Focus Izalco size advice?

philkeeble
philkeeble Posts: 109
edited October 2012 in Road buying advice
Thinking hard about a Focus Izalco Ergoride 3 as Edinburgh Bicycle have a 15% off offer for this weekend. I'm 6ft3in/34.5in inside leg (191/88)

EBC's rough size guide puts a size 58 at 6' to 6'3", and 60 at 6'3" to 6'6". EBC help desk says I'm between 60 and 62 and suggests going for 62, but I'm wary of getting something too big. Needless to say these bikes are "order for store delivery only" so can't try befor I buy.

Does anyone have any experience/advice to lay on me? (Context: I'm 57 with not the best back and neck in the world, hence the Ergoride and not the racier Pro, also my son is a touch shorter than me (has a Trek 58cm) and would probably benefit from a slightly smaller size than me if he ever got his hands on it!)
Cheers,
Phil, in Inverurie

Comments

  • Bozman
    Bozman Posts: 2,518
    I doubt this will be of any use but... I've got an Izalco pro and I went for the size below because of the long top tube.
  • PKRAZOR
    PKRAZOR Posts: 89
    Sat on one of these a few weeks ago, lovely bike and the riding position is superb.

    Im 6ft 2 with inside leg of 31. I wouldnt go by leg though as that can be adjusted with saddle height, but reach on the frame is a bit different. I tried the 58 inch frame and it was spot on, so at 6ft 3 i would go for the 60 inch. The next size up would be too much i suspect.
  • kimare
    kimare Posts: 14
    I've decided to go for a Pro 4.0 but is a bit unsure about the Izalco sizings. I'm 185cm (6'1") with a 87cm (34") inseam. Unfortunatly I'm unable to try the Izalco before I buy, but the retailer says I should go for a XL, so does the Focus catalog. But still concerned the XL will be to big because I've tried a Cannondale Supersix where the 56cm fits me nicely. And the geometry is quite comparable to the Izalco.

    Supersix 56
    Toptube 560mm
    Seattube 540mm
    Headtube 155mm
    Seat Tube Angle 73.5
    Head Tube Angle 73
    Afaik the Supersix comes with a 100mm stem

    Izalco L
    Toptube 555mm
    Seattube 560mm
    Headtube 150mm
    Seat Tube Angle 73.5
    Head Tube Angle 73.5
    Afaik the Izalco comes with a 110mm stem

    The way I see it with my untrained eye will then the cockpit on the stock Focus L/56 exceed in length the stock Supersix 56 cockpit. On the basis of theory, will a Izalco L/56 fit better than XL/58. It remains only to verify that the difference between theory and practice matches, I hope someone here is able to help me with that last one.

    Izalco XL
    Toptube 570mm
    Seattube 580mm
    Headtube 170mm
    Seat Tube Angle 73.5
    Head Tube Angle 73.5

    If I decide to go for a XL should I then ask for a 20mm shorter stem?
  • Bozman
    Bozman Posts: 2,518
    Just noticed the date, hence double post.
    I went down a size when i bought an Izalco because of the length of the TT, the only issue with this is that you get a shorter headtube which leads to a more aggressive riding position.
  • kimare
    kimare Posts: 14
    Bozman wrote:
    Just noticed the date, hence double post.
    I went down a size when i bought an Izalco because of the length of the TT, the only issue with this is that you get a shorter headtube which leads to a more aggressive riding position.

    Which bike did you have before the Izalco? And may I ask for measurements (height and inseam)?

    regards
  • greentea
    greentea Posts: 180
    I would go for the 60" frame too. I sat on one a few months back and the 58" was perfect and im 6ft 2. I would always take the smaller of the suggested frame sizes as i believe its easier extending stems and seat offset over a slighlty smaller frame than it is to get a larger frame and make the riding position smaller. Ive found youre still aware youre stretching over the top tube.

    So 60" for you i would say. Lovely bike that, almost went for one myself. Good luck
  • greentea
    greentea Posts: 180
    kimare wrote:
    I've decided to go for a Pro 4.0 but is a bit unsure about the Izalco sizings. I'm 185cm (6'1") with a 87cm (34") inseam. Unfortunatly I'm unable to try the Izalco before I buy, but the retailer says I should go for a XL, so does the Focus catalog. But still concerned the XL will be to big because I've tried a Cannondale Supersix where the 56cm fits me nicely. And the geometry is quite comparable to the Izalco.

    Supersix 56
    Toptube 560mm
    Seattube 540mm
    Headtube 155mm
    Seat Tube Angle 73.5
    Head Tube Angle 73
    Afaik the Supersix comes with a 100mm stem

    Izalco L
    Toptube 555mm
    Seattube 560mm
    Headtube 150mm
    Seat Tube Angle 73.5
    Head Tube Angle 73.5
    Afaik the Izalco comes with a 110mm stem

    The way I see it with my untrained eye will then the cockpit on the stock Focus L/56 exceed in length the stock Supersix 56 cockpit. On the basis of theory, will a Izalco L/56 fit better than XL/58. It remains only to verify that the difference between theory and practice matches, I hope someone here is able to help me with that last one.

    Izalco XL
    Toptube 570mm
    Seattube 580mm
    Headtube 170mm
    Seat Tube Angle 73.5
    Head Tube Angle 73.5

    If I decide to go for a XL should I then ask for a 20mm shorter stem?

    No i would go with the L Izalco not the XL. As i said above to the OP, ive often found it easier to extend the cockpit rather than shorten it, purely because i feel with a longer frame youre still aware youre 'reaching' over the longer top tube if that makes sense, like youre on it rather than 'in it' (the cockpit).

    Im 6ft 2 with a 31.5 inseam and im sometimes told a 60" is right but nearly always feel better on a 56" or 58". Hope this helps. I just think if you bought the XL Izalco you would regret it.

    And on the subject of asking for a longer/ shorter stem, i would get the bike first as standard, go for a blast then work out what you need stem wise as it might alter depending on your seat position.
  • kimare
    kimare Posts: 14
    greentea wrote:
    No i would go with the L Izalco not the XL. As i said above to the OP, ive often found it easier to extend the cockpit rather than shorten it, purely because i feel with a longer frame youre still aware youre 'reaching' over the longer top tube if that makes sense, like youre on it rather than 'in it' (the cockpit).

    Im 6ft 2 with a 31.5 inseam and im sometimes told a 60" is right but nearly always feel better on a 56" or 58". Hope this helps. I just think if you bought the XL Izalco you would regret it.

    And on the subject of asking for a longer/ shorter stem, i would get the bike first as standard, go for a blast then work out what you need stem wise as it might alter depending on your seat position.

    Thanks for your advice, have you tried the Izalco? The reason I'm asking is because the retailer says he had to go up a size compared to Giant with the Izalco.

    Edit: I guess you're right. According to the Biomechanicalcycling excel sheet which have recieved positive feedback. I'm 555mm horizontal and 568mm vertical. If these are correct it seems like the Izalco L/56 frame are made with me in mind.

    I would also mention that I have very long arms.
    194cm (6'3") shh don't tell my wife where that puts me on the ape index.
  • meanredspider
    meanredspider Posts: 12,337
    So I'm 6' 0" & 33" inseam and ride a 58 in the Cayo which fits well. I have a 56 Variado and that's doable too although adjustments are towards the extremes though it is comfortable to ride.

    For the long arms, it maybe that you can just play tunes on the stem length.
    ROAD < Scott Foil HMX Di2, Volagi Liscio Di2, Jamis Renegade Elite Di2, Cube Reaction Race > ROUGH
  • iplod
    iplod Posts: 83
    Hi,
    Dont know if this is any help but i am currently looking at the izalco pro 3. I'm a 50 yr old with a not too flexible back, 6ft 2 1/2 in, 34 in leg. I've tried the 58 but felt there was just too much seat post extended, am currently waiting for a 60 to come in so i can try it out but it's going to be another 5 weeks before the 2013 60's are in the uk, or so they tell me. but in general i think that focus must come up smaller than most other brands.
    SOLITUDE. It's not for everyone.

    Trek 5.2 madone 2007
    Ribble audax/winter 2010
    Bianchi infinto 2012
  • fred22
    fred22 Posts: 509
    To go against the other opinions here I've got a 56 izalco pro 3. I'm a shade over six foot with 33" inseam. I use a 110mm stem. I couldn't have a 58, i think that would be too big, so i think i agree with greentea
  • greentea
    greentea Posts: 180
    kimare wrote:
    greentea wrote:
    No i would go with the L Izalco not the XL. As i said above to the OP, ive often found it easier to extend the cockpit rather than shorten it, purely because i feel with a longer frame youre still aware youre 'reaching' over the longer top tube if that makes sense, like youre on it rather than 'in it' (the cockpit).

    Im 6ft 2 with a 31.5 inseam and im sometimes told a 60" is right but nearly always feel better on a 56" or 58". Hope this helps. I just think if you bought the XL Izalco you would regret it.

    And on the subject of asking for a longer/ shorter stem, i would get the bike first as standard, go for a blast then work out what you need stem wise as it might alter depending on your seat position.

    Thanks for your advice, have you tried the Izalco? The reason I'm asking is because the retailer says he had to go up a size compared to Giant with the Izalco.

    Edit: I guess you're right. According to the Biomechanicalcycling excel sheet which have recieved positive feedback. I'm 555mm horizontal and 568mm vertical. If these are correct it seems like the Izalco L/56 frame are made with me in mind.

    I would also mention that I have very long arms.
    194cm (6'3") shh don't tell my wife where that puts me on the ape index.

    Yes ive tried the Izalco and also the Ergoride. I would still stick with the 58" as your biggest frame. The retailer is only comparing that with Giant, but if you compare it to another brand, like i did-Cube, they came up similar and in the end it was either a 58" Ergoride or a 58" Cube Agree, even though the chart said i should be 58" minimum and probably 60". If anything i would say 58" for me is tops and often on some brands a 56 has felt right.

    I think the biggest myth with bike fit is this: you look at your height, then you look at the guide and more often than not the bike sizing for any particular height will always be a rough guide. So for me, at 6ft 2, generally the guides will say 58 to 60.
    However, what they often fail to take into account is the real world measurements, like upper torso length compared to leg length, arm reach over height, that sort of thing. Now the biomechanics system is actually really good. When i measured myself it came out that ideally, despite my height, a 56" frame was best. Trouble is i ignored this once and bought a 58, thinking im 6ft 2, the frame has to be bigger right?. How wrong was I!! I then spent a small fortune making the stem smaller, changing the seatpost, the seat, trying to shorten the cockpit area. It only halfed worked as i still had that feeling of sitting over the bike.

    I then went and sat on a 56" Trek one day in a shop and it fitted like a glove, i instantly knew the biometrics was right. Somewhere you need to diss-associate the old ego from the equation ( not you personally) and listen to fit. For me my legs are shorter than my top half, so when i bought too big a frame i was lowering the seatpost for the legs but at the same time creating a longer reach over an already too long top tube. Whereas when i sat on the 56, leg length was spot on, therefore reach wasnt stretched. I personally think you can see it in arm reach, if the arms are fully extended, the frames wrong, there must be a bend in the elbow.

