jimmuller 

It would never work for me to measure myself C-C. I'm too off-center.

RobbieTunes

I knew a guy named Lefty...

repechage

The Southern Cal gear limit in '72 -'75 for Juniors and Intermediates was 84.9" 44x14. Many ran 47x15 which was just a bit shy. Up till and including 1974 the gear limit was off for two months prior to the Nationals on the road as there was no National limit.
When training with the Seniors it was hummingbird legs time on the flats. I used to love pulling a fair pull with the Cat. 1 guys in 53x15's or 53x16's. No ranked Senior used anything else than a 53 big ring, because as John Howard said in an interview, 52 teeth chainrings just don't cut it.
In 1975, the gear limits went National, with the Juniors getting 52x15 max all year.
That was a pretty useful top, it kept one from doing stupid things to their legs and the Seniors could never drop you. Many guys ran too big a ear anyway.
The track had National gear limits earlier. I think over time they have moved them around a bit.

bikingshearer 

+1 to everyone who suggests using one of the established fit mesurement systems and then listening to what your body tells you and adjusting accordingly.

+1 also to those who state that it doesn't have to be to-the-millimeter precise, although I think there is one exception: if you are a serious racer, meaning a pro or maybe a Cat. I amateur with a serious chance to turn pro. For these folks, a 1% difference in performance can be the difference between winning and losing, or even between getting a contract and not getting one. They need to be dialed in so as to be in the most aero, most efficient position they can tolerate. For the rest of us, obsessing to that degree is pointless, unless you like or can't help obsessing.

I do think it is worth paying fairly serious attention to the seat height, however, because getting that wrong can do unpleasant and potentially serious things to your knees. Otherwise, and unless you are one of the aforementioned racers, get it close, tweak it so you can becomfortable on your bike, and enjoy the ride.

Six jours

Seems to me the high level racers are the ones least in need of "perfect" over fit. As evidence, I point out the days back when pro cyclists couldn't expect to have a proper back-up bike in a race. Unless you were a star, you had to rely on a "close enough" bike if you needed a replacement during a race. At best, a mechanic would lean out a window on the fly, to adjust your seat height. But if you look back at old footage, you'll see that a pro would still look flawless on the "loaner" bike even though it didn't really fit him: he knows how to sit properly on the bike, so things being a bit out of whack don't make as a much of a difference.

Contrast that with the typical recreational rider, who is doing so many things wrong that a poorly fitting bike just makes it that much worse. But of course, making the bike fit "perfectly" down to the last millimeter doesn't change the fact that he's still doing a bunch of things wrong. So no matter how you slice it, the millimeters just don't matter. IMO, of course.

T-Mar

The Fit Kit's real claim to fame were the unique RAD pedals used to set cleat angle. Just about every thing else could be accomplished using a measuring tape, level and plumb bob. When pedal sysyems with floating cleats were developed, the Fit Kit appears to have lost much of it's lustre. Which is too bad, because RAD was simple and worked well and there's much to be said for setting your cleats in the neutral position, even if they can float. If they are too far off the neutral, it's possible to disenage with the twist that often occurs during sudden accelerations.

Picchio Special

I'm paying a lot mpore attention to fit since I began doing physical therapy to rehab chronic right hip pain. Part of the PT involved looking at bike fit. I've always gravitated toward 57cm as my "sweet spot," with the ability to go a cm or so in either direction and still be comfortable. But the hip has compelled me to rethink that a bit. I've noticed that it's harder than I realized to get my saddle back far enough to position my knees over the crank adequately. The bikes I ride regularly now all have Arione saddles, regardless of how this looks. I was worried when I got my Grandis that it would be too small, but it has actually given me the best fit I've found so far, with a 56cm seat tube amd 55cm top tube, thoough a slightly longer than usual stem. Which is all to say, the size range I can comfortably ride over any distance, say, 20+ miles, has narrowed, while the need to pay attention to fit specifics has expanded, all related to physical problems that less-than-ideal fit very likely contributed to to begin with.

Road Fan

I can pretty readily measure my inseam, arm, shoulder width, and upper/lower arm, though errors are possible. What I can't do my myself is measure back angle or leg angles. I've had a good fit done with goniometer-based adjustment, and it was a good thing to do, very beneficial. But since then I've taken to more saddle setback and being in better balance over the BB. That essentially means KOPS is not right for me, and hence my knee angles are not what they were.

Nonethiless I'm having IAB's experience, that several of my bikes adjusted for comfort, balance, and feel have ended up with the same numbers.

