help with fit
12-17-11, 03:55 AM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Someplace trying to figure it out
Posts: 10,664
Bikes: Cannondale EVO, CAAD9, Giant cross bike.
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
I do fittings. My guess is when you want to get low on the bike you feel like you need to push yourself away from the bars. There's not enough room for your torso to settle into the cockpit.
Bike's too small. Hunched back. Does your back bother you when you've been on the bike for a while?
12-17-11, 06:08 AM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere Between The Beginning And The End
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
Like I said before, the frame is too small! The stem must have been changed out for a longer one to get you to this point, and it's still too short. You could also do with 170mm-172.5 crank arms. You need a 56cm frame plain and simple.
54cm frames usually do not come with 175mm cranks and a stem that long......
Listen to what roadwarrior and I have said, and you will be much better fit. Also, your back should never hurt!
This is another good video to see what YOU should look like on your bike. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHdnu...eature=related
54cm frames usually do not come with 175mm cranks and a stem that long......
Listen to what roadwarrior and I have said, and you will be much better fit. Also, your back should never hurt!
This is another good video to see what YOU should look like on your bike. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHdnu...eature=related
Last edited by Capecodder; 12-17-11 at 06:39 AM.
12-17-11, 07:37 AM
#29
I would say its a chorus that your bike is too small. You are pushing on 6' tall and look to have relatively long arms and you could even ride a 58 which would be more of a comfort fit. A 56 for a competitive fit would be about right. Swap your frame for one size up. Ebay if full of frames because of this. Meanwhile...if you have a 130mm stem...try to find a 140mm and with a -17 deg angle if you can find it. Your objective should be to increase your reach from saddle tip to bars...and this can be accomplished with a longer stem...and a bit more drop...looks like you have a 130mm stem with -6 deg. Also, you can increase your setback to achieve a bit longer reach which may play dividends. Pros near 6' tall many times run 90-100mm of seback...saddle tip to BB centerline.
Hope that helps.
Hope that helps.
12-17-11, 08:14 AM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere Between The Beginning And The End
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I have a couple of questions.....
1) Did you buy this bike from a shop, and is this the size frame they advised?
2) Did they swap out the stem and cranks, cause a 54cm frame would come with 170.0-172.5mm crank arms and a 100mm stem. I do not believe this frame came with those 175mm crank arms or that 120-130mm stem, so someone either tried to make you fit on this frame or you bought it used.
I've been in plenty of shops that will sell the incorrect size frame cause that's what they have on hand, and just want to get rid of it or they just don't care.
1) Did you buy this bike from a shop, and is this the size frame they advised?
2) Did they swap out the stem and cranks, cause a 54cm frame would come with 170.0-172.5mm crank arms and a 100mm stem. I do not believe this frame came with those 175mm crank arms or that 120-130mm stem, so someone either tried to make you fit on this frame or you bought it used.
I've been in plenty of shops that will sell the incorrect size frame cause that's what they have on hand, and just want to get rid of it or they just don't care.
12-17-11, 11:05 AM
#31
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I original bought a 54"sl2 from a shop (they recommended it) cracked the head tube and Specialized replaced it with this. Built it up myself with the custom components because I felt scrunched up and would always try to get my position to look like pro riders. Sometimes i get numbness/sore back after really long climbs. I just want a good fit so that I can have an efficient stroke. I would like to stop tinkering with my position.
12-17-11, 11:07 AM
#32
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere Between The Beginning And The End
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
I original bought a 54"sl2 from a shop (they recommended it) cracked the head tube and Specialized replaced it with this. Built it up myself with the custom components because I felt scrunched up and would always try to get my position to look like pro riders. Sometimes i get numbness/sore back after really long climbs. I just want a good fit so that I can have an efficient stroke. I would like to stop tinkering with my position.
12-17-11, 11:29 AM
#33
Senior Member
These days, every frame looks too small to me. Guess that's just the trend.
