# Le Champion SL Ti size dilemma -- 56 or 59?



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

Long time lurker, first time poster, please forgive me for any newbie mistakes. After lots of research and thought, I am planning on buying a Le Champion SL Ti but am having trouble deciding between the 56 and the 59. 

I'm 45, approx 6'0'' tall, crotch to floor inseam with shoes is 35 1/4". I currently ride an 8 year old Bianchi Volpe with a set of Mavic wheels, size 58 cm, which fits me. The TT actual is 570mm, virtual (due to slight slope) is 581mm. Standover is 32.8" which gives me approximately 1.75 - 2.0" of clearance when I measure it myself. I have room, but not a ton. I tend to do long-ish rides and climbs in places like the West Virginia mountains and do not want an "aggressive" geometry. 

A few days ago I test rode a new Specialized Roubaix, size 58, and it seemed very upright to me but it felt pretty good. If I bought one I'd probably need a longer stem or maybe even check out the next size up. I also test rode a Cannondale Synapse, size 58, and it seemed to require a little too much reach. I would probably need a slightly shorter stem for that one but overall it seemed like a decent fit.

So, with all this information, do I get the 56 or the 59? My initial hunch was the 59, but Chris from BD responded to the above information by saying that "we would recommend a 56cm LC Ti frame for someone with your measurements, they run big." I've seen some other comments/postings suggesting that these frames "run big" but am not sure what that means and how it would have an impact on me. 

I don't want to be crazy obsessive about this, but would like to make the right choice. I'm excited about the bike. Thanks in advance for any thoughts/help, particularly from anyone with actual experience with the frame.


----------



## akeelor (Apr 18, 2006)

OP:

I am 6'1.5" tall with a 35" inseam. I purchased the 56cm and have ridden about 500 miles. I like the fit of this bike more every time I ride it. The top tube on these bikes are a bit longer than you might find on another brand's 56cm. 

Obviously everyone's measurements are a bit different, but based upon my experience the 59cm would have stretched me out too far.

BTW - there are a few other threads in this forum discussing sizing of this frame.


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

Thanks for the response, this is very helpful. I've seen the other posts, thanks for referring me to them. They shed some light and identified the issue of the frames seeming to "run large." It seems unlikely that I would want the largest size frame they make in this model, and it seems like we are about the same size, and so I'm thinking the 56cm may be the one for me despite my initial thought to the contrary. I'm of course eager to hear any thoughts others may have as well. Thanks again, akeelor.


----------



## Poppadaddio (Apr 15, 2007)

*They Run Big*

I've ridden my new LeChampion Ti over 1500 miles now and I'll second the notion that they "run big." 
It is not so much the frame but the handlebars and stem. You can look at the geometry chart and compare to your present bike. Compare the virtual top tube length, not just the seat tube. You can raise the seat as far as you want to, of course. The stem on my 59cm measures about 115mm, the reach on the handlebars is about 85mm, and the Ultegra shifters have large, long flats on their tops, making for a lot of length you can stretch out front. The drop on the handlebars is about 145mm. I would think you could look up the particular handlebar and stem on the Ritchey web site; they are also shown in the Excel Sports Boulder catalog.

PS: and they run fast, too!


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

Running fast is good! Thanks very much, poppadaddio -- may I ask how tall you are and what did you consider when you chose the 59cm? If it's a question of the stem being a little long, that's not much of a problem. How do you feel about standover on the 59 as opposed to the 56?


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

I am 6'1" and I like a tall frame with a shorter stem and _very_ little rise in the seat post. My inseam (measured per bike fit) is 880mm. On my 5 other bikes, which oddly range from 54cm to 59cm, I use a 172.5 crank with a 90-110mm 65 degree stem and quite a bit of setback on the Brooks saddle with a top tube of 550-575mm. The distance from the tip of saddle to center of bar is 680mm. Because of the Brooks saddles, I always have a bit of machining to do to get the saddle back to the correct distance from the peddle and I have the same issues with the Le Champ so it is fairly standard in that area.

The 59 Ti fit me fine and, actually, could be a bit taller.


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

*56 cm = 175 mm Crank arms?*

Thanks for the thread everyone. I have a question, the sizing of crank length v. frame sizing. Are the 175mm available on the 56cm or not? 

