Interpreting Serotta Fit Cycle Data For Other Manufacturers?

"Steve Sr." wrote in message
...
I am in the market for a new high-end road bike so I decided it
would
be a good idea to get a professional fit done first to figure
out what
bikes would fit and which wouldn't. See, I have been listening
to you
folks all these years!

The best local fitting service that I could find was one
offered by a
local shop that sold Serotta and used the Serotta Fit Cycle.
Before
the fitting I told the shop that Serotta was on my list of
possible
candidates along with several other manufacturers and that I
would
need results that would be applicable to makes other than
Serotta. I
was told that this would not be a problem.

The basic results of the fitting is that I have the loss of
flexibility related to aging (I'm 48 and 160 Lbs.) and that I
needed a
bike with a higher front end and slightly shorter top tube.
This
information ruled out the Litespeed Tuscany as a problem in
both of
these areas.

After the fitting the shop suggested a Serotta Fierte and a
full
carbon Trek Pilot. I also mentioned that Litespeed was on my
list of
possible makes and asked what Litespeed other than Tuscany
would fit.

Here is where the issue begins. The fitter said that the
Litespeed
Siena would probably fit but couldn't provide specifics since
he
didn't have data from Litespeed in the same for as Serotta to
input
into his computer program.

So do I need a PhD in bike fitting to interpret the numbers
from the
Fit Cycle or is there a straight forward procedure to determine
how
close a certain manufacturers bike will match the fit data.

The questions that need answered a

1. Which frame size is needed (53 or 55cm)? A 53cm gives the
shorter
top tube but with a taller seat post effectively lowers the
front of
the bike. A 55cm does just the opposite.

2. Will the seat post need to be straight or setback? This also
will
play into the correct stem length.

3. What is the correct angle and length of the stem?

Can anyone enlighten me?

Man, you make my head a-splode! All the data you need (seat
angle and top tube length) is available at the Litespeed
web-site.
http://www.litespeed.com/bikes/2005/...y.aspx?b=siena .
You paid for the professional fitting, just get the data, take it
back to your fit guru and re-run the numbers. Assuming you are
not built like E.T. -- and assuming you do not buy a bike with a
notoriously top tube (e.g. LeMond), everything is about the same
these days. Most fit changes are accomplished with stems and
seatposts. As for me, I would go with the larger frame to avoid
the leggy seat post and unsightly stem rise, but then again, I am
a conventional frame kind of guy. I hate compacts. I don't
think the 20mm difference in top-tube between the 53 and 55cm
frames is going to make much of a difference.

Also, you do not want to buy a short top-tube bike just because
you are inflexible (as opposed to having a short upper body).
Flexibility changes, especially if you actually ride this bike --
which you should, since it looks like you are going to dump a lot
of money on it. Get an appropriate stem that deals with your
current inflexibility and then change it when you get more
flexible. I am your age and ride a bike with a longer top
tube/stem than the one I raced 25 years ago. I know I am not
more flexible now, but I seem to like being stretched out
ore. -- Jay Beattie.

W/O looking at the data it is difficult to say which size is the best.
However, the Trek Pilot is specifically designed for this type of
application. It has a gentle rise in the top tube that dosen't give the
appearance of a compact. Additionally it has a slightly higher crown to
its headtube. This allows for a more traditional appearance w/o
drastic stem angles. If you want to avoid the mammoth that is Trek,
Cannondale will be introducing a bike called the Synapse in early June.
However, either of these bikes will work well for you.

Josh McClure
Durst Cycles

The basic results of the fitting is that I have the loss of
flexibility related to aging (I'm 48 and 160 Lbs.) and that I needed a
bike with a higher front end and slightly shorter top tube. This
information ruled out the Litespeed Tuscany as a problem in both of
these areas.

After the fitting the shop suggested a Serotta Fierte and a full
carbon Trek Pilot. I also mentioned that Litespeed was on my list of
possible makes and asked what Litespeed other than Tuscany would fit.

