Fuji sl 2.3 road bike - sizing help


New Member
Jun 17, 2017

I am completely new to cycling, and was going to enter my first Sprint triathlon this Summer. Next year I may do a 100 mile ride with friends, so I am buying a pure road bike over the tri/aero style bike.

My LBS can get me a great deal on the FUJI SL 2.3, a bike I had researched and felt fit my checklist. I tested a 52 and 54 in the Fuji Sportif. They both kinda felt the same to me. I was leaning slightly more forward with the 54 and it actually felt better. My dealer, who I trust, said I look more comfortable on the 54 as well. I am concerned the SL may fit differently and the 52 is the right size on paper.

I am about 5.6 1/2 with a shorter torso and longer legs. When I straddled the 54, there wasn't much clearance from the sloping top tube near the handlebars, but I don't plan on sitting up there. I liked the clearance better on the 52, but the ride better on the 54. Again, really not much difference at all.

So which is the better way to go, 52 vs. 54?



Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2005
FWIW ...

While there may-or-may-not be an aesthetic component to choosing a frame size, if by 5.6 1/2 you mean that you are 66.5" tall, then if I were you, I would definitely choose the smaller of the two frame sizes ...

Generally, you can adjust the fit (dimensionally) of a slightly smaller frame UP more easily than you can adjust a slightly larger frame DOWN with a slightly longer stem OR additional spacers beneath the stem -- I think that most LBSes will send a new bike out the store with more spacers than will eventually be needed so that adjustments can be made at a later date (particiularly for a 'new" rider)..
I am 5'9" tall, and BECAUSE the fit for all my frames is the same regardless of the actual frame size the choice of my preferred frame size over the past couple of decades has been a 54cm frame (c-c) with a a 54.5cm top tube & a 120mm stem. That is essentially the same fit I had on my bike which has a 57cm frame & only had 90mm stem. I set up a 55cm frame which I have has a 110mm stem ...

The reach is affected by stem height and handlebar width.

The saddle position relative to the crank-length + pedals is a factor to a proper fit ...

A proper fit is really an individual matter based on a person's physiology than some formula OR the preference of the individual fitting the bike regardless of how "experienced" they may be because the fit of a bike for a very competitive rider may-or-may-not-be different for you or for me ... OR, it could ultimately be the same!

What is comfortable today may not be comfortable in a few months or years as you ride more (or, less!?!).
BTW. Using GOOD cycling shoes are beneficial ... if Shimano shoes fit your feet, then they may be one of the better options to consider because their shoes come in the broadest price range ... a drawback to Shimano shoes is in some of the material choices used in their uppers ... OR, I am just hard on them & after a lot of use they are cosmetically fugly ... which some may think is a good thing!?!
Shoes which you can walk in (MTB shoes) are a good thing.

Pedals with Shimano SPD (MTB) bindings are ubiquitous & the type which are the better option for most recreational riders.

There are a lot of pedal types which many people prefer (e.g., Speedplay is popular because some people like their rotational "float") which are too rich for my blood + I don't like the "float"... if you are intrigued by any pedal type then try to read as many reviews on the various types of pedals and cleat/binding types that you can find.

Wellgo makes less expensive pedals which are derivative of Shimano & LOOK pedals ... some are better than others ... I have-and-use both Shimano, LOOK, and the fore mentioned Wellgo pedals ... AFTER reading as much as you feel is necessary to determine which type of pedal/dleat/shoe type to use, let your budget & your aesthetic sensibilities be your guide.


Similar threads