Frame size, new bike fitting, questions

[octav]

I want to buy for my girlfriend a road bike. Her height is 160cm.
The options are Cube Axial WLS Pro 47 size ; with 515 mm top tube and 140 HeadTube
http://www.cube.eu/en/bikes/woman-like- ... hred-2015/
The other options is a Scott COntessa 15 ; either size XS or XXS
XXS has 505 mm toptube and 111mm headtube
XS has 515 toptube and 116mm headtube
http://www.scott-sports.com/global/en/p ... r-15-Bike/

What would you recommend better for Scott? XS or XXS?
For Cube, it would be the smallest frame, so the option is quite simple
Thanks

[GT56]

Hey, I'm currently looking into a new bike as my old frame broke down on a accident.
Currently thinking of buying a Infinito CV but I'm bit on doubt about the size. My previous bike was a Focus Cayo size 54 and I am doubting between the 53 or 55 Infinito CV. I can't test drive them so have to go from the sizing chart, a friend of mine has the older infinito in 53, but his saddle is allot lower and the bike felt really small because of that.

The sizes: Seat tube / Top tube / Head tube/ Reach / Stack
Focus 54 : 54,0 / 55,2 / 14,5 / 38,7 / 54,1
Infinito 53: 50,0 / 53,5 / 15,5 / 37,3 / 55,1
Infinito 55: 52,0 / 55,0 / 17,0 / 38,1 / 56,7

The reason I'm not sure on the size is because my current bike had a 10mm shorter stem and I think around 2,5 cm of spacers. This would make the 55 (with the 17,0 head tube) perfect, but if I ever want to sit deeper I can't because the stem is slammed. My bike fitter advised a 50, which is definitely too small (i think he was confused with the 53 as that one has a 50 seat tube) with a 10mm longer stem. Knowing this the 53 seems logical but I'm just a bit scared that it might be too small (like my friends bike) or that i still end up with a spacer tower (which i want to avoid), Definitely don't want more then 2/3 spacers.

Do you think the 53 is best as well? Thanks for any advice.

look at the stack values !

the 53 infinito is 10 mm higher than the focus

the reach being 14 mm shorter means you need a longer stem

how tall are you ?

[Rondje]

I am 1,78m. My bike fitter also said I would need a 10mm longer stem then what i currently have on my focus.

[GT56]

I am 1,78m. My bike fitter also said I would need a 10mm longer stem then what i currently have on my focus.

53 will do the job

[stubob]

Since it's still winter in Colorado, I'm daydreaming about my dream bike, but I can't seem to find the size I think I should be. My current bike is a 54cm CAAD9, 100cm stem and Ritchey Classic curve bars and 172.5mm cranks. From where I feel most comfortable on the saddle, I feel too stretched out to the bars, so I think I'd be comfortable on a smaller size. The problem is almost every bike I've looked at has the same reach, but just more drop with the smaller frame.

For example, a CAAD9 54cm has stack/reach of 546/383, but the 52 is 529/382. Drop almost an inch down, but no further back. The 52 does have a steeper seat angle, but wouldn't that just make the reach even longer, since I'd have to set the saddle farther back to get the same position over the BB?

I've played around with BikeCAD and tried to figure out effective seat-to-bars dimensions, but nothing seems to make much difference. The best dimensions I can see so far is a small TCR with stack/reach of 536/374, which theoretically cuts 5mm from seat-to-bars.

I can handle some additional drop on the front end, especially if the ergo bars raise the hoods up a corresponding amount, but I just don't like feeling so stretched out that my hips feel restricted.

After that wall of text, any advice?

[spiderghost]

Put a a 90mm stem on.

[dumptruk]

I ride a Cannondale Supersix in 56cm, and a Cannondale Slice in 54. I recently switched shoes a few weeks ago. After long periods of pushing hard (say, up a hill), my big toe on my right foot falls asleep and I start getting this painful twinge in my right knee. After spending less than a minute going easy, the numbness and pain goes away, until I start cranking again. I'm not noticing my saddle being too high or too low, nor do I notice my toes pointing upward or downward. Having been fit a year ago, the fitter recognized that I pronate in my right foot, and used the BGFit shims to fix it. I transferred this shim to my new shoes, and the pain persists. My new shoes are within 1mm stack height of my old shoes.

[random101]

Question I ride a 54 (181cm~)

Do people generally go for the same sized Track bike frames or do they go bigger/smaller? Stay the same?

