54 or 56cm BMC Team Machine

Father Faff

For what it's worth I ride a Scott CR1 56cm and am 5'11" with 33" inside leg. The stem is 100mm and flipped to get a more upright position and there are quite a few spacers in. THe CR1 is the original version - I believe it is more "sportive" these days. Not sure if that means it has a huigher front end than the original. I find it comfortable but I do know I wouldn't want to go any bigger. I have test ridden a few bikes including a Scott Addict 54cm stock and found it too small for me, a 54 cm Colnago CX Zero and found it very similar to my Scott 56cm once I'd put a shorter 100mm stem on it. So hard to say but I did get out my tape measure to these bikes and compare to my current and that gives you a pretty good idea.

vortice

If it's any help, I'm 5'9" with a 31" inseam and have a Team Machine SLR01 in a 52 and it's perfect.

Also you can get Evans to order in the bike t try it out without obligation. Why not order both sizes and try both?

tonyhogg

Had my bg bike fit session last weekend, my Scott cr1 pro in 54cm now resembles a boris bike, stem has been flipped up, spacer removed, feels more comfortable now. My bike fit session showed I wasn't very flexible, couldn't touch my toes etc, so I would struggle with a large saddle to bar drop. Totally ruled out the bmc team machine it felt horrible in both a 54 and 56. Was told I'm more suited to a sportive type with a tall headtube bike not a race bike.

Pretty gutted, I'm looking at a bh ultralight in large now because that appears to have a massive headtube...the team machine just felt way too stretched out in 56 and really uncomfortable in 54 due to large saddle to bar drop.

Would love to see more detailed dimensions of bikes, would i be right in thinking my inside leg is 32" barefoot but with shoes on this would be more 32.5" or 33", so would give me plenty of clearance top tube wise? I suppose it's just going to have to be how a 56 feels when riding compared to my current 54 frame, large frames have always felt far too stretched out for me, the 56 BMC i tried in evans on the turbo trainer just didn't feel right at all.

Grill

I'm miles away from touching my toes with terrible flexibility all around and I have a big saddle to bar drop. Not saying that it's right for you, just that the two aren't necessarily linked.

tonyhogg

exactly, it's nonsense really, I'm only 30 FFS! not 80!

Grill

My last fit was done by someone who is very well regarded in the bike fit world- terrible fit. My current position isn't even close to what he said I needed. Thing is that a good fit is dependant both on a competent fitter and you giving the appropriate feedback. Even then what feels fine on a turbo isn't necessarily going to translate to the road so adjustments need to be made accordingly.

Saying that, it sounds like they're on the right track and the fact that the bikes you tried weren't comfortable suggests that you would benefit from a more upright position. Bike fitness does have a lot to do with it too as even though I can barely touch the middle of my shins, I can get low on a bike.

antsmithmk

Would look more pro to have the 54 with a ton of post showing imo....

FransJacques

neeb, never knew you were such a fit guru, but you're giving some very sage advice indeed! Tony, you're in good hands.

My 2p is that I think you were a 54 for about 75% of the thread. Now, reading your impressions from your fit, your back might thank you for buying a 56. That said, it depends where you're going with your riding: if you're into stretching and want an aspirational fit, the 54 could work for you if you're willing and able to ride a more extreme saddle to bar drop. If you want to pootle along in more comfort, get the 56.

BTW, have you posted any pix of your Scott for us? This could be instructive. Also, what is your height and exact inseam in CMs please.

neeb

@FransJacques - I've just spent a lot of time faffing and obsessing about my own fit, so I've got a good handle on how to compare bikes and transfer dimensions from one to another. I guess there are two completely separate aspects of fitting though - 1) fitting bikes to a known set of measurements, e.g. from a bike fit or the set-up another bike, and 2) fitting people to bikes.. I don't claim to know so much about the second!

OP - It does sound as if you might be better off with a frame that has a higher stack relative to reach, i.e. tending towards a more so-called "sportive" geometry, but there are increasingly bikes out there that have taller head tubes but still have otherwise racy geometries and aren't marketed as sportive bikes. Often it's just a case of finding a brand where one of the frame sizes happens to work for you, the relationship between stack & reach doesn't always vary continuously across size ranges.

But as Grill says bike fitters don't always get it right and just because you can't touch your toes doesn't necessarily mean that you can't get a substantial saddle to bar drop. You say you are more comfortable after your fit, but how does it feel on the road after a few decent rides?

tonyhogg

my height in cm is 179cm, inside leg is 81cm barefoot, these are slightly rounded down a bit also, it's between the cipollini bond in fluro or BH Ultralight not sure 54 or 56/57. Really wish I could make my mind up quickly, need all the advice and opinions possible please. Me personally I think I could adapt to a large saddle to bar drop on a smaller medium frame 54 and I'm not very keen on going larger 56/57 at all, doesn't fill me with optimism, I'd prefer to make small adjustments to make a medium fit me better than have a large frame size.

vortice

I started cycling 18 months ago on a sportive bike. Even with relatively high bars I was struggling with back ache and found it uncomfortable. 18 months later I have a Teammachine and find it very comfortable. I'm also nearly 46 so I'm surprised I've managed to adapt when I didnt consider myself to be particularly flexible.

Having said that, it's a lot of money to spend so best get one you feel comfortable with. If you did fit the BMC you wouldn't be disappointed.

Grill

Looking at the HT length the Bond isn't going to be the easiest but the BH isn't too far off what you have now.

FransJacques

Are you sure your inseam is only 81? That's defo on the short side for 179. I'm 183 and my inseam is 88/89 but I'm a bit at the opposite end.

When measuring inseam a lot of people a) put their feet too far apart, or b) don't press up nearly hard enough and get a rounded down figure. Those measurements suggest a BMC 56 but with not much seatpost showing.

Too bad we didn't get you on the jig at the bike show last weekend...

Grill

My inseam is just shy of 83 and I'm 180, so not out of the realm of possibility.

tonyhogg

Quick update, had a second bike fit, I'm definitely a medium frame size, stem was flipped back the normal way, still really keen on the bmc team machine with dura ace mechanical, no other bike comes close to ticking all the boxes, 2nd choice bianchi infinito cv with di2 55cm, bh ultralight with di2 54cm, maybe cipollini bond (I could never decide on build) thoughts and opinions on geometries would be greatly appreciated.

tonyhogg

see bike fit, understand the reach has been worked out differently on my fit.