stock vs. custom frames

I've been riding a 2000 Lemond Tourmalet (Reynolds 525 frame, 57cm) now
for about 4 years and been thinking of upgrading.

To make a long story short, when I first got the bike, I was ignorant
about how it was supposed to fit. I went to the wrong bike shop, who was
more interested selling bikes then making sure I got what I needed. I'm
convinced now that my frame is too small, so now I'm looking around for
new one. I've tried installing longer seat posts and stems, but I don't
think it is quite right.

I think my first step is to find a bike shop with a fit kit, take my
bike with me, and figure out if it really is a problem.

If it isn't right, my first choice would be to look at another lemond.
I really like the way the lemond handles, but their bikes have changed.
The new frames are steel/carbon or ti/carbon, and I hesitant to trust a
version 1.0 design. Anyone know how they are holding up?

I also noticed their geometry isn't the same - the chainstays (and
therefor wheelbase) are shorter. How much would this affect the
handling? I've tried short, compact frames before (Giant) and didn't
like it - very squirrely. Do the short stays restrict my tire size
choice? Right now I'm running GP 3000, 25c.

Lemond still has the old steel frames available as custom bikes, but
it's so expensive it's worth considering going custom (Waterford,
Serotta, etc) instead.

I know I need to go out and start test riding bikes again, but how does
one test ride a custom bike when there aren't any in your area and a
frame built to your measurements doesn't exist? Seems like an expensive
gamble to build a bike that you have never ridden.

I'm a lot more comfortable riding now compared to 4 years ago, so maybe
I don't need the extra stability of the lemond any more.

I'm 6'2", 225 lbs. I think have long legs & arms, short torso for
people my size. I don't race and never will. I have my handlebars set
about 1.5" below my saddle. I don't really need nor want an ultra-light
weight weenie bike. With all he stuff I carry in my saddle bag, my
tourmalet weighs about 26 lbs.

Since my old bike is steel and I really like the ride, I'm a bit
prejudiced toward steel, but I know that as long as the bike fits,
material isn't supposed to matter. I've been on some fat-tubed aluminum
bikes that were really harsh though. I've never been tried a Ti or
carbon bike, so I guess I should.

Thanks.

Mark Heiple wrote:
I've been riding a 2000 Lemond Tourmalet (Reynolds 525 frame, 57cm) now
for about 4 years and been thinking of upgrading.

To make a long story short, when I first got the bike, I was ignorant
about how it was supposed to fit. I went to the wrong bike shop, who was
more interested selling bikes then making sure I got what I needed. I'm
convinced now that my frame is too small, so now I'm looking around for
new one. I've tried installing longer seat posts and stems, but I don't
think it is quite right.

I think my first step is to find a bike shop with a fit kit, take my
bike with me, and figure out if it really is a problem.

Good idea. Unless you are very tall/short or have unusual proportions, a
custom bike should not be necessary. But that doesn't mean that any frame
in "your size" will fit right. All "60 cm" frames are not alike. The
Lemonds are known for their slack seat angles, which may or may not be
right for you.

If it isn't right, my first choice would be to look at another lemond.
I really like the way the lemond handles, but their bikes have changed.
The new frames are steel/carbon or ti/carbon, and I hesitant to trust a
version 1.0 design. Anyone know how they are holding up?

I also noticed their geometry isn't the same - the chainstays (and
therefor wheelbase) are shorter. How much would this affect the
handling? I've tried short, compact frames before (Giant) and didn't
like it - very squirrely. Do the short stays restrict my tire size
choice? Right now I'm running GP 3000, 25c.

Short chainstays reduce comfort and stability, and don't offer any real
advantages except being in sync with the current fad. Don't buy a bike
that limits your tire options.

I know I need to go out and start test riding bikes again, but how does
one test ride a custom bike when there aren't any in your area and a
frame built to your measurements doesn't exist? Seems like an expensive
gamble to build a bike that you have never ridden.

It is a gamble. I've seen more than one "custom" bike up for sale because
"it didn't fit."

I'm a lot more comfortable riding now compared to 4 years ago, so maybe
I don't need the extra stability of the lemond any more.

Stability is a good thing. I've rarely heard someone complain that their
bike was too stable.

I'm 6'2", 225 lbs. I think have long legs & arms, short torso for
people my size. I don't race and never will. I have my handlebars set
about 1.5" below my saddle. I don't really need nor want an ultra-light
weight weenie bike. With all he stuff I carry in my saddle bag, my
tourmalet weighs about 26 lbs.

