Wrong geometry-starting from scratch after 20 years

Heres some numbers. Ive been riding a 53 cm bike (I knew its 2cm too big, but the top tube was good (or so I thought) and I just didnt have a lot of seat post showing. I ran my seat at 71cm bb to top of seat and, a 55 cm top tube and a 12.5 cm stem I am 5'9" with a 30" inseam.

I quite riding for years and when i got back in-I felt my seat was too high and I was way to stretched out. Beleive it or not I recall I felt near the end of my racing career (again 15 years ago) that I was to stretched out and my seat was too high, but I was a better than average climber/roadracer and time trialist, so I thought I was doing alright.

Now heres what my research on here http://www.competitivecyclist.com/z...ALCULATOR_INTRO and looking back at my bible Greg Lemonds complete Cycling guide shows I should be riding.

I should be riding a 49.8cm (Traditonal frame-not compact) bike with a 52.5 cm top tube with 10cm stem and my seat should only be 67.5 to 69.5cm from the bb. ON a compact frame I think a 52cm bike will do as the top tube is 52cm.

OMG-my seats between 1.5 to 3.5cm too high and my top tub plus stem about 4cm too long!!!

NOw-on a side note-I know its almost August, but I havent begun any serious riiding yet. SO I am not worrying too much about muscle memory or dmage to my legs.

Again-should I just start from scratch this week with my new bike I am going to order this week or slowly work up to this new fit?

rayhuang said:

Heres some numbers. Ive been riding a 53 cm bike (I knew its 2cm too big, but the top tube was good (or so I thought) and I just didnt have a lot of seat post showing. I ran my seat at 71cm bb to top of seat and, a 53 cm top tube and a 12.5 cm stem I am 5'9" with a 30" inseam.

I quite riding for years and when i got back in-I felt my seat was too high and I was way to stretched out. Beleive it or not I recall I felt near the end of my racing career (again 15 years ago) that I was to stretched out and my seat was too high, but I was a better than average climber/roadracer and time trialist, so I thought I was doing alright.

Now heres what my research on here http://www.competitivecyclist.com/z...ALCULATOR_INTRO and looking back at my bible Greg Lemonds complete Cycling guide shows I should be riding.

I should be riding a 49.8cm Traditonal frame-not compact) bike with a 52.5 cm top tube with 10cm stem and my seat should only be 67.5 to 69.5cm from the bb.

OMG-my seats between 1.5 to 3.5cm too high and my top tub plus stem about 4cm too long!!!

NOw-on a siode note-I know its almost August, but I havent begun any serious riiding yet. SO I am not worrying too much about muscle memory or dmage to my legs.

Again-should I just start from scratch this week with my new bike I am going to order this week or slowly work up to this new fit?

Start over. No question about it. I had a 1977 Medici steel frame with 1972 campy parts. I switched to a Cannondale Six Thirteen. It fits completely different. I have never been so comfortable. Do your self a favor - go to a good LBS and open your mind to a new world.

vascdoc said:

Start over. No question about it. I had a 1977 Medici steel frame with 1972 campy parts. I switched to a Cannondale Six Thirteen. It fits completely different. I have never been so comfortable. Do your self a favor - go to a good LBS and open your mind to a new world.

I am leaning that route for sure. I will buy my bike from the LBS-no mail order for that exact reason. I want fitted. I was going to bring in my bike and take measurements off of it and duplicate it-but I dont think so now.

I lowered my seat 1cm to 70cm to try this week. HOpefully Tuesday evening. I really hope it will help the bottom of my peddle stroke(I pull back, heel down from 3pm till 6pm and pull heal up from 6 to 9pm) and I always felt weak at the bottom of my stroke. I always thought my seat was to high, but I was paranoid to lower my seat!!!!!!!!!

rayhuang said:

Heres some numbers. Ive been riding a 53 cm bike (I knew its 2cm too big, but the top tube was good (or so I thought) and I just didnt have a lot of seat post showing. I ran my seat at 71cm bb to top of seat and, a 55 cm top tube and a 12.5 cm stem I am 5'9" with a 30" inseam.

I should be riding a 49.8cm (Traditonal frame-not compact) bike with a 52.5 cm top tube with 10cm stem and my seat should only be 67.5 to 69.5cm from the bb. ON a compact frame I think a 52cm bike will do as the top tube is 52cm.

OMG-my seats between 1.5 to 3.5cm too high and my top tub plus stem about 4cm too long!!!

