Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

Rose Bikes reach too big? Size advice

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

Rose Bikes reach too big? Size advice

Old 09-12-19, 02:26 PM
  #1  
rekagy
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 7

Bikes: Bianchi Intrepida 105

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Rose Bikes reach too big? Size advice

Hi guys, I'm a lady looking to buy the Rose X-lite Six. However, the reach is huge (380 mm) compared to my Bianchi of 366 mm. Bianchi is a hair big for me (though super comfy on long rides). I'm hoping to get into crits next season, would sizing up with the Rose be a problem? Is there a way to reduce reach by 15 mm? The size smaller Rose is simply too small.

I'm 5'6" (168 cm), 32" (81 cm) inseam, and equal wing span as height.

Bianchi 51: Reach 366 mm, stack 548 mm, ETT 535 mm
Rose 53: Reach 380 mm, stack 538 mm, ETT 535 mm

Thank you so much!
rekagy is offline  
Old 09-12-19, 03:04 PM
  #2  
melikebikey35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 258

Bikes: Cervelo R5 disc - Limited, Cervelo Aspero

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked 129 Times in 65 Posts
Yes...going with the Rose in a 53 would be a huge problem. The 50 would be much better suited for you, and I don't think it's too small for you.

The problem is you are comparing an endurance bike (your Bianchi) to a race bike (Rose), so you'll be unable to get similar geometry...you match the reach, and the stack will be too low. Match the stack, and the reach will be too long.
So, if you feel that the Rose in a 50 is too small, then you need to look into other brands that have slightly less aggressive geometry (Cervelo R3 is a good example), or stick to endurance bikes.
melikebikey35 is offline  
Likes For melikebikey35:
Old 09-12-19, 03:18 PM
  #3  
rekagy
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 7

Bikes: Bianchi Intrepida 105

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by melikebikey35
Yes...going with the Rose in a 53 would be a huge problem. The 50 would be much better suited for you, and I don't think it's too small for you.

The problem is you are comparing an endurance bike (your Bianchi) to a race bike (Rose), so you'll be unable to get similar geometry...you match the reach, and the stack will be too low. Match the stack, and the reach will be too long.
So, if you feel that the Rose in a 50 is too small, then you need to look into other brands that have slightly less aggressive geometry (Cervelo R3 is a good example), or stick to endurance bikes.
Thank you so much for giving your time on this and even checking sizing! The 50 cm I ruled out as Marta Swiatlon races on it at 158 cm height.... I think you are right, I should look at other brands, but I fell in love with the Aurora finish. Plus can’t beat the price for di2 :-)

So no way to make it fit for me?
rekagy is offline  
Old 09-12-19, 04:03 PM
  #4  
melikebikey35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 258

Bikes: Cervelo R5 disc - Limited, Cervelo Aspero

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked 129 Times in 65 Posts
Originally Posted by rekagy
Thank you so much for giving your time on this and even checking sizing! The 50 cm I ruled out as Marta Swiatlon races on it at 158 cm height.... I think you are right, I should look at other brands, but I fell in love with the Aurora finish. Plus can’t beat the price for di2 :-)

So no way to make it fit for me?
The 50 is the smallest size that Rose offers, so I suspect that is the reason that she rides it, as opposed to it being her choice...I did a quick google search, and based on the photos (very little seatpost exposed, and a short, -17 stem) , she could definitely go with a smaller frame. Rose does offer fantastic bikes at a great price, so I so understand why you are eyeing one!

Ultimately, it comes down to your flexibility/strength and desired position. If you are looking at closely replicated your current position, then you'll struggle with the 53 (and possibly on the 50, even). If you feel like you need to go longer/lower, then maybe the 53 could work. I will say, I am 175cm, prefer a very aggressive position, and a 380mm reach with a 100mm stem is all that I can handle. So, I do think that a 380 reach would be pushing it for you.


