Alright have it at. My riding position video.
01-31-16, 10:23 PM
#76
Veteran, Pacifist
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 13,328
Bikes: Bikes??? Thought this was social media?!?
Mentioned: 284 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3898 Post(s)
Liked 4,832 Times
in
2,229 Posts
You 'bent-ers argue quietly about the multitudinous different layouts in your 2 wheel world.
Only there's not too many in the room. And every body is too laid back!
__________________
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.
Vintage, modern, e-road. It is a big cycling universe.
01-31-16, 10:44 PM
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
Riding with your back curved back like that is a beginners mistake, because it's the easiest way for an inflexible rider to bend forward. It doesn't take any particular effort or yoga training. Swinging the elbows out wide on a road bike is another beginner's mistake. It is impossible to move the elbows forward at all without moving your hands, or changing the bike. It just sounds weird that someone riding 12K miles per year, riding for 30 years, would give this kind of advice.
02-01-16, 12:00 AM
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 606
Bikes: Trek Madone, Blue Triad SL, Dixie Flyer BTB
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 160 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
02-01-16, 12:22 AM
#79
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 4,347
Bikes: Felt TK2, Felt Z5
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 943 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 20 Times
in
20 Posts
What we can tell is that the saddle is too low, but OP says it isn't. Even though it is, he says it isn't. Why come on here asking for advice and a critique when you automatically dispel the suggestions given to you? Several people have made suggestions. All I know is that if it were me, I would try it at least.
If the saddle height in that video is what your fitter set it to, you may want to find another shop to fit you. It is too low.
If the saddle height in that video is what your fitter set it to, you may want to find another shop to fit you. It is too low.
02-01-16, 12:35 AM
#80
George Krpan
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westlake Village, California
Posts: 1,708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Riding with your back curved back like that is a beginners mistake, because it's the easiest way for an inflexible rider to bend forward. It doesn't take any particular effort or yoga training. Swinging the elbows out wide on a road bike is another beginner's mistake. It is impossible to move the elbows forward at all without moving your hands, or changing the bike. It just sounds weird that someone riding 12K miles per year, riding for 30 years, would give this kind of advice.
02-01-16, 02:33 AM
#82
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
Actually, even that is a misunderstood platitude of the 41 that needs to be dispelled.
Moving the saddle back 'may' fix reach. Moving the saddle back increases the distance from where the rider sits on the saddle to the handlebar thereby affecting net reach to the handlebar. This may or may not fix reach...depending on if the reach is correct for a given rider.
Further....moving the saddle back does change the position of the rider fore/aft relative to the BB. This also affects net saddle height to the BB. This again, may or may not be good for a given rider including in this case the OP. Most of us can ride +/- 10mm fore or aft our so called sweet spot.
This stuff isn't cast in stone. I have ridden every conceivable position on a road bike. Some maybe slightly faster and/or more comfortable than others but fit largely is a moving target.
Many pros get re-fit every year and tweak their set up a bit.
Moving the saddle back 'may' fix reach. Moving the saddle back increases the distance from where the rider sits on the saddle to the handlebar thereby affecting net reach to the handlebar. This may or may not fix reach...depending on if the reach is correct for a given rider.
Further....moving the saddle back does change the position of the rider fore/aft relative to the BB. This also affects net saddle height to the BB. This again, may or may not be good for a given rider including in this case the OP. Most of us can ride +/- 10mm fore or aft our so called sweet spot.
This stuff isn't cast in stone. I have ridden every conceivable position on a road bike. Some maybe slightly faster and/or more comfortable than others but fit largely is a moving target.
Many pros get re-fit every year and tweak their set up a bit.
02-01-16, 02:45 AM
#83
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
So OP...where do we go from here? As confusing as all the input is you have received and make no mistake road bike fit is an indeterminate puzzle of geometric tradeoffs, you have received a lot of good advice. But as the Voice of the Industry of course, I have share my considerable insight and clear up a few misconceptions.
