dubstylee

I am torn between the size 47 and 49 Salsa Chili con Crosso.

I ride a road bike with a 530 mm effective top tube and a 120 mm stem that's roughly horizontal. The 47 Salsa has a 530 mm effective top tube. The 49 has a 540 mm effective top tube.

I guess I am not sure if there are any tradeoffs in handling with a short TT and longer stem (530+120) versus a longer TT and shorter stem (540+110). One of my buddies suggested that I'd have more trouble unweighting the front wheel with the short top tube.

The thing that is getting me is the Salsa website says the size 47 is equal to a traditional 50 and the 49 is equal to a traditional 52. That surprises me a bit because I figured a traditional 52 would have a shorter TT than 540 mm.

Does anyone have any insight? I have a feeling that I'd be fine with either bike, but I don't want to make a dumb sizing mistake when dropping this much on a frameset.

garrontmo

Not that its much help, but I just went through the same decision with the La Cruz. My road bike has a 537mm top tube and I use a 90mm stem. I ordered the 49cm and am hoping that its not too big. I think the geometry is more relaxed than my Specialized Allez, so that should help some. It came yesterday and it will probably be a while before I get it built up and can give you any more useful info.

Garron

dirtyphotons

do you have or know of any bikes with, say, a 54/55cm top tube and 100ish stem to try for comparison? you could even go test ride a bike at a shop, as most tend to come witn 100mm stems.

i tend to gravitate towards a bike that will give me a 100 or 90mm stem, but i'm not sure if that's due to any advantage or if that's just what i'm used to.

neither the 47 nor the 49 sounds terribly off the mark to me, fwiw.

jfmckenna

TT measurement imo is the only one that is important. I'd keep the same TT and get a shorter stem then your road bike. So the 47 with a 100mm stem would probably be right. Cross bikes often have higher BB's so your seat tube measurement is less then a compared road bike. TT is what counts and typically you want to be a little more scrunched up on a cross bike.

chimivee

I'd go w/ the same TT/stem set up as your road bike if that's what you like (long stem relative to top tube). Can't imagine 1cm would make a significant difference in "unweighting the front wheel."

black_box 

just for comparison to me, what are your measurements? inseam, height, etc.

flargle

For a bike that size, a shorter stem is proportional and makes sense, and 110cm is hardly short. I see smaller bikes with 80cm stems usually.

The head tube on the 49 is 2cm longer than the 47. In other words, you can get away with two fewer spacers below the stem.

flargle

P.S. The Con Cross frameset is truly drool-worthy. If only the fork were painted to match, it would be perfect.

dubstylee

I'm 5' 7.5" with a 32" cycling inseam.

dubstylee

Alright so I am going to go with the 47. I know a 530 mm top tube works for me from road experience. I know my current cross bike (542 mm top tube) feels a bit large. I don't think 2 mm shorter will be enough, so 47 it is.

bnelson

how does the 47 feel

c_m_shooter

I would go for the 49 between the two options you gave us, but I am your height and inseam and ride a 55cm top tube with a 105mm stem, so would recomend jumping up another size.

dubstylee

Went with the 49 after all after talking to a couple guys that do a lot of mountain biking. It feels great.

It's nice having the extra head tube length and an ever-so-slightly larger frame triangle for shouldering.

flargle

Glad to hear things worked out. You got a photo?

IMO when people are debating between two sizes, the larger is probably the smarter choice.

dubstylee

Crappy shot, but you get the picture: