Setback?
 

I just picked up this Union Randonneur and apparently - and to my surprise, I might add - the seat post and bar stem are original to the bike.

Now, why would that be? Is this to compensate for a design flaw or is something else going on that I'm not aware of? Please educate me.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...68ccdbcb40.jpg

The handlebar was too low for the rider, so they put this super-riser stem on it to bring the bar up. But it was short, and made the bike too cramped for the rider, so they changed the seat post. This is not how the bike was designed, and I'm not even sure the bike fits the rider. As is, with his weight far too far back over the back wheel, I imagine it handles very poorly and is hard to pedal since the pedals are so far ahead of the rider's weight.

What I meant to say was that these bikes were actually delivered from the factory with this seat post and stem.

Okay, well, I'll admit that astonishes me! But I'll take your word for it. The frame, judging by your photo, has frame angles between 72 and 73 degrees, like a typical bike of the 60's - 70's. By moving the seat and handlebar back, the bike is now set up with approximately 68 degree angles, similar to an English roadster, classic Dutch bike, etc. So maybe that's the point; they're setting up an off-the-shelf modern frame to fit the rider like a roadster. Why anyone would want that, with a drop bar, remains obscure to me.

Odd. My first thought was square peg, round hole in line with RHM above. Trying to fit a market segment by altering existing hardware. It's interesting that the setback is adjustable, and by quite a bit.

Does it fit? How's the ride?

I doubt it .. what reference do you have?

The last owner personalized it for their needs , Now It's your Turn to personalize if for Yours.

the balance of C of G improves and unweights your hands as you Move your Butt Back

My word, as @rhm put it, is based on the fact that I found one other example of this particular model (and not much else) on the Internet, with the same stem and seat post ... which confused me just as much as you, and was the reason I started his thread.

The other example:
http://bikeforums.net/attachment.php...hmentid=444263

Total Of 2 ..

An OEM catalog In Print from that Year, will be a better reference, Its Yours now Change the stem , bars and seatpost to be what You want .

Here's another one. Really weird.

http://i.marktplaats.com/00/s/NTc2WD...U~K-x/$_84.JPG

Are we 100% sure these aren't all images of the exact same bike, maybe?

Parts are interchangable it hardly seems worth wasting time, Guessing. Maybe they didnt make any taller Bike frames but still had tall customers .

Why? once again go ask the Manufacturer.. not the crowd in the bleachers :popcorn

True. Wish I had one. It's a 1986 Union Randonneur, BTW, judging by the date codes on the cranks, which I also believe to be original.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...5ce2536405.jpg

The seatpost is a Sakae Ringyo MTE-100 post, intended for off-road use. The adjustable setback was to allow riders to move the seat back for better control on steep downhills. It didn't catch on all that well, and was only in production for a couple years.

I suspect neither the seat post nor the stem were stock on that model, but I could be wrong.

If you do a search for these, you'll find three of them. One is a frame on Velobase, the second a complete bike that's recently been sold, and the third is what's now my bike. Both complete bikes have the same seat post and stem.

What are the odds that both PO's didn't like the original setup and changed it in exactly the same, strange way?

Close-up of the seat post:

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...a280b809e7.jpg

Well, all-righty, then. I stand corrected.

As a matter of fact I did contact the people at Union a couple of years ago, concerning another one of their products I had acquired at the time. And to cut a long story short: I got very friendly replies, but there's no-one there anymore who actually knows much about what they were producing BITD.

Most of what I've found out about the Union brand is in this thread.

Union bottle dynamo lights is all the US shops saw . and that was a German company..
I think some spokes WAAAAy Back

Correct. That is indeed a different company. The bike brand is decidedly Dutch. Founded in 1904.

Got some nice pedals from the German Union, though:

http://www.mijnalbum.nl/Grotefoto-EU3HPBX8.jpg

American elites hate Union-seeking workers .

Well, I seek Union, but I don't work very hard. Does that help?

That was not my intention. Just trying to figure out what Union was doing. My first thought was that they wanted to market a randonneur, using an existing frame with angles that were a little too steep. But as far as I know, this frame was only used for this model.

Maybe they didn't get it quite right and changed the specifications following customer feedback?

Just a random pic of a modern "randonneur" bike from a Dutch rider:

http://www.mijnalbum.nl/Foto-EYHHE8WF-D.jpg

(took it from the Wereldfietsersforum, hope the owner doesn't mind). A surprising lot of bikes pictured there have more or less the same geometry: bar a few inches above saddle and a compact, upright riding position.
I see a resemblance with non-fixies Union, main difference being that with the Union the "adjustability" of the riders position is located in the seatpost rather than in the stem. If you look closely, you'll see that the setback does not bring the rider too much behind the BB to make effective pedaling impossible.

My point being: it doesn't look good on a classic diamond frame (even more so since it's called a "randonneur" and directly refers to the French tradition), but it may cater to what some riders like, positionwise. Riders that are used to riding classic upright city bikes, not road bikes, but like to do a little touring in the weekend. And it would have the added advantage for Union that they could skip a few sizes in their offering (like the S,M,L option for modern bikes).

Probably made for the tribes up north, tall people with huge femurs that need seatposts like this to get a proper KOPS position.

As JohnDThompson states, these super set back adjustable seat posts were for off road, and field adjustment. As they are just parts, they could end up all over. A co-worker had a Nishiki International set up with one, he loved it. I ended up one evening departing later than him but going the same way, I found him mashing away in a huge gear for a level section when I caught him as I was spinning away in a 42x17. It reminded me of the chicken/egg situation, did he like to push big gears first, or did the extreme setback guide him to that?

More likely marketing of product(s) that someone(s) in the organization believed in. So how do you get the adjustable stems and seat posts out in the stores so people can see and be attracted to them? You integrate them into a product line (make them standard on a bike). There has always been lots of "great idea" bicycles.... that never caught on.

My entry-level Fuji came with an adjustable stem. I'd guess a selling feature.... as it hasn't proven to me to be a fitting feature.

Thanks for all the replies, guys. I'm not sure yet what I'm going to do with it. I'm generally in favor of keeping things original, but in this case that will take some will power.

The same goes for the original Colani headlight. Kinda cool, but on this bike?

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...7b1ea99277.jpg

As far as the stem/bars positioning, I would expect the bike to have a most flighty steering response with such height and with such little offset from the sterer.

As for an extreme rearward saddle, this precludes the possibility of easily moving to a stand-and-lean-forward riding position, as might be needed for steeper inclines, and so increases the likelihood of knee strain and injury. So it's suitable only for relatively level ground.
Advantages are that it matches the handlebar positioning for an upright position that would suit riding in traffic. Also that it might improve climbing traction where an extremely slippery surface happened to exist. But again, unsuitable for steep climbing imo.

Level ground is just about alle we've got here. I plan to take it for a spin tomorrow. I'll report back on how it feels.

Pretty tame design for Luigi

I dont know about the bars but all my bikes seem to fit best with alot of setback,
I'm using a seatpost very similar to this one on a bike with a Brooks B17 because the short saddle rails don't allow for much setback adjustment. I use bullhorn bars with this setup. Every BODY is different and on that bike it just works for me.

i have a Brooks saddle too and i am having the same issue. Working on a new bike build, and will have a setback seat post. This time. I am not tall: 5'4"