Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Road Cycling
Reload this Page >

bike fitting, bike too low/long ?

Notices
Road Cycling “It is by riding a bicycle that you learn the contours of a country best, since you have to sweat up the hills and coast down them. Thus you remember them as they actually are, while in a motor car only a high hill impresses you, and you have no such accurate remembrance of country you have driven through as you gain by riding a bicycle.” -- Ernest Hemingway

bike fitting, bike too low/long ?

Old 09-17-21, 03:25 PM
  #51  
razorjack
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
razorjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 89

Bikes: Trans Sentinel, Spesh Tarmac

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen
There's not 'Wrong' with 90 or 80 or any stem, for that matter. I will contend that for 'You' that will not be an improvement, over some short time...
How you ride your bike, has no effect on me...
hey! i really apreciate your answers, excuse me, if you feel challanged by my responses, no harm meant. It's just my character, if i hear something, but without any explanation, it's my way to challenge it.

Originally Posted by cyclezen
You're now finding ways to explain away why you are different... You're not 'different', your body Dims are actually quite common. You're young, You're well proportioned, strong and not over-weight. If you can, with straight legs, touch your toes - you're flexible enough... If you can;t touch your toes, or find serious difficulty in touching - you're in serious trouble !
maybe i didn't explain it before, i'm not so young - 41, (i said before, i'm not flexible) if i try to reach the floor with my fingers, while standing - i'm missing 20cm
yep, i know it's bad, i always enjoyed the sport and gaining fit, but didin't have 'time' to do stretching after.


"Idealized Position' is what works and has worked for Tens of Thousands of performance cyclists for many, many decades.
and it's called 'idealised' for a reason
razorjack is offline  
Old 09-17-21, 03:32 PM
  #52  
razorjack
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
razorjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 89

Bikes: Trans Sentinel, Spesh Tarmac

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by bahula03
Having read through most of this thread, there are some great replies about DIY fitting and biomechanics, and maybe I missed it one of the longer posts but: what problem were you looking to address by getting a bike fit? However, let's call it, unorthodox your current fit is, if it ain't broke, ya know?

It seems like pretty much everything you've tried so far has felt weird or wrong, and uhh...coming from MTBs and the fit you've been using, it probably should? That doesn't mean it's bad though- it'll take your body a while to adjust to the muscles being used, and your mind needs a bit to adjust to how the bike responds to inputs and how to provide inputs. It's a distant memory now, but I remember the fit I started with feeling like I was wobbling around 5' off the ground and reaching about as far forward as I could and that was conservative based off of my ability/flexibility at the time.
hey ! i did bike fitting mainly because of my legs - one was broken long time ago and i need some asymetrical set up. i just wanted to confirm that it's right and i won't damage my joints in a long run;
with upper body i was quite ok, but of course far from 'idealised' roadie pose
MTB could affect me a lot, coz i have some power, but it was always in a different position and my hip flexors and hamstrings are really tight
handling is not an issue, i feel confident during descents or jumping kerbs and doing other stuff. and i really like crispness of my Spesh Tarmac, I tried Giant Defy for a moment, and it was soooo slugish...
razorjack is offline  
Old 09-17-21, 05:00 PM
  #53  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
So after all this you are staying with the Specialized and your old setup? After putting us though all this trauma?

Maelochs is offline  
Old 09-17-21, 08:22 PM
  #54  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,340

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 502 Post(s)
Liked 623 Times in 425 Posts
Originally Posted by razorjack
hey! i really apreciate your answers, excuse me, if you feel challanged by my responses, no harm meant. It's just my character, if i hear something, but without any explanation, it's my way to challenge it.
maybe i didn't explain it before, i'm not so young - 41, (i said before, i'm not flexible) if i try to reach the floor with my fingers, while standing - i'm missing 20cm
yep, i know it's bad, i always enjoyed the sport and gaining fit, but didin't have 'time' to do stretching after.
and it's called 'idealised' for a reason
I really dig getting challenged, it's make me think through again, and maybe learn something more/else myself... I never took your Qs or replies in a negative fashion. You never were really that way... I try to give reason why I might suggest something; AND I don;t know enough about you to do more than provide 'suggestion'.
You are Young !!! You're 31 years younger than I, youre' the same age as Alejandro Valverde, who is still winning many races in the Pro Peloton ! Chris Horner won the Vuelta at age 40, David Rebellin is 48 and just extended his contract in the Pro Peloton .
Time for wake-up call. Flexibility is not just about cycling, it's core to having a good aging life. Flexibility, Muscle strength and mass retention, Balance, Awareness and Mental Faculties, Cardio Health are ALL essential to a life worth living as you age. If you don;t pay attention to all these now, it just gets incrementally more difficult - look around, at old people.
'Stretching' is only one component of overall flexibility and balance. To address this comprehensively, there are more components.
We all have and get more physical challenges as we progress/age. You're not alone.
Seriously, the opportunity is NOW, to make your future life and living the best it can be. It's ALL and ONLY in your hands.
... Your "fitter', as others noted, a bit suspect ??? I would go back to him and ask him to get past the B7llsh$t and give you some better suggestions - with REASONS WHY, without waffling.

Originally Posted by Maelochs
So after all this you are staying with the Specialized and your old setup? After putting us though all this trauma?
LOL! It actually has been a fun thread, mostly positive, with many good considerations from many posters - unusal for BF... LOL!
Thx
Yuri
cyclezen is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 03:14 AM
  #55  
razorjack
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
razorjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 89

Bikes: Trans Sentinel, Spesh Tarmac

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Maelochs
So after all this you are staying with the Specialized and your old setup? After putting us though all this trauma?
i don´t know ! but Tarmac (or other racy bike) 54 (one size smaller) - so maybe i could put saddle a bit back? and use 'standard' 100mm stem, but probably would have cockpit too low for me :/
So endurance 54 then?
It's all connected, tight hamstrings + tight hipflexors and then a bit shorter torso makes difficult (and not comfortable) to stretch my upper body and keep it low.
razorjack is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 04:27 AM
  #56  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,176
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,714 Times in 2,911 Posts
This is a very thought provoking thread. Just wanted to comment on a couple of points raised:-

1. Crank length. Here's a really good article summarising recent thinking on the subject of ideal crank length vs leg length:-

https://bikedynamics.co.uk/FitGuidecranks.htm

Basically most people would probably benefit from slightly shorter cranks, especially if focusing on endurance cycling. Being quite tall and my current bikes both having 175 mm cranks I very recently discussed this with a very experienced fitter in regard to a new bike build. He was very much in favour of shorter cranks (for the same reasons summarised in my link above) and advised me to go with 170 mm cranks maximum. For reference my inseam is 88 cm and I'm 184 cm tall.

2. Flexibility and stretching. This idea that you can somehow increase your range of motion from stretching doesn't seem to stack up with my personal experience and the science is not exactly conclusive either. Maybe stretching helps to maintain what natural flexibility you have, but I couldn't touch my toes without bending my knees when I was 10 years old and now aged 53 it is exactly the same. I can reach roughly half way down my shins as I always could. I do stretch and I maintain my full range of motion. It just isn't that much based on touching my toes. Again I discussed this with my fitter and he said it's quite common. I just have relatively short hamstrings, simple as that. My back is fine, I don't have any joint issues. It's just that my natural proportions don't allow toe touching!

3. Saddle set-back. I find that set-back makes it easier to reach further forward with a flat back. Try standing with your backside up against a wall and see how far you can bend forward from your waist. Now take a step forward and try again. Once your backside is free to move rearward you can bend forward much further. So moving your saddle back relative to your feet might actually make reach easier. Slightly counter-intuitive but the wall exercise demonstrates the effect quite well.

Last edited by PeteHski; 09-20-21 at 03:03 PM.
PeteHski is online now  
Old 09-18-21, 06:40 AM
  #57  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
One thing people don't like to do is put a 17-degree upward stem on a bike ... they all opt for 6-7 degrees, and either aim down (which makes them flattish, because of head-tube angle) or up so they actually point a little up.

I use 17-degree stems on two of my bikes, with as many spacers as I feel I need. This way I can ride frames that fit my legs and still keep the bars high without using a dangerous amount of spacers.

Lots of people think stems should be slammed and straight. Good for them. I think riders should be comfortable on their bikes ... apparently not everyone agrees. Good for them.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 07:20 AM
  #58  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
80, 90, 100, even up to 120 are all "normal' stem lengths for a road bike. They are designed around this type of length. Most of the time, going significantly shorter than what designed, like 70 or less may not be such a good idea. However, unless you are in really excellent physical condition I wager its better to err slightly on the short side for better comfort if anything. Road bikes are designed for this leaning forward posture; mostly by incorporating a really short chainstay to achieve ideal balance on the road by counteracting the forward biased weight over the drops while speeding up handling towards the rear of the bike.

if I understand correctly, reach on a road bike versus a mtb doesn't seem all that different. Based on what I see, a longer top tube is really critical for off road riding. I feel too scrunched up on a road bike tackling any off road stuff.

most road bikes I see in my size have a 590mm top tube, about 390or 400mm reach, a ~100mm stem and ~80mm drop reach. In contrast, typical xc bike would be somewhere between 460-480mm for the reach(sometimes less) , roughly 650mm top tube, and a stem that is anywhere from 30-100mm. On average, this puts you in a riding position not radically different, at least in terms of how stretched out you are, between the two genres of bikes. So my question is... what's different?

You may have seen the picture of me on my old road bike from back in March. This was shortly after I lost about 30lbs, however. I seemingly have not caught up with my riding position at the time.. just yet. When I was fat I would only feel decently well balanced over the front of the bike in a ridiculous upright position by using really short stems that were super high on a bike with an already short top tube designed for drop bars.

Now that I lost a total of almost 60lb over the least year and a half, my lanky proportions dictate that I desire a longer stem on almost every single bike I end up setting up for myself these days.
Moisture is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 07:24 AM
  #59  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
I find that regularly playing around with saddle heights, setback, stem height/degree, even the angle of your saddle and handlebars.. all these small details can have a rather profound effect on handling and ride quality when done correctly.

For example, on my e bike, I adjusted the setback backwards by merely 7mm or so and lower the stem roughly the same amount (quill stem) and was shocked to see how drastically improved the bike felt when tackling turns.
Moisture is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 08:11 AM
  #60  
razorjack
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
razorjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 89

Bikes: Trans Sentinel, Spesh Tarmac

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by Moisture
80, 90, 100, even up to 120 are all "normal' stem lengths for a road bike. They are designed around this type of length. Most of the time, going significantly shorter than what designed, like 70 or less may not be such a good idea. However, unless you are in really excellent physical condition I wager its better to err slightly on the short side for better comfort if anything. Road bikes are designed for this leaning forward posture; mostly by incorporating a really short chainstay to achieve ideal balance on the road by counteracting the forward biased weight over the drops while speeding up handling towards the rear of the bike.

if I understand correctly, reach on a road bike versus a mtb doesn't seem all that different. Based on what I see, a longer top tube is really critical for off road riding. I feel too scrunched up on a road bike tackling any off road stuff.

most road bikes I see in my size have a 590mm top tube, about 390or 400mm reach, a ~100mm stem and ~80mm drop reach. In contrast, typical xc bike would be somewhere between 460-480mm for the reach(sometimes less) , roughly 650mm top tube, and a stem that is anywhere from 30-100mm. On average, this puts you in a riding position not radically different, at least in terms of how stretched out you are, between the two genres of bikes. So my question is... what's different?
just few years back, XC bikes had reach like 410-430mm for Large frames (people ~180cm), and long stems - even now in XC races they use >100mm stems, that's why i wouldn't consider XC as a MTB so much, but more like extreme version of road/gravel bike (looking at geo).
My MTB has reach 475mm, which 3y ago was A LOT for a bike (size L), now is a 'standard', stem 40mm, effective TT is about 613mm (but remember about 40mm stem and STa=~77*)
it gives comfy position on climbs, and long reach and long wheelbase=1263mm gives steady handling at speed.126312126312631263613
razorjack is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 09:12 AM
  #61  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
Originally Posted by Moisture
80, 90, 100, even up to 120 are all "normal' stem lengths for a road bike.
But if you scan the pro peloton, they all have Much longer stems ... so they can have smaller, stiffer, lighter frames. Just because a lot of bikes have stems of a standard length doesn't mean those are the "right" lengths ... I mean, most bikes sold are 54-, 56- , or 58-cm frames .....
Maelochs is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 09:16 AM
  #62  
Maelochs
Senior Member
 
Maelochs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 15,453

Bikes: 2015 Workswell 066, 2017 Workswell 093, 2014 Dawes Sheila, 1983 Cannondale 500, 1984 Raleigh Olympian, 2007 Cannondale Rize 4, 2017 Fuji Sportif 1 LE

Mentioned: 144 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 7628 Post(s)
Liked 3,453 Times in 1,823 Posts
As for off-road, I don't see a lot of guys on Freeride bikes going long and low ....

As was said far above, the only worthwhile test of bike fit is miles. On- or off-road, if you can ride it the way you want, it fits.

If your body tells you it doesn't fit, you can choose to adapt to pain or adapt your bike .... still your choice.

I'd waste more time typing but I need to go for a ride before it rains .... or I will have to take my rain bike, which has a totally different set-up than all my other bikes and also fits perfectly.
Maelochs is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 12:36 PM
  #63  
razorjack
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
razorjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 89

Bikes: Trans Sentinel, Spesh Tarmac

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
and here on Medium bikes
TCR M, and Orbea Orca 53

razorjack is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 10:44 PM
  #64  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,340

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 502 Post(s)
Liked 623 Times in 425 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski
...Try standing with your backside up against a wall and see how far you can bend forward from your waist. Now take a step forward and try again. Once your backside is free to move rearward you can bend forward much further. So moving you saddle back relative to your feet might actually make reach easier. Slightly counter-intuitive but the wall exercise demonstrates the effect quite well.
I like this a lot !
A great illustrative example of all that goes into C of G and balance.
Thx
Yuri
cyclezen is offline  
Old 09-18-21, 11:38 PM
  #65  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,340

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 502 Post(s)
Liked 623 Times in 425 Posts
Originally Posted by razorjack
and here on Medium bikes
TCR M, and Orbea Orca 53

not sure what you really want... work with current bike or buy another...
now you're on smaller bikes with lower profiles, taking you away from what you state as wanting a more upright position, less stretch (because you can't) ...
you have been stating things which go against each other ... here you're first post, with key statements Bolded.
Quote:
I had a bikefitting session recently, BF concluded that frontend is too low - should be 5cm lower than saddle optimally, however before I had it 6-7cm lower and i felt fine (definietely more aero, but maybe that's why i don't like to ride on flat? )
and distance between saddle and handlebar ~51.5cm, now it's 52.

I have Spesh Tarmac 56, seatpost without setback (i don't like it, as it puts me waaay too back, comparing to MTB position, with seatpost angles 76-78*), saddle moved forward, stem 90mm - it's really nice crispy feeling, good when i ride slowly and when i do 60-80km/h. however maybe my front wheel is unweighted sometimes? during cornering i try to weight it more (by leaning forward a bit).
I'm 181cm with 86.5cm inside leg, saddle height 76cm (from BB to top surface), cranks 170, and 3cm spacers under my stem.
BikeFitter recommendation is 56 endurance frame (higher and maybe a bit shorter).

However when I tried Giant Defy M/L in a shop, feeling was completely opposite of course, it was because of seatpost with 20mm setback and saddle in central position.
However steering was very slow and 'boring', was it because of head angle? (defy 72.5 vs 73.5) or mainly because of stem=110mm ? (handlebar was very similar, maybe 42cm instead of mine 44)
on a paper, both bikes have similar length defy: TTh=560mm vs Tarmac TTh=565mm.

