Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Cycle-touring, Expeditions, Adventures, Major cycle routes NOT LeJoG (see other special board)
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16083
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 531colin »

The way forward is to use your existing bike as a test bed to get comfortable, then get a new bike next year when you have solved the issues.

You can't "think your way" to a bike fit, particularly when you let demonstrably absurd bike myths get in the way. (eg....."short stems upset the steering"....is absurd. If you can't tell the difference in the steering going from the tops to the hoods to the drops, what difference will 30mm stem length make? You talk happily about using drops or flats on the same bike, that's much more difference than between 2 stems.)
Theres a thread here about bike fit...http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=74985
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by pjclinch »

22camels wrote:Don't think I'm quite yet ready for recumbents, give me a few years though :)


Why not? They're just bikes, but bikes (or possibly trikes) that may well solve your problems more directly and thoroughly than fiddling around with the variables on an upright. The relative lengths of your legs and arms becomes pretty much irrelevant and there will be far less strain on your neck. If those are your problems (and it seems they are) then a 'bent may be a fundamentally better way forwards.

There seems to be some weird perception that they're only for people who can't put up with "proper" bikes any more. They're not cycles of last resort, just for people with a more open mind to addressing their cycling needs. I tour on one because it does touring (my idea of it) better than any upright I'm aware of. Around town I use a Brommie or Moulton or 8 Freight (all uprights) because they do their jobs better.

Pete.
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
Samuel D
Posts: 3088
Joined: 8 Mar 2015, 11:05pm
Location: Paris
Contact:

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by Samuel D »

This fit problem afflicts me too. I’m about 1.77 or 1.78 m with an 87 cm cycling inseam – not freaky but clearly not the shape frame designers had in mind when penning the things I see in bike shops. The difference between me and someone like Chris Boardman is huge, and not just in cycling ability! We’re just a completely different shape.

In general, I find I need a smaller frame than is recommended by simplistic height charts, since otherwise the reach becomes unfixable with a shorter stem (I always have to fit a shorter stem, by the way). Another way to say this is that I need the largest frame I can possibly get away with, but that tends to be small.

The problem with a nominally small frame (and a typical steerer length) is that my saddle ends up higher than the bars, often by a lot. I’ve been told I am decently flexible (though I don’t feel that way) and maybe that is why I can put up with this. I have tried riding with bars level with the saddle, but that is actually too high for me, even for quite gentle riding. So although I struggle to get my bars high enough, I wouldn’t want them quite level with the saddle – and you shouldn’t assume you would like that unless you’ve tried it. What works for people with longer torsos and shorter legs/arms may not work for you.

I think 531colin’s advice to perfect your fit on your existing bicycle before getting a new one is sound. You may only need to buy or borrow a high-rise stem to do that.

Personally, I couldn’t imagine either going fast or covering long distances without drop bars. If you can, flat bars would no doubt open up more options for both fit and gearing.
22camels
Posts: 302
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 8:15pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 22camels »

horizon, why do you suggest a drop bar Sherpa retrofitted with straights is preferable to a straight bar Sherpa?

again, I have been misunderstood a bit by some of you on this thread (never mind the other one). My main question is: i've observed that my odd proportions and desire to get bars level with saddle appear to limit my choice of frames a fair bit (and i'm neither very large or very small). Is this an acknowledged problem or have I misunderstood something?

regarding fit, yes that's a good idea to perfect my fit on my existing bike. Unfortunately, I don't think it will work. I already have a steerer that many bike shops have told me looks dangerously long, and the bars are still 2 inches below the saddle, if I put on a stem raiser, I would not feel very safe except for a short cycle around local bike paths, and I'd want to take it on a long ride to get a good idea of if it works. It would also need a longer stem, maybe considerably so, (my current bike is almost definitely too small, so i've been told) to mimic the reach of the potential bikes i'm considering. Don't take it that i'm unhappy with my current bike, it works ok as I've got used to it, i'll happily take it to Europe for a week next month. But I don't want to use it as a starting point for the new fit, that i'd like to decide afresh from first principles. I know what you mean about replicating the contact point separations at the expense of handling, but ultimately there is also another factor of what feels right being what I am used to, and what I've got used to not necessarily being best for me, which may cloud my judgment.

good point about maybe bars being level with the saddle will turn out too high. I would like the option though, to take that as a starting point and go down from there if I need.

