fit options
This is a continuation of this thread where Matt and William are helping with my fit. Just a note William, the red and white P2 in the previous thread is not mine.
members.endurancenation.us/Communit...fault.aspx
Posted By Matt Ancona on 10 Jan 2011 11:38 AM
Chris - I would say you have about 4-5 cm of spacers between the head tub and stem plus an upturned stem.
I always feel bad saying this but I don't think you are on the right size or type of frame and going to a P3 or P4 will not make things any better. If a P2 has about 2 - 3cm more stack then a P1 that might be ok, but i dobut it had that much more and becuase of how short your stem is I don't think you could get the next size up as it would be too long.
I see a few options:
- Change your position. Get your saddle forward and in front of the BB, then rotate so the hip angle is the same. This will lower your front end and strech it out as well. From there you may be able to get a P2 one size larger and the combination of the new position and more stack in the frame will get rid of the need for the upturned stem and spacers.
- Keep your position. If you want a new frame and are staying in the same position I strongly encourage you to look for a short and tall bike like a Orbea Ordu, Cannondale, Trek TTX or a few others. Cervelos are one of the lowests and longest bikes available and are really designed for people that ride with a very low front end.
- Anohter (and sometimes better) way to add more stack wiht out spacers and an upturned stem is to get aerobars that have more stack. The vision ones you have are some of the lowest available and that is making your situation even worse. Profile Design, 3T and others all make bars with at least 2-3 cm more stack.
- Leave it as is. If the bike works and you are pleased with it no need to make a change.
Your biggest improvement would come from lowering your body in the front, but that might not be possible.
How tall are you? Can you post a picture of you on the bike?
Maybe it is time for this to be a separate thread...
Posted By William Jenks on 10 Jan 2011 12:11 PM
Chris-
Plenty of room to put a flat (-17) stem there, whether you net lower the position or not. But, as Matt implies, if you put a flat stem in there, the equivalent spacer height will have that right up at the top, so you're about as high as you're going to get on that bike with a flat stem. (But you probably want to see if you can go lower, not higher anyway, so no big deal!)
Just at a glance, it's pretty obvious that your saddle is more forward on the new bike than the old one, which is probably reflective of the size change...you don't have to have the post so high, so it doesn't move you back as far. But it also looks like you had a lot more drop on the yellow bike than the sexy new one.
One comment I would make as far as comfort on the long rides (you mentioned this was as low as you wanted to go) is that "comfort" often has two major points. You might think about these as you work on your position for this year.
The first is your hip angle, and you may have a limitation where you can't be comfortable bringing that more acute than you want it now. If so, then you really have to pay attention to bringing the seat forward as you try to lower the front, so that you just rotate your body forward. Rotating how you actually contact the saddle forward can help here too, if you can tolerate that. We can't tell just by looking at the bikes how your new hip angle compares to what you had on the P1.
The other major "comfort point" is how your weight is supported in the front. You may find that subtle adjustments forward or back of where your elbow pads are will "miraculously" let you support more weight skeletally (as upposed to having to use a lot of muscle). Same can be true of width. If so, you might find yourself more comfortable lower than you thought. You also seem to have the extensions (and thus the pads) tilted up. Again, small changes here can make a big difference in how it feels like your front end weight is supported.
Any chance your LBS will let you spend some time messing about with spacers and their stem collection? I assume they will "fit" you more or less indefinitely if you bought the bike there.
Just food for thought.
Here is my current fit and the bike alone. I am 6'3". Here are the measurements from my fit.
saddle to armrest: 435
cockpit: 765
aerobar: 355
armrest drop: 12
saddle height: 824
seat angle: 80.5
shoulder angle: 100
hip angle: 85
knee angle: 150
The saddle can go maybe another centimeter forward, but my knees already hit the bars sometimes even though it doesn't look like it in the picture. The harder I pedal, the more I find myself inching forward.
