Cyclocross bike fit different? - Page 2 - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

07-12-2004, 01:05 AM

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] (Bryan C) wrote:

> I have started looking at cyclocross bikes, which I want for
> commuting/touring and dirt road riding. One shop I was at recommended
> getting a frame TWO sizes smaller than my road bike frame, which is a
> 56 for my Fuji. The explanation was that the bottom bracket was
> higher, so you need to go to the smaller size to have the proper
> stand-over height. Do experienced cyclocrossers agree with this
> recommendation. Yes, I know there are different methods of measuring
> the frame sizes on road bikes, so this may not be exact. But does it
> work in general?

Not necessarily, and it may not work at all if you can't get the bars
high enough. A small-size bike is a problem, unless it has a long
head tube and upsloping toptube, perhaps.

Unscheduled get-offs are more common in cross than on the road, but not
an issue for commuting and dirt-road riding. Still, standover is never
really the first priority in bike fit - you rarely straddle the bike
dead upright in your socks.

For more on cyclocross bike fit see Adam Myerson's article at

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

07-12-2004, 03:45 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] >,
Bryan C <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>I have started looking at cyclocross bikes, which I want for
>commuting/touring and dirt road riding. One shop I was at recommended
>getting a frame TWO sizes smaller than my road bike frame, which is a
>56 for my Fuji. The explanation was that the bottom bracket was
>higher, so you need to go to the smaller size to have the proper
>stand-over height. Do experienced cyclocrossers agree with this
>recommendation. Yes, I know there are different methods of measuring
>the frame sizes on road bikes, so this may not be exact. But does it
>work in general?

_ Well, I followed this advice with my cross bike and I regretted
it. I ended up having to buy a new uncut fork so I could get the
handlebars high enough. Fortunately, surly cross check forks are
relatively cheap. A slightly lower top tube is nice for those
occaisonal accidental dismounts, but not being able to get the
handlebars high enough is a much bigger problem. Plus you may
end up with a too short top tube if you go two sizes smaller.

_ I would also think twice about getting a Cross bike for

"commuting/touring and dirt road riding"

The high bottom bracket makes for a relatively twitchy bike. It
may perhaps be because the bike is on the small side for me, but
my Cross Check is not a bike I would pick for hours in the saddle
with a load. It's a blast on dirt roads and okay for an hour or
two on the road, but just seems to fight you after a couple
hours. It needs looking after when you get tired and sloopy. A
full on touring bike will work just fine for all the above and be
a lot more comfortable on a long day.

_ What you really need to do all the above is a bike
with sufficient clearance to put fat tires on it.
While a cross bike may be the obvious choice, it's
not the only choice.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQPMin2TWTAjn5N/lAQFFogP+P9vfUWqta1YVXl3lAF1Mbu11N6flv3ZW
bVlwCjtqFc/w7Izy4Z2brebZA9ZrwhhoLQX0EVV/MbDe3k5qdbrPp2FzekBwS9B+
bQ27d1GiLDN8vAp2+qa6Pax/zULw6y9xp6PFhCm6xeaxzClPh72dvLH6FIsBqBKr
oWDuEQIsjOg=
=9JNJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

07-12-2004, 03:45 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] >,
Bryan C <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>I have started looking at cyclocross bikes, which I want for
>commuting/touring and dirt road riding. One shop I was at recommended
>getting a frame TWO sizes smaller than my road bike frame, which is a
>56 for my Fuji. The explanation was that the bottom bracket was
>higher, so you need to go to the smaller size to have the proper
>stand-over height. Do experienced cyclocrossers agree with this
>recommendation. Yes, I know there are different methods of measuring
>the frame sizes on road bikes, so this may not be exact. But does it
>work in general?

