spilot101

So I'm 195cm (6'4") with an inseam of 99cm / 64cm arms - (long legs with a normal upper body). Currently living in Korea where sizes stop at L.... So I've had Canyon Endurace 2XL for the past few years.It fits me fairly well, but I've been wanting something a bit more frisky lately and been looking into the Ultimate, which is sized more aggressively: longer reach and a shorter stack. According to Canyon, I'm right in between XL (<98cm inseam) and XXL (>99cm).... So I'm curious which, do you think, would be more comfortable.... While it seems that the XXL (Ultimate) would be more upright....the reach will also be longer. Any input is greatly appreciated

.

spilot101

PS. While my current bike works for the most part, too much time in the drops aches my lower back a bit. Perhaps another question could be.... which of the two Ultimate XL vs Ultimate XXL is less likely to exacerbate the situation?

elcruxio

This is truly a difficult question to answer, because just proportions aren't enough to decide which bike is going to be comfortable for you. Other contributing factors are your mobility and postural strength, pelvic posture, pedaling style etc.

All I can do is contribute some of my own findings since I'm pretty close to your size (6'5" so just over 195,5cm) with a slightly shorter inseam (96.5cm) and slightly longer arms (70cm).
I haven't tried a canyon endurance, but having done some testing with my LHT, which is roughly the same size frame wise I can perhaps give some insight from my own perspective.

Currently the 62cm LHT has 50mm of spacers under a 100mm stem and 85mm reach bars. Accounting for a few variables (also the shape of the bars and subsequent lever placement) the endurance 2XL has roughly 1cm longer and 2.5cm lower riding position than my LHT at the moment.
My take is that the Endurance could work for me with a shorter stem (100mm). It is a bit low though so for me it would resemble a racer rather than an endurance bike. The Ultimate however is even longer and lower so I highly doubt I could make it work for me in any size

Then again, you might be able to make it work for you.

What I've learned about reach and stack over the years however is that going lower can be a choice. This means that you can lower your bar quite a bit and work through the possible initial discomfort. When you get stronger, you get accustomed to that lower position and you're good to go. There are limits of course.
Going longer however is not really a choice. You can potentially strengthen yourself over a season to gain a longer position at some point in the future, but the work needs to be put in beforehand. You'll notice this usually by the sensation that your cockpit feels cramped. But in my experience it's not viable to slap in a longer stem and try to work through the discomfort. Too long a stem leads to all kinds of issues quite quickly. This is the reason you may need to use a shorter stem when you move the bars down so you maintain the same bar reach when the bar stack gets lower.

As to the different sizes, I'd advice you to buy a couple of 17 degree stems in different lengths so you can simulate the Ultimate's reach+ and stack+ numbers in different sizes. That way you'll get a better understanding which size you can get.

I use this tool to make assesments between frames Stack and reach calculator

datlas 

Ordinarily would say get the XXL and get slightly shorter and/or upsloping stem (90-100mm and 17 degrees) as above.

I don’t know the Canyon line but with proprietary stems and stem/bar combos it’s tougher to tweak.

WhyFi

So you're primarily looking for more lively handling via geometry (rake, trail, wheelbase, stay length, etc)?

What's your stack and reach currently and are you using additional spacers (if so, how many)? Are you looking for a slightly more aggressive position, even though you already have discomfort at times? Or would you rather replicate the position that your already have?

imakecircles

You mention that too much time in the drops sometimes hurts your back. I wonder how long you've ridden and if you've experimented with the bike fit to find your position or had a bike fit. I'd encourage getting your current bike to fit you comfortably for you and the type of riding you do by a combination of the above and then looking for a replacement bike that's more high spirited on which to duplicate the position, which would then be a known quantity.

spilot101

Thanks for all the feedback - good stuff

I was looking for something more lively, lighter and easier to corner. The Ultimate would be about 1.8kg lighter.
I don't have any extra spacers or anything else... so my stack and reach are just as they are in the diagram I posted (636mm and 399mm respectively). I'm not necessary looking for a more aggressive position and would rather replicate the one that I already have.

spilot101

That definitely makes sense. So if I'm experiencing a bit of lower back tightness with my current rig, would throwing some extra spacers be a good move, or would the 17 deg. 100mm stem be a more sound next step?

Iride01 

Back tightness or soreness isn't just handlebar height. You might have some reach or saddle position that needs to be sorted too.

Dean V

Why don't you experiment with the fit on the bike you already have?
Then when you are happy with it get the new frame to suit that fit.
It is the only way to do it. Guessing on a forum is useless.

spilot101

True, although I still wouldn't mind getting down to which of the Ultimate models would be more or less close to my Endurace

chaadster

Looking at the charts, the geo is not very different between those bikes at all, and in fact, even though the Ultimates have 5mm shorter stays, they both have a longer wheelbase which negatively impacts the sensation of agility. I would not expect any real handling differences between these two models.

Personally, while a lively bike is a blast, I wouldn’t waste my time or money on such a swap, but if you insist, getting the smaller Ultimate is the easy choice IMO.