NOw-on a side note-I know its almost August, but I havent begun any serious riiding yet. SO I am not worrying too much about muscle memory or dmage to my legs.

Again-should I just start from scratch this week with my new bike I am going to order this week or slowly work up to this new fit?

I thought you were going to say you are 5'9" and were riding a 58cm frame ...

Unless you are having back problems, you will probably feel cramped on a 50cm frame.

A 52cm-to-53cm frame IS probably a proper fit for you by today's standards.

One shop that is local to me still sizes frames the way they were fitted around 1980 -- about 1" larger than the current sizing in the seat tube ... but, if the frame is properly fitted, the rider's REACH will be adjusted to be about the same then-as-now by use of appropriate stem length & handlebar.

Consider getting a shorter stem if you feel that you are too stretched out on your bike ...

alfeng said:

I thought you were going to say you are 5'9" and were riding a 58cm frame

Yeah-it doesnt seem like a lot when you say it like that :lol: BUt I used to think 1/8" change in seat height was too much to change in a day so you can see how crazy a possible 3.5cm change feels to me now!

My back does hurt a bit on a ride, always has. But it always hurts off the bike too.

thanks for the tips,
Ray

alfeng said:

A 52cm-to-53cm frame IS probably a proper fit for you by today's standards.

Thanks-these compact frames have me all confused!! I am going CF monocoque frame this time and all my choices seem to be compact frame (Giant TCR, Fuji Team Pro, maybe Felt). I am fitting the compact frames via top tube length over seat tube length.

I think the younger body is more pliable and more adept at adapting to situations. The enthusiasm to ride and ride well subconsciously green-light the body to make allowances for an incorectly fitting bike.

I had been trying to adjust bikes to fit me, when the base geometry was out. I am 5'6"-5'7" and was always told a medium is what I should be riding. So recently I purchased a budget road bike in 53cm and found it too big. Stuff-all seatpost sticking out, long uncomfortable stretch to ride in the hoods. While riding this though, I did move around and by measuring where my hands were when comfortable etc, I knew I was too big for a small aswell. Or at least there was a chance a small was still too big.

So I ended up buying a 48.5cm top tube bike and have the seat half way back and about 6-7' of seat post exposed. Much better...

Go go new fit for sure...

rayhuang said:

I am leaning that route for sure. I will buy my bike from the LBS-no mail order for that exact reason. I want fitted. I was going to bring in my bike and take measurements off of it and duplicate it-but I dont think so now.

I lowered my seat 1cm to 70cm to try this week. HOpefully Tuesday evening. I really hope it will help the bottom of my peddle stroke(I pull back, heel down from 3pm till 6pm and pull heal up from 6 to 9pm) and I always felt weak at the bottom of my stroke. I always thought my seat was to high, but I was paranoid to lower my seat!!!!!!!!!

Fittings use more scientific methods for determining seat height, seat position, reach, etc. They measured my height, arm length, leg length, etc. After determining the bike and size I needed, they adjusted the bike using laser guides with me pedaling, measuring my hip angle, etc. Much different than standing over the top tube and pulling it into your crotch!

I have a similar issue, I'm 5'7 and was riding a 50cm frame. To small, but my inseam wont allow me to stand over anything else in a traditional frame. I switched to a Trek Pilot 5.2 in a 52cm and what a difference!

I dont know if the LBS I am going to tomorrow will have quite such sophsiticated measuring equipment (lasrer alignment gear), but the store seems to have a nice following and a nice line of racing bikes, so I hope I am in good hands so to speak. The "other" store I was thinking about I was already warned to be aware of one salesmans fittings!! he will try and fit you to a bigger frame and will flip a extra short stem up to get you as upright as possible-YUCK!!!

This has been helpful and I thank everyone. I like the comment about being young and flexible. Now I am older and more rigid, maybe this is a nice way to start over. I dont think I will ever do another criterium, but if the right road race or time trial comes up next year-it would make a great goal and heck-I can now race Masters!!

rayhuang said:

Thanks-these compact frames have me all confused!! I am going CF monocoque frame this time and all my choices seem to be compact frame (Giant TCR, Fuji Team Pro, maybe Felt). I am fitting the compact frames via top tube length over seat tube length.

Arbitrarily-to-some, I am going to recommend that you opt for a compact frame whose VIRTUAL top tube is about 54cm ...

Those fitting machines are ONLY a starting point ... everyone's build is different ...

As I alluded to earlier, the rider's REACH should be adjusted to be about the same for a given rider regardless of the bike's seat tube length ...