_ Well, I followed this advice with my cross bike and I regretted
it. I ended up having to buy a new uncut fork so I could get the
handlebars high enough. Fortunately, surly cross check forks are
relatively cheap. A slightly lower top tube is nice for those
occaisonal accidental dismounts, but not being able to get the
handlebars high enough is a much bigger problem. Plus you may
end up with a too short top tube if you go two sizes smaller.

_ I would also think twice about getting a Cross bike for

"commuting/touring and dirt road riding"

The high bottom bracket makes for a relatively twitchy bike. It
may perhaps be because the bike is on the small side for me, but
my Cross Check is not a bike I would pick for hours in the saddle
with a load. It's a blast on dirt roads and okay for an hour or
two on the road, but just seems to fight you after a couple
hours. It needs looking after when you get tired and sloopy. A
full on touring bike will work just fine for all the above and be
a lot more comfortable on a long day.

_ What you really need to do all the above is a bike
with sufficient clearance to put fat tires on it.
While a cross bike may be the obvious choice, it's
not the only choice.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQPMin2TWTAjn5N/lAQFFogP+P9vfUWqta1YVXl3lAF1Mbu11N6flv3ZW
bVlwCjtqFc/w7Izy4Z2brebZA9ZrwhhoLQX0EVV/MbDe3k5qdbrPp2FzekBwS9B+
bQ27d1GiLDN8vAp2+qa6Pax/zULw6y9xp6PFhCm6xeaxzClPh72dvLH6FIsBqBKr
oWDuEQIsjOg=
=9JNJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

07-12-2004, 03:45 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] >,
Bryan C <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>I have started looking at cyclocross bikes, which I want for
>commuting/touring and dirt road riding. One shop I was at recommended
>getting a frame TWO sizes smaller than my road bike frame, which is a
>56 for my Fuji. The explanation was that the bottom bracket was
>higher, so you need to go to the smaller size to have the proper
>stand-over height. Do experienced cyclocrossers agree with this
>recommendation. Yes, I know there are different methods of measuring
>the frame sizes on road bikes, so this may not be exact. But does it
>work in general?

_ Well, I followed this advice with my cross bike and I regretted
it. I ended up having to buy a new uncut fork so I could get the
handlebars high enough. Fortunately, surly cross check forks are
relatively cheap. A slightly lower top tube is nice for those
occaisonal accidental dismounts, but not being able to get the
handlebars high enough is a much bigger problem. Plus you may
end up with a too short top tube if you go two sizes smaller.

_ I would also think twice about getting a Cross bike for

"commuting/touring and dirt road riding"

The high bottom bracket makes for a relatively twitchy bike. It
may perhaps be because the bike is on the small side for me, but
my Cross Check is not a bike I would pick for hours in the saddle
with a load. It's a blast on dirt roads and okay for an hour or
two on the road, but just seems to fight you after a couple
hours. It needs looking after when you get tired and sloopy. A
full on touring bike will work just fine for all the above and be
a lot more comfortable on a long day.

_ What you really need to do all the above is a bike
with sufficient clearance to put fat tires on it.
While a cross bike may be the obvious choice, it's
not the only choice.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQPMin2TWTAjn5N/lAQFFogP+P9vfUWqta1YVXl3lAF1Mbu11N6flv3ZW
bVlwCjtqFc/w7Izy4Z2brebZA9ZrwhhoLQX0EVV/MbDe3k5qdbrPp2FzekBwS9B+
bQ27d1GiLDN8vAp2+qa6Pax/zULw6y9xp6PFhCm6xeaxzClPh72dvLH6FIsBqBKr
oWDuEQIsjOg=
=9JNJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

07-12-2004, 03:45 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] >,
Bryan C <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>I have started looking at cyclocross bikes, which I want for
>commuting/touring and dirt road riding. One shop I was at recommended
>getting a frame TWO sizes smaller than my road bike frame, which is a
>56 for my Fuji. The explanation was that the bottom bracket was
>higher, so you need to go to the smaller size to have the proper
>stand-over height. Do experienced cyclocrossers agree with this
>recommendation. Yes, I know there are different methods of measuring
>the frame sizes on road bikes, so this may not be exact. But does it
>work in general?

