razorjack

thanks for insights ! really apprieciate that.
It's not like I want to be more upright, no, i feel i'm to stretched, I'm wondering how it would be with shorter frame but a bit more bend elbows, so head height would stay the same.

I undestand your mention about MTB and i guess it could be 'muscle memory' (from last 5-7 years), I'll try to experiment with handlebar (easy to adjust) on shorter rides

your saddle is really way to far forward for an effective road position
What do you mean 'effective'? what's wrong ? you mean for muscles? but could it be that I have a bit different muscle profile than 'roadie' coz I was riding in such position for many years? (real question)
BF stated that saddle top should be 76.2cm from BB, and it was almost like this (originally 76.8), and saddle should be even 1cm more forward ! but again, not according to some ancient knowledge, but more to my feeling and my body (I'll ask him why exactly)
I had 90mm stem for 6 months, today i've tried 100. What's wrong with 90 ? especially if thanks to that i can move my saddle back ?
yes of course i try to keep my elbows bent to absorb bumps, but i can't do it in a comfortable way, if my handlebar is too far (other option is to keep it closer, would shorter the frame, and even if handlebar is a bit lower, I'd feel better (even with more weight on my hands))
about longer times, in last few weeks i was able to do trip >3000m elevation on 120km course in 7h30m (6h moving time) and I felt ok during/after - i know, at the end it means I'm fine on my bike

Another interesting thing, maybe connected with position on a bike, I really like climbs and i can do 4.36W/kg for 5 mins or 4.03W/kg in 10mins. but no way i can do that on a flat road....i think the best is like 3.5W/kg in 3m30s...
Is it because of position? or because i like climbs? (yes, i like them, that's why i can push myself, but on a flat I don't feel so engaged)

razorjack

maybe on a pic looks like a lot of space, but it doesn't mean i feel comfortable with closing that space even more... If you see that my elbows are too straight, it's just because i don't feel like i can bent more for longer time. and i don't think it's about core strength, as I do some core excercises for MTB. and i didn't feel any discomfort with my wrists/hands even after 6-7h rides.
Now I started more stretching (hamstrings and calves), maybe after a month we can see some difference ?

razorjack

I keep them on a left probably because on the back there is more space (no mech), just realise that my front is on right... hm... maybe i was mounting my wheel when the bike was upright?
With thru-axles you don't have a choice, frame/fork's thread is only on one side

cyclezen

OK, so it'd be best not to get too deep into a tome covering everything. But there are salient things/points - and BTW, your photo does tell a lot...
...and YOU posed the question, I'm telling what my experience tells me - You, ultimately decide what works for you, and where you end up.
...and, what we're discussing - getting to a good road position - can be done in 'steps', with aim to an eventual result (which also changes as you and your riding changes) - but best not to go backwards... 90 stem...
1st, you are not even close to 'stretched', it may feel that way to you, but that's prolly because of your extensive time in the 'position' you have on your mtb.
'effective road' - muscle development different because of your longterm position on mtb ??? possibly, but I can't tell nor know that...
Also, if you ride both mtb and road, your development will become more versatile, over time.
'effective' - here's a very common graphic of muscle engagement in a road position - I believe there has been no rebuttal of this in the 30+ years it's been accepted and around.

Pedal stroke Muscle engagement - road position
So, this from a seated position, quads drive early in the stroke at 12ish to just past 3ish, Glutes provide a large part of the drive from just past 12 to almost 6... there is a little drive from the upstroke, but the downstroke is the major part. IF you're forward (without a major raising of the seat) you can't effectively engage the quads at this point, it happens later, 1-ish...
Glutes will still engage and drive until 5, so you've effectively lost most of the initial power from 11 ish to almost 1 ish... (Time Trail is diff., this is road...)
simplified... The hip angle figures into this, when in a good road position. The graphics DOESN'T show what the relative power percentages are for muscle contribution, but the Glutes are the heavy lifters here, followed initial by the quads and also the hip area. AGAIN, this is not about TT position. Body anomalies aside...
FORWARD and UPRIGHT blocks engagement before 1 O-clock. But since we, most 1st world humans, are trained from very early on to 'walk' up steps, stairs, slopes upright - that's the comfort zone. What do we do when the slope gets steeper ? We bend forward to walk up...
Your power numbers are very good - good for you ! (seriously...) But power isn;t the only consideration. Road cycling is often a long time event,thing. So sustainability is important and especially Efficiency. Efficiency determines sustainability, repeatability, and recovery. Over time, your overall road numbers should improve with a good road position - but not a guarantee, just probability.
Bar height - I'm not gonna go there... Your bar/stem seems already set to max height, without having a rising stem. So, 'run what you brung' works here...
so 'position' and 'posture'... you in your pic vs the idealized roadie... I have lotsa pics on my desktop puter, but few on this laptop, so I did some searchinig...
Here's a good pic I 'rescued' - she's on drops, so if she were on the tops, she'd be in a very comfy neutral cruising position, with more bend in the elbows. The numbers ? not mine, par of pic...

roadie position, posture
As it happens, the article/page from which I go this pic, covers the same points I had in my earlier posts, on position and posture, in a good way, worth the read.
PROPER BODY POSITION ON A ROAD BIKE

If you were to slide your seat back 1-2 cm, I think you wouldn't even 'notice' - because your butt is already hanging off the back of the seat a fair amount.
But, with all this, you decide what is good for you, and how much you're willing to try/adapt/change. I'm just offering...

yes and yes, I'm quirky in many ways... yes, thru-axles are predetermined... LOL! I have a weird sense of humor... LOL !
Ride On
Yuri - over and out (riding...)

Moisture

First off, due to your fairly extreme proportions, I understand that bike fit is not easy for you. It is totally possible though. I can understand why you have your seat all the way forward.

Like I've said, you are riding like this to compensate for the length of that stem. If you use a shorter length stem, you will be able to comfortably set the saddle back to a normal position.

A size 56 might fit your torso well, but the long legs can throw that off with the step handlebar drop. Try a shorter stem and then see where you'll want your handlebar height to be at.

By 'balance,' i mean, your positioning over the bottom bracket, your centre of gravity, foot placement and your consequent balance on the bike, etc etc foot placement is always going to be number one when it comes to bike fit next wpukd be saddle position (as this will impact the former)

I've never heard of anybody with a longer than average inseam, such as you or myself prefer sticking to standard crank arm lengths (designed for average length inseam...) after actually trying a custom length. Maybe it doesn't work for everyone. But how would you know from doing some research on the internet? Like I've mentioned, you don't have any personal experience or know anyone who deal with this aspect of frame fit.

I digress. Get your saddle and stem issue sorted out, and you will enjoy your bike much more. Then maybe you can try some cranks which actually fit you and really decide what works for you.

Maelochs

I have very long limbs and a very short torso---finding a good fit always goes against what most people suggest, because most people don't know me. So i can understand that there are things work for you which wouldn't for others.

At the same time, I do have a human body.

I like 175 mm cranks but I can ride shorter .... I tend to spin faster with shorter cranks, and also give up a little leverage, so I put out a little less power per stroke. So long as you put out enough power to keep yourself light in the saddle I don't see where that would be a problem.

I use stems of various lengths (not all my bikes are set up exactly the same--on my sportish bike I reach a little more but I tend to ride shorter distances and (try for) higher speeds. On my work bike I sit up pretty tall because I am often riding longer, or hauling loads, or just wanting a more comfortable ride. The idea that a certain length of stem has some magical characteristic is a little silly---stem angle, number of spacers, and bar reach are also part of the equation. The solution to the equation is whatever lets you ride comfortably for as long as you want to ride.

As @cyclezen mentions, Efficiency is a big part of road riding. I used to ride MTB a bunch, and I found that MTB was more about sharp burst of power to clear obstacles and climb steep parts of hills, then quick rests of lower output, then more sharp bursts. Also on an MTB I am in and out of the saddle constantly, using my weight to maneuver the bike and increase traction wherever I need it.

Road riding is more about sustained effort, and I tend to move my body much less. I might stand just to restore circulation, or on a hard climb, but usually I am in the saddle and just leaning a little. Throwing the bike around as I would off-road gains nothing on the road. Steadily spinning the pedals at the rate which makes best use of my lungs, heart, and legs is what nets m gains. For this reason fitting myself to a road bike is a lot more important.

The idea that roadies are always following silly fads and MTB riders have it all figured out .... well, let's let that one go, eh?

I can say this---even my MTB is set up the same with regards to where I sit on the saddle and where I connect to the pedals. The saddle is a tiny bit lower so I can mover around over the bike more easily, but otherwise on exactly the same line because I only have one body---it doesn't change base don which bike ii ride--and there is only one position in which it delivers the most power most comfortable.

I'd say, go out and ride. if you are doing a couple or a few hours in complete comfort, you have nailed the fit. if different muscles or joints start hurting .... don't be afraid to make changes. it all comes down to enjoying the ride, and if it i working for you, go with it.

