Does my fit look reasonable?
06-30-18 | 04:45 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Does my fit look reasonable?
Hello all!
I'm getting some neck and shoulder pain when trying to do longer rides, and I'm wondering if perhaps my handlebars are too low and/or I'm too stretched out. I wear glasses when I ride so I think I'm also tilting my head further up than normal in order to see through my glasses.
I'm also having some right knee pain. I'm not sure if it's related to saddle height or cleat position, but I've measured my inseam to be 91cm and have set my saddle height at 81cm for the video. Does it look too high? It looks like I may be pointing my toe down too much and my hips might be rocking a little bit. I'm also 6'2 on a 58cm frame and I'm wondering if perhaps it's a bit too small. Maybe I should be riding something closer to 61cm with a shorter stem? The current stem is 120mm.
What do you think?
Thanks very much for any feedback!
I'm getting some neck and shoulder pain when trying to do longer rides, and I'm wondering if perhaps my handlebars are too low and/or I'm too stretched out. I wear glasses when I ride so I think I'm also tilting my head further up than normal in order to see through my glasses.
I'm also having some right knee pain. I'm not sure if it's related to saddle height or cleat position, but I've measured my inseam to be 91cm and have set my saddle height at 81cm for the video. Does it look too high? It looks like I may be pointing my toe down too much and my hips might be rocking a little bit. I'm also 6'2 on a 58cm frame and I'm wondering if perhaps it's a bit too small. Maybe I should be riding something closer to 61cm with a shorter stem? The current stem is 120mm.
What do you think?
Thanks very much for any feedback!
07-03-18 | 11:37 AM
#2
just another gosling
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 20,583
Likes: 2,690
From: Everett, WA
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Not enough reach is cramping your back plus bike is really too small by a good bit. On this bike, move your saddle back as far as it goes, roll your hips forward on the saddle and straighten your back until it's a straight line from your shorts waistband to the back of your neck. Then add stem length until your upper arms are at a 90° angle to your straightened back.
Of course you have neck and shoulder pain with that fit and position. Look at the angle of your upper back, just below your neck. It's horizontal, like you were in a full aero tuck with a flat, horizontal back. Except you're not.
Ideally, with hands on the hoods and forearms horizontal, your elbows should be in front of your knees.
All the above said, we do see a lot of pros with bikes as small as yours. They do that to get a lighter, stiffer bike and they get paid to win or place, so they put up with the little things like pain and discomfort that come with the small bike. Choices.
Of course you have neck and shoulder pain with that fit and position. Look at the angle of your upper back, just below your neck. It's horizontal, like you were in a full aero tuck with a flat, horizontal back. Except you're not.
Ideally, with hands on the hoods and forearms horizontal, your elbows should be in front of your knees.
All the above said, we do see a lot of pros with bikes as small as yours. They do that to get a lighter, stiffer bike and they get paid to win or place, so they put up with the little things like pain and discomfort that come with the small bike. Choices.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
07-03-18 | 12:05 PM
#3
just another gosling
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 20,583
Likes: 2,690
From: Everett, WA
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
I would like to note in passing that the number of riders who post here with fit problems because their bikes are too large is, IIRC, exactly zero. Weird, really. One would think that statistically it would be even numbers each way. But no.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
07-03-18 | 05:33 PM
#4
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Not enough reach is cramping your back plus bike is really too small by a good bit. On this bike, move your saddle back as far as it goes, roll your hips forward on the saddle and straighten your back until it's a straight line from your shorts waistband to the back of your neck. Then add stem length until your upper arms are at a 90° angle to your straightened back.
I'll make the adjustments and see how it feels.
07-03-18 | 06:45 PM
#6
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Thanks a lot!
07-04-18 | 12:22 PM
#7
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 2,498
Likes: 773
From: Chicago North Shore
Bikes: frankenbike based on MKM frame
I recommend learning to ride with elbows bent. If you ride the road like you ride the trainer, I think you're transmitting a lot of shock to your shoulders. I think that implies a shorter stem.
07-04-18 | 08:43 PM
#8
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
I've made the adjustments that were suggested and it does seem to feel better, but I haven't been out on the road with it yet. I believe the reach changed by almost 4cm so that should help quite a lot.
07-04-18 | 11:11 PM
#9
just another gosling
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 20,583
Likes: 2,690
From: Everett, WA
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Yeah that's definitely something I'll keep in mind while riding. I think it's just something I do on the trainer because there's no road vibration, bumps, etc that I need to absorb. When I'm out on the road I have a bend and my torso is slightly lower.
I've made the adjustments that were suggested and it does seem to feel better, but I haven't been out on the road with it yet. I believe the reach changed by almost 4cm so that should help quite a lot.
I've made the adjustments that were suggested and it does seem to feel better, but I haven't been out on the road with it yet. I believe the reach changed by almost 4cm so that should help quite a lot.
Those women are doing it right. Note bent elbows, elbows in front of or nearly in front of knees. Note in the 2 photos of the Timex rider, one with almost straight arms, the other elbows well bent, that the angles between upper arm and torso seem identical. That's normal and by far the most comfortable for long distance riding.
'97 Tour videos have good shots of the positioning of the young Jan Ullrich who climbed almost entirely in the saddle and whose fit was optimized for that:
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
07-05-18 | 12:55 AM
#10
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,778
Likes: 4,884
Yeah that's definitely something I'll keep in mind while riding. I think it's just something I do on the trainer because there's no road vibration, bumps, etc that I need to absorb. When I'm out on the road I have a bend and my torso is slightly lower.
I've made the adjustments that were suggested and it does seem to feel better, but I haven't been out on the road with it yet. I believe the reach changed by almost 4cm so that should help quite a lot.
I've made the adjustments that were suggested and it does seem to feel better, but I haven't been out on the road with it yet. I believe the reach changed by almost 4cm so that should help quite a lot.
07-05-18 | 04:56 PM
#12
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
I asked DannoXYZ to edit his iconic Numb Hands post, putting the photos back in. These photos show what it's supposed to look like, and also explains how to avoid the dreaded numb hands: Numb Hands
Those women are doing it right. Note bent elbows, elbows in front of or nearly in front of knees. Note in the 2 photos of the Timex rider, one with almost straight arms, the other elbows well bent, that the angles between upper arm and torso seem identical. That's normal and by far the most comfortable for long distance riding.
Those women are doing it right. Note bent elbows, elbows in front of or nearly in front of knees. Note in the 2 photos of the Timex rider, one with almost straight arms, the other elbows well bent, that the angles between upper arm and torso seem identical. That's normal and by far the most comfortable for long distance riding.
I'll give that a try too, thanks!
Last edited by MeanSekine; 07-05-18 at 05:00 PM.
07-17-18 | 06:27 PM
#13
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2018
Posts: 588
Likes: 17
Bikes: (2) 2019 Specialized Roll Sports, 1992 Merlin Road Ti, 1986 Schwinn Peloton, 2 Trek 920’s,
Hello all!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2g5aeQ4c_U
I'm getting some neck and shoulder pain when trying to do longer rides, and I'm wondering if perhaps my handlebars are too low and/or I'm too stretched out. I wear glasses when I ride so I think I'm also tilting my head further up than normal in order to see through my glasses.
I'm also having some right knee pain. I'm not sure if it's related to saddle height or cleat position, but I've measured my inseam to be 91cm and have set my saddle height at 81cm for the video. Does it look too high? It looks like I may be pointing my toe down too much and my hips might be rocking a little bit. I'm also 6'2 on a 58cm frame and I'm wondering if perhaps it's a bit too small. Maybe I should be riding something closer to 61cm with a shorter stem? The current stem is 120mm.
What do you think?
Thanks very much for any feedback!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2g5aeQ4c_U
I'm getting some neck and shoulder pain when trying to do longer rides, and I'm wondering if perhaps my handlebars are too low and/or I'm too stretched out. I wear glasses when I ride so I think I'm also tilting my head further up than normal in order to see through my glasses.
I'm also having some right knee pain. I'm not sure if it's related to saddle height or cleat position, but I've measured my inseam to be 91cm and have set my saddle height at 81cm for the video. Does it look too high? It looks like I may be pointing my toe down too much and my hips might be rocking a little bit. I'm also 6'2 on a 58cm frame and I'm wondering if perhaps it's a bit too small. Maybe I should be riding something closer to 61cm with a shorter stem? The current stem is 120mm.
What do you think?
Thanks very much for any feedback!
I am 6’3 and ride a 61cm....perfect! FWIW...
Last edited by Patriot1; 07-17-18 at 06:32 PM.
07-21-18 | 08:39 AM
#14
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Thanks!
07-29-18 | 07:36 AM
#16
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
It might. I think that the handlebar height is likely the largest cause of pain in my neck. I have only managed to get one long ride in on the bike since I swapped the stem and bars, and so far the added reach hasn't helped much.
I've set the bars up to the maximum my current adapter will allow, which is still a 7cm difference between the saddle and the handlebars. So, I'll see how that feels. I think the extra 1cm I've added to the stem will be negated by the amount I've raised the handlebars.
Planning on riding my mountain bike today, but I'll try to record some more video tonight and get an opinion on the current position.
07-29-18 | 08:33 AM
#17
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,278
Likes: 342
From: Alpharetta, GA
Bikes: Nashbar Road
If you were to diagram the force vectors, using a decent approximation of weight distribution in the upper body, I think that we would find that the change in stress in the shoulders, or arms, or hands, is just about insignificant either way even given various assumptions about position changes. Because of that, I surmise that the changes in position (which we'd be making assumptions about) are more relevant than the change in weight distribution.
