# test riding a CLX 3.0 to find out C59 size



## nobrakes71 (Jun 16, 2013)

Folks, 

I've tried everywhere to get a C59 size 52s for a test ride so I can ensure it's the correct size and pull the trigger to place an order. 

Thing is, there are no bikes available (spoke to the distributor in UK) to test ride - dealers also have nothing. 

However, I can quite easily get a CLX 3.0 52s to test ride. 

Looking at the geometries, it seems they are very similar. 

My question is: assuming a CLX 3.0 52s is a good fit, how confidently can I place an order for a C59 52s and expect the fit to be similar?


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

what size Top Tube and head Tube do you currently ride ?

what is your height and inseam ?

a 52s is like a 56 traditional and good for someone around 5'11"


----------



## nobrakes71 (Jun 16, 2013)

Hi, 

I'm 179cm (around 5'10) height, inseam is 88cm, but I use 76cm seat height, which apparently is a bit shorter than the theoretical seat height for my inseam. 

I currently ride a bianchi via nirone size 57cm with 56cm 'virtual top tube' (horizontal measure) - but I'm conscious that it's tricky to use this as a reference for colnagos as the geometries are not comparable, if this makes sense. 



Salsa_Lover said:


> what size Top Tube and head Tube do you currently ride ?
> 
> what is your height and inseam ?
> 
> a 52s is like a 56 traditional and good for someone around 5'11"


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

52s will fit

Btw, mike at maestro has a 52s in PR99 in stock 

www.maestro-uk.com


----------



## nobrakes71 (Jun 16, 2013)

Thanks for the heads up - I think his website is not up to date! 

I actually spoke to him about this frame, and apparently it's gone already (something along the lines that the original owner changed his mind, but then decided to take it).

Regarding your comment the 52s fit - I was originally recommended a 54s - hence my doubts, not sure which one would be 'ideal'... I know, should get a fitting done, etc, etc. But I also think that a good old test ride would be a better indicator.



Salsa_Lover said:


> 52s will fit
> 
> Btw, mike at maestro has a 52s in PR99 in stock
> 
> www.maestro-uk.com


----------



## Salsa_Lover (Jul 6, 2008)

About Colnagos, ( and probably about many other brands) , Fit is one thing, proper balance is another.

I am 1.80m, have relatively shorter legs ( inseam 31.5" ) I use 74.5 saddle height ( BB center to top of saddle, but 76 from BB-Center to seatbone contact point ). I prefer a moderate saddle handlebar drop ( some 7 cms )

In my search of the perfect Colnago I have tried

54,55, 55 with 54 seat tube, 56, 57, 58 and 52s

All of them "fit". you can get exactly the same contact points with a combination of saddle seatback and stem length.

But there is for me only the 56cm ( or 52s ) with a 120mm stem, no spacers, that gives the perfect balance. where you feel good in any position, tops, drops, out of the saddle, rolling, climbing, descending.

I prefer the 56cm because on a Colnago, which has a classic look and feel with its lugs and Italian geomety, traditional looks better and even better with a -17° Stem ( there I need 2 cm spacers to get the same fit as the -6° no spacers though ), so I sold all else and only kept the 56 trad.

Check out my bikes so you can see that they not only fit perfect but also look good

*52s, -6° 120mm stem* my ex #1 replaced by the C50 below


Extreme Power ST02 por Salsa_Lover, en Flickr

*56cm, -17° 120mm stem* this is my current bike #1

Colnago C-50 & Boras por Salsa_Lover, en Flickr

*56cm, -17° 120mm quill stem* this is my bike #2

Master 30th AD10 por Salsa_Lover, en Flickr


----------



## nobrakes71 (Jun 16, 2013)

Amazing bikes, they are really nice, well done. I see your point about the -17 stem, makes perfect sense, even if you need to add a bit of spacers.


----------

