I'm glad you guys are having fun with this , I always get a laugh out of Retros' blog . Because bulldog1935 asked here are some shots of my bike I'm sure it will look wonk .
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...psjpwe7i5n.jpg
http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c1...pso0olwbs9.jpg
show me your pics

thank you - that's nice.

Here is a good shot , this blog is a hoot . Have a Merckxy Christmas and a Coppy New Year . Ummm I know I just broke a rule as I don't own a Italian bike . N+1
Velominati ? The Rules

My setup, typical of my commuting as well as pleasure road bikes. Saddle placed where it feels good, and handlebars a good 4"/10cm below the top of the saddle, or as low as they will go on the particular bike. As necessary, change to a longer/shorter stem to get a comfortable reach.\
I ride on the drops except when lifting my head for a better view at intersections (not to many out my way).

http://i.imgsafe.org/4ba683b.jpg

Here's my latest build. Funky appearance of bar tape is due to re-wrapping after stem transplant; 120mm Cro-Mo stem courtesy of my friend bulldog. :beer:

http://i.imgsafe.org/f14ad80e82.jpg

Strip her naked before you take pics of her ! You have broken rule # 26 . Please read rule #1 .
Velominati ? The Rules

The Ginet formula is based on 170mm crankarms and specifically avoids compensation for different lengths of crankarms due to reported lose of efficiency.

One parameter that very few formulas take into account is the length of the foot, which may require raising or lowering saddle depending on its proportion to leg length.

The foot-on-pedal method is clearly stated to be only a starting point, and thus it requires senstivity and fine-tuning after you make the setting.

The Ginet equation method does not consider many matters that might be important, hence it requires sensitivity and fine-tuning after you make the setting.

It seems to me that they are essentially equivalent in results, except that with the foot-on-pedal method you don't need to do any measurements.

You are just a rule breaker, first, that thing is Japanese and second you have covered up the lovely brake cables in a pretense of aerodynamic efficiency. What could be next, aerodynamic tubes?

J

Speaking of the QRs, I must disagree with the OPs link. Again, for what it is worth, taught by an old Italian racer, builder, mechanic, the front QR shall point up and the lever cross over the leg pointing upward to the bars or saddle. The rear QR shall point upward and to the saddle. Just saying, whilst speaking of rules to which nobody will ever agree completely.

Also, the front brake cable goes ahead of the rear brake cable where they cross to opposite sides. But, again, that is what I was shown to be so, others may do as suits them and is golden and true to them.

J

Interesting that Ginet would conclude that 170mm crankarms are most efficient, regardless of body proportions. Also not only is foot length seemingly relevant, but where the cleat is place on the shoe (I guess those are related).

This is how my saddle height, bars and hoods are set. I ride a lot on the tops and ramps. With the bars rotated further down I would be pitched forwards onto the hoods too much. When in the drops (sometimes for an hour or so into a headwind) my wrists feel comfortable - bars 'pointed' towards the RD. I have large hands so braking in the drops is no trouble.

I made a 'story stick' that captures my preferred dimension from the top of the pedal spindle to the spot on the saddle where my sit bones are (pretty well back on the saddle). It ignores differences in crank arm length and saddle dimensions. I wear the same shoes for each bike. The story stick also captures the dimension from the sit bones home to a line across the back of the hoods. This enables me to easily set each bike's saddle height and reach (saddle position and stem length) the same. Also speeds re-set when I remove something for maintenance. The story stick (furniture builder's term) is a wooden shaft with a flat bottom and a perpendicular dowel rod at the sit bone height. The reach mark is just a mark that measures to another rod laid across the back of the hoods. This stick captures what works for me and helps me repeat it.

Of course, if I decide another dimension works better, I just make another stick and burn the previous one in the stove. Obsolete tools become fuel. Waste not......

For some bars I've tried I'd also need to have them pointed to the RD. It makes the hoods stick up, but makes the whole bar useable. I like the story stick idea. I do the same thing with a tape measure, but your solution is more elegant.

Speaking of setup, do you [rather, does old's'cool] have a bit too much cable housing just in front of the rear brake? It seems like that extra housing is turning what should be a gentle curve into almost a 90 degree angle.

I find the opposite -- too low and my knees feel the strain, too high and I can't generate power at because the leg is overextended. However, I'm finding that a tiny bit too high is more tolerable for me than a tiny bit too low, at least over longer distances (if short distance, just take more weight on the legs and less on the bum).

I routinely break a big rule, yeah, I have no problem using a Shimano drive train on an otherwise Campy Italian machine. This bike had Shimano 600 on it the first time I built it back in the 80s, now it wears 105 9 speed and a Nitto stem and Noodle bar.

http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b3...pstavkoi8t.jpg

It will rock Ultegra hubs on silver Mavic wheels, at least that si my current plan with Conti 23mm GP4000 tires. The saddle will be whatever I can find in yellow. I also need to trim the cables yet.

J

You also break the "never clamp the top tube" rule.

So do I.

Quite so, arguably the cables from the levers as well. One of my first cable jobs, I wanted to err on the side of too long when making the first cut. Maybe someday when I have to disconnect the cables for a more important reason I'll get around to trimming them a little shorter. I'm less fussy about aesthetics than function.

Yes, the key here being "depending on the body proportions of the individual". The perfect custom frame for me would likely be one with a 57cm seat tube and a 61cm top tube (c-c). Thus every bike I own is a compromise one way or the other. Does anyone know of a decent 70s-80s model with a TT that's around 4cm longer than the ST?