Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    375

    Masi Coltello get a 51 or a 53

    ok so i was at my lbs getting ready to order my track frame, a Masi Coltello. i had the frame size in mind that i wanted but they were suggesting another so i wanted a second opinion. im going off my road bike for sizing and it has the geo as follows
    HT angle 73
    ST angle 74.5
    effective TT horizontal 53
    ST c-t-c 52
    i ride with a zero offest seatpost with the seat centered in the clamp and a 120 stem. this fits me perfect!!

    the masi has the geo as follows
    51
    HT angle 74
    ST angle 75.5
    effective TT horizontal 52.5
    ST c-t-c 51

    53
    HT angle 74
    ST angle 75
    effective TT horizontal 53.5
    ST c-t-c 53


    from what i have been reading on track geo im leaning toward the 51 being that it will be more in line with sizing off a road bike and using that for a track bike. the only worry i have was the ST angle being steeper and the TT being shorter that i would need a 130 stem to get close to my road bike fit. the lbs say to get a 53 but thats longer than my road bike. what do you think

  2. #2
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation: David Loving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,755
    I'd get the 51. For track/fixed gear, I want less reach; shorter top tube.
    Waxahachie, Texas
    Biciclette Gios

    "She loves to limbo. That much is clear. She's got the right dynamic for the New Frontier"

  3. #3
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    581
    if it's a matter of matching the road bike, get the 53. the steeper STA puts you closer to the bars, effectively shortening the TT. that 0.5cm should pretty much disappear.

  4. #4
    dropped!
    Reputation: r_mutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    486
    a steeper STA effectively lengthens the TT. why? because to get your seat setback in the same place behind the center of the BB, a steeper STA brings your seat closer to the BB, and you have to compensate by moving your seat backwards.

  5. #5
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    375
    Quote Originally Posted by r_mutt
    a steeper STA effectively lengthens the TT. why? because to get your seat setback in the same place behind the center of the BB, a steeper STA brings your seat closer to the BB, and you have to compensate by moving your seat backwards.

    ok so then a 51 would be what i want, if im reading what you wrote correctly

  6. #6
    duh...
    Reputation: FatTireFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    9,823
    Quote Originally Posted by b24fsb
    ok so then a 51 would be what i want, if im reading what you wrote correctly


    on the horizontal plane yes,but be sure you can get your bars high enough w/ the smaller size
    .


    Quote Originally Posted by mikagsd
    Fat tire Fred....you are the bike god of the universe and unless someone agrees with your reasoning they are just plain stupid

  7. #7
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    375
    good point! ok well now im not sure again

    my road bike is a 130 HT length and i have the stem slammed/zero spacers. im fine all day long on the hoods and in the drops for 20min at a time, bar drop is 130 as well.

    now the 51 has a HT length of 110 vs the 53 has a HT length of 120, both options are shorter than my current bike but hey is a track bike .

    so if a get the 51 the TT will fit with a 120-130 stem is my guess but ill have 20mm of spacers or if i go the 53 its going to be a 110-120 stem with 10mm of spacers.

    on a side note im 26 so im still flexible in the back. i will use this bike for some road bike sprint training on the road.

  8. #8
    dropped!
    Reputation: r_mutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    486
    just to complicate matters further, i find it a bit odd that you ride a 53 TT (your road bike) with a 120mm stem. conventional logic dictates that that short a TT would have you riding a 90 or a 100mm stem. look at the stem sizes on the jamis site for their sonik. notice the stem sizes that they use for each size. 90 for their 48 and 51, 100 for their 54 and 56, 120 for their 58 and 61.have you experimented with different stem lengths? how long have you been riding this TT/stem combo?

    if you are riding mostly on the street and not the velodrome, i would do everything possible to replicate your road position on the masi. if you were riding the velodrome, i wouldn' t worry so much about drop and so forth as track races aren't very long, and comfort isn't as high up on the scale as efficiency and power.
    Last edited by r_mutt; 04-13-2009 at 02:10 PM.

  9. #9
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    375
    yes i know, i could have ridden a 54(M) but i went for the 52(S) because of the smaller size and because race the smaller bike works better. i have short thighs so thats why i needed a zero offset seatpost but my torso is longer, i also ride a 170 crank. its not really that weird because i was looking are mark cavendish's bike and fit. we both ride the same bike (scott addict) and he has the zero offset seatpost collar like i do and he rides a 120 stem and im 5'8" and i think he is the same. now if i only had his power!
    Last edited by b24fsb; 04-13-2009 at 02:55 PM.

  10. #10
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    132
    Get the 53. If you think that you would have to run a 130mm stem with the 51 then this says that you're maxed out for the 51 size.

  11. #11
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    375
    ok so after a sleepless night of debate i decided on the 53 and ordered it up will post a pic up when the frame comes in.

  12. #12
    dropped!
    Reputation: r_mutt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    486
    Quote Originally Posted by b24fsb
    yes i know, i could have ridden a 54(M) but i went for the 52(S) because of the smaller size and because race the smaller bike works better. i have short thighs so thats why i needed a zero offset seatpost but my torso is longer, i also ride a 170 crank. its not really that weird because i was looking are mark cavendish's bike and fit. we both ride the same bike (scott addict) and he has the zero offset seatpost collar like i do and he rides a 120 stem and im 5'8" and i think he is the same. now if i only had his power!
    actually, imho, it's very odd to have a 120 stem with a 53 TT. ask the opinion of any experienced fitter of any frame builder and they will not try and fit or build you that short a TT with that long a stem- it throws the weight distribution off. you would be better off having a 55 cm TT and a 10 cm stem or a 54 TT and a 11 cm stem. this is what i have gleaned from over the years of obsessing about fit and would be considered a traditional idea of fit on a bike frame. i would ask the opinion of a professional fitter, but of course, your experience on the bike is also equally important.

    as for cavendish, according to info from his team, his peak wattage isn't as high as everyone thinks it is, it's just that he can hold it at his peak for far longer than most.

  13. #13
    RoadBikeReview Member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    375
    i do understand your point but the problem still is that if i went to a 54 frame my seat would be shoved forward almost all the way with a zero offset seat post.

    i didnt know that about cav and that would explain that "extra gear" that he has at the sprints

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Hot Deals

Contest

Tour De France

Latest RoadBike Articles


Latest Videos

RoadbikeReview on Facebook