Frame size, new bike fitting, questions

[MiddMan]

@Nejmann, what is your saddle to bottom bracket height? I think your bike looks okay, as it is, provided your comfortable. As outnumbered said, let us know your saddle to bar drop as well as your saddle to centre bb height. A 61 would of course have a longer top tube, about 2 cm according to specialized geometry chart. How do you currently feel with your reach, do you feel stretched out or I. A good position? I notice your bars are turned up slightly.

Do you ride frequently? (And were you a regular rider for some time?) I ask because neck and back pain are sometimes due to getting back into the sport. Speaking for myself anyway I was abroad and without my bike for a few years; in the beginning of the season I had a little soreness but now it's gone and I'm thinking of bringing my drop down a cm or so to try it out.

PS I'm a few cm shorter than you but with a cycling inseam 1 cm longer. It's hard to find an ideal fit as a tall rider but hang in there. I would recommend riding I'm about to pull the trigger on a C60, but I'm just double-checking my current position etc so that I'm confident with the size.

[Hiro]

above all Hed wheels best choice.

[floriansantana]

Hey guys,

I need some help please. My Fuji Altamira SL was stolen two weeks ago and I'm now looking for a new bike. I may get a very good deal on a S-Works Tarmac, but I'm not sure which frame size will fit me. I had the M/L of the Fuji frame and I'm not sure, if I need the 54 or 56 of the Tarmac. I had a 100mm stem and a high top-cap (1,5cm) and to 1cm spacers underneath. It was perfect for me and I want the Tarmac to be as close as possible to the Altamira. I have a short upper body, so I'm worried about the longer top tube. But the smaller frame with the very short steerer tube might lead to a spacer tower, which I don't want either.

Which size should I take?

Please help me out.

Tarmac geometry: http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bikes/ ... 2#geometry
Altamira geometry: http://www.fujibikes.com/bike/details/a ... k_desc_tab

[Tinea Pedis]

I've been incorrectly ordered a 54 S2. Normally I'd ride anything with a TT from 555 to 575. Had a 555mm Opera Canova with a 130 stem when I raced in Asia - worked fine and I'm more flexible now. Also ridden a Bianchi Sempre (56 TT) and a M/L Giant TCR Advanced SL.

Looking at the Cervelo geo chart, reach in only 9mm less in the 56. Stack could be the issue. But wondering if you guys thought it could still work with 10mm of spacers?

The store will have a 56 next week. But if I could save them the hassle then that would be ace (also saves me a ton more running around).

[efeballi]

Tinea,

Reach looks to be 9 (not 19 as I posted this) mm less on the 54 on this chart. Also 25 mm less stack.

If you were set on the 56 fit-wise, it would be difficult to replicate that fit on the 54 IMO, at least without a spacer tower.
Push the bike shop and get the 56.

On another note, does anyone have stack and reach measurements of a Dogma 60.1, size 55?

edit: I forgot how to math as I posted this, reach arguments go out the window


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cyclenutnz]

Hey guys,
I'm not sure, if I need the 54 or 56 of the Tarmac. I had a 100mm stem and a high top-cap (1,5cm) and to 1cm spacers underneath. It was perfect for me and I want the Tarmac to be as close as possible to the Altamira. I have a short upper body, so I'm worried about the longer top tube. But the smaller frame with the very short steerer tube might lead to a spacer tower, which I don't want either.

Tarmac isn't ideal for you. 54 is a bit low stack and the 56 is too long reach
You can see below that you can get the bars on the 54 within 2mm of where they were on the Fuji but it will take a spacer tower

[Tinea Pedis]

Tinea,
Reach looks to be 9 (not 19 as I posted this) mm less on the 54 on this chart. Also 25 mm less stack.

If you were set on the 56 fit-wise, it would be difficult to replicate that fit on the 54 IMO, at least without a spacer tower.
Push the bike shop and get the 56.

So...I played around to see. Call me curious...

(excuse the uggs and tracksuit pants )







Reach is fine. Stack seems to be the only question I still have. But doesn't seem too bad...

[efeballi]

Oh man, UGGs... Must be cold there down under...
Anyways, doesn't look too bad to my eyes, but I'd personally prefer to slam a 56.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AJS914]

I could use some suggestions on Colnago fitting. I've always wanted a Colnago so I'm selling a few bikes and other toys while keeping my eye out for a good deal on a lightly used C50, C59, C60. Even a new CX-Zero looks pretty nice and the frame reviews well. I have a Parlee Z4 right now that I'm pretty happy with. The shorter Colnago top tube and shorter reach though appeals to me.