0
Comments
Chris,
the fact that your knees hit your elbows when generating good power, is a problem. i agree with the others that a different size bike is best, but if that is not an option, then see below.
i was professionally fitted on my P3C by John Cobb. A couple of things I learned can apply to your case.
#1) from your photo and from the fact that you move forward on the seat when generating good watts, you could move the seat a bit more forward. for most people, the greater trochanter (bone you can feel on the uppermost part of your femur) needs to be as close over the bottom bracket as you can get it, to have a good leverage point from which to generate power. your tendency to move forward supports this, since it is where you can generate the most power. a more simple explanation for knees hitting is that your seat nose is angled too low, but i don't think that's the case.
#2) if you move the seat more forward, your knees will hit the elbows even more. so, you need the arm rests to be moved forward, not a longer stem. a new set of aerobars with the adjustability to move the armrests way forward would do the trick. in my case, John Cobb made me some extensions for my Zipp bars himself! so i was able to move my elbows forward while keeping the handle bar where it felt most comfortable.
Finally, another pointer i got from him, since he tests all the time in the wind tunnel, is that you can go 2inches up or down from a decent aero position (like the one in your picture) and it won't make a significant difference. you need to go really aggressive for the big differences to be seen and for IM racing that's just not in the cards for most people. so, i wouldn't worry about going lower than your current set up.
hope this helps!
GH
@Chris, I have read the entire thread as you posted the link. Two posters resonate with me, Matt and William. I am not an expert, but will just give you a few thoughts.
Just a few observations on that picture you provided. Not everything is visible but I will coment on a few things:
1. Your saddle height appears reasonably set.
2. Your cockpit length also appers ok except that I would prefer to see elbow pads closer back to your elbows.
3. Your hip angle appears decently open, your torso is well supported by position of your elbows.
These are all good news.
I am also hoping you are relatively comfy over long diatnce.
Aerobar drop is individual and influenced by many factors, cockpit length plays a major role in supporting a good drop.
It seems to me that you are an athlete with a relatively speaking shorter torso but longer femur. You have normalized your reach artificially by using an extremly short and up turned stem. Not a good thing. An upturned stem with spacers under indicates that you would rather benefit from a taller stack frame. This all stands true if you have arrived at your desired position.
Thing or two about moving forward when generating power. The phenomenin is called choking and is quite normal when rider is putting high power efforts. The fact that you are occasionally brushing your knees against the elbows is just a result of these two factors, your short torso, long femur. This happens quite frequently with riders whose cockpit length is set correct but due to this anatomical proprtion are running into it. I am also in the same boat, I also brush elbow pads if I stand up.
You can eliminate a part of the problem as Matt indicated by using a higher stack aerobars with somewhat of a more normal pitched stem. That is only a part of the solution. In order to preserve the cockpit length you got (I would not want it any longer), you will have to push that seat all the way forward. That may allow for a the same stack and reach coordiante you currently have.
Clearly, the solution would be a better fitting frame, little shorter and little taller than what you got. Slowtwitch stack and reach database is a good start if you want to go alone in your research. In either case not an extreme, you appear to be like me, my LBS fit tech called me a "tweener" in between, he says.
I concur with Matt in your frame choices should you decide to go that route. Enjoyed the thread, a lot of good info.
Todd will take a look for free and if he can't help-no charge! Just send him a video.
I tested at A2 wind tunnel on same bike and equipment before and after Todd's setup and my Cda went from .253 to .235. A stunning improvement!
Free advice from wicked smart members is great but there is a reason Todd gets paid to fit people. Check him out if you want.
Good luck, Jeff
I really appreciate everyone's feedback, but I have to tell you, I'm so confused. Here are my measurements. Maybe they'll help, or maybe everyone else will get confused too. This was generated using the Competitive Cyclist calculator. It is the reason I went with the 58cm frame. I fit myself using these numbers, did IM Louisville, then went and got a professional FIST fit and that's the position you see in the picture.
Can someone explain how you determine that I have long legs and a short torso or vice versa?
The Orbeas only go to size 57 and have a shorter stack and reach than the Cervelos.
