What Size Should I go for?

[bkulacs0410]

There seems to be a fashion these days for people to ride undersized bikes, which I find rather bizarre. Youngsters in my day often rode oversized frames on the basis they had "growing room" and so would last the rider until they stopped growing, but now I see the exact opposite - adults riding what I would consider to be kids sized bikes.

It is because the world has evolved and constantly develop to be better. In your time there were not that many professionals in certain niche industries and therefore people always learn from mistakes. It is still valid to this ERA and will always be and that how it should be. We fail forward and learn and develop.

 

[cougie uk]

Hey guys, I am 6ft or 183cm tall with 34" inside leg and the last time I purchased a Boardman MTX 8.6 Mens Hybrid Bike 2021 in Large (21" or 54cm) as according to their size chart it suits 181 - 189.

It turned out to be extremely Large as my feet barely touched the ground, then I decided next time I will definitely go for a Medium (19" or 49cm) frame from Boardman Hybrid bikes.

Today I rode my sister's "Carrera Parva Womens Hybrid Bike Limited Edition 2020" which is frame size "small (16" or 40cm) and I put the saddle up nicely. It was very comfortable that way

So my next bike will be the "Boardman HYB 8.8 Mens Hybrid Bike 2021" and they come in the following sizes Small (16" or 40cm) Medium (17" or 43cm) Large (18" or 45cm)

What size should I really get from the above HYB 8.8?

Thanks for your help in advance

Regards
Balint

I'd be surprised if a medium fits you properly. As has been said you don't need both feet on the floor. One foot is as stable as anything.

When you're riding the bike you only want a slight bend in the knee at the bottom of the pedal stroke.

 

[bkulacs0410]

I'd be surprised if a medium fits you properly. As has been said you don't need both feet on the floor. One foot is as stable as anything.

When you're riding the bike you only want a slight bend in the knee at the bottom of the pedal stroke.

Yeah, I get that, but I quite like the saddle higher up so I can lean onto the handlebar and have a more comfortable ride with my back straight. It is just what I prefer, that is why I thought a slightly smaller bike will fit perfectly, but thanks for your reply. I appreciate it

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

It is because the world has evolved and constantly develop to be better.

Undersizing of frames and compact geometry had nothing to do with developing anything to be better. Manufacturers simply realised if they could persuade the cycling public to accept them, they could cut costs by by only making and stocking a limited number of sizes. Nowadays, three or four sizes will cover the whole customer audience. In the days of steel, high quality bikes were available in inch, and sometimes even in half-inch size increments. That could mean up to ten or twelve size options.

 

[DRM]

I am just fractionally smaller than the OP in both overall height and leg length, and I have no problem with 23 1/2" old school road frames with horizontal top tubes.
The only ones I have had to be careful with were an early 23 1/2" Raleigh Pioneer hybrid frame, with a high, MTB-inspired BB height, and this lugged 23" Raleigh MTB, if ridden on rough surfaces. The welded 23's have a slightly lower standover height and are fine.
View attachment 572539
The early Pioneer frame cracked and has now been retired, the MTB isn't used as an MTB, since I've got others with more standover clearance better suited for that.
There seems to be a fashion these days for people to ride undersized bikes, which I find rather bizarre. Youngsters in my day often rode oversized frames on the basis they had "growing room" and so would last the rider until they stopped growing, but now I see the exact opposite - adults riding what I would consider to be kids sized bikes.

What model is the Raleigh in the photo, I've got one in the garage and can't find one like it on line, it's currently part restored to working order, more bits are on their way.

 

[Lovacott]

Ideally try them. If you’re saying you couldn’t touch the ground when seated you shouldn’t be able to, only with the tips of your toes.
When seated with the pedal at six o’clock your leg should be more or less straight.
Either M or L should work, some prefer a smaller some larger so it’s your preference.

I can only touch the ground on my MTB if I get off my saddle. In the saddle, it's a tippy toe on the ground if I lean the bike slightly. This is how every bike I've ever had has been set up. At lights etc., I pop forward of the saddle and flat my left foot on the ground with the right foot on the pedal at 2 o'clock. I then use the down pressure on the right pedal when I take off, to lift myself back into the saddle. It's how I was taught to ride when I was a kid.

My missus has a bike which she uses about twice a year and she insists on her saddle being low enough to have both feet flat on the ground. It means that she has to work twice as hard to get the crank moving and even a short two miles to a pub on the Tarka trail leaves her unable to walk properly for a week. I've tried telling her that her saddle is way too low but she won't listen.

I've sized my Boardman as a medium from their chart although I could have got away with a large (I'm on the cusp of the lower measurements for large).

I bought my daughter a medium sized mens hybrid bike last year and when I was test riding it, I found it suited me a lot better than my large sized MTB. I thought it would be an awkward ride (it looked so small), but it turned out to be very comfortable.

 

[Lovacott]

Undersizing of frames and compact geometry had nothing to do with developing anything to be better. Manufacturers simply realised if they could persuade the cycling public to accept them, they could cut costs by by only making and stocking a limited number of sizes.

Manufacturers don't sell bikes to end users. They sell them to bike shops.

As with any product, the more models you make, the more colour and size choices, the greater the amount of stock the shop has to buy to be a "stockist".

So it would be counter intuitive for a manufacturer to slim down their range.

I've been able to make most bikes fit me by simply raising the saddle and adjusting the bars because the only dimensions that seem to matter to me are pedal and handlebar reach.

Then again, I've never been professionally sized for a bike so maybe I don't know what I'm missing?

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

What model is the Raleigh in the photo, I've got one in the garage and can't find one like it on line, it's currently part restored to working order, more bits are on their way.

I believe it to be a Raleigh Moonrun from the 1991 model catalogue. The Raleigh engraving at the top of the seatstays indicates the frame is made from Reynolds tubing, not just hi-tensile 18-23, that's why it's lugged not welded. The 501 sticker and the model decal had been removed when I rescued it from being taken to the tip. They seem to be pretty rare, I cant recall seeing another identical one. Nice stable riding frame, copes well with crap urban tarmac. Feels as big as it looks though, not really ideal for actual MTB riding!

 

[Colin Grigson]

Undersizing of frames and compact geometry had nothing to do with developing anything to be better. Manufacturers simply realised if they could persuade the cycling public to accept them, they could cut costs by by only making and stocking a limited number of sizes. Nowadays, three or four sizes will cover the whole customer audience. In the days of steel, high quality bikes were available in inch, and sometimes even in half-inch size increments. That could mean up to ten or twelve size options.

Pinarello offer 13 frame sizes, perhaps it’s only certain manufacturers that have cut the range.

 

[T.M.H.N.E.T]

Pinarello offer 13 frame sizes, perhaps it’s only certain manufacturers that have cut the range.
View attachment 572824

Therein lies the issue. I could happily ride at least 4 sizes with completely minor tweaks

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

I'm surprised Pinarello offering anywhere near that many sizes, but I suppose they have the mark-up to be able to afford the costs. Also, as we're talking about carbons here the build process is not really automated. If you were mass producing alloy frames using a lot of CNC equipment you would want the minimum number of size variants and the biggest possible production run of each size offered.