Bike geometry for short-legged woman

Chuchote

I just found the perfect Goldilocks bike in all ways but one - it's a racer, and I'm looking for a light, handy bike to do a little touring.
The perfect/imperfect bike was a Cube, I think Cube Axial.
I've looked at other Cube bikes online, but they don't seem to have the kind of squat geometry of this, which is perfect for my build - I have the same length body and arms as a friend who is five foot seven, but I'm only five foot one, so presumably my legs are seven inches shorter than hers. So I need a bike that's good for a long body and reach but short legs.
Two questions if you'd be so kind as to help:
* What shop in Ireland has the biggest variety of Cube bikes for me to try out, in the hope that I can find another Cube with the same geometry?
* What are the measurements that make the Axial squat and suitable for my shape?

- Chuchote, formerly known as Qualitymark

Alek

I was researching this subject for my wife and among all the women-specific bikes I've been looking at, Giant Liv Avail 3 in XS size had the top tube low enough. My wife's 5"0.5, more or less, rather proportionally built.

formerly known as Qualitymark

Hello again, good to see you back.


AFAIR you are Harold's Cross based. I'm just a stone's throw away, you are welcome to try my wife's bike if you wish. It's more of a racer than tourer, but should give you an idea on what to expect from other Giant Livs in XS.

Chuchote

Thanks, Alek!

Unfortunately, I was shown a Liv Avail, and it was unbelievably, shockingly horrible combined with my body. The crossbar was up against my crotch and I was on tippy-tippy-tiptoe while on the saddle set to its lowest, yet with the saddle set to its lowest, my legs were bent right up so my thighs hit against my belly with every pedal-stroke. It would be actively dangerous for me flying around pothole-rich Harold's Cross.

On that particular Cube, my legs were extended properly while cycling, I was able to stand flat on the ground over it without risking personal injury, and I could stand on the balls of my two feet with the saddle set right for me.

I've found the perfect bike - apart from it being a racer, which is no use to me - and now just have to find a tourer with exactly the same geometry.

Here, take a look:

Damn, don't - was about to add a screen shot showing the Cube Axial, the Cube Nature Pro (a light-ish tourer, according to their propaganda) and the Liv Avail to see if you could see why one suits me, the second is unknown and the third is horrible for me; I don't seem to be able to use 'advanced' features under this new persona.

Alek

Are you absolutely sure you've tried XS version of Liv Avail? It has standover height of 26.6inches, and there is also XXS available with SH of 25.3inches, which is most likely as low as a diamond-shape frame on 700C wheels can get.



This is the XXS geometry:

Cube Axial in 47cm (the smallest size they make) seems to be a bit higher in this respect:

Alek

Also comparing the Axial vs Nature Pro geometry from the manufacturer's website:

http://www.cube.eu/uk/products/woman-like-series/axial-wls/cube-axial-wls-whitenaqua-2016/

http://www.cube.eu/uk/products/trekking/nature/cube-nature-pro-grey-black-2016/

, it seems that the seat post in the smallest Nature Pro (44cm) is slightly longer in the smallest Axial (43cm).

Considering that bicycles with front shock (instead of solid fork) have their bottom bracket higher, the smallest Nature Pro may not be small enough for you. But try it of course, if you can find it locally.

nak

Did you try the Specialized Ruby in a 44?

Seweryn

Alek wrote: »

Are you absolutely sure you've tried XS version of Liv Avail? It has standover height of 26.6inches, and there is also XXS available with SH of 25.3inches, which is most likely as low as a diamond-shape frame on 700C wheels can get.

As a matter of interest, what is the crank arm length in the XXS size?

Chuchote

Alek - No, that was the S size I was trying in the Avail; however, I have previously tried an XS and it had the same horrid scrunched-up feel for me.

Bad news on the Nature Pro; it sounds as if it's quite a different geometry from the Axial. What a pity Cube's designer, Michael Prell, didn't make a road touring bike with the same geometry as the Axial racer.

