HOT: Active* forum members generally gain 5% discount at starbike.com store!
Weight Weenies
* FAQ    * Search    * Trending Topics
* Login   * Register
HOME Listings Articles FAQ Contact About




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 05, 2009 9:40 am
Posts: 414
Location: Switzerland
i looked at a number of geo tables, but there aren't any with stack heights of 600 that have a reach of less than 395

staying with cervelo (as reference only :)) you could consider going down one size to 56 - stack = 580 reach is 387 so frame reach is 9 mm less. also decrease stem lenght to 110. if you want to keep the handlebar drop the same, you would have to add 25 mm of spacers though......


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 1:40 pm 


Top
  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:22 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Les Pays Bas
You're absolutely right. Tall bikes naturally come with (a relatively) long reach and that's not what I'm after necessarily. The Rose Xeon RS still looks like a relatively tall and relatively short bike to me, but I'll do some more number-crunching ;)

Regarding the "spacer tower": I feel I could lose at least another centimter in bar-height on my current bike, maybe even 1,5 cm but not much more. I could live with a 1 cm spacer though, or a cone shaped headset-cover.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:35 am
Posts: 5014
Location: New York
Get a frame that is one size smaller that will give you the shorter top tube.
You can adjust the seat height and bar reach with the stem and seat post.
The geometry will be fine.

_________________
I never took drugs to improve my performance at any time. I will be willing to stick my finger into a polygraph test if anyone with big media pull wants to take issue. If you buy a signed poster now it will not be tarnished later. --Graeme Obree


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:34 am
Posts: 98
Sjoerd wrote:
187 cm tall
91 / 92 cm inseam
I ride my saddle at 82 cm with 9,5 cm of setback
I have 10,5 cm of drop between saddle and bars, with a slammed stem and an extra thin headset-cover
The stem is 6 degrees angle and 120 mm long

So, long legs and short torso.

@ultimobici: the Cervelo is tall enough but feels too long. It's more a question of weight distribution than being unable to reach the bars. I'm quite light for my length, in the summer I go down to 60 kg and judging by feeling, most of that weight is on the rear wheel. A longer bike makes cornering harder for me. If you look at the size of the Rose, the bike looks shorter than the Cervelo with a relatively long seat tube, so I thought that it would fit me better. I need the height because of the saddle height, but I don't need the long top tube that ususally comes with it. I've had a 57 cm BMC Pro Machine (57,5 cm toptube, 18,7 cm headtube) which fit me much better than my current bike, but unfortunately I broke two frames and couldn't get a warranty replacement because they weren't being made anymore.


Your saddle is too high. It's higher than what even that old Lemond/Guimard formula recommends for your inseam, and that typically produces a high seat height which requires a long adaptation period for those who can tolerate it, and many can't. For an accurate saddle height do the heel on pedal test in your socks and add in the thickness of your shoe sole to get a starting saddle height. Saddle should be fairly far back in the clamp for this test -- at least at midrail. You should be able to pedal backwards smoothly and without hip rocking with heels on the pedals. With your shoes on and in a normal riding position, you should be able to drop your heel at least 1-2 cm below the horizontal pedal with the leg in the fully stretched position. If you can't then you have almost no bend in your leg when pedaling and are probably dipping your toes to achieve bend, which is inefficient. At your height, you should be on a frame that gives you about a 9cm drop to the bar with the saddle in the correct position. For your size, the top of saddle should be about 18 cm above the seat tube. That will give you a classic stage racing position and a sweet looking set up. Your Cervelo should be very close.

This is an excellent general reference, but you have to get the saddle height right first. I would not go by a static inseam measurement: http://de.scribd.com/doc/93309029/Bike- ... ve-Moulton


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:22 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Les Pays Bas
Thanks for your kind response, I appreciate that! Although I don't have the feeling that my saddle is up too high, out of curiosity I'll check how things are with the heel method you're mentioning.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:08 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:34 am
Posts: 98
Sjoerd wrote:
Thanks for your kind response, I appreciate that! Although I don't have the feeling that my saddle is up too high, out of curiosity I'll check how things are with the heel method you're mentioning.

Sure. Just a note: On Dave's chart, I would ignore the inseam measurement. Look at the other parameters of height, shoe size, etc. to get your frame size. Inseam measures are rarely taken correctly, and even Dave's method differs slightly from some of the others floating around. What matters is your actual saddle height, as it can throw off everything else if incorrect. Unless you have really wacky proportions, your Cervelo should be close. My guess is that your true saddle height is going to be around 78-79 based on the test.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:31 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:22 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Les Pays Bas
Can't access that chart since I am at work, but I'll look into it tonight.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 8:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:09 pm
Posts: 1227
Location: In the industry
Maybe a custom frame? Or move saddle forward slightly for weight distribution and see how that feels?

_________________
Fast falcons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3mTPEuFcWk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
www.falcobike.com
Facebook: falcobikeglobal


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 1:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2006 10:29 am
Posts: 3309
Location: Athens, Greece
With most modern frames having 4-6 sizes it is not that easy to find a really good fit. Colnago still has 12 or something sizes for that reason. A custom frame is another option.

