Frame size, new bike fitting, questions

Discuss light weight issues concerning road bikes & parts.
User avatar
derosa2000
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2013 12:19 am

by derosa2000

borza wrote:
Fri Aug 24, 2018 5:42 pm
Hi guys, need some advice on buying the Colnago V2-R.
Not sure whether I should choose a 50s or 52s. I currently ride a 2009 Fuji Roubaix size 56 which is a bit big by my account. Longer rides tend to cause some neck/shoulder/upper back pain. :(

I've replaced the stem with a shorter one (100 mm), and pushed the sadddle all the way forward, which helped to a degree. However, I still feel that my saddle is too far backward based on the knee/pedal spindle position in 3 o'clock position. I also did not get rid of the shoulder pain.
Been planning this for a long time and I really hope to solve my fitting and poor bike issues, so any help would be immensely appreciated! :beerchug:
Any owners out there, please give your input! :thumbup:

Here are my measurements:
Inseam: 82.5 cm
Trunk: 66 cm
Forearm: 35.5 cm
Arm: 64.5 cm
Thigh: 58 cm
Lower leg: 54.5 cm
Sternal notch: 148.5 cm
Total height: 176 cm
50s ! no doubt ..

borza
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 3:44 pm

by borza

Thanks derosa2000! Couldn't reply to your PM, but I've already found a sweet deal on it, plus I want to avoid Di2.
Appreciate the offer, though!

by Weenie


diego83
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 8:33 am

by diego83

Hi,I need advice about Giant Tcr frame size.
I'm about 173-174 cm tall,with 82 insteam.
Saddle high 72.5 cm
Saddle seatback 33.0-33.5 cm
Saddle-bar 80.5 cm
Saddle-bar drop 9 cm
I think I can use either S and M and i'm probabily between the two size.
I've seen S size and the frame seems too small(the distance between bootom bracket and the center in front hub is about 57 cm),the weelbase is very short.
In M size i should use a short stem,i think 100 mm or less.Normally i use 110 mm.
I'd ask you an opinion about.
Thanks

betwo
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2018 6:40 pm

by betwo

i want buy a fm066 but I'm not clear about my size
my measurements:
Actual inseam 76 cm
Trunk 68 cm
Forearm 32 cm
Arm 60 cm
Thigh 54 cm
Lower leg 52 cm
Sternal notch 141 cm
Total height 172 cm

I'm between 50 -52 I do not want something aggressive for a beautiful herniated disc that I have,what dou you recommend?

osw000
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:23 am
Location: Girona

by osw000

Hey guys,

Cheers from Girona, Spain.

This is my first post in WW, so it goes as an introduction and inquiry about bike fit fine tuning altogether. I'm WW at heart but still have to solve the following doubts before starting shaving weight on my current anchor boat (8kgs with pedals)

Earlier this year I got my first road bike after practicing MTB only. I got a Pinarello GAN 515 Shimano 105 (2016) and after some rides went to a biomechanic to fit it properly.
We analyzed discomforts, previous injuries, flexibility and dynamics on the bike. I suffered IT syndrome lately from running, so I was concerned about it.

My measurements and bike fit :
175cm height
81.5cm inseam.

74,5cm saddle height.
50cm nose to handlebar center. > I changed saddle and now I can only get 51,5cm with the new Speedneedle and my offset seatpost.
3,5cm nose to BB
5cm of spacers.
8cm saddle to handlebar drop.
11cm stem.
8cm/12cm: handlebar reach/drop

I went with a 72cm saddle height that was raised 2,5cm up to 74,5cm. With a lot of fore saddle, leaving BB to saddle nose in 3,5cm and saddle rails pushed all the way to the front.
That helped in getting a more upright position and pedaling efficiency somehow. I've also got some degrees of shims under my cleats to compensate for my slightly bow arched legs. So far so good.

After a good a amount of kms. I'm starting to learn by experience and doing minor tweaks and one saddle change. So some doubts about frame size and bike components arised. Biomechanic eluded to make any observation about bike sizing or component change. Just fitted what I got him.

Summarizing my experience after the fit:
1) When my position was upright on the hoods the reach felt about right, but experienced saddle numbness. Now with a new saddle numbness problems disapeared but I find it a bit far yet, so I need a zero seatback post to get it right.
2) When on the drops I feel OK. Not strange since I carry a hell of a spacers stack. Anyway the new Speedneedle saddle made the difference.
3) On descents I feel my weight going too far forward and the bike feels small, too squeezed (edited: the oposite to stretch). I rotated a little bit the bar for better reach of brake levers and it made a huge difference in self confidence altough very forward balanced.
Note: I can see the front hub over the handlebar.

Also I got an annoying toe overlap which almost made me kiss the ground twice when making U turns at low speed.

Playing with bikegeocalc with a larger frame (53) I'm not able to figure out If I could get a better fit with a larger frame (still mantaining the zero setback seatpost, to get the correct BB to saddle), or I should try to fix the reach with different stem-handlebar combination (1cm shorter stem and compact bar).

