Australian Cycling Forums - Bicycles Network Australia

I'm close to you dimensions Baldy. 178cm with a 783mm saddle height. I usually ride old steel frames in the 23"-24" range. However this thread has got me interested.

I've got a 54cm square Chris Marshall frame (Pommy shop brand) built from oversized Columbus Thron tubes hanging in the garage. I was saving it for one of my boys but I might slap it together for S & G and see how it goes.

Baldy wrote:

Dr_Mutley wrote:

HLC wrote:I ride a smaller frame with a shorter slammed stem and massive saddle-bar drop and find this is the best fit for me as well.

Have tried a larger frame more traditionally associated with my height/inseam with a longer raised stem and felt like superman (ie stretched out). Not a good feeling.

Fyi, 179cm,90cm inseam, 54cm frame, 80mm stem.

Both my trackie and roadie are set up the same.

Shouldn't that be, u ride a LARGER frame, with a shorter, slammed stem?

Given the figures above couldn't u ride a 51 with a more normal length stem?

Fwiw... I'm 179cm, 87cm inseam just measured with a spirit level,barefoot. 56cm frames 120mm+/-7deg stems.

The centre-BB to top of saddle measurement means more to me than the inseam. Mine is 780mm which is enough that you run out of seatpost on a stock 54cm Tarmac. My 56 still has 12cm saddle/bar drop. I had a Specialized BG fit and this is what works for me.

Thats a long winded way of saying I'm his height and theres no way I'd fit on a 51!

Skinning cats n all that

Yeah I think u probably would run out of seatpost on a 51, and i agree, most your height would float between a 54 & 56... I guess I was reflecting on running a 80mm stem on a 54, would probably handle like a truck compared to a 51 with a much longer stem. But anyways, as we are all to aware, fit is very idiosyncratic

singlespeedscott wrote:

HLC wrote: Pic of bike for reference (Saddle has been moved forward about 15mm and up about 8-10mm from this picture)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v654/ ... irocco.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nice Ciocc. What size is it? I.e. what is the top tube length? What is you saddle height?

Cheers, Top Tube is 53.5-54 IIRC.

Again without confirming, Saddle is either 775mm or 795mm from centre of BB to Top of Saddle. I know that's a fairly big window but they are the two numbers I have in my head. Will confirm correctly tonight. 170mm cranks too.

singlespeedscott wrote:What's the point of riding a bike and not smashing the descents.

I don't get why people are afraid of descending. Often most are quite happy to tear it up in a crit. Jostling for position with 10 other blokes at 60km/hr to win a prime. But are to scarred to roll down a hill on an open road at 70km/hr.

Going downhill is my favorite thing to do. I am slow as a slug going up but catch most of my mates on the descent.

I think my fear comes from lack of experience and therefore poor bike handling skills. Didn't take up cycling til my mid 50s. Jostling for position at 70km/hr is certainly something I've never experienced. In fact I've never experienced 70km/hr !

Lots of steel bikes wrote:

singlespeedscott wrote:What's the point of riding a bike and not smashing the descents.

I don't get why people are afraid of descending. Often most are quite happy to tear it up in a crit. Jostling for position with 10 other blokes at 60km/hr to win a prime. But are to scarred to roll down a hill on an open road at 70km/hr.

Going downhill is my favorite thing to do. I am slow as a slug going up but catch most of my mates on the descent.

I think my fear comes from lack of experience and therefore poor bike handling skills. Didn't take up cycling til my mid 50s. Jostling for position at 70km/hr is certainly something I've never experienced. In fact I've never experienced 70km/hr !

Speed on a treadly is a real buzz for you and especially, if you can get in behind a truck and scoot down the hi-way at 100kmh.

I should state, this is probably not a good idea for the noobies!

Foo

singlespeedscott wrote: I don't get why people are afraid of descending.

Well I can't speak for anyone else but this is why i'm afraid.





That was 5 years ago and 'the fear' is only just leaving me now.

ldrcycles wrote:

singlespeedscott wrote: I don't get why people are afraid of descending.

Well I can't speak for anyone else but this is why i'm afraid.





That was 5 years ago and 'the fear' is only just leaving me now.

Yet you said the other day at the Noosa Century ride you were hammering at 50+ coming to the finish. More chance for a crash there IMO.

Fear does not bow to logic.

I feel so lucky that I started racing early. I've been riding like a teenager for nearly 30 years.

Cheers,

Cameron

ironhanglider wrote:Fear does not bow to logic.

+1, I agree scott, I was actually bloody terrified in that sprint, but for some time there I was able to go faster on the flat than on some downhills. Coming down a very steep hill this evening though I didn't feel at all secure, even at less than 30kmh, as though I didn't have gravity helping to hold me down onto the road (if that makes any sense).

What are you riding without your hands on the bars Idry!

Foo

ldrcycles wrote:

You need a few coaching sessions with the bloke on the right...

Not only will he teach you to ride through the pain but he'll have you winning from the front with his "None shall pass." methods

ldrcycles wrote:...as though I didn't have gravity helping to hold me down onto the road (if that makes any sense).

It does, never fun. Cornering becomes a painfully smokebox like experience on those not rare enough days.

singlespeedscott wrote:I'm close to you dimensions Baldy. 178cm with a 783mm saddle height. I usually ride old steel frames in the 23"-24" range. However this thread has got me interested.

I've got a 54cm square Chris Marshall frame (Pommy shop brand) built from oversized Columbus Thron tubes hanging in the garage. I was saving it for one of my boys but I might slap it together for S & G and see how it goes.

geez, i'm 177 and my inseam is a tad longer than your saddle height..

munga wrote:

singlespeedscott wrote:I'm close to you dimensions Baldy. 178cm with a 783mm saddle height. I usually ride old steel frames in the 23"-24" range. However this thread has got me interested.

I've got a 54cm square Chris Marshall frame (Pommy shop brand) built from oversized Columbus Thron tubes hanging in the garage. I was saving it for one of my boys but I might slap it together for S & G and see how it goes.

geez, i'm 177 and my inseam is a tad longer than your saddle height..

I got long shanks and a short torso. I could of been a super model if it wasn't for my hairy cankals.

I have short legs, long body, compared to some. I read the other day, this should lean me to go up a size if between sizes, in order to get "enough" reach.

There was an interesting post on the net recently from Jonathan Vaughters, comparing the current pro preference for small frame/ big drop to past practice of long frame/higher stack. He said most riders end up in the same position in terms of flatness of the back, due to (unchanged) physiological reasons, and had photos to illustrate the point. They just achieve it a different way, by reaching down rather than out.

MREJ wrote:There was an interesting post on the net recently from Jonathan Vaughters, comparing the current pro preference for small frame/ big drop to past practice of long frame/higher stack. He said most riders end up in the same position in terms of flatness of the back, due to (unchanged) physiological reasons, and had photos to illustrate the point. They just achieve it a different way, by reaching down rather than out.

Which most likely came about to reduce weight. Can't see it being in the interests of good braking though.

Also, that's why I find it puzzling to read the comments of some who mock others about their lack of handlebar drop as it says little about the body angles involved. I suppose it says more about their lack of understanding rather than any superiority they think they have.

I wonder how aggressive you are with the front brake Nobody. I have a 130mm handlebar stem and a ~10cm seat -bar drop. The seat is run with nearly minimum legal setback also. Never had an over the bar incident or even close to it. We are not talking motorcycles backing it into a corner sideways pulling up from 300kmh here. My dry weather braking performance is fine.

As far as being stretched out to achieve an aero position goes, they also used to ride the big climbs on a 42-21. Just 'cause they used to do it back in the glory days of steel doesn't mean its the best way to do it.

Nobody wrote:Also, that's why I find it puzzling to read the comments of some who mock others about their lack of handlebar drop as it says little about the body angles involved. I suppose it says more about their lack of understanding rather than any superiority they think they have.

I don't remember seeing any mocking going on in this thread.

But never let an opportunity to grind that axe slip by do you. Impressive

I've done a bit of stirring of him in the past over his Brooks saddles and cardigan wearing riding style , all good fun though Usually gives as good as he gets, I'm waiting 'til he reads that latest dig

maybe he's referring to antipodean's comments in the bike gallery

warthog1 wrote:I wonder how aggressive you are with the front brake Nobody.

Very. I like to practice emergency braking on every ride, on every bike I own. That's why I know a shorter center to front and a more forward body position relative to the front hub doesn't help braking. I also take my brakes seriously too. But then I haven't hit anyone or anything in recent history either.
Have a read here on how poor bicycle braking is considering a car can usually pull a 1g for braking. My MTB has the largest frame I can fit on, which is a 58cm ETT so I can get a longer centre to front.

warthog1 wrote:I have a 130mm handlebar stem and a ~10cm seat -bar drop. The seat is run with nearly minimum legal setback also. Never had an over the bar incident or even close to it. We are not talking motorcycles backing it into a corner sideways pulling up from 300kmh here. My dry weather braking performance is fine.

But you live in the country. Can't see you getting too many opportunities to test your emergency braking performance. Get on a modern MTB if you want to see what good braking is. I'm sure there is someone who can lend you one.

warthog1 wrote:As far as being stretched out to achieve an aero position goes, they also used to ride the big climbs on a 42-21. Just 'cause they used to do it back in the glory days of steel doesn't mean its the best way to do it.

True, but I'm sure the PEDs would have helped.
By the way, I'm too short to have the option of getting the smaller frame for a road bike to get "the pro look". A bike I could do that position on would have a 75 degree STA or even 650 wheels. Most small frames could be better designed IMO.

Baldy wrote:I don't remember seeing any mocking going on in this thread.

I suppose you need to be "Nobody" to experience it. Maybe I'm just too sensitive.

Nobody wrote:

warthog1 wrote:I wonder how aggressive you are with the front brake Nobody.

Very. I like to practice emergency braking on every ride, on every bike I own. That's why I know a shorter center to front and a more forward body position relative to the front hub doesn't help braking. I also take my brakes seriously too. But then I haven't hit anyone or anything in recent history either.
Have a read here on how poor bicycle braking is considering a car can usually pull a 1g for braking. My MTB has the largest frame I can fit on, which is a 58cm ETT so I can get a longer centre to front.

warthog1 wrote:I have a 130mm handlebar stem and a ~10cm seat -bar drop. The seat is run with nearly minimum legal setback also. Never had an over the bar incident or even close to it. We are not talking motorcycles backing it into a corner sideways pulling up from 300kmh here. My dry weather braking performance is fine.

But you live in the country. Can't see you getting too many opportunities to test your emergency braking performance. Get on a modern MTB if you want to see what good braking is. I'm sure there is someone who can lend you one.

warthog1 wrote:As far as being stretched out to achieve an aero position goes, they also used to ride the big climbs on a 42-21. Just 'cause they used to do it back in the glory days of steel doesn't mean its the best way to do it.

True, but I'm sure the PEDs would have helped.
By the way, I'm too short to have the option of getting the smaller frame for a road bike to get "the pro look". A bike I could do that position on would have a 75 degree STA or even 650 wheels. Most small frames could be better designed IMO.

Bugger, you've given me nothing to work with here. Stop being so factual

You can always move your torso back on the pedals to help with c of g under maximal braking. Probably not going to happen on unplanned emergency braking though true.

I haven't ridden a modern disc equipped mountain bike but have seen a practical demonstration of their power while riding alongside one. Seems ok I spose I'll grudgingly admit.

warthog1 wrote:Bugger, you've given me nothing to work with here. Stop being so factual

Sorry. It's a serious/factual subject so I have a tendency to be...

Also I didn't want to indirectly insult all the people in this thread that are happy with their new "pro" positions. I just hope they can stop in time the next time they need to emergency brake.

warthog1 wrote:You can always move your torso back on the pedals to help with c of g under maximal braking. Probably not going to happen on unplanned emergency braking though true.

That's why we need to practice. So moving back is instinctual/automatic and knowing the exact maximum braking pressure without going OTB, or at least be able to modulate the brake well. We all know there are no second chances and road bikes are already at a disadvantage compared to MTBs, even without the small framed "pro" position. As someone recently said here somewhere, "road bikes are for going fast, not stopping!"

warthog1 wrote:I haven't ridden a modern disc equipped mountain bike but have seen a practical demonstration of their power while riding alongside one. Seems ok I spose I'll grudgingly admit.

I found a calculator which shows at 18.75 miles/h or 30 Km/h, the minimum stopping distance is 4.06m. Do you think any of your bikes could do it? Something to try one day maybe. I might try it. I think my flat bar and MTB could do it, but I'm doubtful whether my CX/road bike could. We'll see.

Nobody wrote:I found a calculator which shows at 18.75 miles/h or 30 Km/h, the minimum stopping distance is 4.06m. Do you think any of your bikes could do it? Something to try one day maybe. I might try it. I think my flat bar and MTB could do it, but I'm doubtful whether my CX/road bike could. We'll see.

That is impressively short
I'm pretty sure I couldn't get anywhere close to that stopping distance unless it was my posterior sliding on the ground. Which would probably happen if I tried it. The front ends either not going to have the traction or I'd be over the bars as you say.