To me after 4 decades of high experimentation, there is no right or wrong to best fit...just shades of grey. Also, not discussed is your flexibility. We don't know what your fit feels like on a road bike. The stresses in your body for a given fit change your comfort level and even your propensity for pain and even injury.
Saddle height:
Consensus is your saddle height is a bit low and I believe it is as well. So 'experiment' with it.
You could even apply a formula if you wish. But first you need to learn what your cycling inseam is...by careful measurement and you said you didn't know what it is.
Reach:
Most say you are a bit cramped. I believe you are a shade cramped but you say when you go to a longer stem, you feel too stretched out. A 6'er on a 56 with a 100mm stem is cramped all said, T-rex arms or not. The reason why you are cramped is your pelvis position and your flexibility...how you sit on the bike which affects your net reach to the bars.
Proof of a different way to consider how to sit on the saddle? This is drill I perform with many that sit on a road bike like they are at the bleachers of a ball game. Get out of the saddle...stick your butt way out and back with horizontal back, and then sit down. It will expose a completely different world of how to sit on a saddle. Your sit bone contact will be much less. You will need 'more' and not less reach. Yes it will change the lower position of your back argued about here based upon the A to B picture shown....truth is closer the slumped picture on the left for most including top riders. Very few ride with a convex down or arched back shown on the right. For one, its an instable lower back position and generally not sustainable even consciously. But hip position which does affect lower back curve is very important and would say poorer riders in general ride with not enough pelvis rotation forward which tends to make the lower back more slumped or convex up.
What to do next? Experiment. Don't experiment a little. Experiment 'a lot'. Chart your fit. Carefully write down your current fit you are beholden to. This is your baseline. You have 100 different permutations in front of you. You want the truth? You need to seek it. This takes dogged trial and error. There is no substitute. At least start with a 110mm stem. Install it both inverted and then angled up. Move it up and down the steerer put some of the spacer stack above and below the stem...with it flipped up and flipped down. That is 10 permutations right there.
Move your saddle position fore/aft and up and down. That is at least 10 more permutations.
I ride with countless riders who shake their hands well into a group ride. Their fit is bad. If you have pain on the bike that you don't experience in your daily life, your fit is bad and you need to change it.
All said I would say you are easily in the 80% range of good fit for a recreational rider. No your position isn't that aggressive which may be what your body needs. We don't know your fitness, your speed or your flexibility. I think overall your fit is good honestly.
But own different stems...a couple at least and experiment. You came here asking so you believe there maybe an opportunity for improvement and there is for each of us.
Good luck
To me after 4 decades of high experimentation, there is no right or wrong to best fit...just shades of grey. Also, not discussed is your flexibility. We don't know what your fit feels like on a road bike. The stresses in your body for a given fit change your comfort level and even your propensity for pain and even injury.
Saddle height:
Consensus is your saddle height is a bit low and I believe it is as well. So 'experiment' with it.
You could even apply a formula if you wish. But first you need to learn what your cycling inseam is...by careful measurement and you said you didn't know what it is.
Reach:
Most say you are a bit cramped. I believe you are a shade cramped but you say when you go to a longer stem, you feel too stretched out. A 6'er on a 56 with a 100mm stem is cramped all said, T-rex arms or not. The reason why you are cramped is your pelvis position and your flexibility...how you sit on the bike which affects your net reach to the bars.
Proof of a different way to consider how to sit on the saddle? This is drill I perform with many that sit on a road bike like they are at the bleachers of a ball game. Get out of the saddle...stick your butt way out and back with horizontal back, and then sit down. It will expose a completely different world of how to sit on a saddle. Your sit bone contact will be much less. You will need 'more' and not less reach. Yes it will change the lower position of your back argued about here based upon the A to B picture shown....truth is closer the slumped picture on the left for most including top riders. Very few ride with a convex down or arched back shown on the right. For one, its an instable lower back position and generally not sustainable even consciously. But hip position which does affect lower back curve is very important and would say poorer riders in general ride with not enough pelvis rotation forward which tends to make the lower back more slumped or convex up.
