I think Nobodyetal might have it dialed in for us long legged, short torso folks. I just found a Fit Kit fitting I had done in 2002. My vital stats, at least the ones that mean anything to me off this sheet show my inseam a 88.75 cm or very close to 35" and my height is right at 6'. The arm length and other measurements are "corrected", so I really don't know what they mean. I would have scanned the whole thing, but my wife is preparing a presentation on that computer. If you are interested I can get you a copy. It was also a fit for a road bike where the seat would be higher than the saddle.

The reason I think he is right is the recommendations that came from the fit were a 56cm top tube with an 80mm mm stem, or "looked good" on a 55 cm with a 110mm stem. This was combined with a 58cm seat tube length. Unfortunately, They don't make any stock bikes that I know of with that geometry.

The LHT 58cm has an effective top tube of 58.6, and the 56cm frame has an effective top tube of 57.0cm. This is only about 0.63" difference between the 58cm and the 56cm frames. With an 80mm stem, I am only .25" off from most stretched out recommendation. The 56cm might have worked just as well or even a little better.

If it would help you, I can also take a wing span measurement, and maybe with a little interpolation you can dial it in a little closer. I also have a a 58cm Bianchi Volpe that has a proportionally shorter top tube, and that is the reason I bought it. It has been a good touring bike, and I'm considering it for our next this summer.

A couple of shots my wife took last summer (2900 mile ride). I would not call that stretched out at all (58cm LHT w/80mm stem). Bar height has a lot to do with it. PS. That is not my stomach, it is my camera tucked inside my jersey. I was down to 150 at that stage of the ride