]

Any conclusion? That 59 Clem L special on the Riv website seems like a very good deal. 

https://www.rivbike.com/collections/web-special-framesets-and-bicycles/products/grants-bike-of-the-week-green-59cm-clem-l

[Brad]

Hi,

I'm 6' with an 88 pbh and I'm riding a 59 Clem L. I'm the opposite of your wife- relative to my height, I have short legs and a long torso/arms. 

I love the way my Clem fits, but I have a really small amount of seat post showing (you can kind of see it here, I'll try to take a better photo today). If I lowered my saddle any more I'd risk having the tip of the seatlug floating in space. I'm resigned to a "finger-full" of seat post on Riv's because that's what gets me the reach I like without a 14cm stem. You might want to figure out the saddle to bars distances on the 52 and 59 to make sure you can get the reach you want with a stem in the normal size range.

Brad

On Saturday, February 3, 2018 at 9:21:48 PM UTC-5, tc wrote:

[tc]

She just returned from a business trip,so hopefully she'll decide soon!  59 Clem L definitely a bigger bike than a 60 Chev.

[tc]

Thanks Brad.  I will ask Riv to measure saddle-to-bars for the 59 Clem L vs 60 Chev -- good idea.  Hard to get a confident feel looking only at geo's.

Love your Clem, and the pup!  Great pic.  How to you like your G-Ones?   Done any relatively tame single track on them?  I imagine they'd be great on gravel and hardpack too.    

On Thursday, February 8, 2018 at 9:20:12 AM UTC-5, Brad wrote:

Hi,

I'm 6' with an 88 pbh and I'm riding a 59 Clem L. I'm the opposite of your wife- relative to my height, I have short legs and a long torso/arms.... 

[Brad]

I like the G-Ones. I didn't get to ride them offroad, but they were great on the bumpy industrial streets of Northern Brooklyn. I switched them out for Big Bens so I could run full fenders. One thing I noticed:  the bike felt more stable when I switched to the slightly smaller tires. With the G-Ones, it felt a little uncertain when I rode no-handed. With the Big Bens, it felt noticeably more stable without hands on the bars.

I'll put the G-Ones back on in the spring and try some trail riding.

Brad

[Mark in Beacon]

Well, one of the things about the Clem L is you don't need to concern yourself with standover. Also the seat post and seat tube are super beefy, so if you don't mind a bit of post, the 52 will absolutely work in terms of reach to bars with a Bosco setup. I think if there is any real concern the bike could be too big, you can safely go with the 52 (if they have 'em in stock.)

[tc]

Mark, thanks again.  The actual saddle height on her 58 Sam is 75cm / 29.5", with about 4" of seatpost showing.  A little shorter SH than the PBH - 11 calc that Riv suggests, but, it's where it's comfortable for her.  Do you mind measuring the distance between the bar end of your grips and approx where the seatpost would pierce the top of the saddle?  That would give us a really good comparison to the Sam setup.  Thanks!

Tom

[Mark in Beacon]

Hey Tom, sorry just saw this. I get 17.5" for this measurement. Remember, I have the Bosco Bull bars--with the regular Bosco you could shorten this if necessary (ie, if you went with the 59 Clem, in which case you need to buy that bike on special for $1300 asap!).  My saddle height on the Clem is currently 73cm, a bit on the low side, but I sometimes run my city bikes that way. At this height there is about 5.5" from the top of the seat tube to the saddle rail. The bike and the seat post could easily handle a 75cm saddle height without looking weird (in my book, anyway.)