loimpact

Everyone was just given the ok to run 1 of 2 choices of stem......

60mm

or

140mm

All other stems are now obsolete.

Sullalto

No. If you're not already, you might look at tri saddles, with the drop/back angle you're interested in though.

timtak

I spent a while recommending a great new bike hybrid.
Be faster. Be slimmer. Lance your relaxed roadbike now!
With one of these.... (150mm not 140mm)
https://www.aliexpress.com/item/Trial...316271029.html
Only 183 grams! You will also need to cut a spacers at a 60 degree angle
Robot Check

timtak

Thanks. I have a notification if any Cobb saddles come up second hand on the local ebay. I will look out for others.
https://www.triradar.com/gear/best-bi...athlon-review/

Fiery

The shape of your current drops is indeed such that it's hard to find a comfortable position in the hooks, near the levers. If you checked out the two bars I suggested, you'd notice they are shaped much better for riding comfortably deep in the drops with levers right where you can reach them.

The unforseen consequence of not having to use an extreme stem would be the ability to further refine your position, going lower, or longer, or shorter than you currently are. Oh, and you might feel fast right now, but you're really not. Your cruising speed on flat ground seems to be below 30km/h, which you should be able to achieve easily with a "fat guy" setup if you just worked more on your actual pedaling instead of getting into the most extreme position you can contort yourself into.

timtak

Fiery,

Sorry you are right I did not check them out. I will now (and did) but, I don't see myself purchasing some.

I have ridden quite a few bikes and I have never used drops much. I find my current ones quite comfortable but up at the front there, with my hands on the horizontal part of the bars, it stands to reason that I can put much weight on my hands since my hands are on a pole that travels horizontally. Who uses their drops anyway? Not many riders, as far as I am aware. I think that I use my drops more than most other riders I see. They are fine.

I do intend to keep tweaking.

I average more than 30kmh on segments at least. In my commute there are lights and supermarket stops and I generally turn strava on well before I leave my house, walking around with it on my back.
These top few recent segments averaging are in the 35-43kmh range
Bike Ride Profile | Lunch Ride near Japan | Times and Records | Strava
Bike Ride Profile | ********** near Japan | Times and Records | Strava
Bike Ride Profile | ********** near Japan | Times and Records | Strava
Bike Ride Profile | Morning Ride near Japan | Times and Records | Strava
Going down the list, here 41kmh 3/22
Strava Segment | ?58**********??Km**************************************************
Here 40kmh　& second and third out of 21 and 22 riders despite being an old fart
Strava Segment | ?58**********?4km**************************************************
Here 40mph and 2/32
Strava Segment | ?338**********?4km?25********************25******************************
Here I am KOM at 28kmh out of 23 on a climb
Strava Segment | ????(Nihongi Pass ********************???5********************
I only go less than 30 on climbs or into a wind.
I do not feel in the slightest contorted.

I have merely semi converted a relaxed road bike into more of a time trial position (or hybrid road/tt position). I think I am in the top three of all, or almost all, my Strava segments (full list https://www.strava.com/athlete/segments/starred) having a great time, and here to recommend not (in this instance) to be taught, because I know I am onto a good thing.

I may go even faster, be KOM on everything if I bought the bars you recommend but... sorry, no I know I am not (like most people I see riding everywhere) into using my drops all that much.

Fiery

It's funny how you go with "but everybody does that" when it is something you are also doing, yet you have no problem going against well stablished wisdom when it doesn't match your ideas. In other words, most people also ride very upright, so why do you care if they use or don't use the drops? For the way you are riding, using the drops would make so much more sense that it's not even funny. Trials stems are made for trials bikes. Drop bars are made for getting low. Of course, you are free to do as you wish, but I'll stick with my opinion that forcing equipement to do something it was not made for, instead of using similarly priced equipement that was designed for just the task, is stupid.

Regarding your Strava results, fair enough. I had looked only at the last couple of rides on your profile.

timtak

Hi Fiery

I am suggesting a, pretty obvious it seems to me, hybrid: Road bike bars at a TT position.