For what it's worth, the Trek Pilot makes an excellent credit-card-touring
machine. What many don't realize is that it's got clearance for pretty big
(28c+ if desired) tires, something not commonly found on higher-end bikes
these days. It's also got a higher starting position for the stem, due to
the upward-sloping top tube (it's not really a "compact" design, where the
front of the bike is the same as most but the top tube slopes down to a
lower point; rather, it's an upwardly-sloping top tube where the seatpost
end of the tube starts at a normal height, and goes up from there).

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com


"Steve Sr." wrote in message
...
I am in the market for a new high-end road bike so I decided it would
be a good idea to get a professional fit done first to figure out what
bikes would fit and which wouldn't. See, I have been listening to you
folks all these years!

The best local fitting service that I could find was one offered by a
local shop that sold Serotta and used the Serotta Fit Cycle. Before
the fitting I told the shop that Serotta was on my list of possible
candidates along with several other manufacturers and that I would
need results that would be applicable to makes other than Serotta. I
was told that this would not be a problem.

The basic results of the fitting is that I have the loss of
flexibility related to aging (I'm 48 and 160 Lbs.) and that I needed a
bike with a higher front end and slightly shorter top tube. This
information ruled out the Litespeed Tuscany as a problem in both of
these areas.

After the fitting the shop suggested a Serotta Fierte and a full
carbon Trek Pilot. I also mentioned that Litespeed was on my list of
possible makes and asked what Litespeed other than Tuscany would fit.

Here is where the issue begins. The fitter said that the Litespeed
Siena would probably fit but couldn't provide specifics since he
didn't have data from Litespeed in the same for as Serotta to input
into his computer program.

So do I need a PhD in bike fitting to interpret the numbers from the
Fit Cycle or is there a straight forward procedure to determine how
close a certain manufacturers bike will match the fit data.

The questions that need answered a

1. Which frame size is needed (53 or 55cm)? A 53cm gives the shorter
top tube but with a taller seat post effectively lowers the front of
the bike. A 55cm does just the opposite.

2. Will the seat post need to be straight or setback? This also will
play into the correct stem length.

3. What is the correct angle and length of the stem?

Can anyone enlighten me?

Thanks,

Steve

On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:08:18 -0800, Jay Beattie
wrote:


"Steve Sr." wrote in message
...
I am in the market for a new high-end road bike so I decided it
would
be a good idea to get a professional fit done first to figure
out what
bikes would fit and which wouldn't. See, I have been listening
to you
folks all these years!

The best local fitting service that I could find was one
offered by a
local shop that sold Serotta and used the Serotta Fit Cycle.
Before
the fitting I told the shop that Serotta was on my list of
possible
candidates along with several other manufacturers and that I
would
need results that would be applicable to makes other than
Serotta. I
was told that this would not be a problem.

The basic results of the fitting is that I have the loss of
flexibility related to aging (I'm 48 and 160 Lbs.) and that I
needed a
bike with a higher front end and slightly shorter top tube.
This
information ruled out the Litespeed Tuscany as a problem in
both of
these areas.

After the fitting the shop suggested a Serotta Fierte and a
full
carbon Trek Pilot. I also mentioned that Litespeed was on my
list of
possible makes and asked what Litespeed other than Tuscany
would fit.

Here is where the issue begins. The fitter said that the
Litespeed
Siena would probably fit but couldn't provide specifics since
he
didn't have data from Litespeed in the same for as Serotta to
input
into his computer program.

So do I need a PhD in bike fitting to interpret the numbers
from the
Fit Cycle or is there a straight forward procedure to determine
how
close a certain manufacturers bike will match the fit data.

The questions that need answered a

1. Which frame size is needed (53 or 55cm)? A 53cm gives the
shorter
top tube but with a taller seat post effectively lowers the
front of
the bike. A 55cm does just the opposite.

2. Will the seat post need to be straight or setback? This also
will
play into the correct stem length.

3. What is the correct angle and length of the stem?

Can anyone enlighten me?

