# Time Frame Sizing/Geometry



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

What are opinions on range of available sizes for the latest Time models, specifically the RXR Ulteam or VRS Vibraser? Coming from Colnago sizing options, they seem quite limited. Top tube lengths jump from 54 to 56, which takes out the sweet spot in between for me. Do people caught in between sizes generally go up or down? Seat tube angles seem to stay around 73, again not ideal for certain femur lengths. I am intrigued by both models, but am hesitant to pull the trigger on a bike this expensive if it doesn't fit just right.


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

Time has much slacker STA than Colnago on small-medium size, by about 1 degree on average, in top tube 54cm which is exactly what I have (Time Edge, size small). I could not fit Colnago well due to 74 degree STA. So even though Colnago has more sizes it does not fit me well at all. Hence I bought Time. 
Dont worry about femur length, there are no good numeric formulas for guaranteed good fit. I have relatively long femurs and I don't position myself on KOPS at all, I am positioned on what feels good. I could not even tell you where my seat is in relation to KOPS or where my ball of foot is in relation to pedal spindle etc.


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

*you could probably*

ride both
the medium with a 10cm stem, 0 spacers (15.6cm head tube) and slide the saddle forward 1cm+ with a seatpost with 0 degree setback (now seat angle would be close to 74 and 73.5 head angle with good amount of trail)

or small with a 11cm, 1.5cm spacers (14.1cm head tube) keep the sadde centered (seat angle would be 73 and head angle would be 72 with a good amount of trail)

both would give very close to effective top tubes, but different seat angles and way different wheelbase's.
you could ride both...up to you, like small and snappy or a little longer wheelbase with quick handling???


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

Thanks to both of you on the feedback. Acid rider, can you tell me what your saddle height is and how much drop you have on the small frame?

Its funny, because my first real road bike which I still have has a geometry almost exactly like the medium Time and my Colnago is closer to the small except with a steeper seat tube. It seems like I am able to get into a better position on the smaller frame where I can drive the pedals harder behind the bottom bracket and not get too stretched out.

It also looks like the RXR Ulteam would have a slightly taller head tube than the Vibraser. I have to say I am blown away by the looks of the Ulteam.


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

My seat height is ~710mm (172.5mm cranks) and saddle to bar drop is hard to measure but I guess ~35mm but this is not reliable measure. This may help: I have 30mm of spacers and -4 degree (Deda 31-86) stem. My height is 173-174cm and cycling inseam 83cm (or 83.5cm). Stem is 100mm because I have poor overall flexibility. I can ride 110mm stem too but 100mm feels a bit better, more upright. Time Edge has ~141mm head tube length (check Time Edge Pulse geometry which is same, to be sure). The RXR/VXR etc have ~3mm shorter head tubes, not significant. The STA is 73.0 and top tube is 540mm. I would have more problems fitting on Colnago of similar size - either reach will be not good or head tube length will be not good. I also have a 2004 Trek Madone 54.5mm top tube with similar angles and tubes to Colnago C-50. I can ride Madone but Time fits considerably better and on Madone I have 40mm of spacers and 90mm stem to get similar reach to Time with 30mm spacers and 100mm stem. In general my opinion is that seat tube angles on most off-the-shelf frames are too steep for small and medium size frames, at least ~0.5-1.0 degrees too steep. Only Time, Cervelo, BH (?) and LaPierre (?) have slacker angles (and custom frames too) but BH and LaPierre have short head tubes which does not suit many riders. Which leaves Time and Cervelo as the best overall geometry frames for small and medium height riders. This is just my opinion.


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

My inseam is also 83cm, I probably would require a 110mm stem on a 54cm top tube, although a 100mm might work as well. I think I am slowly coming to the same conclusion about the reach issue as you have. Even though Colnagos offer more size options than Time, it really doesnt help because the steeper seat tube angle can actually increase the reach on a smaller frame size. I am going to look at some Time models at an LBS in Minneapolis this summer, and hopefully be able to take a test ride on one. Thanks for all the help.


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

bertoni said:


> Thanks to both of you on the feedback. Acid rider, can you tell me what your saddle height is and how much drop you have on the small frame?
> 
> Its funny, because my first real road bike which I still have has a geometry almost exactly like the medium Time and my Colnago is closer to the small except with a steeper seat tube. It seems like I am able to get into a better position on the smaller frame where I can drive the pedals harder behind the bottom bracket and not get too stretched out.
> 
> It also looks like the RXR Ulteam would have a slightly taller head tube than the Vibraser. I have to say I am blown away by the looks of the Ulteam.


