Long legs/short torso bike fitting problems
05-22-23, 05:35 AM
#26
Newbie
Join Date: May 2023
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm the other way 'round, short legged, but it's still the same issue in a way. That's the reason I recommend sizing bikes by the effective top tube length, not by seat tube length. Too late now, but one really has to sit on a bike with a normal length stem and see if when one is "in the position," one's upper arms are square off one's torso when on the hoods.
But yeah, you might have to go for a short stem. Do what I suggested above, looking in a mirror or have someone photograph you. Sitting on the bike with a straight back, hands on hoods, elbows bent either some or a lot, doesn't matter, your upper arms should make a right angle with your torso. Mess with your hands' location on the bars until that's true, measure to see what your stem length should be to make that so.
That said, some folks will say that position feels unnatural. Don't worry about that. You'll get used to it. In the long run, on the long ride, that'll be the most comfortable. Stem length doesn't matter as much as folks think it does. It changes the bike's steering response, but one gets used to it very quickly. It's not dangerous one way or the other. My wife has like a 20mm stem, no problem.
Of course before selecting stem length, one has to make sure of correct fore-and-aft saddle position, that one is correctly balanced on the bike, little weight on the hands.
But yeah, you might have to go for a short stem. Do what I suggested above, looking in a mirror or have someone photograph you. Sitting on the bike with a straight back, hands on hoods, elbows bent either some or a lot, doesn't matter, your upper arms should make a right angle with your torso. Mess with your hands' location on the bars until that's true, measure to see what your stem length should be to make that so.
That said, some folks will say that position feels unnatural. Don't worry about that. You'll get used to it. In the long run, on the long ride, that'll be the most comfortable. Stem length doesn't matter as much as folks think it does. It changes the bike's steering response, but one gets used to it very quickly. It's not dangerous one way or the other. My wife has like a 20mm stem, no problem.
Of course before selecting stem length, one has to make sure of correct fore-and-aft saddle position, that one is correctly balanced on the bike, little weight on the hands.
Last edited by Jason Lim; 05-22-23 at 05:45 AM.
05-22-23, 07:05 AM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,496
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3388 Post(s)
Liked 794 Times
in
527 Posts
However i heard that you may need much more hand strength when it comes to lower stem length due to increased castor effect. Rake angle is already protruding with the 70mm on this bike and its sort of already below the normal safe limit. Would this be dangerous, or would there be any situations where this would be dangerous if i lack the hand strength to manage it.
Take a short ride with your hands balled into fists and your thumbs hooked over the handlebar tops close to the bend, as if your fists were clenching a section of handlebar tubing pointing back at you. That's what a much shorter stem will feel like in terms of handling.
Last edited by Kontact; 05-22-23 at 07:08 AM.
05-22-23, 11:21 AM
#28
Newbie
Join Date: May 2023
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
It doesn't take any hand strength to turn a bicycle. The problem with really short stems the way it makes steering feel - smaller movements produce greater effects due to the short lever arm.
Take a short ride with your hands balled into fists and your thumbs hooked over the handlebar tops close to the bend, as if your fists were clenching a section of handlebar tubing pointing back at you. That's what a much shorter stem will feel like in terms of handling.
Take a short ride with your hands balled into fists and your thumbs hooked over the handlebar tops close to the bend, as if your fists were clenching a section of handlebar tubing pointing back at you. That's what a much shorter stem will feel like in terms of handling.
05-22-23, 03:27 PM
#29
just another gosling
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Everett, WA
Posts: 19,205
Bikes: CoMo Speedster 2003, Trek 5200, CAAD 9, Fred 2004
Mentioned: 114 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3735 Post(s)
Liked 1,739 Times
in
1,268 Posts
One should ride the length of stem which is comfortable. There's no point in talking about it. Stems are really cheap. Go buy a stem, try it out, and stop talking about it until you've tried a new stem for a few hundred miles.
__________________
Results matter
Results matter
05-23-23, 06:01 PM
#31
OM boy
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,304
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 489 Post(s)
Liked 582 Times
in
404 Posts
i have an even bigger problem if we could kindly chat over this, my proportions are even more unique than this person that posted here, my inseam is 87 and my height is 165. Im having problems with reach and problems with lower back issues ONLY on my right side i realize my left leg is longer than my right leg by 1cm causing me to have lower back issues only on my right, as for my reach, ive replaced the initial seatpost with an offset of 20mm to 0mm and already slammed it as far forward as i can. Im riding a Canyon Grail 7 and the size is Womens 2XS. It is already the smallest bike i could find.