What to do next? Experiment. Don't experiment a little. Experiment 'a lot'. Chart your fit. Carefully write down your current fit you are beholden to. This is your baseline. You have 100 different permutations in front of you. You want the truth? You need to seek it. This takes dogged trial and error. There is no substitute. At least start with a 110mm stem. Install it both inverted and then angled up. Move it up and down the steerer put some of the spacer stack above and below the stem...with it flipped up and flipped down. That is 10 permutations right there.
Move your saddle position fore/aft and up and down. That is at least 10 more permutations.
I ride with countless riders who shake their hands well into a group ride. Their fit is bad. If you have pain on the bike that you don't experience in your daily life, your fit is bad and you need to change it.
All said I would say you are easily in the 80% range of good fit for a recreational rider. No your position isn't that aggressive which may be what your body needs. We don't know your fitness, your speed or your flexibility. I think overall your fit is good honestly.
But own different stems...a couple at least and experiment. You came here asking so you believe there maybe an opportunity for improvement and there is for each of us.
Good luck
Last edited by Campag4life; 02-01-16 at 03:03 AM.
02-01-16, 06:24 AM
#84
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
No, no. I meant one guy says in, the other guy says out. One guy thinks left is right. The other guy thinks right is right. It is a circus. Meanwhile the two pictures are both horrible. Put some clothes on that guy, PLEASE.
02-01-16, 06:27 AM
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
Actually, even that is a misunderstood platitude of the 41 that needs to be dispelled.
Moving the saddle back 'may' fix reach. Moving the saddle back increases the distance from where the rider sits on the saddle to the handlebar thereby affecting net reach to the handlebar. This may or may not fix reach...depending on if the reach is correct for a given rider.
Further....moving the saddle back does change the position of the rider fore/aft relative to the BB. This also affects net saddle height to the BB. This again, may or may not be good for a given rider including in this case the OP. Most of us can ride +/- 10mm fore or aft our so called sweet spot.
This stuff isn't cast in stone. I have ridden every conceivable position on a road bike. Some maybe slightly faster and/or more comfortable than others but fit largely is a moving target.
Many pros get re-fit every year and tweak their set up a bit.
Moving the saddle back 'may' fix reach. Moving the saddle back increases the distance from where the rider sits on the saddle to the handlebar thereby affecting net reach to the handlebar. This may or may not fix reach...depending on if the reach is correct for a given rider.
Further....moving the saddle back does change the position of the rider fore/aft relative to the BB. This also affects net saddle height to the BB. This again, may or may not be good for a given rider including in this case the OP. Most of us can ride +/- 10mm fore or aft our so called sweet spot.
This stuff isn't cast in stone. I have ridden every conceivable position on a road bike. Some maybe slightly faster and/or more comfortable than others but fit largely is a moving target.
Many pros get re-fit every year and tweak their set up a bit.
02-01-16, 08:16 AM
#86
Vain, But Lacking Talent
02-01-16, 08:23 AM
#87
Vain, But Lacking Talent
Either way, I think we can all agree that the illustration posted by @Lazyass is terrible.
02-01-16, 09:37 AM
#89
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 7,827
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 692 Times
in
468 Posts
I agree with a lot of this. I definitely think hip and pelvis rotation is a big player here. I'll move the saddle up a hair and ride that for a little while.
__________________
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
02-01-16, 10:07 AM
#90
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 7,827
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 692 Times
in
468 Posts
So OP...where do we go from here? As confusing as all the input is you have received and make no mistake road bike fit is an indeterminate puzzle of geometric tradeoffs, you have received a lot of good advice. But as the Voice of the Industry of course, I have share my considerable insight and clear up a few misconceptions.
