Looking at a new TCR but I'm really sure which way I want to go. My current outgoing bike stack and reach are 553mm and 391mm respectively. Stem is -10 degrees and on a slim headset cover (not quite one of those super thin ones though).
I had a Giant TCR before this, size L. Basically the stack was a huge issue. Giant seems to always run tall headtubes on their bikes.
With Giant's current sizing: (stack/reach in mm)
S = 534/377
M = 552/386
M/L = 566/391
This seems like a no-brainer to go for the M, but there might not be one available at the LBS. From there, M/L could be an idea if I find a -17 stem (stock would be -8), and perhaps a thinner headset bearing cover to get close to my current fit. The stock one is surely taller than the one I run.
One reason I mention the Small (other than it's available) is because the combination of stock headset cap and stem being less-angled than my current one would likely end up matching my current stack measurement, and it'd boil down to hopefully having a longer stem option (125mm) in the shop to match the reach...so it may save the need for additional purchases.
No pro by a long shot, but then there was 6'1" Schlecks sometimes being on 56cm Treks and then the way 5'9" Cav (I'm personally 5'10) downsized onto a 49cm frame like in another thread here:
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/pr...mark-cavendish-downsizes-his-bike-316645.html
I've read posts of similarly-tall riders, including one in a cyclingweekly review do without fuss (5'9 rider on a Small)
Giant TCR Advanced SL 1 review - Cycling Weekly
I'm not sure. It sounds so goofy - especially because TCR's look smaller to start already - yet this is possible in technical terms. Of course test rides may reveal something I don't know, so I guess I'm just asking to confirm whether or not this would be a crazy approach in the meantime, or if anyone here can speak on doing the same.
I had a Giant TCR before this, size L. Basically the stack was a huge issue. Giant seems to always run tall headtubes on their bikes.
With Giant's current sizing: (stack/reach in mm)
S = 534/377
M = 552/386
M/L = 566/391
This seems like a no-brainer to go for the M, but there might not be one available at the LBS. From there, M/L could be an idea if I find a -17 stem (stock would be -8), and perhaps a thinner headset bearing cover to get close to my current fit. The stock one is surely taller than the one I run.
One reason I mention the Small (other than it's available) is because the combination of stock headset cap and stem being less-angled than my current one would likely end up matching my current stack measurement, and it'd boil down to hopefully having a longer stem option (125mm) in the shop to match the reach...so it may save the need for additional purchases.
No pro by a long shot, but then there was 6'1" Schlecks sometimes being on 56cm Treks and then the way 5'9" Cav (I'm personally 5'10) downsized onto a 49cm frame like in another thread here:
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/pr...mark-cavendish-downsizes-his-bike-316645.html
I've read posts of similarly-tall riders, including one in a cyclingweekly review do without fuss (5'9 rider on a Small)
Giant TCR Advanced SL 1 review - Cycling Weekly
I'm not sure. It sounds so goofy - especially because TCR's look smaller to start already - yet this is possible in technical terms. Of course test rides may reveal something I don't know, so I guess I'm just asking to confirm whether or not this would be a crazy approach in the meantime, or if anyone here can speak on doing the same.