# Help with sizing Giant Avail 1



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Hi all,

first time posting here. I am having commitment issues and hoping for some clarity here.

I have been riding for a long time recreationally on one of those 1970's 10-speed bikes and am looking to upgrade to a modern road bike so I can go on longer rides/climb burlier hills. Budget is < $1500, so looking at an Al frame, 105 components.

Also did my measurements on the Wrench Science website and came up with the following recommendations:
Frame Size center-to-center:	52 cm
Frame Size center-to-top:	54 cm
Overall Reach:	62.42 cm
Saddle Height:	70.65 cm
Handlebar Width:	40 cm

(I am 5'7", 31.5 in cycling inseam, female, 135lbs, flexibility: can (barely) touch the floor; age: early 30's)

I started, as recommended here (been reading Beginners Corner too much), by shopping for a shop as well as a bike. Some bikes I rode (e.g., Trek LEXA WSD, Marin Argento) made me feel like I was reaching too far (curving my shoulders inward - doesn't seem right). The LBS I like has the Giant Avail 1 that feels pretty good reach-wise (still longer reach than my old bike, but not curving at the shoulders) with a shortened stem (to 80mm). All of the above-mentioned bikes were recommended in something resembling "size 54 cm", which in the case of the Giant is size M, says on the label that the rider height should be 5'6" - 5'10". The LBS guy said that Giant has been quite accurate in correlating rider height and frame size. So looked like Giant Avail 1 in size M with an 80 mm stem (and a better saddle!) was it. Somewhat uninformative numbers from Giant here:
http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-US/bikes/model/avail/7306/44117/

BUT THEN, I checked out a higher end, also well regarded, bike shop in town. They put me on some smaller frames, the best being Specialized Amira (I know, outside price range) size "51" which has a 52 cm TT. They checked out the fit more carefully, on a trainer, and tweaker around at the stem. The first ride they sent me out with made my shoulders sore, so they swapped out for a stem angling upward to raise the handlebars, getting me to about a 2 cm saddle-handlebar drop (the drop on the Avail is ! 1-2 cm), which felt better. They claimed that I needed the smaller size frame because the reach would be too long on something like a 54 cm. 

So basically it's a tradeoff between a smaller frame, for which handlebars have to be raised, and a larger frame for which the stem needs to be shortened, and possibly raised. Another wrench is that Avail is supposed to be a "relaxed" geometry whereas I've read here that Amira is more "aggressive." 

Then I did the Wrench Science measurements thing, and don't fully understand the meaning of the numbers, since they don't mention TT size, but they do say that the overall reach number is TT + stem length, in which case 54 cm TT and 80 mm stem seem to add up OK.

So maybe I should ride the Avail in a smaller size next just to check it out and make sure that the M is the correct size. At this point, I feel like a pest going into the shop and asking to ride bikes (though I always buy something for good measure). The guy there is a "fitting expert" so I think he will be a little annoyed at me doubting his frame recommendation. 

I am clearly way overthinking this and the bike should just "feel right." However, starting off on a road bike geometry for the first time (my old bike has a VERY short reach), it's hard to tell what "right" is supposed to feel like. 

After this long monologue, my question is: what has been people's experience with sizing accuracy of the Avails? And are there any other words on wisdom on whether I should consider smaller frames. I like to think of myself as having long legs and a short torso  The shopping is driving me a little crazy and I'd like to get it over with, but I'm terrified of getting the wrong frame that can't later be fixed by adjustments of stem etc.

Your help will be much appreciated!


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> first time posting here. I am having commitment issues and hoping for some clarity here.
> 
> ...


You're much more right in your thinking here than you may realize. From what you've offered, IMO it's likely you're in between sizes on the Giant, and as I read along was thinking that you should try the S before commiting to a purchase.

Regarding the Specialized, I completely agree with the fitter than reach on the 54 (which is basically what the Giant M is) borders on excessive reach, even with an 80mm stem. You're also correct that dropping down a size (in most any frame) poses a compromise - shorter reach for increased drop to bars, all else being equal. Something you and the fitter(s) need to work through, but IMO reach trumps drop in importance and the latter can be adjusted with variations of angled stems/ spacer set ups.

As far as your over thinking this? IMO, not at all. This is a sizable investment and if you want to be happy riding your new bike you want to get the fit right. If you want to avoid appearing to be a 'pain' to the fitters, tell them you posed your questions on a bike forum and we (well, I) am advising you to ride the 'S' Avail and the 51cm Amira (back to back, if possible) and decide from there.

One last thing. Forget the online calculators. The time you've spent with the fitters has already told you more than they ever will, and good luck!!


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

Do they have a Defy Small that you can try? It's got a 530 TT and is a bit different on the angles.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Riding a 52cm was a bit of a revelation for me, and I'm taller than you. Not that that means a whole lot - just saying that if you're going to spend money on this project, get the bike that really fits you. After all, the Tour de France was contested in the 1970s too.

