Do I have long femurs?

[hansenator]

My riding tends to be non-competitive. I tried a mountain bike race once and it was really tough.

Mostly it's fitness, fun, or commuting rides of about 20 miles or less. Sometimes I'll go out for the day. I'll start early and go into the next town for breakfast. Then ride to to the next town and hang out at the beach... I'm not in shape for it right now but I love that sort of thing.

 

[hansenator]

I think the seat is adjusted pretty good now, thanks for all the advice!

A straight seat post with the seat shoved almost all the way forward seems to put it in the right spot, I found my center of gravity and everything. I took it for a short spin today and it felt pretty good. I might raise the seat another millimeter or so, haven't decided yet. I do want to bring the handlebars about an inch closer, I'll run it over to the LBS and ask about swapping out the stem.

I'm looking forward to riding this year. I like the bike and I'm excited about having it fit right. I think being comfortable on it will improve the whole experience.

 

[Timmbits]

Originally Posted by hansenator
My riding tends to be non-competitive. I tried a mountain bike race once and it was really tough.

Mostly it's fitness, fun, or commuting rides of about 20 miles or less. Sometimes I'll go out for the day. I'll start early and go into the next town for breakfast. Then ride to to the next town and hang out at the beach... I'm not in shape for it right now but I love that sort of thing.

OK, I was just wondering if I should recommend something that I had in mind - your type of riding definitely does not justify self-punishment!
You just need something that is a good fit and comfortable. No steep angles required.

 

[Timmbits]

Originally Posted by hansenator
I think the seat is adjusted pretty good now, thanks for all the advice!

A straight seat post with the seat shoved almost all the way forward seems to put it in the right spot, I found my center of gravity and everything. I took it for a short spin today and it felt pretty good. I might raise the seat another millimeter or so, haven't decided yet. I do want to bring the handlebars about an inch closer, I'll run it over to the LBS and ask about swapping out the stem.

I'm looking forward to riding this year. I like the bike and I'm excited about having it fit right. I think being comfortable on it will improve the whole experience.

Somehow, I cannot imagine, with your femur length, how the tip of your kneecap would vertically intersect with your pedal spindle.
You must be in some awkward position, from what you are describing.
OK, I get it! Your top tune is a mile too long. But still, a much shorter stem to compensate, I can definitely imagine... but your seat so far forward... there is something terribly wrong with that picture.
BTW, weight distribution should be about 60% on the rear wheel, and 40% on the front. NOT half and half.

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by hansenator
I think the seat is adjusted pretty good now, thanks for all the advice!

A straight seat post with the seat shoved almost all the way forward seems to put it in the right spot, I found my center of gravity and everything. I took it for a short spin today and it felt pretty good. I might raise the seat another millimeter or so, haven't decided yet. I do want to bring the handlebars about an inch closer, I'll run it over to the LBS and ask about swapping out the stem.

I'm looking forward to riding this year. I like the bike and I'm excited about having it fit right. I think being comfortable on it will improve the whole experience.

If you are comfortable it doesn't really matter what anybody else thinks, especially based on words on a page. If you think you need it get a fit have it done in person, with the fitter able to see your position dynamically. But remember, you are the one riding the bike, they are still only offering "guidelines".

 

[hansenator]

Originally Posted by Timmbits
Somehow, I cannot imagine, with your femur length, how the tip of your kneecap would vertically intersect with your pedal spindle.
You must be in some awkward position, from what you are describing.
OK, I get it! Your top tune is a mile too long. But still, a much shorter stem to compensate, I can definitely imagine... but your seat so far forward... there is something terribly wrong with that picture.
BTW, weight distribution should be about 60% on the rear wheel, and 40% on the front. NOT half and half.

The tip of my kneecap is definitely behind the pedal spindle. I have the seat adjusted just far enough back so I can take my hands off the handlebars without sliding forward. With the pedals parallel, I can take my hands off the bars and stand up without any dramatic weight shifting. The handlebars are kind of a reach though.

