Dennis-
I’m of the school that nearly everybody can be fit on an off-the-shelf frame, even though they might prefer to have something custom. I had the most luck with a mid-80’s steel bike which was 57 cm C-C and square (also a 57 TT) with a 74 degree seat tube angle. So much adjustability with quill stems…
I still have and ride that bike, but wanted indexed shifting (and something new and different, I’ll admit) so I bought a Foco steel bike a few years back. It’s 56 C-T and square, also with a 74 degree seat tube. For a while I used a 0 degree post and moved the seat forward to reduce my reach. This actually put my fore-aft position at KOPS, although that wasn’t really the intent.
Lately I’ve been moving further back to get weight off my hands. Right now I’m using an old American Classic post with a normal amount of setback and the seat moved about 3/4 back on the rails (this puts me well behind KOPS). I’m fairly flexible so the reach isn’t that much of an issue, but I do use a 10cm stem (Ritchey WCS +/- 6 deg) and I might go shorter although I wonder how quick I want to make the steering. The steel fork on the Foco has three narrow spacers. I had been riding with the stem in the lower position, but recently flipped it to move it upward as I moved my seat back.
That Felt has a short head tube (maybe it’s typical these days), plus it’s got an integrated headset so that drops you down a bit more. The fork has an alloy steerer, so you could be fairly liberal with spacers and then use a stem flipped up to get the bars up higher. How was the bike you tried on set up? There’s nothing wrong with using a stem with a lot of rise if it gets you where you need to be, as long as you don’t mind the appearance. My problem (one of them, anyway) is that I’m of the time of level top tubes and -17 degree stems, and just prefer that classic look. That’s all aesthetics, though, and I don’t mind my sloping TT, angled-stem MTB, so go figure.
If you can ignore KOPS, you can maintain the same saddle to bottom bracket distance but lower your saddle height by moving the seat back and down. You do have to move it back a good bit to achieve any noticeable drop in saddle height. I’m not one of the guys to run the trigonometry on my dinner napkin, but I’d guess you’d only reduce your saddle-to-bar drop half an inch to an inch by doing this.
If I were looking seriously at a new frame now and wanted Ti, I’d give some thought to something slack-angled like a Merckx Majestic-- it’s got a relatively short top tube to begin with, and with the slack seat tube you should be able to move the seat up a bit to shorten it some more and still maintain pretty good balance. Of course for the price of Litespeed or Merckx titanium you could go custom steel, or try one of the Chinese Ti places that will do custom, but they won’t be as light.
None of this is rocket science and I’m sure you’ve thought it through yourself, but I hope it helps. Those Ghisallos sure are nice…
Herbert-
I’m pretty confident in my measurements, give or take 1/4" or some thin cycling socks. My question was a bit rhetorical, I’m afraid. Somehow I knew you’d say I was a candidate for custom, although I don’t necessarily disagree.
Any chance of Litespeed coming out with a performance and comfort-oriented bike along the lines of Specialized’s Roubaix Pro, but with the Ghisallo’s tubeset and a level top tube?