But seriously .... how an a fitter say a certain drop is "optimal," even for a specific rider? "Optimal" is what that rider finds comfortable. The "right" drop is where you can ride all day comfortably. The fact that this guy thinks there is some "optimal" drop makes me think he has some "perfect fit" image in his head and is forcing it on riders. Don't trust him, don't trust us, and don't trust habit. Go out and ride and see what your body says.

Branko D

In the end, the road doesn't lie; if you can ride a century without pains, aches or numbness the fit is probably in the ballpark of fine. Especially if you can use all the positions on the bike comfortably enough (so drops and hoods and tops). Things can always be tweaked, sure.

There are no hard and fast rules for saddle forward-aft position, btw (well, there are UCI rules on the subject*, actually, which shape the way road bikes are designed, but they're not related to biomechanics); triathletes ride with saddles pretty far forward all the time. It does place more weight on the hands, though, but if you're in aerobars that spreads it out.

I adjusted saddle fore-aft based on the balance method, which basically involves putting the bike on a trainer, pedalling moderately and then taking both your hands off the bars and seeing what happens. If you start far forward, when you do that you find it hard not to slide forward when you get your hands off the bars, as you move it back at one point the balance is much improved, and that's where I set it - it's roughly somewhere in the middle of the adjustment range on my bike, which is always a good sign.

If you want to experiment, remember that if you move the saddle rearward you need to move it down at the same time. Just mark where you started with so you can go back if you don't like it.

Ideally, handlebar height and reach is adjusted after this, and is a matter of choosing something in the range of what's comfortable for you (which is also changeable if you work on flexibility / core strength) - if you want to be more aerodynamic, then go as low, long and narrow as is comfortable, if it doesn't matter much to you, a slight bit higher and shorter might be a bit more comfortable on the long haul.

Ditching a race geometry bike in favour of an endurance geometry bike if you're comfortable... I don't know - I wouldn't.


*Basically, saddle that far forward is banned by the UCI. Don't enroll in any professional races

razorjack

I'll experiment a bit and try to move my saddle back, but i'm asking again, what's wrong with 90mm stem? or even 80mm?
(i'm not comparing it to MTB of course, where i run 40mm stem with handle bar rolled a bit back)
My hamstrings are really tight, if i move myself more back, i'll close hip angle even more - not comfortable (yes, maybe better aero or better looking pose)
interesting reading: https://coachendurancesports.com/bik...nt-is-useless/



well...we all know all these sexy ppl on bikes... but it doesn't mean it's achievable by a mere mortal (not by me ATM )

Also that's why I consider one size smaller bike (like 54), bike will be shorter, and i could use stock 100-110mm stem.

razorjack

Yes, i did a research (internet research) about crank arm length, there is a lot of articles from last 5-10y, and consensus is that there is no connection leg length/body height - crank arm length. (unless you go for extreme lengths like <150mm or >200mm).
Power in general is the same, with shorter crankarms you just spin faster. Other PROs:
-you can lower your front - more aero
-you can pedal more while cornering (let's say this is valid for crit racers).

this is just first example https://www.cyclist.co.uk/in-depth/3...2-crank-length

razorjack

well... he didn't take this numbers out of thin air i guess, but from measuring my body, checking my flexibility, and later seeing me on a bike (arms bend, back bend, hip rotation etc.).
and then he look at his magical excel table and found 5cm - joking here of course
interesting reading https://coachendurancesports.com/bik...nt-is-useless/

Maelochs

Meh. Unless you have some severe injury, you Should make the bike adapt to the body. The idea that the bike should be in some certain shape and the body must be adjusted .... Yeah. Good luck. Some people are naturally flexible, some are naturally diligent about stretching, some just want to get on a bike and ride, some are injured, some have actual deformities ..... If a fitter told me, "The bike will be really uncomfortable to ride, but it is your fault. I will set it up like this, and you go get flexible .... " I would refuse payment.

The article actually states that every body is different .... and then tries to prescribe changing the body. So ..... I should somehow gain flexibility in my hips, at my age, that I didn't have when I was doing yoga and half this age. My repeatedly broken or separated or bashed and battered shoulders should suddenly become limber and loose .... or else I should ride in pain, as penance for not being good enough to fit on the bike as is. Bull droppings.

I should adjust the bike to fit However my body works. And in fact, one of the best ways to change my body---is to ride. it is a form of exercise I enjoy and if it hurts to do, I wouldn't do it.

