Giant posted the pad x/y fit range in their geometry chart. I used this to compare my previous bike to determine the right size for me.

I'm 5'10.5", 32" inseam and went with the small.
Pads all the way forward, with 20mm of spacers. I would go 10mm lower, but need the pads spaced up since they are in their narrowest setting and won't clear the nose cone hydration if any lower.
Saddle is about 50-70% forward on the seat post (if 100% is slammed all the way forward). Still playing around with different saddles, which I'll adjust fore/aft accordingly.

---

Alex Arman

Strava

your height and your inseam are in no way the metrics you should use to fit yourself to this bike.

this is a great bike. a great bike. giant has done a great job with it. but... this bike has no crossover options, overlapping possibilities, as most bikes do, as regards fit. you could be a size L in a speed concept but a size M or XL if you prefer. not so this bike. if you choose poorly you're screwed.

i'm happy to help you in this, but you have to do your part.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Thanks for the information. Much Appreciated.

Thanks for the reply Dan but really have no idea what you just said..but thanks anyways.

I didn't just use my height to fit the bike. I got a Retul fit and that is what I came away with. I simply used the height/ inseam as a reference point see how others are fitting on the bike.

"I didn't just use my height to fit the bike. I got a Retul fit and that is what I came away with."

ahh. well, these are facts not previously in evidence. what i got from your post was:

5-11 - 33.5 inseam
Frame size = Medium

i guess i don't know what the point of your post was. do you want to know if this bike fits, or will fit, or not? do you want to know what your proper size and config of this bike is?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Just asking for reference points. That's all. I know you can't fit a bit over the web, and I'm not asking if it fits or not, just want reference points.

I'm not trying to start an arguing match here, but I did say I got "fit today" in my original post. All I would like are some reference points. I you don't have any of that to add, thats fine, just skip to the next thread.

Thank you for your time, and have a great rest of you day. :) Cheers.

Giant has done a lot of great things with the new Trinity (and the Avow) but for the life of me, I can't find the X/Y chart anywhere. What a horribly uninformative website they have... It took me all of five minutes to find pad X/Y charts for the Speed Concept, Canyon and Felt, but after hours of searching I only found a rough guideline for pad X/Y ranges on the Liv Avow size run.

So, do you mind sharing a link to said X/Y chart? My girlfriend's very keen on the Avow but we need to know if it fits (big ask for a 5"1 female).

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

http://www.slowtwitch.com/...ke_in_Kona_5404.html

The geo chart at the bottom of the page has the pad X/Y range for each size. This is to the top back of the arm cradles (pads not included).

---

Alex Arman

Strava

here's the chart from its own site. the bike is slightly tall versus long, but it will only go up to 670 of pad height, and that disqualifies the bike from certain taller folk.

there is crossover in length, but not in height. heightwise there is 1 size that you'll fit. then you see if that bike is an acceptable length. note the measure of length is to pad rear. usually that's pad center minus 40mm.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

That is for the trinity, not the Avow. The Avow comes in smaller sized, the smallest trinity would probably be too big for someone 5"1'.
http://www.bikerumor.com/...-designed-for-women/

3cm of stack adjustment, good god, why even bother? Surely it can't be that hard to build a longer pad spacer.

---

ZONE3 - We Last Longer

I did a dynamic fit on my customer who has access to a great deal on this bike but is still causing me concern based on his fit results. I measured his pad Xr (486mm) and Y (625mm) and a Medium comes up looking like the right size. The kicker is that his best trial was at 80deg seat angle. Not having the bike too look at, I had to back calculate the center of the seat post from the bottom bracket (602mm top tube - 417mm reach = 185mm) to help me line up his Sx and Sy on this bike (final trial was 125mm and 710mm) . I have no idea where points they are calculating the seat post angle but my calculations at center of seatpost to what I assume is 76.4deg seat angle is 753mm above the bottom bracket. Extrapolating to 78 and 80deg would be 870mm and 1049mm above the bottom bracket. Even if I move the seat clamp forward 30mm and the seat itself 15mm, I doubt I'd be able to replicate the 80deg I'd need to make this fit at a saddle height of 789mm.

Am I calculating this wrong? How are they coming up with those points to measure the seat angles to according to their geometry chart?

---

http://www.clperformancetraining.com
http://www.pillasport.ca

you calculated 486 to pad rear? technically that's a tad long for the medium, and the large is a tad tall. the one problem with this bike, fitwise, is that the window of position options is rather tight.

nevertheless, if you go with the M is the seat able to go steep enough? when you look at this bike, you can see that the seat angle gets steeper as the seat post comes out further. so, one advantage to the M is that you'll probably have quite a bit of post out. i don't know how they measure the seat angle. you can't measure a seat angle. you can only say it's X° @ 75cm of saddle height or some such thing.

but if you look at the adjustability of the binder mechanism, fore/aft on the post, i would be surprised if you can't get it steep enough. i think you should be okay.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

I went with the Medium as the cockpit would be more versatile in the cockpit and a better chance to hit that 80deg seat angle. What threw me for a loop is that I get a size 52 in a QR PR6 with his pad X/Y as the 54 would be too tall. He must be a weird size but then the SC, Shiv and IA all worked out.

---

http://www.clperformancetraining.com
http://www.pillasport.ca

"What threw me for a loop is that I get a size 52 in a QR PR6 with his pad X/Y as the 54 would be too tall."

2 things going on here. first, the PR is sized in a way that actually means something. the size of the bike is the frame stack. so, a 54 has a stack of 54cm, and that is the stack of a 56cm bike in felt, a L in the speed concept and so forth.

second, the stem in the PR is relatively tall, that is, the lowest config of that stem has the bar center a bit above the head tube top.

that's why THAT bike fits the way it does. it actually is a very conventional geometry, it's just the way the sizing nomenclature works. i would ride a 54 in that bike, and a 56 in other bikes, and the occasional 58. mind, this bike is not alone. an M dimond and a L speed concept are virtually identical.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman