BIKE SIZING TIPS FOR RIDERS AND STORES | WHY CONTEND SIZE S = EMONDA ALR SIZE 52

Hello in this video I will try to objectively tackle why reading off size charts from main manufacturers is futile and misleading.
The other day one client who was 170cms walked into a bikestore in Bangalore which I wont name. He asked for a Contend SL and Emonda ALR which
are compareable premium alloy bikes. Both sit somewhere in between race and endurance in terms of their geometry.
To my surprise he was suggested an S Contend SL but a 54 Emonda ALR. While this got me annoyed it was pretty obvious to me why this was
the case. Whoever, the store owner was, blindly trusted the size charts from the two manufacturers.
I will tell you why simultaneously suggesting an S Contend SL and a 54 Emonda ALR to the same client are absolutely incosnsistent.
We will talk later about which size structure is more accurate.
If you being 170 cms need an S contend you should be suggested a 52 Emonda ALR. Here is why. The best two metrics that
determine how long and low the bike is are effective top tube length and the stack. Now some people use reach in combination with the seat tube angle
and this is because reach takes care of the horizontal distance only upto the bottom bracket and ignores the bike behind that.
We have found effective top tube length to combine reach and seat tube angle quite well into one metric.
Of course stack does tell you how low the front end of the bike is.
Now let's assume that the S contend is the right size for the individual who is 170cm. Now please understand we are not stating its the right
size. We are assuming its the right size. If so the Emonda ALR size named 52 is 4mm longer at the effective top tube and 6mm higher at the stack.
Hence all other things like the stem handlebar width saddle being equal, the position of the emonda alr 52 would be very very close
to the S contend because there is only about 5mm in it horizontally and vertically.
If now you are looking at a 54 Emonda ALR as per Trek's size chart you are looking at a bike which has a 13mm longer effective top tube and
14 mm higher stack which you can say is a whole size up.
In general if the deviation in effective top tube is +-5mm you may assume its the same size. If its between 5-10mm its half a size larger or smaller
and if its 10-15mm that worth a size of difference.
Now my point is the store owner was seeing the size charts blindly instead of reading how long and low the bikes objectively are.
So suppose MR Tom who is 170 was well fitting on a S contend he should unequivocally be suggested a 52 Emonda ALR. Please understand
to reiterate, we are assuming that the S contend fits him well. We are not stating that everyone who is 170 should be riding an
S contend. This is a request to bike shops to have a more general idea using effective top tube lengths and stack which would
require experience but would pay dividends in the long run rather than using size charts from manufacturers which can make you go wrong
pretty easily as demonstrated. For what its worth
From our experience atleast a S contend fits someone who is 170 way way better than a 54 Emonda ALR.
I am not saying its the same for everyone who is 170 but atleast in 95% of the cases a bike with effective top tube of over 540 is just way too
big for someone who is 170 cms.
So my request to clients and bike store owners and staff is this. Please please dont read off size charts blindly. Instead
use objective measurements. Then you will go much less wrong when you are suggesting sizes across brands.

[@nitishsrivastava1496]

We all talk about buying the correct-sized frame, but no one knows how to read the charts. You're doing a great job helping us out, Ronit.

[@ronitdebnath]

Thanks Nitish.

[@jayeshudawat]

Thanks

[@kamaljeetsingh3377]

Sir my height is 189 cm which emonda sl5 size should i buy 58 or 60