smaller frame / higher seat post



dannyyy

New Member
Nov 7, 2006
29
0
0
I see many bikes that have a very high seat post, and I look at my bike and my seat post is not even 1/2 the size of the other bikes. I understand that the purpose of this is for more aero when riding, but my question is, do they specifically buy a smaller frame to put a higher seat post on?

Right now, I'm riding a 52cm bike and with the seat post the way it is now, my bike fits perfectly (I am 5'7"). Although it fits, it isn't very aero, is there anything I can do to my current bike to make it more aero like the others with the higher seat post, or will I have to buy a new, smaller frame?

Thanks
 
dannyyy said:
I see many bikes that have a very high seat post, and I look at my bike and my seat post is not even 1/2 the size of the other bikes. I understand that the purpose of this is for more aero when riding, but my question is, do they specifically buy a smaller frame to put a higher seat post on?

Right now, I'm riding a 52cm bike and with the seat post the way it is now, my bike fits perfectly (I am 5'7"). Although it fits, it isn't very aero, is there anything I can do to my current bike to make it more aero like the others with the higher seat post, or will I have to buy a new, smaller frame?

Thanks

I think you're missing a few things here. You have to remember there's a pretty wide variance in frame design and geometry, so, for example, there are probably 10, 20, who knows how many frames that have 57.5cm top tubes or virtual top tubes that vary widely in seattube length. Just as there is a large variance in frame geometry, there is an even larger variance in human body morphology: some people have nice, average proportions; some people have long legs and short torsos; some have long torsos and short legs; some people have arms long enough to interest Diane Fosse. Then, to top it off, flexibility varies greatly among riders. What all of these differences mean is that a "correct fit" for this wide variety of people can vary widely.

Then, you need to consider someone's goal with their bike fit: are they a racer? Are they fitted for just the odd ride around the block or two? Are they fitted for touring?

And lastly, there are some bad fits out there.

What all this means is that if you're comfy on your bike now, if your fit is right, then don't worry about how much seatpost you've got showing, because the amount you've got showing is the right amount.
 
I have heard several reasons for some people choosing smaller frames and then getting longer stems, high seat posts etc. Some of these reasons being that the bike easier to handle, lighter and, as you mentioned, a better aero position. Whether any of these reasons actually have any merit I have no idea.

From my experience I have had a bike that's been too small and got nothing but back pain from it. Unless there are other reasons to pick another frame, go with what you have now. If you are worried about how aero your position is perhaps see if your LBS can help make adjustments.
 
dannyyy said:
..... my bike fits perfectly ...

Agree with the Retro Grouch that this is all you need to know. Lance didn't show much post either.
 
Smaller frames have benefits for taller riders to get a lighter frame with a tighter wheel base and a better aero position. There is a trend now to run smaller frames. Part of the reason is that some CF frames are not made in larger sizes. Little benefit to smaller riders.

I don't know what Lance's seatpost has to do with anything, but he never rode a compact frame. Besides, he's the last person anyone should model themselves on.

Jens Voigt runs a smaller frame with a tall seatpost and compact geometry, with a long stem. But he's 6'3".
You have to be very fit and flexible to do this
 
I used to have a compact geometry Specialized MTB that was 17". I am 6'3" and had the seatpost very high but it handled like a dream. I'd still right it today if it hadn't been totalled.
 
Thanks for all your replies. :)

My bike does fit me perfectly, but I was just wondering what else I can do to make it more aero AND fit perfectly
 
dannyyy said:
Thanks for all your replies. :)

My bike does fit me perfectly, but I was just wondering what else I can do to make it more aero AND fit perfectly
can anyone help?
 
dannyyy said:
Thanks for all your replies. :)

My bike does fit me perfectly, but I was just wondering what else I can do to make it more aero AND fit perfectly
How can you improve on "perfect"? Improvements on your engine is probably much more important than aero unless you are already near elite levels.
 
Perhaps I am just not in touch with the latest fads, but this is the first I have heard about people getting a smaller frame in an attempt to go faster.

Short of getting a Time Trial bike, I just cant see what kind of changes you can physically make to your bike to make it more aero.

If you feel that your riding position is not aero enough, then perhaps the bike has not been fitted "perfectly" to your needs.
 
Trying to get the "perfect" fit can be like trying to hit a moving target. As your body adapts to riding, you'll find that your position can change to accentuate the adaptations your body has made.