I think it's related to the seat tube angle. I think it puts the seat farther behind the pedals than many frames do. What's interesting is I needed to swap the seat post to move the seat forward enough but, on my other bike, I had to move the seat almost all the way back to get a similar adjustment.

 

[danfoz]

Originally Posted by hansenator

What's interesting is I needed to swap the seat post to move the seat forward enough but, on my other bike, I had to move the seat almost all the way back to get a similar adjustment.

That observation would seem to confirm a shallow seat tube angle, unless the Poprad has longer crankarms than your other bike. If the Poprad has a shallow seat tube angle AND longer cranks the difference could be quite pronounced.

This article suggests it comes with 175's which seem pretty long for the size of the bike in the review (54?): http://bostonbybike.blogspot.com/2012/01/2008-lemond-poprad-review.html
This ad specs 172.5's on a 52cm, pretty long for the frame size: http://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/1407623/

Typically bikes in this size range come with 170's.

These could all be aftermarket mods but it's worth checking on your bike.

All else equal, longer cranks would extend the position of the spindle further forward if taking a typical KOPS measurment. Longer crankarms may also affect the way a bike feels. I once tried 172.5's after having ridden 170's for three decades and could not get over what a difference 2.5mm could make.

 

[hansenator]

The Poprad does indeed come with 175 crankarms, the same as my other (mountain) bike. I'd be interested in trying shorter cranks because I've read that longer doesn't really help anyway. Maybe later this year.

I think mine is a little older than the one in the article. It doesn't have the carbon fork or flat spokes. It's also black with blue decals.

 

[danfoz]

This page may help: http://www.cptips.com/crnklth.htm

I'm not endorsing it but at a glance it seems to capture some common theory.

At 35"+ you may be able to get away with 172.5's, but 175 seems like it the right ballpark. A lot has to do with pedaling style (spinner or masher), what one is used to, and personal preference. At just under 32" 170mm works fine for me, plus I enjoy spinning a bit more. A track cyclist with my inseam might run 165's, a TT'er 172.5's. A mountain bike is where it makes sense to run slightly longer cranks, as low gear high torque situations are sometimes called for during steep trail riding, especially when standing out of the saddle on the pedals may cause the rear wheel to slip on dirt.

Some time back I got a got a good deal on a pair of powermeter cranks in 172.5 and asking around someone said I probably wouldn't even notice the difference... the extra length killed my pedal stroke and it was probably the least enjoyable month I've ever spent on a bike. I ended up eating a few $$ on the resale and went back to the 170's. Lesson learned.

 

[hansenator]

What do you think of the article here: http://www.powercranks.com/cld.html?gclid=CMeIvurEwr0CFS9p7Aoda0cA4w

There was a study which found the highest power output from 145 cranks but there wasn't much difference from 170. They do have a product to sell so I'm sure they're biased but it gave me something to think about.

 

[danfoz]

Some people apparently like the power cranks. I have zero interest.

 

[Timmbits]

Originally Posted by danfoz That observation would seem to confirm a shallow seat tube angle, unless the Poprad has longer crankarms than your other bike. If the Poprad has a shallow seat tube angle AND longer cranks the difference could be quite pronounced.
This article suggests it comes with 175's which seem pretty long for the size of the bike in the review (54?): http://bostonbybike.blogspot.com/2012/01/2008-lemond-poprad-review.html
This ad specs 172.5's on a 52cm, pretty long for the frame size: http://www.pinkbike.com/buysell/1407623/
Typically bikes in this size range come with 170's.
These could all be aftermarket mods but it's worth checking on your bike.
All else equal, longer cranks would extend the position of the spindle further forward if taking a typical KOPS measurment. Longer crankarms may also affect the way a bike feels. I once tried 172.5's after having ridden 170's for three decades and could not get over what a difference 2.5mm could make.