Back around 1980, when I was shopping around for a "new" frame, I opted for a 57cm (c-c) Fuji S12-S LTD frame from Colorado Cyclist ("overstock"😉 to replace my mega-60cm Gitane (bought new in 1970) based on the top tube's length. I'm 5'9", too, BTW.

My current bikes [see attachments] are a 52cm (c-c) Peugeot and a 53cm (c-c) Olmo. The REACH is set up the same as on the Fuji.

The Peugeot's top is ~54cm. The Olmo's top tube is ~55cm, but is fitted with a stem that is 1cm shorter than the Peugeot ... the Fuji's top tube is ~56cm.

The Fuji was fitted with a 9cm Cinelli ... the Olmo has a 110mm, and the Peugeot has a 120mm stem!

The biggest difference between now-and-then is that I used to ride on the drops, before, and now, with the smaller frame, I ride on the tops/hoods .

Yes-a 54cm virtual top tube I used to think was optimal. I am worried its just a skoch (sp?) too long now. I have been stretching, doing a lot of back exercises, some crunches lately-so I do think I will be able to get more aero on the tops just via that.

My favorite position for hammering on the flats also is back flat, hands draped over the brake hoods. It always felt more aero and easier on my back and legs then in the drops where my legs would hit my chest.

For what its worth-I had made for me 18 years ago a Waterford Paramount and luckily I wasnt too far off as I sized it smaller than my race bike. Its 51cm seat tube cc, 54cm top tube, but a 13cm stem!! That bike I need only lower my seat and get a shorter stem. Sad part is the 13cm stem was a one-off custom made Titanium stem!! I dont even remember who made it for me 🙁 . The bike is the most beautiful bike, but its ride is hard and unforgiving on our horrible streets (Cleveland, Ohio) and I always opt for the cushy riding carbon/alum bike, even though its a 54cm bike.

rayhuang said:

Yes-a 54cm virtual top tube I used to think was optimal. I am worried its just a skoch (sp?) too long now. I have been stretching, doing a lot of back exercises, some crunches lately-so I do think I will be able to get more aero on the tops just via that.

My favorite position for hammering on the flats also is back flat, hands draped over the brake hoods. It always felt more aero and easier on my back and legs then in the drops where my legs would hit my chest.

For what its worth-I had made for me 18 years ago a Waterford Paramount and luckily I wasnt too far off as I sized it smaller than my race bike. Its 51cm seat tube cc, 54cm top tube, but a 13cm stem!! That bike I need only lower my seat and get a shorter stem. Sad part is the 13cm stem was a one-off custom made Titanium stem!! I dont even remember who made it for me 🙁 . The bike is the most beautiful bike, but its ride is hard and unforgiving on our horrible streets (Cleveland, Ohio) and I always opt for the cushy riding carbon/alum bike, even though its a 54cm bike.

You're kidding, right?

An aluminum frame with carbon fiber stays won't give you a cushier ride than your Paramount (hey, what are you planning on doing with THAT frame?) ...

The better framemakers, IMO, whether they are independent OR working for a large firm, try to engineer the RIDE to get as close as possible to simulating the ride one would get their "new" frame to one you would get with a gas-pipe tubed steel frame ... but, at a reduced weight.

An aluminum frame with carbon fiber stays & carbon fiber fork could weigh in at what your Paramount frame weighs sans fork ...

You can retro-fit a carbon fiber fork onto your Paramount as I had done with the Peugeot & Olmo ... but, all that did was reduce the over-all weight by about a pound. It didn't change the way either bike rides when compared with the ride of their (well made) steel fork.

The problem isn't the frame size ... it's that ultra-long stem! You really just need to put a 110mm stem on that bad-boy of yours rather than getting a frame with a top tube that is 2cm shorter ...

Possibly have the rear triangle re-spaced to 130mm, and put a Campy Groupo on it next Spring (updated for 2007 ... either get the latest-and-greatest OR 2006-or-earlier-NOS at a discount).

Put some 700x23 or 700x25 tires on your bike & inflate to ~100PSI if you want a cushier ride.

That's my 2-cents ...

alfeng said:

You're kidding, right?

An aluminum frame with carbon fiber stays won't give you a cushier ride than your Paramount (hey, what are you planning on doing with THAT frame?) ...

The better framemakers, IMO, whether they are independent OR working for a large firm, try to engineer the RIDE to get as close as possible to simulating the ride one would get their "new" frame to one you would get with a gas-pipe tubed steel frame ... but, at a reduced weight.

An aluminum frame with carbon fiber stays & carbon fiber fork could weigh in at what your Paramount frame weighs sans fork ...

