Shiv owners (any vintage) -- can you confirm a measurement?

tetonrider · October 16, 2011, 10:39pm

80 to end of the shifter? Just position them at a non-horizontal angle and that will gain ~3cm back. Pads are rear position.

Former bike was a 54 Transition.

thanks, carl. 54=L or XL transition?

agree about non-horizontal extensions.

wow…pads in the rear position?that would mean your overall reach is less than mine, so putting you in one size smaller than i am is making a bit more sense.

ps yes, 80 to end of shifter. have to consider that as the zipps are considered part of the aerodynamic portion of the bike.

Carl_Spackler · October 16, 2011, 11:21pm

54 would be med Transition.

If you set R2Cs so they aren’t horizontal then they aren’t considered part of extension. It’s how I have mine set.

tetonrider · October 17, 2011, 12:58am

54 would be med Transition.

If you set R2Cs so they aren’t horizontal then they aren’t considered part of extension. It’s how I have mine set.

cool. i didn’t know that. i’ll (with some luck!) be making the transition to di2 bar end shifters, so that may not be an issue if i get the shiv, but i may run the zipps in the interim.

hm. so, if you were fit on a medium transition, then a medium shiv would make sense.

as said above, i was sized for an XL transition, so a L/XL makes sense on the shiv (assuming my sizing was correct).

Carl_Spackler · October 17, 2011, 2:11am

If you’re under 6’ and ‘normal’ proportions then I’d question the capabilities of whoever sized you on a large.

tetonrider · October 17, 2011, 4:03am

If you’re under 6’ and ‘normal’ proportions then I’d question the capabilities of whoever sized you on a large.

now i’m baffled and back to square one.

tetonrider · October 18, 2011, 7:22am

If you’re under 6’ and ‘normal’ proportions then I’d question the capabilities of whoever sized you on a large.

thanks for the info in this thread, carl. mind if i ask what your inseam is (and/or saddle height)? i think i saw it was around 81cm on another thread, and you run ~19cm drop.

as mentioned before, i’m also 5’11". i’ve got a long torso w/ my saddle at 75.5cm. i only run 12.5cm drop. my inseam is a bit smaller than yours, but only by about 1cm.

i was sized, in general, for stack & reach and fit on my current bike. i’m trying to transfer the stack & reach from that sizing, along with measurements from my current bike to the shiv (so don’t blame that on the fitter!).

with my current frame & stem, i measure 545mm from nose of adamo saddle to center of pads horizontally, as specialized is specifying. if you subtract the 5cm setback of my saddle behind the center of the bb, that implies 495mm from bb to center of pads. that’s as far forward as i’d realistically want to go.

doesn’t all that add up to the large shiv with pads in the forward position?

again, sorry for these questions, but i’m trying to reconcile what everyone is saying with the published specs from specialized, as well as my fit on the current bike. i could switch to the rear pad position on the large and have 22mm less reach.

i noticed a pic you’d posted of yourself on the shiv during a TT, and you look pretty low/flat back. my back is pretty flat on my bike, but perhaps you are a bit more flexible. running more drop (all else equal) would tend to require less “effective reach” (measured horizontally, again to match up with the specialized system).

i do notice your pads are hitting you further toward your hands than my normal position…which seems to imply you could go even smaller in terms of reach if you preferred to rest your elbows where i do. i think you also said your saddle is a bit further back than mine (6.5cm vs my 5.0). your saddle is possibly longer, too (prologo scratch?), and it kind of looks like you sit further back whereas i tend to ride on the nose of my adamo. if the nose of your scratch were as short as the adamo, that might mean you are even further back behind the bb (2-3cm?) for an apples-to-apples comparison…and that 1.5cm difference in current position + 2.5cm difference in saddle length/nose could justify a medium vs a large…maybe?

forgive me if these questions are naive, but provided my current bike is a good fit (it is), and the above numbers are accurate (mine are)…then to fit something other than the large implies there’s something either i’m not considering or something off about the way the frame actually fits vs the stated geometry.

you’re on the nosecone shiv, right? looks like the geometry for the nosecone shiv (http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?arc=2011&sid=11Shiv) is at least slightly different than the shiv TT i am after (http://www.specialized.com/us/en/bc/SBCProduct.jsp?spid=62028&scid=1101&scname=Road). the shiv tt is listed as having the same seat tub length for S-XL(within a few mm), whereas it varies by 20mm between each size for the nosecone version. wonder if anything else is different that caused folks to size down for the nosecone shiv.

many thanks!

tetonrider · October 20, 2011, 4:08am

hey, all:
thanks so much for the input on this thread. i have been trying to process all of it as relates to my fit. i wanted to run one more thing by everyone – this makes sense to me but i could be missing something.

i do believe (as much as one can without throwing a leg over this bike) that i would be running a size large w/ pads in the forward position, for an effective reach of 495mm from bb to center of pads (horizontal).

that said, a medium is 15mm shorter in reach, and i could possibly replace the stem/bars on a medium with a pro missile setup. i could go with an 85 or 95mm stem.

does this sound right? are there any flaws in my thinking?

despite all of the published geometry and my coordinates from my current bike, if shivs really do “run long”, then a medium with stock stem/bars could turn out to be ideal.
if the geometry and my coordinates were correct and i truly needed 490-495 reach, i could still accomplish this by running an 85mm stem on the medium, and slide the pads a touch further forward. (i hear the pro missile has a little more pad adjustability fore-aft.)
due to UCI regulations, if i got the large and it is too long, then i could not slide my saddle up at all. on the medium, if things were still a tad short, i could slide my saddle back a few (3-5?) mm, which could make a difference.
stacks a non-issue with these frames between sizes, so no problems there. wheelbase seems to be the main thing that would be affected, perhaps meaning a bit faster/twitchier handling.
i’d be going from a 75 to 85mm stem. 85 is still on the shorter side, so i wouldn’t anticipate a major, adverse change.

does the above sound correct?

the downside is possibly needing to pony up for the pro missile setup, but it intrigues me anyway, and there may be a market for the shiv’s stem/bars to offset that cost. it appears that the pro missile setup is compatible with shivs based on some searching, although i don’t know if any custom work was necessary.

many thanks!
-eric