Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > General Cycling Discussion
Reload this Page >

two different companies recommend very different bike geo - help understanding size

Notices
General Cycling Discussion Have a cycling related question or comment that doesn't fit in one of the other specialty forums? Drop on in and post in here! When possible, please select the forum above that most fits your post!

two different companies recommend very different bike geo - help understanding size

Old 04-21-21, 04:37 AM
  #1  
wilson_smyth
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 20 Posts
two different companies recommend very different bike geo - help understanding size

with lack of availability i am exploring purchasing a bike online.
Im finding various companies recommend vastly different geometries and id appreciate some help and expertise understanding this.

Take for example the Cube Attain SL and the Canyon Endurance AL Disc 7
My height is 165cm and inner leg is 75cm.
For these measurements these companies recommend very different geometries.
Without trying, how does one get an idea of how they will feel on each of these bikes?

(measurements all in mm and degrees where applicable)


Im guessing the cube is a much more relaxed upright ride, whereas the canyon is a more aggressive position, being taller and shorter in reach, but im really not too sure.
wilson_smyth is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 05:15 AM
  #2  
Badger6
Obsessed with Eddington
 
Badger6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Brussels (BE) 🇧🇪
Posts: 1,330

Bikes: '16 Spesh Diverge, '14 Spesh Fatboy, '18 Spesh Epic, '18 Spesh SL6, '21 Spesh SL7, '21 Spesh Diverge...and maybe n+1?

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 532 Post(s)
Liked 621 Times in 368 Posts
Originally Posted by wilson_smyth
Without trying, how does one get an idea of how they will feel on each of these bikes?
You generally can't. The dimensions on the bikes are similar enough that they would feel quite similar, though the canyon may be a touch more aggressive in position, but not by much.

Just so I am clear, because I ran both bikes through a geometry comparison (click the link for a neat comparison tool)...the Cube is a 51cm frame and the Canyon is 2XS?
Badger6 is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 05:24 AM
  #3  
wilson_smyth
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by Badger6
You generally can't. The dimensions on the bikes are similar enough that they would feel quite similar, though the canyon may be a touch more aggressive in position, but not by much.

Just so I am clear, because I ran both bikes through a geometry comparison (click the link for a neat comparison tool)...the Cube is a 51cm frame and the Canyon is 2XS?
Hi, thanks for the reply.
The cube is a 50cm in their sizing chart.
The canyon is indeed a 2xs
wilson_smyth is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 06:51 AM
  #4  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,367

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3071 Post(s)
Liked 1,624 Times in 999 Posts
No, that Canyon is laid back and laid out compared to the Cube. It has slacker head- and seat tube angles, and longer stays and wheelbase. The Cube looks like it puts the rider more aggressively over the pedals on a tighter machine.

Try to imagine what more stack and less reach means by sitting and reaching forward with some bend at your waist. Add stack by raising your arms, and reduce reach by bringing your hands closer by bending less at the waist. See? That’s a formula for a more relaxed position, but of course how relaxed depends on the starting position and how many millimeters of stack is added and mm of reach is removed.

3 or 4mm doesn’t make a major change (i.e it won’t make an aggressive position relaxed), though it may make the position more comfortable.

Missing from the info you provided is fork offset, with which we can look at trail and get a sense of how the bikes would feel and handle. Just looking at the geo numbers, they both look pretty chill, but knowing they’re really small frames, the slack angles are necessary to clear the front wheel, so I’m guessing the fork offset is low, otherwise HT angles like those would steer like trucks. I don’t know small frame geometries intuitively like I do the large sizes which fit me, so I’d really need to see offset to make any more distinctions between the two.
chaadster is offline  
Likes For chaadster:
Old 04-21-21, 06:54 AM
  #5  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 329 Times in 245 Posts
The standout difference is the 69.2 head angle on the Canyon. It will not feel like a road bike.