Nak, the Specialized Ruby looks like sort of the same kind of shape as that nice Cube - but is there a version that isn't carbon? I'm liable to load it down like a camel, and carbon frames always seem too delicate? (And the price too harsh for my delicate wallet.) Where can I try one, though? It also looks like the crossbar is too high for me, on a quick guess. But I'd happily try it.

Chuchote

Where can I try all of these - is there one place in Dublin that does them all?

Chuchote

Where can I try all of these - is there one place in Dublin that does them all? And maybe the Cannondale too?

Chuchote

Sorry for the repeat posts; the Edit function isn't working for me.

rollingscone

Welcome back artist formerly known as QM!

I know you've been searching for a while but have you ever popped into a Decathlon in the UK or Mainland Europe?

A few vertically efficient friends of mine found B'twin bikes to be decent fits

fat bloke

I'm looking at these for my girls and the crank lengths are mental. They're all 165+. They should be 140 ish

Seweryn

fat bloke wrote: »

I'm looking at these for my girls and the crank lengths are mental. They're all 165+.

Absolute madness. I use 165 mm cranks on my own bike and I am not the shortest guy around...

fat bloke

Seweryn wrote: »

Absolute madness. I use 165 mm cranks on my own bike and I am not the shortest guy around...

Yeah, I've 5'11.5 I've 165 cranks on my TT bike.i see Halfords have a new range of Wiggins branded junior road bikes and while their 650 wheeled one has 145 cranks, the one up from that with 700c wheels, billed as for 11+year old, has 165mm cranks. Sure you'd be kneeing yourself in the chin!

Isla bikes seem to be the only crowd who think of finishing kits and that smaller people have smaller hands and leg bones so adjust bars/hoods/levers/cranks accordingly, proportionally and appropriately.

Chuchote

Thanks, Rollingscone - I'm looking for a light bike - are Decathlon bikes light?

Alek, I just measured my inside leg and it seems to be 26 inches.

Fat bloke, what are cranks - the stalks of the pedals?

Chuchote

Alek, looking at that Cube Axial and the Liv Avail, can you explain the unhappy scrunched-up feeling I get with the Liv? I get that with the S size (too big) and the XS size (correct size but horribly stomach-crampy hunched feeling).

Chuchote

There's an interesting discussion of stumpy-legged people and bikes here:

ask dot metafilter dot com slash 263218 slash Best-bike-for-a-really-really-short-woman

(sorry about that; I can't pose links)

That Trek Navigator sounds possible, but can you try them here?

Chuchote

By the way, the reason I've been looking so long is that I was waiting several months for an XS in one of the Liv bikes which never turned up. Having tried it out now, I'm glad it didn't, though. I'm being fussy - this will probably be the last bike I buy, so I want to get the perfect one (for my purposes).

nak

fat bloke wrote: »

I'm looking at these for my girls and the crank lengths are mental. They're all 165+. They should be 140 ish

As far as I know Shimano don't make shorter cranks than 165 if you want 105 or up.

I'm 5"4 and have 170 cranks on all my bikes without issue. I have long legs and a short torso.

OP if you look at the Specialized website they have several versions of the Ruby. The winner of this year's Transam was on a Ruby with carbon wheels and it survived the journey.

You may not get to try smaller bikes in a shop as they cannot stock every size on the off chance someone might buy it. I ride a 49 and have had to order each bike I've ever had without trying it. The geometry charts should give you a good idea, I just went on those and have sometimes had to change the stem or bars to suit but other than that the fit was perfect.

Chuchote

Nak - Thanks, yes, that's been my experience (that bike shops don't have small sizes). I really don't want to ask a shop to get in a bike for me to try when I may not buy it and then they'll be stuck with it.

I simply don't understand those geometry charts. I'm exceptionally stupid with numbers in all cases, but also, I can't see what the difference is between the Liv Avail (which I hate) and the Cube Axial (which I love) - or rather, what the difference is that makes one uncomfortable and the other lovely.

What geometry is it that I need, with a long (or normal-length) body and arms, but short legs?

Chuchote

Oh, and the winner of the Transam may have leaped the bike over many ruts and holes, but did s/he also have it loaded with panniers?

Chuchote

Sorry, that sounded as if I were asking it indignantly. I wasn't, just asking for a point of information.

