Not to be rude, but I would question that fit before asking about bikes because those numbers don't add up. I doubt that position is very good, and no way you should be on 172.5mm cranks with that saddle height. The arm pad width...I didn't know you could get arm pads that far apart! Don't get me wrong, you can obtain that position on a few bikes (Small Trek Speed Concept with a High-Far stem, for instance), but I would really be reticent to do so until you know that position is sound.

Do you have pics or video of the fit session?
What saddle was used?
Is the pad stack measured to the back or middle of the arm pad?

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

I didn't have a proper video done, but I did see from the fitters phone the positioning and it didn't seem off.

We tried 170 cranks and I couldn't tell a difference.

I tried a few different saddles and the fit was done on a ISM - but oddly enough I also like the SMP T4 and SMP Drakon

I have attached my "printout" - for reference i'm 5'9+ and ~150lbs

Well basically there is usually only one way this works:
People come here and ask for fit advise and get told to get a proper bike fit done. You then go ahead and get that done, come here with your results and turns out people tell you your bike fit is crap. And then with the help of some more details and in the best of cases with some pictures and more data the forum will get you properly fitted and you're all set.

I think it would save everyone a lot of money if we would skip right to the part where the forum does the fit.


In your case I don't think the numbers look so bad with two exceptions:

a) Your fit has you sit very high in the front end. Very very unusually high. (read: too high) Unless you can think of any special reason it should be like this? (back injury etc..)
b) Its current trend to use smaller cranks. 172.5mm is pretty much what I'd get in a road bike, with a tri bike you can go right down to 165mm (as per current trend)
c) we can't really judge the reach numbers without seeing the proportions of your body and knowing if thats measured to beginning of armpad or middle (thats about a 4cm difference)


If you want to do some looking around yourself here some ideas to check if you're in the right ballpark:

1) https://custom.diamondback.com/...?__country=DE#step09
Step 9 of the Diamondback Config tool will allow you to enter a fit calculator that will output X/Y stack and reach coordinates based on your seat height or inseam and your body height. You can use these to compare to your bike fit results

2) nose of saddle to end of extensions (add 3-4cm when using ISM PN or 5-6cm for ISM pr) = roughly seat height from BB - usually this is useful if you know your seat height.

3) you can modify both 1) and 2) to suit you better if you know if you're short or long legged (inseam/body height), as a shorter torso would sit a little bit further back while a longer torso.. you get the idea

4) usually a saddle on a tri bike will sit in front of the bottom bracket to achieve the steep seat angle that triathletes prefer. In your case this is accounted for with the ISM saddle as those run shorter. This number seems to be in the right ballpark.


PS: I guess its somewhat safe to say already that unless something really unexpected is going to happen in the end you will need a size 51 or 54 bike depending on some more specifics of your fit and bike model specific geometry.

That arm pad stack and reach IS achievable on a number of 50-51cm bikes. You would need a basebar that allows the clip ons to move very wide, and the clip ons themselves would need a bunch of width adjustments, Profile Design clips and the right basebar can get you to 29cm center to center.

BUT, no way. I'm with Jim. Those numbers overall just don't add up for a 5'9" 150 lb rider. 172.5mm crank is a big clue. I believe you tried 170 and didn't notice a difference, but at 3.5cm of drop, you were not likely taken to the limit of your existing crank before you made a change. And 170 isn't exactly what I would consider a change... just another crank length that is way too long. You needed to try stuff at 165, 160 and shorter.


29cm of armrest width, while achievable, is a width I've used exactly twice in 12 years. Both times for riders that were roughly 6 inches away from getting their elbows together in a basic mobility test. So maybe that is you, but I'm skeptical.


Listen, you probably got a bad fit from a "reputable fitter". Happens all the time. Pictures would help. Wait, you didn't get pictures from your fitter? No video? C'mon guy(s and gals), there are a ton of articles on this site detailing things like reasonable bike fit expectations, and orthodoxy. Please read that stuff first, instead of trying to fix a bad fit after the fact. I mean, how the heck do you not get photos?

interestingly enough I was recommended a 56cm Cervelo P-series or Felt IA.

in terms of injuries - i have none. however, i think i do have neck mobility issues that have been aggravated over the years using computers. i'm not the most flexible person in the world, but not awkwardly stiff. my inseam is 32inches, i'd say slightly longer legs than torso in comparison, which may show why the stack is pretty high in comparison to reach especially if consider a less aggressive/upright head/neck position.

to be honest, i was skeptical getting a bike fit in the first place for this exact reason. the fitter in question has all the certifications, accolades and even Fit Institute Slowtwitch Certified - for whatever that means. i'm probably more unsure about bike/fit before this all started. i ride a 54cm road bike - always have. fitter says 56cm frame, community says small/medium - I thought I would be fine on a 54cm Shiv, which seems to have the geometry (taller/shorter) frame size for my numbers - but also thinking my odd numbers won't get me anywhere comfortable on any tri bike for long distances and nowhere near aero.

You're 5'9" with a 71cm seat height and you were recommended a 56cm bike? I assume to achieve the tall stack. That pad reach is super short for a 56, you are super short for a 56, your neck mobility is probably not the reason for the high position, your cranks are without a doubt way too long, and I could go on.

You probably need to cut about 30-60mm out of the pad stack, 6-12cm out of the elbow width, and 10-20mm out of the crank. That's your fit. It's probably a good fit.

