i thought i'd start a new thread on this, hope you don't mind, to keep this a little better organized. here are some results, if i didn't give you results in the prior thread:
there are many caveats here!
1. the point if this exercise is to tune an online tool for a direct selling bike maker that wants to be able to better tell the customer which bike to buy (frame size, stem size, pad pedestals, etc.). the frame maker already has a pad x/y prescriber (you type in your pad x/y, here's the prescription). the tool i'm working on now is to generate pad x/y via simple exercise. you could port the pad x/y into the prescriber for the solution.
2. this is not bike fit tool! this is the fallback. if you have nothing - no good sense of your own position; you haven't gone to a proper fitter for a bike fit; you're too embarrassed to put a video of yourself on slowtwitch to help get your fit dialed - but you want to buy this company's bike, this is a tool to help you choose the bike to buy.
3. this tool heavily relies on conformity to the norm. as you see, those blue dots are you, and you don't conform. the red dots are male pros. they conform somewhat better than the rest of you. this tool is built with the assumption that the bike you'll choose conforms to the norm.
4. blah blah blah. too many caveats to list. but they would or should be listed with the tool, so, if you (for example) want the "gentleman's fit" you could (say) add 20mm to "y" and subtract 10mm from "x". or, if you think you'll eventually get yourself into a better position, and ride more aggressively, the tool would coach you how to buy the solution that had 20mm of drop available by taking out pad pedestals, and 15mm of forward pad placement.
5. you'll see that this tool has no guidance for saddle placement. the suggestion here is that you place the pads first - the bike perhaps comes pre-positioned from the factory - and you place the saddle where you need to so that you're not too stretched, etc.
6. this should conform - if the math is right - to static formulas i've developed for armrest elevation drop, cockpit distance, seat angle and so forth. the assumption here is that you're riding with 79.5Â° of seat angle as measured in the old days before split-nose saddles. yes, that means this tool is assuming you'll ride with your hips in the position that represents long held assumptions as to the mean seat fore/aft.
all that said! this is an exercise. i'm interested now in hearing where you are, rather than where this tool says you "should" be. what i'd like from you all are:
1. what is your pad x/y?
2. are you long in the torso or long of leg?
3. anything else you want to say.
after i get a couple things off my desk i'll place a schematic on this thread telling those of you who haven't yet participated how to measure.