Compromises can happen when attempting to maintain toe clearance to front wheel on small frames. At 165cm the OP is not that short. No need for any compromises. Someone does not know how to design a frame.
63rickert is offline  
Likes For 63rickert:
Old 04-21-21, 07:07 AM
  #6  
Badger6
Obsessed with Eddington
 
Badger6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Brussels (BE) 🇧🇪
Posts: 1,330

Bikes: '16 Spesh Diverge, '14 Spesh Fatboy, '18 Spesh Epic, '18 Spesh SL6, '21 Spesh SL7, '21 Spesh Diverge...and maybe n+1?

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 532 Post(s)
Liked 621 Times in 368 Posts
The actual dimensions of the bikes make the Canyon look like a (slightly) more aggressive position (with 20mm less stack, and 3mm less reach) despite its slacker angles.

Check the link I provided above...the numbers in the geometry comparison match the data at the webpages for each bike.
Cube Trail: 56.9mm
Canyon Trail: 81.2mm

I think the Canyon will steer pretty slow (comparatively) to the Cube. That said, I've never ridden a 58 or 61, so I have no idea how they steer compared my 52s and 54s. I think the OP would be fine, because even if the bikes steers "slow" (comparatively speaking), the only baseline of comparison is other similarly sized bikes.
Badger6 is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 07:10 AM
  #7  
Badger6
Obsessed with Eddington
 
Badger6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Brussels (BE) 🇧🇪
Posts: 1,330

Bikes: '16 Spesh Diverge, '14 Spesh Fatboy, '18 Spesh Epic, '18 Spesh SL6, '21 Spesh SL7, '21 Spesh Diverge...and maybe n+1?

Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 532 Post(s)
Liked 621 Times in 368 Posts
Originally Posted by 63rickert
At 165cm the OP is not that short.
And with a 75cm inseam, the OP should at least be able to get a leg over a 52 (or S) frame. There's more than enough seat tube to adjust the seat post, and there are shorter stems to fix the reach to the bars. I'm 173cm, 76.5cm and I ride 52 to 54.
Badger6 is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 07:36 AM
  #8  
Iride01 
I'm good to go!
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 14,703

Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020

Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6063 Post(s)
Liked 4,694 Times in 3,238 Posts
Unless you know where you want your butt. The angle of your body, and how far your hands will be from you, then trying to pick a bike from numbers is silly. IMO. For some, maybe many it'll work, but it'll confuse the best of people.

Just go try on some bikes of different fits, relaxed upright all the way to very low and aero and see what you like or want. Use the size bike suggested by the manufacturer for that particular model if you have no other experience to go by. Also consider the suggestions of others that can actually see you on that bike.

You can fit a size up or down on most any bike. Doing that might address certain issues with your fit as you are looking at a bike made for the average leg, body and arm dimensions. Not a custom built bike for you.
Iride01 is offline  
Likes For Iride01:
Old 04-21-21, 12:48 PM
  #9  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,196

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 551 Times in 441 Posts
Measure cycling inseam from floor to firm crotch contact in bare feet. I'm 168cm tall with an 83cm cycling inseam. I look for a 510-525 stack height and 365-380 reach for a relatively racey fit with about 10cm of saddle to bar drop. My actual saddle height is 72-73cm. I use no spacers and a -17 stem with a 525mm stack. I'd rather use a -6 stem than spacers to gain 20mm of bar height rather than spacers.

On my latest frame with a 509mm stack, I'm using a 30mm conical headset top from omni-racer with no other spacers and a -17 stem.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 04:27 PM
  #10  
philbob57
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Chicago North Shore
Posts: 2,330

Bikes: frankenbike based on MKM frame

Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 714 Post(s)
Liked 602 Times in 371 Posts
Geometry is only part of the story. Materials, construction techniques, skill all play a part in how the frame will feel, and tires will play a gigantic part in the bike's feel.