To me after 4 decades of high experimentation, there is no right or wrong to best fit...just shades of grey. Also, not discussed is your flexibility. We don't know what your fit feels like on a road bike. The stresses in your body for a given fit change your comfort level and even your propensity for pain and even injury.
Saddle height:
Consensus is your saddle height is a bit low and I believe it is as well. So 'experiment' with it.
You could even apply a formula if you wish. But first you need to learn what your cycling inseam is...by careful measurement and you said you didn't know what it is.
Reach:
Most say you are a bit cramped. I believe you are a shade cramped but you say when you go to a longer stem, you feel too stretched out. A 6'er on a 56 with a 100mm stem is cramped all said, T-rex arms or not. The reason why you are cramped is your pelvis position and your flexibility...how you sit on the bike which affects your net reach to the bars.
Proof of a different way to consider how to sit on the saddle? This is drill I perform with many that sit on a road bike like they are at the bleachers of a ball game. Get out of the saddle...stick your butt way out and back with horizontal back, and then sit down. It will expose a completely different world of how to sit on a saddle. Your sit bone contact will be much less. You will need 'more' and not less reach. Yes it will change the lower position of your back argued about here based upon the A to B picture shown....truth is closer the slumped picture on the left for most including top riders. Very few ride with a convex down or arched back shown on the right. For one, its an instable lower back position and generally not sustainable even consciously. But hip position which does affect lower back curve is very important and would say poorer riders in general ride with not enough pelvis rotation forward which tends to make the lower back more slumped or convex up.
What to do next? Experiment. Don't experiment a little. Experiment 'a lot'. Chart your fit. Carefully write down your current fit you are beholden to. This is your baseline. You have 100 different permutations in front of you. You want the truth? You need to seek it. This takes dogged trial and error. There is no substitute. At least start with a 110mm stem. Install it both inverted and then angled up. Move it up and down the steerer put some of the spacer stack above and below the stem...with it flipped up and flipped down. That is 10 permutations right there.
Move your saddle position fore/aft and up and down. That is at least 10 more permutations.
I ride with countless riders who shake their hands well into a group ride. Their fit is bad. If you have pain on the bike that you don't experience in your daily life, your fit is bad and you need to change it.
All said I would say you are easily in the 80% range of good fit for a recreational rider. No your position isn't that aggressive which may be what your body needs. We don't know your fitness, your speed or your flexibility. I think overall your fit is good honestly.
But own different stems...a couple at least and experiment. You came here asking so you believe there maybe an opportunity for improvement and there is for each of us.
Good luck
To me after 4 decades of high experimentation, there is no right or wrong to best fit...just shades of grey. Also, not discussed is your flexibility. We don't know what your fit feels like on a road bike. The stresses in your body for a given fit change your comfort level and even your propensity for pain and even injury.
Saddle height:
Consensus is your saddle height is a bit low and I believe it is as well. So 'experiment' with it.
You could even apply a formula if you wish. But first you need to learn what your cycling inseam is...by careful measurement and you said you didn't know what it is.
Reach:
Most say you are a bit cramped. I believe you are a shade cramped but you say when you go to a longer stem, you feel too stretched out. A 6'er on a 56 with a 100mm stem is cramped all said, T-rex arms or not. The reason why you are cramped is your pelvis position and your flexibility...how you sit on the bike which affects your net reach to the bars.
Proof of a different way to consider how to sit on the saddle? This is drill I perform with many that sit on a road bike like they are at the bleachers of a ball game. Get out of the saddle...stick your butt way out and back with horizontal back, and then sit down. It will expose a completely different world of how to sit on a saddle. Your sit bone contact will be much less. You will need 'more' and not less reach. Yes it will change the lower position of your back argued about here based upon the A to B picture shown....truth is closer the slumped picture on the left for most including top riders. Very few ride with a convex down or arched back shown on the right. For one, its an instable lower back position and generally not sustainable even consciously. But hip position which does affect lower back curve is very important and would say poorer riders in general ride with not enough pelvis rotation forward which tends to make the lower back more slumped or convex up.
