Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
I like the x-fire.

The frame might be a bit big... the short stem, the low bars, the little of the seat post showing. Looks like a size smaller could have done.
If you feel fine on it now - don't let me start you worry! :)

Have fun!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
size

I guess the bike does have a unussual look, the extemly long headtube did suprise me at first (and I got rid of the stock front brake hanger to reduce 20mm of stack) but the the effective top tube and wheelbase were the exact same as my old bike- I think ridley builds their cross frames tall for easy shouldering - - It took me awhile to find the right bar postion and I do run my stems a little shorter than average but I'm 100% certain I have the right size and I'm very happy with the ride quality, handling, and length - thanks- Keyth
 

·
aka Zoo
Joined
·
763 Posts
I agree, I think the Ridley bikes are very tall, I mean heck, their bike with a 53.5cm TT has a seat tube of 56cm c-t which is pretty dang tall, a little too tall IMHO, but then again I'm short.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
38 Posts
Good. People are not standard sizes, so there is no reason all bikes are fitted the same.
What size is the frame and what are your first impressions of the frameset/ride?
(I'm very close to buying an x-fire this summer, that's why I'm asking)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
313 Posts
look585carbon said:
I guess the bike does have a unussual look, the extemly long headtube did suprise me at first (and I got rid of the stock front brake hanger to reduce 20mm of stack) but the the effective top tube and wheelbase were the exact same as my old bike- I think ridley builds their cross frames tall for easy shouldering - - It took me awhile to find the right bar postion and I do run my stems a little shorter than average but I'm 100% certain I have the right size and I'm very happy with the ride quality, handling, and length - thanks- Keyth
You cannot compare TT lengths from different manufacturers, or even bikes, for that matter, without taking into consideration the seat and head angles. When working on fit, I assume that for every one degree difference in ST angle, then you add or subtract roughly one centimetre from the TT length. The true comparison is the distance from the BB (perpendicular to TT) to HT, assuming the HT angles are the same - known as "reach". This is important because the saddle should always be a constant position, based on positioning over the pedals, thus ST angle effects TT length, but not rider position. Thus, bike A may have a 74 degree ST angle and a 56 cm TT, and bike B may have a 72 degree ST, but a 58cm TT, but the fit would be the same. QED
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
ok......

shomyoface said:
You cannot compare TT lengths from different manufacturers, or even bikes, for that matter, without taking into consideration the seat and head angles. When working on fit, I assume that for every one degree difference in ST angle, then you add or subtract roughly one centimetre from the TT length. The true comparison is the distance from the BB (perpendicular to TT) to HT, assuming the HT angles are the same - known as "reach". This is important because the saddle should always be a constant position, based on positioning over the pedals, thus ST angle effects TT length, but not rider position. Thus, bike A may have a 74 degree ST angle and a 56 cm TT, and bike B may have a 72 degree ST, but a 58cm TT, but the fit would be the same. QED
I don't want to scrap too much about this - I still feel I have the right size for me - I feel like you said alot without really adding alot of value here (sorry)-- I agree with all your comments, but My goal wasn't to have the exact same geometry as my previous bike -(and most bike companies will try to sell you that the little combination of tweeks to the geometry, they do is why their bike has that mystery "dream" ride quality) most bikes of the same type (cross) will have head tube and seat tube angles pretty similiar (motobecane 58, xfire 58 both have 72,73 respectivley) and there are numerous other small geometry changes that can effect fit and handling (bb height for example) - I think wheelbase might be the most relevant for fit and handling, but I do agree you want to look at all the measurements to get the big picture -
I think most everyone here will agree, Ridleys are tall. -- thanks - Keyth
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
xfire

first off - sweet ride, very stealth

looks like your set up is for technical courses where you need to ride up top a lot

i bought my xfire in a 50cm vs my las cruces in a 52cm - kudos to the folks who talk about the differences in the geometry of the bike - this is the bike after it was first built, i had to roll the handlebars to get the levers down (too high) and push the seat back an inch to get the right position. the original build was based on my salsa measurements but it definitely needed some tweaking. i felt totally cramped on the bike until i move the saddle etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
hows the ride? I have a steel cross bike (old lugged trek) and an aluminum one (converted spec sirrus), the steel is too heavy but rides great, the sirrus feels snappier, im concerned that a carbon frame might be too stiff when riding over rough terrain??? your input?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
ride

Ok - now that I have had the chance to put a half dozen rides on the bike I'm very happy with it. In regards to materials it doesn't have quick the squish in the rear as a good steel frame but it is much much more comfy that alluminum. The major benefit as i see it with carbon over steel is that you get close to the comfort level, lighter, and the major thing is lateral stiffness - -most good steel frames have a slight disconnected feeling when chnaging direction quickly - this can be felt most threw a series of tight switchbacks downhill, it allmost feels like the headtube is not connected to the bottom bracket - with carbon you get the comfort in the tail but lateral stiffness that will rail corners and turn extremly effectively. I thought my 585 was stiff in the bb, but this bike is super stiff in the bb area, lots of stiffness for all out efforts and I weight a little over 200lbs - thanks- Keyth
 

·
Game on, b*tches!
Joined
·
13,528 Posts
Nice bike. I'd lose the xtra set of brake handles, if it was me. Don't sweat the short stem-mine's only 100 on my empella.
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top