Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Rush Sizing...

  1. #1
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247

    Rush Sizing...

    I'm going to buy a Rush 1000 soon. I've had tried a Scalpel 1000 size large and I found this bike big for me. I'm 178cm tall (5' 10", 33" inseam). I do prefer a frame size that leans towards the small end (rather than a frame that is slightly too big). I know scalpel geometry and rush geometry are different. Should I buy the medium rush ?. I would really appreciate any advice and comments. Many Thanks.

    Fidel.

  2. #2
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,435
    I'm 180cm and ride medium Cannondales in most models but I haven't tried a Rush yet and I always suggest to try before you buy. I'm pretty sure a medium might be just perfect for you though.

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  3. #3
    Crooooow!
    Reputation: Deepwoods-Flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    54

    ... and if we just ...

    My inseam is only 32 and I bought a Med Rush 2000....If the bike wasnt soooo long I would have bought a large. I had the Seatpost maxed out so I put in a 410 mm Thomson post...

  4. #4
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepwoods-Flyer
    My inseam is only 32 and I bought a Med Rush 2000....If the bike wasnt soooo long I would have bought a large. I had the Seatpost maxed out so I put in a 410 mm Thomson post...
    Thank you very much for your answer. I just want to know how tall are you ?.
    I think i will go for the medium rush.

  5. #5
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Gerous
    I'm 180cm and ride medium Cannondales in most models but I haven't tried a Rush yet and I always suggest to try before you buy. I'm pretty sure a medium might be just perfect for you though.
    Thanks for your advice.

  6. #6
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Deepwoods-Flyer
    My inseam is only 32 and I bought a Med Rush 2000....If the bike wasnt soooo long I would have bought a large. I had the Seatpost maxed out so I put in a 410 mm Thomson post...
    Could you please let me know the saddle height of your bike ?. Thanks.

  7. #7
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Gerous
    I'm 180cm and ride medium Cannondales in most models but I haven't tried a Rush yet and I always suggest to try before you buy. I'm pretty sure a medium might be just perfect for you though.
    Do you ride a medium prophet ?. How big is your inseam ?. Thanks.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    75
    If you get a medium Rush you WILL need a longer seatpost, I'm only 5'-9" but have a similar inseam as you and I've ridden both the medium and large... neither one could get the seat high enough at the max line with the stock post, but the large was close (notice in pictures how the top tube slopes down and the seat tube is shorter than the head tube). Length wise, the medium was pretty good, maybe a little short, and the large felt good, maybe a little long, so it was pretty much a toss up there, but because of the seat post height I went with a large when I ordered mine, should be here in a month or so.

  9. #9
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by Mt. Biker
    If you get a medium Rush you WILL need a longer seatpost, I'm only 5'-9" but have a similar inseam as you and I've ridden both the medium and large... neither one could get the seat high enough at the max line with the stock post, but the large was close (notice in pictures how the top tube slopes down and the seat tube is shorter than the head tube). Length wise, the medium was pretty good, maybe a little short, and the large felt good, maybe a little long, so it was pretty much a toss up there, but because of the seat post height I went with a large when I ordered mine, should be here in a month or so.
    The seatpost length is a very good point to decide. Horizontal top tube length is the same for medium and large Rush (24.6"), so this measurement does not make any difference between them. The wheelbase for the large is 1.2" larger. Bike comes with a 120mm stem, and I think I will get the large and will change the stem, maybe a 90 or 100 mm with a little rise. Thank you very much for you advice.

  10. #10
    LA CHÈVRE
    Reputation: Dan Gerous's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    9,435
    Quote Originally Posted by vizcaino
    The seatpost length is a very good point to decide. Horizontal top tube length is the same for medium and large Rush (24.6"), so this measurement does not make any difference between them. The wheelbase for the large is 1.2" larger. Bike comes with a 120mm stem, and I think I will get the large and will change the stem, maybe a 90 or 100 mm with a little rise. Thank you very much for you advice.
    I think an error slipped in the geometry chart, it's impossible that the medium and large Rush have the same top tube length, same chainstay length, same head and seat angles and have different wheelbases... I suspect one of the two have the wrong top tube length, probably the medium. If you look at the whole thing, top tube goes: 22.6 - 24.6 - 24.6 - 25.6, a 2" jump from small to medium seems like a big step. I think the medium might be 23.6.
    Last edited by Dan Gerous; 10-19-2005 at 04:08 PM.

    DAN.GEROUS.NET : MOUNTAIN BIKING : CYCLOCROSS : ROAD :

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation: skinl19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    648
    I sent Cannondale a note a few weeks ago about the Rush geometry error. The earlier chart had the XL top tube being shorter than some of the smaller sizes. They sent back a note saying it was wrong and they would fix it, looks like they haven't fixed it correctly yet.

  12. #12
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247
    Quote Originally Posted by skinl19
    I sent Cannondale a note a few weeks ago about the Rush geometry error. The earlier chart had the XL top tube being shorter than some of the smaller sizes. They sent back a note saying it was wrong and they would fix it, looks like they haven't fixed it correctly yet.
    Rush Specs shows that the seat tube length for the large is 18.9" and for the medium is 16.9 ". Does anyone knows if these measurements are correct ?. Thanks.

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    22

    go ride one

    Quote Originally Posted by vizcaino
    I'm going to buy a Rush 1000 soon. I've had tried a Scalpel 1000 size large and I found this bike big for me. I'm 178cm tall (5' 10", 33" inseam). I do prefer a frame size that leans towards the small end (rather than a frame that is slightly too big). I know scalpel geometry and rush geometry are different. Should I buy the medium rush ?. I would really appreciate any advice and comments. Many Thanks.

    Fidel.
    unless you're ordering or don't have access...go test ride!

  14. #14
    Crooooow!
    Reputation: Deepwoods-Flyer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    54

    Smile swap out that seatpost!

    Im 5-9 and I had to swap out my stock carbon seatpost for a 410mm thompson(on a med rush 2000)...because it was at the limit line

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    75
    I'm wondering why they designed a bike like this with a short seat tube and then put such a short seat post on it with a really long top tube since obviously in it's stock form it doesn't fit anyone, maybe everyone at canondale has super short legs and long monkey arms or something to be able to fit the stock setup.

    At least it's an easy fix to get a taller seat post.

  16. #16
    Beep, Beep...
    Reputation: vizcaino's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    247

    Medium Rush...

    Quote Originally Posted by vizcaino
    I'm going to buy a Rush 1000 soon. I've had tried a Scalpel 1000 size large and I found this bike big for me. I'm 178cm tall (5' 10", 33" inseam). I do prefer a frame size that leans towards the small end (rather than a frame that is slightly too big). I know scalpel geometry and rush geometry are different. Should I buy the medium rush ?. I would really appreciate any advice and comments. Many Thanks.

    Fidel.
    Finally, I tried both sizes and got a medium Rush 1000. The top tube length for the large was too big for me.
    I have been riding a scalpel the previous two years and the rush is plusher and still feels quick and light. The Rush is an awesome bike !!!.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •