Stack and reach question.

[Kronos]

@kronos I am a bit confused, are you saying you can put your feet down to actually stop yourself? or prevent yourself from being knackerd?

Both really, if you're coming up to a crossing or whatever and something happens its another braking force especially with rim brakes. There's some contention for the use of disc brakes for better stopping and yeah... Not knackering yourself is actually beneficial also..

So you are saying that you need to be able to put both feet on the ground to slow yourself down. Brakes are not enough braking force, you need the feet as well. Unclip and slide the cleats on the tar to slow down. Really?

Depends on the situation.

[Derny Driver]

Regardless of the facts of a top tube sloping, standover height must be measured for a horizontal top tube. As I said above if your top tube standover is incorrect, then the length of the top tube will be wrong as bigger bikes also have longer top tubes. You can't correct this beyond a 130mm stem without starting to slow your turning. Your seat tube will be wrong, and you may well have too much seatpost in your seat tube. This runs the risk of cracking your seat tube. .

Too much inserted seatpost cracks the seat tube? How would that happen?
If the seat tube was tapered, couldnt you just shorten the seat post?
This ranks with telling the Retro bike builders that "Campag is just a name" and telling a newbie that a Hybrid bike is "not a real bike".
Seriously

[Derny Driver]

. Your crank arms may also be the wrong size in relation to the length of your leg and you may not be able to pedal correctly and so on and so forth ad nausea.
.

When you buy a new bike, you are asked what crank length you prefer

[Derny Driver]

Both really, if you're coming up to a crossing or whatever and something happens its another braking force especially with rim brakes. There's some contention for the use of disc brakes for better stopping and yeah... Not knackering yourself is actually beneficial also..

So you are saying that you need to be able to put both feet on the ground to slow yourself down. Brakes are not enough braking force, you need the feet as well. Unclip and slide the cleats on the tar to slow down. Really?

Depends on the situation.

What situation would that be?

[Kronos]

So you are saying that you need to be able to put both feet on the ground to slow yourself down. Brakes are not enough braking force, you need the feet as well. Unclip and slide the cleats on the tar to slow down. Really?

Depends on the situation.

What situation would that be?

You're the one making the story up as you go along just like the one about not understanding every component of a bike fitment has a flow on effect to another one. So seeing as you're the one making up the story, how's about you give me some context?

Is this the school holiday influx or something? You sure as hell don't have any idea what you're talking about and please use one post to reply next time. As to the rest of your nonsense it doesn't really warrant a reply. The short and the long of is that you should never shorten a seat post. You may want to use it on a different frame next time and realise you've cut off the bit you want to use. Too much seat post in the seat tube will crack your seat tube eventually. Shortening a seat tube is just another failure in your array of daft logic. I also already told you there is already only so much adjustment before you can do nothing more and if you want to craptacularly choose the wrong frame size you sure as likely will run into the problem of not being able to adjust things properly. On the issue of cranks, you may well run into the problem of your leg length not being able to fit between the seat and the crank arm in the first place if you start out with the wrong sized frame. Here's a pro tip to save in your logic bank... Buy the right sized frame for your body in the first place...

Please save yourself face and admit defeat.

[Derny Driver]

Please save yourself face and admit defeat.

Im not trying to win anything.
You have a nice night mate.
Cheers

[Kronos]

Seems like you're trying pretty hard to me

[CKinnard]

If the Ritchey is going to require a similar 5cm of spacers, then I'd look elsewhere.

Plenty of steel road frames out there will have a good stack/reach ratio to suit. You just have to look around online at geo charts.
Being able to look at a frame triangle pic and have an idea is helpful also.

Ritchey: long and low.

Yeah, I think I agree. I may hold off til the trek emonda sl6 is on sale, the Geo seems to be suitable. My current frame was purchased when I had no idea about race frames, endurance frames etc.....I got the race frame (it looked cool).