What to do next? Experiment. Don't experiment a little. Experiment 'a lot'. Chart your fit. Carefully write down your current fit you are beholden to. This is your baseline. You have 100 different permutations in front of you. You want the truth? You need to seek it. This takes dogged trial and error. There is no substitute. At least start with a 110mm stem. Install it both inverted and then angled up. Move it up and down the steerer put some of the spacer stack above and below the stem...with it flipped up and flipped down. That is 10 permutations right there.
Move your saddle position fore/aft and up and down. That is at least 10 more permutations.
I ride with countless riders who shake their hands well into a group ride. Their fit is bad. If you have pain on the bike that you don't experience in your daily life, your fit is bad and you need to change it.
All said I would say you are easily in the 80% range of good fit for a recreational rider. No your position isn't that aggressive which may be what your body needs. We don't know your fitness, your speed or your flexibility. I think overall your fit is good honestly.
But own different stems...a couple at least and experiment. You came here asking so you believe there maybe an opportunity for improvement and there is for each of us.
Good luck
The current saddle height is a few mm lower than the fitting's. Because like you said, I've been changing one thing at a time and seeing how it goes. There are other issues besides the low back, it just happens to be the biggest issue. The other issues are left hand numbness and, currently, outside left knee pain but that's a new thing and probably related to overuse. The fitting had me on a 100mm stem. It generally feels pretty good actually, except for the left hand. The 90mm stem basically instantly cleared that up. Heck on Saturday I rode 40 miles with no gloves at all and didn't have a twinge of numbness.
The one thing that I keep coming back to is the saddle. For over a year now I've been back and forth and back forth on the tilt.
Saddle level: I feel like my weight is centered evenly. Hands are good, sitbones are good, everything but low back is good. But with this position I find I have a hard time keeping my pelvis rotated forward.
Nose down a hair: More weight on the hands, low back still hurts but *maybe* not as much? Hard to say. But it does a better job of keeping my pelvis rotated forward. This position introduces the problem of overusing my back erector muscles to keep my trunk up, resulting in nasty trigger points. Those almost suck worse than my current low back pain and definitely take longer to heal.
Also of note I have a suspicion that my saddle (143mm Romin) is too narrow (150mm sitbone width) and we all know that's a problem. The thing with my 155mm Romin is that it gives me a saddle sore on anything resembling a hot and steamy and/or long ride. And those suck bad too. I'm looking at getting a Specialized Power Saddle but can't figure out which width I should get. Maybe I'll go to the store today..
Anyway, so you can see why I have the bike set up as it currently is. I'm not sure where to go from here. My flexibility has always been really good. Core strength, always really bad. Working on that though. Any other thoughts, I'm all ears
edit: Oh, I have various lengths of stems too. 90-110mm I believe.
__________________
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
02-01-16, 10:22 AM
#91
George Krpan
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westlake Village, California
Posts: 1,708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
The rider on the left is on the hoods. On the drops the angle of his lower back would be better. But, what I wanted to emphasize is stomach in, lower back filled out verses the sagging back on the right.
Indeed it is. I could pull lots of similar photos of other pro riders in various riding positions (on the hoods or in the drops on a regular bike), but the result is the same. As I was trying to explain earlier, I think the main mistake of the picture on the left is where the lower back is perpendicular to the saddle. Like I said, I made a conscious effort to see if I could replicate it on the bike and it was awkward and awful. Looking at DZ there, he's doing everything you're saying in terms of pulling the stomach in and filling out the lower back, but his lower back is at an angle to the saddle.
Either way, I think we can all agree that the illustration posted by @Lazyass is terrible.
Either way, I think we can all agree that the illustration posted by @Lazyass is terrible.