You're actually going to have troubles with frames that get much smaller. Because of the size of the wheels, it gets harder and harder for the frames to have a shorter top tube without doing something weird, like steepening the seat angle. At that point, you have to get a seat post with extra setback, and the distances that actually matter - saddle to bars, and crank to bars - are the same as with the bigger bike, so it's a wash.

Anyway, for something more friendly to your budget, check out the Ruby and Dolce, and don't be afraid to hop on the Secteur and the Roubaix. There's no rule about women and men's bikes, and it looks like the head tubes at the sizes it sounds like you're liking are pretty close in length.

Do you recall what stem size you had on the Amira? IME, 80mm is too short. Handling can be a little funky. But, I'm a bigger, differently-centered person.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> Anyway, for something more friendly to your budget, *check out the Ruby and Dolce*, and don't be afraid to hop on the Secteur and the Roubaix. There's no rule about women and men's bikes, and it looks like the head tubes at the sizes it sounds like you're liking are pretty close in length.
> 
> Do you recall what stem size you had on the Amira? IME, *80mm is too short*. Handling can be a little funky. But, I'm a bigger, differently-centered person.


Good suggestion to try out the Ruby and Dolce, and while there's no harm in also trying the Secteur or Roubaix, I think indications are that your proportions lend themselves to WSD bikes.

Gotta break with Andrew on an 80mm stem being too short. It's a widely held belief that shorter stems make for twitchy handling, but IME the real culprit is incorrect f/r weight distribution, which can occur with the use of a short stem on a bike sized too large.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Hi all,

just chiming in to say thank you, the suggestions are very enlightening. I checked with Giant LBS, they have Avail and Defy in all sizes, so I can go ride more sizes.

Andrew, just to clarify, did you mean that 52 cm actually ended up working for you, and not to go smaller than 52?

Specialized dealer did mention Ruby but didn't put me on it - probably didn't have the right size. I'll call him too. They did not have the Dolce.

Are there any other bikes you guys would recommend I ride? (I know there are many manufacturers. I have the usual suspects in town, though no Jamis dealer. Perhaps something from Cannondale? In the end, I'll only do business with a shop I like, but it doesn't hurt to try them out.)

Thank you, great advice so far. Keep it coming!


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> Are there any other bikes you guys would recommend I ride? (I know there are many manufacturers. I have the usual suspects in town, though no Jamis dealer. Perhaps something from Cannondale? In the end, I'll only do business with a shop I like, but *it doesn't hurt to try them out*.)


By all means, test ride more bikes. The C'dale Synapse women's is one possibility...
http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/wom...synapse-alloy/2011-synapse-womens-alloy-5-105

BTW, the only differences in frameset between the Ruby and Dolce is that the Ruby uses CF, while the Dolce uses an aluminum frame, CF fork. The prices reflect this, but since the geo is the same, if you test ride the Ruby and like the fit/ handling, it might be worth the effort to hunt down a Dolce or ask the LBS to order one. Just be clear on their policies (like non-refundable deposits) before commiting to the purchase. 

And you're right, only do business with the LBS's that you feel are extending an effort to find the right bike for you.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

ggggggg123 said:


> Andrew, just to clarify, did you mean that 52 cm actually ended up working for you, and not to go smaller than 52?


The 52 did work for me. Bear in mind that one 52 is not like another 52, necessarily, and frame designs vary. Smaller than a 52 is not necessarily pointless - I suspect that the real minimum size that a frame can be built to is smaller. Some brands build their smallest bikes with 650C wheels instead of 700C wheels, which, for very small people, is a great way to get around the limitations of the larger wheel size. I'd be surprised if you needed a bike like that for fit and handling - I tend to think of them as being for people closer to 5' tall - but there's definitely a size that will work for you. You just need to find it.

You can go astray if you accept sizing recommendations uncritically or based on some strange formula to do with your inseam, or really almost anything to do with seat tube length, rather than based on ride feel and whether or not the dealer can fit the bike to you well.

PJ made a good correction further up the thread - it's probably not the 80mm stem itself that screws up the handling on bikes that have them - it's more that bikes with that stem size are typically too big for their riders. And it's a free country - people will disagree with me on this point.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Alright, I found a shop that has both Specialized and Cannondale bikes, so will pay them a visit to check out the Ruby and Synapse.

BTW, the previous Specialized shop had me riding on all these carbon frames, which I admit make me drool a little bit, though I don't know whether I could tell the difference from Al frame BUT later when I asked the guy what tire pressure he was running, he said 90 psi (23 mm tires). The Giant dealer was running 110 psi with 25 mm tires. 
Is 90 psi:
(a) A smooth sales trick to make you feel like the bike is a more comfortable ride?
(b) Or a better estimate of what a 135 lb person and 20 lb bike should be riding on?

Thanks again!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I'd say 90 psi is c) - both of the above.

I'm a little heavier than you and have 80 psi front and 95 psi rear in 23mm tires on my nicer bike. Handles well, treats my tuchus nicely, and there's evidence that the rolling resistance is better, or a wash, vs. higher pressures.