There is a 53 that I'm interested in (obviously riding it would be ideal, and bike fits vary alot) but is there a rule of thumb whether people tend to ride a size larger or smaller on the track then the road?

Cheers

[Fiery]

Since it's still winter in Colorado, I'm daydreaming about my dream bike, but I can't seem to find the size I think I should be. My current bike is a 54cm CAAD9, 100cm stem and Ritchey Classic curve bars and 172.5mm cranks. From where I feel most comfortable on the saddle, I feel too stretched out to the bars, so I think I'd be comfortable on a smaller size. The problem is almost every bike I've looked at has the same reach, but just more drop with the smaller frame.

For example, a CAAD9 54cm has stack/reach of 546/383, but the 52 is 529/382. Drop almost an inch down, but no further back. The 52 does have a steeper seat angle, but wouldn't that just make the reach even longer, since I'd have to set the saddle farther back to get the same position over the BB?

I've played around with BikeCAD and tried to figure out effective seat-to-bars dimensions, but nothing seems to make much difference. The best dimensions I can see so far is a small TCR with stack/reach of 536/374, which theoretically cuts 5mm from seat-to-bars.

I can handle some additional drop on the front end, especially if the ergo bars raise the hoods up a corresponding amount, but I just don't like feeling so stretched out that my hips feel restricted.

After that wall of text, any advice?

This is exactly why reach/stack as it is right now is not really a good measurement. You see, reach is measured at the same point as the stack - so the reach for a 52 is measured some 17 mm lower than for a 54, and when you raise the handlebar you also decrease the reach because the headtube is angled towards the saddle. Regarding the seat tube angle, it doesn't matter - the reach is measured from the BB, and two bikes with the same stack and reach will fit the same when the saddle position is the same, no matter what the STA is.

But your main problem seems to be that you are looking only at full-on race geometry bikes. Take a look at the Cannondale Synapse for example, the size 54 has both more stack and less reach than the CAAD9, while the 51 has similar stack but drastically less reach. Most other manufacturers offer similar endurance geometry models for a more upright riding position, so there is a lot of choice out there.

[stubob]

I really wasn't complaining, just observing how similar all these frames are across the board (+/- 10 mm saddle-to-bars), and how long the smaller sizes are. I can handle more drop, but I'd like a shorter reach. But with very few exceptions, the smaller size of the same frame has almost the same saddle-to-bars as the larger frame.

You'd mentioned sportif frames, and even those have the same problem: small frames have the same reach as the larger frame. I looked at the Roubaix numbers, and the 52 has 17mm more drop, but only 1 mm less reach. Overall, the reach is slightly less than my CAAD, but not nearly as much as I'd expect.

It just seemed really weird that the "smaller" size would fit longer than the larger size. I guess what I'm missing is that for equivalent drop, the smaller size would fit smaller.

[jeffy]

i have found some brands tend to be 'short' (Giant / Canyon), and some tend to be long (Spec / 'Dale) whilst others go for Mental (Focus) it is only 10mm-30mm here and there but it makes a massive difference.

[bungis]

Question I ride a 54 (181cm~)

Do people generally go for the same sized Track bike frames or do they go bigger/smaller? Stay the same?

There is a 53 that I'm interested in (obviously riding it would be ideal, and bike fits vary alot) but is there a rule of thumb whether people tend to ride a size larger or smaller on the track then the road?

Cheers

Probably depends on if you're a sprinter or endurance track rider. Sprinters would most likely not want to size up from their road size.

Track sprint handlebars generally have deeper drops so you'll want to keep stack height in mind.

[bungis]

Any tips on dealing with major arm length differences in terms of fitting?

One of my arms is approximately 6cm longer than the other, probably from playing so much baseball. I'm wondering if that's contributing to my weaving on the rollers.

[Stancke]

I'm wondering what size of frame you guys would advise me...

Lenght: 180cm
Inner leg length: 83.8cm
Torso length: 61.5cm
Arm length: 61cm
Shoulder with: 45.7cm

I'm doubting between a 54 or 56... but some say I don't fit with an aero frame due to my body.

[twoangstroms]

I'm not sure if this is on- or off-topic for this thread, but I'm getting really interested in gravel grind/that kind of rides and racing. After years of road, mountain, and track racing, coaches and pro fits have pretty much dialed me in there. But what should one keep in mind for gravel bikes??? Do I want a shorter top tube, higher stack, which what the now? For reference, my last team bike was a 54cm Felt F series (a tad on the large side for me, but the smaller size didn't have enough saddle setback, which is key for my proportionately long femurs).

Thoughts?