It's finally time I get my first Merckx. So many different models and specifications... I have read that his Frames fit/feel a little small is this true? I am no racer and just "hover" in Clyde territory. So what frame material should I be looking at? Seems Merckx frames cover the spectrum as far as frame materials go. Any suggestions from the Eddy aficionados would be appreciated. Cheers

No advice, but consider me jealous. Interested in the replies you'll get...

Thanks seeing I will be ordering on line I will need all the help I can get. I will be breaking my Maiden for buying a Bike sight unseen.

I have a Eddy Merckx MX-Leader, and I love it. It descends better than any bike I've ridden...very stable over 40 mph. I too hover near the clydesdale class. The fit is pretty spot on for me. I need a 57-58 cm top tube. If you find one, try to get one in good shape. Pay a little extra so you don't have to repaint or fix any major imperfections. It's worth it in the long run. I have another one that's been at the painter for over 6 months, which has been a real bummer...I told him I want it perfect, so It's partly my fault.

I have a mid-80s Corsa Extra. Can't beat SLX for a smooth ride. I'm 6'1" 185. 58cm top tube is my critical dimension, with a head tube not less than 16cm.
Hard to go wrong with an Eddy.

If you are looking for a used Merckx finding one that is the correct frame size for you will be the issue, models and material will be random.
All of the steel models were true racing designs for the period and will require adaption to the Classic Merckx fit.

There are TI and CF later production, any Merckx framesets were/are high quality competition machines, can't go wrong w/ one that fits regardless of materials.

-Bandera

Not as far as I know - I have a 55cm EM Corsa. I also have a 55cm Klein... fit is about the same. I had a 56 cm steel Masi that fit fine, but was maybe a smidge too big. I also had a 54cm steel Ciocc that was a smidge too small. So I propose you get the size you think you need in any other bike.

As for materials - just my preferences in order.
1. Steel.
2. Scandium.
3. Titanium.
4. Plastic

I have a mid 80s Corsa Extra in size 62 cm in SLX. I recently sold my MX Leader, which rode similarly. I am a heavier rider and love the ride of both of them. I would highly recommend either one.

Definitely looking at Steel Frames specifically,

Have owned, built, and ridden about a dozen Merckx frames and would say thay they ride according to their size, neither smaller nor larger. They tend to be pretty square until you get into the larger ST sizes. Are you tall, or just a heavyweight?

I wouldn't say that Merckx frames fit "small." The Merckx frames with Century geometry tend to have slack seat tube angles, which effectively shortens the reach if your saddle is positioned properly.

I have owned two Merckx frames, a Corsa 01 and an AX (ti). Both frames were size 57 with Century geometry and rode, handled and fit nearly identical. Try to hold out for a frame in nice condition with good paint and chrome because you could easily double the cost if you end up having it repainted.

One cautionary note. I also bought two used Merckx frames off eBay that turned about to be damaged when I received them. Both of them had the tell-tale bulge in the top tube just behind the head tube, indicating frontal collisions. A lot of Merckx bikes have been raced and ridden hard. Use due diligence and caution if buying used. I was able to return both of the damaged frames that I bought with full refund, but it was a hassle and I had to eat the return shipping costs.

6 feet tall 31" inseam

So you're looking at a 58 or 60cm, I'm guessing? Or a 56cm if you want that "feels small" thing to be a self-fulfilling prophecy

Mine is the blue one @Wildwood posted above (he sold it to me last February). I would agree the frame's relatively slack angles help make it a comfy long distance rider, for a "racing" bike. I'm around 200 lbs and do significant out-of-the saddle climbing. It feels plenty stiff for a big frame. The SLX tubing seems to be a good choice for a frame that size. For the record, that's (c-t-c) 61.5 seat tube and 58.5 top tube. Not quite square, but y'know how they do it on bigger frames like that.

Here are some more pix of the bike in question.

I have never ridden one, but I think I remember others here saying earlier Merckx frames built by Falcon aren't quite the calibre of the ones from the mid 80's onward.

This one's nice, maybe you can find a facilitator

eddy merckx 'professional' frameset

Slx

Or TSX. I have a Century frame I'm thinking of selling, it's a 57 or 58, respray by Al Wanta in the original Cobalto blue metallic with white downtube panel. Flat crown fork. Used it as my Century bike in 2014, put about 1400 miles on it with a triple Ultegra setup using a Sugino compact triple (50/34/24).

But, honestly, you can't really go wrong with a Merckx frame of any model in good shape that's your size. Never had a bad one.

Here is the replacement for the one that went to Lascauxcaveman. The 'hole' needed filling. 1985 Corsa Extra (SLX), repaint by CyclArt 7 years ago. Awaiting final build. Components in-route. To be assembled by a fellow BF member with skills far beyond mine.
Nice Christmas present. Maybe the weather will stay dry.



edit: checking size on this one ST = 60.5; TT = 58.0; HT = 18.6
ST + TT are CtC. It's 1 cm smaller than Lascauxcaveman's; near perfect for me with a 125mm stem.

Actually my Holdsworth 531 is a 57 and it's about perfect for me. My Miele SLX is a 56 and works for me too a 58 or 60 is too large.

Think about these three critical measurements:
From center of seatpost an inch below saddle to middle of handlebars where they pass thru the stem when using a 90-105mm stem
From center of crank BB to top of saddle, measured straight up the seat tube
From center of handlebars to ground, assuming the BB is neither unusually high nor low

What are those three measurements on your Holdsworth?

I find if I get all three of those within a quarter inch or so I can ride the bike all day. On most frames that means a 57-58cm seat tube and a 56cm top tube, measured CTC. Since Merckx bikes square out at about 55-56cm, a 57-58 is just right and since we're the same size and weight-ish, probably is for you as well. But my Centurion Ironman has a 54cm seat tube with a 56cm top tube, so with more seatpost it fits just fine.

I've owned Scandium/aluminum or steel framed EMs.

My favorite rider was actually an Columbus SL framed Corsa.

What a champ.

They all have been a joy to own and each had its charms.

I could recommend any of the Corsas, Corsa Extras, SCs or my Century as daily riders.

The one I still would like to own is this one:

A very (1980ish) early Professional.

All Merckx frames are excellent, but their steel frames have always been at the very top. The geometry and ride feel is very very similar to De Rosa, which suffice it to say is doggone good. Have owned both over the years and no sure if I could tell the difference blindfolded. In fact if memory serves, Ugo de Rosa built a lot of EM's frames way back when -- could be wrong on this.

What size do you ride Gomango? You could own a blue one

58ish tt.

Send a pm with link just for grins.

Clearly put. I had a 56cm Corsa Extra (SLX) that fit the same as my 56cm DeRosa, Cinelli, Ironman, Simoncini, and so on. I also had a 56cm EMX-3 carbon plastic fantastic that fit a smidge smaller, as I used a 100mm FSA Plasma stem/bar instead of my normal 90mm Cinelli stem. I used Colorado Cyclists web site to measure and chose the "Merckx fit."

One poster here said "stable over 40mph." I agree with that, descending Thunder Ridge was much less white-knuckled than I anticipated, because the bike was entirely stable and predictable, while I watched others be all over the road. I am not an experienced descender, by any means, was just on a good frame with a properly-adjusted headset on a good fork spinning a good wheelset and tires. All that comes to play in a descent, but the frame is where it transmits to you.

Yes to Merckx. Ride? Ride lots.