Also ... the guy "decided" that "optimal" drop was whatever? I thought every body was different? What if we have different levels of flexibility in our lower backs, shoulders, elbows, wrists? Who cares, it is all based on hips? Ridiculous.

Further---There is no "Optimal" bike fit even for an individual. because people are constantly changing. If I have a lazy winter, or after recovering form illness or injury, I need a completely different set-up than I do after a strong several months of frequent cycling. And every week along the way, I need different fittings.

A pro fitter can help a racer who already has a pretty dialed-in position make marginal gains---adding a few spacers under cleats or tweaking cleat angles half-a-degree, or making micro-adjustments elsewhere---but if a cyclist is not in touch with his or her own body enough to feel what works, and/or is unwilling to try adjustments to see if stuff works .... and sometimes it is immediate while sometimes it takes a little while .... if a cyclist cannot tell what works, what works less well, and what works better ..... a fitter cannot help. (By the way, a lot of the guys I used to ride with---"serious" cyclists who really liked to push---went to see a fitter, and pretty much all of them liked the results (not all as I recall.) But that fitter offered a free refit after several weeks because he knew that riders would slightly change their postures when faced with slightly changed bikes.--That is a fitter who knew his stuff, IMO.)

It is just like taking a test ride. I can ride most bikes comfortably for a few minutes .... but after an hour or so I can tell you what needs to change. Sometimes it takes a few minutes after a ride, and my left knee will tell me if the seat needs adjusting. Sometimes the first hour is fine, but 15 minutes into the second hour my neck and shoulders start really hurting (this is stuff which has happened, not stuff I am making up.) And sometime I have ridden badly set-up bikes and thought nothing was wrong but me .... because I Thought the set-up was right. But when I finally decided to experiment, I was glad.

As I and a couple others have suggested---the road will let you know. Do some long rides and see where you hurt, and try to figure if it is set-up or fitness.

(By the way, I know the difference. My lower back is always the first place I feel the worst pain .... because I have a 100-lb cannonball pulling it out of shape while I ride. That is not a set-up issue, not a hip-flexibility issue---it is that my back, even though I exercise it, was never designed to support such a weight and certainly not while sitting at such an angle. Knee pain (joint pain,) is rarely from muscular weakness unless I really overcook it, pushing way too long and too hard and not taking care of my joints .... which I don't do any more. Minor shoulder, neck and hand discomfort at the end of a long ride is due to compensating for weak legs and the weak lower back---because I have already adjusted my reach and stack to fit my body, because of more severe pains from having the bars too far away and too low. The pain is different, and I can tell.)

So again .... listen to your body, and think really carefully about all the variables, and I am sure you will continually tweak your set-up until it matches you really well .... and will thereafter keep tweaking it as you change.

Smiles per mile is the only metric I care about.

DaveSSS 

FWIW, my height to inseam ratio is nearly identical to yours. There is absolutely no reason for your saddle to be shoved forward like that. Any fitter who would do that isn't real sharp. Moving the saddle forward puts more weight on your hands and the compensation for that is raising the bars up.

Moisture

But you haven't tried different lengths yourself and came to your own conclusion. This means whatever research you've done is totally irrelevant.

I think that 80 or 90mm stem might still be too long considering where your saddle setback is supposed to be.

try looking hamstring flexibility excersises on YouTube.

razorjack

yep, exactly, so that's why i won't stretch my body even more, by mounting longer stem or by removing spacers - just to achieve 'perfect looking' roadie position, if it's not comfortable for me.

as i said, on my dimensions and my flexibility, and his experience, right? i can only guess


that's how i found my position, so setting were bad, some better, some of them i could feel right after first climb, some after 2h.

razorjack

no i didn't and i won't, too expensive experiments, and also I KNOW that with longer crank arms, my knees will go higher....

yep, i have even spare 80mm stem at home, i'll try it too (but then, definitely shorter frame would be good)
sure I know how to stretch hamstrings and I do that (but i've just gently started few months ago), but it'll take months anyway.... we'll see...

razorjack

but it also depends on your hamstrings, right? i'll try slowly to move it back, and we'll see... however it's not comfortable position.... maybe with 80-90mm stem....

Moisture

Considering *roughly* where your saddle is supposed to be, you'd probably want a stem that's about 60 or 70mm long. Does that sound accurate?

You can also try mounting it upside down (eg. +7° rise instead of -7° drop) to get the handle bars a little bit higher. You should be able to get away with your 80mm stem by doing this, at least for now.