_________________
My 6530gr Wilier Cento Uno
My 8618gr Colnago Master X-light


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 15, 2013 7:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 7:22 pm
Posts: 202
Location: Les Pays Bas
Wish I could afford a C59, but unfortunately that's not going to happen. Same goes for custom. And I would never go down that route without a proper fitting proces. Problem is, you read so many different stories on bike fitting and good / bad fitters. Steve Hogg mentions on his website he deals with clients that have been "professionally" fitted three times before they come to him. So that raises the question: when is a fitter a good fitter? And will I benefit from it?

Let's not forget that I'm able to ride my current bike without any (big) problems. In fact, I've ridden tons of miles (two Marmottes, two Maratone dles Dolomites, five Trois Ballons) on bikes that I consider a bit too large. They were fine but they never felt perfect. I just kept getting the feeling a smaller bike would suit me better. Maybe with roughly the same reach, but with my weight more on the front wheel.

My dad lent me his Orbea Orca (size 57) this week and although I had the feeling it would be too small, it fits very nicely! It has a 57 cm toptube and a 18,5 cm headtube (with a 1 cm spacer). It's given me enough confidence to order the Rose Xeon RS in size 59. If it doesn't fit well I'll let you guys know and you can all shout at me :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 11:36 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:34 pm
Posts: 53
I'm in need of a quick sanity check here before I have my LBS order up a new SLR01 frameset.

I'm 172.5 CM tall which puts me at the large end of the 50cm frame and the small end of the 53cm frame. Currently my favorite frame and best fitting frame is my old 54CM CAAD8 R1000 circa 2004 or 05. Based on my hack job measurements, the CAAD8 has a stack of 540mm and a reach of about 585mm. I'm running a 100mm, -6* stem that sits on the 1cm FSA headset cap with no extra spacers.

Based on my backwards math, I'm thinking that the 50cm SLR01 with a 110mm stem and a 10-15 mm of spacers on top of the headset cap should put my bars in almost the exact same spot as my CAAD8. If I go with the 53 SLR01, I think that I'd need a 90mm stem that would be slammed on top of the head tube to get the 110mm of saddle to bar drop that I run.

Sadly the local shop doesn't have a 50 or a 53 to test out to see what would work best.

Any thoughts???


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 12:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 11:13 pm
Posts: 547
Location: Denmark. Yeeees
I would go for the 53
They don't feel that long. So you could use a 100mm. stem, just as well.

_________________
Custom Rychtarski steel bike
Ridley X-ride 10


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 1:04 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:34 pm
Posts: 53
I managed to stumble across this while looking at some other stuff this morning.

Image

These measurements line up with what I was getting on my frame. The original CAAD8 had a shorter head tube and a longer seat tube, and less of a slope to the top tube than the newer one. This would put my stack and reach numbers close to what I believe they are.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 1:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:38 pm
Posts: 1058
Location: Toronto
looking at the 2 geometry charts, and the key measurements, the 53cm BMC is closer, slightly bigger.

STA is the same at 73.5 deg.

ETT is 55cm for BMC vs 54.5 for the CAAD

HT is 15.3 for BMC vs 14.6 for CAAD.

both measurements are 1cm smaller than CAAD for the 50cm BMC.

So if you need a more aggressive position, get the 50cm. Otherwise it's the 53.

_________________
There's sometimes a buggy.
How many drivers does a buggy have?

One.

So let's just say I'm drivin' this buggy...
and if you fix your attitude you can ride along with me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GekiIMh4ZkM


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed May 01, 2013 1:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 12:34 pm
Posts: 53
bikerjulio wrote:

So if you need a more aggressive position, get the 50cm. Otherwise it's the 53.


Never thought if it that way. I don't need a more aggressive position, in fact, I don't think I can get more aggressive with my position.

I did however decide to get scientific about the whole thing. I built a simple calculator in Excel and based off the measurements in Cannondale's chart I get these nubmers:

Stack= 556
Reach= 379

Very close to the newer CAAD8 surprisingly.

So it looks like I'll be going with the 53cm frame.


Top
 Profile  
 
Posted: Wed May 01, 2013 1:51 pm 


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 234 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 16  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], ghisallo2003, Google [Bot], olebole and 62 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

   Similar Topics   Author   Replies   Views   Last post 
There are no new unread posts for this topic. Fitting mechanical to a Di2 frame

in Road

CIANSUTCLIFFE

6

687

Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:41 pm

SuperDave View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Frame aesthetic questions

in Road

vdrey

7

521

Mon May 26, 2014 1:20 pm

bikerjulio View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Need advice on frame size

in Road

poppiholla

5

890

Thu Sep 26, 2013 10:54 pm

shimmeD View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Principia Revolution SX 2009 frame size information

in Road

hoojammyflip

7

736

Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:33 pm

Krull View the latest post

There are no new unread posts for this topic. Frame failure Carbon Road Bike

[ Go to page: 1, 2 ]

in Road

Tucker13

24

2059

Sun Aug 17, 2014 7:27 pm

mattr View the latest post


It is currently Thu Aug 21, 2014 12:04 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour




Advertising   –  FAQ   –  Contact   –  Convert   –  About

© Weight Weenies 2000-2013
hosted by starbike.com


How to get rid of these ads? Just register!


Powered by phpBB