110 psi in 25mm tires would be missing the point for someone my weight (155) and even more so for you.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> Alright, I found a shop that has both Specialized and Cannondale bikes, so will pay them a visit to check out the Ruby and Synapse.
> 
> BTW, the previous Specialized shop had me riding on all these carbon frames, which I admit make me drool a little bit, though I don't know whether I could tell the difference from Al frame BUT later when I asked the guy what tire pressure he was running, he said 90 psi (23 mm tires). The Giant dealer was running 110 psi with 25 mm tires.
> Is 90 psi:
> ...


If it's a reputable shop and the employee setting the bike up for a test rides knows what s/he's doing, I'd go with b. FWIW, assuming decent road conditions, I would have gone with 90 front, 100 rear for you. They're the pressures I run and I'm ~140 lbs.

If they're less than reputable, a. 

I agree with Andrew re: the Giant dealer. 110 was excessive, but I've seen other dealers do the same.

JMO on the CF versus alu 'argument'. If you stick to shorter rides on smoother roads, alu bikes will suite the purpose just fine. It's when you start logging hours and ride rougher roads that CF has a slight edge, all else being equal. You still feel bumps/ road irregularities, but road buzz/ vibrations are quelled. 

If your budget doesn't allow it, don't fret over having to go with alu. CF forks go a long way in absorbing road buzz, and anyone sticking with the sport is always thinking about that 'next' bike, so something to look forward to.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thanks again guys! Good to know I don't have to push the high PSI. 

So I am checking out the options of bikes I should ride as recommended above, and I don't understand why Specialized Al bike w 105 components costs $1800, while everyone else has them at about $1300 (I know there are other parts that could be nicer on the Spec bike, but it does not seem competitive price-wise). Unless they let their dealers give you a "sale" with $400 off or something like that.
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?spid=52858&scid=1001&scname=Road

Their bike in my price range (Dolce Elite) comes with SRAM Apex shifters. I tried those, and something bothers me about pushing a lever in the same direction for up- and down- shifting, seems like a higher chance of shifting error than with Shimano system.
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?spid=52859&scid=1001&scname=Road

Any thoughts on SRAM Apex. I've heard of people with small hands liking those, but I don't have small hands. 

So, if Specialized is a no go based on shifters and out-of-budget price for 105, looks like we're narrowing in on Giant Avail and Cannondale Synapse, if I stick w WSD. Didn't like our Trek store, though there is another dealer in town, though possibly also not a store I want to do business with. So maybe current plan is try those two in different sizes, see what feels better. That is manageable. 

Thanks, PJ, for the reassurance on the frame. I'd feel pretty silly riding a CF frame until I'm a "serious" cyclist (i.e., can climb big hills). They are pretty sexy though, as you say, maybe for bike no. 2.


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

It won't take long to get used to the SRAM. I run Rival on my bike, and prefer it to Shimano, after riding 105 and DA.

Don't set yourself on getting a WSD bike if you find a normal that fits better.

Have you tried Felt, Masi, or Scott? I'm not too familiar with those brands beyond the normal stuff, but I think you'd be looking at the Z series on Felt and the Speedster (or Contessa, if they still make the WSD) on Scott. There's Fuji too.

Basically - ride everything that fits, and see what you feel best on.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thanks, Fontarin. 

I am not really set on WSD, though it does seem my proportions warrant it. I tried one "unisex" bike and the saddle was so uncomfortable I couldn't really notice anything else about the bike. But that was before I purchased shorts, so maybe I should try again.

I am trying not to get too overwhelmed with choices because I don't think my sense of road bikes is fine tuned enough to tell the difference between different ones, and if I look at too many, I won't be able to make up my mind, and will end up back on my trusty, if heavy and fond of spontaneous gear shifting on climbs, 1977 Motobecane. 

My big question is: Are all the bikes from different manufacturers really THAT different?

I don't think there are any Masis or Scotts in the shops I frequent, the Giant dealer sells Felt as well so I can potentially hop on one.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

ggggggg123 said:


> So I am checking out the options of bikes I should ride as recommended above, and I don't understand why Specialized Al bike w 105 components costs $1800, while everyone else has them at about $1300 (I know there are other parts that could be nicer on the Spec bike, but it does not seem competitive price-wise). Unless they let their dealers give you a "sale" with $400 off or something like that.
> http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?spid=52858&scid=1001&scname=Road
> 
> Their bike in my price range (Dolce Elite) comes with SRAM Apex shifters. I tried those, and something bothers me about pushing a lever in the same direction for up- and down- shifting, seems like a higher chance of shifting error than with Shimano system.
> ...


Specialized is supposed to be fairly tight about how much they'll let their dealers come down on current-year bikes. But it's always worth a try.

If a saddle doesn't fit you in street clothes, it doesn't fit you in cycling shorts either. Some cyclists bring their own saddles and pedals to try new bikes. Some go as far as wheels, too - you already saw how much of a difference tire pressure makes; wheel construction matters too. That's a little far for me, but most unisex and men's bikes will have men's saddles, and you'll have a hard time getting a sense of the ride, so bringing a saddle that works for you would be reasonable.