I'm really glad I don't need a bike now. At my age, an upper-end production bike should cost about $300, so I wouldn't want to spend more than about $200 without a test ride.
Good luck in your search. Don't let the desire for perfection keep you from riding.
philbob57 is offline  
Old 04-21-21, 04:54 PM
  #11  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,196

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 551 Times in 441 Posts
You're comparing the wrong size canyon. An XS size is more similar to the other frame.

https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road-bi...ometry-section
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 04-22-21, 01:48 AM
  #12  
wilson_smyth
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 20 Posts
OP Here:
Thanks for the replies everyone, some great expertise.
Sounds like the only sure way of knowing if a bike is comfortable is to have a ride on it. Unfortunate given the situation these days but its a fact that cant be argued with.
Means ill probably stay with my hybrid a bit longer. its one of the slightly more "nippy" ones that some people call flat bar racers, & ive customised it a bit and can cover decent distance at reasonable speed (to me) so im not stuck for a bike.

To reply on some specific points/questions:

Originally Posted by DaveSSS
You're comparing the wrong size canyon. An XS size is more similar to the other frame.
https://www.canyon.com/en-us/road-bi...ometry-section
I took the size recommended by both companies sizing calculator. they both ask for height and inseam and thats what they recommended. I dont know enough to know straight away that one size up in the canyon would be more comparable.
It seems they both use very different sizing models.
Originally Posted by Badger6
You generally can't. The dimensions on the bikes are similar enough that they would feel quite similar, though the canyon may be a touch more aggressive in position, but not by much.
Just so I am clear, because I ran both bikes through a geometry comparison (click the link for a neat comparison tool)...the Cube is a 51cm frame and the Canyon is 2XS?
That geometry comparison tool is great, thanks!

Originally Posted by philbob57
Geometry is only part of the story. Materials, construction techniques, skill all play a part in how the frame will feel, and tires will play a gigantic part in the bike's feel.
I'm really glad I don't need a bike now. At my age, an upper-end production bike should cost about $300, so I wouldn't want to spend more than about $200 without a test ride.

Good luck in your search. Don't let the desire for perfection keep you from riding.
This is why i was looking at the canyon. It gets terriffic reviews for being a fantastic ride, its reasonably priced and its Aluminium which is a prerequesite for me (bike has potential for bumps, knocks as will be a commuter also).
Im still getting out a few times a week on my hybrid, have made it my own with a few changes and its thoroughly enjoyable with the spring weather we're currently experiencing.
Im not stuck for a new bike, but after a year with the hybrid, i just know something else will fit me better and i think that something is an endurance geometry, aluminum drop bar road bike.

Ill probably just stick with the hybrid for the time being and pick up something i can actually try next year when hopefully stock shortages are less of an issue.

Thanks All
wilson_smyth is offline  
Likes For wilson_smyth:
Old 04-22-21, 07:12 AM
  #13  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,851

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1851 Post(s)
Liked 654 Times in 498 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
Measure cycling inseam from floor to firm crotch contact in bare feet. I'm 168cm tall with an 83cm cycling inseam. I look for a 510-525 stack height and 365-380 reach for a relatively racey fit with about 10cm of saddle to bar drop. My actual saddle height is 72-73cm. I use no spacers and a -17 stem with a 525mm stack. I'd rather use a -6 stem than spacers to gain 20mm of bar height rather than spacers.

On my latest frame with a 509mm stack, I'm using a 30mm conical headset top from omni-racer with no other spacers and a -17 stem.
Great point! His inseam needs to be done correctly, it's not based on pants!

I'm 5'6" tall (167.6 cm says my calculator), and my PBH is 81.6 cm. In C&V road bikes (I don't have a modern roadie or gravel bike I like a 55 cm with a very laid back seat tube (70 degrees) and a 53 cm with a rather upright (74.5 degree seat tube). For both, my nominal saddle height ends up around 71 cm, but longer when I use a Selle Anatomica since they sag, it's how they work. I just raise the saddle to get comfortable leg extension. In a plain old vintage Trek, I take a 20.5" or 52 cm c-c. These bikes all have head tubes around 110 to 130 mm. I usually have the saddle to bar drop around 4 cm. I also have a plain old vintage Masi which is 51 cm c-c and 75 degrees. This causes real problems in saddle fitting because of the lack of seat tube setback - I need the extreme S-84 seat post and a very long saddle rail (Specialized Toupe or Selle Anatomica Series 1) to be comfortable. "Too small" is a real thing.

