I'm not going to apologise for continuing to discuss riding position......what is handlebar shape about, if it isn't about riding position?
I think Samuel has shown us where this 0.88 magic number originates....
Samuel D wrote:..............
The 0.883 × inseam method was popularised in Lemond’s book but first put forward by Lemond’s coach, Cyrille Guimard. However, this is what Lemond’s book actually says about it (I have it in front of me):
“That is the overall distance, in a straight line, from the centre of the bottom bracket to the top of the saddle. Remember, though, that what’s meant by the top of the saddle is the cupped part where you actually sit, not the lip that rises to the back of the saddle.”
That’s a bit vague, but I don’t think he means to measure in line with the seat tube. I think he means where the sit-bones rest. If you take his formula and measure in line with the seatpost, you’ll end up higher than even Lemond recommends............
Previously I was measuring my saddle height from BB axle to saddle top along the seat tube, and the result was 70cm.
However, if I measure from BB axle to about the middle of the dent my bum bones make in my saddle, my saddle height is then 72.5mm......which is fairly close to the 74cm which the Lemond method seems to suggest.
So, where has the missing 15mm gone?
My bullbar grips replicate this "hoods" position...
when I had drops, with the "tops" level with the saddle, this was my "drops" position...
Thats certainly not an extreme position by to-day's standards, but my pelvis is rotated further forward when I'm on the drops than it is when I'm on the hoods. If I had a significant saddle to bar drop, then my torso would be closer to horizontal and my pelvis would be rotated more, but my hip flexion would be extreme (belly interfering with thighs), and i would need to put the saddle forward to reduce hip flexion, and up to compensate for moving it forwards. I would also need a longer reach.
You can see here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pelvis_(male)_02_-_lateral_view.png
that my hip joint moves forward and down as I rotate my pelvis forward, which increases effective leg length. Moving the saddle forward makes it more likely that I would ride toe down ....you can think of the body "rotating around the pedal spindle".
So if i put the bars down and forward, the saddle forward and up, and i rode with my pelvis rotated forward, my toes down and my cleats forward, its possible that i could actually find my missing 15mm saddle height and ride with a 74cm saddle height as per Lemond. However, this is an aerodynamic racing position suited to an athlete (originally a Tour de France winning athlete).....it requires good biomechanics and functionality, as well as flexibility and core strength.
It seems to me that modern fashionable road bikes with steep seat tube angles and pronounced saddle to bar drop force the rider to attempt to adopt a riding position as described by Lemond.
The average person who spends 35 hours a week sat at a desk isn't going to be comfortable in this sort of position unless they devote a considerable amount of time and energy to developing flexibility, functionality and core strength (like a professional athlete).
I have never read "Lemond's book" but I would be interested in what it has to say about riding position in general......I don't think its wise to just pick out a part of the whole position and make it a universal recommendation, to anybody who just wants to go for a nice bike ride in the country.