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 »

22camels wrote: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).......


22 camels
....You may be missing a couple of things here. R2's saddle is further back, this moves the saddle away from the pedals just as raising it does.
Lemond was world class. I imagine his fit system is designed to get elite athletes into a racing tuck. Even though they have no beer belly to get in the way, they need the saddle forward in order to get low over the bars, if you can pedal hard enough the reaction supports your torso. If you are young, fit, and injury-free with good biomechanics (no tight hamstrings, no joint problems) then you can pedal smoothly through the bottom even with a high saddle. For a recreational cyclist, everything pivots back around the BB.....saddle back and down, bars back and up. Much more weight on the saddle, athletes put their weight on the pedal!
In my view the right saddle height for a recreational cyclist is where you need to slide back a bit on the saddle if you need to get maximum push for a while to crest a rise without changing down, or whatever.....you can watch the climbers in the tour doing just that. Having the saddle a bit lower than the athletes' maximum power height gives a bit of slack for those days that aren't quite your best day.
Last edited by 531colin on 1 Apr 2015, 6:08pm, edited 1 time in total.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by reohn2 »

531colin wrote:
reohn2 wrote:..............,problem solved and the grips are nearer to the saddle than the hoods are on my drop barred bikes :)
But then I don't spend more than 31/2 to 4 hours in the saddle on that bike.
That said,I like the drops in a position where I can ride them most of the time,on or (mild)off road,getting the tops up higher than the saddle provides me with that comfort.


Everybody is different....your "problem solved" is a problem created for me.....I want the same reach on all my bikes.

That's OK we just differ
Similarly, as far as I'm concerned, the drops are for headwinds or occasionally for chasing somebody down. (I'm not too old yet!) I can't think why you would want to ride most of the time in the lowest position of what, about 4 workable positions with drops?
If it works for you, great, but its not "the answer" for me... :wink:

The reason I ride mostly on the drops is that it's very comfortable for me,I won't everyone with my health issues,but it works for me :)
BTW I see more people who can't,never mind won't,ride on the drops for more than a few minutes at a time and even then they'de need to be freewheeling,which is all down to race position bike fit due to short/cut off steerers,for not very race fit riders :wink:
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by reohn2 »

531colin wrote:
22camels wrote: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).......


....You may be missing a couple of things here. R2's saddle is further back, this moves the saddle away from the pedals just as raising it does.
Lemond was world class. I imagine his fit system is designed to get elite athletes into a racing tuck. Even though they have no beer belly to get in the way, they need the saddle forward in order to get low over the bars, if you can pedal hard enough the reaction supports your torso. If you are young, fit, and injury-free with good biomechanics (no tight hamstrings, no joint problems) then you can pedal smoothly through the bottom even with a high saddle. For a recreational cyclist, everything pivots back around the BB.....saddle back and down, bars back and up. Much more weight on the saddle, athletes put their weight on the pedal!
In my view the right saddle height for a recreational cyclist is where you need to slide back a bit on the saddle if you need to get maximum push for a while to crest a rise without changing down, or whatever.....you can watch the climbers in the tour doing just that. Having the saddle a bit lower than the athletes' maximum power height gives a bit of slack for those days that aren't quite your best day.

I agree but don't see what I'm missing,people ride differently.
I was merely point out to 22 camels(great handle BTW) what appeared to me to be a huge difference between his and my saddle position for not much difference in leg length.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
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 »

OK, I edited my post for clarity.... :wink:
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by reohn2 »

531colin wrote:OK, I edited my post for clarity.... :wink:


No worries Colin :)
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
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 »

reohn2 wrote:22 camels(great handle BTW)

What does it mean? I Googled it a few days ago to no avail.
22camels
Posts: 302
Joined: 21 Sep 2013, 8:15pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by 22camels »

...to no avail.


evidently you didn't google enough :)

"When Julius Caesar defeated the Numidian king Juba in 46 BCE, among the spoils he took were 22 camels."
"The Emperor apparently had a much friendlier relationship with the Sultan's successor, for according to the medieval historian al-Maqrizi, Dawit sent 22 camels laden with gifts to Berkuk, the first Sultan of the Burji dynasty."
"Dressed as a Bedouin she took with her a caravan of 22 camels to carry her baggage. "
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 »

Excellent!
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by reohn2 »

Just so long as they don't get the hump about it....







I'll get me coat :?
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
dandru
Posts: 39
Joined: 3 Mar 2015, 1:27am

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by dandru »

531colin wrote:I'm with Bicycler on this. Last time I had a flat-bar bike, I messed around for ages . When I finally got comfortable I rode most of the time on the bar ends. Surprisingly enough, these were at the same reach as the hoods on the drop bar bikes....so that I occasionally went the wrong way for the brakes....now I'm back to drops on all the bikes, and much happier. I don't race, just on and some off road touring for pleasure.


There is nothing wrong with your setup, if you're comfortable, that's fine, maybe you're stretched out more on your Flatbar than me.

I tend to ride my touring MTB in Asia where I'm not riding too far each day, 80 kilometres is a good day but on a recent trip I rode a few 130 km days and they were hard, but for short tours, I can cope. On my Cannondale tourer, the longer distances are easier because of the drop bars, which are designed for riding comfortably, if I want the flat bar/Mtb riding position, then I get onto the Tops, whereas every other position is a bit further forward and gives a more streamlined position, so I can be in the saddle longer and cover more distance when it's needed, like across the Nullarbor in Australia or through parts of America, especially when you've got a tail winds, so you make the most of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_bar_road_bike

Use he trekking/Butterfly bars as an example, the levers and shifters are mostly located close to the rider which would be the Flat bar riding position, and the front part would be like the Hoods on a drop bar bike, further away.

http://goo.gl/DMFNbS
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 »

If the OP was comfortable, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.
aflook
Posts: 188
Joined: 22 Nov 2011, 3:21pm
Location: Sheffield

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by aflook »

All seems a bit technical to me. I've just been through all this - I had a frame custom built to account for me long legs realative to height. This was brilliant - until it was nicked a few weeks ago. On a short tour of Angelsey (aagh spelling?) I was back on Bob Jackson 55cm or so and it felt way too small. I've now bought a Condor Heritage, which has a slightly sloping top tube, but in a 58cm size with a longer steerer. On first tries, this feels much closer to my custom frame - it's like coming home. Not finished the build yet so can't be sure. It seems so much is personal - I ride well forward over the pedals because my knees prefer it, so keep a longer (120mm) stem. Shallow drops suit me fine. It's counter intuitive that a sloping top tube would be better for me, but it actually means I can raise the bar height to what feels good. There are so many variables in body shape and riding style (not to mention and I don't age and fitness) that I don't believe in any numbers system. Trouble is, trial and error can be so costly...
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 »

buying the wrong bike is costly all right.....which is why its preferable to get the position sorted on an existing bike, with a steerer extender, etc.
Why is a sloping top tube counter-intuitive? If you have a short torso for your height, (the other way of saying long legs for your height) you are liable to want the bars high....which is why sloping tubes are popular anyway.
Sitting on top of the pedals with a long stem....OK if you can manage it...I could, 30 years ago.
Do you have any dimensions of your custom frame? Just off the cuff i would guess short, sloping top tube, from the frame sizes you mention toe overlap shouldn't be a problem.
I don't have a problem with "variations" in riding style, but if somebody is uncomfortable on their existing bike, a conventional riding position is the first thing to try, isn't it? Nobody can guarantee to find an off-the-peg bike which will give instant comfort for a rider who insists on a position way outside the normal range.
User avatar
bigjim
Posts: 3244
Joined: 2 Feb 2008, 5:08pm
Location: Manchester

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by bigjim »

Are modern bikes suffering from the fashion for a long drop to the handlebars? I struggle with modern frames to get comfortable. I'm 6'2" with very long legs. Bikes from older era tended to have the handlebars a lot closer to saddle height. This, IMO, to facilitate riding on the drops a lot more. Hence those simple single sidepull brakes that people believe are not very powerful. But operate them from the drops and they are just as good stoppers as the modern stuff.
I try to buy older, mint, if possible 25" horizontal toptube frames. I don't have to have too much stem or seatpost showing and can comfortably ride in the drops.
I do have smaller frames but once aboard the big ones I notice such a difference in comfort. I tour on a big 25" 90s frame and can ride comfortably all day.
mercalia
Posts: 14630
Joined: 22 Sep 2013, 10:03pm
Location: london South

Re: Touring bike choice for people with long legs

Post by mercalia »

bigjim wrote:Are modern bikes suffering from the fashion for a long drop to the handlebars? I struggle with modern frames to get comfortable. I'm 6'2" with very long legs. Bikes from older era tended to have the handlebars a lot closer to saddle height. This, IMO, to facilitate riding on the drops a lot more. Hence those simple single sidepull brakes that people believe are not very powerful. But operate them from the drops and they are just as good stoppers as the modern stuff.
I try to buy older, mint, if possible 25" horizontal toptube frames. I don't have to have too much stem or seatpost showing and can comfortably ride in the drops.
I do have smaller frames but once aboard the big ones I notice such a difference in comfort. I tour on a big 25" 90s frame and can ride comfortably all day.



well its the small frames and the cut off steerer? unless u get a preying mantiss frame?
Post Reply