# 585 Sizing help needed



## MCJ (Oct 8, 2002)

First off I wasn't interested in a new bike until my lbs got in a new 585. What a beautiful frame! Anyway, I'm 5'11" with about a 33.75" inseam. I'm not very flexible (getting older!) and I'm interested in the Optimum geometry. My current Lemond has a 575 mm TT with a 100 mm stem. The XL Optimum has a 561 mm TT. Thats a big difference. The head tube difference is also huge, in a good way, 156 mm vs 191 mm. Shouldn't have to run any more spacers. My lbs, who has fantastic positioning on his bike, is pushing me towards a new stem, a 110 mm. That would put me close to where I am on the Lemond so I'm think why go with Optimum geometry if I'm just going back to where I started. 

Any suggestions?


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*info...*

What you need to figure is the frame reach. To do that, you need both the TT lengths of both frames and the seat tube angles. A steeper STA will increase the reach by about 1cm per degree, so that must be taken into account. With a 73 degree STA on the XL Optimum, the two frames may have the same STA. In that case, a 110mm stem would be needed to produce about the same reach.

Why worry about the stem length at this point? It's simple to change if the 110mm is too long. 

Also, don't forget to figure the difference in the total head tube length, including the headset. The IS standard integrated headsets that come with 2008 frames usually have a 15mm top section. The 2009 is listed as having the new headfit system that is about 5mm taller, maybe a little more.


----------



## OffRoadRoadie (May 15, 2006)

In-Between a Med and Large for Look 585/595....need help! 

I'm 174.2cm tall with a 80.1 inseam and 60.1 cm arm length (arm pit/ribs firmly to the web between your thumb and index finger). My current bike (and most of the bikes I've owned over the last 20+ years) is a 56cm CtC TT with 120mm 84 degree Richey stem and 6.35 Millimeters (.25 inches) of spacers. The drop from the saddle to the top of the bars is 2.25 inches (5.71 cm), my seat height from center of BB to middle of saddle is 74cm (measured along the seat tube) with 172.5 cranks. Reach from rear of saddle to middle of bars (at stem jct) is 81cm and 98cm to hood/bar jct. 

I like my current fit and a Large Look 585/595 gives me the same virtual TT length (73.5 Vs 73.75 seat angle for the Look), but the front to center is longer (59.3 Vs 59.5 Large Look & 580 for the Med Look) and has a 16cm taller head tube (140 now Vs 156cm, 148 for the Med Look), not sure if integrated HS Vs a King NoThread HS adds any additional height. Most online fit kits recommend the Med size Look with a 110 or 120 stem and normal setback post/saddle position.

Med or Large? I average 150-225 miles per week in the spring/summer/fall and 85-150 during our cold & wet Pacific Northwest winters.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*medium...*

The head tube length increases by 15-20mm on the LOOK frames, depending on whether the frame has an IS headset with the 15mm FSA top or the new LOOK headfit system.

Vertically, a medium size is the largest you should ride. Your saddle height is the same as mine and I ride a small 585. I also use a lot more drop, so my total head tube length with the headset and one 5mm spacer is 145mm. I was using an 84 degree Ritchey stem until last year, when I switched to a 73 degree and increased by drop to about 12cm.

If your stated inseam is a cycling inseam, measured to saddle-like crotch contact in bare feet, then you saddle is set a lot higher than most people would. My inseam in 83cm with about the same saddle height. I set my saddle so my foot is approximately horizontal with my leg fully extended at the bottom of the stroke. Then a normal 2-3cm rise of the heel will create the commonly recommended 30 degree bend in the knee during normal pedaling.

Two things could be contributing to your long stem. Bars that are higher make a longer reach more tolerable. If you were running an 8-10cm drop, that 120 stem would probably feel too long. Another possibility is that you place the saddle more forward than some, which reduces each and requires a longer stem. While some people are firm believers in KOP, I like my saddle 1-2cm further back. I would not use short reach handlebars either.


----------



## OffRoadRoadie (May 15, 2006)

Thanks C-40 (I was hoping you would reply). 

I just double checked my cycling measurement inseam, it's WRONG. New measurement is 85.5, and the saddle to BB is 73.3 (taking into account the saddle padding that compresses while seated).

Even with the new measurements I should be fine with a Med?


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*yes...*



OffRoadRoadie said:


> Thanks C-40 (I was hoping you would reply).
> 
> I just double checked my cycling measurement inseam, it's WRONG. New measurement is 85.5, and the saddle to BB is 73.3 (taking into account the saddle padding that compresses while seated).
> 
> Even with the new measurements I should be fine with a Med?


With that saddle height you could go with a small or medium, but with only a 6cm drop, then you'll need the medium to get more 2cm more head tube length.

It could be that you have long arms, but I'd check that saddle fore/aft position - a non setback seatpost always raises my eyebrows. It's rare for that to ever be appropriate on a road bike, unless the STA is around 72 degrees.


----------



## OffRoadRoadie (May 15, 2006)

You're probably correct, my bars are higher to make the longer reach more tolerable.

I do run a post with setback (2000 Campy carbon post with setback), saddle is clamped about in the middle of the rails. The fore/aft saddle position has the front of my kneecap aligned with the center of pedal spindle using the KOP measurement., STA is 73.5. 

The Med 585 or 595 should be fine, it'll give me some flexibility in fine tuning the reach via stem length, height and the reach of the bars once the fore/aft is set.


----------