Both of these bikes would be too small for me!
Road Fan is offline  
Old 04-22-21, 07:26 AM
  #14  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,851

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1851 Post(s)
Liked 654 Times in 498 Posts
Originally Posted by wilson_smyth
OP Here:
Thanks for the replies everyone, some great expertise.

I took the size recommended by both companies sizing calculator. they both ask for height and inseam and thats what they recommended. I dont know enough to know straight away that one size up in the canyon would be more comparable.
It seems they both use very different sizing models.

Ill probably just stick with the hybrid for the time being and pick up something i can actually try next year when hopefully stock shortages are less of an issue.

Thanks All
The sizing models can be thought of like proprietary information (how do you quantify the comfort of an earbud?). A company sells a bike based on a frame made in the same factory that all their competitor's frames are also made in. The geometries and component choices are not part of product uniqueness or "selling the exclusive ride you can only get if you buy a Special Pedal Thruster." What is unique is how you interpret how your bike should fit to the human body, and how that affects ride feel and riding experience. So there are no standards for bike fit beyond a few ergonomic considerations like leg extension, not doing a head over heels when you brake, and putting your foot on the ground when stopped. Other than such baseline stuff, it's wide open. Stack and reach are intended to normalize key performance issues across bike types, but I don't know how to decide what stack and reach I need for my measurements. I also like a lot of saddle setback, and stack and reach say nothing about that.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 04-22-21, 05:29 PM
  #15  
urbanknight
Over the hill
 
urbanknight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,329

Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 979 Post(s)
Liked 1,180 Times in 677 Posts
Originally Posted by Iride01
You can fit a size up or down on most any bike.
This may look like an insignificant comment, but it's pure gold. Unless you have some crazy whacked out proportion somewhere, you just need to get a bike with "close enough" geometry and then adjust as needed. Seats have rails, seat posts come with various amounts of setback, stems come in different lengths and rises, new bikes have long steer tubes with spacers you can move, etc.
__________________
It's like riding a bicycle
urbanknight is offline  
Old 04-23-21, 06:54 AM
  #16  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,196

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 551 Times in 441 Posts
A 4cm saddle to bar drop isn't much. I use 8-10cm, even though I'm old. A too tall stack height won't allow enough saddle to bar drop, even with no spacers and a -17 stem. With an 83cm cycling inseam and saddle height about 73cm, a 525-530mm stack height is my limit. Sure I could ride an endurance bike with 40mm more stack, but that's not what I want. What fits depends on the type of fit you want.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 04-23-21, 08:36 AM
  #17  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,367

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3071 Post(s)
Liked 1,624 Times in 999 Posts
I just want to understand how anyone could make— or ride— a road bike with a 69° HTA and 81mm of trail. It just doesn’t make sense to me. What am I missing here?
chaadster is offline  
Old 04-23-21, 10:18 AM
  #18  
63rickert
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,068
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 329 Times in 245 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster
I just want to understand how anyone could make— or ride— a road bike with a 69° HTA and 81mm of trail. It just doesn’t make sense to me. What am I missing here?
Canyon doesn’t make them, they market them. Legal department does not want toe overlap. The designers could accommodate legal and sell a good bike — but these are marketer/designers. It is not old bike guys coming up with this.

They can get away with it because there are dozens of measurements and variables and darn few of us customers are up to speed on all of it. I look at the geo chart and that head angle pokes its head up rather alarmingly. I look at stack and reach and that is Greek to me. Short people (OP is not in my book) are used to being ill-served and not having things as nice as big people have.

