Re: [CR] Funny Bike Fit?

(Example: Production Builders:Cinelli)

Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 23:04:47 -0400
From: Marcus Coles <marcoles@ody.ca>
To: CLASSIC RENDEZVOUS <classicrendezvous@bikelist.org>
References: <7ae842ea0906171150s566be5abi6746c10420889102@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7ae842ea0906171150s566be5abi6746c10420889102@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [CR] Funny Bike Fit?


I don't have a funny bike, but I do regularly ride a less extreme, equal sized wheel bike that has flipped and clipped bars 9" below the saddle. In the case of my bike with a 53cm frame with a 57.5cm horizontal top tube and a lot of seat post, it is the height of the saddle and the reach to the bars that are in my view are important, the rest is what it is. For reference I normally ride a 58cm frame. How I like to visualize my setup is my regular bike fitting rotated forward around the bottom bracket. This does put a lot of weight on the arms, but when you are putting out power most of the weight is taken by the legs. It's when you slack off that the weight ends up on your hands, for me a few easy kilometres can lead to the beginnings of finger numbness and you can probably guess what the cure for this condition is .... . That's right stomping the pedals again. Needless to say while such antics are fun, for someone of my abilities it's not a bike that can be ridden for many hours.

Marcus Coles London, Ontario, Canada.

PS: Speaking of not quite funny bikes, how about Graeme Obree's latest. http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/graeme-obree-bidding-for-hour-record-again-21712 Lugged steel with some nasty modern bits, but to my eye looks kind of old timey, maybe its the long wheelbase and the gearing that looks like it should be paced by something motorized.