What is your current saddle height, stem length, reach of the handlebars, and amount of spacers under your stem?
Then, when you say that your current bike is slightly too big, what are you referring to...reach, stack, or both?
melikebikey35 is offline  
Old 09-12-19, 04:20 PM
  #5  
rekagy
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 7

Bikes: Bianchi Intrepida 105

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Thank you again for such valuable information! I definitely don't like to feel crammed in on the bike. I prefer a relaxed geometry and as a first seasoner, my core is pretty weak. (On the contrary, I had my Bianchi with no spacers before and felt great, but the bike fitter told me to raise it). It's pretty late in Denmark to measure the bike, but perhaps for now my Strava photos will suffice. The Strava link is listed on my profile with riding pictures :-) I would be happy to get back to you tomorrow if you still have some time on this.

Edit: I have a 100 mm stem and 80 mm reach handlebars.

Last edited by rekagy; 09-12-19 at 04:24 PM.
rekagy is offline  
Old 09-12-19, 04:31 PM
  #6  
Chi_Z
Senior Member
 
Chi_Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 507

Bikes: Niner RLT 9 RDO

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 263 Post(s)
Liked 69 Times in 50 Posts
please don't be another, buying a new race bike then put 50mm spacer and 70mm flipped stem on it, to make it fit.
Chi_Z is offline  
Likes For Chi_Z:
Old 09-12-19, 06:16 PM
  #7  
melikebikey35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 258

Bikes: Cervelo R5 disc - Limited, Cervelo Aspero

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked 129 Times in 65 Posts
Originally Posted by rekagy
Thank you again for such valuable information! I definitely don't like to feel crammed in on the bike. I prefer a relaxed geometry and as a first seasoner, my core is pretty weak. (On the contrary, I had my Bianchi with no spacers before and felt great, but the bike fitter told me to raise it). It's pretty late in Denmark to measure the bike, but perhaps for now my Strava photos will suffice. The Strava link is listed on my profile with riding pictures :-) I would be happy to get back to you tomorrow if you still have some time on this.

Edit: I have a 100 mm stem and 80 mm reach handlebars.
You're very welcome! Based on your Strava photos, you do seem to have a very relaxed setup...a sizable amount of spacers, and handlebars rotated backwards. And your arms also appear to be very straight, and you are gripping behind the hoods...all of which usually suggest the bike is too long and too low for the rider.

With that said, I do believe that there is a "breaking-point" where once you go low enough, it allows your upper body to "fall" into place, and become more relaxed than a setup with a higher stack...if that makes any sense? Me for example, am much more relaxed/comfortable on a slammed race bike than I am on an endurance bike.

If you are seriously considering going with a race bike, I suggest removing all the spacers from your current bike, and put on a 110mm stem (try to find a cheap used one), then ride it for a week.
If you like it, then you know you can handle race geometry. If not, then you just saved yourself A LOT of money lol.
melikebikey35 is offline  
Likes For melikebikey35:
Old 09-13-19, 11:43 AM
  #8  
rekagy
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 7

Bikes: Bianchi Intrepida 105

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by melikebikey35
I suggest removing all the spacers from your current bike, and put on a 110mm stem (try to find a cheap used one), then ride it for a week.
If you like it, then you know you can handle race geometry. If not, then you just saved yourself A LOT of money lol.
Fantastic idea thank you! Otherwise I will patiently wait till the 2020 Canyon Endurace, which should fit me much better. Also nice bike! I felt right at home on a Cervelo R5 51cm, but the di2 disc is a bit too expensive for me at the moment. Thank you again for all the information, it really cleared my head. :-)
rekagy is offline  
Old 09-13-19, 04:37 PM
  #9  
melikebikey35
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 258

Bikes: Cervelo R5 disc - Limited, Cervelo Aspero

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 141 Post(s)
Liked 129 Times in 65 Posts
Originally Posted by rekagy
Fantastic idea thank you! Otherwise I will patiently wait till the 2020 Canyon Endurace, which should fit me much better. Also nice bike! I felt right at home on a Cervelo R5 51cm, but the di2 disc is a bit too expensive for me at the moment. Thank you again for all the information, it really cleared my head. :-)
If you felt at home on an R5, then you shouldn't have an issue with race geometry, but definitely try it out on your current bike since it's really hard to get a true feel for a bike on a short test ride.

