# Verify this...EPS/C50 sizing issues



## nealrab (Aug 6, 2002)

OK need some help with this...you guys were really helpful with my last posting so here goes. There will be True/False questions here...
(1) 2010 EPS geometry is different than previous C50/EP frames [T/F]
(2) C50 geometry remains unchanged through all incarnations (~'03 thru '10) [T/F]
(3) Sizing across model lines may vary for any specific individual especially when considering sloping frames [T/F]

And here's my basic query: Given that I am a 57 trad on an '08 EP (and happy with that), and am in a low priority search for either a C50 or an EPS in the same size, is it possible that if I widened my search parameters to include sloping frames, the sizing may vary based on the year/model of the C50 or EPS??

My belief is that I would be best suited for the 57 trad across the board...but if, for example, a later model C50 ('08 - '10) showed up somewhere with low miles in primo condition I might be tempted to look at a 54s frame. It might be a smidge larger than I'd like ideally, but I could do it given my riding style and proportions. The HT=165 compared to the 158 on the 57 trad (which would be good), and the ETT=563 cf. 557. The 52s would be a smidge too cramped for my liking with a very short HT=153 and short ETT=550. So for ALL the C50's I think this sizing would be accurate unless I've miscalculated.

However, for an EPS (and a C59 also I think) everything changes...My newer charts show that I would be OK with a 52s possibly. This could be the case since the HT=161 and WB=1000...slightly longer WB (not much) but taller HT. The 54s on the EPS shows HT=177 and WB=1005 with ETT=565 (maybe too much now on the ETT length). So the 54s now seems to be lengthening out...HT, ETT, WB. I might actually be a better fit with the 52s, but only on the EPS/C59. I would still lean towards the 54s on the C50.

Am I reading this all correctly? Or have I missed some valuable bit of data somewhere in my musings?? Thanks for any input. As I say, this is all hypothetical at this point, since I have no real options under consideration at the moment. I just want to have all options on the table and ready to put into operation should the opportunity arise at some point.


----------



## Maverick (Apr 29, 2004)

(1) 2010 EPS geometry is different than previous C50/EP frames [T/F]
>> Yes, EPS and C50 has slight difference in geometry due to tube diameter differences. 

(2) C50 geometry remains unchanged through all incarnations (~'03 thru '10) [T/F]
>>Yes you're right. However the later C50 (most likely post yr2009) has is BSA threaded bottom bracket. 

(3) Sizing across model lines may vary for any specific individual especially when considering sloping frames [T/F]
>>Correct. Do some cross referencing, not many shops are aware of the minute changes and may most likely post an incorrect info. I have a PDF file on EP/C50 geometry from a Colnago catalogue, send me a PM with your email if you need one. 

cheers!


----------



## nealrab (Aug 6, 2002)

Thanks for the info Mav...I PM'd you as the catalogue geometry charts would be great to have as a comprehensive reference guide for sizing. I also found that retailers usually provide either an abbreviated chart for sizing or the wrong chart for the model pictured. It is a bit disconcerting, since I can't be sure what is exactly correct. It took many searches to compile some data and lead me to the statements above. I still lean towards the 57 trad...but if a 54s C50 showed up OR a 52s EPS, I'd like to be prepared to make an "informed" decision based on totally accurate specs. Every couple of mm's count when it comes to fit. The significantly taller HT on the newer EPS could possibly sway me towards a slightly smaller frame. I'd have never figured that out given the wrong chart dimensions from an EP or a C50.


----------

