Originally Posted by
sleepy
So I made a possible mistake, which would is kind of embarrassing.
I had a fitting done, and apparently, my awesome CAAD9 is just slightly too big for me. I have a 52, should've gone with a 50 [technically, I should ride a 51.5cm frame. Funny world.] After some tweaks and adjustments, it fits fine, although it looks somewhat aesthetically unpleasing. Rides fabulous, but pretty much resigned to a 80mm stem [which I'm used to.] and maybe getting a Compact handlebar. Alas, there is smidgen of seatpost showing albeit with adequate saddle to handlebar drop.
Well, folks. Grin and deal with it? It's not that big of an issue, but I'm a very neurotic type when it comes to sizing.
Anyway, the frame is amazing. Super stiff, you want to go, and it follows suit. Awesome stuff, the CAAD9.
I'm in pretty much the same position. Bought a 60cm CAAD9-5 as a leftover from 2010. They had a 58, but were positive that the 60 was the right choice (he actually said he wouldn't let me walk out the door with a 58, even if that was all he had). I'm tall, but my legs are not proportional to my torso (90cm inseam). My stats on some of the bike fit sites indicate that the 60cm frame (C-T) is correct for me (wrenchscience.com). To attain the proper reach I currently have a 70mm stem intalled. Wrench science even spec'ed a 60cm frame and 67cm of reach. With the 70mm stem I'm currently at 66cm reach. After my conditioning improves, I expect to move to an 80 or 90mm stem.
Honest question, I don't pretend to be an expert in these matters, but why is it incorrect to use a shorter stem? I haven't noticed "twitchy" steering at all. I am having some knee pain, but I think that's more related to my knee than to any specific set up issues. If I ice it after a ride, it's better. I bought a computer with cadence to make sure I'm spinning enough. But I do live in an area with lots of hills, so even in my lowest gear, I'm sometimes mashing up a steep.
I think that if I were to move to a 58cm frame that my seat would be so high that I'd have way too much drop to the handlebars. With the 60 there's already "quite a bit" of seat post extended (I haven't measured). So if I need a 70mm stem (until my flexibility improves?), why is that bad?
I've hesitated to post pictures of my bike, because I've read enough of this forum to know that the "stem police" will call out my short stem. I have stem inadequacy syndrome! if it's so "bad" why do they make them?
I've rectified the frame size in my mind, given my specific proportions. But some of these blanket statements that the short stem is BAD, make me wonder if I'm missing something. Of course, the answer for me may be a different brand bike (blasphemer!) or a custom frame...