531colin - the spa cycles link you posted in the other thread, http://www.spacycles.co.uk/info/pedaltosaddle.php, is a good illustration of what i mean here. I need a saddle to pedal height of 37in, and in the photo (http://www.spacycles.co.uk/smsimg/uploa ... tourer.jpg) you see that in the recommended frame (57cm) presumably with the full steerer, the bars still barely reach the level of the saddle.

re recumbents, my main objection is it seems it would make me the centre of attention in some places.. I don't want to stand out. And how does it handle off-road?
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by Bicycler »

I don't see the problem with the Spa bike. Bars level with the saddle with plenty of seatpost showing. If necessary they could easily be raised further by using a high rise stem. As mentioned above the standard riding position on a drop barred bike is on the brake hoods, not the drops themselves.
User avatar
pjclinch
Posts: 5470
Joined: 29 Oct 2007, 2:32pm
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Contact:

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by pjclinch »

22camels wrote:re recumbents, my main objection is it seems it would make me the centre of attention in some places.. I don't want to stand out. And how does it handle off-road?


If you don't want to stand out, fair enough. You will, and then some.
(off road depends on what level of "off-road", on a typical track they're fine, close veg around singletrack tends to bite a bit more, if you need to bunny hop stuff then not much good (but then not is a loaded tourer if you're jumoing rocks and roots!))
Often seen riding a bike around Dundee...
maxglide
Posts: 194
Joined: 19 May 2013, 5:35pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by maxglide »

and the bars are still 2 inches below the saddle,


Only 2 inches?

Mine are nearly 8 inches below - "Why is that guy riding his hybrid like a road bike.."
User avatar
honesty
Posts: 2658
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 3:33pm
Location: Somerset
Contact:

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by honesty »

Blimey, you're all making me feel like I have really stumpy legs... at 179cm and 83cm bfso height...
22camels
Posts: 302
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 8:15pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 22camels »

"Blimey, you're all making me feel like I have really stumpy legs... at 179cm and 83cm bfso height…"

I think that's close to average. I first realised my legs were long when I let a mate the same height as me try my bike out, I had to lower my saddle by over 5cm for him!
User avatar
horizon
Posts: 11275
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by horizon »

22camels wrote:horizon, why do you suggest a drop bar Sherpa retrofitted with straights is preferable to a straight bar Sherpa?



Two points:

1. Thorn (to their credit) run two frame lengths throughout their range. They reckon that because drop bars throw you foward 12 cm (see above), the top tube needs to be correspondingly shorter for drop barred bikes. Of course, no-one (AFAIK) really knows what the starting point for this is: is Thorn making its drop bar bikes shorter or its straight bar bikes longer? In the end I came to the conclusion that it was the latter, just. (Thorn's short tubes are just a tiny bit shorter than others e.g. Club Tour versus Spa).

Anyway, assuming that Thorn's drop bar bikes are normal (whatever length that is) they are shorter than straights (e.g. 565S and 565L). So if you are not normal and need a shorter frame, buy the drop bar bike and put straights on it. La voila! The top tubes on my MTBs are longer than the top tubes on my tourers. But put straights on my tourer and voila! Of course if want drops you are still struggling: basically, drops on a 700c frame with a normal steep head tube will require long arms - the wheel cannot come back any further as it would hit your toes.

2. I haven't talked about bar height because it isn't the same problem. Although height and reach are related due to the angle of the head tube, really it's easy to deal with height - you just keep on going upwards - six feet anyone? To get more bar height, just leave the steerer uncut. To get the bars lower - well ... If only it were that easy with top tube length.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16083
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 531colin »

22camels wrote:...........
531colin - the spa cycles link you posted in the other thread, http://www.spacycles.co.uk/info/pedaltosaddle.php, is a good illustration of what i mean here. I need a saddle to pedal height of 37in, and in the photo (http://www.spacycles.co.uk/smsimg/uploa ... tourer.jpg) you see that in the recommended frame (57cm) presumably with the full steerer, the bars still barely reach the level of the saddle........................


Since we did all those photos, there is now a 60cm bike, which I have personally fitted quite happily to riders 6' 6".
Crotch to floor on me is about 32", saddle to pedal is about 34", that's this on a 54cm bike http://www.spacycles.co.uk/smsimg/uploads/tourer/5434tourer.jpg
I'm 5' 10", you are an inch taller than me with crotch to floor 88cm, that's about 34 1/2" , or 2 1/2" longer than my legs.
I actually designed the 54 for me, the 60 head tube is 2 1/2" taller than the 54, I would be ever so surprised if it were too small for you.
Since the photos, we have also changed the fork supplier, the steerer is now 350mm.....after all this time I have no idea what length the steerers in the photos were cut to.....you could probably scale it from the 700c wheel, if you had a mind to.
You can be considered to have long legs for your height, or a short torso for your height....that being the case, you might fit better on a 57 with an uncut steerer, as the reach is less, although if you also have long arms, it might all cancel out. (I have never heard of 1 1/8" steel steerers breaking.....ever).
The 60cm bike is huge....like a field gate with wheels.
22camels
Posts: 302
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 8:15pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 22camels »

the Spa steel tourers do look nice, unfortunately I am looking for 26 inch wheels for parts availability.