My current Parlee is a Large with the current specs:

top tube 57.5cm
head tube angle 73.5 deg
seat tube angle 73 deg
BB drop 7cm
headtube 17.4cm
wheelbase 99.8
stack 57.9cm
reach 39.8cm

I'm currently running an 11cm stem. I'd actually to get my seat back a tiny bit more but I'm not wanting to go to a 10.5cm stem. I always used to like the balance of a 12 or 13 but I'm no longer 20 years old and my stem has gotten a tiny bit shorter over the years as well as my position a bit more upright.

When I look at Colnago's offerings a 54S looks ideal.

Virtual top tube 56cm
reach 38.5
stack 58.2

It seems like I can easily achieve the same position with a 12cm stem while moving my seat back .5 cm. Is reach/stack the way to look at it when comparing Colnagos to others? A 52S has almost the same reach (38.4cm) and a stack of 56.6cm. I could squeeze into a 52S with the same 12cm stem but I'd need more spacers under the stem or be willing to try more drop from the saddle.

The sloping vs. traditional in the Colnagos are interesting. I'm curious as to what Colnago is trying to achieve with both types of sizing. Is the idea that the sloping frames are supposed to have more stack for a more upright position and the traditionals a more racer like aggressive drop from the saddle to the bars? It looks like I would be on a 58cm traditional or a 57 with an extra spacer under the stem would also work.

The other thing I've been thinking of increasing the drop of my bars relative to my saddle but shorting the overall reach to compensate. (If I wanted to do that, I should probably install a 10cm stem in a lower position to see how it feels.)

[Spincycle]

It's important to take the time to collect all your measurements and work through the details. Determining optimum reach and crank length can mysterious. I found these resources to be helpful, google these key words:

competitivecyclist fitCalculatorBike

and

htsheldonbrown frame-sizing

[AJS914]

I'm good on reach and crank length. My fit is very comfortable on my Parlee. Just researching Colnagos to finally quench the Colnago lust.

I've plugged all the numbers into the bike reach/stack calculator I've seen posted here and that has been very instructive in comparing Colnagos to my size Large Parlee. A Colnago 52S or 57 traditional looks about right. I could probably go 54S or 58 traditional with no spacers but all the Colnago advice I've read seems to indicate that the smaller frame is better. On a 52S I end up with a 13cm stem versus the 11cm on my Parlee but otherwise the contact points will be identical. I've also been thinking of lowering the handlebars and shortening the stem. That seems much more achievable on the Colnago, say drop 2cm and go with a 12cm stem.

GEOMETRY...........................Parlee Z4 Colnago C59 52S
TOP TUBE LENGTH (EFF)........575..............550
HEAD TUBE LENGTH..............165..............163
HEAD TUBE ANGLE.................73.5............72.5
SEAT TUBE ANGLE..................73...............73.57
BB DROP................................70...............70
FORK LENGTH.......................369..............370
FORK RAKE............................43...............43
STEM LENGTH.......................110.............130
STEM ANGLE..........................-6...............-6
SPACERS + HEADSET + STEM STACK*0.5....60.....60
STACK.................................568.78........564.62
REACH.................................401.11........383.50
STACK WITH SPACERS..........626.30........621.85
REACH WITH SPACERS..........384.07........365.46
STACK WITH SPACERS + STEM....646.35.......647.76
REACH WITH SPACERS + STEM....492.23.......492.85

I come up with a similar scenario with a 57 traditional.

[Felixhase]

I also would like to ask for advice:

I am 185 cm tall. Inseam: 89 cm. Weight 73 kg. What frame size should I choose for racing with the focus max izalco (2014).
I would choose L (56cm) at the moment. Too small? Should be sportive.

http://www.focus-bikes.com/us/en/bikes/ ... o-max.html

Thanks!

[Marin]

Felix, I'm 187 with 91cm legs and ride a 56 effective top tube with setback post and 130mm stem. I could go to a 1 size larger frame, but why?

You upper body seems to be the same lenght as mine, so you would probably fit on my bike with some saddle adjustment (I run my saddle pretty low though).

[Felixhase]

Perfect, sounds good! I will go for size L (56)!

Thank you!

[Timmy269]

I'm gonna buy a Sworks or Specialized Tarmac. My height is 174cm and inseam is79cm. Which framesize I should buy?