kc0yef 

I know an Ilean

kc0yef 

Why I need to be framed for my fit...
I have a bike that my cycling fanatic friend and I built in 1996 since then I have hyper extended the tendons in my leg and bent a bone in my shoulder, I had not ridden that bike in 15 years when I got on it I realized it did not feel right.
So I re positioned a few things moved my brake hood 2mm to the left I increased my q 15mm lengthened my stem by 30mm and went from baskets to SPD my cycling fanatic friend has since then become an Osteopathic Doctor and he now fits people for their body and their components. He told me to simple buy a bigger frame old was a 510 steel steel seat post steel stem and well you can imagine it was very heavy...and only a 58cm this was determined to be the best geometry in the price range and we built it well with limited funds and FUN in mind. I am 6'5" 260lbs and he told me to get a ti bike in the 60-62cm range and see it that would be a better fit... well I did and built the frame up and he spent a few hours with me fitting me... The bike disappears when I ride now. My cycling position is great I can breath better and just to be sure I got back on the steel beast and promptly got off. I just bought a vintage 68cm frame valite tubing and adjusted to the same measurements. I did this because I always needed a rise in the stem so I lowered the seat and like magic I prefer the steel bike a Fuji Royale II. The weight is almost the same the more I ride the more I notice the differences so ride get a fitting and make sure they are competent. Most quality bike shops include a fitting with a new bike buy a certified fitter I am blessed enough to have a friend that can do it and two great bike shops nearby that I can casually discuss fitting. This is not a mark of distinction but in reality makes cycling more fun and enjoyable and I want to ride much more often. So get fit. If you look at a Racer his position is so different from years of developing his riding style that, his fitting will be different. My Doctor fit me differently on same size bikes with different components every millimeter can make a difference.

T-Mar

Glad to hear that things worked out well for you. Once you have your magic fit, all you need are the relative dimensions of the body contact points to each other.

Italuminium

I've been into road bikes for a relatively short amount of time, only about 2 years or so (although I'm a lifelong cyclist). I swung into it pretty hard, and within a year I've build up a fast roadie, a fast vintage and a drop-bar fixie. I've come to this point via several frames and several component sets, just swapping them out based on feel, not measurements. After every ride or so, I made little adjustments to the saddle, the bars etc. and when I took the tape measure to them a short while ago, I found out I reached numbers within 1 cm of each other on all the key measurements across the three bikes. I had myself measured and crunched some numbers according to the CONI and Guillimard methods, and came roughly to the same conclusion as I reached by trial and error. Interesting, huh? I could have saved me a lot of time swapping out stems and fidgeting saddles, but it's nice to know taht the methods work!

RobbieTunes

Trial and error, for me. Mostly error.

Bike shops tell me 52-54.

I cannot ride a 54, after several hundred dollars spent on 54's with the "hope fit" system.
Several stems, several seat posts; each one, I hoped, would be 'the solution."

I ride a 56cm square, but my ideal fit, over the years, I've learned would be a 55.5x55.5
That's my hunch and I'm keeping to it.

I can ride a 58cm, and have done so, on centuries.
Mostly because measurements vary among those who sell me frames.

I can ride a 59cm, and have done so, on two centuries.
Enough for me to stop tempting fate. Standover was not an option.

I suppose I could have saved a lot of time, and money,
by measuring myself at various intervals determined by a chart.
However, there are many charts, theories, and approaches to the proper fit.
They all come back to trial and error.

I wouldn't say finding my "perfect" fit was an accident, but it sure wasn't on purpose.
For most of us, we gravitate towards what works, over time, with several bikes.
I'm just glad I wasn't experimenting with $1000 bikes.

Italuminium

exactly. I bought my first bike based on standover height, a 60 square peugeot for 25€. I felt like I was on the rack. Two lbs's advised me 56'ers, but those felt still too stretched out. Turns out my arms are quite short, along with short hands, so I need short tt's, yet st's are much more open for any size between 53 an 60 .

ftwelder

I build a lot of frames for a kid, Mickey Dennoncourt who owns the Spooky brand. He convinced me to build my latest bike to "his" geometry and in doing so, I ended up measuring my whole body and drawing it up in autocad. At the end of the day, I switched out my stem a couple of times, adjusted my saddle and ended up loving the bike. Just like anything else I find with a 58 TT. I think a lot about the way I fit on a bike when I am riding. What else is there?

non-fixie 

I just bought a nice original Peugeot PR10 that came with the original 1976 instruction manual for Peugeot owners, featuring Bernard Thevenet on the cover, who'd just won the previous year's TdF.
In this manual are clear instructions on how to get the right bike, and set it up correctly. It's not difficult. For the poor souls not proficient in Dutch:

• measure your inside leg and deduct 25 cm's
• buy the Peugeot nearest in size (seat tube, C-T)
• put your heel on the pedal when the crank is aligned with the seat tube - the leg should be not quite stretched (see fig. a)
• adjust saddle height accordingly
• put crank in horizontal forward position - the knee should be above the middle or the front of the pedal (see fig. b)
• adjust seat setback accordingly

Bernard Thevenet:



Instructions:

cudak888 

Reminds me of early, slack-geometry racers from the 1920's - essentially DL-1's with drop bars.

-Kurt

due ruote 

Like others, I've found that my bikes all have very similarly sized cockpits, though I haven't measured myself and haven't used any fancy methods. If I'm setting up a new bike, the two measurements I pay close attention to are a)top of saddle to pedal spindle and b)sit bones to center of brake hoods. When those two metrics are where I want them, I'm generally within millimeters of the final product.

noglider 

Me too. I don't measure. I just move my saddle until it feels right. I change the stem if I feel I need to. I think I like my saddle farther back than most people, but I haven't measured to verify. I often have my saddles all the way back or almost all the way back.

Six jours

The picture is so ridiculous I had to go verify it with other sources. I was pretty sure it was going to turn out a Photoshop job. At 60 degrees, the seat tube is at least 6 degrees shallower than any I have come across from the 20s onward - and those all used steel seatposts with the clamp facing opposite what we consider standard today, so they the riders weren't nearly as far back as Bauer sat. Strange...