Guide to finding the right bike for you:
Just because you can stand over it doesn’t mean that it fits you.
For many short women, stand over height is the first criteria that they use in sizing a bike.
When your inseam is 28″ or less, standing over a road frame can be challenging. The standard rule for sizing a bike is 1-3cm clearance between you and the top tube. Unless the frame has an extreme slope to the top tube, there most likely will be no stand over height for women under 5′ tall. However, even for taller women, standing over the bike is not the key measurement to ensure a successful fitting – in fact, for many women this measure will lead them in the wrong direction. Why?
It’s TOB TUBE LENGTH that is most important in sizing your bike. Tradition has always been that changing your stem length is the key to finding the right cockpit length. Although this works fine if you are a 5′10″ guy that can ride anything from a 55 to a 59cm frame, with tiny women, the options for stem length aren’t as numerous. A typical woman under 5′ tall would need a top tube of 50cm or shorter. Most small frames that are standard sizes for men have a minimum of a 51cm top tube length. If the frame comes with a 90mm stem, there is not a lot of room to shorten the overall reach. Look in any catalog or shop at stems; 80mm is about as short as you can find from most manufacturers.
So what do you look for in a frame that will fit? Before checking any other specs on the bike, check the top tube length. If the center to center (c-c) length of the top tube is a 50 or shorter, then this bike should be considered as a possibility.
When I first started riding, there were very few options for someone of my size in the world of road bikes. Only one company was making woman specific bikes: Terry Precision Bicycles. If you aren’t familiar with Terry bikes, they often use a 24″ front wheel with a standard 700c rear wheel. This unusual set up allows for a top tube short enough to fit a petite rider, but not create the dreaded toe tire overlap
What is toe/tire overlap?
If you are a normal size person, this is will never be an issue for you. ( However, if you’re a normal size person, why would you be reading this website anyway?) But very short riders requiring very short top tubes end up with a limited amount of space between the front wheel and the downtube of the frame. The problem arrives when your foot and pedal is in the 3 o’clock position in the pedal stroke. As you pedal forward the crank delivers you foot closer towards the front wheel. On smaller bikes with short top tubes, it is common for the rider’s foot to actually overlap the plane of space that the wheel occupies. If you are traveling forward in a straight line, then there is no problem. But turn your front wheel slightly and your foot will catch the wheel and launch you to the pavement. I speak from experience.
So Terry bikes use a smaller front wheel on their smaller frames to eliminate this problem. This is a good idea, and if you are looking for a recreational bike for fitness riding, then a Terry is a perfect choice for you. However, there are problems with Terry bikes. A small problem with the two separate wheel sizes is the need to carry two separate size spare tubes–not a big price to pay for comfort and fit. However, the second problem is a bit more complex: if you want to race, USCF and UCI guidelines state that the wheels on your bike must be the same size. It was a trend in the mid 80’s to late 90’s to use the 24″ front wheel on time trial bikes. This set up allowed riders to get into a lower, more aerodynamic position. But as with most technological innovation, whenever the UCI gets wind of it that it might actually give someone an advantage, they make said innovation illegal in competition. Terry recognized this problem and is now making their high end racing model, the Fast Woman, with a pair of 650c wheels on their smaller sizes. They are also making the Valkyrie, a cyclocross/commuter/touring bike with dual size 26″ mountain bike wheels on the smaller sizes and 700c wheels on the largest size.
What’s the deal with compact frames?
When I began riding in 1998, compact frames were a new idea in frame design. My first racing bike was a Cannondale R600C. The “C” stood for compact. At the time, compact geometry was unusual and only a few companies used it. In a compact frame, the top tube slopes down from the headtube towards the seat tube, similar to a small mountain bike frame. When Cannondale designed their compact frame, they did so with the purpose of making a frame to fit smaller people (what a concept!). Cannondale used 650c wheels on these small frames to eliminate the toe/tire overlap problem. The smaller frames with smaller wheels and sloping top tubes enabled little riders to stand over the bike, reach the handlebars, and pedal through corners without falling. I cannot thank Cannondale enough for popularizing this concept for frame builders.
By 2001 compact geometry was catching on in the pro peloton for a different reason: weight savings. Frame manufacturers discovered that they could make a “full size” bike with a sloping top tube and use less actual frame material, thus reducing frame weight. More and more companies hopped on the “compact geometry” bandwagon. Giant introduced a full line of compact frames with a rather novel sizing system: instead of offering frames in the traditional 2cm increments from 48 – 60, they simply offered 3 sizes: Small, Medium, and Large. The idea was that the compact geometry combined with varying stem lengths and saddle heights could accommodate most riders.
This created an unusual phenomenon: small women could stand over the small Giant frames. However, the ’small’ frame was designed to be the equivalent of a 48 – 53 cm standard geometry. The top tube lengths on the bikes were usually 51-53 cm, too long for most little women. But many shops sold these bikes to women racers, and a lot of women racers were riding bikes that stretched them out too much. Being too stretched out causes problems with handling, biomechanics, etc. Since the Giant frames hit the market, other companies like Specialized and Klein had made similar frames. However, they too have long top tubes
What’s the difference between a women specific bike and a really small bike?
