I just bought a 2016 Kestrel RT-1000 105 47CM from Amazon for $1000 with free assembly from my local bike shop. I am 5'5" male and have a 28.5" inseam. I was sort of torn of whether to get a 47CM or 50CM but decided to go with a 47CM since it might be easier to make a smaller bike feel bigger than a bigger bike feel small.

Anyone own a Kestrel RT or is similar in size to me? What size would you have gotten? Mainly using the bike for joy rides

I think that you did the right thing. Road riders tend to buy too big of a bike. Roadies are riding smaller frames now. You would be shocked to look up the bike Bartalli won the 1938 tour de France on.

Good news/ bad news; The good; I think that you are going to really like the 52 cm top tube length and 110 mm head tube length. The only downside is that the 47 cm seat tube length is measured center to center, (so It is a little bit bigger than other 47 cms in other brands) most companies measure crank center to the top.

Thanks for the input

but I am a little confused. The 47CM(XS) has a TOP TUBE CENTER TO CENTER of 50.5CM while to 50CM(S) has a 52CM TT. Kestrel lists the TT as center to center, that doesn't mean effective TT right? So is the 47CM's TT effective length closer to a 52CM?

Also the head tube of the XS is listed at 12CM/120MM and the S as 14CM/140MM.

If your new to road cycling don't get too ingrained in all the various tube dimensions and lengths... in the big scheme of things it's over thinking things unless your some kind of elite cyclist.

I've cycled all my life and ride a 60cm frame which according to today's standard of small frames is apparently too big, but look at the bikes of old...

I would say a few good measures for whether the frame is the correct size are:

- Standover height, a couple of inches between cross bar and groin
- Can you see the front hub when you are sat on the bike resting on the bars? you shouldn't be able to
- Seat stem visible length approx. same length as head tube

That's all pretty traditional, but the #1 thing that matters is how do you feel on the bike? Do you like it, are you comfortable. Let your body tell you what is right for you...

There isn't a Kestrel dealer by me and even if there was I doubt they would have had a 47CM to try let alone have a 50CM. I basically took a leap of faith due to price since this is one of the few flat bar carbons I could find for $1000 shipped and assembled with tax included. I am willing to live with a few flaws considering the price I paid. I went with the XS since I have read on here that it's easier to make a smaller bike feel bigger than a large bike feel small.

My decision was sort of based on my last bike which was a 2014 Giant Escape RX Composite which was a size small. While my stand over was good since the bike had a 27.5" stand over height, but I felt a bit stretched out since the TT was 22.4" (Kestrels 47Cm= 19.88" TT and 50CM= 20.47" TT). Even though the RT-1000 has a sloping tube I thought the 50CM (Small) would have been too big since the stand over is listed at 29.4" while the 47" (X-Small) is listed as a 28.7" stand over which give me enough room to clear the bar better.

I guess I just question the fit because I never got to try the bike before buying it and secondly the bikes shops and online store I have inquired about sizing were pretty split on what size I should pick. While charts are never a good way to decide fit a lot of charts have a 47CM bike for someone 5'3" or bellow. My personal theory is that a bike is a lot like a suit. You don't wan't it too big or too small and you have to be able to freely move in it. Some of this is subjective, but as a small man used to always buy too big of a suit (2 sizes too big). My gut is telling me maybe I was riding too big of a bike in the past since a lot of the time retailers just want to sell what they have or can offer.

Maybe I am wrong since I see people on here my height (5'5") claiming they ride bikes as big as a 52CM, I know geometry differs greatly between bikes but either I just bought the wrong bike or my 28.5" inseam is really short?

I hate to jump in again. Sorry, but the truth is that I hate the geometry on the Kestral. First of all the Kestral sizing is misleading. Second of all, you actually could be on a much smaller frame. The on line geometry charts are a joke. If I were working with you in person, I would be trying to put you on a bike with a 42- 44 cm full seat tube length. The goal is to have 9.5" (24cm) of seat and seat post sticking out of the frame. Top tube length from 52 -54 cm and preferably a 71 degree head angle. Just my 2 cents.

I got the bike yesterday and while there was a scratch on the handlebar and a scratch on the left side of the bike, the bike felt wonderful for the brief amount of time I was on it. Your assumption that I need to be on a bike less than a 47CM is probably right but the Kestrel RT-1000 47CM is really a 44.6CM seat tube center to center with an effective seat tube of 47CM. This is probably why some retailers suggested I get the 50cm when I inquired since the seat tube is a 47.5CM center to center or 50CM effective. I didn't measure the seat post but from where it is it looks close to 9" but I am not sure.

https://imgur.com/HmXlWRs
https://imgur.com/Wx42MoX
https://imgur.com/yWdxwpu

The guy at the bike store even asked how I managed to pick out this bike since he said the sizing was spot on. I am a little disappointed with the scratches but I have already asked Nashbar what they can do for some sort of refund or credit since I don't think it's worth the hassle of breaking down the bike and sending it back just to wait to get another once and have to maybe pay for assembly this time.

Overall I still need a decent ride on it to truly test it, but the 47CM was the right choice and the $1000 for a carbon 105 flat bar bike is very hard to beat.

Fantastic! Too bad about the scratches. Have fun.