----------



## fontarin (Mar 28, 2009)

ggggggg123 said:


> My big question is: Are all the bikes from different manufacturers really THAT different?.


No, honestly, not really. Most bikes will have a similar component spec in similar price ranges. They'll likely have slightly different geometry, though. 

Yeah, it's possible your measurements will be better on a WSD bike.

You might be able to work something out with the shop to swap out saddles. In most cases, the saddle on a normal bike will be more narrow than a WSD bike. Some shops have a way of measuring sit bones, which will determine the saddle width you need if you're not sure already (you can always measure your old one if it was comfortable, or swap it out). Most people have a certain saddle that they prefer - for example, my wife likes the Specialized ruby saddle and dislikes riding most others. I prefer my Fizik Aliante above all others.

I checked out the Felt sizes and I think you might fall between Medium and Tall on the WSD Z range and a 51 and 54 on the regular Z range.

You should take something to make notes on when you try bikes. Right after a test ride, jot down your impressions, what you liked, what you didn't, etc. After you narrow your choices to a few bikes, try to see if you can go on a bit longer test ride (out of the parking lot) if you haven't. Most shops should allow this, with either a credit card held or a shop employee sent with you.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Some thoughts....

From the beginning of this thread when you offered your height, proportions and test ride experiences, I thought you'd be a good candidate for WSD geometry. I still do, and think it would be unwise to be swayed away simply because "there are more choices in standard geo" (or similar). Used to be WSD meant slightly wider saddles and flowery paint schemes on what was essentially a standard geo bike, but no more. Now, the better manufacturers (and you're looking at some) offer WSD geo that really does accommodate those with longer legs/ shorter torso. If there was a flaw in any of this, it would be that some men also are proportioned this way, so WSD is a poor acronym/ naming convention. Marin, to its credit, opted for 'Natural fit'. Still makes little sense, but at least it's not gender specific. 

To be clear, I'm not suggesting that you test ride nothing but WSD bikes, just that (at least thus far) indications are they're a viable (and probably preferred) option for you.

I'll offer upfront that in my 25+ years of road riding, I've always ridden Shimano. Given my limited experience with SRAM (Rival) I'm not opposed to someday considering it, the Apex bike I tried did not impress me. It may have been poor set up, but it lacked the refined feel of Shimano's groups and I'd go so far as to say I'd give up one rear cog and opt for Tiagra, given the choice. 

You're sure to get opposing views on this, so rather than be confused by them, test ride the groups on the bikes in your price range and pick the one that feel best to you. But always keep fit in mind, because the right fit trumps componentry, IMO/E.

Since you mentioned the C'dale Synapse, here are my two recommendations for test rides:
http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/wom...synapse-alloy/2011-synapse-womens-alloy-5-105

http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/wom...apse-alloy/2011-synapse-womens-alloy-6-tiagra


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

OK, just spent 4 hrs with another shop (probably 2 hrs riding with a hill - I'm getting some exercise with this shopping ordeal!) that carries Spec, Cannondale, and Trek. 
I rode a few bikes. Really was hoping that Cannondale Synapse would work for me because it has the right components in the right price range, and the color is not so bad. 

Spec Dolce with SRAM Apex fit LIKE A GLOVE in size 54 (53 cm TT; handlebars 2.5 cm higher than saddle with a 16 deg upsloping stem)! It just felt right, even the saddle! I felt like my upper body was sort of floating, like I didn't have to lean hard on the handlebars to support myself.
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?spid=52859&scid=1001&scname=Road

I also rode:

a 54 cm Trek Madone (NO! - I felt like I would crash every time I look behind me for cars, and was too stretched out), also not in the budget, so it was more informational. 

a 51 cm Synapse (52.5 cm TT) with the Spec Dolce saddle http://www.cannondale.com/bikes/wom...napse-alloy/2011-synapse-womens-carbon-6-apex 
The Synapse felt in my shoulders like the bars were narrower (which they weren't) and my shoulders got sore pretty quickly (This was the same deal as riding 51 cm Amira and 49 cm Rubeaix (sp?) - must mean small frame/too much drop, no?). 
On the trainer, we also tried the 54 cm Synapse, and both sizes Synapse with a raiser stem to try to get the saddle-bar drop similar to the Dolce. It didn't look like there was hope of getting the Synapse to fit, both were still making shoulders sore and were more reachy. The guy's advice was to give up on Synapse, it looked like there would have to be too many changes to make it fit, which would compromise my overall geometry. 

Then just for fun he put me on the 54 cm Spec Ruby with 105 components, which is supposedly the same geometry as Dolce. And that one hurt my shoulders as well! 

So, it seems pretty clear that Dolce is the winner today. BUT:
- I don't like Apex shifting. Mechanically, it seems like too much twisting of arm to get into bigger cog. Also, when you unknowingly run out of cogs and try to push to the next one, it pops into a smaller one, since it has nowhere to go - not cool on a hill!
- Dolce does not come with Tiagra shifters, and the 105 set, while very nice, is $1800, which is over budget. It is not available right now from Spec until a month from now, but the guy said that he will call other stores and try to make a trade, and that the price will be more like $1600 (which is still over budget, but not by as much). 