My inseam is a 32" and height is 6'1". I'm leaning toward the 56cm myself, studying the over all compared to my 58 cm Super Six H3 Cannondale. The cannondale is 55.5 cm centre top tube/centre bottom bracket with an added jetting of frame shooting up about 2 cm above the top tube for the seat post to go into - hence the 58 cm top of seat tube measurement. Actually it's a 56.5 cm centre to top of top tube.+  Any help with the crank arm length info would be much appreciated.


----------



## akeelor (Apr 18, 2006)

EverydayRide said:


> Thanks for the thread everyone. I have a question, the sizing of crank length v. frame sizing. Are the 175mm available on the 56cm or not?
> 
> My inseam is a 32" and height is 6'1". I'm leaning toward the 56cm myself, studying the over all compared to my 58 cm Super Six H3 Cannondale. The cannondale is 55.5 cm centre top tube/centre bottom bracket with an added jetting of frame shooting up about 2 cm above the top tube for the seat post to go into - hence the 58 cm top of seat tube measurement. Actually it's a 56.5 cm centre to top of top tube.+ Any help with the crank arm length info would be much appreciated.



Crank arm length on the 56cm is 172.5mm. I have 175mm on my other bike and I notice zero difference. It is only 2.5mm.


----------



## Poppadaddio (Apr 15, 2007)

*Crank Arm Length*

That is a subject we won't settle here. There are as many theories as there are riders. (Short: quicker cadence. Long: More leverage, ... )
BikesDirect can tell you which length crank comes with which frame. You won't have a choice. Take a look at the difference between a 175mm and a 172.5mm. 2.5mm isn't much. I've ridden from 172.5 to 180 and even if I can actually feel the difference, there are pluses and minuses to either.


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

I can't worry about the crank arm -- still trying to get comfortable with the 56 over the 59 -- I'm almost there but I can't handle additional complexity!


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

dscott1000 said:


> I can't worry about the crank arm -- still trying to get comfortable with the 56 over the 59 -- I'm almost there but I can't handle additional complexity!


http://www.bicycling.com/gear/detail/0,7989,s1-16-156-2733-0,00.html
Read that review. It states that the top tube is more/less a 58 cm sizing frame and the sloping top tube offsets the over all real measure centre BB to top tube. So a 56cm is more close to a 58cm. The wheel base is identical to my Cannondale Super Six at 996 v. Motobecane Ti at 995

Specs on 58 cm HiMod Super Six

As for the crank arm length, I live in pretty hilly areas and dislike riding flats, so the preferences are climbing terrain.


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

I think the 56 is the way to go for me. Thanks for the reinforcement! I'm hoping to pull the trigger this week.


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

Just placed an order for the 56cm. Can't wait to get it. Will report back. Thanks to all who provided input!


----------



## dstedman (Apr 14, 2010)

You won't be disappointed - I just got my 51cm Le Champion SL Ti 2 weeks ago and it is everything I hoped it would be. And way better looking in person!


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

That's great to hear, glad you're enjoying it! Mine is scheduled to arrive Wednesday, can't wait.


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

56 cm comes as follows.


Crank - 175mm

Stem - 110mm

Bars 440mm

per [email protected] [e-mail today to me]


----------



## akeelor (Apr 18, 2006)

EverydayRide said:


> 56 cm comes as follows.
> 
> 
> Crank - 175mm
> ...



That's interesting because mine came with 172.5mm cranks and 120mm stem. Bought it in February.


----------



## zion rasta (Aug 15, 2004)

*How tall are you???*



dstedman said:


> You won't be disappointed - I just got my 51cm Le Champion SL Ti 2 weeks ago and it is everything I hoped it would be. And way better looking in person!


I ordered one Le Champion Ti for my neighbor and he is 5'7". The size I picked was 51cm because of the long eff top tube 540mm.

How tall are you?
What stem size comes with the 51cm?
Crankset size?

Thank you,
ZR


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

wow

great feedback am in almost exactly the same spot at 6'0"

also hearing that 56 is the way to go. scott lemme know i am right behind you on the trigger


----------



## Brayne (Jul 17, 2009)

I've had mine a month and have my first 300 miles on it. Getting ready for my first Metric Century. I'm 5'7" with a 31" standover w/o shoes. I got the 53cm and .... flipped my stem and I'm very comfy. 20-25 daily miles and no issues other than "Old Bones"


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

My new Le Champ ti (56 cm) came Wednesday, I assembled it without any problems (packaging was excellent, everything was well padded, box unbroken by UPS, etc.). Looks terrific. Only had time to ride around the block but seems like it will be great -- incredibly light with head-snapping acceleration compared to my old Bianchi warhorse (that I nonetheless love). Had to raise the seat fairly high compared to what I've ridden before but I think that will be ok. Will have more to say (with photos) after giving it a real shakedown cruise this weekend!


