Originally Posted by
JayTee705
I hope I'm not hijacking the OP's thread, but I'm finding this discussion very useful.
Some followup questions for whoever cares to indulge me.
1) I've heard about the 45-degree back angle for fitting purposes. My question: is this with the hands in the drops, on the hoods or on the bar?
Typically fitters use the hoods for this. However, it is a ROUGH guide, and I don't think the angle is effected largely from hoods to drops, depending on the bar of course.
The reason they use the hoods is that it's the most ergonomic way to grip the bars, and thus if fit to the bike with the hoods as the hand placement it will be the place most cyclists spend the most time. Drops are there for windy situations and descents, and flats for a bit of relief.
Originally Posted by
JayTee705
2) Likewise, I've heard of how the bar should obscure your view of the front hub on a well-fitting bike, but this is with the hands where on the bars?
Definitely a "guideline" in the classic sense...because it doesn't factor in arm length vs. inseam vs. torso at all. For instance, I have short arms, but on my roadie I have a 100mm stem and I'm definitely stretched out, but the front hub is still in front of the bar.
I think there's much more that goes into picking stem length than this old rule of thumb.
Originally Posted by
JayTee705
3) If you're at the point where it's time to lengthen (or shorten) the stem, how much can you lengthen (shorten) before it's time to throw in the towel and get a different size bike? And what are the drawbacks when you start getting to the extremes? e.g., twitchy handling with really short stems, etc.
Depending on individual anatomy, I really think the range for road bikes that makes sense is 90mm to 120mm stem length. If you need longer than that in a stem then you need a bigger bike. If you need smaller than 90, then you need a smaller bike.
There are exceptions, but modern framebuilders are trying to address this already. The big one I can think of is the frame that forces the user to use an 80mm stem, but going smaller would make it impossible for the user to get the bars high enough. It becomes an awful compromise game in these cases. Bikes like the Specializes Sequoia are prime examples of solutions to this problem.
Originally Posted by
JayTee705
4) Finally, not considering the drops, where are your hands most naturally supposed to fall--on the hoods, on the ramps/flats or on the bar part?
It's personal, and it's where you like to ride. I mentioned before the most ergonomic part of the bar is the hoods...or even the drops, really, with the least ergonomic (on the wrists and hand) being the top of the bar. Some guys set their bikes up to be in the hoods 90% of the time. Old-skool fit says drops...modern fit, as I also mentioned before, says hoods. It's kind of an in-between. It allows moderately aero-position with approx. 45 degree back, but gives more aero if the drops are used, and also gives a relief position on the tops.
But this is just current dogma, and to a degree it makes sense, but that's not to say that arguments can't be made in different directions.
Originally Posted by BCRider
The point here being that saddle angle and comfort MAY be playing a role in how you hold your pelvis and how well you can straighten your back. I'm not saying it is but it's worth paying some attention to what your own body is telling you when you try to stretch or form it into a new posture and tuning the bike to support and encourage that posture rather than fight against it.
Thanks for going into detail on that. I alluded to this above, but didn't dig at it.
As an example, using a Brooks B-17 on a road bike, there is no tilt forward enough that allows me to rotate my pelvis adequately on a drop bar road bike. The Team Pro is better, but still not best.
Certain saddles and certain angles are ideal. I used an E3 ti from Performance and felt like there was nothing inhibiting me from rolling my pelvis forward. It's definitely worth playing with.