So my questions are:
1. How is it possible that seemingly identical Ruby (same stem too) wasn't as good a fit as Dolce? Did I just get tired? I don't know, the Dolce is the bike I didn't want to return to the store, and I rode it first, and also later when I was "tired."
2. Could it be that the Apex shifters fit differently than 105?
3. Should I just suck it up and learn how to use Apex rather than go out of my budget? (the extra granny gear is probably good for me too - Apex has a bigger cog in the back, 32 teeth) If the answer to that is yes, I could have a bike tomorrow. Not the best looking bike, but I'll just have to fly by so fast nobody can see the fugly green color 
The 105 may or may not be available by trade with other stores.

BTW, the bike shop guy was great and really worked with me. He did try to steer me out of my budget into carbon etc, but I'm a big girl, I can handle him. 

The other option is one more test ride on the Giant Avail. I THINK that one also felt like a pretty good fit, but I'll ride it again tomorrow morning, now that I know what "good" feels like. It certainly never gave me sore shoulders. And I'll hop on the smaller size too. If the Giant could be as good as the Dolce (maybe a stem that angles up, like it does on the Dolce - 16 deg), that could solve my problems. The Avail HT is 5 mm taller than the Dolce, and 2 cm taller than the "51 cm" Synapse. 
I'm hopeful on the Avail, it would have the right components at the right price, and a nice color. 

Which brings me to Question no. 4:
The Giant fitting guy was saying that there will be some getting used to the modern road bike geometry and that I should trust him to fit me the correct way (not in so many words) even if it feels a little strange (given the very short reach of my current bike). In other words, maybe what feels the most comfortable to me right now might not be the most comfortable over 40-50 miles. He said we could start more relaxed with an 80 mm stem to ease me into it, but even 80 mm will feel different than what I'm used to (fair enough). 
The Specialized guy was more of the "it should feel right right away" persuasion, especially since it's not like I have never ridden a bike before.

Should I insist on being comfortable right now (e.g., up-sloping stem) and then move the stem down as I get more time in the saddle? Or should I trust the Giant fitter guy to get me into the optimal position for now?

One more note:
- the Specialized stock saddles are the only ones I have found not to be torture devices and I indeed did not even notice them. I think other manufacturers might sell more bikes if they went that route - some people may think the bike does not fit because they are spending the entire time hovering over the damn saddle trying not to get violated. Just my 2 cents on business strategy. 

Looking forward to your thoughts on questions above. I am, in the meantime, going to do some trigonometry to see what Avail has to do to be like a Dolce. I'll let you know if I learn anything useful.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

Wow - the Dolce and Ruby in your size look like they have exactly the same geometry. So then I thought "handlebars," but they look like they have the same set. Of course they're not available aftermarket. It's possible that the bikes had them in different sizes. The 105 and SRAM shifters do fit differently, so that matters.

I haven't used a doubletap shifter. It seems weird, but people do get accustomed to all sorts of weird things. On the other hand, if you're doing a hills ride that pushes you, you're going to be pretty stupid by the tops of some of the peaks.

There seem to be two kinds of fitters: the ones who want to fit the person who walks into the shop, and the ones who want to fit a racer who happens to share the proportions of the person who walked in. I think the guy at the shop carrying Specialized is taking the better approach. If you're uncomfortable on a test ride on a bike, imagine what that's going to feel like two hours later - it's unlikely to get better. And when you get stronger, if you start getting back pain from riding too upright, or just want to try a lower position again for some other reason, it's a free country.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thanks, Andrew!
Maybe the Dolce handlebars were tilted up a little bit or something like that. The Ruby wasn't terrible, but the fit felt noticeably different, though the guy could not see any difference aside from shifters.
How do the 105 and Apex fit differently? I mean, outside from the shape of the hubs, does one tend to be higher on the handlebars than the other or something like that? 
Or could the bikes have been built slightly different with respect to positioning of hubs?

You're right, if something if sore after 10 min, seems like a no-go, though to be fair the Giant did not make anything sore, I don't think.
I can fine tune the fit later, but do want to avoid buying a frame that is totally the wrong size.

A friend recommended a physical therapist who does bike fitting. She does not do "commercial-type" fitting like the bike store guys, but if you come with your own bike, she helps with the fit. So after I put in some time in the saddle, that is definitely an option. As long as I don't have the wrong size frame!!!!!!


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

I was looking for a current, larger picture, but this'll have to do it.










The bar shown is an Easton model, so credit (or booing) goes to them.

The choice of handlebar in the picture isn't really important aside from that. What is is that the Shimano levers are a little shorter before the big bulgy thing at the front, and that is almost big enough to be another hand position on its own. It's hard to see in this picture, but the Shimano shifter is also clamped a little lower on the handlebar shown. That's because the angle between a Shimano shifter and handlebar is a little different from how SRAM shifters sit on the bar - they angle up a little more.