I tend to put more emphasis on the rider than the bike, which makes me unpopular. For my money, there is nothing horribly wrong with the bike fit, at least by today's standards, although I certainly agree that he looks scrunched up. But what stands out to me is the toes-down pedaling and the way he pulls himself forward on the saddle. It looks very fatiguing.
If I was that rider's coach, I would work on relaxing the calf muscles during most of the pedal stroke and dropping the heel. It's better to push the heel down at the front and bottom of the pedal cycle, which allows the soleus and gastrocnemius to contribute their power. Holding them tight throughout the pedal cycle and pedaling with the toes pointed downward is fatiguing and prevents them from adding to the stroke.
I'm not quite sure what to think WRT the way he pulls himself forward on the bike. Is he trying to get more comfortable? Is he trying to mimic the way he looks during hard efforts? Is this some thing that's come out of spin class that I don't know about? Whatever, it looks ridiculous and makes a poor fitting bike that much worse. Seems to me that if he stops the toes-down pedaling he'll be able to drop his saddle, which may then allow him to rotate his pelvis around and put his energy into pedaling rather than climbing all over his bike. Of course, that will extend his spine and get him even closer to his handlebars, thus exacerbating the already short "cockpit", if you enjoy Trek's marketing lingo.
At any rate, this thread is starting to help me understand why everybody looks the way they do on bikes these days. The shops are sending them out the door on the smallest possible frames, and the riders are having to make all sorts of physiological compromises in order to ride them.
I tend to put more emphasis on the rider than the bike, which makes me unpopular. For my money, there is nothing horribly wrong with the bike fit, at least by today's standards, although I certainly agree that he looks scrunched up. But what stands out to me is the toes-down pedaling and the way he pulls himself forward on the saddle. It looks very fatiguing.
If I was that rider's coach, I would work on relaxing the calf muscles during most of the pedal stroke and dropping the heel. It's better to push the heel down at the front and bottom of the pedal cycle, which allows the soleus and gastrocnemius to contribute their power. Holding them tight throughout the pedal cycle and pedaling with the toes pointed downward is fatiguing and prevents them from adding to the stroke.
I'm not quite sure what to think WRT the way he pulls himself forward on the bike. Is he trying to get more comfortable? Is he trying to mimic the way he looks during hard efforts? Is this some thing that's come out of spin class that I don't know about? Whatever, it looks ridiculous and makes a poor fitting bike that much worse. Seems to me that if he stops the toes-down pedaling he'll be able to drop his saddle, which may then allow him to rotate his pelvis around and put his energy into pedaling rather than climbing all over his bike. Of course, that will extend his spine and get him even closer to his handlebars, thus exacerbating the already short "cockpit", if you enjoy Trek's marketing lingo.
At any rate, this thread is starting to help me understand why everybody looks the way they do on bikes these days. The shops are sending them out the door on the smallest possible frames, and the riders are having to make all sorts of physiological compromises in order to ride them.
12-17-11, 11:43 AM
#34
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Six,
You recommend I drop the saddle a little and try to use my calf muscles? I dont really even feel my calf muscles being used when I pedal (they are small too). I have been diagnosed with short achilies tendons and cannot dorsiflex my feet. I have been stretching them for years and they have'nt budged 1cm!! I dont think they will get any longer.
You recommend I drop the saddle a little and try to use my calf muscles? I dont really even feel my calf muscles being used when I pedal (they are small too). I have been diagnosed with short achilies tendons and cannot dorsiflex my feet. I have been stretching them for years and they have'nt budged 1cm!! I dont think they will get any longer.
12-17-11, 11:58 AM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,919
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Liked 671 Times
in
512 Posts
Kiserm, why do you slide forward on the saddle so much when you go into the drops? You were thoroughly on the rivet, rather than sitting with your sit bones supported. Perhaps your handlebars are too low?
I think your leg extension is good.
You do look crowded in the drops, knees are at or ahead of your elbows. How is it if you keep you butt back, with sitbones still on the sweet spot of the saddle?
I think your leg extension is good.
You do look crowded in the drops, knees are at or ahead of your elbows. How is it if you keep you butt back, with sitbones still on the sweet spot of the saddle?