You can retro-fit a carbon fiber fork onto your Paramount as I had done with the Peugeot & Olmo ... but, all that did was reduce the over-all weight by about a pound. It didn't change the way either bike rides when compared with the ride of their (well made) steel fork.

The problem isn't the frame size ... it's that ultra-long stem! You really just need to put a 110mm stem on that bad-boy of yours rather than getting a frame with a top tube that is 2cm shorter ...

Possibly have the rear triangle re-spaced to 130mm, and put a Campy Groupo on it next Spring (updated for 2007 ... either get the latest-and-greatest OR 2006-or-earlier-NOS at a discount).

Put some 700x23 or 700x25 tires on your bike & inflate to ~100PSI if you want a cushier ride.

That's my 2-cents ...

I was suprised my first ride on the Paramount too. Especially after waiting forever to finally get it. Maybe its rims, tires, or a combination, but its ride is hard. Bumpy asphalt or sealant leaves you with the rear tire in the air. Its an OS tubing bike, I dont know if that has anything to do with it. My butt doesnt lie!! Its does climb fast and sprinting seems easier on it. Years before that my racing bike was a Trek 600 which was a good old fashioned steel true temper frame and I LOVED that bike till I drove it my parents garage with it still on top of my car. The replacement was the bigger Trek 2300. And I got it slightly used, cheap from the Cat1 team locally.

Coincidentally, after the Trek 600 was when I started to lengthen the stems, raise the seat more. I think I was always fastest on that smaller Trek 600. Hindsight is always 20/20.

rayhuang said:

Now heres what my research on here http://www.competitivecyclist.com/z...ALCULATOR_INTRO

Something's wrong with that link. Use this one:
http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=FIT_CALCULATOR_INTRO

rayhuang said:

The bike is the most beautiful bike, but its ride is hard and unforgiving on our horrible streets (Cleveland, Ohio) and I always opt for the cushy riding carbon/alum bike, even though its a 54cm bike.

I live in a suburb of Cleveland. I think the riding is better in Cleveland than the Chicago or Boston area. I love the hills and the quality of the rides.

vascdoc said:

I live in a suburb of Cleveland. I think the riding is better in Cleveland than the Chicago or Boston area. I love the hills and the quality of the rides.

I agree-I was talking about the roads themselves. I live in Cleveland Heights and the roads out to the east can be quite bad, I think. I do love a ride down into Chagrin River road, up Fairmont to Caves!!! Then pick any one of many short, steep hills out of Changrin river road to take Gates Mills home. AAhhhhhhh....

Dont know if its to late but I took the advice of someone on this or the Serotta forum and purchased the Bill Boston program for fit. I have never been so comfortable on a bike. I have always ridden bikes that are to big and now, such a difference. I cant recomend this enough - go to your local bike shop but download his program and check and fine tune etc.....

billbostoncycles.combillbostoncycles.comOpen ↗

Never heard of him before but after doing some more research my local bike shop knows him and found this on the Spectrum site .... spectrum-cycles.comspectrum-cycles.comOpen ↗.....

[font=Arial][font=Arial]Bill Boston (billbostoncycles.combillbostoncycles.comOpen ↗[/font][font=Arial])- Long retired from frame building, Bill was my master when I first entered the frame business. Brilliant, single-minded pursuit of excellence in frame design characterized Bill's extraordinary work. Bill taught us at Spectrum to never compromise on anything related to quality. Thanks Bill. [/font][/font]

I am three rides into this season (a little late-eh?) and todays 30 miler went very well. I am still on my old bike, but I did lower the seat 1cm from a way too high 71cm to 70 bb to top tube cc.

The first 19 mile ride with the seat lower felt odd, but I am adapting my peddle stroke to the 70cm and I can finally see how I could possibly go 0.5 to 1cm lower now. Understand that 70cm is still 0.5cm to 2.5cm too high according to Lemond and other fit systems I have done.

My new bike should be ready for Tuesdays club ride. I will be shorter on the top tube by ~4cm!! Right now lookng stright down when in the drops I can see my full hub BEHIND the flat of my bars... I swear I have shrunk in the last 15 years. But truthfully its because I was riding in the late 80's early 90's when we were all trying to get as flat as possible.

Maybe I stretched better ths morning, but I didnt feel as stretched out today and I wasnt putting all my weight on my hands like last weeks ride. I wonder if my crucnches are strengthening my stomach muscles to hold up my back better? man I doubt t works that fast.

Ray