Any downsides of putting shorter stem? from 110 to 90mm ? other than i mentioned, and also the feeling with steering response is great
or maybe I should look for smaller endurance frame with even higher stack? i see that Roubaix 54 has stack as high as Defy M/L and still 2cm higher than Tarmac 56"
end Quote
So you say being lower is great, endurance is boring, (a roubaix will not be as 'responsive' as the Tarmac.
M or L doesn't mean anything... do you wear M or L shoes ?
you've gotten a bunch of ideas, point and counterpoint on stem length. Yes a shorter stem will seem more 'repsonsive' - there is a fine line (personal to each rider) of what is responsive or overly twitichy - you rmeasure.
But the overwhelming comments are also that you saddle is poorly positioned.
And if you do reposition the saddle rearward, you'll likely also need to lower it a bit. And BTW, the sizeable nose down of the saddle is part of the poor position also. There are a lot of possible causes why you now have the nose down this much. When the best saddle position is determined, you'll likely not have near as much as current nose down.

The 56 tarmac is a good size for your body Dims, with good range of adjustment. Going to the smaller bikes you show would just make finding a comfortable position even more difficult.
Aero - when you want to be in the drops. Can you ride in the drops now? (rhetorical) Hoods and top are good for a more 'comfort' position.
At this point I think the best tact is to learn by doing, experiment per your ideas, and see how it works out.
Ride On
Yuri
cyclezen is offline  
Old 09-19-21, 06:50 AM
  #66  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,176
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,714 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen
I like this a lot !
A great illustrative example of all that goes into C of G and balance.
Thx
Yuri
Exactly! So imagine our man on those two bikes pictured above sliding his saddle way forward. He would then have no choice but to sit more upright because of restricted flex at his waist. His effective reach to the bars would be more or less the same despite shortening the cockpit.

Another way of looking at it is that sitting on a bike is like doing a partial squat. The lower you squat/sit, the further back your bum has to go to maintain balance as your upper body bends forward.

It also explains why reach from BB centre to bars is more important than effective top tube length. Moving your saddle back or forth doesn’t really affect your physical reach very much, only your balance relative to the BB. So that’s why I favour the balance method in setting my saddle fore-aft position. Too far forward loads up your hands and too far rearward makes you bend too much at the waist.

To the OP: Don’t fall into the trap of moving your seat forward in an attempt to shorten your reach. It doesn’t work because your feet are still in the same place and so all you are doing is restricting how much you can bend forward at the waist.

Last edited by PeteHski; 09-19-21 at 07:32 AM.
PeteHski is online now  
Old 09-19-21, 07:59 AM
  #67  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,213

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
The OP has a saddle height that's 3cm greater than mine and a that height is 5cm greater. When I look for a frame, I want a stack close to 525mm and a reach around 375mm. I then use a 100-110mm stem with a -17 angle and no spacers to get my desired 10cm saddle to bar drop.

For the OP, a stack around 555mm should be plenty, since 20mm of spacer and a -6 stem would raise the bars by about 4cm .and produce a 6cm saddle to bar drop. A 56cm Tarmac would have the 555mm stack, but the reach is 398mm, which is on the long side, as are all tarmac frames. My size would be a 52, with a 383mm reach - the same as my previous Colnago. I'd be using 100mm stem and 80mm bar reach.

An atheos model has 10mm more stack and 3mm less reach.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 09-19-21, 09:22 AM
  #68  
Moisture
Drip, Drip.
 
Moisture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Location: Southern Ontario
Posts: 1,575

Bikes: Trek Verve E bike, Felt Doctrine 4 XC, Opus Horizon Apex 1

Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1034 Post(s)
Liked 193 Times in 163 Posts
398mm reach for a size 56 is rather long. It seems to cause an awkward riding position as the top tube is a more normal length (565?)

Most XL road bikes are no more than 400mm.

Its an interesting point of reference, because a 90's GT XC hardtail in size XL has a top tube length of 595mm (which is like a size small in today's xc geometry) but the reach i measured at a whopping 480mm or so, which is on the high end even by today's standards. Can you imagine what sort of position this puts you in? You are like leaning over the bike, and sitting upright at the same time.
Moisture is offline  
Old 09-19-21, 01:34 PM
  #69  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,213

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
All of the specialized frames are a bit long on reach, but so are Colnago and others. Usually it means a 10mm shorter stem. I had to use a 100mm stem instead of a 110mm on my last Colnago frames.

