Cinelli Handlebars
 

A dear friend made a killer deal on a top-end Cannondale. Like new. $800. Including the Cinelli bars!

But those bars were too far away, even with the seat adjusted forward. She ended up riding with her palms on the back of the bars, reaching under one side or another to brake or shift. I offered to change the bars out as a Christmas present.

Jane (wife) is the same approximate size as the owner. Jane was professionally fitted to her bike and finds it "perfect." So I first measured HER bike, then attempted to duplicate those dimensions on the other bike with new bars, new stem, brifter placement, seat height and distance to bars, etc. She took it for a ride this afternoon and didn't want to give it back. So I think I'm getting there.

Here are pics of the "old" bars. Top quality but unfortunately, they're 5 - 6 cm too long in their effective stem length.

As far as your methodology goes, you might find this of interest.

Otherwise, you're options are limited unless you're willing to give up on the one-piece Cinelli bar. I don't know that they make it with a shorter extension, but even if they do, it'll be pricey.

So short of lengthening you're neighbor, some kind of compromise will need to be made. She can enjoy high fashion in discomfort. Or she can trade style for good fit and comfort. This is a dilemma a woman can appreciate, practical shoes or Jimmy Choos.

Yes. Well. I've already replaced those $600 handlebars with an off-the-rack set - and a new steering stem - from my LBS. That change alone brings the reach to the handlebars closer to the rider by almost three inches! Moving the seat forward on its rails gave me the additional one inch I needed to duplicate the specs on Jane's bike. It should be a much more pleasant ride for her now . . . I hope she'll agree, and then sell the Cinelli bars on e-bay.

The retro-grouch in me recoiled at the integrated stem at first, but on second thought, they did eliminate a clamping zone and potential source of creaking. Might even be safer as long as it doesn't asplode.

You can't use saddle position to set reach because it changes how your weight balances and can put too much on your hands.

Stand on your toes with your butt and heels against the wall. Lean over and fall over.

Do the same in the middle of the room and you can even touch your toes because your butt moved aft to counter balance your torso.

The same thing happens on a bike.

+1 Overly steep seat tubes, (or saddles pushed forward which is the same) combined with drop bars ends up being very tiring. Triathletes get away with it because they're resting on their elbows, but for others it's not comfortable for any length of time.

In this case, the seat had been moved backward on the rails as far as it would go by the original owner. I only moved it forward one-third of its capacity - about an inch. By doing so, I was able to mirror the setup my wife received from a $200 fitting at a respected LBS.

It worked. I don't doubt the truth of your statement above. Nor do I doubt the positive results gained from a combination of changes to stem length AND seat position. Thanks.

OK, what Drew and FB were warning about was moving the saddle excessively forward in an attempt to get closer to the bars without consideration for the rider's position relative to the bottom bracket.

I'll also go on record as thinking one-piece bars and stems are a very expensive way to limit your sizing choices. A fashionable bad idea.

Drew and FB jumped to conclusions, when they SHOULD have asked "How far did you move it forward?" or "Where was the seat positioned before you moved it?"

A blanket statement like "You can't use saddle position to set reach" is not only inappropriate - it's incorrect. Saddle position DOES affect reach to the bars, unavoidably, and every time you change it. Drew, if you were correct in your assertion that we CAN'T use seating position to affect reach, we'd all be living with fused, non-adjustable saddles. Fortunately we don't, and are thus able to combine seat position, stem length and height, even crank lengths to find a comfortable and safe geometry combination. Thanks.

Agree with the quote on integrated bars being an expensive way to limit your sizing choices. Sure is pretty, though. :-)

Well, they are technically correct. Saddle position relative to the pedals is more important, then you may have to make changes to the cockpit to get the reach right. You don't sacrifice your knees to make the front of the bike fit comfortably.

The statement is accurate as far as it goes. You do a fit in sequence. The saddle is set relative the the cranks, then the handlebar stem is used to set the reach. There's no reason not to use the saddle to fine tune reach a bit, but the general statement, that the saddle isn't used to set reach is still true.

Moving the saddle to improve reach might be fine if the saddle is too far forward or back to start with, but the saddle position priority remains the cranks.

Looks like you got something, to re-sell.. and get a separate stem and a bar of approptiate dimensions.

This needs a little clarification. What they said is true but to elaborate the saddle position (height, setback) is the first thing to setup for a rider and everything else gets measured around this. You don't compensate reach by moving the saddle. In your friends case it sounds like she had to move the saddle from where it was when purchased to fit her better but it should remain in that comfortable position when fitting new bars and stem. Also using your wife's measurements can certainly help get close, or possibly even perfect, but everybody has a different posture on a bike despite having the same measurements and may need to tweek the fitting a bit.

I'll jump in on the defense side also. Yes you can use saddle position to adjust the reach but it's a mistake to do so. As several posters have noted, saddle position relative to the bottom bracket is set based on the rider's leg geometry and preferences and THEN reach is adjusted by stem and bar choice.

Your friend's saddle may have been positioned incorrectly at first but you should not readjust it only to change her reach.

I'm not going to make any absolute statements about the fit of the bike without knowing any more than has been stated, but I will say that, fore-aft saddle position aside, the fact that the effective stem length was 50-60mm too long to begin with makes me doubt the bike is truly the correct size. If, that is, the Cinelli stem/bar was stock on the bike. Not that replacing stock stems with different lengths is uncommon; but generally, stock stems are proportionate to frame size. 50-60mm difference is huge in regard to stem length. Again, not making any absolute statements, not enough info for that.

But out of curiosity, just for general info purposes.....what's the height of your friend, and what size is the frame? :)

On the subject of saddle position, I think Peter White does a great job of discussing this on his site under the heading "Fitting a Bicycle." Scroll down to the sections titled "Saddle Height," "Saddle Tilt," and "Fore-Aft Saddle Position." http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/fitting.htm

Using the saddle position to set reach IS inappropriate.

The saddle height, tilt, and fore-aft should be determined first and completely independently from the handlebar reach, and then it's time to adjust the reach via the bars/stem. (I was initially worried about an uncontentious Duane thread, but that concern has passed. :))

[working blind, here] they both may be the similar overall height ,
but Men are longer armed and shorter legged, proportionally
as a general thing.
so the Wife's shorter torso and arms make the Reach too far.

I gather the "dear friend" is also a woman and about the same height as the OP's wife so there is a decent chance that a bike that fits one will also fit the other.

Yes. But 50-60mm is a huge difference in stem length, regardless of gender and bodily proportions, on a like-sized frame. There comes a point where you would just say, "this isn't the right size frame, the top tube is too long." One thing you are correct about: using the term "general thing." I asked for general info of the OP, just to get us in the ballpark of the fit we're talking about. We don't have enough specific info to make absolute statements about any of this at this point regarding the OP's friend and her bike.

Duh.

Pile on.
OP, how do you know if the reach is now too short? The saddle position was never set according to femur/foot length, rather it was moved randomly to accommodate reach to bars. What if the saddle needs to go forward even more to get the correct position?

That is the correct process.

Fit is an individual thing.
Copying another's position, even if was done by an experienced fitter for rider #1 and both riders are similar in size and of the same gender, will not be as effective as using one of the several well proven fitting systems to determine what rider #2 's actual requirements are.

The classic Guimard/Lemond system is easily available as well as several online systems. All will get a good "baseline" fit without wasting a lot of time & $ on component changes and provide documentation for future adaptation.

-Bandera

So this is a secret to be under the tree next Tuesday? and you want it pre fitting?

Agreed. But I've seen the two of them together to know that Jane and "Molly" are very close to identical in size, shape and weight. And, while I would enjoy it immensely, I won't put Molly through what she would find to be a tedious (and ticklish) measuring process. Making the bike perfect for Jane should be a good starting point; enough so that subsequent adjustments won't require component changes. Eh?

BTW, if I was ever "contentious" here, I didn't mean to be and I apologize. Besides, we can actually agree here: while movement of the seat on its rails fore-and-aft unavoidably DOES affect the reach to the bars, it should NOT be the primary means of establishing that dimension.

oo xx

Next post - frame size, then "before" and "after" dimensions.

Sigh. After spending 10 minutes typing Jane's and Molly's bike dimension data, ALL of it disappeared and I was logged out. It kept blinking "Auto Save" in yellow, but I have no idea how to retrieve that auto-saved data without filing an FOIA request with the NSA. :-)

The original owner was my size; around 5' 11". He was riding a 50 cm frame. Seat set way back and (probably) up, ultra-expensive Cinelli bars to add still more length. It was his first bike.

I think some dealer got rid of a bike they couldn't move, to someone who didn't know any better.

Yup. Thanks. As noted, setting it up for Jane will make it easier to fine-tune it for Molly. She was riding it in the original setup prepared by the original owner's bike shop. It was truly whacky. . . they had tried to make a 50 cm frame fit an average sized man. Hence, the seat way back, after-market (and expensive!) bars, etc. A 50 cm frame will be fine for her, but only after getting it back into sane proportions.

That's good. So it was the previous owner who had the wrong size bike and had equipped it with a disproportionate stem to try and compensate.

Understanding and following a well proven fitting system to get a good "base fit" is essential. I use a book, it is Very Reliable.

-Bandera

The Eggs Benedict method strikes again.

We could debate this forever, but I believe that the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Regardless of how you did the fitting, if it helped the rider be more comfortable, and happier riding more, than it's a good fit. Could it be better? Maybe, but usually good enough truly is good enough.

Exactly. I'm only trying to bring it back to reality. Thanks. DB

How do you suppose the LeMonde and other methods were established? Easy - they measured groups of various riders with similar arm, torso and leg lengths, then converted those groups' most comfortable and efficient ergonomics into standardized fit dimensions.

Jane and Molly have similar arm, torso and leg lengths (not to mention two very nice derrieres). So duplicating Jane's bike geometry to Molly's was a no brainer - the perfect starting point. We'll ride this weekend; I'll let you know how she likes it. Thanks; I think we agree on most things. :-)