This is pretty similar to the now conventional "hybrid": Straight bars on a road bike

I don't care too much about anything. I am having a good time. I want to share good news.

I may well be stupid. Yet, I hope some folks test my stupidity because it, my ride, seems good, for others also, to me.

Tim

Muffin Man

Strava is pretty good at taking out time that isn't spent on the bike at speed. There's a moving time, which is the time where you're actually moving, and an elapsed time, which is the timer from when you started to recording, to when the timer is stopped.


Also, I use my drops probably more than my hoods, because my bike is set up correctly and its comfortable to be in all positions that the bars and hoods were designed for.

emveezee

Just for fun, you have one that shows leg extension at the bottom of the stroke?

BoSoxYacht

Every photo he posts of his positioning is fun(funny).

timtak

Ho, ho, ho! The social cohesion here is incredible. I have Strava results that prove the effectiveness of my fit, but people keep going on and on about how unconventional "fun", "funny" I am. Who gives a flip? Where is that rugged individualism that I read about?

Fast is more fun than "funny" feels.

Campag4life

Actually social cohesion is rare on the 41 because of the diversity of cyclists here...young and old, fast and slow. What we have here is philosophical cohesion. Most that are into bike fit and better riders tend to be...they don't agree with your position. This is no slight, its just a rare consensus. Of course you need to continue with what you are doing because you have been steadfast in your belief you are doing what is best for you.

Another point is...your one way commute is less than 15 miles. Very few here go out and ride their bike for 15 miles. A 15 mile ride doesn't expose a poor fit. In fact, I can go out and ride my bike 15 miles fast with a piece of wood for a saddle 2 inches too low or a handlebar down like yours or up high like a cruiser....doesn't matter. A 50 mile ride will however expose your weight forward position which includes handling around other riders. So you have an outliar fit which I believe you would agree with. So don't expect much resonance for your set up. I also believe and no doubt others believe that your Strava times are about the engine aka you, and not your fit. My personal belief is you would be as fast or perhaps even faster on a more traditional fit and certainly would be faster if riding 40-70 miles.
Have fun and most importantly ride safe. Doesn't look to be very safe where you ride per your videos.

timtak

Campag4life
Yes, indeed. My fit is designed for my ride length which is rarely longer than about 30 miles, and generally almost exactly 15 miles (I think in km these days -24km). This is because my ride is the our beach house commute, and family trips to one of two local towns. I do sometimes ride 60 km and the fit is fine then too but sometimes my feet ache. I wonder if that is a product of my "digging" pedalling style. Maybe.

I believe that many other fat-forties, with young families, like myself do not have the time to go out on long (e.g. 50mile) rides would like a fit that allows them to go fast for an under one hour workout. On the other hand I firmly believe that the typical UCI fit, seat rearward, mud scraping, using ones glutes, is good for longer distances, riding all day (as TDF riders do). Due to the dominance of UCI races us fat fourties are directed towards this long distance UCI race style. This is a bad idea in my view, and another reason why I am not keen on local bike shops.

It seems to me that there are two poles of good fit (1), sprinty, "digging" the pedals, saddle tall and forwards "praying-Landis/Obree/Superman" and (2) classic long-distance UCI, flat-footed mud-scraping, saddle low and rear, using ones glutes, and probably a variety of styles in between. Most fat forties, with little time, should be directed towards (1) not (2) but there is money in being a UCI/brand vector.

Campag4life

You seem to have some sort of hang up with a UCI fit. UCI, legal or not is irrelevant. The reason why your fit isn't popular is because a. it isn't faster and b. for most but apparently not you, its less comfortable. Why is it less comfortable? Simply because of higher lumber and neck flexion and more weight on the hands...riding a bike while doing a push up isometric isn't comfortable. The butt is designed to sit on and more weight goes on the butt versus hands the farther the saddle is behind the BB. Basically you have a quasi TT position only instead of supporting your weight forward bias with your elbows, you support your weight with your hands. This works for you on short rides and that's fine.