The R5 was the bike I was hoping for, but yah, the di2 disc is just way too expensive. So I went with the R3 (in a 54). I'm really happy with it, and I don't think you'd be disappointed with it either, if you decide to go the Cervelo route. Canyon's are another great bike (and a great value), so it just comes down to which style of bike you prefer!
melikebikey35 is offline  
Old 10-21-19, 03:59 AM
  #10  
rekagy
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 7

Bikes: Bianchi Intrepida 105

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Update for anybody looking for ROSE:

I got a Canyon Ultimate WMN XS, and completely in love with it. Perfect with for me and way more comfortable than my endurance Bianchi.
:-)
The Rose 53 would have been way to big for me.
rekagy is offline  
Likes For rekagy:
Old 01-12-20, 09:56 AM
  #11  
nidrig
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Posts: 1
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by melikebikey35
The 50 is the smallest size that Rose offers, so I suspect that is the reason that she rides it, as opposed to it being her choice...I did a quick google search, and based on the photos (very little seatpost exposed, and a short, -17 stem) , she could definitely go with a smaller frame. Rose does offer fantastic bikes at a great price, so I so understand why you are eyeing one!


Ultimately, it comes down to your flexibility/strength and desired position. If you are looking at closely replicated your current position, then you'll struggle with the 53 (and possibly on the 50, even). If you feel like you need to go longer/lower, then maybe the 53 could work. I will say, I am 175cm, prefer a very aggressive position, and a 380mm reach with a 100mm stem is all that I can handle. So, I do think that a 380 reach would be pushing it for you.



What is your current saddle height, stem length, reach of the handlebars, and amount of spacers under your stem?

Then, when you say that your current bike is slightly too big, what are you referring to...reach, stack, or both?

hi,


Thank you so much for your valuable input.


I'm the same height/inseam as the op, female as well, also lurking at the rose x-lite and struggling with the size.


After reading your posts, I did my research and found out that as far as my lower back is concerned, I'm much better on a smaller frame.


I rode a bike with a geometry similar to the rose size 53 for two years and it lead to debilitating lower back pain. Actually, you're spot on when you say that at some point we "fall into place".


The problem in my/our (op) case, is that the x-lite in size 53 has a stack too high. It means, that even with the stem slammed, it is not possible to achieve enough saddle to bar drop. Which means not enough pelvis tilt, a more backward position and more weight on the lower back. That is probably not an issue for younger people and/or recreational riders, but when we push hard, that leads to too much strain on the back. I believe men are less subjective to this problem, as they naturally have less lumbar curve and probably can handle an upright pelvis more easily. But for women, that could lead to problems.


To get more drop, we would need to use a stem with negative angle, exactly as the athlete mentioned earlier did. But the stem would need to be shorten as well, meaning in our case a 80mm stem maybe. Overall, with the relatively long reach, the position would be too stretch and I think you are right that trying to make the size 53 fit is almost impossible in our case.


The size 50, on the other side, fits perfectly for my case. But I shall put a foreword here, in case anyone find herself/himself in the same situation. With our respective height of 168 (5'6''), the rose xlite size 50 falls into the sporty/aggressive position category. And just like you with the size 53, it is all I can handle on size 50.

My conclusion, in case of the rose xlite, for female struggling in between sizes as we do, the geometry just doesn't fit. Either we go for a endurance position on the larger frame, or a very aggressive one on the smaller one. I think the op choice (canyon wmn ultimate) is the way to go.

Thanks for reading and your contribution!