_ Well, I followed this advice with my cross bike and I regretted
it. I ended up having to buy a new uncut fork so I could get the
handlebars high enough. Fortunately, surly cross check forks are
relatively cheap. A slightly lower top tube is nice for those
occaisonal accidental dismounts, but not being able to get the
handlebars high enough is a much bigger problem. Plus you may
end up with a too short top tube if you go two sizes smaller.

_ I would also think twice about getting a Cross bike for

"commuting/touring and dirt road riding"

The high bottom bracket makes for a relatively twitchy bike. It
may perhaps be because the bike is on the small side for me, but
my Cross Check is not a bike I would pick for hours in the saddle
with a load. It's a blast on dirt roads and okay for an hour or
two on the road, but just seems to fight you after a couple
hours. It needs looking after when you get tired and sloopy. A
full on touring bike will work just fine for all the above and be
a lot more comfortable on a long day.

_ What you really need to do all the above is a bike
with sufficient clearance to put fat tires on it.
While a cross bike may be the obvious choice, it's
not the only choice.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQPMin2TWTAjn5N/lAQFFogP+P9vfUWqta1YVXl3lAF1Mbu11N6flv3ZW
bVlwCjtqFc/w7Izy4Z2brebZA9ZrwhhoLQX0EVV/MbDe3k5qdbrPp2FzekBwS9B+
bQ27d1GiLDN8vAp2+qa6Pax/zULw6y9xp6PFhCm6xeaxzClPh72dvLH6FIsBqBKr
oWDuEQIsjOg=
=9JNJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

07-12-2004, 03:45 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

In article <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ] >,
Bryan C <[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]> wrote:
>I have started looking at cyclocross bikes, which I want for
>commuting/touring and dirt road riding. One shop I was at recommended
>getting a frame TWO sizes smaller than my road bike frame, which is a
>56 for my Fuji. The explanation was that the bottom bracket was
>higher, so you need to go to the smaller size to have the proper
>stand-over height. Do experienced cyclocrossers agree with this
>recommendation. Yes, I know there are different methods of measuring
>the frame sizes on road bikes, so this may not be exact. But does it
>work in general?

_ Well, I followed this advice with my cross bike and I regretted
it. I ended up having to buy a new uncut fork so I could get the
handlebars high enough. Fortunately, surly cross check forks are
relatively cheap. A slightly lower top tube is nice for those
occaisonal accidental dismounts, but not being able to get the
handlebars high enough is a much bigger problem. Plus you may
end up with a too short top tube if you go two sizes smaller.

_ I would also think twice about getting a Cross bike for

"commuting/touring and dirt road riding"

The high bottom bracket makes for a relatively twitchy bike. It
may perhaps be because the bike is on the small side for me, but
my Cross Check is not a bike I would pick for hours in the saddle
with a load. It's a blast on dirt roads and okay for an hour or
two on the road, but just seems to fight you after a couple
hours. It needs looking after when you get tired and sloopy. A
full on touring bike will work just fine for all the above and be
a lot more comfortable on a long day.

_ What you really need to do all the above is a bike
with sufficient clearance to put fat tires on it.
While a cross bike may be the obvious choice, it's
not the only choice.

_ Booker C. Bense

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBQPMin2TWTAjn5N/lAQFFogP+P9vfUWqta1YVXl3lAF1Mbu11N6flv3ZW
bVlwCjtqFc/w7Izy4Z2brebZA9ZrwhhoLQX0EVV/MbDe3k5qdbrPp2FzekBwS9B+
bQ27d1GiLDN8vAp2+qa6Pax/zULw6y9xp6PFhCm6xeaxzClPh72dvLH6FIsBqBKr
oWDuEQIsjOg=
=9JNJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----