regarding Thorn, yeah i've had thoughts about mixing it up a bit between their drop and straight bar setups too, but I think if I do end up going for the Sherpa, I'll go with their recommendation which is either 565S/600S for drops, or 565L/600L for straights and only retrofit if I really have to.. I'm not sure I really need that short a reach (I have longish arms too), guess it depends on how this neck thing evolves, I hope it's just a matter of spending more time in the saddle.

thanks for all the responses so far.
reohn2
Posts: 45159
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by reohn2 »

22camels wrote:I recently learnt that I have exceptionally long legs (88cm bare-foot standover) for my height (180cm)....... .......My formula is this. I need my seat to be 780mm vertically above the BB. Max bar height above BB = Stack + (Uncut steerer length - Head Tube Length) * SINE (head tube angle). I know I'm making a couple of assumptions and it might be out by a cm or two but it gives a meaningful comparison between bikes.

Another problem is that shops love to cut the steerers (to make them look pretty?) and even for bikes that would suit me, it's hard to find a test ride with the bars set up level, so I have to guess how it would feel if it were set up for me..

Anyone else have this issue?


By comparison my bare foot inside leg is 865mm so 15mm shorter than yours
I also like to ride fairly upright ie;nose of saddle to centre of compact drop bars 540mm,h/bars 40mm higher than the saddle.
On my Salsa Vaya's there's 35mm of spacers under 6deg 110mm stem flipped upward.
The problem I'm having is that if I measure my saddle height vertical above the BB(an unusual way to do it IMHO) I get 700mm for mine.
From BB to saddle inline with the seatube it's 730mm and from pedal axle at BDC inline with seatube 890mm(with 175mm cranks).
Your saddle would be,if I'm reading your post correctly,80mm higher than mine even though your inside leg is only 15mm longer than mine :? ,I'm aware I ride pretty flat footed and some people ride on their toes ie; feet point to the ground,but still 80mm is a lot of difference.

My Vaya's are both 57cm frames the stem is 110mm,the saddle is 90mm behind the BB(to achieve KOPS) and the h'bars are 40mm higher than the saddle.I don't have any toe overlap with 40mm tyres,generous m/guard clearances,175mm cranks and size 47 shoes.I could ride a 58cm Vaya with 100or105mm stem and less spacers under it.
To get a clear picture or your requirements IMO the best way to measure your riding position is
a)saddle height to pedal axle with the cranks @ BDC inline with the seatube(Mine is 890mm).
b)saddle set back measured vertically behind the BB(mine is 90mm).
c)nose of saddle to either centre of the h/bar tops(mine is 540mm).
d)h/bar tops height in relation to the saddle(mine are 40mm higher than the saddle)

Going off your measurements I suspect a 57or58cm Surly LHT or DT,or a 57or58cmSalsa Vaya will be big enough but I like to see you measurements a to d, first.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
22camels
Posts: 302
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 8:15pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 22camels »

interesting numbers reohn2.

You are right that my saddle is 80mm higher than yours even though my inseam is only 15mm longer. My BB to saddle-top distance parallel to ST should be 777mm according to Lemond, but I have it 43mm longer than that - highest I can get away with without rocking hips etc. - it feels fine (I have size 46 feet). Yours should be 764mm by Lemond, but you say you have it 34mm lower than that at 730mm. Net that's a difference of 77mm just due to me being above Lemond, and you being below. Add that to the 15mm difference that you would expect based on our different inseams, and you get 92mm, which is spot on (820 - 730 = 90).

I was studying the Vaya 57cm geometry recently and yeah I can see exactly how with your flipped stem you'd be able to get your bars to 40mm above your seat with the 300mm uncut steerer. Useful check on my math :).

Like I mentioned my current bike fit is probably wrong and in any case I don't want to base my new bike sizing off it, as it's also a case of me having got used to it over the four years I've had it, but I'll give you the numbers anyway. The bike is a 54cm tricross sport 2011 (probably too small for me - the drop bar bikes that have been recommended to me so far have effective top tubes 10-35mm longer..) with
a) that would be 820mm + crank length (170mm) = 990mm.
b) saddle nose locations vary but mine is currently about 50mm horizontally behind the BB. But it depends on where the seat bones are, i think I'm close to KOPS.
c) saddle nose to bar is 490mm - I've been messing around with a longer stem last few days and this's gone up to 520mm and I'm not sure I like it though it's probably what a bike fitter would recommend. But the bars being lower than the saddle increases the effective reach.
d) my bars are currently about 60mm below the top of the saddle .

Maybe I should try lowering my saddle a notch :).
User avatar
531colin
Posts: 16083
Joined: 4 Dec 2009, 6:56pm
Location: North Yorkshire

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 531colin »

Image

this is from the bike fit thread i posted earlier somewhere....be interesting to see your equivalent picture....
Post Reply