02-01-16, 10:46 AM
#92
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
You keep saying his back is sagging on the right, but it is arched in an S configuration which is natural and correct. When you say his back is sagging, it is hard to understand what you are talking about.
Last edited by rpenmanparker; 02-01-16 at 10:52 AM.
02-01-16, 10:49 AM
#93
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 28,682
Bikes: 1990 Romic Reynolds 531 custom build, Merlin Works CR Ti custom build, super light Workswell 066 custom build
Mentioned: 109 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6556 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 58 Times
in
36 Posts
I tried the forward pelvis and concave back (as well as I am able) on my ride today. Very comfortable. The forward pelvis effectively lengthens the torso and gives me more reach to the bars. Better weight distribution and better control of the bars in my case. I can ride in the drops much more comfortably that way. Very natural to reach the drops. Easier to flex down to them. Head more forward than it was before. I can't say about hammies and glutes. I am ignorant about that stuff.
02-01-16, 10:53 AM
#94
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 7,827
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 692 Times
in
468 Posts
I tried the forward pelvis and concave back (as well as I am able) on my ride today. Very comfortable. The forward pelvis effectively lengthens the torso and gives me more reach to the bars. Better weight distribution and better control of the bars in my case. I can ride in the drops much more comfortably that way. Very natural to reach the drops. Easier to flex down to them. Head more forward than it was before. I can't say about hammies and glutes. I am ignorant about that stuff.
I ran across this article from Steve Hogg and it describes what you're talking about very well. I'm sure others that run across this thread will benefit from reading the article.
https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com...or-road-bikes/
__________________
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
02-01-16, 10:55 AM
#95
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 7,827
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1872 Post(s)
Liked 692 Times
in
468 Posts
__________________
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
2014 Cannondale SuperSix EVO 2
2019 Salsa Warbird
02-01-16, 11:02 AM
#96
Senior Member
Just my opinion ( I am by no means an expert - not even close) - but the bike looks small for you. It seems your legs don't extend quite enough.
I know it's generally preferred to go with smaller rather than larger, but in your case it seems to me that you could go a little bigger...or maybe move the seat back a little?
...maybe get your palms on the hoods to stretch you out a little more?
Just throwin' it out there. Have you had a good fitting done?
I know it's generally preferred to go with smaller rather than larger, but in your case it seems to me that you could go a little bigger...or maybe move the seat back a little?
...maybe get your palms on the hoods to stretch you out a little more?
Just throwin' it out there. Have you had a good fitting done?
02-01-16, 11:29 AM
#98
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 19 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1188 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
Ah crap I didn't realize there were four pages and just saw your post. First of all thanks! I'm not sure where to start. First, I am dedicated to figuring this out, and have been for over a year now. It's to the point now that it's either figure it out or stop riding.
The current saddle height is a few mm lower than the fitting's. Because like you said, I've been changing one thing at a time and seeing how it goes. There are other issues besides the low back, it just happens to be the biggest issue. The other issues are left hand numbness and, currently, outside left knee pain but that's a new thing and probably related to overuse. The fitting had me on a 100mm stem. It generally feels pretty good actually, except for the left hand. The 90mm stem basically instantly cleared that up. Heck on Saturday I rode 40 miles with no gloves at all and didn't have a twinge of numbness.
The one thing that I keep coming back to is the saddle. For over a year now I've been back and forth and back forth on the tilt.
Saddle level: I feel like my weight is centered evenly. Hands are good, sitbones are good, everything but low back is good. But with this position I find I have a hard time keeping my pelvis rotated forward.
Nose down a hair: More weight on the hands, low back still hurts but *maybe* not as much? Hard to say. But it does a better job of keeping my pelvis rotated forward. This position introduces the problem of overusing my back erector muscles to keep my trunk up, resulting in nasty trigger points. Those almost suck worse than my current low back pain and definitely take longer to heal.