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

Hi, if you have time could you take some shots of the bike for us all? I'm 5'11 - 6'0 with an inseam of 33. That equates to a 56 cm by the fit kit. 

questions, the real world measurements help us all out. If you have time to grab a cm measuring tape these as the questions below. I was told by BD that the crank arms are 175 in this size [I believe they're mistaken]


What size crank arms came with the 56 cm
What was the stem length
Real Word Measurement of the seat tube center to top of seat tube clamp
Real World Measurement of the top tube [centre of head tube level to seat post centre]


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

lol...cool

35 inseam and the fit is right on a 56? i ran into a guy the other day on the ti, i think he was like 5' 10' i think he said. and he was on a 53. and giddy.

i think the 59 is for the tall guy with long legs, like 6'1 and up


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

I can't speak to the parts measurements, but my 59cm was dead on with the spec sheet at 585mm top tube, 590mm center to top of seat post, and 570mm center to top of top tube for seat post. The chain stay is a very short 410mm.


----------



## akeelor (Apr 18, 2006)

View attachment 199868


EverydayRide said:


> Hi, if you have time could you take some shots of the bike for us all? I'm 5'11 - 6'0 with an inseam of 33. That equates to a 56 cm by the fit kit.
> 
> questions, the real world measurements help us all out. If you have time to grab a cm measuring tape these as the questions below. I was told by BD that the crank arms are 175 in this size [I believe they're mistaken]
> 
> ...


Here's a pic of my 56cm

Crank arm length = 172.5mm
Stem length = 120mm
TT = 57.2cm spot on
ST = 56cm


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

akeelor said:


> View attachment 199868
> 
> 
> Here's a pic of my 56cm
> ...


Hey thanks for the measurements. Here's a pic of my *58 cm* Cannondale Super Six. As you can see, I'm a little shorter than you and have a 33 inch inseam. The 56 cm Motobecane is the correct size if you examine your seat height at a 2" inch plus inseam v. me. The Cannondale is 55.6 cm centre BB to centre top tube/seat tube. It's 58cm centre BB to *top of clamp* on seat tube.


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

I started this thread and am back to report on my purchase -- thanks to all for your very helpful comments on sizing. 

My new Le Champ SL Ti arrived last Wednesday. After three rides over the weekend, it's clear that the 56cm was the way to go for me. I'm still tinkering with some things (flipped the stem to see what that's like but haven't ridden it yet, will almost certainly replace the saddle, etc.) to get things dialed in but overall the bike is just terrific. A revelation compared to the heavy but lovable Bianchi beast I have been riding for several years. 

Process was great too. Bike is as advertised, well packed, simple to assemble, delivered when promised. Would absolutely buy from BD again and have recommended to friends already. Can't beat the value for the money. I can't wait to tackle some serious climbs this weekend out in West Virginia! 

Attached is a photo before I removed the top tube decals, which I really didn't like for some reason although after I took them off I had a minor second thought. Too late, they're just decals anyway and the bike looks great with or without them -- it's a beautiful machine!


----------



## Poppadaddio (Apr 15, 2007)

*Decals*

I don't have a problem with the frame decals but I would really like tot get rid of the yellow and orange decals on the wheels. The next time I have a tire off I will definitely work on the rims. 
If I take a hair dryer to the hubs will it fry the grease in the bearings? How can I get the orange-and-yellow Mavic decals off of the hubs?


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

I don't mind the wheel decals at all, but if the tires are off you can take acetone (get at any hardware store, in the paint remover area), put it on a rag or sponge, and rub them off with a little elbow grease. Could also come off with a hair dryer, probably easier and safer than the acetone since the rim decals are nothing like the frame decals in terms of adhesive I'm guessing. Not sure about the hubs, I'd be a little reluctant to try either the acetone (don't know how you'd get in there to rub) or the hair dryer (for the reason you suggested).


----------



## travmn (Aug 5, 2009)

I'm liking this bike the more I look at it. Thinking about getting the frameset and building one up. (I'd really like to go compact, but I don't want the $1600 model. Would like a full ultegra or sram force compact group).

Anyways - I'm in a similar situation. I have a similar build (6'1" with roughly 34.5-35" cycling inseam). I am curious how your reach is. I currently run a 58cm Spec. Roubaix and am running a 120mm stem at negative 16 degrees of rise. depending on how I am set up, I could use a bit more reach. 

