Riding (leg) position advice - photo included

rob\'s_lexx

Hi all,

I posted a little while back regarding seat height positioning on my road bike. I was advised to maybe take a photo in situ with pedal at 6 o'clock position for comments etc. I was worried that I wasn't extending enough at the bottom of the pedal revolution - however, when turning the pedal upside down and placing my heel on at 6 o'clock my foot nearly loses all contact with the pedal (so i assume the height is not an issue).

In the photo below, my seat post is at full extension - from looking at it, I wonder whetehr the seat needs to be moved back a little on the slider?




Any advie/commenst welcomed

Thanks

Rob

sungod

can you also post a pic from the same viewpoint with the left crank at 9 o'clock, then it shows the knee vs. pedal axle position

Slack

Virtually impossible to tell from a photograph, for example, that frame looks too small for you!

sampras38

Slack wrote:

Virtually impossible to tell from a photograph, for example, that frame looks too small for you!

+1, although if I had to comment from a photo I'd agree the bike looks a bit small, especially as you say the seat post is at it's max.

AidanR

That bike is almost certainly too small, and looks substantially so. I'm guessing it's a medium, maybe even a small, and you're 6'+.

MichaelW

The saddle fore-aft positioning should be done relative to the 9:00 pedal position.
The starting point is Knee Over Pedal Spindle (KOPS). You measure this with a plumb line dropped from the pivot point of your knee, which should intersect the pedal spindle. You can then adjust back and forward according to personal preference.
There are 2 other factors which affect this process:

Crank length: a longer crank puts your foot further forward at 9:00 (and further down at 6:00). Generally, average sized males should use 170mm cranks, taller males, 175mm. That's about the only variation in crank size commonly available and found on new bikes.

Toe clip size: These come in S/M/L and restrict how far forward your feet sit on the pedal. For clipless pedal riders there is more variation and setting up cleats is more complicated.
I am shoe size 9 and use L.

I think your frame is too small.

Peddle Up!

Yep, looks too small.

rob\'s_lexx

Frame is 56 cm. I'm 6ft 1 and was advised this frame size was suitable :? It may be a slight optical illusion as well, because the photo was taken at a height above the bike (standing on a hill whilst taking the photo) - so this might make things look disproportioned slightly?? I can retake if needs be?

The 9 o'clock position is shown in this image:


thanks guys

rob

AidanR

Yeah, 56cm is on the small side for someone your height, though it should be noted that body proportions, riding style, flexibility etc. play a role too.

I'd agree with Michael that you need to look at your top clips - your feet do not seem far enough forward on the pedals. Others may correct me on this, but I'd say you want the pedal spindle on the rear edge of the ball of your foot, just before the arch begins. You could probably do with the saddle moving back a bit as well - if nothing else it'll stretch you out on the bike a bit more! For the same reason consider getting a longer stem.

geoff_ss

AidanR wrote:

That bike is almost certainly too small, and looks substantially so. I'm guessing it's a medium, maybe even a small, and you're 6'+.

Yes, I agree. The toe clips look too small as well but they may be because you're wearing big clumsy trainers rather than cycling shoes. It looks as if your toes rather than the ball of your foot is over the spindle.

Fore and aft position of the saddle is a matter of personal choice IMO. The KOPS thing doesn't work too well on recumbents for example. I also find I slide back in the saddle when climbing seated (as I usually do)

G.Zero

I would also echo that 56cm is too small for you I am 5'10" ish and I ride a 56cm..

rob\'s_lexx

The toe clips came with the bike and I do feel they are a little small (but the trainers don't help) - I'm planning on buying some Look Keo pedals and appropriate shoes in due course.

The thing that concerns me is if the bike frame is too small - can the seat height/position be adjusted so as it makes the riding position correct, or is it impossible?? I tried various 56 and 58 cm bikes at LBS's and both sizes seemed suitable....

What would be worth me trying to adjust/amend and get photo's up of for comment that may provide a better view etc than the two images already posted?

If there is a fundamental issue with size then I'd assume i must be able to return the bike as I've had it only 2-3 weeks and only done about 20 miles on it!!

Cheers

Rob

mowflow

To my relatively inexperienced eyes the bike does look a little small. However, if it feels right for your riding style then so what. I'm 6ft and after searching for a new bike recently I found that quite a few manufacturers 56 frames were the most comfortable to me as I have a short back so require short reach.

MountainMonster

From first glance, frame definitely looks a bit smaller than it should be, I reckon a size up and proportions would be about right.

As far as pedal stroke, that depends on the person sometimes. I put my seat a little lower, because i'm more of a power rider and turn bigger gears, and I have no compact chainset so even in low gears out in the mountains I power through instead of high cadence.

