Women's Specific Fit bikes?

cricketk

I'm curious - how many women are riding (or thinking about riding) women's specific fit bikes (WSF)?

I've read the blurbs about WSF being designed for:

• longer legs,
• shorter torsos,
• shorter arms,
• smaller hands, and
• narrower shoulders than men...

so I mostly thought that a WSF bike wouldn't really fit me properly, as I have not been gifted with leg-length and have about the same shoulder width and handsize as most men my height (5'8'').

I happened to pretty much luck into getting an entry-level SUB road bike, and it feels like it was made for me. Either I am more of a standard female shape than I (and every single clothes designer in the world) thinks I am, or SUB is designing bikes for oddly shaped women.

I've never ridden a men's road bike to compare. My beloved is 6'4", so there's not much point in trying out his OCR.

Has anyone got experience in riding both sorts? Any tales to tell?

I'm pretty curious.

Partially I'm posting this in self-defence. There's a thread elsewhere on this site talking about sizing saddles based on distance between ischial tuberosities and I'm now trying desperately not to measure my bum.

alfeng

FWIW. Based on what I have seen women ride, I think the benefits of a "women's specific design(ed)" frame/etc. diminish for riders who are 5'2" (or, taller) since the frame for most riders is generally/frequently/whatever-and-whenever sized by the top tube length, now.

A woman I know who is about your height rides a 55cm (c-c, 56cm c-t) Colnago Master X-Lite which she chose based on the top tube length -- her current stem is 100mm (originally, a 90mm a half dozen years ago). While I used to ride a 57cm frame (I'm 5'9"), most of my frames are in the ~52cm (c-c) size with a ~120mm stem (54cm top tube), with my larger frames having shorter stems (i.e., the 57cm frame had a 90mm stem). The point is, that she could be riding the same frame that I am if she didn't want her handlebars slightly higher, or vice-versa.

Another woman (who I think is about 5'3") recently got a new Litespeed (I haven't seen it, yet) ... and, I don't think Litespeed has so-called WSD frames.

BTW. Most of the "racing" saddles are designed for the European racers who tend to be smaller than most "regular" riders ...

The Fizik "women's" saddles that I've seen don't look as peculiar as some of the others ...

A "standard" Brooks B17 (I've used both the "standard" & "narrow" + "regular"/plastic saddles) is as wide as a contemporary "woman's" saddle ... maybe, wider!?! THAT underscores someone else's observation that, beyond finally providing "nice" bikes for women who are shorter than 5'0", some of the WSD hype is marketing.

BTW2. With regard to shoes, SIDI apparently have the narrowest shoes for women (if that is ever an issue for anyone).

Jewls4me

I'm 5'8" and have a 2003 Terry Isis. Love my bike. It just about fits me like a glove. I also know of another female cyclist who happens to have the same bike but in a smaller frame size. She loves her bike. I test-rode a number of bikes before I settled on the Terry. Part of my concerns with bikes is that I don't want to aggravate existing back problems.

Ultimately it comes down to what makes you feel comfortable and what it will cost to make you feel comfortable on the bike. WSD bikes may work for you or they may not. You have to test ride the bikes to see if they suit you.

LaDolceVita

I'm probably replying to this out of ignorance, as I don't have a whole lot of experience yet. I'm pretty new to more serious cycling. I've just starting riding my Specialized Dolce but I really like it. It fits really well. It's a 54 cm and I'm 5'7". My beloved, who got me into this, is 5'5" and rides a 52 cm. His legs are shorter but his torso and arms are longer, which coincides with the design of the WSF, right? The guy at the bike store also said that the handlebars are narrower and something about the brakes being closer or easier to grasp for smaller hands on the WSF. I like my bike better -- just fits better. My legs are too long for his. And another thing, the saddle is a little softer than his.

However, I have ridden on a 54 cm men's Giant bike and it fit really nice. I could ride either. But I do like the narrower fit better.

hilaryworton

I've been wondering the same thing as I'm looking to buy a new road bike. After reading as much blurb as I could find on the subject on the internet I convinced myself that a women's specific design was the way to go however I was getting conflicting advice from the shops I visited. Today I found a bikesizing.com facility who measured me up and told me that I have short legs (boo! ) and a long torso so a men's bike is likely to be more comfortable for me. I've tried out a few of both and as a relative novice I have to say I didn't notice much difference in the frame itself. What does seem to make a difference is the smaller bars that get put on the WSD bikes and the smaller distance in the hand position between brakes and shifters. The other thing that really seems to affect comfort for me is finding a bike with the right top tube length. So I think I'll be going for a man's frame (of the right size which for me is around 49-52" and 540 reach) but will have womens type bars and shifters - campag do a specific womens version and shimano have an extra 'bit' that fits onto their standard kit.

mb123

I started riding with a women's specialized Dolce and then upgraded to a men's Scott CR1. The men's bike fits me better because I was able to spec out the bike instead of getting what came with it from the factory. The women's Dolce had handlebars wide enough for a linebacker. The stem was also too long on the factory built bike.

For my Scott I chose smaller width handlebars that fit appropriately. I also changed component groups from Shimano to Campy because Campy has smaller brake levers and the thumb shifters favor smaller hands as well. The stem on a men's bike can be changed out to adjust your reach distance. With any bike you'll probably want to specify your saddle since preference is personal and varies widely from person to person.

Some men's frames are being made in sizes down to 47 or 49 cm, depending on manufacturer and frame type.

Thus the issue at hand in my opinion is not men's vs women's bikes, but rather that every part of the bike should contribute to the proper overall fit.

GinaNY

I have the Jamis Quest women's specific and it fits beautifully. I'm almost 5' 3" and I do have longer legs, proportionally. The handlebars are closer together and that is about the biggest thing. When I tried out a road bike, it was not fit to me as well as this one and I really felt the difference. Again, I think if you're really petite (ie short) it makes more of a difference, but as said by others, if you get the right components, it'll work too. One thing I did need was a longer post than came with the bike - again, long legs for my height.

__________________
GinaNY

surfinbernard

I'm not an expert of any kind, but my last bike was a ladies mountain bike and I found that the reach between the seat and the bars was too short making me feel cramped and burning my butt cheeks on climbs. The frame was the right size for me, as larga as I could have gone as the seat was all the way down on it, but it was still too close between the seat and the bars. My new bike is a gents frame which, although a smaller frame, is a slightly longer reach. Although I'm still getting used to the 'twitchy' steering on it, I'm much happier with the reach on it than on the last one. Admittedly it is a much better bike all round, but just on comfort and the riding position, I would go for a gents frame in future for the reasons above. I suppose if you are longer in the leg you may prefer a ladies' frame. I'm 5'4'' and have quite short legs.

SB