# cervelo fit question



## jammin (Feb 7, 2009)

Looking at a Cervelo R3. It's size 56 and i normally ride a 58 in other brands with a 100mm stem. I'm 6'-1" 34" inseam. Wondering if the R3 would work for me? Looking at there sizing they look to do it a little different.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

I see nothing unusual with the top tube vs. frame size of the R3, 58cm.

From your inseam and height, the 58cm should be your frame of choice. You are running an unusually short stem for such a frame size so either your upper body/arms are short, you lack flexibility, or your position on the bike is off. Raising the stem would allow you a longer stem.

If I were you I'd pick the 58 and leave all the 3cm of spacers under the stem.


----------



## jammin (Feb 7, 2009)

Hi, thx. for the info, The stem was a typo. i was running a 110mm stem. I'll have to keep looking. the 56 was a used bike and with in my budget.


----------



## MercRidnMike (Dec 19, 2006)

jammin said:


> Looking at a Cervelo R3. It's size 56 and i normally ride a 58 in other brands with a 100mm stem. I'm 6'-1" 34" inseam. Wondering if the R3 would work for me? Looking at there sizing they look to do it a little different.


Jammin, I think you're right to keep looking. I'm 6' with the same inseam and I'm on a 58 cm S2 with an 80 mm stem and long reach bars. When I was being fitted, the 56 cm frame (I was looking at either an RS or an S2) just seemed a bit too small to be good for the long haul. You might be able to make it work on shorter rides, but I don't think you'd be as happy with it overall if you went 56 cm. JMHO, YMMV


----------



## goodboyr (Apr 19, 2006)

Cervelo geometry changed in 2011 for the r series. S2 is old geometry. Different than newer r3. I was on a 58 older geometry r3. Now on a 56 newer geometry (rca). I am 6' even.


----------



## jammin (Feb 7, 2009)

Thx. for the info guys, checking with some shops to see if they have any to test ride.


----------



## MercRidnMike (Dec 19, 2006)

goodboyr said:


> Cervelo geometry changed in 2011 for the r series. S2 is old geometry. Different than newer r3. I was on a 58 older geometry r3. Now on a 56 newer geometry (rca). I am 6' even.


Have the R3's always been new geometry and the S2's and RS's old? Jammin was looking at a used bike...I thought the cut-off was like 2012 or close, so unless it was a really recent used bike, then it would be the older geo.


----------



## jammin (Feb 7, 2009)

Hey guys, i'm acctually looking at new 14's now.


----------



## seppo17 (Dec 7, 2008)

jammin said:


> Hey guys, i'm acctually looking at new 14's now.


I'm 6ft and am riding a '14 s2 size 56. It really depends on your fit. I have long legs, but proportionally short femurs. So I'm runing the 2 position seatpost for the 0 offset position and the stock 110mm stem with like ~10cm saddle to bar drop.

Sizing based on height and inseem is very general. There are a lot of other factors. Though the opposite of that is, most people can have a couple sizes adjusted to fit them.

For example: If the head tube is tall enough, you should be able to match your current bar postion with a 56 and a 120(or 110)mm stem.


----------



## rcordray (Jul 30, 2006)

Not sure where you're located, but I was just able to test ride Cervelo R3's this weekend at InCycle, Pasadena, CA.
I'm 6'0" with a 34 (pant) inseam.
The 56 seemed tight. When out of the saddle, my knees could touch the handlebars.
The 58 felt better and I had clearance for the knees. The test bikes had 110mm stems and the reach on the 58 seemed fine, not too stretched out for my less-than-flexible physiology.


----------

