riding a frame size that is too large??
12-02-07, 07:27 PM
#26
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ffld Cnty Connecticut
Posts: 21,819
Bikes: Old Steelies I made, Old Cannondales
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1170 Post(s)
Liked 879 Times
in
581 Posts
You should really cite references or personal experience, because I was there (well, in the 80's and 90's at least) and amongst us racers, a "fist full of seatpost" was plenty and 2-3" handlebar drop was normal. Some crit racers started to ride smaller frames for handling and aerodynamics (lower bar), but the compact frame wasn't around until the mid 90's.
I admit that my photo is at the extreme of one end, but it's about 1cm less seatpost than the bike I raced in 1994.
I admit that my photo is at the extreme of one end, but it's about 1cm less seatpost than the bike I raced in 1994.
There are plenty of old pics you can find with more seatpost showing.
Last edited by Homebrew01; 12-02-07 at 08:06 PM.
12-02-07, 07:33 PM
#27
Senior Member
It just looks like "classic french" sizing. As long as cockpit fits, and you're not rolling your hips from side-to-side, you should be OK for general riding.
12-02-07, 08:37 PM
#28
Over the hill
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,247
Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 951 Post(s)
Liked 1,117 Times
in
646 Posts
12-03-07, 06:49 AM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
"Fist full of seatpost" and other guesstimates?
There is no need to guess. If a cyclist knows that his preferred saddle height is 30 1/8th inches and his preferred cockpit size is 31 1/4th inches, and his preferred bar drop is one inch, all he has to do with any bike is set it up to those measurements. If he can dial in those measurements with a normal sized stem, the bike fits, if not, it does not fit.
Folks buy bikes backwards. They start with the idea that they ride a 56, or a 57, or a 58, and then try to make the bike fit. Instead, know your OWN measurements, set up the bike and see if it fits.
Among the 10 or so road bikes I've had in the past five years, every one could be set up to match my preferred saddle height, cockpit size and saddle drop, even though they ranged in size from a 54 to a 62. The 54 needed a very high stem to fit, so that bike had to go.
There is no need to guess. If a cyclist knows that his preferred saddle height is 30 1/8th inches and his preferred cockpit size is 31 1/4th inches, and his preferred bar drop is one inch, all he has to do with any bike is set it up to those measurements. If he can dial in those measurements with a normal sized stem, the bike fits, if not, it does not fit.
Folks buy bikes backwards. They start with the idea that they ride a 56, or a 57, or a 58, and then try to make the bike fit. Instead, know your OWN measurements, set up the bike and see if it fits.
Among the 10 or so road bikes I've had in the past five years, every one could be set up to match my preferred saddle height, cockpit size and saddle drop, even though they ranged in size from a 54 to a 62. The 54 needed a very high stem to fit, so that bike had to go.
12-03-07, 10:41 AM
#30
Over the hill
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,247
Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 951 Post(s)
Liked 1,117 Times
in
646 Posts
^ All true, but keep in mind cockpit length isn't all there is to it. Where that cockpit is placed over the bike matters as well. I can get the right cockpit length on bikes ranging from 54cm to 59cm using a 100-120mm stem, but only the larger sizes tend to have the <73 degree seat tube angle I need to accomodate my long thighs. It's annoying to say the least, but I now shop for a frame starting with the seat tube angle and go from there.
12-03-07, 12:50 PM
#31
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
And, don't forget that some of us (like me, fer'instance) don't know what our best road bike size is because it's our first road bike.
I might get something a little different next time, but that's next time.
I might get something a little different next time, but that's next time.
12-03-07, 08:28 PM
#33
ROAD enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Bat Cave
Posts: 712
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
If you don't ride a lot miles, or ride casually, you might be able to get away with a poorly fitting frame/bike.
One you start putting on miles, and or ride hard, very small misfits can become very painful problems.
One you start putting on miles, and or ride hard, very small misfits can become very painful problems.
12-04-07, 12:16 AM
#36
Spin Forest! Spin!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Arrid Zone-a
Posts: 5,964
Bikes: I used to have many. And I Will again.
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
9 Posts
I can't remember his name, but there was a Columbian hill climb jersey winner who rode this way.
12-04-07, 06:58 AM
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Put the saddle at your preferred height. Put the saddle at "mid-rails". Put the bars at your preferred height. The cockpit size is the distance from the back edge of the saddle to the front edge of the stem.
You better compare how two different bikes will fit, you can "fine-tune" cockpit size by measuring from the back edge of the saddle to the front edge of the brake levers, to take into account the differences in size and style of various road bars. But, as a practical matter, measuring to the front of the stem works just as well.
Someone pointed out in an earlier post that even if your cockpit size was identical on two bikes (say 31 inches) your position on the bike may be different. And that is true. A bike with steep angles will move your weight toward the front of the bike. A bike with relaxed angles moves your weight toward the rear wheel.
But, for fitness and recreational riders, comfort on a bike is the most important part of bike fit. And, if the best cockpit size for you is 31 inches, you will be equally comfortable on bikes with steep angles and relaxed angles.
You better compare how two different bikes will fit, you can "fine-tune" cockpit size by measuring from the back edge of the saddle to the front edge of the brake levers, to take into account the differences in size and style of various road bars. But, as a practical matter, measuring to the front of the stem works just as well.
Someone pointed out in an earlier post that even if your cockpit size was identical on two bikes (say 31 inches) your position on the bike may be different. And that is true. A bike with steep angles will move your weight toward the front of the bike. A bike with relaxed angles moves your weight toward the rear wheel.
But, for fitness and recreational riders, comfort on a bike is the most important part of bike fit. And, if the best cockpit size for you is 31 inches, you will be equally comfortable on bikes with steep angles and relaxed angles.
12-04-07, 07:41 AM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 612
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'd be surprised if your new frame is "too large", as I have never seen an experienced adult cyclist riding an expensive bike that was too large. But 60% or 70% of the guys I see on road bikes are riding a frame that is one, two, or even three sizes too small.
There are two measurements that matter in bike fit:
1. Saddle height
2. Cockpit length (the distance from the back edge of the saddle to the front edge of the stem).
A guy doesn't go into a store to buy slacks without knowing his inseam length. And a guy should not buy a bike unless he knows his cockpit length.
Bike fit is really, really simple. If you can dial in your preferred saddle height, and your preferred cockpit length with the bars at your preferred height, the bikes fits. If the bike is set up with your preferred saddle height and preferred bar height, and the cockpit is too long, or too short, the bike does not fit.
Set up your new bike with the saddle at your preferred height, and at the middle of the saddle rails. Raise the bars to the correct height (which ranges from level with the top of the saddle for a long distance cyclist to two inches lower than the top of the saddle for racing crits or time trials).
Then measure the cockpit length. All of my road bikes have precisely the same cockpit length, even though the frame sizes range from size 56 to size 61. How can a size 61 bike have the same cockpit length as a size 56 bike?
Although the top tube on the size 61 bike is longer than on the size 56 bike, the frame is taller, and the headtube is longer and taller. The combination of the taller frame and taller headtube brings the bars both up and back, closer to the saddle.
You can verify that your new frame fits by taking measurements on the bike that fits you the best. Measure the saddle height and the cockpit length. Then set the saddle on your new bike to precisely that height, put the bars at your preferred height, and measure the cockpit length. If the cockpit length is within 1/2 inch of your "perfect" bike, it will be easy to dial in a perfect fit by swapping out the stem.
If the "perfect" cockpit length for you is 31 1/4th inches, any bike that provides you with a cockpit length of 31 1/4th inches is a perfect fit, regardless of the size of the frame, or the length of the top tube.
What about the relationship of the knee to the crank? Many sprinters SWEAR that it is crucial to have the knee in a forward position relative to the crank bolt. And, Greg LeMond SWEARS that having the knee BACK relative to the crank was crucial to his success in long stages and climbing stages. But, for cyclists without a racing license, comfort is more important than mythical claims about racing performance. Start with the saddle at mid-rails and dial in your preferred cockpit length. If you are into short fast rides, you may end up sliding your saddle a bit forward. If you prefer looong rides with a steady high cadence, you may prefer sliding the saddle back a tad.
There are two measurements that matter in bike fit:
1. Saddle height
2. Cockpit length (the distance from the back edge of the saddle to the front edge of the stem).
A guy doesn't go into a store to buy slacks without knowing his inseam length. And a guy should not buy a bike unless he knows his cockpit length.
Bike fit is really, really simple. If you can dial in your preferred saddle height, and your preferred cockpit length with the bars at your preferred height, the bikes fits. If the bike is set up with your preferred saddle height and preferred bar height, and the cockpit is too long, or too short, the bike does not fit.
Set up your new bike with the saddle at your preferred height, and at the middle of the saddle rails. Raise the bars to the correct height (which ranges from level with the top of the saddle for a long distance cyclist to two inches lower than the top of the saddle for racing crits or time trials).
Then measure the cockpit length. All of my road bikes have precisely the same cockpit length, even though the frame sizes range from size 56 to size 61. How can a size 61 bike have the same cockpit length as a size 56 bike?
Although the top tube on the size 61 bike is longer than on the size 56 bike, the frame is taller, and the headtube is longer and taller. The combination of the taller frame and taller headtube brings the bars both up and back, closer to the saddle.
You can verify that your new frame fits by taking measurements on the bike that fits you the best. Measure the saddle height and the cockpit length. Then set the saddle on your new bike to precisely that height, put the bars at your preferred height, and measure the cockpit length. If the cockpit length is within 1/2 inch of your "perfect" bike, it will be easy to dial in a perfect fit by swapping out the stem.
If the "perfect" cockpit length for you is 31 1/4th inches, any bike that provides you with a cockpit length of 31 1/4th inches is a perfect fit, regardless of the size of the frame, or the length of the top tube.
What about the relationship of the knee to the crank? Many sprinters SWEAR that it is crucial to have the knee in a forward position relative to the crank bolt. And, Greg LeMond SWEARS that having the knee BACK relative to the crank was crucial to his success in long stages and climbing stages. But, for cyclists without a racing license, comfort is more important than mythical claims about racing performance. Start with the saddle at mid-rails and dial in your preferred cockpit length. If you are into short fast rides, you may end up sliding your saddle a bit forward. If you prefer looong rides with a steady high cadence, you may prefer sliding the saddle back a tad.
12-04-07, 08:53 AM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,757
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Why the back edge of saddle? Cyclingnews.com uses tip of saddle to center of bars when writing about rider specs. Does it matter either way?
12-04-07, 10:55 AM
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
Why use the back edge of the saddle to measure cockpit length? Because of how I sit on my bikes...with my sitbones back on the widest portion of the saddle. That measurement tells me the MAXIMUM size of the cockpit...if I slide forward on the saddle, the cockpit gets a bit shorter.
The article at Competitive Cyclist on "French Fit" is one of the clearest explanations of why a "tall" frame is more comfortable on a four or five hour ride than a short frame. But, their measurements chart is not helpful to me. It is very subjective where an arm starts and ends. If I measure my leg length ten times, I get eight different measurements.
The only true way to get a "perfect" fit is from road testing a bike. If I were buying a new bike tomorrow, and I knew which specific model I wanted, I would just road test the two sizes that are in my range. I first test the tallest frame I could stand over without the top tube pressing into my crotch. Set it up with my preferred saddle height and bar height, and take it for a ride. Next, I'd ride one size smaller. Whichever bike provides the best "fore/aft" balance is the bike I'd buy.
I learned how useful "cockpit" length was when I was trying to figure out why several of my road bikes felt "perfect" during long rides, but I felt "bunched up" on one of my bikes, and "stretched out" on another bike. The bikes that felt "perfect" had a cockpit length of 31 1/2 inches. On a bike with a 30 inch cockpit length, I felt bunched up. On a bike with a 33 inch cockpit length, I felt stretched out, and I had too much weight on my hands.
So, now, each of my bikes is set up with an identical saddle height and cockpit length. Each of my frames is a different size, ranging from size 56 to size 61, but I have an identical fit on each bike.
The article at Competitive Cyclist on "French Fit" is one of the clearest explanations of why a "tall" frame is more comfortable on a four or five hour ride than a short frame. But, their measurements chart is not helpful to me. It is very subjective where an arm starts and ends. If I measure my leg length ten times, I get eight different measurements.
The only true way to get a "perfect" fit is from road testing a bike. If I were buying a new bike tomorrow, and I knew which specific model I wanted, I would just road test the two sizes that are in my range. I first test the tallest frame I could stand over without the top tube pressing into my crotch. Set it up with my preferred saddle height and bar height, and take it for a ride. Next, I'd ride one size smaller. Whichever bike provides the best "fore/aft" balance is the bike I'd buy.
I learned how useful "cockpit" length was when I was trying to figure out why several of my road bikes felt "perfect" during long rides, but I felt "bunched up" on one of my bikes, and "stretched out" on another bike. The bikes that felt "perfect" had a cockpit length of 31 1/2 inches. On a bike with a 30 inch cockpit length, I felt bunched up. On a bike with a 33 inch cockpit length, I felt stretched out, and I had too much weight on my hands.
So, now, each of my bikes is set up with an identical saddle height and cockpit length. Each of my frames is a different size, ranging from size 56 to size 61, but I have an identical fit on each bike.
12-05-07, 11:25 AM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
To the OP.... get the frame and mount parts on it - seat, crank, bars, wheels as a minimum and set it up as you're used to. You'll be surprised how 'big' a frame most people can ride, as long as the top tube length isn't too long.
I think Hinault and Lemond started the trend to higher seat heights, based on reading their books on race training (both from the mid 80's). The formula they came up with (Based on lab testing by the Renault team) was (from memory - correct me if I got it wrong!);
seat height (BB to top of seat) = 0.885 x in seam
They also liked to set the saddle back further than knee-over-peddle, and the stem length based on arm length and comfort. The goal was a flat back riding in the drops with arms slightly bent.
I like to keep in mind that a pro riding full out for 6 hours just might need a different setup than an enthusuastic rider going at 60% max for an hour or two. So I like the 0.885 seat height but also like the bars higher - more of the French setup.
I was there too - started racing in 1979. My first race bike was 23" Raleigh Pro, which I soon realized was too big & I switched to a 56 cm ... same size I ride today. The compacts are a bit extreme, but most guys rode standard frames that would not look out of place today.
There are plenty of old pics you can find with more seatpost showing.
There are plenty of old pics you can find with more seatpost showing.
seat height (BB to top of seat) = 0.885 x in seam
They also liked to set the saddle back further than knee-over-peddle, and the stem length based on arm length and comfort. The goal was a flat back riding in the drops with arms slightly bent.
I like to keep in mind that a pro riding full out for 6 hours just might need a different setup than an enthusuastic rider going at 60% max for an hour or two. So I like the 0.885 seat height but also like the bars higher - more of the French setup.
12-05-07, 05:40 PM
#42
Over the hill
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,247
Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 951 Post(s)
Liked 1,117 Times
in
646 Posts
That part confuses me. Wouldn't cockpit length be more accurate if the saddle was set to the ideal fore/aft position first? If you measure it with the saddle at mid rails, I'd need a 70 degree seat tube to accomplish that, but a 72/73 with the saddle set far back on a setback post would accomplish the same thing.
12-05-07, 05:59 PM
#43
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,553
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1082 Post(s)
Liked 1,998 Times
in
1,364 Posts
That part confuses me. Wouldn't cockpit length be more accurate if the saddle was set to the ideal fore/aft position first? If you measure it with the saddle at mid rails, I'd need a 70 degree seat tube to accomplish that, but a 72/73 with the saddle set far back on a setback post would accomplish the same thing.
12-05-07, 07:06 PM
#44
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
"Fist full of seatpost" and other guesstimates?
There is no need to guess. If a cyclist knows that his preferred saddle height is 30 1/8th inches and his preferred cockpit size is 31 1/4th inches, and his preferred bar drop is one inch, all he has to do with any bike is set it up to those measurements. If he can dial in those measurements with a normal sized stem, the bike fits, if not, it does not fit.
Folks buy bikes backwards. They start with the idea that they ride a 56, or a 57, or a 58, and then try to make the bike fit. Instead, know your OWN measurements, set up the bike and see if it fits.
Among the 10 or so road bikes I've had in the past five years, every one could be set up to match my preferred saddle height, cockpit size and saddle drop, even though they ranged in size from a 54 to a 62. The 54 needed a very high stem to fit, so that bike had to go.