Glad you asked. Women specific bikes have a number of features, ranging from frame geometry to components, that are designed to make the bike more comfortable for women riders. Many of these features are not necessary on a racing bike. In fact, some of these features will put you at a disadvantage when it comes to racing. For recreational fitness riders, these features can be a positive enhancement. Decide on your goals as a cyclist and what you plan on using the bike for. Then you can determine if you need woman specific components or not.
One of the biggest issues that I have with companies that make “Women Specific Bikes” is the use of triple chain rings. They market the bike to women and include among the specs a “triple chain ring to offer women a wider variety of gear options”. This is a politically correct way of saying that women can’t handle a double chain ring and need that granny gear. This is a complete and total load of crap.
Being a woman does not make your legs weak, and you are perfectly capable of riding with a double chain ring. Many women get into cycling after having spent a number of years in another sport. Four seasons of playing high school field hockey or swimming in college will have strengthened and conditioned your body adequately to handle the demands of cycling. I am not sure why bike companies insist on including triple crank sets on their women’s models, but I find it insulting. If you race, you will never encounter a need for the granny gear, with the exception of some hill climb events. I have never used a triple chain ring on a road bike; even in the Mt. Washington hill climb, I used a double chain ring and a mountain bike cassette. My gearing was a 38×34. This was adequate for the World’s Toughest Hill climb. Again, if recreational fitness riding is your goal, then there is no reason to shun the triple, especially if you live and ride in an area with a lot of long steep climbs. However, a racer should be able to handle almost any type of terrain with a double chain ring. On the rare occasion that a 39×27 will not be enough gear for you, then you can opt for a compact crank set.
Crank length: If you are under 5 feet tall, you should be using 165mm cranks. They usually come as the stock size on smaller bikes. Some riders might prefer a 167.5mm crank. They are hard to find in newer product lines but they do exist, and they may be the perfect choice for women who find 165s too short but 170s a bit too long.
Short Reach Brake Levers: You want these. Trust me. In the years before STI, Diacompe made short reach brake levers for small hands. Terry used these on their road bikes, back when down tube or bar end shifters were in vogue. Fifteen years after the conversion to integrated shift and brake lever systems, Shimano is finally making short reach STI levers. They introduced the design on the Ultegra model, and have recently released the R600 and R700 level model,s which are comparable to Ultegra and Dura Ace components.
Handle bars: Many women specific bikes use 36-38mm handle bars. This makes sense since most small women have narrow shoulders. I have used both narrow 38 or 40cm bars as well as wider 42cm bars. I actually prefer the wider bars. In an aggressive pack of riders it is easier to throw elbows out and get where you want to go. I also find it easier to open up my torso and breathe. This will be a personal preference for you, so experiment with both. The important thing is that you get bars that are comfortable. Salsa is making a set of Poco bars that are designed with a shallower drop and narrow width for women. If you ride in the drops a lot, ergonomic bars are a better choice since they provide a flat surface for you to rest your hands on and comfortably reach your brakes.
Saddles: Finally, a product that offers a variety of options from every manufacturer. For reasons that we won’t go into here, the men in the bike industry seemed to focus on the one part of a woman’s anatomy that was the most different from theirs and started making appropriate equipment. Of course, it was a woman (Georgena Terry, founder of Terry Precision Cycles) that first designed the woman specific saddle.. The Liberator was the original women’s saddle designed for serious women cyclists. Since the innovation of the Liberator, Terry has expanded their line for both women and men, and now offers high end racing saddles in a variety of styles for women. Other companies also make racing saddles for women, among them Selle Italia, Selle San Marco, Specialized, WTB, and Fi’zi:k. Saddle choice is entirely personal, and is determined by riding style, hip width, and body fat distribution. Many women racers prefer a narrower, lighter, harder racing saddle. In fact, some women racers do not use women specific saddles. Again, this is a personal issue
One of the biggest misconceptions for women is that they need a wider, shorter saddle. If you are a tiny, 4′10″ woman with a narrow waist and hips, you might find a traditional wider saddle too wide. This can lead to chafing and discomfort along the inner thighs. I find most women’s saddles too wide for me; my hips are only 32″ and I wear clothing ranging from a kids’ medium to a women’s size 1. If you have narrow hips, consider a men’s saddle, you might find it more comfortable.
Often, the saddle is the source of the most discomfort for women on the bike. In many cases, it isn’t the saddle that is causing the pain, it’s an improperly fitted bike. A common cause for soreness in the crotch is being too stretched out on the bike. The farther away your handle bars are, the more you will have to reach forward, thus rolling your pelvis forward and putting pressure on soft tissue. This will cause numbness and pain almost instantly on a bike ride. If you find that you are sore on the saddle, check the top tube and stem length to make sure that you are not too stretched out on your frame.
