KBH: This has always been a problem for me. I have short femurs, long torso, short arms. The ideal
body not to do cycling. Good cyclists tend to have longer legs, shorter torso's and long arms. This
is why you see them riding with small bikes and with the stem all the way down in pictures. They can
put the seatpost all the way up, they need a smaller bike with a short top tube, and they can easily
reach the handlebars with their long arms. There is an advantage in aerodynamics and in having
proportionally more weight in the lower bodies than upper bodies.
We all want to look like good cyclists, so we buy bikes designed for them, but our bodies do not
fit. I had to look for a bike that wasn't too tall but had a long top tube, for a long time.
American bikes are designed this way more than european bikes. While it solved my torso problem, I
always felt that I was too far back in relation to the pedals. This has been a problem for me when
ridding for a long time, or when I wanted to get aerodynamic for a long time, as in a triathlon. By
being too far behind my pedals, I created a very acute angle between my back and my thighs, when my
leg was on top of the circle. After a while, I would get pain on my lower back. I would have to
dimount after 40 miles or so, to stretch. I am reasonably flexible and I swim a lot which helps, but
I would still get a sore back.
About a year ago I purchased a bike with a steeper seat angle of 76 degrees, a long top tube and
farily short seat tube. It is perfect. I can ride forever, and my back does not hurt. I set my
handlebar around the same height as my saddle and I can get pretty aerodynamic. Last year I rode a
century and stayed on the aerobars for most of the ride. I was too lazy to get up and it felt really
confortable staying aero. while the bike has similar dimensions of a triathlon bike, for my body
type it fits well as a rode bike and rides great. Good luck,
Andres
"KBH" <
[email protected]> wrote in message news:<CPfsa.694355$L1.199115@sccrnsc02>...
> I realize that KOPS is nothing but a reference point, and I was only referring to it as such. My
> desire to try KOPS actually has to do with back problems, and general experimentation with bike
> fit. It just seems odd to me that I can only get to this common rider position with a 73 degree
> seat tube, saddle forward on rails , and no seatpost setback.
>
>
>
> "Jim Edgar" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
>
news:BAD6D621.3FFE4%[email protected]...
> > KBH at
[email protected] wrote on 5/1/03 1:14 PM:
> >
> > > This is a continuation of my riding posture thread from below:
> > >
> > > Put my bike on the trainer to do a self fitting, using my plumb bob I verified that I was
> > > about 1.5" - 2" behind KOPS. My bike has a 73
> degree
> > > seat tube angle, and I'm using a seatpost with no setback and the saddle rails in the middle.
> > > My saddle height is 79 which results in a setback
> of
> > > 23.1 cm. Only by putting the saddle almost as far forward as it can go
> on
> > > the rails can I get near KOPS. I'm going to try this for a while. I
> can't
> > > fathom the need for a saddle with setback, or a bike with a shallower
> seat
> > > tube angle.
> > >
> > > Is this setup unusual? Short femurs?
> >
> > Before you follow that too far, read Keith Bontrager's article on the
> "Myth
> > of KOPS" -
> >
> > (of course, there's a version on sheldon's site)
http://www.sheldonbrown.com/kops.html