Advice on Colnago C59 Geometry

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
keong72
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 9:26 am

by keong72

My 178cm saddle height 74 use 50s n stem 110 ,bike looking very nice,,

User avatar
PSM
Posts: 1570
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Location: Stockholm, The Arctic...

by PSM

52s is correct. I'm 183 and ride 52s.

by Weenie


nobrakes71
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 11:12 pm

by nobrakes71

Thanks everyone for your views. It seems that 52s is the way to go.

As a last piece of homework I'll try to get a test ride, but I believe there are no dealers with C59s available for test rides these days (I'm in London, spoke to 4 dealers already, none have test bikes).

One more question: assuming a seat height of 76cm, I'll have around 24cm of seat post + saddle showing on the 52s frame. Would this be too much seat post, or do you think it will be a good proportion overall?

Thanks again for all the help.

User avatar
PSM
Posts: 1570
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 2:45 pm
Location: Stockholm, The Arctic...

by PSM

If you measure 76 from bb. Check my M10 in introduce yourself. I have set to 75 cm.

I think the proportions on my bike looks pretty good. If not perfect. :)

jasoncd
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 6:24 pm

by jasoncd

I'm your body double apparently, right down the preferring the same saddle height you do with the exact height and inseam, and I ride a 52s C59. I was lucky enough to get to test ride an EPS in a 55 traditional, which was an awesome ride.

I had some bad ideas on fit, and honestly it was a mistake to buy the bike before I got them worked out, but after some work I'm happy with the fit and the bike. I sometimes think a 57 traditional would have been viable, but that probably also goes against what I hear is the 'intended' Colnago fit, compared to a 56 or 52s.

lazerzxr
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2011 2:18 am

by lazerzxr

Another datapoint for you, I'm 188 and ride a 54s with a 140mm 8 degree stem with no spacers. Fantastic fit and ride and gives 75mm drop

nobrakes71
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 11:12 pm

by nobrakes71

PSM wrote:If you measure 76 from bb. Check my M10 in introduce yourself. I have set to 75 cm.

I think the proportions on my bike looks pretty good. If not perfect. :)


PSM -> very nice M10 you have! Can I ask, what's the reach (tip of saddle - centre of handlebars), drop (top of saddle - top of bars) and stem length you currently have?

nobrakes71
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 11:12 pm

by nobrakes71

jasoncd wrote:I'm your body double apparently, right down the preferring the same saddle height you do with the exact height and inseam, and I ride a 52s C59. I was lucky enough to get to test ride an EPS in a 55 traditional, which was an awesome ride.

I had some bad ideas on fit, and honestly it was a mistake to buy the bike before I got them worked out, but after some work I'm happy with the fit and the bike. I sometimes think a 57 traditional would have been viable, but that probably also goes against what I hear is the 'intended' Colnago fit, compared to a 56 or 52s.



Jasoncd -> why are you saying it was a mistake to buy the bike before having it worked out? I mean, if you think you ended up with the right frame size, it's all good.

Colonia
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:34 am

by Colonia

nobrakes71 wrote:Hi all,

Quick question: looking to get a new C59.

I'm split between frame sizes: either 54sloping or 52sloping.

My measures are: 179 height and currently using seat height 76cm (BB centre to top of seat).
I have 88cm inseam (which in theory equals to a 'theoretical' seat height of 77.9, but I feel it's a bit too high and feel more confortable on 76cm, maybe 76.5cm.

One last piece of info: I'd ideally look for a drop (top of seat - top of bars) of around 8cm

I know sizing a frame on a forum is no good, I should get a proper fitting done, etc, etc. but would also value your opinions: 52s or 54s? Also, feel free to comment on traditional geometries (so it would be either 56, 57 or 58).

Cheers


Just a bit of extra info: if your inseam is truly 88cm, you can also ride a lower saddle. Technically, based on traditional fit calculations (not Guimard formulas), if you pedal heel down, your seat can be as low as 74 cm, depending on cleat/pedal/shoe sole stack height.

A good drop range for your body size is 7-8 cm, though you could have more depending on preference.

The 56 trad. or 52s should be fine, but you could also ride a 55 trad. if your seat were lower (which would also be good for your short torso).

76 cm seat height is pushing it on the 56 (more appropriate for a 57); would try and keep top tube to saddle top below 19cm for your body size (on a trad. frame).
Last edited by Colonia on Wed Jun 26, 2013 2:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Colonia
Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:34 am

by Colonia

jasoncd wrote:I'm your body double apparently, right down the preferring the same saddle height you do with the exact height and inseam, and I ride a 52s C59. I was lucky enough to get to test ride an EPS in a 55 traditional, which was an awesome ride.

I had some bad ideas on fit, and honestly it was a mistake to buy the bike before I got them worked out, but after some work I'm happy with the fit and the bike. I sometimes think a 57 traditional would have been viable, but that probably also goes against what I hear is the 'intended' Colnago fit, compared to a 56 or 52s.

There is no truth to the long stem/"rider draped over the frame" nonsense, if that is what you are referring to. Colnago geometry is just like that of any other Italian brand; they just measure C-T (or to underside of seat clamp for the new stuff) rather than C-C.

If you were contemplating between a 56 or 57, know that your setup would have been virtually identical on each bike. The reach is the same on both bikes (since STA accounts for the minor difference in TT length), so your stem length would also be the same. The only difference is that the 57 would allow you to use less spacers (if using them on the 56). Your seat height is actually more suitable for the 57. :beerchug:

User avatar
mvacolnago
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:29 am

by mvacolnago

I have an '09 Colnago EPS is size 53cm traditional, and a C59 in size 50 sloping, pics here show how similar the fit is I am 5-9 with a 30 inch inseam

Image

Image

Image

nobrakes71
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri May 31, 2013 11:12 pm

by nobrakes71

mvacolnago wrote:I have an '09 Colnago EPS is size 53cm traditional, and a C59 in size 50 sloping, pics here show how similar the fit is I am 5-9 with a 30 inch inseam

Image

Image

Image



What's your seat height on the C59, if I can ask?

User avatar
mvacolnago
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 12:29 am

by mvacolnago

Seat height measured from center of BB to the top of saddle inline with the seat tube is 712mm with about an 8cm difference in drop from the top of the saddle to the top of the bars

User avatar
carbonLORD
in the industry
Posts: 394
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2004 6:31 pm
Contact:

by carbonLORD

Slopers are for small people. Get a traditional, the way Colnago's are supposed to be (with Campy).

If you want sloping get an M10.

Many will disagree and cite that Colnago made sloping geo to stay in touch with the other manufacturers. They will also cite Colnago has been using Shimano for a long time which might be true, but that doesnt make it right.

If you put SRAM on it I will beat you with a carbon tube :wink:
carbonLORD.com

User avatar
eurperg
Posts: 789
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 10:32 am
Location: Finland

by eurperg

Sloping vs traditional, I have Colnagos in both varieties and don't really care what the zealots say. If you have short legs, traditional can look a bit stupid.

Image

Descending is more fun with a sloping frame since there is more room to sit on the top tube like this:

Image

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post