In short, do I start swaping components and stay with this frame or would a larger frame/different geo make things easier?
Pinarello GAN 2016 - SRAM eTap - Alu wheels. 7,2kgs.

gtharv
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:52 am

by gtharv

Some saddles are different from each other so have your bike to fit perfectly to your body for correct height and angle. Upright positioning is very important to avoid saddle sores which have less impact on you bum bones. check out different types of bike saddles that prevent numbnes

maxice
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2018 11:05 pm

by maxice

Hi,

Finally decided on a Colnago C64 but have a query over frame sizes.

I believe I am in between a 45s or 48s going by several websites

Measurements as follows:
Height 169cm
Inseam 75.5cm

Have had a retul fit in the past with the following details:
Saddle height 68cm
Saddle setback -4.7cm
Saddle angle -1deg
Eff Seat tube angle 74deg
Grip Angle 30deg
Handlebar reach 49.7cm
Handlebar drop -4.6mm
Grip Reach 59cm
Grip drop -1.2cm
Bar Reach 4.2cm
BB to Grip reach 54.4cm
Handlebar Stack 59.3cm
Handlebar reach 45cm

Which frame size would be better? Would probably prefer the smaller frame but would this be comfortable?. Need to also consider any toe overlap (would this be an issue in a smaller frame?)

thanks

muddevil
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 12:19 pm

by muddevil

Hi Guys!
Any thoughts on this brake surface?

Image

osw000
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 7:23 am
Location: Girona

by osw000

maxice wrote:
Wed Nov 28, 2018 2:37 pm
Hi,

Finally decided on a Colnago C64 but have a query over frame sizes.

I believe I am in between a 45s or 48s going by several websites

Measurements as follows:
Height 169cm
Inseam 75.5cm

Have had a retul fit in the past with the following details:
Saddle height 68cm
Saddle setback -4.7cm
Saddle angle -1deg
Eff Seat tube angle 74deg
Grip Angle 30deg
Handlebar reach 49.7cm
Handlebar drop -4.6mm
Grip Reach 59cm
Grip drop -1.2cm
Bar Reach 4.2cm
BB to Grip reach 54.4cm
Handlebar Stack 59.3cm
Handlebar reach 45cm

Which frame size would be better? Would probably prefer the smaller frame but would this be comfortable?. Need to also consider any toe overlap (would this be an issue in a smaller frame?)

thanks
I don't understand how some of the measurements from your bike fit are taken:
Handlebar drop 4,6mm?? Wouldn't this be cm's??
There are 2 Handlebar reach measurements: the one that makes sense to me is 49.7cm if taken from the tip of the saddle to the center of handlebar.
Handlebar stack don't know where the reference is taken from...

Anyway assuming just those that seem clear: saddle height and setback and handlebar reach. I would go 48s. It will give you a closer fit with a 90mm stem (know what angle stem is Colnago's?) and 15mm setback standard post.

Reach is almost identical between frames, at the price of a steeper STA angle in the 45s. I think 48s will fit better the 4.7cm setback you got and better balance you on the bike with the standard post.

If your saddle to handle bar drop is 4,6cm. The 48s is also spot on regarding stack height (w/ 90mm stem, 17mm headset stack and 6º angle). Going 45s would require a discrete 0,5mm spacer anyway.

Regarding toe overlap both frames have almost the same BB to axle distance (586 vs 587). So it will depend more on crank length, shoe size and cleat position.
Pinarello GAN 2016 - SRAM eTap - Alu wheels. 7,2kgs.

beatle75
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:01 pm

by beatle75

Hello everybody,

I'm thinking about buying the Colnago Concept Disc. So far I drive a Canyon Ultimate cf slx disc

Size of the Canyon ist L , Stack / Reach 592/399, top tube length horizontal 571, head tube 174, stem 110.

My data: Male, age 43, height 185 cm, step length 90 cm.

The framework of Colnago is in Sloping geometry:

Size 54s Stack / Reach 578/386, top tube horizontal 565, head tube 179
Size 56s Stack / Reach 587/398, top tube horizontal 580, head tube 187 ... Stem then my choice.

Does any of you with similar body measurements drive a Colnago with Slopinggeo?
Stack / Reach are most similar to the Canyon at 56s, with the top tube being much longer.
At 54s, I would probably have to take a longer stem!?

