Merckx San Remo Geometry - why so different?

[r_mutt]

I was looking at the Merckx San Remo. Compared to other brands whose geometry is not too dissimilar from each other, the Merckx San Semo seems completely from another planet. Could someone explain what these differing angles would ride like?

FYI, i was looking at a 52 in the Cannondale and I was trying to match the reach and stack


San Remo


compared to a Cannondale:


SS Evo

[sandyrs]

Originally Posted by r_mutt

I was looking at the Merckx San Remo. Compared to other brands whose geometry is not too dissimilar from each other, the Merckx San Semo seems completely from another planet. Could someone explain what these differing angles would ride like?

FYI, i was looking at a 52 in the Cannondale and I was trying to match the reach and stack


San Remo


compared to a Cannondale:


SS Evo

Eddy Merckx has consistently employed slacker seat angles for god knows how long. They have no effect on the ride if you don't want them to. Just use a straight post and set your saddle where you want it. If you like to 'pedal from behind' you can do so with Merckx geo without resorting to a highly set back post.

The head angle isn't so out of the ordinary in larger sizes. I have no idea how the angles on the smaller sizes would ride because I am 6'5" but I can say that my Team SC was extremely stable both in a straight line and cornering hard. That bike's handling was my favorite I had ridden to that point (since surpassed by my Gaulzetti). I would imagine the small sizes have a slack head angle to avoid toe overlap. A poor tradeoff IMO but to each their own.

There is also much more to how a bike rides than the head and seat angles.

[Mark McM]

Reach/stack-wise, the 52 cm Cannondale is directly between the XS and S Merckx. Where the geometries differ, is that the Merckx has slacker seat and head tube angles, and a longer wheelbase (as well as a fork with a slightly shorter offset). The seat tube angle won't affect handling - it only affects the range of seat setback adjustment. However, the slacker head tube (which results in higher trail) and longer front center of the Merckx will make the Merckx more stable at speed, but at slower speeds it will be less nimble, and may experience more steering flop.

Some riders may prefer the longer trail and front center on the Merckx, other riders may not. In any case, neither bike is that far off from typical, and a rider will likely be able to get used to the handling of either bike.

[stephenmarklay]

Originally Posted by sandyrs

Eddy Merckx has consistently employed slacker seat angles for god knows how long. They have no effect on the ride if you don't want them to. Just use a straight post and set your saddle where you want it. If you like to 'pedal from behind' you can do so with Merckx geo without resorting to a highly set back post.

The head angle isn't so out of the ordinary in larger sizes. I have no idea how the angles on the smaller sizes would ride because I am 6'5" but I can say that my Team SC was extremely stable both in a straight line and cornering hard. That bike's handling was my favorite I had ridden to that point (since surpassed by my Gaulzetti). I would imagine the small sizes have a slack head angle to avoid toe overlap. A poor tradeoff IMO but to each their own.

There is also much more to how a bike rides than the head and seat angles.

I did not know this. Back in day he had the century geo but I did not know he used it still. He like Lemond like getting behind the pedals although I don’t know if he always rode a slacker bike like lemond. I certainly like this geo.

[FlashUNC]

Eddy has pretty consistently said about his bike geos that getting up the hill with a lightweight bike is one thing, but you gotta get down the other side in one piece too.

(And yes, I know Eddy doesn't own the company anymore, but they still tend to hew towards his ideas on geometry.)

[stephenmarklay]

Interestingly, the geo on the Merckx site looks way different than the Competitive cyclist chart.

[Pegoready]

Originally Posted by sandyrs

Eddy Merckx has consistently employed slacker seat angles for god knows how long. They have no effect on the ride if you don't want them to. Just use a straight post and set your saddle where you want it.

Not exactly true. The San Remo forces one to use their proprietary setback post, so the slack STA makes a real difference:

[sandyrs]

Originally Posted by Pegoready

Not exactly true. The San Remo forces one to use their proprietary setback post, so the slack STA makes a real difference:

Oh interesting. That seems like an ill-advised application of this design philosophy!

[oldfatslow]

Originally Posted by Pegoready

Not exactly true. The San Remo forces one to use their proprietary setback post, so the slack STA makes a real difference:

I'm usually not one to find carbon exciting but that's kind of hot.

[r_mutt]

thanks gents. that was helpful.


is this what was commonly referred to as "Century Geometry"?

is eddy totally uninvolved with the brand presently?


having ridden on a steady diet of modern carbon bikes, the Merckx looks like a bit of a departure for me if i jump.

[FlashUNC]

Originally Posted by r_mutt

thanks gents. that was helpful.


is this what was commonly referred to as "Century Geometry"?

is eddy totally uninvolved with the brand presently?


having ridden on a steady diet of modern carbon bikes, the Merckx looks like a bit of a departure for me if i jump.

Eddy allegedly still has input on the geometry and signs off on every model.

[velomonkey]

I had a san remo - there is a HUGE difference in the geo from the '15 to the '16 models. My '15 san remo had a TT that was like 1.3cm longer than most, however, when I set the bike up the actual reach wasn't all that much different.

Eddy does it different that's for sure - but if we're talking the geo the '15 and '16 models are not even close to the same.

[r_mutt]

Originally Posted by velomonkey

I had a san remo - there is a HUGE difference in the geo from the '15 to the '16 models. My '15 san remo had a TT that was like 1.3cm longer than most, however, when I set the bike up the actual reach wasn't all that much different.

Eddy does it different that's for sure - but if we're talking the geo the '15 and '16 models are not even close to the same.

you're right. i had a look and they are very different. the '16 is more in-line with "current geometry" while the '15 seems "different". it's odd that a company would release a new model and then completely change the geometry 1 year later.

[p.demian]

Hi, sorry for dragging this up again.
I was just wondering if you went for the Merckx in the end? I am currently trying to decide between a San Remo and a Supersix Evo, and just wondered how you found them to compare when making your decision? It's difficult to find information on the Merckx, and the test ride only tells you so much.