Forum home Road cycling forum Road buying advice

Have I ordered the wrong sized Canyon Aeroad??

celery101celery101 Posts: 37
edited July 2015 in Road buying advice
After weeks/months of dithering, I have just ordered a Canyon Aeroad SLX with Ultegra. I've got a 2011 CF Ultimate in Large and know the geometry is different -- longer and lower basically -- but after some consideration, went large again.

I'm 6'1 with an 86cm inseam and I'm now worried I should have gone M as a lot of people say the bikes come up large. Reason I didn't go M was I thought it might be cramped as, looking at the numbers, it would actually be shorter than my Ultimate (which I run with about 18cm of seatpost showing and one spacer removed).

The difference doesn't seem huge between my large Ultimate (which fits great and I love) and the large Aeroad, but I am concerned given what I've read online. Any real world advice from owners would be VERY gratefully received as I'm going around in circles.

Ulitmate (L)
TT - 566
ST 563
wheelbase - 997
HT - 170
Reach - 395
Stack - 579

Aeroad Large (M in brackets)
TT – 573 (560)
ST 551 (531)
wheelbase – 1001 (989)
HT – 167 (147)
Reach – 403 (397)
Stack – 570 (551)


  • foggymikefoggymike Posts: 862
    Looking at the numbers a large with a 1cm shorter stem would give you the most similar position to your ultimate, as long as you aren't using a short stem already and have scope to do that.

    The medium has similar reach to the large ultimate but would be 3cm lower at the front so even with all spacers in you wouldn't get anywhere near the same position you like now.

    The large would appear to give you more options to get a good fit so I'd have gone for that. You can make it a bit longer and lower as intended or make it fit like your current Canyon. With the medium it will always be a lot lower at the front and nothing you can do about it if you don't get on with that.
  • ugo.santaluciaugo.santalucia Posts: 26,756
    the difference between the two sizes is hardly worth mentioning
  • on-yer-bikeon-yer-bike Posts: 2,974
    Youll be f***ed by the short headtube on the M. Six one people dont usually ride M unless super conditioned pro. As long as you dont go smaller than 110 stem on the L. If you do, then dont buy it.
  • rafletcherrafletcher Posts: 1,235
    As long as you dont go smaller than 110 stem on the L. If you do, then dont buy it.

    Why this?
  • ugo.santaluciaugo.santalucia Posts: 26,756
    rafletcher wrote:
    As long as you dont go smaller than 110 stem on the L. If you do, then dont buy it.

    Why this?
    Don't listen to him... he's recently turned 60 and he's stiff like a crane... :lol:
  • celery101celery101 Posts: 37
    Ok, nice one, thanks for your thoughts - I kinda thought the M wouldn't work for me given the big drop, but had a mild panic attack when I saw a lot of forum stuff about Aeroads coming in REALLY large, and other stuff suggesting an M was effectively a 58.

    I'll stick with the L (it has a stock 110 stem, which I can/might change ahead of time). Will post pics and details when it lands. It's been four yrs since I last bought a (new) bike, so maybe over thinking all of the details.
  • TjgoodhewTjgoodhew Posts: 628
    Might help but i have the older aeroad model and am 6ft with a 33inch inseam. I ride a Large frame and it is absolutely fine for me.

    Unless the geometry has changed massively between models my guess is it will be fine and a M would have been way too small
    Cannondale Caad8
    Canyon Aeroad 8.0
  • passoutpassout Posts: 4,425
    Hard to say of course but from the info given I'd guess you've got it right. Worst case scenario is likely to involve a new stem.
    'Happiness serves hardly any other purpose than to make unhappiness possible' Marcel Proust.
  • rafletcherrafletcher Posts: 1,235
    rafletcher wrote:
    As long as you dont go smaller than 110 stem on the L. If you do, then dont buy it.

    Why this?
    Don't listen to him... he's recently turned 60 and he's stiff like a crane... :lol:

    Then I'd have thought he (like me at 58) would welcome a shorter stem! 60cm frame with 12cm stem was ok 40 years ago, now it's 56 with 90 :lol:
  • stueysstueys Posts: 1,332
    You get 30 day return on the canyons i think? So sit on it when you get it and no real drama if the size is wrong.
  • DeVlaeminckDeVlaeminck Posts: 7,791
    If either fits it'll be the large, personally I think they are over long for most but then I suppose they are designed for young flexible racers not old inflexible racers like me.
    [Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]
  • gaffer_slowgaffer_slow Posts: 417
    bear in mind, that when it comes to reach, that it is not just at the stem you can make adjustments

    especially on smaller sizes some people (perhaps rightly) don't like reducing the stem size too much - but "matching" your current bikes fit can also be done by different handlebars in some cases (depends on what your current bars are).

    just taking the cheap & common 3T and Zipp bars for example.
    there is ~20mm difference in the reach available to you between various models.

    For example if i went my current bike had a reach measure of ~10mm shorter than the new frame i wanted, rather than use a 10mm shorter stem i could swap out 80mm reach bars for 70mm bars.

    Another thing to bear in mind, especially if you use spacers - is head tube angle difference and the (very slight) difference it make to reach in practical terms. Not necessarily significant but perhaps useful to know which way "direction of travel" in terms of + or - a few mm. (similar to how seat tube angle impacts reach vs top tube and position of saddle on rails (i have found that this is also variable based somewhat on chain stay length/center of gravity).)

    If you are having the sensation that "it feels like the apparent reach number for theses two frames doesn't feel right?!" it could easily be either (or both) the reach of the bars or impact of head tube angle (or both). I certainly found this moving between two frame where the reach difference (of the frames) was only 3mm - but "felt" significantly more.
  • I've been going through the same dithering/worrying too! I placed my order back in April and was ready to order the large based on the online size guide (and my lengthy calculations) but when I rang it through was assured by the guys at Canyon UK that I'd need a medium, so I did some more measuring/dithering and ordered a M instead. 2 months later it arrived and as has been mentioned above the head tube is pretty darn low so needs to be accounted for, and the other thing to note is that the BB actually sits in front of the seat tube - so the effective TT length is actually a good bit shorter than its stated length once you set your saddle in the right place.

    There was actually a slight defect in the M frame when it arrived so Canyon wanted it back anyway, so I got a large sent out instead as a replacement. The large TT rides more like a 56 than the 572 it measures once you take into account the BB position. The head tube also gives me more adjustment than the M - its does look a bigger frame, mainly due to the TT not being very sloped and I did prefer how the medium looks, but when you do the measurements the large isn't actually that big - I just need to get over its slightly loftier looks..! :?

    I'm 6ft (with 87cm inseam) so slightly worried about it looking a bit big under me, but at 6'1 you shouldn't be as worried I don't think. Absolutely stunning bike tho...
Sign In or Register to comment.