# CAAD10 fit help



## iampogi (Apr 26, 2011)

Hey guys,
Sorry to clutter the forum with another fit thread but I'm about to purchase a CAAD10 as my race bike (yay for crashing with a clear conscious) and I'd like to have a good idea on what size I should be looking for during my purchasing process. A little background: I'm 5'8 and a half and inseam length of 31inseam. I have a average-to-fair flexibility (can palm the ground on a good day) and looking for a somewhat aggressive position. I use to have lower back pain on my old 52 cm trek 5000 which is the main reason for me looking for a new steed. In my opinion, I'm in between a 54 and a 56 which posses a problem because the only 54s available are 10-5 and 56s are 10-4 and the ultegra model. My gameplan with the rig is to build it up with Sram force/red, rotor cranks, and hand-build wheels, so stock components aren't highest priority. 
Any help and guidance would be great!
Thanks
-Andrew


----------



## effersl (Apr 22, 2011)

Best thing I did when purchasing mine was to have a fitting done at an authorized Cannondale dealer. My sizing was similar to yours, however between the 52cm and 54cm. In the end I went with the 52cm but without having the fitting, it would have been a coin toss.


----------



## jcgill (Jul 20, 2010)

I would have to say the 56 would be too big for you.....I am 5'10" and have a 31" inseam and i ordered a 54cm at the advice of the cannondale dealer.

Again this is all just guessing without you on a bike, but our inseams are the same, so you have 2" less torso than me, so that rules out a 56, so you should look at 54 or 52 in my opinion.


Jon


----------



## Sloburu (Mar 23, 2011)

I think if you wanted an aggressive position I would go with a 52 and a longer stem. thats just me. If your racing I would just use the 10-4 just like that and worry about crashing.good luck!


----------



## iampogi (Apr 26, 2011)

Thanks guys! Yeah i agree that the best route would be to get fitted professionally at the dealer. I just wanted to get a good ballpark range to set as a guideline. I did test ride a 54cm a month ago and am incredibly impressed with the ride characteristics. I didn't get to put it through the ringer, but my main concern is my lower back pain when during extended efforts while i rode my 52cm trek 5000. 

jcgill: what length stem are you using?


----------



## jcgill (Jul 20, 2010)

I am still awaiting delivery of my CAAD10-3, it is supposed to ship to the dealer on June 25th....But on my Trek i have a 110stem i believe.


----------



## capt_phun (Jun 14, 2004)

The Trek 52 would have a much shorter headtube than the cannondale 52 with 3cm topcap, that is probably why backpain.
I am 5'9", 81 cm inseam & ride a 52. 54 had not much seatpost showing. & needed a 90 or 100 stem. On the 52 I run a 110 stem with an almost aft saddle on a Thomson setback post.


----------



## kneejerk (Feb 2, 2007)

I'm 5'8" without shoes and go for the 54cm frame. 

There are usually 3 different sizes you can make work for you in your "average" height range (52-56). Differences will be in the extention to the bars (effective TT length) and the height you desire of the handlebars (headtube length).

With road bike sizing it is usually best to go with the smaller size frame that works.


----------



## CAADEL (Jul 23, 2011)

jcgill said:


> I would have to say the 56 would be too big for you.....I am 5'10" and have a 31" inseam and i ordered a 54cm at the advice of the cannondale dealer.


This is interesting. I'm 5'10" too but I have a 33" inseam and when I visited the cannondale dealer and got on a 54cm bike I was told that the seat post had to be raised a lot, thus I should try a 56cm. And on the 56cm I was told it was ok (although I felt the handlebar was a little far away).

I've ordered a 56cm CAAD 10-5 and my order is due in a week. This is the first time in my life I buy a road bike, although I've been a cyclist since the 80's (mostly mtb's and hybrids).
(?) I guess I'll probably need a shorter stem. (?) Or move the saddle forward. Do you think I should go for the 54cm? (Although it's a little late now to cancel my order.)


----------



## jcgill (Jul 20, 2010)

CAADEL- I think the 56 will be good for you, a shorter stem and possibly moving the saddle forward a little should bring the bars a little closer...i have a 31" inseam and ride the 54cm, so with 2 more inches inseam, the 56 is probably the better choice for you.


----------



## CAADEL (Jul 23, 2011)

Just to report that I got my 56 today _(that was fast - I thought I was going to wait a few more days)_ and the fit seems perfect. 

I didn't need to change the 10cm stem that comes with the bike. Just the saddle was moved forward and everything's perfect.


----------



## s4one (Jun 8, 2008)

I am about the same size as you but 5'11, watch out for getting a 52 or 52 because the headtube length is a lot shorter so you may end up using a lot of spacers under the stem as if you were to go with a 56 with a 150 headtube. just a thought. I am in that issue right now, I need my stem raised up a bit.


----------



## AceyMan (May 6, 2010)

Just a general comment here about seat position- the seat should not be moved fore/aft to put the bars at some "correct distance" from your body/shoulders, but rather to locate your center of gravity properly over your seated contact point.

A seat that is moved forward from the position where your CG is correct will mean you must rest more weight on your arms and shoulders, which results in muscle fatigue in those areas (and neck). 

The key is to be seated so that in the riding tuck you are nearly balanced on your sit bones and therefore need very little pressure on the arms Besides comfort this also improves manuverability since your ares are tension free and can therefore turn naturally.

I started off with my seat too far forward and as a result had constant neck/shoulder pain (primarilly in my trapezius) until I moved my seat back quite a bit -- switched to a setback post and am close to the end of the rail. Counterintuitively, even though the stem is the same and thus the bars are further away, I'm now really comfortable on the bike and the shoulder pain is gone.

Cheers,

fyi: i'm 176cm (5'9 1/3"), 80cm inseam (31.5"), - long torso, short legs - 68KG (150 lb). I ride a 54cm 2011 SuperSix 4 and 2011 CAAD10.


----------



## Wile_E_Coyote (Jul 15, 2011)

I'm fairly novice to all of this, but the seat height seems like the size point that should be more flexible? The reach to the bars seems more critical to me, but maybe I am looking at it wrong. I'm 6'1 with a 34.5" inseam. I have longish arms, but a short torso. I started on a 58 and it was horrible. Now am on a 56 and much happier. I even think I could do a 54 given the right stem length.


----------



## AceyMan (May 6, 2010)

@Wiley-

I think I agree with you. I test rode a CAAD9 52 early on in the sizing process and felt really good on it. With my short legs I was concerned about stand over height, but the 54 Cannondales are not a problem for me, despite them being traditional designs with level top tubes.

On my 54 with the stock stem (110mm I believe) on steep climbs out of the saddle my thighs and knees come quite close to the bar tops, so while a 52 might have worked I'd have needed a longer stem, probably 130mm at least.

In general, as I've read here and elsewhere, a good rule of thumb is to get "the smallest bike that's big enough".


----------

