Fit question stretched out on the hoods

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
keyboardmonkey
Posts: 657
Joined: 1 Dec 2009, 5:05pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby keyboardmonkey » 17 Mar 2013, 9:01pm

Hi, Mark1978. I would suggest that if at all possible you persevere with the kit you have for the time being unless it is painful to do so. You have gone from a completely different style of bike to your Madone. I was thinking of getting the 3.1 last year, but couldn’t quite scrape together the money. If you’ve just spent a grand on your best bike I would try to limit any further, unnecessary expense.

I am 5’8” with a 29” inside leg. Out of interest, what are your measurements? I tried the 54cm model and the reach was too great. I agreed with the chaps in the shop that the 52cm model was the right size for me. (I have a 51cm Racelight Kinesis T2 (2010 version) and now a super compact small (46.5cm) Giant TCR 2 Composite.) How flexible are you? Can you touch your toes without bending your knees?

Another suggestion would be that you ask your cycling buddies to ride alongside you a bit of a distance away when it is safe to do so and see if you ‘look’ right. (What happens when you bend your elbows?) Not a brilliant visual check, but it might be worth a go. (I can’t improve on 531colin’s rules of thumb.)

robc02
Posts: 1667
Joined: 23 Apr 2009, 7:12pm
Location: Stafford

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby robc02 » 17 Mar 2013, 9:28pm

A couple of contributors have said that Colin's rule of thumb would result in them shortening their stem by some margin - me too. My stem is around 10cm longer than the rule of thumb suggests; it is also around 11cm lower than the saddle (considerably affecting the forearm length reach method compared to bars nearer the saddle height), and I use traditional deepish drop bars. (I'm 6ft tall and thin).

Another post points out that some ex (and current) racers tour with their racing position - that's me too.

All this goes to show is that, as pointed out by several others, the rule of thumb is just a starting point and there may be rather large variations in practice. However, I would expect that most riders, including the OP by the sound of it, using drops for the first time would find these longer and lower positions pretty uncomfortable - probably excruciating!!

I would say the advice to try shorter stems is sound - you can always sell them on if you find them no use. I would also echo the advice to get your saddle position correct before adjusting reach. Bear in mind that as you get used to drop bars you may find you need to make further adjustments, especially if regularly riding hard - egged on by your mates!

JohnW
Posts: 6249
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby JohnW » 17 Mar 2013, 9:52pm

robc02 wrote:.......my stem is around .....11cm lower than the saddle.....I'm 6ft tall and thin.......


...........I'm 5'4" and podgy, and those dimensions would have me in the Luton Girls' Choir.........!

Richard D
Posts: 224
Joined: 27 Sep 2011, 6:16pm

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Richard D » 17 Mar 2013, 10:07pm

I bought a bike that was too large for me last year. Once I tied doing any sort of proper riding on it, I could barely reach the brakes and felt like I was lying flat - Superman-style. My "solution" was to buy a ridiculously short stem, but it still wasn't very comfy.

I went for a proper bike fit. I can't tell you exactly what the fitter did (Adrian, at Cadence Sport), but it included fitting a *proper* length stem (probably similar to the one I'd taken off) and moving the saddle *back*, plus no doubt some secret ninja stuff. The result was I could then reach everything just fine, and did several 100k-plus rides on the bike in relative comfort (though the frame was still too big for me).

So "feeling stretched out > must buy a shorter stem" isn't necessarily the right answer all of the time.

User avatar
RickH
Posts: 4582
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby RickH » 17 Mar 2013, 10:41pm

FWIW the saddles of both bikes currently in the house are approx 270mm long & I've no easy way of determining where my sit-bones rest on them.

To get personal: In comparison to keyboardmonkey I am 5'7" (used to be 5'8" but someone, Father Time is the prime suspect, has nicked some) & also 29" inside leg, I can't touch my toes with my legs straight (hamstrings too tight). I ride a 54cm 2008 Racelight Tk - the geometries seem to be unchanged, so I have an extra 0.9cm toptube (54.7cm v 53.8cm) & an extra 2.5cm headtube. At 170cm I am mid-range for Kinesis quoted heights of 166-176cm. I was never really much of a racer but did a few time trials a few decades ago but do like my bars lower than the saddle - within a week of getting the bike I flipped the stem over to the low position & have dropped the stem by another 2cm, in 2 steps, since then. Top of bars is approx 2.5"/6cm below saddle height.

Here are the current geometries
Image

To get the saddle to bars distance near Colin's rule of thumb I would need a 20cm stem or would have to turn the seatpost back to front (which is currently pretty much KOPS, although was set up without reference to that). That was why I questioned it.

John W: when I changed the bars it was primarily in the first instance because I was never comfortable on the drops & had come across this video review which struck a chord with me. I had noticed that I was tending to rest my hands towards the back of the brake hoods rather than fully on them so did my calculations with stem length to reduce the reach by that much - a couple of cm, I forget the exact amount - with the tertiary benefit, mentioned earlier, of slightly longer reach on the tops as I tended to feel too upright at times riding on the tops. For me it was a win, win, win situation. :) The old bars weren't bad - I'd happily done more than 10,000 miles on them - but these compact short reach bars weren't available (or at least I didn't know about them) when I bought the bike & I do like the new ones better.

Rick.

