Frame size, new bike fitting, questions

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
Bliquid
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2017 9:50 pm

by Bliquid

andytan wrote:Hi Guys, I just ordered the canyon ultimate slx 8.0 disc in size S (https://www.canyon.com/en/road/ultimate ... c-8-0.html). My height is 175cm, inseam 78cm ( short legs)
:). My saddle height on my current bike is 71.5cm. Will I have enough saddle to bar drop height if I use size S ? or should I just get it in XS? thx before :)


I'm the same height as you with slightly longer legs. I ride a Small Ultimate, saddle height around 75cm. The bike comes with a good few centimetres worth of spacers on it, so you can easily increase your drop by removing some of them

by Weenie


User avatar
Ivan
Posts: 354
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2003 7:11 pm
Contact:

by Ivan

I have a question regarding Canyon Ultimate CF SL/SLX geo. I am looking into buying one but I am used to judging my size based on head tube/top tube/BB drop. Unfortunately, BB drop is not mentioned on the Canyon website. I asked via the chat on Canyon's webiste and BB drop was slightly less then 7 cm. Then again, there is a review from Cyclist:
http://www.cyclist.co.uk/reviews/1699/c ... -90-review

They measured the BB drop as 77 mm. I just want to know who is right. Can someone with a canyon ultimate CF SL/SLX in size L please measure the BB drop for me ? Thanks !
He ride a bike instead of a car I wanna be his friend
Golden Earring - Going to the run

peted76
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:30 pm

by peted76

Hi I'm in the market for bit of a do it all bike, but with a heavy lean towards the road, I'd like some wide tyre clearance for a bit of off roading and I want a bike which I can ride in winter with mudguards... if I could have a crack at a CX race it'd be a bonus but I'm not too fussed.

The idea is I'll set it up as a 'road bike' primarily but might invest in another set of wheels for anything to do with mud and grass in future.

I figure I want room for up to 38mm rubber, provision for proper mudguards, a 2x groupset and I'm leaning towards hydro discs mainly because as soon as you look for anything with tyre clearance you need discs and I hear non hydro discs are where it's at.

So I've been around the houses a bit looking for this spec within my price range (circa 3.3k GBP all told). There are some very uninspiring carbon bikes out there and a growing number of 1x bikes. Neither of which I'm very keen on. I'd love a nice titanium bike but I think I'm hovering around the 'can't afford it' area.. also I'm a bit ignorant to the magic of Ti and don't understand why PlanetX can offer a bike at £700 and Van Nick are three times that for a frame.

It is unusual that I can actually spend money on a bike with free hands so I want to make the purchase count. I want to plan to ride this bike for a decade.

I've narrowed my choices down to the:
J.Laverack J.ACK (Titanium beauty which ticks all the boxes - but has a huge question mark on the sizing (24mm higher stack than I'm riding now!!)
Mason Definition (which looks beautiful and fits price range, it won't take me offroad, max 33mm tyre, but I still love it)
Reilly Gradient (Titanium, ticks all the boxes - but has a huge question mark on the sizing)
Shand Stooshie (Ticks all the boxes and I can have my own paint job done, but although light steel is still on the heavier side of these bikes)
Kinesis PRO6 Disc - (ticks all the boxes and allows me to buy a second set of wheels from the off, but is a proper CX bike and may not suit long multi day rides in the saddle for example.

I've included my current Giant TCR in the below numbers, I get it's low and racy but I don't really get what it means to me when comparing against other bikes.. I have had a bike fit and can provide numbers if that helps.. I'm really after a bit of guidance before I go crazy.

STACK REACH
TCR (S) 529 378
Kinesis PRO6 Disc (51) 522 375.3
Reilly Graidient (52) 531 384
Mason Bokeh (50) 537.9 363.3
Mason Definition (50) 543 380
J.Laverack - J.ACK (52) 553 370
Shand Stooshie (XS) 558 358
Shand Stooshie (S) 570 368

I am concerned about sizing on these.. in particular the JLaverack J.ACK which until I saw the huge stack was the front runner.
I should also note that I really can't actually sit on these bikes prior to purchase.. as much as I'd love to, all but the JLaverack are just too far from me, hence why I come to the internet hive mind that is WW, for your opinion and expertise.

Here are my bike fit measurements:
Saddle top to crank centre 678
Saddle tip to head bolt 385
Saddle tip to hoods 640
Stem length 100
Crank length 170
Saddle to bar drop (bar centreline) 67
Saddle set back (tip to crank centre) 30
Inseam measurement 77.5

Any comments about sizing or in particular any other bike or build options are welcomed.
Thanks in advance
Attachments
Stackreach.jpg

Raccooningtanuki
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2016 7:30 am

by Raccooningtanuki

Rodrego Hernandez wrote:Get a bike fit. In a proper shop. By someone who knows what they are doing.

Bought both my bikes sight unseen and they've worked for 150km+ rides.

waltthizzney
Posts: 197
Joined: Mon Jun 20, 2016 6:35 pm

by waltthizzney

Hey guys,

I have my heart set on a Ritchey Road Logic, but I am stuck in between sizes of 51cm and 53cm. Any input? I am sort of worried that 115mm headtube may be a little short, however the TT almost matches what I ride now basically which is a 535mm, don't think 3mm will make a difference, my current HT is 120mm on my FM066. For me to get a 51cm to work, I was thinking riding a 130mm -7 stem. However, I dont want an ultra aggressive set up as I want this to be my winter / exploring bike. Here is the geo;

Image

I am 5.9 and currently ride a 52cm FM066 with a slammed -17 120mm stem

Image

Here is the bike set up for reference

Image

The other bike I was looking at was the Holdsworth Competition Frameset in small

Image

3Pio
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2016 7:13 pm

by 3Pio

Im also 5.9" (175 cm), with inseam of 82.5 and riding Colnago C60 in 50S. And also thinking about Road Logic frame. But im almost sure for me will be 53 size, since 51 will be too agressive (based on stack comparation to my C60 in 50S size). The C60 im riding is with 12 mm spacers under the stem, using 110mm -7 deg stem.

If u are ok with ur bike right now and u are riding with -17 stem, seem that u can go for 51 cm and riding with -7 deg stem. Also the geometry u posted about Ritchey is for Gray (older model), the new one (blue), have a bit of different geometry.

I wonder what is ur inseam?

megl
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:58 pm

by megl

I'm using the Fit Calculator from Competitive Cyclist and based on my measures it suggests I need a bike with a top tube of length 55 or 56 cm. I'm 6'5 so it seems pretty short. Is the calculator right - do I need such a short frame?

My measures based on the competitive cyclist are:

Actual Inseam 95 Cm
Trunk 68 Cm
Forearm 35 Cm
Arm 68 Cm
Thigh 67.5 Cm
Lower Leg 62 Cm
Sternal Notch 161.5 Cm
Total Height 195 Cm

And the Eddy Fit suggests:

Top Tube Length 55.4 - 55.8 Cm
Seat Tube Range CC 62.8 - 63.2 Cm
Seat Tube Range CT 64.6 - 65.2 Cm
Stem Length 10.7 - 11.3 Cm
BB Saddle Position 84.7 - 86.7 Cm
Saddle Handlebar 56.9 - 57.5 Cm
Saddle Setback 9.4 - 9.8 Cm
Seatpost Type Setback

jemima
Posts: 78
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Perth

by jemima

@megl

Maybe? i.e. if you're all legs with arms a bit on the short side.

Your thigh proportions are probably sitting you back, also > pointing toward a shorter frame 'reach'.

That is what I am, though I'm not your height. Perhaps someone might come along with similar proportions to you, and comment.

Fiery
Posts: 359
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 9:21 am

by Fiery

That calculator has been way off for me, suggesting 3-5 cm less reach than I actually need, and I don't even have unusual proportions. It may be an error in measuring or it may be an error in their calculations, but I would definitely not trust it for buying a bike without trying first. If it seems off, it most likely is off.

cyclenutnz
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

megl wrote:
Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:40 pm
I'm using the Fit Calculator from Competitive Cyclist and based on my measures it suggests I need a bike with a top tube of length 55 or 56 cm. I'm 6'5 so it seems pretty short. Is the calculator right - do I need such a short frame?
That suggested position is not great. This should be more realistic (note, I created the system so may be biased)
ww.PNG
http://www.speedtheory.co.nz
http://www.velogicfit.com - 3D Motion Capture and Frame Finder Software

megl
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:58 pm

by megl

Awesome - thanks a lot cyclenutnz!! I'm riding 60/62 frames now and had a hunch that I need a smaller frame, but the suggestion from Competitive Cyclist seemed ridiculously small. The fit you suggest still seems like a small frame for my height(?), but I think it actually might be spot on for me. Makes me want to find a frame and build right away :-)

cyclenutnz
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

megl wrote:
Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:10 am
The fit you suggest still seems like a small frame for my height(?), but I think it actually might be spot on for me. Makes me want to find a frame and build right away :-)
You and I have basically the same dimensions so get essentially the same results. This calculation is for a 'Race' position (~10cm drop to bars) - if I set it to 'Sport' you would see larger frames to get the bars higher.

But the 'Race' mode is not hardcore race - my bars a 30mm lower and 20mm longer stem than the system outputs. Because no one should be put into my position (road racing since I was 12) based off body measurements and formulae.

If you want a more stable, all day bike, you would size up. But a 58 Cervelo would allow you room to stretch out or be a little higher without compromising handling
http://www.speedtheory.co.nz
http://www.velogicfit.com - 3D Motion Capture and Frame Finder Software

megl
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 12:58 pm

by megl

Thanks a lot! Today I've tried a Canyon Endurace with a similar top tube length, but the head tube is much longer than on a 58 Cervelo, so the position is more "sporty" than "race". It seems to fit me incredibly well.

What frame(s) do you ride?

cyclenutnz
Posts: 756
Joined: Tue Jul 18, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Cambridge, New Zealand
Contact:

by cyclenutnz

megl wrote:
Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:42 pm
What frame(s) do you ride?
My race and training bikes are these:
megl.JPG
Endurace has 23mm more stack than a 58cm Cervelo S3/2. 40mm more than my S5 - so yes - definitely suited to a higher bar position.
http://www.speedtheory.co.nz
http://www.velogicfit.com - 3D Motion Capture and Frame Finder Software

Evanum
Posts: 3
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:18 pm

by Evanum

Have a Chas Bland going spare, very nicely built 531c, sizes as...

HT 165mm,
ST C/C 565mm,
TT C/C 560mm,
Standover 830mm,
Bottom bkt 280mm.

Im 510 to 511 and it fits me, built as a crit frame so the bb is a little higher...so you can corner even quicker. Rides as a good as a steel frame should.

Based in Gloucester.

Carl.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post