Here's part of a Q&A from current cyclingnews.com regarding vintage bike frame sizes compared to modern frame sizes. The answer is by Steve Hogg - self proclaimed bike fit expert. I'm not looking to stir up a controversy about older vs newer is better etc. - just wondering about the old time religion of bike fit/riding style and frame geometry. I was wondering if the guys that were riding seriously back then and could compare old vs new had any thoughts on this subject? I'm not sure Steve Hogg has his facts straight on old racing geometry (which I've always thought was no steeper and/or slacker in the mid 70's than modern frame geometry). His comment about having fewer gears leading to the need to spin more seemed bogus. Did riders ride in more forward possitions than today?
"Modern frame sizes too small?
Do today's bicycle manufacturers, in an effort to reduce weight, make bicycle frames too small for the rider that they are supposed to be catering for.
Looking at older pictures of racers like Eddy, Coppi, Van Looy, it seems that these racers rode frames that may have been larger than today's frames. If you look at the saddle to bar drop, it seems that they do not have the large differences of today's racers. Van Looy made the comment in an interview in a magazine, stating that if you cannot get into the drops to get aero, what is the point.
Steve Hogg replies:
You are right. 30+ years ago, larger frames for a given rider than they would ride today were common. Riders had less gears to play with too, so pedaling fast for extended periods was more valued than it is now. This meant that seat tube angles were often (not always) steeper on many frames of the 70's than they are now. Leather seats of the era had much shorter seat rails than modern seats which steepened the effective seat tube angle by a degree typically. The net effect of all of this was that riders rode further forward generally.
As a rider moves forward, there is a weight transfer onto the upper body which has to be supported by the arms and upper body. This mitigates against reaching low because the back tends to arch and tense to assist in stabilising the rider. As an example, forward positioned triathletes with low positions would struggle to cope if their aero bars were removed. So the answer in the 70's and prior was to have larger frames and hence higher bars relative to seat position. If you have a look at photos of Van Looy on the drops he was VERY hunched over as tends to happen when the seat is too far forward and real effort is being applied. Coppi wasn't as cramped as Van Looy and Merckx less cramped again but still, they had higher bars than is common today.
Another thing that may have played a part is that races were often longer than they are now (Grand Tours were four weeks not three), road surfaces often weren't as good resulting in comfort being a higher priority than aerodynamics. Cycling then was basically a working class European sport where there wasn't a large amount of money to throw at biomechanical or aerodynamic studies and so on. Riders did the best they could with what they had."
Roman "dreamin' of warmer weather" Stankus Atlanta, Georgia USA