Or post some pics/video along with the fitters reasoning for an unorthodox position. Because it is an unorthodox position, and there needs to be a reason.

for what it's worth, i took a look at my road bike (Giant Defy 54 cm/172.5 cranks), which I have adjusted over the past 2 years to my liking and comfortability. my seat height on the road bike is 86-87cm. I wouldn't think there would be that huge of a difference between seat height on a road bike vs. tri bike.

Is that from the pedal? THat would make it about the same as the Tri recommendation.

pedal in line with the seat post and measurement taken from the middle of the pedal bolt to the top of the seat - so yes.

Premier Tactical XS Stack and Reach but at 5'9" does not add up.

---

Dan Kennison

facebook: @triPremierBike
http://www.PremierBike.com
http://www.PositionOneSports.com

I'm 5'9" too, but with a couple more centimeters for seat high (73-74) and got a Felt 56 that fits right. I have a long torso, so there is that.

I had the same question after a -probably- bad fit, but got me in the ballpark and after several questions and recommendations in the forum, I pulled the trigger for that bike. I was initially recommended a size 60! (gasp!)

If you input 5'9" in the Felt IA bike sizing chart, you get 48, 51, 53 and 56 sizes.

Here's the link to the whole discussion along with videos of after/before.

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/First_Pro_fit_results_in..._what_bike_do_I_get%3F_1.74m_tall_and_a_size_60_Felt%3F%3F%3F_P6631140/

Check out this thread, I had the same question after my last fit. I'm 5'9" too, but with an inseam of 73-74 cms. The link also has videos.

I decided to go for the Felt 56.

https://forum.slowtwitch.com/forum/Slowtwitch_Forums_C1/Triathlon_Forum_F1/First_Pro_fit_results_in..._what_bike_do_I_get%3F_1.74m_tall_and_a_size_60_Felt%3F%3F%3F_P6631140/

Whoa, 5'9" with a 32" inseam? I always knew I had a long torso, but damn. I'm 6'1" with a 32" inseam.

interesting...thanks for sharing Mario

i've read through the thread and have been comparing your guru fit to mine. what's interesting is that although i may be ~0.5 inch taller, our coordinates are very different. your saddle height was longer even though your inseam was significantly smaller. i have nowhere near the reach you have, this i know, but my saddle height or pad stack now seems really out of line.

i was "recommended" a 56 Felt IA as well. but i have a hard time believing i can get in the ballpark on the reach side. not to mention, my saddle height would probably be bottomed out.

I am 5-9 and ride a 48cm p3 saddle height 72.5, 162.5 cranks 32.5" inseam ~90cm GT height

We are almost the same size--I'm a bit taller just under 5' 10"-- I went from 175s this past spring to 165s. Never been happier & I'm "leggy" so you should be able to go shorter a bit more.

One thing that fitters do all the time: they run out of room on the bike.

Was this done on a fit bike or an existing bike on a trainer? I'm guessing the latter because you say trainer - but this can mean different things to different people.

Jim and Findingfreestyle are correct - your saddle height and that crank length won't work. that is, unless your hip angle is open enough for it to work. My guess is it won't be - crank length and saddle height go together but the function of crank length is opening the hips for peddling efficiency.

One thing I didn't see mentioned is drop. You've got 3.5cm of drop? That makes no sense. I'm guessing that's because the fitter couldn't get your hips open enough with that crank length. The fit kinda reads like a road bike with aerobars on it and the fitter ran out of real estate on the front of the bike. But that's just a guess.

Saddle height and setback look fine (setback with an ISM at your height will be between 3-6cm normally). And, yes that armpad width is way to wide but that could be a function of a bad measurement. Say, if the fitter measured the outside of the pads vs center to center.

PennBen - the fit was done on a Purely Fit Bike.

I kinda wished I had tried 165mm cranks...not sure why it wasn't suggested. i can follow-up on wear the measurement was taken on the pads. i don't recall having any discussion on pad width and double guessing from the fitter so when it was pointed out, I was a bit surprised.

I kinda wished I had tried 165mm cranks...//

We have the same saddle height and I would suggest that if you are going back in, try the 155's. You might not notice any power difference, but that is standard. And that is the point, you dont lose power, but you then get to ride in a better fitting position that is more aero..My initial jump from 175 was to 165, figured that was a lot. But then went to 155 and found the "right" crank length for my leg length and hip angles...

Right, plenty of difference. For our height Felt has 4 sizes of the same model bike so that does not help.

For most riders with reasonable Pad X,Y numbers, looking at intelligent and adjustable bikes like the Felt IA series, you are usually going to find 2-4 sizes that fit you. I would look to a few things to narrow your choices down.

1. Where in the PAD X,Y range do you fall? Centered is good. Close to the edge in up, down, back, or forth is not.
2. What is your seat height and how does that work with (and look) on each of those sizes? 70cm seat height on a 56cm bike looks weird. Some manufacturers publish seat height ranges, and this can be useful. If you are near the limit, we'd call that a clue.
3. What would be a "typical" size bike for someone of your height?
4. What is likely to change with your position in the future? If you had a good fit, maybe nothing. If you are going to lose significant weight, perhaps be sure you have some room to drop down. Many proper bike fits won't change much over time, but those that do generally move forward and down, less frequently backwards and up. So I try to make sure there is room for more reach and more drop.

Yes, I agree on your comments.

i don't mean this in a snarky way, but a teaching way. do you ever read any of the articles i write on the front page about bike fit, the bike fit experience, what underpins bike fit, the reasonable expectations of your bike fit session?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Out of curiosity, when someone goes through the FIST workshop/certification, do you talk about the same things you write in your articles and what these fitters should be providing to customers? Do you mention they should be providing video to their customers of their final products? Even if its just on a fit bike?

---

blog