Unknown Soldier

Chuchote wrote: »

Where can I try all of these - is there one place in Dublin that does them all? And maybe the Cannondale too?

There is a Giant store on the Long mile road? Near the Epmooney hyundi garage.

FWIW have you considered a Giant defy? They have a really low back end! A bloke at work has a 56cm one and against my Canyon S(53ish) the top of his seat post tube is about 4-5 inches lower than mine. Not sure what year his is though.

So with a bike like that you have the length on top that you need, and you can always get a longer stem too. Going from a 90mm stem to 110/120mm is quite normal.

Chuchote

Unknown Soldier, I've set all ideas of any Giant bike aside, having found the Liv versions so uncomfortable; they really don't seem to suit my shape. In fact, I was astonished at how nice the Cube was, after trying other bikes. Only trouble is that it's a racer; you can't put a back carrier and panniers on it - it's not designed to take them, and it won't bear the weight.

nak

Chuchote wrote: »

Oh, and the winner of the Transam may have leaped the bike over many ruts and holes, but did s/he also have it loaded with panniers?

It's a self supported event, so frame bag, bar bag, saddle bag etc.

Chuchote

nak wrote: »

It's a self supported event, so frame bag, bar bag, saddle bag etc.

Ah, interesting!

The Ruby does look like a good shape. I wish I could understand the numbers on the geometry, but really that's like wishing I was a six-foot redhead like my grandma!

Chuchote

Nak, where can I see these Specialized Ruby bikes? (I'm encouraged by the thought that a good woman's prize is above rubies, so maybe a good ruby's price isn't above this woman's.)

rollingscone

Re: feeling cramped. Has anyone suggested a longer stem?

Chuchote

rollingscone wrote: »

Re: feeling cramped. Has anyone suggested a longer stem?

Stem? Is that the thing the saddle sits on? Nope, that just whooshes me up, but the cramped feeling comes from being not too far down but too close in, between saddle and handlebars, I think.

secman

Chuchote wrote: »

Stem? Is that the thing the saddle sits on? Nope, that just whooshes me up, but the cramped feeling comes from being not too far down but too close in, between saddle and handlebars, I think.

Stem is what handlebar is on... a longer stem stretches out distance to handlebars

nilhg

Chuchote wrote: »

Ah, interesting!

The Ruby does look like a good shape. I wish I could understand the numbers on the geometry, but really that's like wishing I was a six-foot redhead like my grandma!

OP, the two numbers to concentrate on are stack and reach.

Stack is the height of the top of the head tube, with no spacers underneath, so it can be increased a little by using spacers.

Reach is the distance from the bottom bracket to a vertical line drawn through the top of the head tube, there's a diagram at the link below which will make it more obvious

http://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/Choosing_a_Tri_Bike_via_Stack_and_Reach/Stack_Reach_Primer_Chapter_One_95.html

If you know the stack and reach figures for the bike you liked it should be possible to match that to any other model using spacers under the stem and varying the stem length.

Not sure I've explained that well if you can get your head around stack and reach it's a good starting point in finding something to fit you.

nak wrote: »

It's a self supported event, so frame bag, bar bag, saddle bag etc.

Lael was riding a Specialised ruby pro with quite a tidy baggage setup.

http://www.bikepacking.com/plog/lael-wilcox-trans-am/

cdaly_

Chuchote wrote: »

I just found the perfect Goldilocks bike in all ways but one - it's a racer, and I'm looking for a light, handy bike to do a little touring.

You could consider a Thorn Audax. Steel frame, suitable for light touring and available in very small (701mm (27") standover). They'll make the bike up to your measurements (they ask for height, standover height and arm span).

Lovely bikes, not terribly light but a joy to ride. Starting price GBP1240 but you'll likely end up spending more. They're in Somerset UK and there's no irish showroom or stockist...

Chuchote

Thanks, nilhg, I'll take a look at the stack and reach. What's a head tube again?

I'm inclined to think you're right about stack and reach being important, but they're the upper body, right? If I could graft long spidery legs on to me, I'd be fine. The main problem is that I'm built like an Eskimo; somewhere in my genetic line a kayaking gene was lurking and came out with me as a sport (in the genetic sense, not the good-at-athletics sense).

cdaly, the bike I'm currently riding is a steel-framed Dawes - I think it's probably a Galaxy, but the name's long since worn off. It was grand when I was younger and stronger - too big for me, but I could cycle it happily enough. It keeps trying to kill me, and clearly hates me, but heck, you can't have everything. But 'not terribly light' is no longer a joy to ride for me, as my muscles are simply not up to what they were. And don't tell me about your 90-year-old mother-in-law doing 99 miles on her 90lb Elswick Ludlow; she's not me. I'm a weak old thing. Heavy bikes are not for me, not any longer.

Chuchote

Hm, looking at some youtubes about Lael Wilcox doing various long-distance races. Wouldn't call her bike heavily loaded, though! A bivvy bag and a toothbrush seems about the height of it, and I'm not sure about the toothbrush! What a brave rider…

Chuchote

Probably the ideal bike for me would be one built for Chinese women tourers, if that's a thing. They seem to have the same build as me - long in body and arms but short in leg (though considerably less flabby and cellulitey).

nilhg

Chuchote wrote: »

Thanks, nilhg, I'll take a look at the stack and reach. What's a head tube again?

I'm inclined to think you're right about stack and reach being important, but they're the upper body, right? If I could graft long spidery legs on to me, I'd be fine. The main problem is that I'm built like an Eskimo; somewhere in my genetic line a kayaking gene was lurking and came out with me as a sport (in the genetic sense, not the good-at-athletics sense).

cdaly, the bike I'm currently riding is a steel-framed Dawes - I think it's probably a Galaxy, but the name's long since worn off. It was grand when I was younger and stronger - too big for me, but I could cycle it happily enough. It keeps trying to kill me, and clearly hates me, but heck, you can't have everything. But 'not terribly light' is no longer a joy to ride for me, as my muscles are simply not up to what they were. And don't tell me about your 90-year-old mother-in-law doing 99 miles on her 90lb Elswick Ludlow; she's not me. I'm a weak old thing. Heavy bikes are not for me, not any longer.

I'm far from an expert, but in your case what I'd be thinking is to find a frame size to fit your leg length then adapt by changing stem height (with spacers) and length, which would lessen that cramped up feeling.

I don't know exactly what it might cost but someone like Brendan from Bicycle Design Centre might be worth a visit, if you could afford a bike built by him that might be ideal but if you just got a fitting off him he'd be able to match you up to some suitable frame sizes, have a look at his fitting page, he's in Naas.

Chuchote

Thanks, Nilhg, I may try a bike fitting.

The only thing that makes me a little cautious about that is a friend who's long and stringy in build, and is invariably told by bike fitters that she needs a particular size and type of frame. In fact, she prefers a couple of sizes bigger, and gets a nice stretchy cycle on that. Her cycling is along some of the back roads of the far west, and she's ecstatic with a new bike which is theoretically a bit too big for her, but actually suits her perfectly.

And heh, a personally built bike is a little beyond my price range!

Chuchote

Nak, I see that this magazine that carried a long interview with Lael Wilcox has no Irish routes on its worldwide bikepacking chart - maybe you could add some: http:// www. bikepacking. com/bikepacking-routes/ (sorry about the spaces, as a 'new user' I can't post URLs).

Kaisr Sose

This is an interesting thread that shows the complexities and importance of getting a bike that fits!! I think it's great that you are getting so many/much technical info here. What is not amazing or surprising is how little help you are getting in retail shops. Hope you get sorted.

Chuchote

Alek wrote: »

It seems that the seat post in the smallest Nature Pro (44cm) is slightly longer in the smallest Axial (43cm).

Alek, which seat post are you saying is longer, please?

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

This is an interesting thread that shows the complexities and importance of getting a bike that fits!! I think it's great that you are getting so many/much technical info here. What is not amazing or surprising is how little help you are getting in retail shops. Hope you get sorted.

