Old 04-07-13, 06:03 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NZ
Posts: 3,841

Bikes: More than 1, but, less than S-1

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by elcruxio View Post
I might have stated that a bit wrong since hip angle is a correlation between the hip, legs and torso as i've understood it. What I meant was that the adequate reach and increased drop forces one to lean forward, rotate the pelvis forward and get a flatter back in the process. I believe the drop plays a signifigant role since i have trouble rotating the pelvis forward if I don't have enough drop (this problem occurs with my mtb where road drop would be sillystupid) and I can't "pull" myself forward or fall forward.

Of course the pelvis rotation takes a lot of flexibility but you have to do it of else your lumbar vertebrae are going to be in trouble.

As a main example of how one should never make bikes for tall people i present leonard zinn. Not only are the big models the ugliest things I have ever seen, they often have the handlebar level with the saddle, which easily enables a normal sitting position on the saddle which of course is wrong.

Also one thing that interests me is the weight distribution between a high and a low frame. A low frame should have a healthier weight distribution since you are sitting lower, more forward and not necessarily putting more weight on the handlebar but still being more pronouncedly over the forward section of the bike.

Bit of an off topic perhaps...
With all due respect. I usually attempt to refrain from offering what will or won't work for outlying tall riders over the net unless they provide detailed measurements, indication of their flexibility and riding style. There is simply too much variation amongst us tall folks to start talking about will or won't work. As an example, a few years ago I had a riding buddy who was within an inch (2.54cm) of my height 6'6 1/2" vs 6' 5 1/2". We could not possibly ride each others bikes. Not even for a distance long enough to call it a test ride. He was all legs and arms with a proportionally short torso. I am more normally proportioned but, without the arm ape factor he had and slightly shorter thighs in relationship to my overall inseam.

The consqence was that while both our bikes were 63cm c-c seat tubes, his had a considerably longer tt (in order to accommodate his long reach despite his short torso), extra set back block on top of a 20mm setback seat post and 140mm stem with long reach bars. I simply could not reach the bars while seated on his saddle. Tops, maybe. But, no hoods or drops, at all. My Belgian style, shorter tt, standard post and 120mm stem resulted in so much elbow/knee overlap for him that he resembled a monkey on top of a football and while he could ride the bike. He could do so in a normal fashion.

I find it curious that you would point to Lennard of all people as an example of how not to fit large people. When that is exactly what he is, and that has been his specialty for many years. His palmares are also reasonably note worthy and I would say he generally knows what he's talking about. Others would agree to the extent that he's the technical editor for velonews. Your credentials are what? for comparisons sake?
Birth Certificate, Passport, Marriage License Driver's License and Residency Permit all say I'm a Fred. I guess there's no denying it.
bigfred is offline