Man, you make my head a-splode! All the data you need (seat
angle and top tube length) is available at the Litespeed
web-site.
http://www.litespeed.com/bikes/2005/...y.aspx?b=siena .
You paid for the professional fitting, just get the data, take it
back to your fit guru and re-run the numbers. Assuming you are
not built like E.T. -- and assuming you do not buy a bike with a
notoriously top tube (e.g. LeMond), everything is about the same
these days. Most fit changes are accomplished with stems and
seatposts. As for me, I would go with the larger frame to avoid
the leggy seat post and unsightly stem rise, but then again, I am
a conventional frame kind of guy. I hate compacts. I don't
think the 20mm difference in top-tube between the 53 and 55cm
frames is going to make much of a difference.

Also, you do not want to buy a short top-tube bike just because
you are inflexible (as opposed to having a short upper body).
Flexibility changes, especially if you actually ride this bike --
which you should, since it looks like you are going to dump a lot
of money on it. Get an appropriate stem that deals with your
current inflexibility and then change it when you get more
flexible. I am your age and ride a bike with a longer top
tube/stem than the one I raced 25 years ago. I know I am not
more flexible now, but I seem to like being stretched out
ore. -- Jay Beattie.



Can you ride any of these bikes? I bought a LeMond because of the
supposedly long top tube, but I still ended up changing the stem by 10mm.

--
Bob in CT

"Bob M" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:08:18 -0800, Jay Beattie

wrote:


"Steve Sr." wrote in message
...
I am in the market for a new high-end road bike so I decided
it
would
be a good idea to get a professional fit done first to
figure
out what
bikes would fit and which wouldn't. See, I have been
listening
to you
folks all these years!

The best local fitting service that I could find was one
offered by a
local shop that sold Serotta and used the Serotta Fit Cycle.
Before
the fitting I told the shop that Serotta was on my list of
possible
candidates along with several other manufacturers and that I
would
need results that would be applicable to makes other than
Serotta. I
was told that this would not be a problem.

The basic results of the fitting is that I have the loss of
flexibility related to aging (I'm 48 and 160 Lbs.) and that
I
needed a
bike with a higher front end and slightly shorter top tube.
This
information ruled out the Litespeed Tuscany as a problem in
both of
these areas.

After the fitting the shop suggested a Serotta Fierte and a
full
carbon Trek Pilot. I also mentioned that Litespeed was on my
list of
possible makes and asked what Litespeed other than Tuscany
would fit.

Here is where the issue begins. The fitter said that the
Litespeed
Siena would probably fit but couldn't provide specifics
since
he
didn't have data from Litespeed in the same for as Serotta
to
input
into his computer program.

So do I need a PhD in bike fitting to interpret the numbers
from the
Fit Cycle or is there a straight forward procedure to
determine
how
close a certain manufacturers bike will match the fit data.

The questions that need answered a

1. Which frame size is needed (53 or 55cm)? A 53cm gives the
shorter
top tube but with a taller seat post effectively lowers the
front of
the bike. A 55cm does just the opposite.

2. Will the seat post need to be straight or setback? This
also
will
play into the correct stem length.

3. What is the correct angle and length of the stem?

Can anyone enlighten me?

Man, you make my head a-splode! All the data you need (seat
angle and top tube length) is available at the Litespeed
web-site.
http://www.litespeed.com/bikes/2005/...y.aspx?b=siena
..
You paid for the professional fitting, just get the data,
take it
back to your fit guru and re-run the numbers. Assuming you
are
not built like E.T. -- and assuming you do not buy a bike
with a
notoriously top tube (e.g. LeMond), everything is about the
same
these days. Most fit changes are accomplished with stems and
seatposts. As for me, I would go with the larger frame to
avoid
the leggy seat post and unsightly stem rise, but then again,
I am
a conventional frame kind of guy. I hate compacts. I don't
think the 20mm difference in top-tube between the 53 and 55cm
frames is going to make much of a difference.

Also, you do not want to buy a short top-tube bike just
because
you are inflexible (as opposed to having a short upper body).
Flexibility changes, especially if you actually ride this
bike --
which you should, since it looks like you are going to dump a
lot
of money on it. Get an appropriate stem that deals with your
current inflexibility and then change it when you get more
flexible. I am your age and ride a bike with a longer top
tube/stem than the one I raced 25 years ago. I know I am not
more flexible now, but I seem to like being stretched out
ore. -- Jay Beattie.