Hey Booge, when you are comparing the stack and reach of two frames, you do it without spacers. google pics of stack and reach.

If you need 5cm of spacers to make the new frame equal in set up to your current frame, hmmmmm.

Sounds like you are a Masters rider and/or have a stiff spine and/or are "carrying weight" that prevents you from being comfortable lower on a more aggressive race frame.

Effective top tube length (or seat tube angle) is also an important metric, as this determines how far behind the bottom bracket you sit.

Wheelbase is also important to the type of riding (race vs sport vs touring) and how responsive a bike is.

Either way, if you need 5cm of spacers, it sounds like you'd be better with a less aggressive non racing frame...unless you intend to lose weight or gradually remove the spacers.

[warthog1]

I have just gone through this on a custom Ti frame order. On the sizing chart I fell between two sizes.

What are you getting?

[warthog1]

Seems like you're trying pretty hard to me

Go back and delete your posts mate.
Derny made sense.

[Kronos]

Seems like you're trying pretty hard to me

Go back and delete your posts mate.
Derny made sense.

Nah... We can live in a world of false beliefs about standover height, and pay no attention to conventional geometry or we can actually learn something that actually makes sense. I won't be deleting anything. If you want to look like a circus clown riding a bike that doesn't fit you that's not really my problem either. Just don't ride anywhere near me.

[fat and old]

On the question of spacers...

What actually is the "correct" amount between stem and tube? 30mm? 20mm? 10mm? 0? Who made this a mandatory measurement, and what is it based on? Serious question, as I'm not understanding why 30-50mm isn't acceptable unless the aero side of things comes into the equation. If I take my own bike, i have 25mm of spacers. 100mm stem. I'm comfy, bike is predictable and solid. Going up a size gives me 24mm extra stack, so I could slam the stem on face value. I lose 2.5mm of BB drop, and gain an extra 2.5mm of crank length (although as DD points out I could have them swap it over....probably at a cost.) so net effect of 0 in stack, unknown effect of 2.5mm extra crank length. More seat post in the frame too. Just to get the bars closer to the HT? I add 10mm in reach, so would shorten the stem accordingly, which I assume will quicken the steering up. Am I missing something here? Seems to me that stack relates to the flexibility of the rider, and aesthetic for the observer to a large degree.

Oh yeah, my S/O would go up by 30mm. Means I'd be giving myself some auto stimulation flat standing over. Not so good in Lycra Kuku penthouse equipped knicks.....

[CKinnard]

What actually is the "correct" amount between stem and tube? 30mm? 20mm? 10mm? 0? Who made this a mandatory measurement, and what is it based on? Serious question, as I'm not understanding why 30-50mm isn't acceptable unless the aero side of things comes into the equation.

Many steerer tubes are fabricated for light weight, which means low tolerances to levered lateral loading, which increases the more the tube extends above the top headset bearing.

The wedge (or star nut) and bolt securing system is also compromised by greater levered lateral loading.

[booge]

If the Ritchey is going to require a similar 5cm of spacers, then I'd look elsewhere.

Plenty of steel road frames out there will have a good stack/reach ratio to suit. You just have to look around online at geo charts.
Being able to look at a frame triangle pic and have an idea is helpful also.

Ritchey: long and low.

Yeah, I think I agree. I may hold off til the trek emonda sl6 is on sale, the Geo seems to be suitable. My current frame was purchased when I had no idea about race frames, endurance frames etc.....I got the race frame (it looked cool).

Hey Booge, when you are comparing the stack and reach of two frames, you do it without spacers. google pics of stack and reach.

If you need 5cm of spacers to make the new frame equal in set up to your current frame, hmmmmm.

Sounds like you are a Masters rider and/or have a stiff spine and/or are "carrying weight" that prevents you from being comfortable lower on a more aggressive race frame.

Effective top tube length (or seat tube angle) is also an important metric, as this determines how far behind the bottom bracket you sit.

