CAD8 Size and reach set up advice

I recently bought a CAD8 I was advised that although I was between sizes I should get a 54 and use a longer stem if needed. Having taken it out a few times, whilst I felt ok but quite upright on the hoods, as soon as I went down onto the drops I felt hunched up like my back was too long and found myself shifting back on the seat to accommodate. I plugged my measurements into competitive cyclist calculator and it came back with pretty much the exact measurements from the 56. I've just managed to switch to the larger size, now despite only gaining 1.5cm top tube (1cm or so in reach) the hoods feel a mile further away. They also look further away from the stem. Is there something I am missing in terms of set up? Or is it possible the bars have different reaches? I've already swapped the stem to a shorter 100mm so the initial jump between sizes wasn't too big. having said this I feel 100% more comfortsble on the drops.
I Could use some help as I'm concerned I've made a massive error moving to the larger size
If it helps I am 179cm tall with a 83-84 cycling inseam
I Could use some help as I'm concerned I've made a massive error moving to the larger size
If it helps I am 179cm tall with a 83-84 cycling inseam
0
Posts
100mm stem isn't all that small, I see many riders wanting the "pro look" because "you MUST have a 120mm stem at least" but then need all the spacers in the world to, as you say, feel comfortable on the drops. Keep pressing away with the 56 plus 100mm stem (which is what I'd choose as I'm the same height as you and my Tarmac has exactly the same measurements though I can't speak for your handlebar drop and reach) and you should be OK. If not it might be worth dropping a line to Cannondale and asking them what the drop and reach on their handlebars are?
Bar wise from a quick (not that accurate) attempt at measuring. It looks centre of the stem to the centre of the furthest point forwards on the bar is 90mm and to the top of the steep of the hood (where they are set up) 130mm. Based on the 75mm figure you gave this sounds like they are large bars. Does this also sound like an acceptable difference between the two or is there some movement I can make to the brakes?
I have contacted cannondale already just waiting on them
I am still considering eating my words and quickly asking the shop if they still have the smaller size, not sure if I may end up in a worse position going smaller though as it didn't feel good either
What do you base that on out of interest?
No it's not about height I have the 56 slammed. And just 1-2 spacers on the 54. On the 54 i felt like i was always wanting to place my hands an inch infront of where they were in the drops. Or am I just not used to the position? I actually feel more comfortable reaching for the drops on the 56 with the same bar height. It's that I feel stretched on the top (hoods).
I also felt a little twitchy going fast and got quite annoyed with my toe touching the front wheel on slow corner, is that a normal experience? Coming from a mountain bike background that was completely foreign for me.
In addition the standover of the Cannondale in a 56 is far higher than a Tarmac. That's why I like road bikes with at least a bit of curve in the top tube (TCR/Tarmac etc) for shorter legs, That way the bike feels short, yet stretched as opposed to, say, a Giant Propel with its massive standover. That bike in a 56 (M/L) feels huge, yet cramped.
For the record I now use Deda Zero 100 road bars (75mm reach) on all bikes. Might be worth sourcing a set of them, or a Deda Zero 2 which can be easily found for around £20?
The only difference between the two is the 56 can obviously made bigger, the 54 smaller. In the middle the frames the effectively cross over.
I'm sure you'd be fine on either size, but the shop was right, you would generally go the size down.
Ok just wondered what you had based that on. I'm a little confused that all of the measurements seem similar to many other main brand 56" bikes and from getting a tape measure out it doesn't seem like they lie.
I have has a response from cannondale who said 56 is right for my measurements but did not mention a bar difference just to confuse things further.
I did check the stack and reach which is part of what I based the decision on as it wouldn't be much bigger. But the diference feels huge now
I am swaying back toward's tucking my tail between my legs and going back to the shop before I dirty the bike up/they get rid of the 54 to be honest
My concern is I go 54 and it's comfortable in the short term but long term as my flexibility and core strength improves I will find it short?
You said you were running the 54 with spacers, so you can chop those down if you get more flexibility.
You can also get a more setback seatpost, and as you say a longer stem (perhaps with a sharper angle), and or bars with a greater reach.
If you genuinely have no idea, can't get a bike fit in quickly, I would go with gut instinct.
Worst case you may need to sell it, or the frame on next year.
Marin Palisades Trail 91 and 06
Scott CR1 SL 12
Cannondale Synapse Adventure 15 & 16 Di2
Scott Foil 18
You shouldn't really be adjusting the saddle position to compensate for reach. That should be set to get your knee position right etc.
Nightmare this in between sizing.
The advice I was given is that the larger frame will give you a more stable, planted ride with slower steering, and the smaller frame will give you something more responsive with sharper steering. So it depends on your own preference.
As others have said, if in doubt, go down a size.
A shorter stem on a larger frame will make the bike twitchier.
Sorry, I should add that I'm running a 110mm stem.
I did it by marking my knee position on the top tube when my pedals were level (front foot forwards) and striking a line to the pedal axle. I think I was just set back too far before. I've backed off the slammed front, tilted the bars slightly less aggressively and all of the sudden have opened up a lot more. Think I will just be geting a 90mm stem while I get used to it. I'm perfectly at home on a mountainbike with zero reach in bars an 45-60mm stems so I don't think I will have a problem with handling. Then I can gradually head back down and longer as I get more comfortable.
I've just been using this: http://bikedynamics.co.uk/bikesizingbd.htm
Which sizes me perfectly for the cannondale 56.
A 56cm will force you into an upright position (due to the tall headtube) and you'll forever feel stretched out, hence you'll keep going down stem sizes. Your bike will end up handling badly because of the forced upright position = no weight on the front wheel. Further exacerbated by the fact you have long legs for your height.
I agree with you - looking up the OP's dimensions, he is 0.5" taller than me, and has an inside leg 1" less, meaning his upperbody height is theoretically 1.5"\3.8cm greater than mine.
I know from other bikes (As I have long legs and a short upperbody) that my optimum top tube length is 545, and on a 54 frame I then go for a 90mm stem, and that fits me perfectly.
I appreciate there is no way to compare flexibility, and arm length etc, but if I adjusted that setup for the OP, it would suggest a 120mm, or 130mm stem, which I believe was suggested up the page somewhere.
it looks like either will fit to some degree, one way or another, but the 54cm has the capacity to give a more aggressive riding position, which I thought was the desired outcome.
Marin Palisades Trail 91 and 06
Scott CR1 SL 12
Cannondale Synapse Adventure 15 & 16 Di2
Scott Foil 18
In general it is easy enough to make a bike a little too small fit but next to impossible to make a bike that is too big fit.
This poor advice; being fixated with the position of your legs relative to the bottom bracket is a good way to get a poor fit on a road bike.
So kind of opposite to a mountain bike long stem is more aggressive handling?
Interesting. Certainly not doubting the experience but any ideas why things like the link I posted, competitive cyclist etc. Size me up for the 56 on reach etc? Is it more current to go for a more aggressive fit? I actually found a long thread which suggested a 56 cad10 (same geo) for my size but it was from 4 years back
Just FYI legs are probably on the bottom end of what I stated. At 82.5-83
I think you have misunderstood my post i did not mention the bottom bracket, just gave general advice. If you have detailed bike fit advice by all means make suggestions.
So what's the right place for the saddle in regards to the pedals then?
That's exactly how most people do it.
Adjusting the position of the bars may/will require a change in saddle setback.
http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/p ... evo-34013/
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/arti ... mod-40636/
http://www.bikeradar.com/road/gear/arti ... deo-37774/