Inseam
92.5 cm
Trunk
65.5 cm
Forearm
37.125 cm
Arm
70.625 cm
Thigh
66.35 cm
Lower Leg
60.05 cm
Sternal Notch
155.7 cm
Total Body Height
190.8175 cm
The Aero Fit
Top Tube Range
56.9 - 58.9
Stem Length Range
8.0 - 10.0
Saddle-Bottom Bracket Position
83.3
Saddle-Pedal Position
100.5
Saddle-Ground Position
108.3
Cranklength
180.0
Aero Bar Size
L
Saddle-Aero Bar Pad Drop Minimal
9.7
Saddle-Aero Bar Pad Drop Moderate
15.5
Saddle-Aero Bar Pad Drop Intense
18.0
Saddle-Aero Bar Pad Drop Maximal
22.2
Pad-Ground Position Minimal
98.6
Pad-Ground Position Moderate
92.8
Pad-Ground Position Intense
90.3
Pad-Ground Position Maximal
86.1
@Chris,
1. Numbers mean little to me, I am not a fitter and using that calculator means little unless you are put on fit bike and than arrived at numbers. That calculator I guess goes by conventional fit formulas, not by actual biomechanical and other factors observed when individual turns the pedals, ie. FIST fit achieved using dynamic methods.
2. Your position looks very sound to me. It is not your position that is in question, it is the frame you have under you that does not appear to fit correct. A good fitter can make the best out of what he's got to work with when customer has no option of getting another frame. It seems to me that your fitter did a good job. He did have to normalize the frame to your stack and reach coordinates and he achieved it with pitched up very short stem. That is the cheapest way to accomplish that but not the most desirable one in my humble opinion, Matt and William provided good suggestions.
3. Body proportions, no expert there either, but it is not hard to tell just by looking at that low/long frame you got under you. Also, measure your saddle height, than measure the distance between the saddle nose tip and the shifter housing, not the end of the shifters but a center of their pivot where they mount into the housing.
Comparing these two may give you a clue on torso/legs ratio. It may not be a case of short torso long legs, you may only have a longer femur to torso, just enough that makes you brush the pads or elbows. That is not an issue as even a shorter reach frame will not solve that. That is determined by your cockpit length as that is a function of your drop vs. comfort. In other words, some people can ride lower in front when cockpit length is such that allows for good support and takes some pressure of the other contact point, saddle. For that, elbow pads are placed closer to the rider's saddle nose. Now you add a long femur and you got it. Nothing to be worried about. Hip angle is more of a concern and your angle looks good to me.
Bottom line is, in my opinion you can get away with riding that frame just fine, but from the fitting standpoint, you could be placed on a better option. By the way, P2 would have not fit any better. Again, I am no expert and don't take this too seriously, yeah just another angle maybe for you to discuss truly with your fitter, he should be your best source.
Sorry, I am of no better help.
So if I need more stack and roughly the same reach, why would the next size up P1 or P2 (they have the same geometry) not solve the problem? The stack is 2.7cm taller while the reach is only 0.7 longer. My current stack is 550, the next size up Cervelo is 557, and the suggested Orbea is only 530. Don't I need more stack, not less?
Chris, I actually think that you should have both more stack and less reach.
Going from a 58 P1 ( S 550 R 440 ) to a 61 P1 or P2 ( S 577 R 447 ) would help out and get rid of either the shorter spacer issue or the uptruned stem. If you also switched to high stack aero bars at the same time you coudl probably get very close to what you are looking for (i.e. few spacers and flat stem). My concern with this approach is you already have a VERY short stem on the bike and adding another 7cm of reach will likely require you to go with a 1cm shorter stem.
Alternatively the following frames would likely be a better fit as most would give you the same stack but with 10-15 mm less reach you could run a more normal length stem. Plus each of these will allow you to have much more adjustment going foward as you are not starting out with and extremely short stem.