FYI, the taller headtube height was my concern when I bought a RXR Ulteam (I own a Proteam) because I have my stem pushed all the way down.
Then, I look at RXR and it has lower stack height of headset which turns out to be an identical height for my handlebar. I wish the head tube was slightly shorter on Time but other than that I think most people will find the good fit.
I'm too blown away by the look, fit and finish of RXR Ulteam. It looks a lot better in person than the picture. That why I now have my 3rd Time frame.

Btw, I'm 6 feet tall with 32" inseam and the M fits me like my custom Serotta Legend Ti.
How tall are you? 


Thanks,


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

cpark said:


> FYI, the taller headtube height was my concern when I bought a RXR Ulteam (I own a Proteam) because I have my stem pushed all the way down.
> Then, I look at RXR and it has lower stack height of headset which turns out to be an identical height for my handlebar. I wish the head tube was slightly shorter on Time but other than that I think most people will find the good fit.
> I'm too blown away by the look, fit and finish of RXR Ulteam. It looks a lot better in person than the picture. That why I now have my 3rd Time frame.
> 
> ...


I am 5'10", with a "riders" inseam of 32", my pants inseam is more like 30".


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

bertoni said:


> I am 5'10", with a "riders" inseam of 32", my pants inseam is more like 30".


I think a small will fit better and you might feel little stretched out on a medium.
I'm 2 inches taller than you but it's all on torso.
If I had shorter torso, I'd probably gone with a small.
One possible thing that might prevent me from getting a small (if I had shorter torso) that would be the rather short front center.
The tip of my toe glazed by the front wheel with a medium and that means I'll have a more significant toe lap with a small frame. I don't mind a little bit of toe lap but I don't like it when the front center gets below 58cm.


----------



## haydos (Sep 17, 2007)

Hey Guys,

I'm the same height as acid rider and run the same saddle height on my EPS. FYI I have it in a 52 trad. (53TT, 120stem)

Bikes I have had previously (that are relevant to this) are Cervelo RS(51) and a BMC Pro Machine (51). The Cervelo runs a 73 STA, the BMC 73.5 STA, and the Colnago 74.57 STA.

I used to run 10cm of drop on the BMC (and Cervelo) and i'm actually running about 7cm on my Nago atm, the problem i'm having is severely numb hands. After 30k or so, my hands are just killing me. I've never had this problem (like this) before. The reach is about the same and the reason i'm getting numb hands, I think, comes down to the forward position the STA is giving me - it's seems to be putting alot more pressure on my hands. I'm certainly no bike-fit expert, but I think i'll be selling the 'Nago and buying a Time shortly...or should I just HTFU and ride and it'll sort itself out?

Is my thinking/logic correct????

Thanks!

PS> good luck Bertoni - they are beautiful rides!


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

haydos said:


> Hey Guys,
> 
> I'm the same height as acid rider and run the same saddle height on my EPS. FYI I have it in a 52 trad. (53TT, 120stem)
> 
> ...


I would agree that your seat is positioned too forward. I solved this problem on my C40m by purchasing a Fizik Arione that allowed me to push the saddle back farther and sit farther back on the saddle, because of the added saddle length. This has really helped a lot on longer rides. This also required going to a 100mm stem, which has helped as well. I love Colnagos, but the seat tube angles on the smaller sizes (from 55 on down) seem too steep.

That EPS of yours is so gorgeous, I hope you can make some adjustments to make it fit better!


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

cpark said:


> I think a small will fit better and you might feel little stretched out on a medium.
> I'm 2 inches taller than you but it's all on torso.
> If I had shorter torso, I'd probably gone with a small.
> One possible thing that might prevent me from getting a small (if I had shorter torso) that would be the rather short front center.
> The tip of my toe glazed by the front wheel with a medium and that means I'll have a more significant toe lap with a small frame. I don't mind a little bit of toe lap but I don't like it when the front center gets below 58cm.


I experience some toe overlap on my C40 as well, but not enough that its a problem. I think I could make either size work, but I am also concerned about being too stretched out on the medium. I am hoping to ride both sizes before pulling the trigger, this is one bike I don't want to buy twice!


----------



## haydos (Sep 17, 2007)

I'm running a record post - as it has lots of setback - i've also slammed the Scratch back as far as possible - here's hoping it works! 

I'll give it a couple of months to see how it goes - otherwise the Nago will be up for sale.


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

Bertoni,
What saddle height do you ride at?
Sounds like you and I are about the same size. I also feel between sizes on the times.
I ride a saddle height of 73cm. I actually like the Colnago geometry with the 74 seat angle. I've had an R3 in the past (54) and found the the 73 SA on those had me pushing the saddle pretty far forward, thus putting a lot of my weight over the front of the bike.
In Colnago, I would ride a traditional 54 which has a 54 TT, and I used a 120 stem..

Hados, I hope you can sort out your numb hands, cause your Nago is about the nicest I've ever seen!


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

gibson00 said:


> Bertoni,
> What saddle height do you ride at?
> Sounds like you and I are about the same size. I also feel between sizes on the times.
> I ride a saddle height of 73cm. I actually like the Colnago geometry with the 74 seat angle. I've had an R3 in the past (54) and found the the 73 SA on those had me pushing the saddle pretty far forward, thus putting a lot of my weight over the front of the bike.
> ...


Right now, my saddle height is exactly 73cm running 175mm cranks. My C40 is a traditional 55 with a top tube length of 54.3cm, which almost identical to the 54 you ride. I had the saddle height up to about 73.5 most of last year but lowered it a little after a fitting said it was too high. The distance from the front of the saddle to the centerline of the handlebars is 50.5cm, although I have had the seat back a little further than that as well. I use a 100mm Ritchey pro stem, and have 20cm of spacer under the stem, which is all I can run since the steerer tube was cut off. I guess the only thing I would like sometimes is a little more handlebar height, but once my fitness is attained it isn't much of a problem.

I have to say I am still a little apprehensive about looking at different frame geometry since my current bike fits me quite well. I don't think I will buy anything unless I have the chance to ride it extensively first. And I know my frame is more than a few years behind the technology curve, but still is a very smooth ride and more than stiff enough for me. If I was racing it might be a different story.


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

bertoni said:


> Right now, my saddle height is exactly 73cm running 175mm cranks. My C40 is a traditional 55 with a top tube length of 54.3cm, which almost identical to the 54 you ride. I had the saddle height up to about 73.5 most of last year but lowered it a little after a fitting said it was too high. The distance from the front of the saddle to the centerline of the handlebars is 50.5cm, although I have had the seat back a little further than that as well. I use a 100mm Ritchey pro stem, and have 20cm of spacer under the stem, which is all I can run since the steerer tube was cut off. I guess the only thing I would like sometimes is a little more handlebar height, but once my fitness is attained it isn't much of a problem.
> 
> I have to say I am still a little apprehensive about looking at different frame geometry since my current bike fits me quite well. I don't think I will buy anything unless I have the chance to ride it extensively first. And I know my frame is more than a few years behind the technology curve, but still is a very smooth ride and more than stiff enough for me. If I was racing it might be a different story.


I had a 55 Nago in the past, but didn't like the fact that I had so little post showing, and since the top tube lengths are so close, I went with the 54.
If you are using 2cm (I think 20cm was a typo?) of spacers under the 55 nago, I think you would find the head tube on the 'small' Time too small. Your nago has a traditional headset which adds 2 - 3cm in head tube height. So 14cm(HT) + 2.5cm (headset) + 2cm spacers = 18.5cm?
The small time head tube is 13.8cm with what looks like a 5mm top cap?
So you might need 4cm of spacers which is quite a bit, and you mentioned that you'd actually like more height.

I too use 175 cranks. Man, we could swap bikes mid-race!


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

gibson00 said:


> I had a 55 Nago in the past, but didn't like the fact that I had so little post showing, and since the top tube lengths are so close, I went with the 54.
> If you are using 2cm (I think 20cm was a typo?) of spacers under the 55 nago, I think you would find the head tube on the 'small' Time too small. Your nago has a traditional headset which adds 2 - 3cm in head tube height. So 14cm(HT) + 2.5cm (headset) + 2cm spacers = 18.5cm?
> The small time head tube is 13.8cm with what looks like a 5mm top cap?
> So you might need 4cm of spacers which is quite a bit, and you mentioned that you'd actually like more height.
> ...


Sorry about the typo, it was supposed to be 2cm. Thanks a lot for the info on the time headset, I had done some calculations last night on the actual difference in reach between a size 55 colnago and the medium size time to discover that they are virtually the same due to STA difference. So I was starting to rule out the small based on that, but your point about the head tube height difference is more important than the top tube difference, which I probably could deal with by using a longer stem. There is a vxs translink for sale on ebay right now but it is a small, and has a combination of Dura Ace and Ultegra on it, which is fine except I am pretty sold on the Campy Record 10 speed that I have on the nag.