Cyclist75354986865

This thread, like the bike stem, is too long.

utahp8ntballer

I hate myself more and more every time I click on the link.

megalowmatt

If it gets locked you can follow the same argument over at weight weenies.

timtak

It is not that I have a hang up with UCI fit, but that too many Local Bike Shops, selling as they are the image of the UCI racers in the form of the major-mark-up UCI sponsoring brands, have a UCI fit fetish. The UCI fit is good for those that ride around in a group of 80 people for long distances. It is a good fit for those people. It may even be a good fit for those who have the leisure to go on 50 mile rides on their own.

But for the majority of fat-forties, who cycle shorter distances, on their own, the UCI fit is inappropriate and should and would be demoted but for the UCI-industrial-lBS complex that makes money out of the races, making massive mark up bikes, and massaging egos ("You look just like a TDF/Grand Fondo pro") for money.

Cobb ("advisor to Lemond and Armstrong") claims the butt is not designed to sit on. Supporting yourself on your sit bones in your butt is less comfortable, he claims, than rotating around and putting weight on your thigh muscles. I tried it and found him, the expert saddle maker, advisor to champions, to be right. What a surprise.

The lower handlebars and rotated position (he uses a -60 stem, I use a long -30) actually takes some weight off your hands, because you can support yourself more easily on your muscles on your saddle. Sure I do have some weight on my hands, but no I am not doing push ups. I have as much weight on my hands as the average fat-forty rider (except less now that I have slimmed up).

By the way, my skill at geometry is not great but I think that when rotating a rider forward on a relaxed frame, a long -30 stem is going to be better than Cobb's short -60 degree stem because as one rotates forwards ones head and center of gravity rotate forwards so with a short stem, the good imho rule of thumb "your handlebars should obscure your view of the front axcle" which is true of my bike, will not be true for a short -60 stem. That is not to say that my fit is better than Cobb's because I am sure he advises his riders to purchase a bike with a longer top tube. But if you been fitted up in a "relaxed" UCI catch-the-wind 'Grand Fondo' peleton-position by an lBS then, the long -30 stem (not the short -60 stem) is the way to go, imho.

And variable stems creak. And long stems flex your forks providing suspension. Perhaps I am saying my fit is superior to Cobbs. It is very similar, and it was his idea.

Now that it is winter, though, the pounds are coming back! I may go for lunch time rides.

utahp8ntballer

I don't have enough beer in my fridge to make this make any kind of logical sense at all.
Wouldn't some form of science just make you realize that if your seat is pointed at the ground when you sit on it, you'll lean forward and need your hands/arms to hold you up? I know in my experience that is exactly what happened when my saddle was a few degrees down from level.

timtak

Yes, but please forget my seat. This thread is about stems.

In this thread I am recommending is a stem length and position and with regard to this lower (using -60 or -70 in Cobb, or -30 stem in mine) the lower bar position actually, surprisingly perhaps, takes weight off ones hands.

If not persuaded, please listen to John Cobb (expert saddle maker, advisor to champions) at the 5 minutes 23 second point
A style back road position - YouTube

"As you go down further it keeps taking weight off the seat and off your hands" (and onto your thighs)

utahp8ntballer

It's because you're laying on your legs at that point. You'll also notice at the end he says to run your saddle 4-5 degrees high to relieve pressure on the hands.

seypat

Did I miss the Rod Serling intro/narrative?

timtak

> It's because you're laying on your legs at that point.
Yes. I know. This position "laying on your legs," as you call it, is what I am recommending.

> You'll also notice at the end he says to run your saddle 4-5 degrees high to relieve pressure on the hands.
Can we forget the saddle here? Sure, tilt your saddle for less hand pressure.

But get the -70 degree or -30 degree stem first because head tubes are, according to John Cobb, too long and a "laying on your legs" position is fast, comfortable and takes the pressure off ones seat (sit bones) and hands.

utahp8ntballer

If you get the right size/style of bike you don't have this problem and have to run an absurdly long angled stem.