12-17-11, 11:58 AM
#36
Senior Member
If you take a look at some video footage of top racers, you'll note that as they push through the pedals at the front and bottom of the pedal stroke, they tend to have their feet either parallel with the ground or with the heel lower than the toes. It's considered "correct" for the reasons I listed in the prior post. If you are capable of placing your feet flat on the ground while walking, it seems like you ought to be able to while cycling as well. I'm just another 'internet expert", though...
12-17-11, 12:06 PM
#37
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Makes sense six. I will try it. I think to accomplish that I will need to move my saddle forward a little. I think i either need a bigger frame or a longer stem.. I will scoot my saddle forward and shoot another video tomorrow. I am at work now 
Road fan, I moved forward just to show what it looked like when I was on the rivet. It is more comfortable to ride that low with my ass back.
Road fan, I moved forward just to show what it looked like when I was on the rivet. It is more comfortable to ride that low with my ass back.
12-17-11, 12:12 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,919
Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8
Liked 671 Times
in
512 Posts
Kiserkm, lowering your saddle is essentially the easiest thing you could try. Just measure it before and after in case you want to put it back where it is now. Might be a good idea to start keeping a log.
I'd not lower it by more than 3 mm at a time. After you lower it, try to feel if you are sliding forward off the sweet spot of the saddle. If so, you might try raising the nose maybe 3 mm at a time until you stop sliding. If it turns into perineal numbness you might have gone too far - down 3 mm and stay that way for a while. Pain in the front of the knee is a sign of saddle too low - raise it before something becomes injured!
I'd say the frame is a usable size if it allows you to get your contact points where they need to be. I don't think they are there, yet. A different frame with the same contact points will still not be good. With saddles, you can adjust height, angle, and setback to a very wide extent. But handlebar positions, especially height, are more restricted. But I can't imagine making a judgement about your best bar position (beyond saying I can't go that deep!) until you saddle and legs are right.
I'd not lower it by more than 3 mm at a time. After you lower it, try to feel if you are sliding forward off the sweet spot of the saddle. If so, you might try raising the nose maybe 3 mm at a time until you stop sliding. If it turns into perineal numbness you might have gone too far - down 3 mm and stay that way for a while. Pain in the front of the knee is a sign of saddle too low - raise it before something becomes injured!
I'd say the frame is a usable size if it allows you to get your contact points where they need to be. I don't think they are there, yet. A different frame with the same contact points will still not be good. With saddles, you can adjust height, angle, and setback to a very wide extent. But handlebar positions, especially height, are more restricted. But I can't imagine making a judgement about your best bar position (beyond saying I can't go that deep!) until you saddle and legs are right.
12-17-11, 12:24 PM
#39
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Road,
thanks for the input. I will lower the saddle a little and see what it does. What do you think about the fore/aft? It is pretty far back, not sure of the measurement but I can go take it really quick because I rode my bike to work. There is also a little room to move my bars up. Should I try and move them up a little to level out my back? Will it make a difference?
thanks for the input. I will lower the saddle a little and see what it does. What do you think about the fore/aft? It is pretty far back, not sure of the measurement but I can go take it really quick because I rode my bike to work. There is also a little room to move my bars up. Should I try and move them up a little to level out my back? Will it make a difference?
12-17-11, 01:08 PM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere Between The Beginning And The End
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
This is one reason so many riders give up on cycling all together. They spend so much time and money trying to make a wrong size bike fit that they finally give up. You would be so much more comfortable and happy if you get the correct size bike. If I were you, I would remove the components and sell or trade the frame for a 56cm and be done.
12-18-11, 05:33 PM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Boulder County, CO
Posts: 4,464
Bikes: '80 Masi Gran Criterium, '12 Trek Madone, early '60s Frejus track
Liked 479 Times
in
361 Posts
Classic gorilla build, so the slammed stem works fine. I think your upper body could use the extra stretch of a 56 or another centimeter of stem. The cranks are comparatively long for your leg length but they don't appear to be getting in the way.