Sorry I hadn;t responded sooner, but just back from a week of backpacking, so offline.
So, things which are discussed here, online, by natuer of the project, are going to be incomplete and can only give some insight on places to look for getting closer to some resolution.
If your measurements are accurate, the certainly you have a short torso and longer legs. But what about the arms? What about saddle setback? There are so many points of consideration for which you've given no info. And still, there are no 'exact' things, just places to look/consider. ALL these things are interlinked.
Comments by others, since you made this post, have mostly given good things to consider. But they're limited by your 'curated' info, lacking much info which would help provide more ideas.
So here are so of my observations.
1. Your leg length issue - affects EVERYTHING greatly. That is the 1st thing I recommend you resolve in some acceptable manner. This affects the orientation of your hips, pelvis, spine, shoulders, neck, arms - hmmm, just about everything.
2. You have 5 points of contact with your road bike - saddle, 2 pedals and hands on the bars. But the saddle/butt/pelvis is the anchor point from which everything else is formed. WHere is your saddle? Height and setback - and any 'angle' other than mostly horizontal...
3. Going from 20 mm setback to 0 setback is counterintuitive to what might be need for a 'tall' person on very small 2XS frame.
4. A 2XS frame 'stack' is going to be considerably lower than a 'normal' size frame in M or S. Putting you in a much lower torso lean angle, unless you're also using a very large degree up-angle stem. All that might also contribute to a 'comfort' position.
Forget the 'stem' thing for now.
If not done, get the leg length issue resolved as best as possible. Then get your saddle situated for a good allround road riding position.
After that the Stem/bars/shifters placement is worked on to give you the combination which suits you, for your body and your riding. After, not before.
Re-measure your inseam using 2-3 cm thick book, in your crotch, standing as upright as possible without shoes, heels and back against wall, measuring floor to spine of book. Best if you have someone do the measurement for you, while you hold the book up inside crotch.
Good Luck
Ride On Yuri
05-23-23, 06:05 PM
#32
OM boy
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,304
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 489 Post(s)
Liked 582 Times
in
404 Posts
i have an even bigger problem if we could kindly chat over this, my proportions are even more unique than this person that posted here, my inseam is 87 and my height is 165. Im having problems with reach and problems with lower back issues ONLY on my right side i realize my left leg is longer than my right leg by 1cm causing me to have lower back issues only on my right, as for my reach, ive replaced the initial seatpost with an offset of 20mm to 0mm and already slammed it as far forward as i can. Im riding a Canyon Grail 7 and the size is Womens 2XS. It is already the smallest bike i could find.
Sorry I hadn;t responded sooner, but just back from a week of backpacking, so offline.
So, things which are discussed here, online, by natuer of the project, are going to be incomplete and can only give some insight on places to look for getting closer to some resolution.
If your measurements are accurate, the certainly you have a short torso and longer legs. But what about the arms? What about saddle setback? There are so many points of consideration for which you've given no info. And still, there are no 'exact' things, just places to look/consider. ALL these things are interlinked.
Comments by others, since you made this post, have mostly given good things to consider. But they're limited by your 'curated' info, lacking much info which would help provide more ideas.
So here are so of my observations.
1. Your leg length issue - affects EVERYTHING greatly. That is the 1st thing I recommend you resolve in some acceptable manner. This affects the orientation of your hips, pelvis, spine, shoulders, neck, arms - hmmm, just about everything.
2. You have 5 points of contact with your road bike - saddle, 2 pedals and hands on the bars. But the saddle/butt/pelvis is the anchor point from which everything else is formed. WHere is your saddle? Height and setback - and any 'angle' other than mostly horizontal...
3. Going from 20 mm setback to 0 setback is counterintuitive to what might be need for a 'tall' person on very small 2XS frame.
4. A 2XS frame 'stack' is going to be considerably lower than a 'normal' size frame in M or S. Putting you in a much lower torso lean angle, unless you're also using a very large degree up-angle stem. All that might also contribute to a 'comfort' position.