I'm not going to try to contrast ride feel - like I said, I haven't ridden a bike with doubletap, or any SRAM shifter since the crappy grip shifts my hybrid had in the late '90s. Suffice it to say that there really is a difference in how they feel, some of it can be changed by moving the shifter on the handlebar, and some of it really can't.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Since the bulk of your post deals with fit and we haven't seen you on any of the bikes, I'll offer some thoughts based primarily on my experiences. 

I have two bikes with identical geometry, saddles, pedals, stem/ bars and hoods, so all contact points are identical. I'f I'm not very careful about the setup/ placement of the saddle, bars and hoods, I feel a difference in fit on the road. A change in just a few mm's can make a difference in any of those contact points, so it's not all that surprising that the Dolce and Ruby fit and feel differently. 

Another possible factor is that you tried to do too much in a 4 hour span of time. By the time your shoulders hurt, it was probably best that you called it a day, because once pain sets in it's hard to get rid of it, especially when you continue to try different bike fits that are all foreign to you.

Regarding the Giant and Specialized fitters philosophies, to some extent, I agree with both. I take the Giant fitters remarks as saying that you may have adapted to a less than ideal fit on your current bike, so rather than duplicate it, he wants to set up the Avail on a conservative side (thus the use of a shorter stem). As your fitness improves and fit evolves, he'll tweak to accommodate. IMO/E that's a good plan, and I think if you asked him, he'd say his remarks weren't intended to imply that riding in pain is acceptable. Only that he'd taylor your fit as your fitness/ flexibility warranted.

Taken at face value, the Spec fitter is also correct. You should be sized and fitted to a bike that (as you say) fits like a glove from the start. But I don't think that's inconsistent with what the Giant fitter offered, because if you asked the Spec fitter if tweaks would be necessary sometime in the future, he's likely to say yes, so essentially both fitters are following a similar path.

Regarding the bikes and groups, I think if the fitter tried his best to get you set up on the Synapse and it still didn't feel right, you should pay heed to his advice and forget that model. It doesn't matter what the geo numbers say or if 'on paper' it should work. the reality is that (for whatever reason), it doesn't work for you, and you have better options.

Nothing wrong with retrying the Giant, but I'd caution you to avoid rushing to judgement because you can have a 105 equipped bike now. You've taken a lot of time and effort to ensure getting this right, so stick with your priorities, narrow the field to the bike that fits/ feels best,_ then _start contemplating the differences in componentry.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thanks PJ!
I just returned from Giant shop. Definitely getting some clarity. 
Hopped on a smaller frame, and it didn't seem like it would work. The guy measured the angle between my arms and back to be too small at 84 deg (he says that 90 is perfect), and he would need to move the saddle forward more to get the knee positioned correctly above the crank arm, so that would make for even shorter reach, so he thinks I'm definitely better off on a Medium.
Then we went back to medium. He had to move the saddle forward a bit to get the knee in the right position (the post is set back, I'd probably want to go to a "zero setback" post so I don't run out of fore-aft range), but then the 90 mm 8 degree stem it came with looked "perfect" angle-wise (90 deg between arms and back). I took it out for a ride. And I rode and rode and rode trying to see whether the shoulder pain would ever come and it didn't. I would say that it felt good. I didn't want to get back to the store. The saddle to bars rise was 1 cm.
Then we tried the 17 deg stem (still 90 mm), now the rise was 2.5 cm. That felt a little different, possibly better, I can't quite tell. But still, a nice ride. The shop swaps out stems for free (even after I ride for a while), so stem cost is not a factor. 

So now I'm a little torn between the Dolce and the Avail. 
I think they are both good fits, though from the Ruby experience, I am a little worried that with different shifters Dolce might come out of the comfort range.
Both the Dolce and the Avail I rode were good "out of the box" meaning that there was still room to tweak things later if needed (with the exception that Avail saddle needed to come forward and I may need a zero-setback post, which costs around $100 in carbon - less than half as much in Aluminum - *does a carbon seatpost make a difference?*).

I like both bike shops. 
Color is better on Avail. 
Dolce with 105 would cost $1600 or $1650 vs. Avail at $1370, but Dolce stock saddle is great, so I wouldn't need to swap out any parts. I can get some credit from Giant on seatpost and saddle, but it's not much. 

So ideally now I would fine tune and see which of the two (Avail, Dolce) fits better, but I don't know whether I would be able to tell the difference. Should have driven to the Dolce shop right after, doh!. Maybe I'll head over there now. 

There is some possibility that Dolce will not be available with 105 shifting, which would sway things in the Avail direction. 

Can anyone tell me about the quality of components (esp. wheels) between the two? I can't really tell what's different. 
http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?spid=52858&scid=1001&scname=Road
http://www.giant-bicycles.com/en-US/bikes/model/avail/7306/44117/

Spec doesn't say anything about wheels, but maybe those in the know can tell from the pictures.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

At this point all indications are that you've got it narrowed down to the Dolce and Avail, but I think you're right to ride the Dolce while the Avail's attributes are fresh in your mind. Don't let the relatively small price dif sway you, rather, let the better fit dictate your choice. 