Blue Triad ( S 577 R 429 )
Cannondale Slice ( S 572 R 425 )
Scott Plasma I or II ( S 581 R 427 ) <--- this is probably the best fit for you based on your current position as it adds 3cm of stack and has 1 cm less reach.</p>
All that said, I have used extreme stems to make certain frames work however I feel my position is pretty much set and not going to change much at all. I always wrry when someone buys a frame that starts them off in this situation as it limites future options.
If you are set on a P2 go for it, but just keep in mind there are a few other bikes out there that will fit better.
The guy who helped you get into the fit you have on the yellow P1 did a pretty darn good job. We can all moan about the inelegance of the stem, blah blah blah, but most of the drag is YOU, not the bike, and he got it to work for you even if a lot of us think that was a poorly chosen frame size. A perfect frame might handle a little better, and it might be a little faster, but you should be pleased with where you were, all things considered (unless you think the frame was wrongly foisted on you).
Matt makes a lot of sense about choosing a frame that inherently fits you very well, so there are fewer issues to deal with.
BUT, I also very much value the service I get from my LBS. If I were going to buy a new bike (road or TT), I would probably buy whatever they were able to sell me that fit the best, because I know I'll want more of it in the future...and I know they'll make me a very competitive deal.
Other people want the cheapest price out there and order a frame mail order. They probably get a bike cheaper in the short run, but I can't tell you how much "free" advice and little tweaks I get. I can walk in and come out 15 minutes later with a trued wheel and probably not pay a nickel. I am literally "borrowing" a stem right now. So if you have a shop like that AND they can do a great job fitting, it's worth considering buying what they can get you. I bet the place that sells Cervelos also sels one of the makes that Matt mentions (although my particular store is mainly Trek and Giant outside of Cervelo, I think they can get Blue).
All this said, and as happy as I was with the fitting that I had, I am also in the midst of working with ttbikefit, trying to graduate to a "superfit" (hence the borrowed stem...). My body shape has left me relatively high in front, even though I have no spacers and a flat stem and I'm on a long/low bike. Todd has brought in a couple new tricks I didn't know about and we're in the midst of it. (Short femur + long humerus = not so easy to get real low)
Good luck!
Fully agree with both posts above and if I had not left an impression as Matt put it, you need both, more stack and less reach frame.
As I stated above, your position is very good and your fitter did a textbook job. He is good. See now if you can work with him to put you on a frame he thinks you should be on, cross reference it with Matt and William's suggestions. I bet he will be in that ball park with his suggestion.
Thanks to everyone for their input. Just to be clear, I chose the frame size, fit myself, and rode on it for most of 2010. It was only after IM Louisville that I went and got fitted professionally, so the frame sizing was not the fitter's fault. I went because I was having some piriformis issues and the professional fit made them go away completely. I already had the short upturned stem based on feel; I just felt like I needed to be closer to the pads and that I needed them higher, so that's how I solved the problem. I think I'm at the limit of how low I can go because it's already tiring to keep my eyes up.
He changed my saddle height, moved the saddle forward, and changed the spacers around on the stem, bringing the bars up higher. I now see that he was trying to do exactly what you guys say I need; more stack and less reach. He did mention that if I were to get a new bike or frame, that the next size up would be optimal, and would eliminate the upturned stem.
How do you guys know all this stuff? Thanks again.
You're welcome... just trying to save others from the pains I have gone through.
A combination of reading a ton and trial and error. I know becuase I have been on the wrong size frame and because I purchased a set of bling integrated lightweight non-adjustable aerobars than changed bikes and needed new aerobars as well. Mostly lessons learned the hard way.
I also have lots of time to think while on those 5-hour easy bike rides I'm doing every weekend and how I want to bend my body for the rest of the day... :-)
I'm still trying to sort this stuff out and have been reading some of Dan's stuff. He makes it sound like the frame is only going to get you close, and that the remainder of getting the fit just right is done with the correct aerobar and stem, and knowing whether you are long legged/short torso or the opposite. I'm still trying to determine if I have long legs/short torso. This description below sounds like me. My inseam to height ratio is .484.
So, imagine the rider who rides only mid-steep, and who's got very long legs versus his torso. He's a fitter's nightmare, for two reasons: He's going to need a narrow/tall bike mated with a high-profile aerobar, and he's going to have a devil of a time not hitting the backs of his armrests with his knees
My life, and welcome to it.
OK folks time for an update. I took the advice from the experts here and bought myself a frame with a shorter reach and a taller stack. On my old frame (the yellow Cervelo pictured above), I had 64mm of additional stack added by way of spacers and an upturned stem. I now have only 24mm of spacers and a slight upward tilt to the stem. This is the first stem I have tried, and I will fine tune things as I start to ride the bike.
I am within millimeters of my previous fit and I have been able to get the saddle even with the bottom bracket. Here are some photos.
And after I finally got it all together and out for a test ride.
I will do my first session on it tomorrow. Thanks to everyone Matt, William, and everyone else here who helped me dial things in.
The new Trek looks great. If you want to get really dialed in, I would swap the Vision aero bars for profile design T2s which can usally be found for about $100 if you shop around for deals online. Those will add about 3cm of stack and allow you to flip the stem around and remove a few additional spaces. As we discussed in PM's if you want to go with more bling, check out the 3T brezza or similiar bars as they will give you the additional stack in an integrated (but still addjustable) carbon setup.
BTW, always take pictures from the drive side of the bike and with the chain in the big ring :-) Other than that the bike looks great with the Zipps on. I'm glad it worked out so well for you.
I tinkered with those damn shifter cables so many times I'm scared to remove them again to install another set of bars but I will put it on the list for the next cable replacement.
Point taken on the picture faux pas, and thanks again for all your help. Hopefully after tomorrow's ride I'll be able to report back that I was comfortable and powerful on my new setup.
The workout went great today. I felt a touch low on the saddle so I moved it up about 1cm. My power was all there and I felt really comfortable the whole time. I was able to hit my 1.2 intervals and felt really solid.
Looks great. I would love to see a video of you pedaling. I am having a feeling that your hip angle is plenty open and that over time, with the same bar, you could possibly loose all the spacers. How many cm do you have left on the saddle rail till full forward. I believe the Equinox TTX has a more slack SA, which could allow you to rotate forward to a similar effective SA as you had, but with more drop.
Just a thought. If now feels good, stick with it. That frame is for you, no doubt. Nice job. Love the way your bike looks.
Here is some video. vimeo.com/20691956
The saddle is all the way forward on the rails, so no more room to work with there. My knees are very close to the pads, just as before. I feel even more dialed in now though, and on the two rides I've done on the bike I have felt very powerful.
The seat post is in the forward position. I tried the other one and it just didn't work out with the fit I wanted.
1. Reach of this frame is correct for you.
2. You do have a plenty open hip angle and room to close should you decide that is for you.
3. Saddle could go a bit higher, maybe the angle of the camera is such that is deceptive, eyball says.
4. Saddle may have a 1cm to go forward later should you decide to go lower
5. It appears as I thought, that your femur is long, just like mine and you are close to pads, maybe even brushing when stood up, I do the same
6. How long is the stem?
Verynice job overall. Congrats, that bike fits much better.
The stem is very short and my knees are close to the pads, just as before. The bike feels great and my power output seems spot on.
I really appreciate the feedback. I will continue to fine-tune as I get outside on it.
I finally got outside on the new bike today and felt great. I do feel more forward than before, mostly because my drinking straw is right under my chin instead of being more out in front. The saddle feels like it could maybe go up another few mm.
The bike feels different in a way that's hard to describe. More solid? More secure? Maybe it's because of the stiffer frame? Not sure but it felt great.
HR isn't correct until the start of the second interval for whatever reason. My Garmin has been doing that lately, not reading well until further into the workout. If I hit even 170 it won't be for more than a few seconds.
connect.garmin.com/activity/72915605