I’m curious how it differs, if at all, from the fit I ended up with at the ST fit workshop in February.
Height: 5’6"
Saddle Height: 705mm
I’m 5’10 - saddle height 735mm
What say you?
I’m curious how it differs, if at all, from the fit I ended up with at the ST fit workshop in February.
Height: 5’6"
Saddle Height: 705mm
me curious too. 587/452
Pad Xr: 397
Pad Xc: 437
Pad Y: 607
.
Pad Xr: 397
Pad Xc: 437
Pad Y: 607
did i try to move you forward and lower? if so, how did that go? i don’t remember. in any case, we’re not horribly off. my prescription is 20mm lower and 15mm further forward. my math prescribes you as being just one step more aggressive, but, in scale. in proportion. if you go forward you probably go lower, and by that rough amount.
having said that, if you and i agreed that 607/437 was the best outcome, i would trust THAT more than i would trust arbitrary math.
I actually have gone further out (20mm) and a little lower now (10mm) on my fit bike which I feel is even more comfortable but have only translated the x and not the y to my current bike.
Here’s my information for the data pool:
Pad X = 470mm
Pad Y = 597mm
Saddle height = 673mm
Height = 5’5" (165cm)
Inseam = 30.5" (77.5cm)
Not sure if this is considered long or short of torso/legs.
I’m riding a XS Spec. Shiv with a 110/-20 stem with no spacers; 20mm of pedestal under the armpads.
i have you at 571/450. i’d like to see a pic. there are a few of you who have longer padx than i’m coming up with, esp in the smaller configs.
Sorry… I was slow to get back to my bike to measure. Mine are reasonably close…
The analysis came up with 620/474. My HY is 641 and HX is 467. The 641 measurement is to top of pads. However, I suspect that I am too tall at the moment, because I am slow for my power, so I am planning to submit my position to the forum for analysis once I get a camera setup to do some picture taking and videoing.
Saddle height: 730mm
Pad Y: 629mm
Pad X: 500mm
My height: 179cm
Would say I lean more towards long(er) torso
165mm cranks
M Shiv
.
Height : 5’11’’ (long torso)
Saddle height : 735mm
Pad x : 530mm
Pad y : 560mm
Consulting your chart, I note that my pad x/y is quite unorthodox…
I am riding a size 54 Cervelo NP3, with 120mm -35 stem , 3T vola bars with pad forward and extensions under the bar. I am thinking of changing my bike next year, but can’t find anything that will fit without crazy stem angles. Any ideas? Would I be better off on a size 51 P3 (kind of crazy at 5’11’')?
Here are a few pictures of my position (training setup). Not the best pictures, but it gives you an idea.
Thanks Dan.
Saddle height: 730mm
Pad Y: 629mm
Pad X: 500mm
My height: 179cm
Would say I lean more towards long(er) torso
165mm cranks
M Shiv
620/488
.
Sorry… I was slow to get back to my bike to measure. Mine are reasonably close…
The analysis came up with 620/474. My HY is 641 and HX is 467. The 641 measurement is to top of pads. However, I suspect that I am too tall at the moment, because I am slow for my power, so I am planning to submit my position to the forum for analysis once I get a camera setup to do some picture taking and videoing.
just as a point of order, did i write HY and HX somewhere? if so that was my mistake. HY and HX are terms of art and refer to the handlebar clamp, that is, where the handlebar (pursuit bar in this case) pass through the stem. PadY and PadX are obviously different.
don’t assume that my math is a more important driver than the other drivers that you use to dial your position. i’m asking you for the length of your index finger and the circumference of your head and from that i’m calcuating what foods are likely to give you indigestion. that’s a like analogy. there are better and more direct ways of knowing what will give you indigestion.
just as a point of order, did i write HY and HX somewhere? if so that was my mistake. HY and HX are terms of art and refer to the handlebar clamp, that is, where the handlebar (pursuit bar in this case) pass through the stem. PadY and PadX are obviously different.
don’t assume that my math is a more important driver than the other drivers that you use to dial your position. i’m asking you for the length of your index finger and the circumference of your head and from that i’m calcuating what foods are likely to give you indigestion. that’s a like analogy. there are better and more direct ways of knowing what will give you indigestion.
No… I used one of your sizing sheets with HX/HY on it when I recorded the measurements. I just parroted what was on the sheet. My actual measurements were PadY and PadX.
And, I definitely did not assume that the magic math was more important than the drivers in my fit. It is just another little tweak that makes me suspect I could further optimize my position. I feel like I am sitting a ton more upright than everyone else. And, others here are posting much faster times on same power as I ride. So, I have been planning a follow-up with both a local fitter and on ST to see if I can get faster.
179cm height
740mm saddle.
Pad stack: 590mm
Pad reach: 505mm
179cm height
740mm saddle.
Pad stack: 590mm
Pad reach: 505mm
623/486
you know you could almost switch bikes with BMS just above.
i would always trust drivers achieved on the bike over my math. just, when padx and pady creep closer to each other, such as fewer than 100mm apart from each other for a rider aboard a size L or 56cm or 58cm bike, that’s a sign of a very aggressive position, even if you’re long torsoed. while this position may in fact be correct for you, i wouldn’t expect my math to generate such a position.
179cm height
740mm saddle.
Pad stack: 590mm
Pad reach: 505mm
623/486
you know you could almost switch bikes with BMS just above.
i would always trust drivers achieved on the bike over my math. just, when padx and pady creep closer to each other, such as fewer than 100mm apart from each other for a rider aboard a size L or 56cm or 58cm bike, that’s a sign of a very aggressive position, even if you’re long torsoed. while this position may in fact be correct for you, i wouldn’t expect my math to generate such a position.
I am on a Large Spec. transition. I have a -45 adjustable stem (long story).
I have never been more comfortable on this bike than these last 2 months since lower the front end with this stem. Power is also up.
My local dealer carries Specialized and Trek. But not sure I can fit either bike.
Here is my current position:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=623862314633623&set=pcb.623721477981040&type=3&theater
179cm height
740mm saddle.
Pad stack: 590mm
Pad reach: 505mm
623/486
you know you could almost switch bikes with BMS just above.
i would always trust drivers achieved on the bike over my math. just, when padx and pady creep closer to each other, such as fewer than 100mm apart from each other for a rider aboard a size L or 56cm or 58cm bike, that’s a sign of a very aggressive position, even if you’re long torsoed. while this position may in fact be correct for you, i wouldn’t expect my math to generate such a position.
I am on a Large Spec. transition. I have a -45 adjustable stem (long story).
I have never been more comfortable on this bike than these last 2 months since lower the front end with this stem. Power is also up.
My local dealer carries Specialized and Trek. But not sure I can fit either bike.
Here is my current position:
https://www.facebook.com/...p;type=3&theater
i wouldn’t counsel any change. that said, on paper, saddle height of 740mm, typical pro or top AG triathlete, the expected armrest elevation drop is about 12.5cm to 13cm, something like that. my guess is you’re 16cm, 17cm, maybe more. i don’t know.
the reason we don’t want those big drops is because you lose mechanical advantage at TDC. however, you can ameliorate that by moving the saddle forward (opening that hip angle back up) and also by going to shorter cranks (making the top of TDC not quite so close to your torso).
because we are afraid of power diminishing with a really low pads position, if your power actually increased then we don’t have to worry about that. that’s why the math i’m using for this exercise is not for outliers. it’s intended to drive you toward the norm because this math is the result of a wager, that if you’re buying a bike you haven’t seen, and you have no idea what size you should buy and how it should be configured, we’ll wager toward the fat of the bell curve of good riders who ride good positions. you’re not on the high point of the bell curve. not everyone should be there. you obviously are a case where you need to deviate from the fat of the bell curve.
Very cool information.
I believe my old position was closer to the fat part of the bell curve. I have been working on getting lower for a few years now.
I use 165cm cranks. Just by luck my road bike and Tri bike have the exact seat height as measured from the flat part of the pedals to the seat. I ride the exact same seat and pedals/shoes with both bikes.
I have added pictures of last years position and this years position
This new position
.