Forget the 'stem' thing for now.
If not done, get the leg length issue resolved as best as possible. Then get your saddle situated for a good allround road riding position.
After that the Stem/bars/shifters placement is worked on to give you the combination which suits you, for your body and your riding. After, not before.
Re-measure your inseam using 2-3 cm thick book, in your crotch, standing as upright as possible without shoes, heels and back against wall, measuring floor to spine of book. Best if you have someone do the measurement for you, while you hold the book up inside crotch.
Good Luck
Ride On Yuri
05-25-23, 01:11 AM
#33
Newbie
Join Date: May 2023
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Hi Jason,
Sorry I hadn;t responded sooner, but just back from a week of backpacking, so offline.
So, things which are discussed here, online, by natuer of the project, are going to be incomplete and can only give some insight on places to look for getting closer to some resolution.
If your measurements are accurate, the certainly you have a short torso and longer legs. But what about the arms? What about saddle setback? There are so many points of consideration for which you've given no info. And still, there are no 'exact' things, just places to look/consider. ALL these things are interlinked.
Comments by others, since you made this post, have mostly given good things to consider. But they're limited by your 'curated' info, lacking much info which would help provide more ideas.
So here are so of my observations.
1. Your leg length issue - affects EVERYTHING greatly. That is the 1st thing I recommend you resolve in some acceptable manner. This affects the orientation of your hips, pelvis, spine, shoulders, neck, arms - hmmm, just about everything.
2. You have 5 points of contact with your road bike - saddle, 2 pedals and hands on the bars. But the saddle/butt/pelvis is the anchor point from which everything else is formed. WHere is your saddle? Height and setback - and any 'angle' other than mostly horizontal...
3. Going from 20 mm setback to 0 setback is counterintuitive to what might be need for a 'tall' person on very small 2XS frame.
4. A 2XS frame 'stack' is going to be considerably lower than a 'normal' size frame in M or S. Putting you in a much lower torso lean angle, unless you're also using a very large degree up-angle stem. All that might also contribute to a 'comfort' position.
Forget the 'stem' thing for now.
If not done, get the leg length issue resolved as best as possible. Then get your saddle situated for a good allround road riding position.
After that the Stem/bars/shifters placement is worked on to give you the combination which suits you, for your body and your riding. After, not before.
Re-measure your inseam using 2-3 cm thick book, in your crotch, standing as upright as possible without shoes, heels and back against wall, measuring floor to spine of book. Best if you have someone do the measurement for you, while you hold the book up inside crotch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGUTPmnrRJM
Report back
Good Luck
Ride On Yuri
Sorry I hadn;t responded sooner, but just back from a week of backpacking, so offline.
So, things which are discussed here, online, by natuer of the project, are going to be incomplete and can only give some insight on places to look for getting closer to some resolution.
If your measurements are accurate, the certainly you have a short torso and longer legs. But what about the arms? What about saddle setback? There are so many points of consideration for which you've given no info. And still, there are no 'exact' things, just places to look/consider. ALL these things are interlinked.
Comments by others, since you made this post, have mostly given good things to consider. But they're limited by your 'curated' info, lacking much info which would help provide more ideas.
So here are so of my observations.
1. Your leg length issue - affects EVERYTHING greatly. That is the 1st thing I recommend you resolve in some acceptable manner. This affects the orientation of your hips, pelvis, spine, shoulders, neck, arms - hmmm, just about everything.
2. You have 5 points of contact with your road bike - saddle, 2 pedals and hands on the bars. But the saddle/butt/pelvis is the anchor point from which everything else is formed. WHere is your saddle? Height and setback - and any 'angle' other than mostly horizontal...
3. Going from 20 mm setback to 0 setback is counterintuitive to what might be need for a 'tall' person on very small 2XS frame.
4. A 2XS frame 'stack' is going to be considerably lower than a 'normal' size frame in M or S. Putting you in a much lower torso lean angle, unless you're also using a very large degree up-angle stem. All that might also contribute to a 'comfort' position.
Forget the 'stem' thing for now.
If not done, get the leg length issue resolved as best as possible. Then get your saddle situated for a good allround road riding position.
After that the Stem/bars/shifters placement is worked on to give you the combination which suits you, for your body and your riding. After, not before.
Re-measure your inseam using 2-3 cm thick book, in your crotch, standing as upright as possible without shoes, heels and back against wall, measuring floor to spine of book. Best if you have someone do the measurement for you, while you hold the book up inside crotch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wGUTPmnrRJM
Report back
Good Luck
Ride On Yuri
https://www.canyon.com/en-us/gravel-bikes/performance/grail/al/grail-7-wmn/2373.html?dwvar_2373_pv_rahmenfarbe=RD%2FBK&dwvar_2373_pv_rahmengroesse=2XS
05-25-23, 09:15 AM
#34
OM boy
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,304
Bikes: a bunch
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 489 Post(s)
Liked 582 Times
in
404 Posts
i will look into it and be providing you more details in the future. Thanks for the reply. here is the reference for my bikes geometry:
https://www.canyon.com/en-us/gravel-...mengroesse=2XS
https://www.canyon.com/en-us/gravel-...mengroesse=2XS
Torso can be inferred from the leg inseam and overall height.
I do measure for 'backpack' size and that gives a relative number for sizing packs, for the general population ( and also confirms relative torso length)
That is done by measuring along the spine, from a line across the Iliac crests up to the occipital. A good outdoor shop can do that for you. REI, here in the US, has an actual gauge to measure that. This number is compared to actual height, But anything shorter than 17" (43 cm) would be a 'Small' back/pack size. Shorter of course, means shorter torso...
Yeah, anyway, best is to resolve the leg length discrepancy, then situate the saddle. I still prefer using KOPS as a starting point (for many reasons) - again, it is a starting point. It should get you positioned close to the point where your torso mass is well supported by the saddle.
Good Luck
Ride On
Yuri
05-30-23, 11:30 AM
#35
Newbie
Give it a try. But you can usually simulate a shorter stem by putting your hands further back from the hoods.
Butterfly bars are for flatbar setups. Do you want to trade out your drop road bar shifters for flat bar shifters?
But I really don't know what is actually going on with your fit. Sometimes leggy people like yourself have particularly long arms as well, and that can go a long ways toward making their fit work out. I'm just going off the information you provided.
Butterfly bars are for flatbar setups. Do you want to trade out your drop road bar shifters for flat bar shifters?
But I really don't know what is actually going on with your fit. Sometimes leggy people like yourself have particularly long arms as well, and that can go a long ways toward making their fit work out. I'm just going off the information you provided.
05-31-23, 07:39 PM
#36
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,496
Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3388 Post(s)
Liked 794 Times
in
527 Posts
I don't think I said legs longer than torso. But the discussion is about proportions, and if you are used to reading people's numbers it becomes clear when an inseam is long or short for a person's height.
Someone listed a proportion range in the first part of the thread that seemed reasonably accurate.
Someone listed a proportion range in the first part of the thread that seemed reasonably accurate.
06-01-23, 07:49 AM
#37
I'm good to go!
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 13,814
Bikes: Tarmac Disc Comp Di2 - 2020
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5639 Post(s)
Liked 4,313 Times
in
2,966 Posts
Do you need a formula? Seems pretty simple math to me.
However for the purposes of the conversations here, I've always felt that torso includes head and is everything that isn't considered leg length. Though actually leg length and inseam aren't the same thing or measured the same way. So depending one whether you want to use leg length or inseam will also make a difference.
So you can't quite go by the literal definition of Torso.
Yes maybe I'm somewhat trying to be a smart ass here, but there are some things in my statements above that are fact and need consideration if you wish to follow the train of thought in the conversations in other threads.
Welcome to BF!
However for the purposes of the conversations here, I've always felt that torso includes head and is everything that isn't considered leg length. Though actually leg length and inseam aren't the same thing or measured the same way. So depending one whether you want to use leg length or inseam will also make a difference.
So you can't quite go by the literal definition of Torso.
Yes maybe I'm somewhat trying to be a smart ass here, but there are some things in my statements above that are fact and need consideration if you wish to follow the train of thought in the conversations in other threads.
Welcome to BF!
Last edited by Iride01; 06-01-23 at 07:54 AM.
