Frame size, new bike fitting, questions

[GT56]

i would agree to having as little spacers as possible, but, also depends on: sloping top tube y/n

[JS300]

I am looking at getting a new bike and wanted to get some thoughts on fitment. I am pretty short (166cm). I have narrowed down the choices to the 2016 Canyon Ultimate CF SLX and 2016 Giant TCR Advanced SL, Team Edition (pretty nice limited Giant Alpecin paint job).

My previous bike is a Cervelo S3 (Size 48):

Stack: 505
Reach: 360
Spacers: 10mm
Stem: 90mm

Canyon (2XS):

Stack: 500
Reach: 368

Giant (XS):

Stack: 516
Reach: 372

I think the stack of both bikes is ok (I could run the Giant with no spacers), but I am a little concerned about the reach. The Canyon comes with an 80mm stem, which makes the reach similar to my Cervelo, but that's a pretty short stem. I don't know what the Giant has, but it would be local, so I can get a fitment done. That is not possible with the Canyon, as I would have to order.

Am I missing anything? Is there anything else I should consider? Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks!

[CamW]

As you said, stack and reach are all close enough that they will probably work fine with a little tweaking. The biggest difference between those three will be handling. They are all likely to handle quite differently and depending on how old your cervelo is it is likely that they will both suffer from more toe overlap as well.

EDIT: On second thought, I'm not sure there will be more overlap due to the extra reach on both but they will definitely all handle quite differently

[JS300]

As you said, stack and reach are all close enough that they will probably work fine with a little tweaking. The biggest difference between those three will be handling. They are all likely to handle quite differently and depending on how old your cervelo is it is likely that they will both suffer from more toe overlap as well.

EDIT: On second thought, I'm not sure there will be more overlap due to the extra reach on both but they will definitely all handle quite differently

Thanks for your help. I don't think toe overlap will be a big issue, as it wasn't an issue at all on the Cervelo. I hear you about handling though. Most small bikes have very slack head tube angles. The Cervelo had 70.5 degrees. The Canyon is even slacker at 69.6 (but it has a shorter stem), and the Giant is way steeper at 74.5. I wouldn't mind quicker steering than I had on the Cervelo, but the Giant seems dramatically different. I guess I will have to see if I can test ride the Giant before deciding.

[Calnago]

I just scanned through the thread for interest not intending to comment but are you sure that Giant XS has a 74.5 degree headtube? I'd say it's either a misprint in the geo chart or you have got the seat tube angle mixed up with the headtube angle. I'd doublecheck that.

[JS300]

I just scanned through the thread for interest not intending to comment but are you sure that Giant XS has a 74.5 degree headtube? I'd say it's either a misprint in the geo chart or you have got the seat tube angle mixed up with the headtube angle. I'd doublecheck that.

You're right. I double checked the Giant Korea website, and the XS head tube angle is 71 degrees. I was previously looking at a vendor's website, and they seem to have listed it wrong. So it's not a huge difference with the other two bikes. Thanks!

[CamW]

As you said, stack and reach are all close enough that they will probably work fine with a little tweaking. The biggest difference between those three will be handling. They are all likely to handle quite differently and depending on how old your cervelo is it is likely that they will both suffer from more toe overlap as well.

EDIT: On second thought, I'm not sure there will be more overlap due to the extra reach on both but they will definitely all handle quite differently

Thanks for your help. I don't think toe overlap will be a big issue, as it wasn't an issue at all on the Cervelo. I hear you about handling though. Most small bikes have very slack head tube angles. The Cervelo had 70.5 degrees. The Canyon is even slacker at 69.6 (but it has a shorter stem), and the Giant is way steeper at 74.5. I wouldn't mind quicker steering than I had on the Cervelo, but the Giant seems dramatically different. I guess I will have to see if I can test ride the Giant before deciding.

Head angle is only part of the equation. Cervelo are one of the few manufacturers who spec different fork rakes across their sizing to better match the head angles although I'm not sure that they have always done this so it depends on how recent your S3 is. Given Giant and Canyon don't mention fork rake I'd be inclined to think they use the same across all their bikes which is likely to be 43-45mm which means you are likely to end up with a pretty large trail and the different handling that comes with.

Basically I'm commending Cervelo for making more of an effort with small bike geometry than a lot of companies. If you like the way your Cervelo handles don't be surprised if the Canyon or Giant feel very different.

[JS300]

Head angle is only part of the equation. Cervelo are one of the few manufacturers who spec different fork rakes across their sizing to better match the head angles although I'm not sure that they have always done this so it depends on how recent your S3 is. Given Giant and Canyon don't mention fork rake I'd be inclined to think they use the same across all their bikes which is likely to be 43-45mm which means you are likely to end up with a pretty large trail and the different handling that comes with.

Basically I'm commending Cervelo for making more of an effort with small bike geometry than a lot of companies. If you like the way your Cervelo handles don't be surprised if the Canyon or Giant feel very different.

Thanks for your insight. I hadn't noticed Cervelo's rake variations for small sizes. My S3 was from 2014, so it has the higher rake. Perhaps I will contact Canyon to see what they do (and try to test ride the Giant soon).

Thanks!

[AE86Micah]

I have a 53 Pinarello Dogma 60.1 and am looking to get into a Bianchi. Anyone have experience on how the sizes compare?

[GT56]

I have a 53 Pinarello Dogma 60.1 and am looking to get into a Bianchi. Anyone have experience on how the sizes compare?

your answer can be found in the respective geometry tables

[jekyll man]

I have a 53 Pinarello Dogma 60.1 and am looking to get into a Bianchi. Anyone have experience on how the sizes compare?

Depends which Bianchi youre looking at.
Oltre, Specialissma and 1 other (sempre??) are pretty much the same as Pina, although they tend to be "1 sized up" compared to Pina. eg I've gone from a 51.5cm Paris to a 53cm Oltre.

Endurance models follow the shorter + taller models, probably like the Rokh Kobh etc

[AE86Micah]

I was looking into the Specialissma and my LBS doesn't have one in stock. Don't want to request them to order the wrong size :/

[GT56]

geometry tables - that's what they are for

[nicedat]

If anyone here has a Giant propel sl0 size small, would it be possible to get the seat pole height? I have picked up an ex demo and think the pole may have been cut down. Thanks.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[benjo]

I have a quick bike size question:

I'm considering Cannondale Supersix sizing. To replicate my current fit (which I am happy with) I can go with either of the following:

Option A:
Frame Size: 56
Stem: -6, 120mm (with 85mm reach handlebars), or 130mm (with 75mm reach handlebars).
Spacers: 15mm

Option B:
Frame Size: 58
Stem: -6, 120mm (with 75mm reach handlebars)
Spacers: None

If I go with the 58 I could also go to steeper stem and add some spacers beneath it.

I am currently on a 58 Caad10 with a -8, 120mm stem, 75mm reach bars, and 10mm of spacers, but the geometry of the Supersix has changed a bit from my bike. I'm tempted to go with the size 56 so I can get lower more easily if my flexibility improves (I haven't been riding seriously for the last year), and because of the old advice to always go with the smaller size frame if possible. Between Option A and Option B above, will I even notice a difference in handling?

Thanks,
Ben