epon

I'm looking at a few used Merlin and Litespeed bikes and am not able to ride them or similar sized bikes of those brands in my area. I currently ride a 59cm Lemond with a 100mm stem and a 61cm fantom cross with a 110mm stem commuter and am 6' 3" with a 35" inseam. When I test rode the Lemonds the 57 felt too small like I was over the bars and the 61 felt too large like I was in the bike. Te Fantom feels good if not maybe a tiny bit long in the reach. I'm wondering has anyone with a similar build ridden these sizes and can provide feedback for me?

I'm leaning towards the XL in a Merlin. The top tube for the 59 Lemond is 574 with the effective being 591. The top tube for the 61 Fantom is listed as a 590mm. The XL Merlin I'm looking at states its a 61cm Virtual Size 55.5cm Top Tube. A Large size Merlin looks to have an effective toptube length of 58cm and an actual TT of 56.5cm.

Thanks in advance. I know I should ride them first but I'm hoping to get close based on other's experiences.

RichinPeoria

Try an online fit to start with

https://www.competitivecyclist.com/za...LCULATOR_INTRO

I bought my frame on line using this information and it worked out well for me.

bitterken

That doesn't sound right at all. Tom Kellogg's geometry hasn't changed as far as I know.

I have two Merlins - one is a 57cm traditional geo while the other is a M/L compact. Both have an effective TT length of 56.6cm.

A L Merlin compact should have an effective TT of 57.5 while a XL should have 58.5.

Do you know the model names and years? You should consult an actual geometry chart from Merlin or email them and ask. Those sizes just don't make sense to me.

socalrider

I am close to your measurements and ride a 61cm litespeed.. The litespeeds are measured c-t, the c-c measurement of a 61cm litespeed is 59.5..

NeezyDeezy

I'm 6'3 and I find litespeed and merlin don't make bikes I can ride - the XL frames are just too small and I end up with too much saddle to bar drop.

Asian Sensation

i would get the merlin, i hear great things about them. Plus most people who ride Ti have a litespeed.

As for fit, I'de rather a bike be a little small than a lil big, but i have not road either

epon

I'll do the competitive cyclist fit to see what numbers I get.

I was given the sizes from the sellers descriptions. I thought it looked odd too.

socal rider, how tall are you and what's your inseam?

Thanks for the feedback.

socalrider

I am 6'3 with 34" inseam.. I ride a 1999 Litespeed Liege, my other road bike is a 60cm Merckx..

epon

It's a XL 2002 Agilis and according to their geometry chart its a 58.5 top tube. The Large Litespeed Ultimate is aproximately a 2002 with a 57.5 top tube. I'll probably be more comfortable on the XL.

epon

Does it feel large, small, perfect ? What size stem are you running ?

epon

Here's the Competitive Cyclist fit result:
https://img145.imageshack.us/my.php?i...8225514kc6.jpg

socalrider

Feels just right, I think you can't go wrong between a 59-61cm bike.. I use a 110 stem length w/5* rise..

epon

Kinda confused here, I found a 2006 XL Litespeed Ghisallo. Thier geometry chart states it has a 58 cm top tube length. On the fit chart for competitive cyclist it shows my range from 67.8 to 69.4 for top tube length, but the Seat tube range c-c: is 58.4 - 63.6 depending on which fit it is. Does this mean I cannot ride a Merlin Ghisallo and have it be comfortable ?

Also, there is a small dent in the chainstay from what looks like chain suck. Does anyone think this is an issue ?