Been looking at the non-forum stuff on the site and something puzzled me.
I was reading through the section on finding the bike that is right for you. I figured I was a Longleg Craig, but then I got thinking if I had a short torso or not?
My inseam is 92cm. My height is 188cm, basically the inseam is half of my height. What category would I fall under?
Just curious since I am considering purchasing a new bike when I visit New Orleans this fall.
I definately found I fell in that category at 183 with a 88 cm inseam. I think you will find the same problem that I did, well described by slowman. It is not easy to find a bike that fits.
I bought a Yaqui via email and over the phone. It has been the perfect all-around bike for me. I’m sure there are others out there who can work with you, but I couldn’t seem to find any of them that thought making a really steep angled bike with a short top tube was a good idea. My bike’s handling is a huge improvement over the twitchy tri bike I rode before.
Chad
Looks like you are a bit longer in the leg than I. I’m at 81 cm of inseam and 177cm of height. So the difference between my height and twice my inseam is 15cm, while for you it’s only 4cm. Interesting. I’ve never thought of myself as having really short legs (although they are the same length as my girlfriend, who is 4 inches shorter). You really are longleg craig!
-Shortleg Colin
Hmmm maybe I do fall in the category of Longleg Craig. I would prefer Tall-handsome-with-very-powerful-longlegs Craig.
I may be tall but I usually match the stumpy ones in squats (max at 190kg). Which is why I thought I fell in the Wilt Andretti category. I guess I gotta wait till September to find out which bike I fit, since there are no LBS in area who carry Tri / TT bikes.
I the meantime I think I should get a picture posted of my nicely unshaven white legs… 
I would say that you’re a “Longleg Craig”. You have the same inseam/height ratio as me - your ratio is 92/188 = 0.489 and mine is 85/174 = 0.489 . Although I’m not over 5’11" (180cm), I have the fitting problem described under “Longleg Craig”
So to be classified as a Wilt then you should have a ratio of 0,5? Do the 2 cm I have make all that big a difference?
Just wondering… how tall is Bjørn Anderson?
So to be classified as a Wilt then you should have a ratio of 0,5? Do the 2 cm I have make all that big a difference?
A normal inseam/height ratio would be lower than yours, not higher. For example, Colin’s inseam/height ratio is 81/177 = 0.458 and Chad’s is 83/188 = 0.481.
Yes, the 2cm can make a difference. One of my brothers is ~2cm shorter than me. His legs are also ~2cm shorter than mine. He was a pretty easy fit on a tri-bike since he has more “normal” proportions. My other brother is about ~2cm taller than me but we have the same leg length. He also was a pretty easy fit on a tri-bike.
Hey Quark
I’m 185.42cm high and my inseam is 91.44cm. So I’m in with the long legged guys! I have the body of some one who’s 5’10” and the leg’s of some one 6’3”, and to make it worse I have a 30” waist! Go and find pants! I need 30/34 or 30/36’s very hard to find.
As for my main road bike I have a Seven custom 61cm with a 58.9cm tt with a 125mm ti stem, And boy is it sweet!!! If you ever get the chance to have a custom bike built do it you will not be sorry!
Cheers
Dan…
Thanks for reply fellas.
If I do decide to go for a custom frame, what would be the damage?
Hey Quark
well my Seven was $3000 for the frame and that was 4 years ago that sounds like a lot and it is. but this bike should last me 10+ years. i don’t think every body needs a custom but if you are having a prob getting a good fit and you do ride your bike a lot then it’s a very good idea. and like i said you will not be sorry the ride is just the best!!!
Dan…
My inseam is 92cm. My height is 188cm
Standing up as straight as you know how, what is the measurement from your navel to the ground?
From navel to ground 112cm
.
From navel to ground 112cm
Well, for reference, I’m 177cm tall, 85cm inseam, and a 109+ navel to ground. I’d say you have long legs for your height, but not at all extraordinarily long by any means. What’s strange is your navel to ground measurement, it’s pretty short given your height and the fact your longs are a bit long. Anyway, your body isn’t too extreme, so I don’t think you’ll have any problems finding a bike to fit you well. From my “fantastic” models/calculations, I’d recommend a 180mm set of cranks with whatever bike you end up getting.
all this cm talk just messes me up but i’m 6’3" with a 37 in inseam and have always been told i have super long legs…someone else can convert that into cm’s if they want, i’m southern and stubborn that way. and on a side note, it’s tough finding pants long enough that fit in the waist too…you try finding 32/36+ pants at the mall!!!
The nice thing about the metric system is that it’s more exact. I say I’m 5’10", yet 177cm is closer, but I’m not going to tell somebody I’m 5’9 & 3/4", because then it sounds like I have issues with my height, even if I’m just trying to be precise. When it comes to fitting, the more precise the better. I’m sure you are neither 6’3" on the dot nor have an inseam of 37" on the dot, so a measurement in centimeters would be better, and if you had somebody else taking the measurement you might even be able to pull off millimeters with accuracy. But you are stubborn, so who really cares. You do have some spider legs for your height though, assuming of course that your measurements are spot on.
very well put, i think i have seem the light. i guess the more i get into the cycling thing the more i’ll worry about those precise measurments. for now, i just kinda put my seatpost at a height at a height that looked and felt right and that’s where it has stayed…for now. come to think of it, i guess i kinda use the metric system by running the 1500 meters in track and 8k and 10k in cross country…i’m more cultured than i gave myself credit for after all!!!