    The reason i got a 58" Cube is because generally Cubes are slightly smaller and they say size up. Thats how i knew 58" was the biggest frame and sitting on it proved right, as its more like a 57" frame. The Izalco is similar. So if your biometrics are saying 56" then stick with it. As i said before, its easier to extend the stem, move the seat back, stick an offset post in, but still feel in the cockpit. Its a lot harder to shorten the cockpit and still feel planted on the bike. More often than not you will still feel like youre siting on top of the bike and in the real world, things like descending and sharp corners, that will make you feel unsettled.
  • chaymck
    chaymck Posts: 157
    I'm 5'10/5,11 and I had a large cayo from a few years back. It was quitelong on the top tube and I ended up putting on a shorter stem- 90mm instead of 110. I have tested the new 56 izalco and the fit is very similar to the old cayo.

    I was suffering with a lack of back flexibility when I changed thestems. But is was never a upright bike, not uncomfortable but def race position Hope this helps.
  • kimare
    kimare Posts: 14
    I've been out trying more bikes today.

    Nakamura Pursuit 6.0 54cm (Norwegian brand): Toptube 555mm

    Seattube 540mm Headtube 155mm Seat Tube Angle 73.5 Head Tube Angle 73 This felt a bit aggresive

    Nakamura Pursuit 6.0 57cm (Norwegian brand): Toptube 570mm Seattube 570mm Headtube 190mm Seat Tube Angle 73 Head Tube Angle 73

    The second felt more comfortable naturally due to the larger headtube.

    Due to the fact that Izaclo have an even smaller headtube than this bike I'm leaning towards the XL/58, as compromise between these two.

    I've also tried Focus Variado L/56 TT545, ST560, HT150 felt too small Specialized Allez L/56 TT565, ST530, HT170 felt correct Scott Speedster XL/58 TT575, ST580, HT190 felt large but ok.

    Keep in mind that I haven't rode any of these, but have been seating on them with the seatpost in about correct position.
  • kimare
    kimare Posts: 14
    Alright now I got several registrations from different persons, some are noted here, lots are sendt via PM and some are found elsewhere on the net. I'll try to summarize.

    If you're
    5'9" go for M/54 (100%) 2 registrations
    5'10" go for L/56 (100%) 2 registrations
    5'11" go for L/56 (100%) 5 registrations
    6' go for L/56 (66%) or XL/58 (33%) 9 registrations
    6'1" go for XL/58 (50%) or XXL/60 (25%) or XXXL/62 (25%) 4 registrations
    6'2" go for XL/58 (75%) or XXL/60 (25%) 4 registrations

    If we follow the trends a XL/58 would be appropriate, this combined with my experience from trying other bikes eartlier today have made make up my mind. Thanks to all who took their time,hopefully my investigations could be useful for others considering Izalco who are unable to try.
  • Bozman
    Bozman Posts: 2,518
    edited October 2012
    kimare wrote:
    Alright now I got several registrations from different persons, some are noted here, lots are sendt via PM and some are found elsewhere on the net. I'll try to summarize.

    If you're
    5'9" go for M/54 (100%) 2 registrations
    5'10" go for L/56 (100%) 2 registrations
    5'11" go for L/56 (100%) 5 registrations
    6' go for L/56 (66%) or XL/58 (33%) 9 registrations
    6'1" go for XL/58 (50%) or XXL/60 (25%) or XXXL/62 (25%) 4 registrations
    6'2" go for XL/58 (75%) or XXL/60 (25%) 4 registrations

    If we follow the trends a XL/58 would be appropriate, this combined with my experience from trying other bikes eartlier today have made make up my mind. Thanks to all who took their time,hopefully my investigations could be useful for others considering Izalco who are unable to try.

    Well I'm just under 5'10" and I've got a size small Izalco(53.7) and I know another bloke at 5'9" with a small too, all due to the length of the TT.
  • ive got a izalko pro 4 XL. Im 6ft and it fits just fine. The only thing i have done is replace the stem and bars so far. I went for a shorter stem (110mm 3T Ltd carbon) and the same 3T Ltd carbon bars just to remove some of the road buzz. Love this bike and personally think it fits really well. It shocked me a bit to that they suggested the xl but i sat on the cayo in large and it just felt a tad to cramped.
    Good choice though