Bike Fit: 60cm v 58cm CAAD10/SS-EVO

[Clean39T]

I could use some help deciding between 60cm and 58cm CAAD frames.

I currently have a new CAAD10 Black Inc. 60cm built, as well as a previous gen EVO HM and a regular CAAD10 frames (both in 58cm) unbuilt.

I'd initially bought the 58cm frames thinking I'd build one as a rain/crit bike and one as my fun weenie climbing bike.

I used to ride a 60cm CAAD (even had a 63cm at one point) and figured I'd go with 58cm this time to try the whole nimble/smaller thing...plus found good deals on eBay...

Then I found a great deal on the Black Inc. new-old-stock and figured I should take another look at my fit before doing two builds, selling parts, etc. With the deal on it I'm fine doing the parts swap and will come out ahead, but I do like the anodized finish and HM fork..

My initial thought is that the 58cm with a 120mm stem and 5-10mm of spacer (incl dust cap) would be about right to get my hands a bit lower with reaching out further.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GambadiLegno]

It's difficult to give any advice only looking at photos, but I think it's a bit big for you, at least for me. But, to be honest, I'm that kind of cyclist who likes frames a little small than usual.

I think you'd be better in the 58. We'll see what the others think!

[Kurets]

Definitely not too large, although the 0-setback post is odd. How is your weight balance with that setup? Can you ride with your hands behind your back?
To me the bike looks too short which might be due to the zero setback post putting your bum far forward. Sure, a 58 would give you more drop, but drop isn't more aero unless you can get long.
Also try bending your elbows to fet low in the drops, if your elbows overlap your knees a lot, the bike is too short.

[Clean39T]

Definitely not too large, although the 0-setback post is odd. How is your weight balance with that setup? Can you ride with your hands behind your back?
To me the bike looks too short which might be due to the zero setback post putting your bum far forward. Sure, a 58 would give you more drop, but drop isn't more aero unless you can get long.
Also try bending your elbows to fet low in the drops, if your elbows overlap your knees a lot, the bike is too short.

I've been playing w zero setback vs the 10-15mm I get with a Thomson and I have the zero on there because I feel like I'm reaching w my feet when I'm further back. Even with the zero my knee is ~ 1cm behind my pedal spindle. And I have my cleats pretty far back, but not slammed.

I can just about take my hands off the tops and keep somewhat upright, but drops...not a chance in hell. I need core strength work.

Outdoors I would bend more and my knees would overlap my elbows for sure...on the trainer I find it more difficult to get in that position unless I'm really pushing intervals. For these I was just in recovery at ~120W.

I'll try a 120mm and 130mm stem tonight and snap more pics.

I do have a pro fit scheduled for Friday...just trying to decide if I show up with the 60 or the 58!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fa63]

Based on those pictures, I think you need to raise the handlebar and try a longer stem. I absolutely would not size down to a 58 cm frame.

[Kurets]

Based on those pictures, I think you need to raise the handlebar and try a longer stem. I absolutely would not size down to a 58 cm frame.

Exactly what I try to get at. I see many bikes set up with lots of drop and short stems. That may "look pro" kind of. But it really isn't...
To OP, I am not an expert fitter or a fitter at all for that matter, but I would say that it is very important to have a setup where you can ride at tempo/low FTP without hands on bars. This is indicative of a good weight balance even if you violate KOPS.
I think you can view getting-low in different ways, at a specific back angle your hands can be in a roughly 90 degree arc in front of you. Going low and short accomplishes the same as "semi-low" and long. But weight distribution changes a lot.
Obviously, you cannot expect to support your upper body by your legs while doing low intensity work.

[Clean39T]

Based on those pictures, I think you need to raise the handlebar and try a longer stem. I absolutely would not size down to a 58 cm frame.

Exactly what I try to get at. I see many bikes set up with lots of drop and short stems. That may "look pro" kind of. But it really isn't...
To OP, I am not an expert fitter or a fitter at all for that matter, but I would say that it is very important to have a setup where you can ride at tempo/low FTP without hands on bars. This is indicative of a good weight balance even if you violate KOPS.
I think you can view getting-low in different ways, at a specific back angle your hands can be in a roughly 90 degree arc in front of you. Going low and short accomplishes the same as "semi-low" and long. But weight distribution changes a lot.
Obviously, you cannot expect to support your upper body by your legs while doing low intensity work.

That's great info. I don't care much about looks. I'll see how it feels with the setback post and 120 stem tonight.

Here's a pic of my last bike, which I was comfortable on and am kicking myself for selling..




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clean39T]

Wife wasn't around to help w the camera, but here's a pic w the setback post and 120mm stem. It did feel more comfortable.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Marin]

Smaller Frame, some setback, and a stem longer than 110 IMO.

[fa63]

It seems you lowered your handlebar even more. Any pictures while riding this latest setup?

I think you need to go the other way to open up the hip angle a bit while on the hoods. Then you can get low by bending your elbows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clean39T]

It seems you lowered your handlebar even more. Any pictures while riding this latest setup?

I think you need to go the other way to open up the hip angle a bit while on the hoods. Then you can get low by bending your elbows.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Should get some photos tonight. I got rid of the 25mm top cap in favor of a 5mm CaneCreek so I could use the 5mm spacers more effectively.

[Clean39T]

I played around with inputting some values into the Bike Comparator tool - interesting results. Still not sure what this means for where I should start. I'm going to contact the fitter and see what she thinks I should show up with on Friday as a starting point. Is it crazy to go in with two built bikes and see which one she thinks I should commit to for getting an appropriate fit?

[fa63]

At 191 cm, you have no business on a 58 cm bike in my humble opinion. The increase in reach from a 58 to 60 cm frame is minimal (about 1 cm), the seat tube angle is slightly slacker to allow you get a little more setback, and I think you would also benefit from the longer headtube of the 60 cm frame.

[Clean39T]

Update: fitter said bring both bikes and we'll work from there..

Here's the 58cm built and ready to ride:




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Clean39T]

Update to close this out..

Fitter was great [emoji106] super knowledgeable, really well set up studio, very thorough.

She has me on the 60cm w the setback post and 110 stem with probably 2.5cm of spacers under. And has me going to 42cm bars.

The main problem with the 58 was the hip angle being so closed off. Turns out that's not very effective and a bit dangerous (she's a PT also), so while I could ride that drop, there isn't any reason to..

So far I'm very happy and comfortable with the position...so much so that I bought another bike to replace the EVO HM, but that's another story for another day.. [emoji41]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk