That'd be incorrect. There's a reason that there are zero-setback posts, and it's not because everybody that uses one is incorrectly fit on their bike. With a zero-setback post, the clamps would likely be in the middle of his saddle rails.

Thus, there is no way the fit is correct for that bike including that seat post.

The stem is not sloping down. It's a -17 degree stem, and a 73 degree head tube.

This issue has already been addressed by the owner.

-17˚ means its 17˚ angled downward, correct? I must be missing something.

do the math

17 + 73 = ?

the stem is level with the ground

You specifically said (my bolding) -

...which is incorrect. If you want to move the goalposts, fine, but your original assertion is wrong.

You're right. I misspoke.

Maybe I am just too old school but adjusting the saddle position should be for the body placement over the cranks and not seat to handlebar reach. At least from the look of the bike, it seems like the owner is trying to compensate for the latter. It looks to me like the owner is trying to fit his bike in a position too aggressively (slammed stem) in the saddle to bar drop aspect for his current level of flexibility. I'd really like to see a picture of the rider on the bike to confirm this or to debunk my theory either way.

Nobody insulted you.

We said your bike isn't hot, looks silly, doesn't fit, could downhill ski off the saddle, etc.

The only thing said about you was that maybe you need to gain flexibility and a question about the length of your femur.


-Tim-

Yes, saddle positioning should be relative to the BB/crankset, but we don't know that it was determined in some other fashion. You're making an assumption that it's being used to shorten the reach, but I can assure you that there are individuals out there that need/prefer a zero-setback post - that's why zero-setback posts exist. Also, since many bike models have the same ST angle across multiple frame sizes, sizing up or sizing down isn't necessarily going to change the need for setback/zero-setback since, again, position is set relative to the BB.

I personally like -17 degree stems, and that already looks slammed. As far as the seat angle, its a few degrees down from where it is commonly set up but the power saddle is supposed to kick up in the rear accentuating the nose down look. Only the nose of the sadle should be used for levelling and its for aggressive fits. The seatpost as already has been mentioned makes it a not hot, I also have to ride with the seat pretty far forward according to my fitter so I run zero setback seatposts because they look better, which is what this thread is about

Just got my Vamoots RSL / ETap / Belgium Plus - White Industries:



https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...920f535b5d.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...2a56e241de.jpg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...a6284494fb.jpg
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...8e7ac77e3c.jpg

Pretty much stock right now, but looking to upgrade wheels to something in the 40-50mm depth range soon.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...1f40548be3.jpg

The geometry alone makes this hot but the discs are not :(

Points for Ti, for cleanliness and for American craftsmanship. All points removed by the "vortex" name. By definition, this is a vortex:

https://www.gogorooter.com/wp-conten...-1024x1024.jpg

Who names a bike after a flushing toilet?

Completed my built, put about 22 miles on it today.. internal cable routing is rather noisy without internal lining... frame/fork/seatpost/stem/headset/BB kit cost less than that Pinarello seatpost.

https://i.imgur.com/blorfN5.jpg

https://i.imgur.com/EGSmYGI.jpg

Not

[MENTION=78221]cat0020[/MENTION], what bar is that?


-Tim-