While a zero setback post isn't a deal breaker fit-wise, it does indicate that the Avail's geo isn't ideal for you, so something to consider.

Regarding the wheelsets, the hubs on both bikes are what are commonly referred to as generic alloy, but the Mavic CXP22 rims _are_ tried and true and proven to be pretty durable, albeit, on the heavy side. But all wheelsets on low to mid range bikes are.

If you decide on the Dolce and it isn't available with 105, see if the shop will work a deal on swapping the Apex group out for 105. They can always put the Apex on another bike.

EDIT: If you have to go with a zero setback post, I suggest going with an alloy model. CF isn't worth the added expense, IMO/E.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (May 28, 2009)

IIRC, my Mom's bike has a carbon seatpost. My bike has an alloy seat post, and while there are a bunch of other differences between the bikes, I don't find myself missing the carbon post when I've been borrowing hers. So I would be disinclined to worry about that. It won't make as much of a difference as 5 psi in your tires, or a saddle with little bumper thingies where it attaches to the rails, or a rim with a little more flex.

It seems weird that you might need a zero setback post of the Giant but not the Dolce. By the charts, both have the same seat angle. Do you think the Giant dealer had you in a more forward riding position? Anyway, there's a lot of variation in saddles and how your sit bones relate to the part of the saddle rail that attaches to the post. I would be disinclined to worry about it. Especially if the dealer is working with you on the seatpost, replacing both saddle and post still doesn't bring the Avail to the cost of the Dolce, and there's the issue of getting the Dolce with 105.

I'd probably just buy the Avail, get a saddle I liked for it, probably not even bother with a new post if I didn't have to ram the saddle all the way forward, and go ride. But you're the one who has to ride this bike for the next however many seasons. The bike I've had the longest is one I bought in 2000, and unfortunately it's also my worst-fitting of my three fun bikes.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

AndrwSwitch said:


> It seems weird that you might need a zero setback post of the Giant but not the Dolce. By the charts, both have the same seat angle.


The Dolce's STA is 74* HTA is 72* and 532mm ETT, while the M Avail's STA is 73.5* HTA is 72.5* and 540mm ETT, so the Avail's STA is slightly slacker while reach is slightly longer. Not by much, but it could explain the potential need for a zero setback post.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thanks guys.

Just got back from riding the Dolce (and Ruby).
It was nice. We scratched our heads about the difference between the two, the bars were about 1 cm lower on Ruby and the reach was 5 or 10 mm longer on Ruby, we couldn't figure out why. DOlce was marginally better. 

I can't really tell the difference between the Avail and Dolce. I'm sure they are slightly different but I can't tell which is better. 
With both I just sort of ride along and don't think about the bike, which is probably a good thing.

Re: the seatpost: must be that I was sitting differently on the 2 saddles so one had to come forward. Both guys measured the line from kneecap to crankarm, presumably both looking for the same thing. 

The guys at both shops were so great, so I can't make a decision based on which business I like more. 

Aaaaack. This is hard.

I guess I go with Giant (better value) and bake cookies for the other guy? I feel guilty after all the time he spent with me. . . .


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Just saw PJ's latest post, that could explain it.

Thanks, both of you for advising the alloy post - solves that question for me.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> Just saw PJ's latest post, that could explain it.
> 
> Thanks, both of you for advising the alloy post - solves that question for me.


I think you now have enough info about and time spent with each bike to make an educated decision.

Your statement:
_With both I just sort of ride along and don't think about the bike, which is probably a good thing._ 
...actually says a lot about the fit and feel of both the Avail and Dolce, so I don't think there's a good/ bad choice here. More, a tough call between two closely matched bikes.

Good luck, and if you have any further questions or opt for one of the bikes, pls update this thread. It's always nice to read about the outcomes.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thanks, PJ!
I will most def update, with a photo too!


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

I did it!
Got the Avail yesterday!!!! Was so excited for the first ride - it was really cold out and I stupidly wore summer gloves, so the ride was short. Now it's 37 deg outside, so I don't know . . . 

I'm a little afraid of the breaks, I found that on downhills I wasn't able to stop the bike as well as my old bike. I could hear the pads rubbing on rims, but didn't instantly stop. (This was on the hoods, but I also tried the drops, still not instant). 
Part of it is that I'm afraid to go fast on the new bike just yet, part of it is that I go faster on it than on my 40 lb mule with the same amount of effort. 
Are the road bike breaks good at stopping? Is it just a matter of getting used to it?
Any tips? (Aside from feathering the breaks, and putting more weight on the back wheel when breaking, which works great on my old bike). Funny enough, I did not feel any issues breaking on my miles and miles of test riding this bike. I did fiddle around with the barrel adjusters to get close to the rims and still let the wheels spin freely.

Funny aside: when I took the motorcycle safety class we were asked to slam on the breaks quickly between 2 lines. The guy said "just slam on the breaks hard, don't worry, nobody ever locks up the wheels." I showed him - awesome fishtail action - stopped quickly though and managed not to drop the bike.