For kicks, my rough arm length is 27" or so. (Using the competitive cyclist fit method).

If I go and order a frame, don't want to get stuck with not enough fitting room...


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

so you're thinking 59?


----------



## travmn (Aug 5, 2009)

Yeah, thinking I may need 59cm. Top tube on the Specialized Roubaix 58cm is 582mm, center to center. On the le champion, the 59cm measures at 585mm. I think the seat tube length differs more with the Spec. running about 54cm and the motobecane at 59cm.. That extra height doesn't really bother me since my seat isn't too close to the frame on the Specialized.

Otherwise the specs don't seem too different between the bikes. Short head tube on the motobecane and a half degree more head tube angle.


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

but the seat wouldnt be close to the frame on the specialized anyway because of the slope on the top tube. at six feet i dont know, man, i dont know if the 56 is enough, wish i could compare it to the 59 on a test ride. everything i read says 56 if you're on a 58 unless the 58 is small for you to begin with. and that the 56's run big. everything. and everyone on the 56 loves it, i havent heard from one guy on a 59, though, who was on a 58 and said it was the right size up. i'm sure they are out there, i just havent heard from them

like i said elsewhere i saw one guy on a 53 he must have been 5 8 five nine, and he was friggin ecstatic. go figure.


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

Top tube is really the calculation to move with and not the seat tube measurement. You can add a longer stem to the 56cm without issue; even a 130mm stem up from a 120mm will gain what is lost in that 1cm difference between the specialized top tube and the motobecane. The top tube is 57.2 cm centre to centre on the motobecane.

I would go with the 56 cm frame no questions asked if you're 6' 1"

Just saying.


----------



## dscott1000 (May 3, 2010)

As the OP who started this thread and bought the 56cm, I concur fully. I am very happy with the 56cm.


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

easyridernyc said:


> ... i haven't heard from one guy on a 59, though, who was on a 58 and said it was the right size up. I'm sure they are out there, i just haven't heard from them...


You are hearing from one now. Almost all my "perfect" fit bikes are 58cm, including the generally accepted measurements for my custom fit Waterford. I have always preferred a larger frame with the seat just slightly above the seat tube and the 59cm Ti is just as I expected. I built it up from the frame and with the slightly longer top tube I went with a 175mm crank and a slightly shorter than usual stem at 90mm. As it is now, all my fit measurements are virtually the same as my other bikes. I am 6'1" with a regular inseam and slightly longer trunk.

If I had gone with the 56cm, I would have had a longer stem than I like, I could not have mover the Brooks back far enough and it would have been much higher than I want above the top tube. 

The main thing I would point out is that what I want is _generally_ not what most people do. I almost never see anyone riding with a seat as close to the top tube as mine, and most seem to want a much lower handlebar than mine. Also, my standover height is nearly at my inseam. So I would not expect a more aggressive rider to go with my fit requirements. It is a real shame that BD chose to leave such a gap in the sizing from 56-58cm.


----------



## easyridernyc (Jan 10, 2008)

regular inseam meaning what, like 34?

sounds like you got the fit you wanted, like you say, most guys want to see a bit of that seat post and ride in the saddle and up above the top tube, plus use what amounts to a higher stem on the smaller sized frame. but like you say, your comfort zone is different, you want to stay close to the tube and let the bars rise up to meet you. good clarification on practical differences between the two sizes. makes sense, thanks for the input

i wonder, though, why moto skipped the 58 size, maybe it really is because the 56 footprint runs so large. maybe i'll ask mike


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

easyridernyc said:


> regular inseam meaning what, like 34?


Pants inseam, 32", bike measurement inseam, 35". My spacing between the top of the seat tube and the bottom of the saddle bracket generally runs around 30-50mm.


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

I am 6' with a 34" cycling inseam (32" pants). I think the 56's 57.2cm top tube will work for me with a fairly long stem, but I am a little concerned about the head tube height. Due to mobility limitations with my neck caused by radiation treatments for throat cancer, I need to run my handlebars very close to level with my saddle in order to look ahead comfortably. I want to be able to do this without a high stack of spacers and a very upwardly sloping stem. The Le Champ 59 might work. I get a good fit with my Salsa Casseroll with a 585mm eff. top tube and 80mm stem, but it has a sloping top tube. I'm afraid the standover may be a little high with a level top tube. Too bad there is not a size between these two.