Last edited by nidrig; 01-12-20 at 10:42 AM.
nidrig is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 10:42 AM
  #12  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,224
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by rekagy
Hi guys, I'm a lady looking to buy the Rose X-lite Six. However, the reach is huge (380 mm) compared to my Bianchi of 366 mm. Bianchi is a hair big for me (though super comfy on long rides). I'm hoping to get into crits next season, would sizing up with the Rose be a problem? Is there a way to reduce reach by 15 mm? The size smaller Rose is simply too small.

I'm 5'6" (168 cm), 32" (81 cm) inseam, and equal wing span as height.

Bianchi 51: Reach 366 mm, stack 548 mm, ETT 535 mm
Rose 53: Reach 380 mm, stack 538 mm, ETT 535 mm

Thank you so much!
Simply comparing reach and stack does not disclose actual seat to hood distance and drop. You need to compare top tube, stem length, seat post set back and bar reach as well. Just comparing reach and stack is meaningless.

Flame away if you must :-)
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 11:09 AM
  #13  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,212

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
Duplicate post.

Last edited by DaveSSS; 01-12-20 at 11:14 AM.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 11:13 AM
  #14  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,212

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan
Simply comparing reach and stack does not disclose actual seat to hood distance and drop. You need to compare top tube, stem length, seat post set back and bar reach as well. Just comparing reach and stack is meaningless.

Flame away if you must :-)
No flames, but you are incorrect. Reach and stack make it much easier to compare two frames, but there are a few tricks to making a proper comparison. With reach, there is no need for a TT length to be considered.

To properly compare these frames, the reach should be compared at the SAME stack height on both frames. The Rose has a shorter stack, so at the minimum the reach should be reduced by 3mm to account for adding an additional 10mm in spacer to match the stack of the other bike. That would make the reach 377, compared to 366, so it would require one size shorter stem, to fit the same.

The seat tube angle does come into play, but only to identify what change might be required to place the saddle in the same position, relative to the BB. The rose must have little more slack STA, so the saddle would be pushed forward by a small amount to get the same saddle nose to center of bars length. That might require a seat post with a different setback.

My other observation is the frame size selection has been made, mostly based on stack height and not reach. I'm the same height with slightly more inseam and a 73cm saddle height. I'd pick the smaller 50cm size. The issue is probably saddle to bar drop. If the saddle is placed too far forward, there will be too much weight on the hands and the wrong solution is usually raising the bars up higher to fix the problem.

The OP may want to consider an endurance frame to get more stack height.
DaveSSS is offline  
Likes For DaveSSS:
Old 01-12-20, 11:31 AM
  #15  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,212

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
The Rose Team GF six has the taller stack height that might be more appropriate. They call these marathon frames, rather than endurance.

https://www.rosebikes.ie/rose-team-g...icle_size=50cm
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 11:33 AM
  #16  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,224
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
No flames, but you are incorrect. Reach and stack make it much easier to compare two frames, but there are a few tricks to making a proper comparison. With reach, there is no need for a TT length to be considered.

To properly compare these frames, the reach should be compared at the SAME stack height on both frames. The Rose has a shorter stack, so at the minimum the reach should be reduced by 3mm to account for adding an additional 10mm in spacer to match the stack of the other bike. That would make the reach 377, compared to 366, so it would require one size shorter stem, to fit the same.

The seat tube angle does come into play, but only to identify what change might be required to place the saddle in the same position, relative to the BB. The rose must have little more slack STA, so the saddle would be pushed forward by a small amount to get the same saddle nose to center of bars length. That might require a seat post with a different setback.

My other observation is the frame size selection has been made, mostly based on stack height and not reach. I'm the same height with slightly more inseam and a 73cm saddle height. I'd pick the smaller 50cm size. The issue is probably saddle to bar drop. If the saddle is placed too far forward, there will be too much weight on the hands and the wrong solution is usually raising the bars up higher to fix the problem.

