bigfred 

I hear exactly what you are saying. From an optical stand point, it's simply an illusion that the saddle is slammed forward. In reality it is moved back as far as the manufacturer's indicated limits. I've removed the saddle bag attachment to eliminate its role in this illusion. But, yes, I concur that it doesn't "look right".
(please pardon the poor focus)
[IMG][/IMG]

From a purely aesthetic point, what really bugs me even more is that less than <3mm of nose down adjustment looks like so much more on this saddle. All I can attribute that to is that the nose actually starts to roll down from a point reasonably far aft.


Agreed. However, Hot or Not isn't about functionality beyond being able to pedal the thing. In this regard morphology somtimes doesn't align with aesthetics. I'll deal with the degree to which this may or may not be the "right" or "wrong" frame later.

Historically, as frame size has increased designers have usually lessened seat tube angle. Whether this is in order to accomodate additional top tube length without stretching front center or in an effort to keep close to KOPS is somewhat irrelevant. Instead of the normal 73-73.5deg., you would normally see 72-72.5 on frames of such size and still see someone like myself with their knee significantly ahead of pedal spindle with standard 180mm cranks. My morphology is a bit screwy. I'm tall, with a long inseam and moderately short torso. But, without arms to match my legs. Additionally, I have more of my inseam distributed to my tib/fib/shin than my femur.

So, yes the seat tube is slack. Approx. 72-72.5deg.

The classic resonse to this observation would be. No. Stem length should not be used to compensate for incorrect saddle position. But, in the current day when more people recognize that you can rotate the angles around the BB, there might be some value to this. However. See my previous point about the optical illusion of the saddle being forward in the clamp. It is in fact, full aft.

Saddle setback is currently 81mm. Which using my measurements in the competitive cyclist calculator would put it right in the range they would suggest for a french fit, a bit less than an Eddy fit and a bit more than a comp fit. Consider, also, that is using the elevated BB as the measuring point. If one were to extend the seattube/BB down to a more traditional position it would also be slightly further foward, increasing the distance.

Complete Herman Munster. 6'5" (used to be taller before compressing a couple discs), size 16 feet, massive barrel shaped rib cage (awesome tidal volume:-).

The top tube is too long. The stem is about right to 10mm long. For as low as I have the bars (130mm drop) I would benefit from 10mm less reach. If they were 10mm higher, I think the reach would be about right. It does stretch me forward just slightly. But, I prefer that to having knee/elbow overlap.

I was willing to go for the second hand custom frame to try the long cranks and I'm glad that I did before investing in a made to measure frame for myself. I'm learning tons about my fit. Some of it counter intuitive from what I would have thought. If your interested in following my fit saga further keep your eyes on the "fit my bike" forum or the C&A forum. In the next week or so I'll have the new bicycle torture chamber up to photographic standards and am about to start working on my fit. Moving it away from the curent dimensions which were largely moved across from a previous bike. And, toward attempting to optimize my fit for the long cranks and the frame which has 15-20mm more top tube than I would probably specify. However, I don't think less top tube would see my saddle to BB position change considerable. Just that I might spec a steeper seat tube and use a set back post for a more conventional aesthetic look.

So, in conclussion: Yes, the slack seat tube neccessitates the use of a zero setback post. But, the saddle is aft on that post, despite appearances. That slack seat tube also contributes to a top tube measurement that sounds too long. But, if one were to increase the seat tube angle to conventional standards, allowing for the use of a 16-20mm setback post, it would shorten the effective top tube to what would be very close to ideal proportions for me (+/- 5mm). If you calculate for effective front center/reach using Zinn's or Comp Cyclists formulas they arrive at values very close to the current setup.

On the subjecting of attempting to make it "hot": First would of course be elimination of the 13mm of spacers from below the stem. Second the wheels would have to get swapped out for something with some budget curb appeal. HED Belgium C2s or Pacenti SL23s with alloy nipples and aero spokes laced to a reasonably priced but lighter set of hubs. Ditch the very capable GP4Seasons for some 25/28mm Schwalbe ZXs. A frame geometry change would be neccessary to allow the use of a setback post. But, I agree, setback posts due have a better conventional aesthetic. Maybe some cheap chinese carbon cages? Anyone have anything else in mind that would improve her curb appeal?