Originally Posted by
DaveSSS
I get this for the geometry:
https://www.scott-sports.com/us/en/p...icle=286425054
Stack is 572.4 and reach is 390.9. That's way too big. I'm 168cm with an 83cm cycling inseam and 72-73cm saddle height. I'd pick the 47 or 49cm size. I see that this is an endurance bike, but that usually calls for a 20mm taller stack with no increase in reach. The 52 has too much reach, unless a 90-100mm stem is used.
Most bikes have a headset top cover that adds 10-20mm to the stack. My bikes are setup for a racing fit, so my saddle to bar drop is 10cm. That's what I get with a 505mm stack, plus the 10mm headset top cover and one 10mm spacer, with a -7 degree stem.
This makes zero sense to me. If someone of average height is supposed to be riding the XXS or XS frame size, what are short people supposed to be riding? Sometimes a taller person needs a small bike to deal with reach issues, but on average the medium sizes are for medium people.
There is also this bizarre trend of people riding road bikes with the handlebars located almost straight below their shoulders. Which is maybe what you do when you've decided to ride a 47 but are much too tall.
@
Surpin, the correct sizes for you are the 540 or the 520. As they have only 1 cm of difference in reach, the important difference is the that front end of the 540 is 2 cm higher. High is good if you aren't flexible. But the reach issue is a choice between a 100mm stem and a 90.