Why don't you try to move that saddle about 2cm back, install the 80mm stem, then update us with the results and maybe post a pic?

Branko D

No.


Please stop giving fitting advice on road bikes.

razorjack

i'll do a ride like this tomorrow

Maelochs

I have a 55- or 60-mm stem on my vintage Cannondale and it rides quite well, thank you. I am not sure what people think will happen if a person puts s shorter stem on a bike, but science says .... the wheel will turn when the bars do.

Moisture

No thank you, ill contribute however I like. I didn't ask you for your opinion.

DaveSSS 

If the saddle is moved back, then it needs to come down a little too. I always make sure that I can drop my heel around 2cm below horizontal, with my leg fully extended. I pedal at least 5 degrees heels up, so I have adequate bend at the knee. Saddle setback should have nothing to do with hamstrings. You can move the
saddle back 20mm and then down to have the same leg extension.

I'd also check your wingspan. Mine's about 2 inches greater than my height. The short stem and saddle pushed forward make no sense to me.

FWIW, my height is 168cm and cycling inseam 83cm, so I have long legs for my height. I've owned many bikes and never used a stem shorter than 100mm and always use a 25-32mm setback post. I have a 32mm on one bike and the saddle is centered on it.

Maelochs

Well, I am American so I cannot be measured in metric units, but i am about as tall as the OP. I like 25 mm of setback and often have the saddle back a bit .... but I also have really long feet. I also have really long arms ... but I tend to use a 90mm stem with a steep upsweep. Because I have a short torso, and because I don't want to reach very far forward .... the shortish stem is not an issue. I have one bike with a 100-mm stem (six degrees, I think) and it doesn't handle any better or worse ..... head-tube angle and rake, and chain stay length, seem to affect handling a Lot more.

But, as has been said over and over---Every single one of us has a different body. Each of has a whole bunch of joints, and each joint works differently on each of us. Each of us has a different comfort zone.

What works for me doesn't necessarily--probably won't---work for anyone ese. Let's give the guy a few weeks to ride some miles and see what he says.

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... so why go through this? Well, many years back , when I was first starting to 'ride' to get into 'racing', there were VERY FEW and VERY LIMITED resources to learn the sport. A very few books in other languages than English, One magazine one tabloid rag and other riders/racers (many of whom were very poor or uncommunicative sources) and a bunch of old immigrant 'ex-racers' (claimed...), in Central Park, NYC, from various countries/languages. They helped me a lot ! Much of what they conveyed helped, some of what they held dear didn;t really work out or was just old convention which had little basis.
I try to be that 'Old Guy'.... pass on a bit of what I know, in a context which might apply...
Big Difference is that I try to keep up and evaluate current and new findings - I am a 'student' of everything I do, always and ongoing... Not everything I espouse may hold water for everyone/others. but it has some support under it...
You started the thread and asked, gave some decent info.
I could, like many others say - 'do it your way' done...
I wouldn;t do that cause it's a total waste...
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 !
"Idealized Position' is what works and has worked for Tens of Thousands of performance cyclists for many, many decades.
I'm not espousing anything un-proven, nothing earth-shattering new. Just pointing out where you might look to getting more/better out of yourself.
You're doing really well already - 120km (72 mi), 6 hrs, 3000m (almost 10K ft...) is quite good, impressive. I think there's more in you.
Merckx - same proportions as you, slightly shorter, same with many others, Thevenet, long list.
check their positions/postures - none have short stems, none have 'forward saddles' - check Filippo Gana, Wout vanAert, even small guys like Roglic..., Carapaz.

Merckx & Ocana, TDF 1971

Ocana, Thevenet and Peleton to Meribel TDF 1973

One last suggestion, make only ONE change at a time - otherwise you'll never be able to determine which changes have effected you in whatever way.
Ride a 'change' for a few days/mulitple rides and terrain, before making another change.
Your easiest change is - Saddle Position - leave the stem for now... move saddle back 2 cm, ride for a while, get accustomed... continue the rearward advance in stages, giving each change at least 5-7 days... until you get to 6.5 cm saddle nose from plumb line drop to center BB... (make sure bike is level !!!) Then play with the stem, if you must.)

To the poster who told another to 'stop posting bike fit comments' - wrong! so wrong! that's the beauty and curse of BF and any forum. You are welcome to ignore, argue or deride. The post/comment is 'The Point' of all this...
And 'Doing it your own way', the way you've always done it' - is a sure path to never getting any further than your own nose.
Thx
Ride ON !
Yuri

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.