Couple years back I helped an old friend pick out a new bike. Guy had owned a bike shop for forty years. Imported bikes, spec’d bikes, did it all. Talking to him, he knows everybody in the business. Everybody likes him. An acknowledged expert. He wasn’t current on new product, asked me to help. After a while I realized the only thing he cared about, for his own bike, was the paint and the stickers. Yes, it is possible to sell a ‘road’ bike with 81mm trail.
63rickert is offline  
Old 04-23-21, 10:47 AM
  #19  
prj71
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: North Central Wisconsin
Posts: 4,595
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2964 Post(s)
Liked 1,159 Times in 758 Posts
Given how close the stack and reach dimensions are and the top tube length the bikes will feel nearly identical when you are sitting on them.

The canyon has a slightly longer wheelbase and chain stay which amounts to intangible amount of stability that you will never notice.
prj71 is offline  
Old 04-23-21, 12:58 PM
  #20  
ZHVelo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Posts: 871
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 520 Post(s)
Liked 228 Times in 160 Posts
Originally Posted by wilson_smyth
with lack of availability i am exploring purchasing a bike online.
Im finding various companies recommend vastly different geometries and id appreciate some help and expertise understanding this.

Take for example the Cube Attain SL and the Canyon Endurance AL Disc 7
My height is 165cm and inner leg is 75cm.
For these measurements these companies recommend very different geometries.
Without trying, how does one get an idea of how they will feel on each of these bikes?

(measurements all in mm and degrees where applicable)


Im guessing the cube is a much more relaxed upright ride, whereas the canyon is a more aggressive position, being taller and shorter in reach, but im really not too sure.
Canyon's endurance bikes are on the aggressive side for endurance bikes which shows here, overall those geometries are close, with the Canyon being more aggressive (particularly the stack).
ZHVelo is offline  
Old 04-27-21, 10:17 AM
  #21  
wilson_smyth
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 20 Posts
Thanks for the advice all.

Regarding my accurate measurements, my inseam is actually about 64cm and the height is pretty much on point at 165cm.
I always classified myself as quite short, being shorter than pretty much every other man I know, but I look in proportion, if that makes sense!


Ive decided for the moment to not buy a bike online, and stick with what i have, (Cube SL Road Race, size 50cm in Cube geometry language) which is a hybrid, but also seen as a flat bar road bike.
When comparing its geometry to the canyon or cube attain, its really not far off at all, just a longer reach which is expected with flat bars.
Until i can really test bikes, its too much money to potentially waste on something that wont make a massive amount of difference.

Besides, the weak point is not the bike, its the engine, and i can make a lot of improvement to that using my current bike!
Now to just get out and cycle more!


wilson_smyth is offline  
Likes For wilson_smyth:
Old 04-29-21, 07:49 AM
  #22  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,196

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1074 Post(s)
Liked 551 Times in 441 Posts
Since you have a bike, you have some known geometry to start with, like a saddle height that is far more important than an inseam measurement. A flat bar frame will have a longer reach. You should try some road bars and levers on it to see how it feels. Road bars usually have a 70-100mm reach and the brake hoods add even more reach. There's a lot of spacer under the stem, which probably creates a fairly upright position. I converted a flat bar hybrid bike to road bars, but that was far too long ago to remember any details.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 04-29-21, 08:32 AM
  #23  
chaadster
Thread Killer
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 12,367

Bikes: 15 Kinesis Racelight 4S, 76 Motebecane Gran Jubilée, 17 Dedacciai Gladiatore2, 12 Breezer Venturi, 09 Dahon Mariner, 12 Mercier Nano, 95 DeKerf Team SL, 19 Tern Rally, 21 Breezer Doppler Cafe+, 19 T-Lab X3, 91 Serotta CII

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3071 Post(s)
Liked 1,624 Times in 999 Posts
Originally Posted by wilson_smyth
Thanks for the advice all.

Regarding my accurate measurements, my inseam is actually about 64cm and the height is pretty much on point at 165cm.
I always classified myself as quite short, being shorter than pretty much every other man I know, but I look in proportion, if that makes sense!