People tend to overlook that the crankarm length is part of the overall gear ratio equation. Usually we figure front teeth / back teeth (front circumference/rear curcumference) is your ratio.(I'm not talking about displacement). Your first gear is actually the circle that the pedals make. So a 175 will make a given gear easier to push, while in actuality your feet will be going a little bit faster (covering a slightly longer distance) at a given pace (RPM). 5mm more is a circumference of roughly 16mm more. Sure, you might feel that.
For Americans, 5mm is only approx. 3/16".

As far as bike sizing goes, 3/16" is too small to affect bicycle fit. You can move your seat 5mm back to compensate, if you feel it is a problem.

I haven't seen a poprad specs table, but the seat tube is most likely in the vicinity of 73 degrees, give or take half a degree.

 

[Timmbits]

Originally Posted by hansenator
(1) The tip of my kneecap is definitely behind the pedal spindle. I have the seat adjusted just far enough back so I can take my hands off the handlebars without sliding forward. With the pedals parallel, I can take my hands off the bars and stand up without any dramatic weight shifting. (2) The handlebars are kind of a reach though.

(3) I think it's related to the seat tube angle. I think it puts the seat farther behind the pedals than many frames do. What's interesting is I needed to swap the seat post to move the seat forward enough but, on my other bike, I had to move the seat almost all the way back to get a similar adjustment.

(1) Could you PLEASE double-check that? Take a piece of thread, with a washer tied to the end of it. Use this as your plumb line.
Unless you have extremely abnormally SHORT femurs, there is no way your kneecap is behind the pedal spindle on a mass-produced bike (post-1972) with the way you describe having it set up right now. You need to use an actual plumb line, not line of sight!
Also, I noticed that you continually talk about center of gravity... and now you talk about getting up on the pedals without holding the handlebars without shifting your weight... I don't know who told you to do this, but it has NOTHING to do with proper bike sizing! So, please get that out of your head, throw that notion away - it is not pertinent, it is counter-productive and distracting from the real things you need to be looking at.

I repeat once again, third and last time - your weight distribution should be approximately 40% on the front wheel and 60% on the back wheel (and has NOTHING to do with standing on your pedals!)... I need to have weight distribution in mind when I design a bike, but you don't even need to concern yourself with that! The bike is already designed for that, including the seat tube angle and setback seatpost taken into account. When you move your seat fore and aft, with the play it has, you remain in the general ballpark, which is good enough.

You need to have a vertical line from your pedal spindle (axle) intersecting with your kneecap. A right-sized bike, with a normal seatpost (not straight - unless it's a BMX), will allow you to be properly positioned on your bike.

(2) If your arms don't reach, your top tube is too long. You can make up for that ONLY with a shorter stem (cheapest solution), or a bike with a shorter top tube (more expensive, but more optimal handling).

(3) I'm venturing to guess that your model most likely has a seat tube angle within normal range for it's intended use - I would venture to guess between 72 and 73 degrees. However, like I mentioned, I was unable to find the geometry on the web (plus I don't have the model year, so even if I found them for a new bike, they may not be the same as your's). So I'm just guessing. Please do let me know if you have more information that would contradict my assumptions, by providing a link to the frame geometry reference for your frame size and of the same model year.

I hope that helps.

 

[Timmbits]

IMO, crank arm length is another discussion. Just like there are sprinters and long-distance runners, there are riders that spin better than others. Crankarm length can adapt to a number of things, including leg length, if the rider tends to power through bigger gears or has an easier time spinning. I'm just touching the tip of it.

But as I said, three eighths of an inch will not make a difference in the topic at hand.

One more thing: if you wish to not slide forward on your seat, the top of your seat needs to be either horizontal, or with the tip (nose) pointed slightly upward. Your weight will have you slide down the gentle slope, to have you rest on the back of the seat, for better comfort.

 

[hansenator]

I had my wife help me double check the knee/spindle measurement and it was closer than I thought, the string intersects on the rear half of the pedal spindle.