Greetings from Hannover, Germany
Gunnar

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 7763
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

@beatle75: For me, this would be a no brainer. I’d be on the 56s. I’m 184cm with a 905mm inseam and an 804mm saddle height. Saddle to bar drop of ~85mm give or take a couple millimeters. I have a 59cm traditional C60 and a 61cm traditional C59. A 60cm probably would have been perfect but they had cut back options then to even numbered sloping sizes and odd numbered traditional sizes. I only considered traditional then. In the sloping sizes the 56s is dab smack in the middle of my two frames. It would be perfect. You could say either my c59 or my C60 are also perfect and we’re really splitting hairs here now because there’s just millimeters separating the parameters. That’s what must have made selling Colnagos a nightmare for a dealer because as if the customers aren’t picky enough already, when you give them a choice of 3 or 4 frame options, all of which will work and work well, then a frustrating period of indecision ensues. Ha. Whereas if there’s a big enough gap between sizes for the most part it makes sizing choice a lot easier. Of course, even with the larger gaps in sizing there’s still a chance you could find yourself wavering between a couple sizes. And then it comes down to your own personal fit and preferences.
Oh, and forget about top tube length for now so long as you have comparable reach numbers (same stack height) to use, as effective top tube length is just a function of seat tube angle. Unless your saddle is clamped at the rear of the rails right now, the Colnago (which must have a slacker seattube angle than the canyon given the reaches are similar but the top tube is longer on the Colnago) will clamp your saddle rails further back on the rails if you retain the same saddle position from bike to bike. A pic of your current setup on your Canyon would be helpful. But either way, just ensure that your saddle isn’t jammed all the way forward (clamped at the rear of the rails) currently or the slacker seattube angle of the Colnago may force a more rearward saddle position than you currently have. Probably not something you want if you’re goal is to get more “aero”.
My biggest caveat in all of this is the same way I started this post... and that it is the thought process I would use for “me”. I haven’t seen you or your bike and generally internet sizing advice is pretty hit and miss but since you’re so close to my physical size (are you good looking too?) and I know Colnagos pretty well I thought I’d throw out some thoughts for you to ponder. Maybe you have shorter arms with a 110mm stem. I use a 130mm. So perhaps that’s why it’s tougher for you to decide between the 54 and 56 than it is for me.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

beatle75
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:01 pm

by beatle75

Hi Calnago,

thank you for your answer. Here is a photo of my canyon, excuse the background, I did not have time for a nicer picture; o)
The difference in height between the handlebar and saddle is about 12 cm, so the bike moves very well. I want to drive the frame with as few spacers as possible.
Regarding the size I have found a table (link) for the correct size of the colnago, the table shows that I would have to drive a 54 frame at my size (185 cm).
confusion ....

https://www.livelo.com.au/pages/correct ... ze-colnago
Attachments
canyon.jpg

User avatar
Calnago
Posts: 7763
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2010 9:14 pm

by Calnago

I really hope no one uses that link as definitive source for sizing a Colnago frame. Isn’t that whole livelo concept just a means to enable rental bikes to be acquired more easily?
The only thing that would have me put you on a 54 vs a 56 is that you say you ride with a hefty amount of drop at ~12cm. Your saddle height, given that you say your inseam is 90cm, must be in the range of 79-80cm I would guess. I’d be hard pressed to get 12cm of drop on my C60 (59T) even if took out all the spacers and “slammed” it on top of the shorter 5mm headset top cover (with a -8 stem). So, if you really want an aggressive fit then 54s is probably your best bet. Whenever people say I like the “quick handling” in cases like this you have to distinguish between whether its handing is “quick” simply because the frame is too small or if the geometry itself makes for a “quick” handling bike. Any bike that is too small is going to “feel” (I’d like to say “too small” here) quick but that’s probably more due to it being too small. Colnago geometry is about as neutral race bike geo as it gets, front and rear.
And that’s where I exit. Sizing advice over the internet is a huge gamble and I stress again that I haven’t even seen you in person so take my comments as just another datapoint to consider in your decision. I only jumped in here because we have such similar proportions and I know Colnago’s geometry fairly well. But I could never ride with 12cm of drop so once you get into that territory you have to make some hard decisions for yourself.
Good luck, you’re close.
Colnago C64 - The Naked Build; Colnago C60 - PR99; Trek Koppenberg - Where Emonda and Domane Meet;
Unlinked Builds (searchable): Colnago C59 - 5 Years Later; Trek Emonda SL Campagnolo SR; Special Colnago EPQ

beatle75
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 9:01 pm

by beatle75

Good evening Calnago,

no problem, thank you for all your ideas. In the moment i'm searching for a dealer where i can test the two sizes of frames but it,s hard to find :o/

Bye

Pulsify
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2019 8:44 am

by Pulsify

IMG_20190111_024428690.jpg
IMG_20190111_024517427.jpg
This is the Canyon Endurace AL 7.0, that just arrived today. This bike has endurance geometry with spacers still in tact, hence the more relaxed geometry (for now). I'm interested to know whether the frame size looks about right, not necessary the fit. I have 30 days if I decide I want to upgrade to a medium size.

I'm 5' 10", and exactly 178cm, which is right in between small and medium. (Of course, that's not the only measurement that matters). Thanks in advance. Here are the specs:

Small Bike:
Height - 172-178
Seat Tube Length - 502
Top Tube Length - 546
Head Tube Length - 148
Stack - 565
Reach - 379

Medium Size:
Height - 178-184
Seat Tube Length - 532
Top Tube Length - 556
Head Tube Length - 167
Stack - 587
Reach - 383
Last edited by Pulsify on Fri Jan 11, 2019 11:53 am, edited 1 time in total.

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post