At least the numbers they give are the same. Easton ec90 Track

you should measure the seat tube...it looks more like a 55 or 56 to me

Don't measure the seat tube. Measure the top tube/effective top tube. That's the measurement that matters.

Ok so I looked up the size chart. A 59cm frame has a 57.5cm effective top tube length. Not bad, but still on the shortish side.

Based on your leg angle, I don't think lowering the saddle is the right thing to do, you have a good bend. It looks like your saddle is already pushed back a bit, try going a bit further + shallower drops (compact road drops like: 3T Ergonovas) and it may help.

Lowering the tip f your saddle a bit will also help to flatten out your back (as someone above mentioned).

so.. uh.. can I just not read, or has nobody mentioned this yet?

Because OP won't give up his track drops.

Jaytron hasn't entered the convo yet.

I agree, the saddle doesn't need to be lowered. I think it may need to be raised.

To the OP:
The ball of your foot isn't on the pedal, it seems to be centered under your foot. Bla bla bla bla.

Once you get the saddle height, you can work on getting your saddle fore/aft correct. THEN you can address your reach problem.

Right off the bat, your set is WAY too aggressive. That'll mean you won't be comfortable. Stop trying to "look" cool. Flip the stem up and get some road drops. FSA Wing Pros, Ergonovas, or hell Dimenson Flat Top (Scrod's Hood Rat Bars) all are low cost choices.

Move that one spacer on top to under the stem.

For great justice:

Fitment question?

http://i.imgur.com/YQM4D.jpg

>>Fitment Calculator<<

And there was much rejoicing.

It's ok people. The earth will keep spinning tonight.

My job here is done.

http://i.imgur.com/OpHjH.gif

Yeah I wasn't doing a good job at balancing on that bench that's why I wasn't on the pedal correctly.

I plan on moving those two spacers on top to under the stem and also flipping the stem. I'm going to tilt the saddle forward as well; it feels like its pulling me back the way it's positioned now. Need to get a torque wrench first though.

I'll throw my hat in with everyone else claiming your bars look really deep. The bars that were stock on my bike were long from rear to front (to the point that I was stretching to ride on top of my brake hoods) and way too deep from top to drop to be practical. Recently I swapped them for FSA something or other compact road drops, and they're a million times better. Like a few other posters, I'd say that compact drops are probably worth looking at, but first I'd say ride the tops for a while and verify that really is the issue.

That's the plan. Been riding on top for 2 days now and back seems fine. Once I make the other minor adjustments I'll check back in.

+1

Riding these daily for commuting or casual riding...

http://www.worldclasscycles.com/deda_pista_alloy.jpg

...is like wearing these for commuting or casual walking:

http://cdn.asia.cnet.com/i/r/2008/cr...ictory_300.jpg


But, some people just won't learn.

except that the reach and drop are not even comparable to my bars. Thanks for your expertise though

Pretty sure he meant track drops in general.

Maybe I misread, thought he was comparing them to mine. Either way I have no problem getting rid of my drops, as soon as I make sure thats the problem.

Its the problem.

Symptoms of a poor fit:

1. Pronounced bend in middle of back
2. Almost straight elbows

You have too much of a drop from saddle to bars, although the horizontal distance looks pretty good. A higher stem and possibly bars with less of a drop ought to get you a better fit.

I think with everyone saying that it's your problem, it's safe to assume that the bars are probably your first problem. :)

Trying to fit a bike with track drops for road riding is like...I don't know, it just doesn't really work.

OP can always just get more spacers. If the steerer tube's already been exhausted he can always use of of these:

http://www.reveloutdoors.co.uk/img/p...209%20zoom.jpg

It'd be comfortable and he gets to keep his track drops! :thumb:

Indeed so.