I'm pretty sure the top tube is too long. Resting my hands on the top, bent part of the bars feels good but the hoods feel like kind of a stretch. I can't afford a new bike so I plan to look into getting a shorter stem.

I found a manual here: http://www.vintage-trek.com/Trek-Fisher-Klein-Lemond/2004specmanualLemond.pdf
I'm pretty sure mine is a 2006 or so but this is what I could find. Unless the geometry changed, it looks like I have about a 72.5 seat tube angle.

 

[danfoz]

If the tops feel good rotating the bars ever so slightly can also bring the hoods a little closer.

Check the difference in bar orientation between my ride and some pic I found on the web, I'm probably between .5-1cm closer on the hoods than I would be on the setup at the bottom. Of course you may just need a shorter stem.

 

[Timmbits]

Assuming you have the 59 (23") (unusually, with this bike, the quoted bike size is the top tube measurement, and not the seat tube measurement)
you have a 24" frame (618 seat tube = 24")

These are real amounts, not affected by seat tube angle.

I would have thought this to be a proper fit for you.

Fortunately, in this model, their top tubes are shorter than the seat tubes. That is a good thing for you, and for handling.

I'm thinking this is a cyclocross frame? It has a touring geometry (angles and longer chainstays), except there are some things that point more towards cyclocross (like the shorter top tube). Lower angles for more vibration absorption and a more stable ride (at the expense of quicker handling on the pavement), and enough clearance for a thick caking of mud on the tires or simply for mud guards. OK, I digress.

In an ideal world, you might want to consider changing for the same model, but one size down (a different model will net you the same top tube length you have now or maybe even longer). Then you can up the seatpost by exactly one inch more than it is on the present bike (not the end of the world - and you can get cheap longer seat posts out of carbon fiber (stronger than metal, therefore won't bend if extended more than normal) - ditto for a stem, and have a nice customized fit. But in the real world, where the purchase is done, a much shorter stem should do the trick for you. If you don't like the dropped bars, you can also get yourself a mountainbike bandlebar - I have one that has an arc to it - it is slightly bent backwards - it looks really cool, and brings my hands even closer than a shorter stem. And try pointing the nose of your saddle slightly upwards, for a more comfortable seating position where you slide back onto the wider part of the saddle.

That's all I got. Good luck!

 

[hansenator]

I wonder if it would be best to get a new, properly fitted bike? It seems that all of this could have been avoided if the shop I bought it from cared. They just kind of took my money and shoved me out the door. There was no fitting or making sure the setup works or anything. It was a bad experience overall and I'll never give them any more of my money.

But yes, it is a cyclocross bike and it's no longer in production. I'm trying to picture what the stem would look like which would bring the bars an inch closer but keep the same height, I do like the multiple hand positions of drop bars. Here's a picture of the current setup. I'd like to be able to use fenders but my feet kept hitting the front one so I took them off.

 

[oldbobcat]

Without seeing you on the bike it's difficult to discern exactly what your problem is, but I'm detecting general difficulty coping with a pretty standard road riding position. The dealer who sold you the bike probably assumed you'd be OK with it and went with your desire to use fenders and a rack and chose the Poprad because that was all he had with eyelets. It's now apparent that more than anything else you need a bike with a short-ish top tube and tall head tube.

I suggest visiting some shops and asking about bikes built on an "endurance" geometry that will accept fenders and a rack. And if something more along the lines of the cross bike but with a more recreational geometry interests you, ask about "gravel racers," the latest micro-category of road bike. Raleigh and Giant each have a couple of these. Also "recreational cyclocross" bikes have been a growing category. Raleigh has several of these, and the Specialized Tricross series and Bianchi Volpe have been available for several years.

 

[hansenator]

Trek's Crossrip Elite looks nice. The LBS had a sale on them, I'm not sure if they still do. They didn't have one in my size but it's about what I'm looking for. Has anyone had any experience with this bike? Do you know of any other similar bikes that are in the same price range and are worth looking at?

I might go to the LBS tomorrow and see if they can get one my size for a test ride.