You sound like a Lemond type. In what way does your current Lemond seem
too short? The main criteria should be top tube length and seat tube
angle. What stem length are you using? The fact that you can get the bars
1.5 inches below the saddle is a good sign. If I were you, I'd try to fine
tune the fit on your current Lemond before giving up on it.

Good Luck.

Art Harris

In article ,
Harris wrote:


You sound like a Lemond type. In what way does your current Lemond seem
too short? The main criteria should be top tube length and seat tube
angle. What stem length are you using? The fact that you can get the bars
1.5 inches below the saddle is a good sign. If I were you, I'd try to fine
tune the fit on your current Lemond before giving up on it.

Good Luck.

Art Harris

I feel ok when I'm riding on the hoods, but when I'm in the drops, I
feel a bit scrunched up. I feel like I should be stretched out more. I
went to a bike shop with a pretty good rep and asked him about the size,
and he had me ride around a bit while he watched. He said that in the
drops, my elbows and knees overlap a lot more than they should - there
should be an inch or so gap between the elbow and knee when my foot is
at 3 o'clock (forward).

I have an extra long seat post now (Salsa Shaft) to replace the one I
just broke. I'm not sure how long my handlebar stem is, but it is
really long and sticks up quite a ways. I think it is fairly long
horizontally also, and I've been warned that going too long will
compromise handling/stability.

Thanks.

Mark Heiple wrote:
In article ,
Harris wrote:


You sound like a Lemond type. In what way does your current Lemond
seem too short? The main criteria should be top tube length and seat
tube angle. What stem length are you using? The fact that you can
get the bars
1.5 inches below the saddle is a good sign. If I were you, I'd try
to fine tune the fit on your current Lemond before giving up on it.

Good Luck.

Art Harris

I feel ok when I'm riding on the hoods, but when I'm in the drops, I
feel a bit scrunched up. I feel like I should be stretched out more.
I went to a bike shop with a pretty good rep and asked him about the
size, and he had me ride around a bit while he watched. He said that
in the drops, my elbows and knees overlap a lot more than they should
- there should be an inch or so gap between the elbow and knee when
my foot is at 3 o'clock (forward).

I have an extra long seat post now (Salsa Shaft) to replace the one I
just broke. I'm not sure how long my handlebar stem is, but it is
really long and sticks up quite a ways. I think it is fairly long
horizontally also, and I've been warned that going too long will
compromise handling/stability.

Longer stem should /increase/ stability, but "handling" (steering) will be a
bit slower.

Just an idea: try rotating your handlebar "out" a little bit, making the
drops farther away. (You might have to move the hoods/levers down
afterwards, if you don't like their new orientation.) Should stretch you
out a tad more...

Bill "talking out his butt, but worth a try" S.

"S o r n i" wrote in message
...
Mark Heiple wrote:
In article ,
Harris wrote:


You sound like a Lemond type. In what way does your current Lemond
seem too short? The main criteria should be top tube length and seat
tube angle. What stem length are you using? The fact that you can
get the bars
1.5 inches below the saddle is a good sign. If I were you, I'd try
to fine tune the fit on your current Lemond before giving up on it.

Good Luck.

Art Harris

I feel ok when I'm riding on the hoods, but when I'm in the drops, I
feel a bit scrunched up. I feel like I should be stretched out more.
I went to a bike shop with a pretty good rep and asked him about the
size, and he had me ride around a bit while he watched. He said that
in the drops, my elbows and knees overlap a lot more than they should
- there should be an inch or so gap between the elbow and knee when
my foot is at 3 o'clock (forward).

I have an extra long seat post now (Salsa Shaft) to replace the one I
just broke. I'm not sure how long my handlebar stem is, but it is
really long and sticks up quite a ways. I think it is fairly long
horizontally also, and I've been warned that going too long will
compromise handling/stability.

Longer stem should /increase/ stability, but "handling" (steering) will be
a
bit slower.

Just an idea: try rotating your handlebar "out" a little bit, making the
drops farther away. (You might have to move the hoods/levers down
afterwards, if you don't like their new orientation.) Should stretch you
out a tad more...

Bill "talking out his butt, but worth a try" S.


Good point, but the OP may also consider going to classic round-bend bars if
he's using anatomic bars now. He'll get more room in the drops for the same
reach to the hoods and tops - that's why I avoid so-called "anatomic" bars.
Some of them are awful! It'll require some measuring and comparison
shopping, but if the scrunch is his only issue, it's a lot less trouble and
expense than a new bike.

As for the other's points about geometry and sizing, the thing to focus on
is weight distribution. Front center and chainstay length should combine
with your build and position to give you good balance, which should hit
around 45%front/55%rear when you're seated and in the drops. Basically, if
you tend to have your seat slammed way back behind the bottom bracket,
you'll need longer chainstays and a shorter front end, and the opposite if
you sit more forward. The forward inside edge of your bar hooks should fall
over the front axle as closely as possible as well. If your long stem puts
you way out in front of the front wheel, you probably need a larger frame
(with a longer front end), which from the sound of it (long stem, xtra long
seatpost) may be the case. Not necessarily custom, just a bit bigger.
Don't know how Lemonds are sized, but a 57 sounds small for someone who's
6'2".

SB

Mark Heiple wrote:

I feel ok when I'm riding on the hoods, but when I'm in the drops, I
feel a bit scrunched up. I feel like I should be stretched out more.

I have an extra long seat post now (Salsa Shaft) to replace the one I
just broke. I'm not sure how long my handlebar stem is, but it is
really long and sticks up quite a ways. I think it is fairly long
horizontally also, and I've been warned that going too long will
compromise handling/stability.

Yeah. Sounds like the frame is too small. What is the nominal frame size
anyway?

Art Harris

"Steve Blankenship" wrote:

Don't know how Lemonds are sized, but a 57 sounds small for someone who's
6'2".

Ah, I missed that. Yeah, that sounds small especially for a 6'2" guy who
says he has long legs. I'm 6'3" (35.5" inseam) and ride frames of 62-63 cm
c-c.

Art Harris

In article ,
"Arthur Harris" wrote:

"Steve Blankenship" wrote:

Don't know how Lemonds are sized, but a 57 sounds small for someone who's
6'2".

Ah, I missed that. Yeah, that sounds small especially for a 6'2" guy who
says he has long legs. I'm 6'3" (35.5" inseam) and ride frames of 62-63 cm
c-c.

Art Harris

My inseam is somewhere between 34" and 35", probably closer to 34", so
I'm not quite as long legged as you.

The Lemond is measured c-c, and I have noticed that even compared to
other bikes measured c-c, the Lemond seems bigger. My brother-in-law
has 58 cm cannondale (not sure how it is measured), and my 57 cm Lemond
feels a lot bigger. It also feels bigger than a 58 cm Trek. Makes it
all kind of confusing what size a bike really is!

A related topic:

My lemond is mostly shimano Tiagra/Sora components, which has mostly
functioned reliably. The front derailleur (triple) is really the only
part that gives me any trouble. It doesn't shift real well in and out
the granny, and the chain will usually jump off if I try to shift into
the granny onto a hill.

Does an Ultegra triple work better than the lower groups, or does it
just save a little weight?

After reading the newsgroup here, I'm also toying with the idea of going
Campy. People seem to be happy with its durability/repairability, and
compatibility with the different levels and even new vs old appears to
be a lot better than Shimano. On the down side, it's a lot more
expensive and harder to find locally.

I thought about going double, but I'm a poor climber and heavy enough
that I should stick with a triple.

markh- My lemond is mostly shimano Tiagra/Sora components, which has mostly
functioned reliably. The front derailleur (triple) is really the only
part that gives me any trouble. BRBR
idea of going
Campy. People seem to be happy with its durability/repairability, and
compatibility with the different levels and even new vs old appears to
be a lot better than Shimano. On the down side, it's a lot more
expensive and harder to find locally. BRBR

There are comparible levels of Campagnolo to shimano, in price. Campagnolo is
easy for a bike shop to get as well. Look at the Centaur level.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

In article ,
(Qui si parla Campagnolo ) wrote:

markh- My lemond is mostly shimano Tiagra/Sora components, which has mostly
functioned reliably. The front derailleur (triple) is really the only
part that gives me any trouble. BRBR
idea of going
Campy. People seem to be happy with its durability/repairability, and
compatibility with the different levels and even new vs old appears to
be a lot better than Shimano. On the down side, it's a lot more
expensive and harder to find locally. BRBR

There are comparible levels of Campagnolo to shimano, in price. Campagnolo is
easy for a bike shop to get as well. Look at the Centaur level.

Peter Chisholm
Vecchio's Bicicletteria
1833 Pearl St.
Boulder, CO, 80302
(303)440-3535
http://www.vecchios.com
"Ruote convenzionali costruite eccezionalmente bene"

I took a look at the Campagnolo web site, and saw that they have both 9s
and 10s versions. For future compatibility, I assume 10s would be the
way to go. Campy's faq says that the even though the 10s chain is
narrower, it is just as strong as the 9s. Is this really true?

Another stupid question: after looking around at the bike shops, it
appears that forks have all gone threadless (my bike is threaded). How
hard is it to swap it for a threaded fork? Probably a detail not worth
worrying about, but I don't really see the advantage of giving up the
ability to adjust my handlebar height.

Thanks