07-30-18 | 08:19 PM
#18
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Ok, I've made another video with my fit changes. I measured my inseam again and it came out about 89.5cm, so I lowered my saddle down to 79cm. I found a seat post with a bit more setback and moved the saddle back. I've also raised the handlebars by maybe 3-4cm, and added 1cm to the stem. I think this gives me around a 5cm difference between the saddle and the handlebars.
I can see in the video that my back is straighter, but isn't quite as straight as it could be, yet. How does this look to you guys?
Thanks a lot!
I can see in the video that my back is straighter, but isn't quite as straight as it could be, yet. How does this look to you guys?
Thanks a lot!
Last edited by MeanSekine; 07-30-18 at 08:27 PM.
08-01-18 | 10:03 PM
#20
just another gosling
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 20,583
Likes: 2,690
From: Everett, WA
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Hey, that looks like a cyclist! Nice. I'd experiment with saddle height on a long climb. Mess with it until it feels like you are generating power with the least effort. Looks low to me right now. It's what works best for you, not a calculated number. Check heel-on-pedal again.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
08-01-18 | 11:32 PM
#21
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 764
Likes: 5
From: Long Beach
Bikes: Fitz randonneuse, Trek Superfly/AL, Tsunami SS, Bacchetta, HPV Speed Machine, Rans Screamer
Hold this in reserve, but some time down the road you may want to read up on crank length. Leonard Zinn has written about it extensively, and there are a number of good web sites that discuss having crank length proportional to leg length.
Knee pain: Many say too long and you risk knee pain, but too short also causes knee pain. It is just that shorter people with cranks too long is more common.
Saddle setback: if you set your saddle with your knee above the pedal spindle (KOPS), your long femurs and short cranks push you well back on the saddle rails.
Power and endurance: personally I was maxed out on RPM and my legs got trashed on log rides with 175mm cranks. When I switched to proportional cranks, my endurance was amazing, and I set many personal bests. It allows you to use your longer limbs and muscles to full effect. And with less knee stress and more general comfort (saddle, back, arms).
The benefits go on and on.
By my calculations, you should be riding 193mm cranks. It only sounds crazy until you do a couple rides. Then you will never go back.
Knee pain: Many say too long and you risk knee pain, but too short also causes knee pain. It is just that shorter people with cranks too long is more common.
Saddle setback: if you set your saddle with your knee above the pedal spindle (KOPS), your long femurs and short cranks push you well back on the saddle rails.
Power and endurance: personally I was maxed out on RPM and my legs got trashed on log rides with 175mm cranks. When I switched to proportional cranks, my endurance was amazing, and I set many personal bests. It allows you to use your longer limbs and muscles to full effect. And with less knee stress and more general comfort (saddle, back, arms).
The benefits go on and on.
By my calculations, you should be riding 193mm cranks. It only sounds crazy until you do a couple rides. Then you will never go back.
08-01-18 | 11:42 PM
#22
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Hey, that looks like a cyclist! Nice. I'd experiment with saddle height on a long climb. Mess with it until it feels like you are generating power with the least effort. Looks low to me right now. It's what works best for you, not a calculated number. Check heel-on-pedal again.
08-02-18 | 11:11 AM
#23
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 6,017
Likes: 925
From: Nor Cal
Thanks for the feedback! I rode it like this for my commute and hated the saddle height. I've since cranked it back up to 81cm. I've also had it set to 82cm and I feel like that is my most powerful position, but I also felt like I was sitting on the nose of the saddle and was getting some discomfort, which I assumed meant it was too high. I didn't play with the fore-aft position at that height and I probably should, since 3cm of saddle height probably has an effect on the setback.
I like your second, lower position better. IME, it takes a while to adapt to lower saddle height using different muscles, but ultimately makes for smoother, higher rpm pedal stroke.
In both videos, your head & shoulders move back & forth w/ each stroke- looks like unnecessary motion.
You might try doing intervals on the trainer at >100 rpm cadence- this will make issues apparent, & show the value of more knee bend & forward rotated pelvis.
08-02-18 | 05:03 PM
#24
Thread Starter
Member
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Bikes: Sekine SHC 270
Thanks a lot!
08-02-18 | 05:23 PM
#25
just another gosling
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 20,583
Likes: 2,690
From: Everett, WA
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Re saddle height: Not just 100 rpm. Cyclists should be able to spin at least 135 w/o bouncing on the saddle. So what I'd do is put it in a really low gear, probably your lowest, and spin it up to where you start bouncing. Then adjust saddle, try again. See if one height is better than another for you. I spin best at the same height that gives me the best power. Another thing you might think about is pedaling in the drops, like going hard upwind. Try that at different saddle heights, drops, flat back. May take some time to decide what's right for you out on the road.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter