Road bike fit

On 12/21/2011 6:24 PM, James wrote:
On 22/12/11 09:39, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Duane Hebert wrote:
On 12/21/2011 4:06 PM, James wrote:
On 22/12/11 04:59, Duane Hebert wrote:

Have I mentioned lately that I hate traffic?

No. You should add that cars suck.

Cars suck.

Oh my, oh my! WHEN will our fantasy world arrive, where we can go
everywhere we want and never see a motor vehicle? I'm _SO_ tired of
waiting!!!

(I assume Duane's 100% car-free. Right?)




Like a snappy bass to a cricket in the drink...

Yep.

On Dec 22, 3:54*am, James wrote:
On 22/12/11 14:51, thirty-six wrote:









On Dec 21, 10:41 pm, Frank
wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Toe overlap is a bummer, but I think it's one of those things that's
hard to get around on a conventional bicycle. *Extending the frame or
fork to place the front wheel further away *dramatically* affects
handling. *I just take the occasional bump or snagging fender stay as
a reminder lesson to not do that (there's almost never any reason for
it).

I've never found toe overlap to be a problem. *I've got it on most of my
bikes, but compensation has never been difficult.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why not just use an appropriate crank length, it's not as if there is
any advantage in using long cranks and there are plaenty of
disadvantages?

Please identify all the pros and cons.

--
JS

Toe overlap making steering difficult during critical handling.
Muscle strain,
Knee joint pain due to taking it out of it's natural range of motion.
Physical breathing restriction due to knees colliding with chest and
clamping the abdomen.
Back pain due to overextension of knee.
Energy expense due to the foot being too far back in the lifting part
of the crank cycle..


On the positive side, You're using something.

On Dec 22, 10:16*am, Phil W Lee wrote:

I've quoted UK building regulations in this, but I have no reason to
believe that other national standards are going to have more than
minor differences. *I'd be very surprised if anywhere allowed stair
drops of as much as 340mm - equivalent to 170mm pedal cranks.

In the usual way that average-fitness people walk up stairs, they
touch
each step with only one foot, thus each leg rises two steps at a
time.
So a stair drop of 170mm (not 340mm) is comparable to 170mm cranks.

Tom Ace

On Dec 22, 8:26*am, thirty-six wrote:
On Dec 22, 3:54*am, James wrote:





On 22/12/11 14:51, thirty-six wrote:

On Dec 21, 10:41 pm, Frank
wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Toe overlap is a bummer, but I think it's one of those things that's
hard to get around on a conventional bicycle. *Extending the frame or
fork to place the front wheel further away *dramatically* affects
handling. *I just take the occasional bump or snagging fender stay as
a reminder lesson to not do that (there's almost never any reason for
it).

I've never found toe overlap to be a problem. *I've got it on most of my
bikes, but compensation has never been difficult.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why not just use an appropriate crank length, it's not as if there is
any advantage in using long cranks and there are plaenty of
disadvantages?

Please identify all the pros and cons.

--
JS

Toe overlap making steering difficult during critical handling.
Muscle strain,
Knee joint pain due to taking it out of it's natural range of motion.
Physical breathing restriction due to knees colliding with chest and
clamping the abdomen.
Back pain due to overextension of knee.
Energy expense due to the foot being too far back in the lifting part
of the crank cycle..

On the positive side, You're using something.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Regarding your first comment; only if by "critical handling" you mean
very slow speed.
For me it's the opposite, and at normal speeds steering angle is never
enough to cause tire to contact shoe...

- Sergio

Phil W Lee wrote:
:Tom Ace considered Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:54:27 -0800
PST) the perfect time to write:

:On Dec 22, 10:16Â*am, Phil W Lee wrote:
:
: I've quoted UK building regulations in this, but I have no reason to
: believe that other national standards are going to have more than
: minor differences. Â*I'd be very surprised if anywhere allowed stair
: drops of as much as 340mm - equivalent to 170mm pedal cranks.
:
:In the usual way that average-fitness people walk up stairs, they
:touch
:each step with only one foot, thus each leg rises two steps at a
:time.
:So a stair drop of 170mm (not 340mm) is comparable to 170mm cranks.
:
:Tom Ace
:
:Only if you never move your legs enough to turn a full revolution.
:You can climb a step (or any number of them) by never lifting your leg
:more than the size of the single drop. To cycle, you need to be able
:to bend your leg enough to manage twice the crank length - and exert
:force through the whole of that movement.

Yes, but that's how abled bodied people usually climb stairs.
Cripples, feebles, and the elderly might put both feet on each tread, but
they're not the market for bikes, generally.

I agree that it would be nice to be able to get cranks over a larger
range of sizes, but suggesting that most people would benefit from
80mm crank arms is nuts, and ignoring the basic physiology of the
human leg.

--
sig 2

On Dec 21, 2:41*pm, Frank Krygowski
wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Toe overlap is a bummer, but I think it's one of those things that's
hard to get around on a conventional bicycle. *Extending the frame or
fork to place the front wheel further away *dramatically* affects
handling. *I just take the occasional bump or snagging fender stay as
a reminder lesson to not do that (there's almost never any reason for
it).

I've never found toe overlap to be a problem. *I've got it on most of my
bikes, but compensation has never been difficult.


I think that's kind of what I was saying. We know how hard and
squirrely you ride, though, too.

On 23/12/11 01:26, thirty-six wrote:
On Dec 22, 3:54 am, wrote:
On 22/12/11 14:51, thirty-six wrote:


On Dec 21, 10:41 pm, Frank
wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Toe overlap is a bummer, but I think it's one of those things that's
hard to get around on a conventional bicycle. Extending the frame or
fork to place the front wheel further away *dramatically* affects
handling. I just take the occasional bump or snagging fender stay as
a reminder lesson to not do that (there's almost never any reason for
it).

I've never found toe overlap to be a problem. I've got it on most of my
bikes, but compensation has never been difficult.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why not just use an appropriate crank length, it's not as if there is
any advantage in using long cranks and there are plaenty of
disadvantages?

Please identify all the pros and cons.


Toe overlap making steering difficult during critical handling.

Can be mitigated by changing the frame/fork design to move the wheel
further forward.

Muscle strain,

Shorter cranks require more strength to produce the same power at the
same cadence.

Knee joint pain due to taking it out of it's natural range of motion.

For a short person with long cranks this might be a problem. Anything
taken to the extreme can be a problem.

Physical breathing restriction due to knees colliding with chest and

Never had that problem with my 175 mm cranks, and I know several ex-pro
riders of similar height (6'3") who use 180mm cranks without this issue.

clamping the abdomen.

Don't know what you're on about.

Back pain due to overextension of knee.

Nop. Haven't had that.

Energy expense due to the foot being too far back in the lifting part
of the crank cycle..

Can you quantify?

On the positive side, You're using something.

A 3% reduction in muscle strain, and improved sprinting torque/power for
a 5mm extension from 170mm.

--
JS.

On 23/12/11 07:36, Phil W Lee wrote:
Tom considered Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:54:27 -0800
(PST) the perfect time to write:

On Dec 22, 10:16 am, Phil W wrote:

I've quoted UK building regulations in this, but I have no reason to
believe that other national standards are going to have more than
minor differences. I'd be very surprised if anywhere allowed stair
drops of as much as 340mm - equivalent to 170mm pedal cranks.

In the usual way that average-fitness people walk up stairs, they
touch
each step with only one foot, thus each leg rises two steps at a
time.
So a stair drop of 170mm (not 340mm) is comparable to 170mm cranks.

Tom Ace

Only if you never move your legs enough to turn a full revolution.
You can climb a step (or any number of them) by never lifting your leg
more than the size of the single drop. To cycle, you need to be able
to bend your leg enough to manage twice the crank length - and exert
force through the whole of that movement.

No, you don't need to exert force through the whole movement, and
certainly it is of little benefit to press straight down when the cranks
are vertical.

--
JS.

In article ,
Phil W Lee wrote:

thirty-six considered Thu, 22 Dec 2011
06:26:19 -0800 (PST) the perfect time to write:

On Dec 22, 3:54Â*am, James wrote:
On 22/12/11 14:51, thirty-six wrote:









On Dec 21, 10:41 pm, Frank
wrote:
Dan O wrote:

Toe overlap is a bummer, but I think it's one of those things that's
hard to get around on a conventional bicycle. Â*Extending the frame or
fork to place the front wheel further away *dramatically* affects
handling. Â*I just take the occasional bump or snagging fender stay as
a reminder lesson to not do that (there's almost never any reason for
it).

I've never found toe overlap to be a problem. Â*I've got it on most of my
bikes, but compensation has never been difficult.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Why not just use an appropriate crank length, it's not as if there is
any advantage in using long cranks and there are plaenty of
disadvantages?

Please identify all the pros and cons.

--
JS

Toe overlap making steering difficult during critical handling.
Muscle strain,
Knee joint pain due to taking it out of it's natural range of motion.
Physical breathing restriction due to knees colliding with chest and
clamping the abdomen.
Back pain due to overextension of knee.
Energy expense due to the foot being too far back in the lifting part
of the crank cycle..


On the positive side, You're using something.

It could only be a good thing for a large range of crank lengths to be
widely available.
The shrinkage of the range of available lengths to the current level,
where anything outside the range 170-175 is regarded as unusual is
only of benefit to the manufacturers, and works only on the assumption
that all cyclists are fit and flexible.

If you look at the leg movement in cycling, it is very similar to that
used in climbing stairs.
There are standards laid down in building codes/regulations which set
maxima for stair drop in different circumstances, and which have been
carefully set to ensure usability by "ordinary people", "mobility
impaired people" etc. On the basis of those, it is unreasonable to
expect average non-sporty people to cope with crank lengths of greater
than 90mm (equivalent to the 180mm maximum stair drop allowed in a
public building). Steps used for "accessible" routes have to be
between 150 & 170mm, so would give crank lengths of 75-85mm.
The absolute maximum allowed under UK building regulations is 220mm
(private dwelling, limit of range allowed), so would give a 110mm
crank.

Now, I don't personally care too much if super sporty hyper flexible
athletes want to screw their knees up running cranks of whatever
length suits their governing body (equivalent to running upstairs two
at a time, in general), but it ****es me off greatly when the
manufacturers then land us all with the same equipment.
We don't expect all cars sold to the public to comply with F1 racing
regs, so I don't see why we accept UCI standards for anything but UCI
racing.

Nearly all utility cyclists would benefit from a crank length more in
line with building regulation stair drop than UCIcle standard.
I strongly suspect that most sporting cyclists would, as well.

I've quoted UK building regulations in this, but I have no reason to
believe that other national standards are going to have more than
minor differences. I'd be very surprised if anywhere allowed stair
drops of as much as 340mm - equivalent to 170mm pedal cranks.

You make no case for the applicability of stair riser considerations
to bicycle crank length. The posture on a bicycle is different than
the posture for stair climbing. On stairs we must balance and too
high a riser means balance is severely compromised as we shift from
one foot to the other.

With increasing height a stair becomes a ladder. A bicycle more
resembles a ladder than a stair.

--
Michael Press

In article ,
Phil W Lee wrote:

Tom Ace considered Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:54:27 -0800
(PST) the perfect time to write:

On Dec 22, 10:16Â*am, Phil W Lee wrote:

I've quoted UK building regulations in this, but I have no reason to
believe that other national standards are going to have more than
minor differences. Â*I'd be very surprised if anywhere allowed stair
drops of as much as 340mm - equivalent to 170mm pedal cranks.

In the usual way that average-fitness people walk up stairs, they
touch
each step with only one foot, thus each leg rises two steps at a
time.
So a stair drop of 170mm (not 340mm) is comparable to 170mm cranks.

Tom Ace

Only if you never move your legs enough to turn a full revolution.
You can climb a step (or any number of them) by never lifting your leg
more than the size of the single drop. To cycle, you need to be able
to bend your leg enough to manage twice the crank length - and exert
force through the whole of that movement.

Ever climb stairs two at a time? I do so with no problem.

--
Michael Press