Can you ride any of these bikes? I bought a LeMond because of
the
supposedly long top tube, but I still ended up changing the
stem by 10mm.

10mm is a relatively small amount, though, and pretty close for
an off-the-rack bicycle. It seems to me that racing frame top
tubes have actually gotten longer in the last 30 years -- for
example, the Litespeed Ultimate has a 61cm top tube in the 63cm
size (my size -- not my bike, though). Back in the day, it was
not uncommon to see a 63cm frame with a 59cm top tube, or even
slightly shorter. The current Colnago Dream, for example, has
58.7cm top tube in the 63cm size. This was the Italian way of
building large bikes -- just make them taller. I commute on an
old, custom steel (SP) racing frame with about a 58.5 top tube,
which is too short even with a 130mm stem. But I have only
myself to blame since I was the one who (mis)cut that tube. --
Jay Beattie.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 10:41:59 -0800, Jay Beattie
wrote:


"Bob M" wrote in message
news
[cut]

Can you ride any of these bikes? I bought a LeMond because of
the
supposedly long top tube, but I still ended up changing the
stem by 10mm.

10mm is a relatively small amount, though, and pretty close for
an off-the-rack bicycle. It seems to me that racing frame top
tubes have actually gotten longer in the last 30 years -- for
example, the Litespeed Ultimate has a 61cm top tube in the 63cm
size (my size -- not my bike, though). Back in the day, it was
not uncommon to see a 63cm frame with a 59cm top tube, or even
slightly shorter. The current Colnago Dream, for example, has
58.7cm top tube in the 63cm size. This was the Italian way of
building large bikes -- just make them taller. I commute on an
old, custom steel (SP) racing frame with about a 58.5 top tube,
which is too short even with a 130mm stem. But I have only
myself to blame since I was the one who (mis)cut that tube. --
Jay Beattie.



That's true. My LeMond replaced a Trek, which I couldn't stand after a
while due to the shortish top tube (meaning I could never get proper
positioning -- even with a "set back" seatpost -- over the pedals). On
the LeMond, I went from a 110 to a 130 mm stem -- oops! That's 20mm, 2cm,
not 10 mm. That's almost an inch (and that's with a set back seatpost
that came standard on the LeMond).

--
Bob in CT

"Steve Sr." wrote in message
...
On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 18:08:18 -0800, "Jay Beattie"
wrote:


"Steve Sr." wrote in message
.. .
I am in the market for a new high-end road bike so I decided
it
would
be a good idea to get a professional fit done first to
figure
out what
bikes would fit and which wouldn't. See, I have been
listening
to you
folks all these years!

The best local fitting service that I could find was one
offered by a
local shop that sold Serotta and used the Serotta Fit Cycle.
Before
the fitting I told the shop that Serotta was on my list of
possible
candidates along with several other manufacturers and that I
would
need results that would be applicable to makes other than
Serotta. I
was told that this would not be a problem.

The basic results of the fitting is that I have the loss of
flexibility related to aging (I'm 48 and 160 Lbs.) and that
I
needed a
bike with a higher front end and slightly shorter top tube.
This
information ruled out the Litespeed Tuscany as a problem in
both of
these areas.

After the fitting the shop suggested a Serotta Fierte and a
full
carbon Trek Pilot. I also mentioned that Litespeed was on my
list of
possible makes and asked what Litespeed other than Tuscany
would fit.

Here is where the issue begins. The fitter said that the
Litespeed
Siena would probably fit but couldn't provide specifics
since
he
didn't have data from Litespeed in the same for as Serotta
to
input
into his computer program.

So do I need a PhD in bike fitting to interpret the numbers
from the
Fit Cycle or is there a straight forward procedure to
determine
how
close a certain manufacturers bike will match the fit data.

The questions that need answered a

1. Which frame size is needed (53 or 55cm)? A 53cm gives the
shorter
top tube but with a taller seat post effectively lowers the
front of
the bike. A 55cm does just the opposite.

2. Will the seat post need to be straight or setback? This
also
will
play into the correct stem length.

3. What is the correct angle and length of the stem?

Can anyone enlighten me?

Man, you make my head a-splode! All the data you need (seat
angle and top tube length) is available at the Litespeed
web-site.
http://www.litespeed.com/bikes/2005/...y.aspx?b=siena
..

