calamarichris

So I've spent years and visits to two different bike fitters arriving at my current position and it works well for me on my other bikesm (see pic at bottom).
But this Lemond I've recently built up has a much more laid back seat tube.



When I set this Lemond (with the leaned-back seat angle) up with my ideal seat height & set-back measurements, the seat looks a little odd being slammed that far forward. If I'm shoving the seat forward like this, am I short-circuiting the benefits & advantages of the Lemond seat tube angle?

How would you handle this?

~Stick with the ideal position and get used to the odd look? (Maybe a saddle bag to break up the odd-looking profile?)

~Lower and slide back the seat about a cm, and look for any perceived difference?

If I stick with the ideal seat position, am I not going to notice the handling advantages this seat angle is purported to afford?

fietsbob

How many degrees does it measure ? (doesn't look odd to me )

want something steeper ? sell what you have and get what you want..

more weight on the saddle = less on your hands .. thus the lower angle is a Benefit.


short thighs? may not be the right frame design for your body, sell It . strip your parts off .

ThermionicScott 

I'd say if you don't have long femurs, you're under no obligation (as if you were before) to use that scootched-back Lemond fit. The slightly longer top tube should cancel out the slacker seat tube if you push the saddle forward to where it would otherwise fall.

calamarichris

Thanks, fellows.
Not at all interested in getting rid of this bike, and not complaining about the geometry, just wondering the best approach. I'm 6'2" and not lacking in the femur department.

What are the benefits/problems with the Lemond fit?


Not really sure how to measure the angle precisely, but when I stuck the seat & post (removed from one of my other bikes with the correct position) the saddle was about an inch and a half further back!

This photo is the only one I have that displays the laid back angle. The angle of the Look in the background is just about identical to my other bikes.

Carbonfiberboy 

It all depends on your personal proportions. If, while riding down the road and holding the hoods, you can lift both hands off them while holding your back angle the same and not slide forward on the saddle, it's in a good position. If you do slide forward, the saddle should be further aft. IOW, it's possible that your current preferred fit could be improved upon to lessen the load on your hands and produce a more aero position.

You may notice that many riders with more upright seat tubes use setback seat posts to obtain the fit that you get with a straight seatpost.

If OTOH, even with the saddle slammed forward you can easily ride no hands in the aero position, perhaps this geometry is not for you.

oldbobcat

The "LeMond fit" was derived, in debatable portions, from the coaching theories of Cyrille Guimard, the DS at Renault-Elf-Gitane, the generally accepted postural assumptions of the period (late '80s to early '90s), and Gregs personal and quite average body proportions. By the 1980s the entire pro peloton were dropping their handlebars, flattening their backs, and setting their saddles a bit more rearward to offset the changes in balance. Guimard's take included longer cranks, even more setback to recruit the back muscles into pushing the cranks over the top, wider handlebars, and more reach than is common today. This was the way Greg sat on the bike during his peak years, and this is how he believed everyone should sit on a bike, to a degree, when he started his bicycle company.

And if you were road riding during this period, you might have noticed that many road riders seemed to be doing their best to sit like Greg, each in his or her own way. This contrasts to today's trend of shorter reach for all riders, a more forward position for racers, and taller head tubes and stems for sport riders. Also, even in their time, Greg's frames were a difficult fit for those whose dimensions indicated shorter top tubes.

My advice is to try the "Guimard stretch" if you feel inclined, and see what happens. You might discover new muscle groups. Or simply go with what you know works.

calamarichris

Wow, thanks very much for the thoughtful & thorough responses, cfboy & Bob!

Funny, when I was racing in NL & Belgium back in 89, most of my teammates remarked on (were bemused) by how far back my saddle was. I'd never been to a pro-fit back then, was just a dumb kid with legs & lungs.
I've been two two different fitters in the last 10 years, and have gotten pretty comfortable with my current position, but maybe it's time to expand my horizons with this Lemond; hopefully these old knees won't protest too much.

Thanks again very much!

chaadster

Aesthetics are a factor, but over function? If it fits and works...

Like the OP, I prefer being atop the pedals more than the Lemond geo recommends ideally, but was able to get mine to an enjoyable arrangement by accepting the seating position somewhat and using a short stem and compact bar to keep my reach in check and balance proper. A longish Classic Flite saddle allows me scoot forward and get "on the rivet" as necessary.

My aesthetic concession was the USE Alien seatpost,which gives the illusion of traditional setback while actually being quite little.

bikebreak

I have a Lemond with a 73 degree seat tube in a 53cm, the advantage is placing the hips further behind the BB, facilitating the forward over the top motion at the top of the pedal stroke, and the pulling "scrape mud off the boots" motion at the bottom. Being behind the BB recruits more glute and back muscles into those motions. This may reduce quad recruitment in the downward motion, ymmv.

So it comes down to your pedal stroke.

If you want to try the Lemond style pedaling, maybe move your seat back 5mm, try to push and pull your pedals, and see if there is any difference.