2018 S-Works Tarmac Sizing 49cm Vs 52cm

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
ichobi
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:30 pm

by ichobi

My saddle to bb is also 68cm. The reason i didn’t buy 49 is it looks ill-proportioned. Way too small especially with dropped seat stay design and sloping top tube


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

sun
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:26 am

by sun

Yes, 52cm.

pesto13 wrote:
sun wrote:Here is a shot of my bike. 662mm saddle height. Quite a bit lower than yours, but I've had a few bike fits and this is where we landed. 110mm stem with -12 degree rise. 10mm spacer on top of the headset cap. I could probably slam it, but I want some more rides outside to determine that.

https://1drv.ms/i/s!ApmgBMekbXRGgfozKfbb5Cx6jI7oJg




sun,

I think it looks nice!. Just to confirm that is a 52cm frame?.

by Weenie


polzag10
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 6:04 pm

by polzag10

I had same question last month, I am 170cm have a shorter torse with longer legs, my bb to top of saddle height is 698. In the beginning I choose 49cm Sagan version, because I want to be more aggressive. However, someone told me that the 49cm frame is too small for me, than I go to do some research about the geometry. I found that the geometry of 49 SL5 is larger than 49 SL6. So, If I choose 49 SL6, it is too small for me and look ill-proportioned. If I choose 52, I can put less spacer. Finally, I change 49 Sagan to 52 UL.

User avatar
ak47
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 2:57 pm

by ak47

pesto13 wrote:What stem size do you use?.

thanks,



105 mm.

Here's the bike I was refering to:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/pro ... ks-tarmac/

The geometry makes the new Tarmac indeed a bit shorter, so 52 might be not a bad bet too.

nathanong87
Resident master of GIF
Posts: 3162
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 2:44 am
Contact:

by nathanong87

the actual reach between 49 and 52 is the same. The difference comes in the seat post angles and head tube length.

i’m 5”7 and 29” inseam and use a 52cm. My saddle top to B.B. center is 703mm

morganb
Posts: 434
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 5:30 pm

by morganb

Something interesting that I've noticed in this topic and in my experience with fits is that saddle height seems to have a bigger determination on what size bike fits than anything else, due to reach changing faster than stack because of seat angles getting slacker as bikes get larger (for most brands). My saddle height has gone up as I have switched to much shorter cranks to alleviate knee/hip issues and some bikes that used to fit me no longer do.

shoerhino
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 4:01 pm

by shoerhino

I think you could probably go either way but it would be helpful to see how you've setup your current bike. If your current bike is setup where the handlebars are about in the lowest position they could be with a reasonable stem and you think you may want to get lower, I would drop down to a 49. If your happy with the fit you have on your current bike and have some room to adjust the handlebars down if needed , it sounds like the SL6 52cm could be setup the same as the 52cm you have today.

I run a 130mm -17 stem on my 52 cm tarmac. I had about 10000 miles on my 2014 49cm Tarmac and have about 2500 on my 52cm 2017 tarmac. Both worked just fine for me and are setup with about the same reach and drop. I think it's really up to you and if you want more handlebar drop.

oraclesin
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2017 7:12 pm

by oraclesin

i'm 174cm and ride 52. but my arm litter long ,so i think you are suit 49cm.

thedonnydino
Posts: 84
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 11:10 pm

by thedonnydino

How are you guys measuring your saddle height? Along seat tube or straight up?

I have a 730mm saddle height from centre bb to saddle top along seat tube. Was considering a 52cm with a 10mm spacer and a 110 stem.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post