If you run Speedplay Zero pedals on your rig we could indeed swap bikes mid-race!


----------



## a_avery007 (Jul 1, 2008)

just my lousy opinion, but if you run more than 2cm of spacers, or 3-4cm spacers and a riser stem then your weight distribution will be all wrong, and your effective top tube length will change!
you should have a bike with longer head tube and longer stays to keep the weight distribution correct.


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

a_avery007 said:


> just my lousy opinion, but if you run more than 2cm of spacers, or 3-4cm spacers and a riser stem then you weight distribution will be all wrong, and your effective top tube length will change!
> you should have a bike with longer head tube and longer stays to keep the weight distribution correct.


As I had mentioned, I am running only 2cm of spacer, would not change that on this bike and would look at a bigger frame a taller headtube instead. As far as handling goes with my C40 set up as is, other riders far more experienced than me have said it is the nicest handling bike they have ever rode.


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

bertoni said:


> If you run Speedplay Zero pedals on your rig we could indeed swap bikes mid-race!


lol, I do!
Here is my current ride, size small Ridley Excalibur, 73 seat height, 110 stem, zero stainless pedals

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showpost.php?p=1999837&postcount=135


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

gibson00 said:


> lol, I do!
> Here is my current ride, size small Ridley Excalibur, 73 seat height, 110 stem, zero stainless pedals
> 
> http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showpost.php?p=1999837&postcount=135


Now that is really funny; before I got jonesing for a time I was looking pretty hard at Ridley, especially since Competitive Cyclist has a blowout deal on the Excalibur. Nice Bike!


----------



## gibson00 (Aug 7, 2006)

bertoni said:


> Now that is really funny; before I got jonesing for a time I was looking pretty hard at Ridley, especially since Competitive Cyclist has a blowout deal on the Excalibur. Nice Bike!


It's a good low cost carbon frame. Works just as well as anything else, just doesn't have the bling paint. And Time & Colnago definitely have higher quality carbon tubes.
If I do get another bike, I'll probably go back to a traditional 54 Colnago.


----------



## tidi (Jan 11, 2008)

*hi haydos*



haydos said:


> I'm running a record post - as it has lots of setback - i've also slammed the Scratch back as far as possible - here's hoping it works!
> 
> I'll give it a couple of months to see how it goes - otherwise the Nago will be up for sale.


sounds like your looking for a new adventure. i could easily say go for it. but i s'pose depends what you like your coqpit to feel like. i like to have room for my legs when i'm outta the saddle whether sprinting or climbing so in that regards a steep sta sounds good to me. but depends how you like to ride seated, if you like to really exert power in that position or are after comfort when after a full gas squirt out of the saddle. you could probably look for an extremely laid back saddle post and maybe bring your bars back the same amount if you have the leg room still, out of the saddle. however i just sold a 57cm ti frame that was on the large size for me. i could have ridden it forever but it didn't have the zippiness of a 55cm for me. so i changed frames and am looking forward to riding my ne 55cm de rosa titanio. keeping the adventure alive.


----------



## haydos (Sep 17, 2007)

tidi said:


> sounds like your looking for a new adventure. i could easily say go for it. but i s'pose depends what you like your coqpit to feel like. i like to have room for my legs when i'm outta the saddle whether sprinting or climbing so in that regards a steep sta sounds good to me. but depends how you like to ride seated, if you like to really exert power in that position or are after comfort when after a full gas squirt out of the saddle. you could probably look for an extremely laid back saddle post and maybe bring your bars back the same amount if you have the leg room still, out of the saddle. however i just sold a 57cm ti frame that was on the large size for me. i could have ridden it forever but it didn't have the zippiness of a 55cm for me. so i changed frames and am looking forward to riding my ne 55cm de rosa titanio. keeping the adventure alive.


I'm gonna keep trying it for a while. I just put on some Deda Presa bars, they may help a bit. I just love the look of the nago so much I really want to make it work - i'd be shattered if I had to sell it. I think either a Time or Baum (custom Ti) would be the only others i'd look at.


----------



## tofumann (Jun 17, 2008)

bertoni said:


> What are opinions on range of available sizes for the latest Time models, specifically the RXR Ulteam or VRS Vibraser? Coming from Colnago sizing options, they seem quite limited. Top tube lengths jump from 54 to 56, which takes out the sweet spot in between for me. Do people caught in between sizes generally go up or down? Seat tube angles seem to stay around 73, again not ideal for certain femur lengths. I am intrigued by both models, but am hesitant to pull the trigger on a bike this expensive if it doesn't fit just right.


i just picked up a RXR a week ago....in size M. My EPS is a 58 standard, My paris is a 56, my Look 595 is XL. I'm exactly 182cm in height(without shoes).

The cut on the seat-tube was (minimal). I met the U.S. TIME guy at the shop and he also rides the same size. He and I are exactly the same height with similar proportion of bodies.
The place i got my RXR happens to be a Colnago dealer as well, and I've been fitted BEFORE i ordered my EPS...so I asked them to order my RXR in accordance to the size of the EPS.

Sounds like you are size 55? I wouldn't be surprise if they say you are size "SMALL" in RXR. Call TIME USA and ask for Gilles, he should be able to help you out. The best is usually straight from the source.


----------



## bertoni (Jan 10, 2008)

Thanks for the tip on calling TIME USA. I am a size 55 according to a fitting done by a LBS, but have been riding a size 55 Colnago, which runs a little smaller than 55cm in the top tube, although I seem to fit on it just fine. I am building up a cross bike right now with a 55cm top tube, and seat angle closer to Time geometry, which might give me a better idea of which way to go.


----------



## rocco (Apr 30, 2005)

bertoni said:


> Thanks for the tip on calling TIME USA.



Hmmm... They actually answered the phone and didn't disconnect you after waiting on hold for 10 minutes?


----------



## Manolis (Feb 16, 2009)

My height is 168cm and my inseam 74.5cm .
I am riding an Edge racer *size XXS* with *11 cm stem*. 
I can’t decide witch size and stem is best…XXS with 11 cm stem or XS with 10 cm stem ?
I "prefer" XS size (VXRS or VRS) because the head tube size is 12.1cm (*not many spacers*) and the front angle is 72’...

Any opinions ?

Thanks !


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

Manolis said:


> My height is 168cm and my inseam 74.5cm .
> I am riding an Edge racer *size XXS* with *11 cm stem*.
> I can’t decide witch size and stem is best…XXS with 11 cm stem or XS with 10 cm stem ?
> I "prefer" XS size (VXRS or VRS) because the head tube size is 12.1cm (*not many spacers*) and the front angle is 72’...
> ...


Not enough information is provide here but here is my opinion.

You may need shorter stem than 10cm one if you size up to a XS. Why? The XS's ST angle is 0.7 degree more laid back than XXS. Also the HT angle is steeper by 0.5 degree. With these 2 datas alone, you will need a stem that is at least 1 cm shorter. On top of that XS's top tube is 1.5 cm longer than XXS's. I'm estimating you will need a stem that is about 2 to 3 cm shoter if you want to maintain the similar geometry. 

How comfortable are you on your XXS Edge?
Post a picture if you can. I'd like to look at the handlebar, amount of spacers, saddle location and the hood location.


----------



## Maverick (Apr 29, 2004)

Manolis said:


> My height is 168cm and my inseam 74.5cm .
> I am riding an Edge racer *size XXS* with *11 cm stem*.
> I can’t decide witch size and stem is best…XXS with 11 cm stem or XS with 10 cm stem ?
> I "prefer" XS size (VXRS or VRS) because the head tube size is 12.1cm (*not many spacers*) and the front angle is 72’...
> ...


I'm on XXS, my inseam is 76.7cm. my stem is 90mm (freaking short), and the correct stem should be 100mm.

i was formerly on the XS, riding the VXR before the current ULTEAM.
reason i got the ulteam was due to incorrect sizing.

as for your case, my recommendation would be to stick to the XXS and do some minor adjustment using replacing the stem, saddle positioning etc. that should be way cheaper than changing a frame due to incorrect sizing (like what happened to me previously)

cheers


----------



## Manolis (Feb 16, 2009)

cpark said:


> Not enough information is provide here but here is my opinion.
> 
> ......
> 
> ...


I am feeling quite comfortable on my Edge (I believe that the distance between saddle and hoods is correct).
I have doubts though about my sitting position…. I think I am sitting too forward.


----------



## cpark (Oct 13, 2004)

Looks good to me.
Looking at the saddle/hood height, you obviously prefer more upright position.
The XS has a longer head tube but it's only 0.5 cm, so you won't reduce much spacer.
However, if you do get a XS, you will have to shorten the stem length quiet a bit, IMO.

By the way, you need to loose the valve stem


----------