Ive decided for the moment to not buy a bike online, and stick with what i have, (Cube SL Road Race, size 50cm in Cube geometry language) which is a hybrid, but also seen as a flat bar road bike.
When comparing its geometry to the canyon or cube attain, its really not far off at all, just a longer reach which is expected with flat bars.
Until i can really test bikes, its too much money to potentially waste on something that wont make a massive amount of difference.

Besides, the weak point is not the bike, its the engine, and i can make a lot of improvement to that using my current bike!
Now to just get out and cycle more!


That’s a nice bike, but with the Attain SL, adding 1.5° of head angle, loping 50mm off wheelbase, 20mm off chainstays, and cranking the seat tube forward by .6° will make a massive difference in the feel of the bike towards more spry and sporty handling.

You’re well right to avoid the Canyon as the slack ST, incredibly slack HT, and mind boggling amount of trail will shut down any of the responsiveness gains you’d see in tightening up the rear end compared to your Road Race, which is, by the way a nice looking bike. It looks like you’ve some SQ Lab Innerbarends on there to help you get aero; nice!
chaadster is offline  
Old 04-29-21, 09:47 AM
  #24  
wilson_smyth
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by chaadster
That’s a nice bike, but with the Attain SL, adding 1.5° of head angle, loping 50mm off wheelbase, 20mm off chainstays, and cranking the seat tube forward by .6° will make a massive difference in the feel of the bike towards more spry and sporty handling.

You’re well right to avoid the Canyon as the slack ST, incredibly slack HT, and mind boggling amount of trail will shut down any of the responsiveness gains you’d see in tightening up the rear end compared to your Road Race, which is, by the way a nice looking bike. It looks like you’ve some SQ Lab Innerbarends on there to help you get aero; nice!
Thanks! The SL was picked more from lack of choice last March. It was the only bike in my size in the area (and i checked half a dozen bike stores). its quick away from the lights and very responsive (IMO).

Its little heavier than i like, and on a reasonably level local cycle (1 hour duration exactly, 200m elevation over the hour) I can only average 27kph on a good day(no wind, good sleep etc), including traffic light stops.
I think with the right bike i could probably average 30kph or more on the same circuit, but i also think more training will get me there on the current bike.

Yes, i got the SQLab inner bar ends for more hand positions on longer rides, but they do help a little with aero and keeping the elbows in. They're a great addition.
Also put Conti GP5000 32mm on it to replace schwalbe 40mm all rounds. nothing wrong with the schwalbe, they were actually great, very comfortable, but I do think i can hit a reasonable kph with less effort on the conti's, but maybe that's just in my head.

Trying to model the attain geometry in my head and i assume it will position the rider more over the front wheel, which is where i spend a lot of my time on my current bike anyway when accelerating from lights or overtaking.

The cube Attain is about 1.5kg lighter, not a huge amount, whereas the canyon is closer to 3kg lighter (all estimates).
Whats odd is the canyon gets rave reviews over here in Europe, but now im not sure if thats simply because of its relatively lower cost for higher spec and low weight for an AL bike, without taking anything else into consideration.

Last edited by wilson_smyth; 04-29-21 at 09:53 AM.
wilson_smyth is offline  
Old 04-29-21, 09:58 AM
  #25  
wilson_smyth
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Posts: 106
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 44 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
Since you have a bike, you have some known geometry to start with, like a saddle height that is far more important than an inseam measurement. A flat bar frame will have a longer reach. You should try some road bars and levers on it to see how it feels. Road bars usually have a 70-100mm reach and the brake hoods add even more reach. There's a lot of spacer under the stem, which probably creates a fairly upright position. I converted a flat bar hybrid bike to road bars, but that was far too long ago to remember any details.
I considered converting it at one point, but it works very well as it is right now and i really dont think it would function as well with drops. Its the best version of what it can be and ill enjoy it as it is, and eventually supplement it with something a little racier, but after the excellent discussion and advice in this thread ive decided that until i can trial a few bikes, im in no rush to spend the cash.
wilson_smyth is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.