The OP may want to consider an endurance frame to get more stack height.
Sure Im wrong

Good luck forever chasing your tail :-)
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 12:28 PM
  #17  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,879

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3905 Post(s)
Liked 7,181 Times in 2,905 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan
Simply comparing reach and stack does not disclose actual seat to hood distance and drop. You need to compare top tube, stem length, seat post set back and bar reach as well. Just comparing reach and stack is meaningless.
Why do you insist on injecting reality into the discussion?
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 01:02 PM
  #18  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,224
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe
Why do you insist on injecting reality into the discussion?
Im wasnt insisting :-) From experience i know this is highly controversial and ppl will argue til the cows come home that all you need is reach and stack, completely ignoring R and S does not predict actual distance between the contact points.
Racing Dan is offline  
Old 01-12-20, 02:10 PM
  #19  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,212

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
The reality is that reach and stack do predict bike fit, but the values are often misused. The reach of two frames can only be compared at the same stack height. You can't just compare the reach, without the proper correction for stack height difference.

That STA is certainly relevant. If there's a lot of difference, use 1 or 1.2cm per degree to figure out how much more or less that the saddle must be moved.

I have two frames - one with a 74 STA and one with a 74.5 STA. I have the same seatpost on both bikes, but the saddle is moved further back with the steeper STA, to place the saddle in the same position relative to the BB. Sometimes you can't get a perfect match with reach, since stems only come in 10mm increments. I opted for a 10mm shorter stem on one bike, with saddle a bit further back, to get the same reach.

Last edited by DaveSSS; 01-13-20 at 09:35 AM.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 01-13-20, 07:46 AM
  #20  
Bah Humbug
serious cyclist
 
Bah Humbug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Austin
Posts: 21,147

Bikes: S1, R2, P2

Mentioned: 115 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9334 Post(s)
Liked 3,679 Times in 2,026 Posts
Originally Posted by Racing Dan
Simply comparing reach and stack does not disclose actual seat to hood distance and drop. You need to compare top tube, stem length, seat post set back and bar reach as well. Just comparing reach and stack is meaningless.

Flame away if you must :-)
No flame, but someone clearly misled you about stack and reach and your reaction is understandable given that misinformation. Let's start here:

https://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/...er_One_95.html
https://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/...er_Two_96.html
https://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/..._Three_97.html

Yes, of course, that's Slowtwitch and thus focused on triathlon bikes. Those articles are the genesis of stack and reach frame measurements, and they explain the reasoning behind it. Specifically, they are strictly for comparing bare frame to bare frame; your concerns about "stem length, seat post set back and bar reach" are valid for fitting and comparing full bikes, buy have zero effect on the frames' stack and reach measurements. Top tube length is important, but is one of a few factors that contribute to reach. Once you take the (effective) top tube length and account for seat tube angle, you get the frame's reach. Of course, you can slide the seat forward or back, or use an offset or straight seatpost, but that's true on all frames, and stack and reach compare how the frames fit before you install the seatpost, saddle, spacers, stem, bars, and hoods.

Stack and reach are the distillation of the frame's (and only the frame's) geometry that contribute to fit, including top tube. seat tube angle, bottom bracket drop, head tube angle, head tube length, and so on. They don't tell you how the final build will fit; that depends on a number of other factors, including those you pointed out. They don't tell you how the bike will handle, either. They do give you the easiest and clearest system for determining whether a 56 in one brand fits more like the 55 or 57 in another brand, which is what they were intended for. You don't have to use them, you don't have to like them, but pretending they don't work is like pretending trigonometry doesn't work.
Bah Humbug is offline  
Likes For Bah Humbug:
Old 01-17-20, 02:17 PM
  #21  
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Posts: 12,098

Bikes: 2016 Hong Fu FM-079-F, 1984 Trek 660, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2016 Islabikes Beinn 20 (son's)