Kaisr, what it shows me (apart from the kindness of people here) is the amazing sameness of bodies generally - the people in the shops look at me, see a normally medium-sized body, but shorter than most, and think in terms of the top of the body. It really doesn't occur to them that the short legs should make a big difference - they think either of putting me on a tiny frame that will cramp my upper body, and adjusting it by longer bits here and there, or putting me on a normal-ish-but-smallish frame and adjusting that by higher bits here and there. Neither, unfortunately, seems to work.

Chuchote

Went out to Cycle Superstore and tried out a Cannondale Synapse that was very nearly right; the nice and knowledgeable guy there also suggested a LaPierre Audacio 100, but doesn't have the small size right now - however, he reckoned it would be stumpy enough yet reachy enough. They don't do Specialized there, so I'm going to go and look at the Ruby somewhere else and wait a little before deciding. On the way home I ran into someone cycling a Specialized Sirius, which also looked nice, but of course looking isn't feeling.

As far as I understood him, he said the two most important things for me were the stack - essentially the height of the frame; and the reach.

Chuchote

Oh, and the Dawes Galaxy, he said - the horrible fecking bike that keeps trying to kill me (and which is too big for me in any case) now sells for around €2,000 in its current model. He said the heavy weight of it is probably down to the components as much as anything else, and they've given a new lease of life to several of these by changing the wheels, etc to modern lightweight ones.

Kaisr Sose

Dawes Galaxy model is around a long time. I remember drooling over one backe in the mid 80's. I think it had a Reynolds 531 frame. If you have one of them, they are keepers - just for the nostalgia!

Chuchote

Kaisr Sose wrote: »

Dawes Galaxy model is around a long time. I remember drooling over one backe in the mid 80's. I think it had a Reynolds 531 frame. If you have one of them, they are keepers - just for the nostalgia!

If I could get it to stop trying to snap at me as I lock it, it might be! But the frame is a couple of inches too big for me; I think it's a 21-inch frame (in old terminology), when I'd normally be comfortable on a 19" or so. OTOH, it's not generally a bike-thief magnet, and if I could get lighter components, it might be worth using as a runaround, keeping a better bike for any bit of touring.

Ideally I'd get one good bike and keep it. However, Dublin's bike thieves seem to have something against people doing so. Until the thief problem is solved, there's not a lot of point in using a good bike as a general bike.

fat bloke

Chuchote wrote: »

Went out to Cycle Superstore and tried out a Cannondale Synapse that was very nearly right; the nice and knowledgeable guy there also suggested a LaPierre Audacio 100, but doesn't have the small size right now - however, he reckoned it would be stumpy enough yet reachy enough. They don't do Specialized there, so I'm going to go and look at the Ruby somewhere else and wait a little before deciding. On the way home I ran into someone cycling a Specialized Sirius, which also looked nice, but of course looking isn't feeling.

As far as I understood him, he said the two most important things for me were the stack - essentially the height of the frame; and the reach.

Let us hereafter replace the term "stumpy" with "petite"

Chuchote

Petite, though, suggests general smallness; stumpy suggests squashed-down shortness

BremoreDave

If you have the means I would highly recommend a Retul bike fit.
They can provide a complete sizing chart and bike geometry based on your measurements and overall mobility.

Chuchote

BremoreDave wrote: »

If you have the means I would highly recommend a Retul bike fit.
They can provide a complete sizing chart and bike geometry based on your measurements and overall mobility.

Hm, €200. When I hear that I hear my mother's ghostly voice, "There are children starving in India…" Even if it were €150 it might be possible, but €200 would feel really sinful!

Lusk_Doyle

Chuchote wrote: »

Hm, €200. When I hear that I hear my mother's ghostly voice, "There are children starving in India…" Even if it were €150 it might be possible, but €200 would feel really sinful!

Why? Do you use the same logic for other purchases?

Chuchote

Good point; and after all, the labourer is worthy of his hire. I'd feel pretty aggrieved if someone didn't want to pay me my assigned fee on that basis. Maybe I should think about it. It sort of seems like something that a professional cyclist would do, though, rather than a slowcoach moocher-along-roads at an average of 12 km/h.