With respects to the frame though, if your seatpost is already fully extended, I wouldn't risk trying to buy a longer seatpost, it looks long enough already! How new is the bike? If fairly new, they may let you trade it in for a size bigger. You could try a longer stem, and pop the seat back a bit more, that could help.

lef

The top tube length is important and on that bike it looks too short for you. The photo is distorted so advice given could worsen your position. Take a photo from further away so less distortion, though you have no idea of the credentials of those commenting (I dont mean to offend, I'm sure you all know your stuff!).

I would do some online research yourself. Steve Hogg is somewhat of a bike fit guru who has several articles floating around the net. Check out the online competitive cyclest fit calculator. This should recommend frame dimensions & set up. You need at least a tape measure, plumb bob and a level would help.

What you should do is get a bike fit. But if you dont want to spend the pennies do some online research and become an expert yourself!

rob\'s_lexx

Ok, thanks for the input guys.

what photos would be ideal to help identify any issues etc? Identical photos but taken further away with camera at pedal level perhaps??

mowflow

Maybe a video clip would be better.

flasher

I think asking a bunch of people on an internet forum if your bike fits is a bad idea, go for a professional bike fit!

ollyridesfirst

Is that frame definitely a 56cm? I'd check that as even with a 56cm you shouldn't have the seat tube all the way out. I'm 6ft and have a 56cm and then seat tube is only out about 4 inches (100mm).

rob\'s_lexx

yes i agree about the bike fit - but the issue I have with that, rightly or wrongly, is if the frame really is too small then the bike fit will not help I wouldn't have imagined?!

as for a video, I could perhaps sort that, but what aspects of the bike/me on the bike should i try to image? is back pedalling suitable for a video in order to look at relative positioning?

rob\'s_lexx

OllyRidesFirst wrote:

Is that frame definitely a 56cm? I'd check that as even with a 56cm you shouldn't have the seat tube all the way out. I'm 6ft and have a 56cm and then seat tube is only out about 4 inches (100mm).

well it says 56 on the frame and that's the size i ordered.....so i guess its a 56??

MountainMonster

Also remember people, not every company makes frame sizes to a certain standard. Had cases of needing a 57 on my current bike, and bike before was a 52 with same fit.

flasher

OllyRidesFirst wrote:

Is that frame definitely a 56cm? I'd check that as even with a 56cm you shouldn't have the seat tube all the way out. I'm 6ft and have a 56cm and then seat tube is only out about 4 inches (100mm).

The OP's bike has a compact frame, whereas yours maybe semi-compact or traditional, so like comparing apples and oranges.

andy46

Flasher wrote:

OllyRidesFirst wrote:

Is that frame definitely a 56cm? I'd check that as even with a 56cm you shouldn't have the seat tube all the way out. I'm 6ft and have a 56cm and then seat tube is only out about 4 inches (100mm).

The OP's bike has a compact frame, whereas yours maybe semi-compact or traditional, so like comparing apples and oranges.

I wonder if this is where I've possibly gone wrong with my bike, 52cm Trek 1.1 compact. At the moment I'm trying to determine weather or not my bike is too small (see my thread) I was under the impression that "compact" refered to the size of the gears in the chainset :?

Arghyrou

Definately not too small, im 6'2 and have a 56 and it fits fine, andy shleck is 6'1 and uses a 56. I have a 140mm stem and it fits great, just adjust the position.

rob\'s_lexx

so what makes my bike a 'compact frame' then??

do people think its worth me looking at a professional bike fitting, or would I be wasting my money iof we assume the frame is perhaps too small??

rob

MountainMonster

You wouldn't be wasting your money, you get measurements you can use with any bike you ever buy to ensure good performance, so using it with this bike wouldnt be much of a problem. It shows you how high, how far back, all the things you should know during a bike fit!

Headhuunter

rob\'s_lexx wrote:

so what makes my bike a 'compact frame' then??

do people think its worth me looking at a professional bike fitting, or would I be wasting my money iof we assume the frame is perhaps too small??

rob

I think by compact frame, people mean one with a sloping top tube. A traditional frame's top tube is parallel to the ground, yours slopes to the rear. Sloping/compact frames are supposed to make the bike more responsive I think...

flasher

rob\'s_lexx wrote:

so what makes my bike a 'compact frame' then??

Sheldon Brown wrote:

Compact Frame

Traditional "road" frames have been built with level top tubes since the early 1900s. The influence of mountain and BMX bike design has led to the increasing popularity of frames with sloping top tubes, higher at the front.
"Compact" road frames have sloping top tubes, and are intended to be used with a long seatpost. Compact frames are a little bit lighter than traditional ones, but this is partially offset by the weight of the longer seatppost. Some riders believe these frames are stiffer.

When the down tube and seat tube intersect directly above the front axle, as is usual with a road frame, weight loading only tensions the down tube and compresses the top tube. When the intersection is farther back than the axle, the bending loads on these tubes require the front end of the frame to be of stronger construction.

Manufacturers like compact frames because they are more versatile in terms of fit. Usually 3 or 4 sizes are enough to fit 98% of customers. This saves a lot of money for a manufacturer who doesn't need to deal with so many different sizes.