The saddle setback is probably right on for the mass of your upper body. To get your center of gravity right (over the feet) with a build like this, you have to forget KOPS.
Everybody should forget KOPS. Just set saddle setback so center of gravity is over both feet.
The saddle setback is probably right on for the mass of your upper body. To get your center of gravity right (over the feet) with a build like this, you have to forget KOPS.
Everybody should forget KOPS. Just set saddle setback so center of gravity is over both feet.
Last edited by oldbobcat; 12-18-11 at 05:41 PM.
12-18-11, 06:03 PM
#45
Senior Member
All those commenting about the frame being too small are not looking at the big picture. You have a long torso and short legs, so the bike fits your legs, but is most likely short on reach. Buying a larger frame would only add about 10mm to the reach, but 20mm to the head tube length. One step forward and two steps back.
I'd be sure that the saddle is not too far forward (KOP is often 2-3cm too far forward). Get long reach bars and and use a 130-140mm stem. If that does not create enough reach, then the frame has insufficient reach.
FWIW, I have a nearly identical 73cm saddle height and I'm only 169cm tall. I ride a 51cm LOOK with 9-11cm of saddle to bar drop. With my short torso, I only need a 110mm with short reach bars and the saddle far back.
I'd be sure that the saddle is not too far forward (KOP is often 2-3cm too far forward). Get long reach bars and and use a 130-140mm stem. If that does not create enough reach, then the frame has insufficient reach.
FWIW, I have a nearly identical 73cm saddle height and I'm only 169cm tall. I ride a 51cm LOOK with 9-11cm of saddle to bar drop. With my short torso, I only need a 110mm with short reach bars and the saddle far back.
12-18-11, 06:47 PM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Somewhere Between The Beginning And The End
Posts: 1,995
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
3 Posts
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
He already has a 130mm stem on the bike.
All he really needs to do is go to his local bike shop and test ride a 56cm and feel the difference for himself, and it's free.........
He already has a 130mm stem on the bike.
All he really needs to do is go to his local bike shop and test ride a 56cm and feel the difference for himself, and it's free.........
12-18-11, 06:49 PM
#47
The first thing that stands out to me is the crank arm length. That will impact fore/aft positioning of the seat, which then also changes the height. 175 doesn't seem normal? 172.5 would move your seat back and slightly higher if that would help?
Proper frame size is always right, but what is the right size is the question?
Fit calculator
1. Competitive Cyclist: https://www.competitivecyclist.com/za...LCULATOR_INTRO
2. https://www.wrenchscience.com/Secure/Fit/Height.aspx
Handlebar: Compact bar ==> There are bars with more reach and drop if that would help?
Proper frame size is always right, but what is the right size is the question?
Fit calculator
1. Competitive Cyclist: https://www.competitivecyclist.com/za...LCULATOR_INTRO
2. https://www.wrenchscience.com/Secure/Fit/Height.aspx
Handlebar: Compact bar ==> There are bars with more reach and drop if that would help?
12-18-11, 07:02 PM
#48
12-18-11, 11:44 PM
#49
Senior Member
There's lots of good advice here, but you need to be a bit methodical. Step one is fore/aft saddle position. Do some reading, some research and experiment. If you can get your saddle in the right position relative to the BB, you're on the right size frame. Even if you need to go to a 32mm set back seat post, this is going to be less painful than going to a new frame. Remember FSA makes a very nice carbon post with that much setback. Also remember that some saddles have longer rails than others.
Start here! Do nothing else until you determine this position!
Start here! Do nothing else until you determine this position!
12-19-11, 12:28 AM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,153
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There's lots of good advice here, but you need to be a bit methodical. Step one is fore/aft saddle position. Do some reading, some research and experiment. If you can get your saddle in the right position relative to the BB, you're on the right size frame. Even if you need to go to a 32mm set back seat post, this is going to be less painful than going to a new frame. Remember FSA makes a very nice carbon post with that much setback. Also remember that some saddles have longer rails than others.
Start here! Do nothing else until you determine this position!
Start here! Do nothing else until you determine this position!