Can someone with a size 56 Ti Le Champion tell me the measurement from the ground to the top of the head tube (to the bottom of the headset spacers below the stem)? That should help me figure out what kind of stem rise I would need.Thanks.


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

Based on your bar/seat requirements, I would guess you need a 59. I am only a little longer than you in the leg and I also want my stem level with the seat. My 59 Ti has a 65 degree stem and a stack of spacers 25mm to get the bar level. You would need quite a bit more spacer to make up for the loss of 30mm if the 56 is proportional.

I would also worry about the standover with the 59 as you are shorter than I and I like a tall standover; mine is right up tight in the shorts and you might be uncomfortable.

If you need a 65 degree stem, in any case, they are scarce. I found them here.

Too bad they took shortcuts with the size offerings on the Ti. The spread between 56 -59 is huge.


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

chas0039, thanks for the input. Can you tell me the top tube height of your bike from near the seat tube and from near the head tube? (What size tires are you running?)

I generally run my saddle top 29.5" from BB center. How does this compare to your setup?
What is the distance from the nose of your Brooks saddle (B17?) to the center of your handlebar at the stem clamp?

Sorry for all the questions. I'm trying to get as good an idea as possible how this bike would fit me before I give up the idea and go for a Specialized Roubaix 58.


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

BluesDawg said:


> chas0039, thanks for the input. Can you tell me the top tube height of your bike from near the seat tube and from near the head tube? (What size tires are you running?)
> 
> I generally run my saddle top 29.5" from BB center. How does this compare to your setup?
> What is the distance from the nose of your Brooks saddle (B17?) to the center of your handlebar at the stem clamp?
> ...


No problem, glad to help:

Top of the top tube at seat: 82.5mm
Top of top tube at head tube: 84.5mm

The 59 has less slope than the 56.

Top of saddle to center of BB: 73mm
Nose of saddle to center of handlebar: 54mm
Back of saddle to center of handlebar: 81mm

I have to modify the seat mount bracket to get the correct seat back measurement far enough back. If I had a 56, it would most likely be impossible with a Brooks.

Tires are 700/25

Let me know if you need any more.


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

Thanks. This is very helpful. I remeasured my PBH inseam and I had remembered it wrong. I am actually 35", same as you. In fact, I have my saddle set about 3/4" higher than yours. Your height advantage must be in a longer trunk. 
Sounds like the 59 Le Champ is very close dimensionally to my Salsa Casseroll, but with the top tube higher at the rear. The Salsa works well for the relaxed style of riding I do on it, but I'm looking for a more aggressive riding style on the new bike. I think the high top tube might be a problem or at least a compromise. 
The Roubaix is starting to look better.


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

To give you my perspective, I have spent most of my riding over the last 25 years on bikes that were "too tall" based on standover height. I have found very little drawback to this and I have become used to the top bar height. If you think about it, we spend 99% of the time riding anyway and is is very easy to tilt the frame a little when we come to a stop if we really need to stand flat footed. What I gain is a longer wheelbase, a higher point of view as I ride, a longer chain stay, a seat that is very much closer to the frame, and a ride that seems generally more stable. The lower seat seems to make the most difference as I am part of the frame rather than a point suspender above the frame, if that makes any sense. I gain a little weight because of the larger size but weight is not an issue having spent many years on "heavy metal" anyway.

Two of my current bikes are shorter than usual and probably closer to spec based on my standover height. These require a longer stem and a little work to get the seat back to where it belongs based on the correct position for the leg/pedal. The smaller bikes seem quicker, partly because they are lighter being newer, but compared to the Ti, not so much.

If I had my choice, I would go with a 58 Ti, and it would be near perfection getting the advantage of the quickness of a smaller frame, the lightness of titanium, and just a slight drop in the height I have become accustomed to. The 59 Ti is just a little taller than my other "too tall" bikes, but, for me, not so much that I don't enjoy it. But there is no way on earth that the 56 would work.

So, if you usually ride bikes that are tall for your specs, and would generally get a 58 then you will probably find that the 59Ti is doable but more sedate than you are used to. If you usually have a lot of room between the saddle and the top bar, then you would not like the 59Ti.


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

chas0039 said:


> So, if you usually ride bikes that are tall for your specs, and would generally get a 58 then you will probably find that the 59Ti is doable but more sedate than you are used to. If you usually have a lot of room between the saddle and the top bar, then you would not like the 59Ti.


I am used to riding quite a variety of bike setups. I have a bike that fits very much like I think the 59 Ti would fit me and I like it very much for long rides at a relaxed pace. But the slot I'm looking to fill now is for a lighter and sportier bike for club rides and organized centuries. It will be an updated replacement for the 57.5cm Bridgestone RB-1 that has been making me smile for 19 years. The new physical restriction requiring a higher handlebar makes it harder to find a good fit. If not for that, the 56 would be perfect. Short of going for a custom frame, the only bike I have ridden that really fits the bill is the 58cm Roubaix.


----------



## Poppadaddio (Apr 15, 2007)

*Standover height -- no problem for me*

I agree, standover height is not a problem. I chose the largest available frame.
For me, the reach from the seat to the handlebars is more important. You can probably extend the seat to whatever height you need and unless you are, well, abnormally proportioned, there is a range of frames that you can make fit.
My 59cm LeChampion Ti came with a 110mm/17-degree stem. After 2500 miles I have changed it to a 100mm/6-degree, with a few less spacers under the stem and it feels much nicer. I have been dialing-in the fit by a few mm's at a time and now I think I've got it.


----------



## BluesDawg (Mar 1, 2005)

As another reference point, Poppadaddio, how tall are you and what is your cycling inseam?
Thanks.


----------



## Poppadaddio (Apr 15, 2007)

*Decals*

The rim and hub decals peeled off quite easily.


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

BluesDawg said:


> ...Short of going for a custom frame....


You know, I can totally recommend Waterford for custom steel. They were very good at building exactly what I wanted and it is truly the only frame I have that is perfect. Add up the number of years left that you can ride and you might find that it is not nearly as costly as you think. I set up mine with Campy Veloce, King, Fulcrum, FSA, and Brooks for $2400.


----------



## SilentAssassin (Jul 29, 2010)

@dscott, can you post some pics without the labels, and maybe a pic of you sitting on the saddle. I want to see what a 6 foot guy looks like on a 56 as I am trying to decide on a 56 or 59. Also you can photoshop to mask your face as well if you are concerned about that thanks. I'm leaning towards the 59 but I think the bike will look weird if I have very little stem length.


----------



## flyingWeez (Dec 12, 2010)

I hate to resurrect a dead thread but Chris from BD pointed me to this thread after I submitted a sizing question to him. 

Like the OP I also ride a 58cm Volpe and I consider it to be a good fit. The only difference between us though is that I'm 6'3", so a couple of inches taller. I am long-legged and short-wasted. 

I thought I was all set on getting a 59 Le Champ Ti and then I actually started to compare other bikes I've test ridden with my bike and the Moto. 

The 56cm moto's effective top tube is .9cm shorter than my Volpe and the 59cm moto's is .3cm longer.

When I have been test riding bikes the shop guys usually put me on the largest size that Brand X has to offer and it ALWAYS feels too big (personal preference I guess) but it just seems that going to the 56 would be way too small. Is there any way to make the 59 a "smaller" bike or the 56 a "larger" bike? Is a 56 even an option for me? Should I stop worrying so much?


----------



## EverydayRide (Sep 12, 2008)

flyingWeez said:


> The only difference between us though is that *I'm 6'3"*, so a couple of inches taller. I am long-legged and short-wasted.


59 cm. You have to be a 34 inch inseam. The 56cm only has 172.5 crank arms. The 59cm has 175mm crank arms. You can play with stem length but there are limits, and would not push you toward the 56cm.


----------



## chas0039 (Jun 26, 2007)

I second the 59cm. I am 6'2" and short leg/long waisted. First, even with my 32 inseam, I have no problem with standover and, as mentioned above, you can get a shorter stem if needed, especially as you indicated above that the 59cm TT is only slightly longer.

BD made a major mistake, in my opinion, with such a large gap between 56-59.


----------



## PhotoJoe (Mar 8, 2011)

Rumor has it (email from BD) that there is a more "comfort" oriented Ti, with room for wider tires and fender mounts coming this spring. Maybe they'll fix the huge jump on that frame (I know it's different and doesn't do anything for those of us wanting THIS frame)


----------



## steve90068 (Jul 29, 2009)

PhotoJoe said:


> Rumor has it (email from BD) that there is a more "comfort" oriented Ti, with room for wider tires and fender mounts coming this spring. Maybe they'll fix the huge jump on that frame (I know it's different and doesn't do anything for those of us wanting THIS frame)


I wish this frame would get confirmed. id love to see the geo on it


----------

