daihard 

I just bought a Cannondale Synapse Carbon two weeks ago. It is a 51-cm frame, with an effective top tube 52.4 cm long. While the ride has been fairly comfortable, I've always felt a little stretched. I've had the original stem (90mm 6-degrees) swapped with an 80mm, 7-degree one, but after riding with the new stem for about 100 miles, the "stretched" feel is still there.

Since the LBS accepts a return within 30 days, I'm thinking about trying the same Synapse in 48-cm frame (the effective top tube length being 50.8 cm) tomorrow to see if the smaller frame is better for me. That's something I should have test ridden and compared to begin with, but I somehow never even thought of doing that. Better late than never, I guess...

I hope I find the 48-cm frame to fit me more properly. Wish me luck!

[ADD] I'm 5" 5' with an inseam of 29 inches.

kleng

do you have a saddle set back on the current seatpost ?

daihard 

No, the saddle is placed quite a bit forward. Come to think of it, is that another indication that the 51-cm frame is a bit too big for me?

2702

From experience a too long top tube is the worse thing for comfort. If I am between sizes I rather go small, you can just add a longer stem.

BTW I am 5 6 and 30 inseam and tried the 51cm Synapse before and I too felt too stretched out.

StanSeven

Definitely sounds too big. Also the saddle needs adjusted independent of reach. Get the saddle position done first and everything else on fit follows. Actually the store shouldn't have let you buy that size based on what you are saying.

bruce19

I would suggest a fitting by someone who is trained. If you go to a smaller frame you may run into the issue of "toe overlap" so check that out and make sure your crankarm length is proper. I went from a 58 frame to a 55 (VTT of 59 & 55) and feel much more comfortable. I use 172.5 crankarms and have a minimal amount of toe overlap which I live with for the benefit of mechanical advantage when climbing. Could have accomplished that with different gearing but it's a new SRAM Red crankset that came on the bike. So, I made the compromise. FWIW it was a used bike (Guru steel) that I bought from a friend.

rpenmanparker 

Something doesn't seem right to me in your analysis. You appear to have fairly short legs and long torso for your height, perhaps not extreme but certainly leaning toward that direction. It is counterintuitive to some, but short legs means you should take a larger frame with today's compact geometries. Look at it this way. If your legs are short and your torso is long, that means you need a longer top tube. The only way to get a longer top tube on a stock bike within a given brand/model is to buy a larger size. Since the sloping top tube doesn't penalize you in stand over height when you do that, larger sizes for longer torsos (and longer arms) have become a standard recommendation.

For example I am 5' 7 1/2", just 2 1/2 inches taller than you. My cycling inseam is 32" so it would appear all the difference in our heights is in my legs. Nevertheless I have always considered my legs short and my torso long. I ride only 54 cm frames with top tubes of 54.5 to 55.5 cm and use 100-110 mm stems. Not only that but I have always ridden with my saddle pretty far back on a 25 mm setback seat post. Despite being not all that flexible and having marginal core strength, I don't feel stretched out at all.

Is it possible the bike size is right, but you are just not yet accustomed to the road racing position and perhaps not (yet) limber enough to be stretched out on your current bike size? Everybody is different; I'm just saying this is so complex, you need some in-person help. Your issue may be you really want to sit straight up. That's fine, but if so, perhaps you should question whether a drop bar bike is right for you or would a less aggressive design be a better choice.

I think you need the in-person advice of a knowledgeable fitter. Sure you want to be comfortable now, but you also want to be properly fitted for the future when you may or may not be more at home in the road racing position.

daihard 

Thanks for the insightful feedback. Having ridden a hybrid bike since I began cycling last summer, I'm definitely more comfortable with an upright riding position than a drop-bar bike position. I'm also not very flexible. Having said that, I would like to ride a bike that will accommodate me not just now but in the future when I'm more used to the road racing position.

I will talk to the LBS today to give them my feedback and ask for further advice.

daihard 

Thanks for the advice. I will make sure toe overlapping won't be an issue when I try a 48 frame later today.

redlude97

What makes you feel like you are too stretched out? I'm almost exactly the same dimensions and ride a 53cm ETT with a 90mm. I've also been riding for a few years and have built up the core strength and flexibility over time to hold a low and long aero position. You might just need to work on your core strength some more if you feel like you are falling forward and putting too much pressure on your hands. Also if you moved your saddle forward to try to decrease your reach that will actually have a negative effect by shifting more weight forward onto your hands. The further back you are the less pressure on your hands, but the position is based on proper fitting for your legs and cleat position

redlude97

BTW I see you're in seattle, if you ever want to chat or ride and want someone to look over your overall fit LMK!

daihard 

Hi!

I believe the saddle position is correct for me. The fitter used the string method to check my knee position and it looked good. I don't think I feel too much weight on my arms, either. The most likely reason that I feel stretched out is my lack of core strength. This is my first road bike, and I've never been a physically fit person to begin with.

Have you been riding the same bike over those years while strengthening your core and getting more accustomed to the more aero position? Have you tried stems with different lengths? I'm now more comfortable with an upright position, but I'd eventually like to be able to ride for an extended period of time in a "racing" position.

bruce19

For 5'7 1/2" I think a 32" inseam is actually a little longer than average.

mulveyr 

Possibly, though I'm 5'5" ( plus a smidge ) and I have a 31.5" cycling inseam.

rpenmanparker 

Now that I see the actual number, I don't disagree. Nevertheless, I can accommodate fairly long top tubes, generous stems and deeper than currently popular handlebars. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

jralbert

Toe overlap will certainly be an issue on a 48cm frame - toe overlap is probably an issue on your 52! I ride a 54 that still manifests some toe overlap. That's no reason not to buy a frame that fits you: just be aware of it and handle your low-speed cornering accordingly.

Lazyass

I'm 5'10" and am fitted perfect with a 54 top tube and 100mm stem. 32 inch inseam with 54 C-T. After years of riding 56's my neck and back no longer hurt and hand numbness is gone. Matter of fact, after measuring myself and doing the Competitive Cyclist calculations, a 53-some odd top tube was recommended. I go with the Eddy Fit. If I were the size of the OP I would probably ride a 48 as well.

rpenmanparker 

With 2.5 inches of additional torso (or torso and neck and head) compared to me but the same inseam, one would think you might actually like a larger frame. In order for all your length to be accommodated on such a small frame as would have a 53 cm TT, you would have to prefer drop to reach. Many people overlook that raising a seat post high above the top tube actually effective extends the top tube backward and lengthens the cockpit assuming the saddle isn't pushed way, way forward. What it doesn't do is raise the top tube (i.e. raise the head tube height). So my guess is on a small frame you would have a high saddle with close to a slammed stem to take up the length of your torso. Such deep saddle to bars drop is in fashion now, but many folks still prefer reach to drop. To do reach instead with the same overall arm extension one would ride a larger frame with longer top tube, less seat post extension and taller head tube. Different strokes for different folks -- can't say it enough.

bruce19

Exactly my dimensions if I hadn't shrunk an inch due to age and injury. Now 5'9" with the loss being in my upper body (spine). However I always had the "wing span" of a Person 6 ft tall so I am riding a 55 C to C with a VTT of 55 and it is really good. A 54 would also fit very well.

bruce19

Truer words have never been spoken.

Campag4life

Bikes are toys. Some like them in miniature.

Campag4life

Have you tried a 50 or 52?

Lazyass

This is my bike when it was new. Seat tube C-C is actually 52cm. I've since raised the stem with all but one of the spacers just because it feels good. Saddle to bar is 51cm, exactly where I need it at. I can ride a century (and have) completely pain free. Being retired I now ride 6 days a week. No aches, pains, nothing. The best fitting bike I ever had, and I've had at least 12-13 over the years, all bigger.

redlude97

Yes, a combination of both. That's why i brought it up. My converted commuter only has a 52cm ETT with a 80mm stem because I ride more upright on it. It was my old fast bike though and before I converted it, it had a 100mm stem and a lot more saddle to bar drop. That took awhile to get it dialed, including a professional fit. As you get into a more low and aero position, you'll actually want to be more stretched out, otherwise you'll feel cramped up. So try the 48, but just be aware of your positioning and where you want to end up fitness and speedwise which will effect your fit.

I <3 Robots

Kind hard to size a person over the web.

I'm 5'8" and have a 30 inseam with a longish torso. I rode a 52cm Cannondale and now ride a 54cm Cervelo. I use a 110mm/-17 stem with no spacers under the stem.