Malaconotus
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 11:31pm
Location: Chapel Allerton, Leeds

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Malaconotus » 18 Mar 2013, 8:32am

Mark1978 wrote:If my calculations are correct going from a current 7deg 90mm stem to a 17deg 75mm should give 20mm less reach and 6mm higher which seems like a good starting point.


Just in case you needed confirmation my calculations say 20mm and 5mm so you're right. With spacers moved up and down to leave the bars at the same height, reach is shortened 18mm, or 3/4 of an inch, with 15mm being, obviously, due to the shorter stem, and 3mm being the steeper angle.

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 47116
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Mick F » 18 Mar 2013, 8:33am

Strange sizing!
I'm glad I'm not buying one of those frames.

I'm 175cm tall.
My frame has a horizontal TT of 55cm long.
The seat tube length is 59cm
My stem is 8cm reach.

The chart seems at odds with my dimensions.

For my height, I would have an effective seat tube length of 49 or 52cm. By fitting a long seatpost to get the leg length correct, it would move my body too far back, would it not??
Mick F. Cornwall

Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Mark1978 » 18 Mar 2013, 8:38am

keyboardmonkey wrote:Hi, Mark1978. I would suggest that if at all possible you persevere with the kit you have for the time being unless it is painful to do so. You have gone from a completely different style of bike to your Madone. I was thinking of getting the 3.1 last year, but couldn’t quite scrape together the money. If you’ve just spent a grand on your best bike I would try to limit any further, unnecessary expense.


I realise that it is a completely difference style, but the main problem is that it *is* painful, hurts my eblows and hurts my hands when braking. I'm not denying I might be able to get used to it, but I stopped at a roundabout a mile or so from home and was thinking - do I really have to ride home, I could walk instead? Which is no good!

Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Mark1978 » 18 Mar 2013, 8:42am

keyboardmonkey wrote:I am 5’8” with a 29” inside leg. Out of interest, what are your measurements?


5'6" and I wear 29" trousers.
How flexible are you? Can you touch your toes without bending your knees?


No, I'm about an inch, maybe inch and half away from being able to do that.

Brucey
Posts: 36188
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Brucey » 18 Mar 2013, 8:53am

Mick F wrote: For my height, I would have an effective seat tube length of 49 or 52cm. By fitting a long seatpost to get the leg length correct, it would move my body too far back, would it not??


Eh? ....why? The seat angle is.... the seat angle. Why should the length of seat pin affect how far back your saddle ends up?

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 47116
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Mick F » 18 Mar 2013, 8:59am

Sorry, can't hang on long.

By raising the saddle, you move it backwards too. Without working out the trig, I guess the saddle moves rearwards by 1cm for every 2cm raised.

My BB to saddle along the seat tube, is 76cm. If I had a (effective) 49cm frame, I'd need a seatpost of 27cm long plus the height below the effective height due to sloping seat tube.

Sorry, gotta go .........................
Back this evening.
Mick F. Cornwall

Malaconotus
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 11:31pm
Location: Chapel Allerton, Leeds

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Malaconotus » 18 Mar 2013, 9:01am

Brucey wrote:Why should the length of seat pin affect how far back your saddle ends up?


It sort of can....

Image

User avatar
Vantage
Posts: 2691
Joined: 24 Jan 2012, 1:44pm
Location: somewhere in Bolton
Contact:

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Vantage » 18 Mar 2013, 9:02am

Because the seatpost is at an angle. the further up the saddle goes, the further back it goes also.
Bill


“Ride as much or as little, or as long or as short as you feel. But ride.” ~ Eddy Merckx
It's a rich man whos children run to him when his pockets are empty.

Malaconotus
Posts: 1842
Joined: 30 Jul 2010, 11:31pm
Location: Chapel Allerton, Leeds

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Malaconotus » 18 Mar 2013, 9:08am

Mick F wrote:Sorry, can't hang on long.

By raising the saddle, you move it backwards too. Without working out the trig, I guess the saddle moves rearwards by 1cm for every 2cm raised.

My BB to saddle along the seat tube, is 76cm. If I had a (effective) 49cm frame, I'd need a seatpost of 27cm long plus the height below the effective height due to sloping seat tube.

Sorry, gotta go .........................
Back this evening.


That's what the virtual seat tube measurement gives you, Mick. It takes the variations of degree of top tube slope, and thus shorter seat tube, out of the equation and allows comparison of distance from headtube/toptube junction to where the seattube/toptube junction would be on a horizontal top tube frame like yours. So the 556 measurement is directly comparable with your 590. Yours is longer possibly because of other modern innovations/fashions. E.g. modern seat tube is likely steeper, (here 73.5 degrees) so more saddle setback, and modern stems tend to be a little longer, with a 54cm road bike usually having a 90mm or 100mm stem.

Brucey
Posts: 36188
Joined: 4 Jan 2012, 6:25pm

Re: Fit question stretched out on the hoods

Postby Brucey » 18 Mar 2013, 9:17am

It doesn't matter if you have a short seat pin in a large frame, or a long seat pin in a small frame; if the seat angle is the same and the saddle height is the same, the saddle is in exactly the same place w.r.t. the BB.

What can change is the ETT measurement, with different sized frames; but to suggest that the saddle mysteriously ends up in a different place with different sized frames is not an accurate or helpful idea.

cheers
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Brucey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~