There is no need to guess. If a cyclist knows that his preferred saddle height is 30 1/8th inches and his preferred cockpit size is 31 1/4th inches, and his preferred bar drop is one inch, all he has to do with any bike is set it up to those measurements. If he can dial in those measurements with a normal sized stem, the bike fits, if not, it does not fit.
Folks buy bikes backwards. They start with the idea that they ride a 56, or a 57, or a 58, and then try to make the bike fit. Instead, know your OWN measurements, set up the bike and see if it fits.
Among the 10 or so road bikes I've had in the past five years, every one could be set up to match my preferred saddle height, cockpit size and saddle drop, even though they ranged in size from a 54 to a 62. The 54 needed a very high stem to fit, so that bike had to go.
OP...FWIW it will be you ultimately that decides if that is the proper bike for you.
I tend to subscribe to Alan's thinking by and large because I am an old cyclist like he is but there are many that ride one to two frame sizes smaller with a big drop which is completely unacceptable to me.
Everybody learns by experience and the more bikes you own, the easier it is to come to the conclusion as to what works best.
12-05-07, 07:12 PM
#45
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
That part confuses me. Wouldn't cockpit length be more accurate if the saddle was set to the ideal fore/aft position first? If you measure it with the saddle at mid rails, I'd need a 70 degree seat tube to accomplish that, but a 72/73 with the saddle set far back on a setback post would accomplish the same thing.
over the years, he puts less stock in KOPS then perhaps you or I. This maybe because he has rather ordinary femur length...just a guess whereas you and I with long legs know the pitfall of being two far forward. I believe it starts with STA and fore/aft saddle position as you do with our long femurs in particular. The rest of the stuff Alan writes has veracity IMHO...cockpit length as he calls it and saddle to handlebar drop. But because seat height affects fore/aft positioning and overall rider CG on the bike, I believe knowing setback is a key dimension as well.
12-05-07, 07:20 PM
#46
Bike ≠ Car ≠ Ped.
It just occurred to me that, because of how many different bits that could be used for measurement, the "most accurate" method of measuring cockpit length is whatever method you, the rider, use consistently for every bike you own and/or test ride (if the shop lets you ).
Making comparisons between measurements is a lot easier if the measurements are taken the same way each time.
).Making comparisons between measurements is a lot easier if the measurements are taken the same way each time.
12-05-07, 09:01 PM
#47
Administrator
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Delaware shore
Posts: 13,553
Bikes: Cervelo C5, Guru Photon, Waterford, Specialized CX
Mentioned: 16 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1082 Post(s)
Liked 1,998 Times
in
1,364 Posts
I tend to subscribe to Alan's thinking by and large because I am an old cyclist like he is but there are many that ride one to two frame sizes smaller with a big drop which is completely unacceptable to me.
Everybody learns by experience and the more bikes you own, the easier it is to come to the conclusion as to what works best.
Everybody learns by experience and the more bikes you own, the easier it is to come to the conclusion as to what works best.
Smaller frames generally set you up in a more responsive and "faster" feel position which also is more aero. If you want to be faster, you need to be aero with a flat or slightly curved back and be comfortable in the drops. That generally comes from bars that are 3"-5" below the saddle. Of course, this all depends upon your specific build and comfort on the bike.
12-05-07, 09:19 PM
#48
Over the hill
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 24,247
Bikes: Giant Defy, Giant Revolt
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 951 Post(s)
Liked 1,117 Times
in
646 Posts
It just occurred to me that, because of how many different bits that could be used for measurement, the "most accurate" method of measuring cockpit length is whatever method you, the rider, use consistently for every bike you own and/or test ride (if the shop lets you ).
).
12-06-07, 07:19 AM
#49
Voice of the Industry
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 12,572
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1187 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
8 Posts
I also am an old cyclist but I learned over the years to go with a smaller frame. I started riding in the 70's and was fitted for what is around a 58-59 cm frame. I am 6'0" exactly. My next bike, which was more of a "racing" style, was a 58 cm. After a lot of miles (and experience) I went to a 56 cm. A couple bikes later (which was a custom), I also ended up with a 56cm. My tri frame is close to a 55 and my fixie is a 55.
Smaller frames generally set you up in a more responsive and "faster" feel position which also is more aero. If you want to be faster, you need to be aero with a flat or slightly curved back and be comfortable in the drops. That generally comes from bars that are 3"-5" below the saddle. Of course, this all depends upon your specific build and comfort on the bike.
Smaller frames generally set you up in a more responsive and "faster" feel position which also is more aero. If you want to be faster, you need to be aero with a flat or slightly curved back and be comfortable in the drops. That generally comes from bars that are 3"-5" below the saddle. Of course, this all depends upon your specific build and comfort on the bike.
Cheers Stan.
BTW at 6'1" I ride a 57 c-t-c~=59 c-t-t with a riser stem to achieve a modest bar drop with my long legs
Last edited by Campag4life; 12-06-07 at 07:26 AM.
12-06-07, 10:37 AM
#50
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,250
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
7 Posts
I suggested putting the saddle at mid-rails in setting up your bikes so that you can dial in a cockpit length that is consistent and identical on each of your bikes, even though your saddles may vary a bit. After you know your best cockpit length, you can move the saddle forward or back, based on the length of the saddle and saddle rails, and based on your own riding style. It is common for guys who doing fast, stop-and-go riding, such as bike messengers, to move their saddles forward a bit, and a lot of folks doing all day cruising seem happier with the saddle back a bit.
KOPS, as with many "scientific" formulas in cycling, is based on studies of what is best for racing. But, even among guys who race, KOPS formulas are rejected based on personal experience. Many guys who specialize in sprints "feel" they can accelarate better with the saddle out in front of the bottom bracket. Greg LeMond felt that the key to being able to maintain high cruising speed for three or four hours at a time was having the saddle back, relative to the bottom bracket.
What about "Joe Average Cyclists"? Each of my road bikes has a cockpit length of precisely 31 1/2 inches. On the bikes with steep geometry, the saddle is forward relative to the bottom bracket. On the bikes with relaxed geometry, the saddle is back relative to the bottom bracket. Yet, each of those bikes feels the same on the road, because my "fore/aft" weight balance is identical, and the distance from the rear of the saddle to the front of the stem is identical, and the saddle height is identical.
Fifty years of riding has taught me that the MOST important factor in comfort for all-day bike rides is "fore/aft" weight balance. The problem with "KOPS worship" is that, unless you have a custom-built bike, by moving the saddle to dial in some mythical ideal KOPS forumula, you are likely to end up with a cockpit length that is too short or too long, either of which will make it impossible to have perfect fore/aft weight balance.
Too short, you are bunched up on the bike, which can restrict breathing, and cause you too feel cramped. Too long, and your weight shifts to your hands, leading to pain in the hands, and wrist, and then to the neck and shoulders.
KOPS, as with many "scientific" formulas in cycling, is based on studies of what is best for racing. But, even among guys who race, KOPS formulas are rejected based on personal experience. Many guys who specialize in sprints "feel" they can accelarate better with the saddle out in front of the bottom bracket. Greg LeMond felt that the key to being able to maintain high cruising speed for three or four hours at a time was having the saddle back, relative to the bottom bracket.
What about "Joe Average Cyclists"? Each of my road bikes has a cockpit length of precisely 31 1/2 inches. On the bikes with steep geometry, the saddle is forward relative to the bottom bracket. On the bikes with relaxed geometry, the saddle is back relative to the bottom bracket. Yet, each of those bikes feels the same on the road, because my "fore/aft" weight balance is identical, and the distance from the rear of the saddle to the front of the stem is identical, and the saddle height is identical.
Fifty years of riding has taught me that the MOST important factor in comfort for all-day bike rides is "fore/aft" weight balance. The problem with "KOPS worship" is that, unless you have a custom-built bike, by moving the saddle to dial in some mythical ideal KOPS forumula, you are likely to end up with a cockpit length that is too short or too long, either of which will make it impossible to have perfect fore/aft weight balance.
Too short, you are bunched up on the bike, which can restrict breathing, and cause you too feel cramped. Too long, and your weight shifts to your hands, leading to pain in the hands, and wrist, and then to the neck and shoulders.
Last edited by alanbikehouston; 12-06-07 at 11:03 AM.