So maybe breaking is not my forte?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Congrats on the new bike! :thumbsup:

Regarding the brakes, any modern dual pivot brake will stop a bike just fine, but some brands (Tektro included) are OEM'd with sub par brake pads. For about $15 you can improve your stopping power by simply replacing them with Kool Stops:
http://www.amazon.com/Kool-Stop-Bicycle-Brake-Pads/dp/B001HBRHJS

You want the Dura-Ace/ Ultegra model.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thank you! I am thrilled and also annoyed that the weather has been so uncooperative. At least I can go pet the bike in the garage. 

That is really useful advice, thank you. Safety is my no. 1 priority so will order these ASAP. 

I will grumble about the wisdom of manufacturers cheaping out on a small part that makes a big difference. I guess they have to cut corners somewhere, but breaks just don't seem like the place for it.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> I will grumble about the wisdom of manufacturers cheaping out on a small part that makes a big difference. I guess they have to cut corners somewhere, but breaks just don't seem like the place for it.


I agree, especially considering the (minimal) cost of replacement pads that are markedly better. 

Don't forget to post a pic when possible.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

PJ, the pads come in black and salmon colors. I plan on mostly riding in dry conditions but of course may get caught in the rain. 
What color should I get?
Their product line is a little confusing on the website - too many options.
Thx.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> PJ, the pads come in black and salmon colors. I plan on mostly riding in dry conditions but of course may get caught in the rain.
> What color should I get?
> Their product line is a little confusing on the website - too many options.
> Thx.


Either will be a noticeable improvement over your current pads, but if you get the salmons you'll be covered in wet as well as dry conditions. Ther'll be no adverse effects running those. 

Yes, lots of options. Just stay with the Shimano compatible pads and you'll be fine.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

One more question. I think I brought the pads too close to the rims, maybe I am losing mechanical advantage with braking. 
What is the best distance from pads to rim for the best braking?
Feel free to send me to a link, I searched around the forum but didn't get far


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> One more question. I think I brought the pads too close to the rims, maybe I am losing mechanical advantage with braking.
> What is the best distance from pads to rim for the best braking?
> Feel free to send me to a link, I searched around the forum but didn't get far


I use a very simple method to adjust my brakes. If you can apply the brakes full on (as in, apply the brakes _hard_) and still have about 1 inch clearance between brake lever and bar you're good to go. Don't fret over the distance between rim and pad, IME my method allows for better modulation.

Just a FYI... you don't have to test ride the bike during this adjustment. Applying the brakes hard while stationary is a perfectly suitable 'test'.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Thank you, that helped!
Still got some wheel turning - noise making against pads action, hopefully the Kool Stops will solve that. And I need to be not afraid to squeeze the brakes hard.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Update: I installed the Kool Stops yesterday and I think they are better. I'm also still twiddling with mechanical advantage. I grabbed my neighbor's brakes yesterday and they were much softer than mine, just about bottoming out in drops. Someone also remarked that I like my brakes hard, so I'm thinking I may still not have enough mech advantage. 

So to clarify your earlier advice, the "break HARD and still have 1 in clearance" is for being in drops or on hoods?

Mine are like this now: if I grab from the bars as hard as I possibly can, I have 3/8 in. on the rear brake and 1/2 in. on the front between the part of the lever that would hit the bar and the bar (I think the shifter bit can clear the bar). 

I mostly ride in the hoods, some in bars when descending (if a straight line, seems hard to steer in bars). 

I plan on going to a parking lot and practicing steering and braking with the new machine (of course, the old one seemed so intuitive, but that's because I was used to it) - it's just a lot more fun to actually ride! Plus Im' in a city, not too many big empty parking lots nearby.


----------



## ggggggg123 (Apr 16, 2011)

Clarify previous sentence: f I grab from the DROPS as hard as I possibly can, I have 3/8 in. on the rear brake and 1/2 in. on the front between the part of the lever that would hit the bar and the bar (I think the shifter bit can clear the bar)


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

ggggggg123 said:


> Update: I installed the Kool Stops yesterday and I think they are better. I'm also still twiddling with mechanical advantage. I grabbed my neighbor's brakes yesterday and they were much softer than mine, just about bottoming out in drops. Someone also remarked that I like my brakes hard, so I'm thinking I may still not have enough mech advantage.
> 
> *So to clarify your earlier advice, the "break HARD and still have 1 in clearance" is for being in drops or on hoods?*
> 
> ...


The clearance I suggested is for general brake set up. Where you apply the brakes from (hoods or drops) doesn't matter, although (IME) applying them from the drops yields better control, but others may have their own preferences.

The 1" clearance (1/2" is fine, if you prefer) _includes_ the inner lever (if applicable). The goal is to not have so much 'slack' that you bottom the lever on the bar before full braking is achieved.

Because this is new to you, practicing is a good idea and to be sure, you need reliable, effective brakes. But don't over think this. Get the pads/ cable tension set up correctly, keep the pads and rims clean and go ride your new bike.


----------