A bigger issue might be the combination of bar reach and the typical long reach Shimano brake hoods. Not a fan of integrated bars.

Last edited by DaveSSS; 09-19-21 at 01:42 PM.
DaveSSS is offline  
Old 09-19-21, 02:54 PM
  #70  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,176
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,714 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by DaveSSS
All of the specialized frames are a bit long on reach, but so are Colnago and others. Usually it means a 10mm shorter stem. I had to use a 100mm stem instead of a 110mm on my last Colnago frames.

A bigger issue might be the combination of bar reach and the typical long reach Shimano brake hoods. Not a fan of integrated bars.
Yeah, I had noticed that too regarding Specialized road frames having long reach. For example an Aethos is 12 mm longer in reach than my Defy in the same frame size. But you really have to take into account stem length, bar and hood reach to get to the total effective reach. That can take a bit of digging when comparing different bikes for reach.
PeteHski is online now  
Old 09-19-21, 03:31 PM
  #71  
Branko D
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 786
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 338 Post(s)
Liked 408 Times in 252 Posts
Outright race bikes, especially and particularly the aero race bikes (and Specialized has kind of deprioritized the Venge, offering it as a frameset only, in favour of making the Tarmac their one race bike), have longer reach and lower stack than more general purpose models and much more so than endurance road bikes.

The Specialized Tarmac with 395mm / 565mm in size 56 actually that's the old model, new is 398/555 and it's touted as faster and a replacement for the Venge is completely normal when compared to other bikes designed with a similar purpose; the Canyon Aeroad in size M has a 393mm reach / 560mm stack, Giant Propel in their ML has 398mm / 562mm stack, Orbea Orca Aero in 55cm has 391mm / 567 mm, Focus Izalco Max 390 mm / 544 mm (or next size up, 400mm/554mm, almost identical to Tarmac SL7), 391 / 563 for Trek Madone in size 56...

Specialized is not unique. For this sort of bike, as long and low as the rider is comfortable is the idea, because it is simply faster.

It’s not even a little faster, btw, it is a fair bit faster. Recently I tried to ride a 320km (double century) with an idea that I'd attempt it in under ten hours, if possible. It ignominiously ended with a torn sidewall and the last 100km rode home in a bus, but the first 40K bit which two years prior took me 233W to go at 32.5 km/hr, this time, similar time of year and temperature and with similar weather and similar luck with the few traffic lights on the way, took me only 201W for 32.4 km/hr. That's a significant saving - there's just no way in hell I can do 230W for 10 hours, but 200W for 10 hours seems within the realm of possibility.

What did I change? Removed the 2cm of spacers and replacing a -6 degree 110mm stem with a - 17 degree 120mm stem , went with a narrower handlebar, a better quality trisuit, and a 45mm deep aero wheelset instead of the 35mm OEM alloy set. The long and low position on the bike has a big impact on speed, if you can get comfortable in it. That's why the bikes made for racing are designed to accommodate it.

​​​​​​Btw, Aethos is designed to have same geometry as old Tarmac, it's not an endurance geometry bike.

Last edited by Branko D; 09-19-21 at 03:37 PM.
Branko D is offline  
Old 09-19-21, 05:17 PM
  #72  
razorjack
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
razorjack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 89

Bikes: Trans Sentinel, Spesh Tarmac

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 53 Post(s)
Liked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen
now you're on smaller bikes with lower profiles, taking you away from what you state as wanting a more upright position, less stretch (because you can't) ...
you have been stating things which go against each other ... here you're first post, with key statements Bolded.
not really...
smaller bike frame - the one i've checked and measured, had handlebar on similar height as mine bike, but they were shorter ! which means my hands were closer and my torso was higher.

Originally Posted by cyclezen
M or L doesn't mean anything... do you wear M or L shoes ?
in this situation M means ~53-54, L=56 (depends on a brand of course)
Originally Posted by cyclezen
you've gotten a bunch of ideas, point and counterpoint on stem length. Yes a shorter stem will seem more 'repsonsive' - there is a fine line (personal to each rider) of what is responsive or overly twitichy - you rmeasure.
But the overwhelming comments are also that you saddle is poorly positioned.
And if you do reposition the saddle rearward, you'll likely also need to lower it a bit. And BTW, the sizeable nose down of the saddle is part of the poor position also. There are a lot of possible causes why you now have the nose down this much. When the best saddle position is determined, you'll likely not have near as much as current nose down.

The 56 tarmac is a good size for your body Dims, with good range of adjustment. Going to the smaller bikes you show would just make finding a comfortable position even more difficult.
Aero - when you want to be in the drops. Can you ride in the drops now? (rhetorical) Hoods and top are good for a more 'comfort' position.
At this point I think the best tact is to learn by doing, experiment per your ideas, and see how it works out.
i did a ride today with saddle 15mm more rearward - my kneecap was above axle (with crank arms horizontal), and i've put 100mm stem. for first 90-100km it was fine.
last bigger climb (about 600m up at 90%FTP) was fine, however later we had flat/a bit down road and I pedal while being on drops for 5 mins (at 85%FTP), and after that i started to feel my right knee, outside below kneecap - maybe it's a coincidence, maybe not (but few weeks ago i did 3000m and 120km and i felt completely fine after, and ready for more, but now, i can feel pain in my knee when i walk, and no biking for next few days)
last 15-20km i had to go very carefully, with minimum power, most climbs i had to do standing (as there was no pain at this position). - total 135km, 2500m.

First thing i'll do is to return to my previous very forward saddle position.... i'll return to my previous settings and slowly try to identify problem...
yes, it's against all DIY bikefitting tutorials from internet, but do they take into account my flexibility? my hamstrings or hipflexors, hip rotation ? i doubt...
the same with saddle tilt - i'm still experimenting, but again, my hip rotation can affect that. (i try to keep middle part of of the saddle flat)
my bikefitter told me that we set saddle like that, to maximise my power. maybe he knows something more ....

Last edited by razorjack; 09-19-21 at 05:45 PM.
razorjack is offline  
Old 09-19-21, 05:26 PM
  #73  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,176
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,714 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by Branko D

​​​​​​Btw, Aethos is designed to have same geometry as old Tarmac, it's not an endurance geometry bike.
Yeah I picked on the Aethos because it is supposedly not a race bike and yet it has race geometry. But then again not all manufacturers agree on what race geometry should actually be. Take the Cannondale Supersix Evo for example. It is very much a race bike, but the reach is relatively short, only 5 mm longer than my Defy endurance bike. So does that make it slower than a Tarmac? I doubt it.
PeteHski is online now  
Old 09-19-21, 05:37 PM
  #74  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 8,176
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4274 Post(s)
Liked 4,714 Times in 2,911 Posts
Originally Posted by razorjack
i did a ride today with saddle 15mm more rearward - my kneecap was above axle (with crank arms horizontal), and i've put 100mm stem. for first 90-100km it was fine.
last bigger climb (about 600m up at 90%FTP) was fine, however later we had flat/a bit down road and I pedal while being on drops for 5 mins (at 85%FTP), and after that i started to feel my right knee, outside below kneecap
I guess nobody told you that whenever you make a significant change to your riding position you should take it easy for at least a few rides while your body acclimatises to the different loading. A bit like when doing a new exercise for the first time. It sounds like you might have overdone it. Changing back will probably feel better simply because that's how your body has been used to riding for much longer. Changes take time and lots of patience.
PeteHski is online now  
Old 09-19-21, 07:06 PM
  #75  
DaveSSS 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Loveland, CO
Posts: 7,213

Bikes: Cinelli superstar disc, two Yoeleo R12

Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1090 Post(s)
Liked 554 Times in 443 Posts
Never expect a change to magically feel great after one ride. I changed from 170mm cranks to 175mm. It took me about 1000km with a few tweaks to feel comfortable, but they're working great for me now.
DaveSSS is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.