Also of note I have a suspicion that my saddle (143mm Romin) is too narrow (150mm sitbone width) and we all know that's a problem. The thing with my 155mm Romin is that it gives me a saddle sore on anything resembling a hot and steamy and/or long ride. And those suck bad too. I'm looking at getting a Specialized Power Saddle but can't figure out which width I should get. Maybe I'll go to the store today..
Anyway, so you can see why I have the bike set up as it currently is. I'm not sure where to go from here. My flexibility has always been really good. Core strength, always really bad. Working on that though. Any other thoughts, I'm all ears
edit: Oh, I have various lengths of stems too. 90-110mm I believe.
The current saddle height is a few mm lower than the fitting's. Because like you said, I've been changing one thing at a time and seeing how it goes. There are other issues besides the low back, it just happens to be the biggest issue. The other issues are left hand numbness and, currently, outside left knee pain but that's a new thing and probably related to overuse. The fitting had me on a 100mm stem. It generally feels pretty good actually, except for the left hand. The 90mm stem basically instantly cleared that up. Heck on Saturday I rode 40 miles with no gloves at all and didn't have a twinge of numbness.
The one thing that I keep coming back to is the saddle. For over a year now I've been back and forth and back forth on the tilt.
Saddle level: I feel like my weight is centered evenly. Hands are good, sitbones are good, everything but low back is good. But with this position I find I have a hard time keeping my pelvis rotated forward.
Nose down a hair: More weight on the hands, low back still hurts but *maybe* not as much? Hard to say. But it does a better job of keeping my pelvis rotated forward. This position introduces the problem of overusing my back erector muscles to keep my trunk up, resulting in nasty trigger points. Those almost suck worse than my current low back pain and definitely take longer to heal.
Also of note I have a suspicion that my saddle (143mm Romin) is too narrow (150mm sitbone width) and we all know that's a problem. The thing with my 155mm Romin is that it gives me a saddle sore on anything resembling a hot and steamy and/or long ride. And those suck bad too. I'm looking at getting a Specialized Power Saddle but can't figure out which width I should get. Maybe I'll go to the store today..
Anyway, so you can see why I have the bike set up as it currently is. I'm not sure where to go from here. My flexibility has always been really good. Core strength, always really bad. Working on that though. Any other thoughts, I'm all ears
edit: Oh, I have various lengths of stems too. 90-110mm I believe.
Road bike fit is in some ways like golf. Taking lessons from a golf pro can only take you so far. To get really good and ride fast without pain, to me the answer is trial and error or if trying to be a scratch handicap golfer...dig the answers out of the dirt.
Personally if your back is plaguing you...I would try both a higher and lower handlebar. Many benefit from either that have back issues on the bike.
You said you are saddle searching...try a Toupe 155...what I ride...I prefer it to the Romin which I also rode in 155.
My advice is...take nothing for granted and keep all options open for your fit...which includes saddle height and setback and handlebar up or down and forward and back. This is a lot of different combinations to try but to me, the only way to find out what works is to try. Chart your fit and when you find a better combo, embrace this is your new baseline and continue.
The great Eddie Merckx who was the ultimate pedant about fit, use have his frames built 1 mm different from one to the next and 1/2 deg diff in seat tube angle. He never stopped searching for the best fit. A lesson for all of us.
Last edited by Campag4life; 02-01-16 at 11:41 AM.
02-01-16, 11:52 AM
#99
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 67
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times
in
2 Posts
I'm an amateur but as others have stated, from your bouncing the saddle looks low.
I've been playing with stems myself. I have 3 stems, 110mm with a 10 degree rise, a 105 mm with 6 degree rise, and now a 90 mm with 10 degree rise.
