Need stretch: stem or seat post?

Raptor wrote:

CowPunk wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:

The key is to always (always, always) start with a bike that fits.
Trying to force fit the wrong bike means you'll spend all your riding
time having less fun than you should.

Mark's right.
A frame has a top tube length designed to obtain a certain
center-of-gravity.
When you go adjusting a saddle way back with a bent seat post you screw
that center-of-gravity up.

That's kind of silly when you realize that people are different. I have
several pounds of weight above my waist that many mountain bikers don't.
By bending or straightening my arms, I can move my COG instantly, on
most any bike.

You could say the same about pretty much any size bike for any size
rider - they could "force" a good balance going into a corner - but
most of us are happiest when the bike is balanced optimally when we're
JRA (Just Riding Along).

Most high performance bikes are bought "small," the smallest frame that
fits. My bike's seat tube is long enough. The top tube might actually be
optimal for a different rider with my particular build. I've just become
comfortable leaning forward with arms more outstretched than many riders.

Proper fit affects a lot of aspects of the bike - biomechanical
efficiency, handling, comfort, etc... we all search for the best
compromise between all of those, and your search has resulted in a
position that most of us would find somewhat uncomfortable and
inefficient, and that almost certainly results in handling quirks that
someone riding the same bike in a "normal position" wouldn't
experience. But if it works for you, go for it.

If you can't get your saddle back far enough with a regular post then
you need
to go and buy a larger frame with a longer top tube.

Seat tube angle and length has more to do with "proper" saddle location
than top tube length.

All seat tube angle does is sets the fore/aft range of the saddle. As
long as the combination of the frame's seat tube angle and the seat
post's offset allow you to put the saddle in the correct position
relative to the crank, the rear half of the bike "fits". Much more
important is the ability to get the "cockpit length" right without
having to resort to a too-short or too-long stem.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

"Duncan" wrote:

"CowPunk" wrote in message
oups.com...

"Duncan" wrote:

Even off the seat I have a tendancy to weight the back wheel:

http://www.ftf.com.au/racegalleries/...MG0640_JPG.jpg

Are you sure that's a 19" frame?

It looks too small for you.

Yeah it's definatly a 19", brands vary a lot in shape and where they
measure. Keep in mind the bike is a race bike where agility is quite
important. Our local race courses have a tendency to by quite tight
singletrack where quick steering pays off.

The difference in wheelbase between a 17" and 19" or 21" frame is
pretty minimal in terms of the effect on handling the twisty stuff.
Much more important is the balance on the bike. All I can say is that
I know I'd have to slow down in twisty singletrack if I were to
unweight the front wheel even half as much as you do in that photo.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

CowPunk wrote:
Raptor wrote:

Seat tube angle and length has more to do with "proper" saddle location
than top tube length.

So, with your rear saddle position, can you drift both wheels in a
corner,
or does one break loose before the other?

I bet your rear slides out first?

I don't think I can drift both wheels in a corner in any saddle
position. If I want the front to slide out first, I put more weight
over it. Or less, depending on the traction.

--
Lynn Wallace http://www.xmission.com/~lawall
I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the
trust by exposing the name of our sources. They are, in my view,
the most insidious of traitors."
George H.W. Bush, April 16, 1999,

"Mark Hickey" wrote in message
...
"Duncan" wrote:

"CowPunk" wrote in message
oups.com...

"Duncan" wrote:

Even off the seat I have a tendancy to weight the back wheel:


http://www.ftf.com.au/racegalleries/...IMG0640_JPG.jp
g

Are you sure that's a 19" frame?

It looks too small for you.

Yeah it's definatly a 19", brands vary a lot in shape and where they
measure. Keep in mind the bike is a race bike where agility is quite
important. Our local race courses have a tendency to by quite tight
singletrack where quick steering pays off.

The difference in wheelbase between a 17" and 19" or 21" frame is
pretty minimal in terms of the effect on handling the twisty stuff.
Much more important is the balance on the bike. All I can say is that
I know I'd have to slow down in twisty singletrack if I were to
unweight the front wheel even half as much as you do in that photo.

That photo was more to show the general geometry of my setup. The actual
pose is in anticipation of some heavy breaking back into the single track.
It would get very uncomfortable riding around like that everywhere.