Yes, the Litespeed data is all there but how to match it up
with the
measurements from the Fit Cycle is the issue.

You paid for the professional fitting, just get the data, take
it
back to your fit guru and re-run the numbers.

Yes, I need to do this but the fit guy works hours that I can't
make
without loosing at least 3 hours of work so communication has
been
difficult.

Assuming you are
not built like E.T. -- and assuming you do not buy a bike with
a
notoriously top tube (e.g. LeMond), everything is about the
same
these days. Most fit changes are accomplished with stems and
seatposts. As for me, I would go with the larger frame to
avoid
the leggy seat post and unsightly stem rise, but then again, I
am
a conventional frame kind of guy.

However, this will cause the top tube to be considerably too
long.
The final adjustments on the Fit Cycle had it set for a 55/55
but with
an unrealistically short 70mm stem.

I hate compacts.

So just what charactistics describe "compact" geometry. I
thought it
was just a sloped top tube to allow the manufacturer to fit
more
people with fewer stock frame sizes?

I don't
think the 20mm difference in top-tube between the 53 and 55cm
frames is going to make much of a difference.

That is almost an inch which seems significant.

Go to the Litespeed page and look at how they size their compact
frames. http://www.litespeed.com/bikes/2005/sizing.aspx This
will also show you the difference between a conventional and
compact frame. I agree with you that 20mm is significant. In a
smaller compact, however (a 53cm v. 55cm) the difference may not
be that significant depending on the seat tube angle of the
smaller frame and the seat post extension (and increased set
back). A small frame may have a shorter "virtual top tube" but
if there is a lot of post showing, you may get stretched out just
as far as a larger frame -- and you certainly will drop a lot
more, unless you get a stem with rise. Someone smarter than me
needs to run the numbers because it involves tangents, cosigns
and all that stuff that hurts my brain to think about. Even on a
conventional frame, 20mm can be taken up with a stem length
adjustment, assuming that you are not at the limits and it does
not put you in an odd place in relationship to the steering axis.



Also, you do not want to buy a short top-tube bike just
because
you are inflexible (as opposed to having a short upper body).

I don't know if it is flexibility or short torso but I like to
see
where I'm going and my neck doesn't bend back far enough to
allow me
to comfortably stay on the hoods or drops for extended
intervals
without a sore neck.

Flexibility changes, especially if you actually ride this
bike --
which you should, since it looks like you are going to dump a
lot
of money on it. Get an appropriate stem that deals with your
current inflexibility and then change it when you get more
flexible. I am your age and ride a bike with a longer top
tube/stem than the one I raced 25 years ago. I know I am not
more flexible now, but I seem to like being stretched out
ore. -- Jay Beattie.


I think my inflexibility is probably more severe than most and
hereditary in nature. I know there is no way my flexibility has
improved with aging.

Anyway, My current ride is a 53 cm 2000 Cannondale T2000. The
seat
post is kind of high and the seat has to be set all the way
back in
the rails for my knee to line up correctly over the spindle.
This is
also with a Thomson set back seatpost.

The top tube on this bike is kind of long at 54cm (measured).
It
currently has a 110mm stem and angle of about 125-130 degrees
from
horizontal. The stem is sitting on top of 3 (3/4") of spacers.

With this currrent setup there is too much pressure on my hands
(numbness) while on the drops and can't really use the drops at
all if
I want to see where I'm going.

It is begining to look like I need a 55cm seat tube to make my
legs
fit and a 53 cm top tube to make the top of my body happy. So
far I
haven't found this combination.

You obviously have fit issues beyond those of the average
consumer. One thing you might try on your Cannondale is a
shorter stem with more rise. This would be a low-cost way of
finding out exactly what makes you happy. This is how I handle
fit: fiddle the hell out of my racing bike and then transfer all
of the dimensions to my other bikes, if possible. The "possible"
part comes in where the other frame has a top tube that is too
short or too long, and changing the stem has a dramatic affect on
steering. Again, I am a tall rider and like longer top tubes --
which appears to be the way the market is trending these days. --
Jay Beattie.