Old 02-22-23, 08:38 PM
  #6  
Kontact 
Senior Member
 
Kontact's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 7,036
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4384 Post(s)
Liked 1,554 Times in 1,019 Posts
Originally Posted by spencertimm
Thanks - that's helpful. Out of curiosity, how did you work the 563 figure out? I have been trying to work out the impact of seat tube angle on overall reach when looking at frames, but having a hard time doing so due to the varying seat tube angles and the impact on overall reach that my ultimate saddle height will have.
You know, I screwed it up. First I read the chart wrong for seat tube angle, then I applied the conversion backwards. I blame my phone.

Your "Universal Level Top Tube Measure" is 578. The conversion is to add or subtract 1cm for every degree difference between two bikes STA. I think the most useful STA for road bikes is 73, so if I want to compare a bunch of bikes I correct TT to 73. So if one bike had a 74 STA, you would add 1cm to the listed TT length to compare it to another that has a 73. If it is 72 you subtract 1cm, etc.

Your 56 fits a bit more like a classic 57 or 58, like someone 5'11 - 6' would ride. You are 6'2", with a 6'2" person's torso, but arms more like someone who would ride a 54cm frame. It seems like a wash to me - the reach on your bike shouldn't be too crazy for your dimensions - at least on paper. It comes with a 103mm stem, but 83mm stems are available. I don't think 83 will do anything bad for handling or look weird, and it will shrink your effective top tube to that of a 56. So it really seems like that should work for you. It is otherwise a smallish bike for your overall dimensions.

But everyone's fit is very specific, and it isn't just about dimensions. You may well be one of those people that benefit enormously from one good fit and some fit numbers you can apply to present and future bikes.

Good luck!
Kontact is offline  
Likes For Kontact: