[quote=blickblocks][quote=CheshireKat]aye, foudn a pic of my on the bike
[/quote]
That’s how its supposed to look.[/quote]
No, it should never look like a non-drive side pic
[quote=lot_22]i’m 5’10" with a 32" inseam 45%
i pedal toes down and that pushes my seat height up about 2-3 cm over where most fit calculators put me.
if i pedaled with my foot in a more horizontal position off the pegs would have that “perfect look”.[/quote]
5’8" with a 32.5" inseam. fml. CheshireKat really does look like an ostrich. Whenever people whine about their long legs I usually tell them to STFU, but dude is for cereal.
edit: my bikes only look somewhat normal because they’re both a size too big and I just compensate with ultra short stems and pushing my saddle forwards a bit.
[quote=cookietruck]when i first started riding i wanted a real short top tube. now i’m riding a track bike that is 57.5cm square with 11cm stem, and my new frame is going to be 58cmx57.5.
to get your general frame size multiply your inseam (taken with no shoes on) by .67
if i do that it says i need 58.5cm frame…pretty damn close to what i like which is 57.5 or 58cm ctc on the seat tube.
most people don’t need a custom frame.[/quote]
“I need a short top tube” is the archetypal Fred attitude on bike fitting.
The OP’s bike is set up with a normal amount of seatpost for a compact frame but that shouldn’t matter.
I was curious on the percentage of leg so I did the math. 6’6 with 38" inseam equals 48.7% legs. The pic above of Boonen shows the amount of seatpost I have showing on all of my frames, but none of them are compact! Try to be tall, most companies biggest frame isn’t big enough (i.e. a 57-58cm top tube for the biggest size).
I got a new bike with a min length fork. I rode it a lot, it hurt my back and shoulders, I said, “I need a short top tube”. Or really, shorter reach/taller stem. So, I got a new fork/stem, etc. Rode that a lot for a while until I started to feel cramped on the bike (~1000 miles later). Now I’m saying, “I need a longer top tube”. I flipped the stem last week, which was a bit too low, so this week it’s angled up, but much lower on the fork. I’m thinking it’s in a good spot now, but I have a 30cm sternum punch, ribbed for her pleasure. Sad truth is that I could put the original min-length fork back on it and be happy.
i’m 47% inseam.
A big part of the top tube length equation is flexibility. When I first started riding, I was on a 57ctc bike with a 57 TT and a 110mm stem. I hated it. I felt way too stretched out The first thing I did was get a 90mm stem. I was comfortable for a while, but after a year or so, it started to feel cramped. Putting the 110mm stem back on got me comfortable again. Nothing changed except my back, legs and arms becoming stronger and more flexible. Now i look at all these people with 80mm stems and risers and my back starts to ache.
I’ve been doing the same thing now with my TCR. When I first got it, It was my first time back on a bike after recovering from a spine injury for 4 months. The stock 120mm stem was killing me. I swapped down to a 100mm, and it got a little better. When I really started riding a lot, I moved again to a 90mm. Now, 8 months after getting the bike and a lot of stretching/training later, I’m back up to the 100mm with plans to get a 110mm.
The fact that so many people riding right now have only been riding for a year or so and many of them don’t ride for extended periods of time leads to the fact that they aren’t as flexible on a bike as they could be. The real question is, should they be encouraged to become more flexible to feel better in a more efficient position, or should they simply set up the bike in a position that, while less efficient, is more comfortable for their type of riding at the moment?
“If folks were more fit they wouldn’t be talking so much about bike fit.”
-Mike Barry
at 6’3.5 I have an inseam of 38.5 inches…
i have long ass legs and a stubby torso and ride a tall ass frame to make up for it
Cheshire, the bike you posted appears to fit you just fine.
yeah. i really need a pic of the track bike. the specialized pic is there for reference.
It was in pieces. I just assembled it, but now my power is out…funny because the stupid online billing thing said i paid my bill. the rest of the complex had power. this month really couldn’t get any more hilariously awful.
[quote=CeeGee][quote=lot_22]i’m 5’10" with a 32" inseam 45%
i pedal toes down and that pushes my seat height up about 2-3 cm over where most fit calculators put me.
if i pedaled with my foot in a more horizontal position off the pegs would have that “perfect look”.[/quote]
5’8" with a 32.5" inseam. fml. CheshireKat really does look like an ostrich. Whenever people whine about their long legs I usually tell them to STFU, but dude is for cereal.
edit: my bikes only look somewhat normal because they’re both a size too big and I just compensate with ultra short stems and pushing my saddle forwards a bit.[/quote]
We’re the same size!!! My road bike is a 58 which is at least a size too big, but it actually works out just fine, the fit is great with the 90mm stem.
[quote=x]“If folks were more fit they wouldn’t be talking so much about bike fit.”
-Mike Barry[/quote]
Sort of true, maybe. Now that I’m in better shape, I start noticing the small things about my fit that I skimmed over before. I can even feel the difference that the thickness of a chamois makes. I have to adjust my seatpost a few mm depending on if I’m riding in street clothes or bike kit. If I don’t, my leg extension feels all funny. When I was first riding I probably wouldn’t have noticed if my seatpost slipped an inch.
[quote=andrewf]at 6’3.5 I have an inseam of 38.5 inches…
i have long ass legs and a stubby torso and ride a tall ass frame to make up for it[/quote]
holy fuck dude. im 6’7" and have a 36 inch inseam
Whichever option rubs pink Deep Vs and risers, of course.
^^ Very true. But from a physiological sense, is there anything wrong with setting up a bike that is made for racing in an attempt to make it comfortable for someone who should be riding hybrid? In the long run, it seems like the better thing would be to become more flexible to be able to be more efficient. But if the rider doesn’t want to be efficient and intends to ride 10 miles every few days (even if they intend to do it for several years), will it effect their body in a negative way to maintain their current short stem/risers positioning?
I guess what I’m really asking is, can’t we link tilted saddles and 60mm stem/riser combos to impotence or something. Maybe we could scare some kids into riding real bikes.