Wheelbase is also important to the type of riding (race vs sport vs touring) and how responsive a bike is.

Either way, if you need 5cm of spacers, it sounds like you'd be better with a less aggressive non racing frame...unless you intend to lose weight or gradually remove the spacers.

Well this topic certainly went places i didn't think it would go!
CKinnard, the Ritchey is basically the same measurements as my current frame, the stack and reach measurements i have are for just the frame as you said. Both are pretty much the same, only 1mm difference in the reach. I'm certainly the opposite of carrying weight, 6'2 and 75kg, flexibility is good, it's just the position that came out as best for the angles, power etc during the Retul fit. He did mention i could gradually remove spacers, but at the time i didn't want to keep going back forking out more cash for a minor adjustment.

[CKinnard]

Booge, in your first post you allude you haven't tried the frame as no stores have it.
In your 2nd, you said 'yeah it's comfortable but has 5cm of spacers".
In your 3rd, you said you had a professional fit and the frame was too low and racy.

All the best with it.

[queequeg]

I have just gone through this on a custom Ti frame order. On the sizing chart I fell between two sizes.

What are you getting?

I have a Mason BokehTi Frameset on the way. It's due this month, assuming there have been no delays. They only make 5 frames a month. I ordered mine back in October, scheduled for the January batch of 5. I think that to date, they have delivered 25 frames worldwide. No idea if anyone in Australia has one yet. I may well be the first (I'll ask them!).

Anyway, I was quite pleased with how they handled the framesize question. Obviously being such a big outlay, they wanted to get it right. I sent them my current Bike Fit, along with my existing bikes and frame sizes, including my stem and bar specs for each. We went back and forth a few times, but ultimately the actual frame designer put me onto the 56. On their standard sizing chart, the 56cm frame is built for a height of 175-185cm, and the 58cm has a range of 180-188cm. I am 185cm tall, so they said I should run on the 56cm with a slightly longer stem, which on this bike may be an advantage anyway.

[booge]

Booge, in your first post you allude you haven't tried the frame as no stores have it.
In your 2nd, you said 'yeah it's comfortable but has 5cm of spacers".
In your 3rd, you said you had a professional fit and the frame was too low and racy.

All the best with it.

I'm not quite sure what you're getting at?
1. I haven't tried the Ritchey frame as no stores have them
2. My current "BeOne" bike is comfortable but yes it does have 5cm of spacers.
3. The fit was for the BeOne which is too low and racy.

The original post was just questioning the sizing of frames re stack and reach, which evolved onto a discussion about possibly having the wrong size/style etc, or maybe a better style frame to reduce the amount of spacers, which I'm more than happy for input.

This topic seems to be getting a little volatile unfortunately.

Thanks all for their relevant comments and help. You know who you are.

[warthog1]

I have a Mason BokehTi Frameset on the way. It's due this month, assuming there have been no delays. They only make 5 frames a month. I ordered mine back in October, scheduled for the January batch of 5. I think that to date, they have delivered 25 frames worldwide. No idea if anyone in Australia has one yet. I may well be the first (I'll ask them!).

Anyway, I was quite pleased with how they handled the framesize question. Obviously being such a big outlay, they wanted to get it right. I sent them my current Bike Fit, along with my existing bikes and frame sizes, including my stem and bar specs for each. We went back and forth a few times, but ultimately the actual frame designer put me onto the 56. On their standard sizing chart, the 56cm frame is built for a height of 175-185cm, and the 58cm has a range of 180-188cm. I am 185cm tall, so they said I should run on the 56cm with a slightly longer stem, which on this bike may be an advantage anyway.

Nice
Sounds like we need a build thread for us to drool over.

[Patt0]

I am in-between sizes. I prefer to go bigger. If I want to get lower, I have elbows and drops.

[Patt0]

I have a Mason BokehTi Frameset on the way.

Anyway, I was quite pleased with how they handled the framesize question.

That is nice.

On that frame I would have went smaller too.