|   Bike Fit story... | Shylock
Aug 28, 2001 8:09 PM | | So....I got my new 17"/19" custom El fuego yesterday. (I'll give the details of why I am so fortunate another time -- like when my finger recovers from its run-in with a broken wine glass cuz for better or worse, I can't really type right now)
Anyhoo, It has a 23.54" top tube mated to a 17.5" seattube. I was on a 17.5" fuego before -- it had a 22.69 toptube. I was thinking initially that since I was running a 135mm stem and had the seat cranked back almost all the way on the old frame, that I would probably end up with my seat at neutral knee and a 120mm stem on the new frame.
Well, I'm 5'11 -- roughly -- and with almost an inch added to my toptube and my seat in neutral position, I feel amazingly comfortable with a 130mm stem, while the 120 stem just feels wrong. I'm guessing that I would need a 24 inch toptube to feel truly comfortable on a 120mm stem....Doesn't that sound nuts for a 5'11" guy? Is the upright feeling of a 120mm stem something you just get used to? It really seems nuts to me that a 120mm stem feels as goffy as it does on this frame--especially when so many of you guys who are my height or taller are running 23-23.5" inch tts with 110-120mm stems
There's no moral to this story --hey , it might not event make a single cogent point (unless you read between the lines). But I thought it intersting considering that, genrally speaking, no one ever suggests to someone my size ( not to mention, me) that they get a 23.5" toptube mated with a 130mm stem on their next frame.
Sure am glad I didn't press Sherwood to make me the 23.1" tt I initially wanted.
... if only my finger would heal enough so that I could remove this splint and go for a ride. I guess until that day comes I'll just have to....
Feel the gin |
| Another Bike Fit story... | MikeeR
Aug 28, 2001 10:10 PM | | Everybody talks about bike fit as if it's the holy grail in bike selection, and maybe it is, but to me it's a pretty hard thing to pin down. At 5'11", my FS bike has a 23.3" effective tt length. I used a 120mm stem for some time until I happened to strip a stem bolt. I had an older 130 lying around so on it went. Felt a little stretched at first, but after a few rides it felt fine. Finally got around to replacing the 120, felt quite upright, but again after a few rides, it's great.
Stranger still. I recently had the option to buy a new Ti hardtail frame, sight unseen, for a particularly good price. The size info I was given turned out to be wrong and I ended up with a large frame with a 24" tt and a tall headtube. Well I could have sent it back but never being one to pass up a good deal, I thought I'd build it up and see how it felt, after all Genesis geometry had similar tt figures. To get my reach right I've put on a 90mm 10deg stem I had and flipped it upside down along with a flattracker bar. Sure does look a little unusual. But the things got a steeply sloping tt so standover is reasonable and my cockpit length is almost identical to my old hardtail. So how does it feel? Well I reckon it feels fine. A slightly longer overall wheelbase, I'm not sure if thats good or bad. I guess I'll ride it for a while and see how I feel.
As to the moral of this story, maybe if you want to like something enough, you can get used to anything. |
| Welcome aboard | Coolhand
Aug 29, 2001 5:06 AM | | Extra top tube lovers unite! All of my bikes have extra top tube. Most people think they are a bit "big" till they try them- then the light bulb goes off over their heads.
Alice and I are spending the Labor day weekend in Slatyfork- at the Elk River Touring Center. Woo Hoo! Hope you can get the bike out on the trail this weekend.
Coolhand (you should see the top tube on the Seven!) |
| You can get used to anything... | CMC
Aug 29, 2001 5:31 AM | | I think the top tube on my Switchblade is a bit too short at 23" but I'm still using a 120 stem with a Thomson layback. I've gotten used to it. It's a little different for a trail bike with risers though. It doesn't have that nose down ass high racey feel but I think it's more comfortable (or maybe it's the 4.5" of travel =). Anyway, your frame sounds sweet. If I were going to get a Ventana, I would get a Salty with the same semi-custom size. Maybe next year.
I would give the 120 a couple weeks before you decide you don't like it. |
| re: The Walrus is Paul...The Walrus is Paul...The Walrus is Paul | John
Aug 29, 2001 6:55 AM | | Dude, quit bringing wine glasses to a knife fight. If i choose a shorter stem i allways go wit one without any rise. Then i make incremental adjustments of the (riser) bar to find nirvana. |
| Ok but... | RP
Aug 29, 2001 7:37 AM | | Would you setup an El Salt in the same manner? It seems that in these discussions about bike setup that quite often the type of riding the bike is intended for is left out. IMO the stretched out feel the 130mm stem provides is ideal for a XC race oriented bike but the same position would be less than ideal for a bike that's going to be bombing down chutes or riding off drops. |
| I'll bet it's because... | ybtodd
Aug 29, 2001 9:30 AM | | you've been riding your road bike. The more miles you do on that (depending of course on how it is set up), the more comfortable you'll be with a more stretched-out position on the mtb.
I like 130 stems... |
| That's what I've been thinkin'.... | shylock
Aug 29, 2001 10:15 AM | | ...And I've always loved 130mm stems so....Guess I've got a bike that fits like a glove
Feel the gin
Whatcha make of OSX? I have it on my new G4 500 powerbook and have found it rather slow. |
| os x | ybtodd
Aug 29, 2001 3:28 PM | | I've been using OS X daily on all my production machines except one (running ProTools and it isn't compatible). My desktop at work is a G4/733 and my home/everywhere else is a G4/500 Tibook. It is mostly a big thumbs up. IE is unbearable slow sometimes when it is trying to hit the network, so I end up using both IE and Omniweb at the same time and switching back and forth between multiple windows and apps. Eudora is fairly stable, but it does crash about once a week or so (but I also have about 15,000 messages stored). Word runs fine under classic. There are a few rough spots, but having a terminal window is damn useful, and i've gone weeks between restarts on my powerbook (just sleep it between uses). We haven't moved our production web server to it yet (still running OS X Server 1.2), but one of our file servers is running OS X Server 2 (the full blown server version of the present OS X).
I think the Puma release (10.1) should address many of the speed issues, especially with the Finder. There is still a lot of debug code in the OS, so it will only get better. Unlike XP which will only get worse as they add the weekly security patches to fix their holes (oh yeah, and don't forget to call and get authorization so you can install it more than twice on a machine!). gag... |
| |