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1240 Post(s)
Liked 94 Times in 65 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
I have two frames - one with a 74 STA and one with a 74.5 STA. I have the same seatpost on both bikes, but the saddle is moved further back with the steeper STA, to place the saddle in the same position relative to the BB. Sometimes you can't get a perfect match with reach, since stems only come in 10mm increments. I opted for a 10mm shorter stem on one bike, with saddle a bit further back, to get the same reach.
105mm are fairly common. You need to search a bit more for 95mm and 115mm but both are available.
joejack951 is offline  
Old 01-17-20, 05:18 PM
  #22  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,212

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
105 is not that common, at least in high end, but not carbon stems. I use a -17.

https://www.zipp.com/stems/service-course-sl-stem/
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 01-17-20, 06:33 PM
  #23  
joejack951
Senior Member
 
joejack951's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Wilmington, DE
Posts: 12,098

Bikes: 2016 Hong Fu FM-079-F, 1984 Trek 660, 2005 Iron Horse Warrior Expert, 2009 Pedal Force CX1, 2016 Islabikes Beinn 20 (son's)

Mentioned: 36 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1240 Post(s)
Liked 94 Times in 65 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
105 is not that common, at least in high end, but not carbon stems. I use a -17.

https://www.zipp.com/stems/service-course-sl-stem/
-17 degree and high end carbon is pretty niche already. Add in 105mm and I can see why you’d just rather move your saddle.
joejack951 is offline  
Old 01-19-20, 05:13 AM
  #24  
Racing Dan
Senior Member
 
Racing Dan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 2,224
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1332 Post(s)
Liked 316 Times in 214 Posts
Originally Posted by Bah Humbug
No flame, but someone clearly misled you about stack and reach and your reaction is understandable given that misinformation. Let's start here:

https://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/...er_One_95.html
https://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/...er_Two_96.html
https://www.slowtwitch.com/Bike_Fit/..._Three_97.html

Yes, of course, that's Slowtwitch and thus focused on triathlon bikes. Those articles are the genesis of stack and reach frame measurements, and they explain the reasoning behind it. Specifically, they are strictly for comparing bare frame to bare frame; your concerns about "stem length, seat post set back and bar reach" are valid for fitting and comparing full bikes, buy have zero effect on the frames' stack and reach measurements. Top tube length is important, but is one of a few factors that contribute to reach. Once you take the (effective) top tube length and account for seat tube angle, you get the frame's reach. Of course, you can slide the seat forward or back, or use an offset or straight seatpost, but that's true on all frames, and stack and reach compare how the frames fit before you install the seatpost, saddle, spacers, stem, bars, and hoods.

Stack and reach are the distillation of the frame's (and only the frame's) geometry that contribute to fit, including top tube. seat tube angle, bottom bracket drop, head tube angle, head tube length, and so on. They don't tell you how the final build will fit; that depends on a number of other factors, including those you pointed out. They don't tell you how the bike will handle, either. They do give you the easiest and clearest system for determining whether a 56 in one brand fits more like the 55 or 57 in another brand, which is what they were intended for. You don't have to use them, you don't have to like them, but pretending they don't work is like pretending trigonometry doesn't work.
I am NOT mislead. Im pointing out its misleading comparing two bikes on the basis of only stack and reach. Im standing by that assertion. Two bikes may, or may not, be vastly different in many different and important ways, even if they have the exact same stack and reach. HTA, STA, TT length, Trail, Chain stay length, stem length, handlebar reach, handlebar width, crank length ect may all differ and contribute to fit and "feel" of the bike.

Arguing otherwise is nonsense AND misleading, imo.
Racing Dan is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Eyedrop
Road Cycling
14
01-12-17 07:48 PM
Fly2High
Road Cycling
19
08-03-16 04:53 PM
Beerope
Road Cycling
1
06-26-16 02:05 PM
chil2makefun
Fitting Your Bike
3
01-12-16 02:29 AM
GMM
Framebuilders
17
03-04-11 05:59 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


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.