Things don't seem to add up, man. You have your saddle all the way forward and have 8cm of setback? No way.
That's *exactly* what the last bike fitter said. He measured it a second time using a laser level and after shrugging he said "That's odd". For the record, it was on a Giant TCR Advanced 2010, with the saddle at 78 cm and a Fizik Aliante, measured from the centre of the BB to the edge of the saddle. Will check again this evening.
Also, you use a 100mm stem now but think you will got to a 130? No way.
I didn't quite get this. I was using a 100 mm stem on a size L. If I got an M/L I could use a longer stem to compensate for a shorter horizontal tube. Seems logical to me.
Also, a 130mm stem usually means a wrong size bike unless you are built like a gorilla.
Don't know what you mean by "built like a gorilla", but I definitely don't have the body of your typical cyclist. I've always heard that if you are between two sizes (say 56 and 58), always take the smaller one, that it's easier to "stretch" a bike than "shrink" it, and the feeling of having a bike which is too long is certainly not comfortable.
Based on your inseam, you could easily drop your saddle height and reduce your stack. But judging by the other numbers posted here, who knows if that is your actual inseam.
You need to start by taking some accurate measures of your body and the bike...
I don't have any reason not to trust the figures given to my by the last (certified) fitter and would like to hear the reasons why you're questioning them.