I'm currently running the 110mm stem, on a size 58 caad9, i am 5' 11". I too feel a little stretched out on my bike hence the 90mm stem purchase. Though now I am not going to run the 90mm stem any time soon but switch the handlebar to a compact handlebar. I noticed I was comfortable when on top of the bar but the hoods were just a bit too far for me. The drops, well I rarely rode in them. So I bought a cheap handlebar that reduced my reach from the top of the bar to the hoods by 10 mm, and it reduced my drops from 140mm to 125 mm. They handle bar is also not as wide, i noticed my arms were always pointing out from the shoulders to get on the hoods. The new handlebar is also 42 cm wide in the drops, and 40 cm when the bar starts bending towards the hoods. My stock handlebar is 44 cm and just looks humongous for me. I really think the new handlebar will be a game change for me. So that's just a long winded reply to say, try the long stem but address the handlebar by using a more compact handlebar.
I am also experimenting with crank length. Online information is inconclusive on what length is right, so again I am just testing and playing and seeing what i like better. I am running a 172.5mm crank but planning to test out a 170mm crank length next. Perhaps reducing the length of the crank but raising the seat may be something to help assist the hamstring issue you mentioned.
Again, I'm not a professional, I'm just playing with my fit so I can get comfortable for a metric century I signed up for.
I've been playing with stems myself. I have 3 stems, 110mm with a 10 degree rise, a 105 mm with 6 degree rise, and now a 90 mm with 10 degree rise.
I'm currently running the 110mm stem, on a size 58 caad9, i am 5' 11". I too feel a little stretched out on my bike hence the 90mm stem purchase. Though now I am not going to run the 90mm stem any time soon but switch the handlebar to a compact handlebar. I noticed I was comfortable when on top of the bar but the hoods were just a bit too far for me. The drops, well I rarely rode in them. So I bought a cheap handlebar that reduced my reach from the top of the bar to the hoods by 10 mm, and it reduced my drops from 140mm to 125 mm. They handle bar is also not as wide, i noticed my arms were always pointing out from the shoulders to get on the hoods. The new handlebar is also 42 cm wide in the drops, and 40 cm when the bar starts bending towards the hoods. My stock handlebar is 44 cm and just looks humongous for me. I really think the new handlebar will be a game change for me. So that's just a long winded reply to say, try the long stem but address the handlebar by using a more compact handlebar.
I am also experimenting with crank length. Online information is inconclusive on what length is right, so again I am just testing and playing and seeing what i like better. I am running a 172.5mm crank but planning to test out a 170mm crank length next. Perhaps reducing the length of the crank but raising the seat may be something to help assist the hamstring issue you mentioned.
Again, I'm not a professional, I'm just playing with my fit so I can get comfortable for a metric century I signed up for.
Last edited by Bumnah; 02-01-16 at 11:55 AM.
02-01-16, 12:18 PM
#100
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Nor Cal
Posts: 6,016
Mentioned: 17 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1814 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 923 Times
in
569 Posts
I have pretty much the same body proportion (6' tall, long torso, shortish arms & legs)
& ride a 56 cm. Also have a 58 cm. which I like, but stand-over clearance is limited.
I've also spent considerable time on a 90 cm. stem, & over time developed a longer & lower position w/ 100 cm. stem.
When you say that your flexibility is good,
does that include forward bend -touching toes (or less), -knuckles on floor, or -palms on floor? (not that this defines flexibility)
What about cross-training, other activities?
Did your fit include feet & shoes? Arch support, shimming?
IME, back issues are often related to weak abdominals, stress- work- family- kids, and 'sitting disease'.
& ride a 56 cm. Also have a 58 cm. which I like, but stand-over clearance is limited.
I've also spent considerable time on a 90 cm. stem, & over time developed a longer & lower position w/ 100 cm. stem.
When you say that your flexibility is good,
does that include forward bend -touching toes (or less), -knuckles on floor, or -palms on floor? (not that this defines flexibility)
What about cross-training, other activities?
Did your fit include feet & shoes? Arch support, shimming?
IME, back issues are often related to weak abdominals, stress- work- family- kids, and 'sitting disease'.