For example, when you first start riding, you tend to be a more upright. This is true until you develop some of the lower back, glutes, and hamstring muscles needed to support your body in a lower position. When you adjust your position so you are more hunched over, it amplifies your power by recruiting your glutes even more - and when they develop in response, you can drop your upperbody again. Of course this will level out and at some point you'll find yourself in the "optimum" range, with adjustments for gear (cold weather gear is thicker and sits you higher off the saddle), any physical issues (stiff back, etc), and any personal preferences (long hilly ride or super short/fast crit).

You also find yourself able to stretch out a bit more, again improving (usually) your aerodynamics.

From personal observations, I would say that one's ideal position is pretty set after about 3-4 years of consistent riding, i.e. relatively serious riding for 3 seasons for 3 or 4 years. This can be radically altered if there is an injury (Floyd Landis - hip issues dictated his position), radical experimentation (Steve Bauer comes to mind, with his chopper bike), or minor experimentation (Bernard Hinault fit a 1 cm longer stem to his bike in the middle of his career, Greg Lemond's seat was raised something like 5 cm after he turned pro).

The one thing that rarely varies is the seat to pedal distance (although changing pedals may drastically alter your seat height relative to the bottom bracket).

So, your current bike may be set up for you as of when you purchased the bike. But if you have changed at all since you got it (you ride more, you ride faster, or conversely you gained weight, you ride less), then it may not be ideal anymore.

Staying optimistic, a compact (or smaller) frame, depending on its design, will probably allow you to drop your bars more relative to your seat. This will probably make you more aero and improve power without changing your seat position. If the compact frame is also longer, it will stretch your upper body out a bit. If you are a fan of Jens Voigt's position (or Alexi Grewal for that matter), he has a very forward, very high seat, coupled with a faraway, low bar. Works for them, it might work for you. All position ideas have their advantages and disadvantages (high/forward seat, low/setback seat, long reach instead of having more drop, etc).

hope this helps
cdr
 
Exactly! Thanks cdr, this is exactly the response I was looking for.

Now, since I feel like I've reached my fit plateau, what can I do to my current bike to make it more aero? Or do I have to buy a new compact frame?
 
dannyyy said:
Exactly! Thanks cdr, this is exactly the response I was looking for.

Now, since I feel like I've reached my fit plateau, what can I do to my current bike to make it more aero? Or do I have to buy a new compact frame?
If that's the angle, rather than a more compact frame, how about a real aero frame? Cervelo comes to mind.
 
I was in the same position as you a few years ago. Before buying a new frame, what I did was to experiment with my current frame to find my (new) ideal riding position. As I had effectively taken three years off the bike, I had gained weight and lost strength.

After fiddling a bit with my seat fore/aft position, I found my bar adjustment range limited. I had a handful of stems but I couldn't raise or lower them significantly. Note - I follow advice a race car driver once told me - if you don't know exactly what changes a small adjustment in a particular direction will cause, make a really big adjustment. See what happens and adjust back from there.

I knew my bars were too high (I raised them as I got less fit and knew I had to drop them as I started to lose weight) so I looked for an adjustable stem. I had good experiences fitting racers with a Look Ergo stem but it was too much money. I bought a Ritchey Adjustable stem. Best investment I ever made. I ended up with my bars really low. My yellow frame also lent itself to magic marker scribbles for frame sizing notes. I adjusted my bike till I was happy then started taking measurements and drawing an imaginary frame, stem, etc., to connect the three main points - center of bar, seat at top of seatpost, and bottom bracket. I found that I could move down a frame size and get an optimal fit. I did and I did.

I attached (I think) one of the pictures I used to figure out what was going on with my bike. You can see how low the bar ended up - and how much shorter the headtube needed to be to accomodate that lower position. I used the stick to measure different top tube and stem combinations. My ideal position would have left me with about 2 cm to play with horizontally (i.e. I could still extend my toptube/stem length by 20 mm) and perhaps 1 cm vertically. But there were no frames available so I decided that the next size down Giant would work. It has the longest 73 degree Ritchey stem, the stem is lowered all the way, and I have no room to fiddle. But it has worked for me for the last couple years.

Regarding aero, improving your body's aerodynamics (overall position, head position) make more of a difference than the frame's aerodynamics. However, if an aero frame fits your needs (size, fit, rigidity), then it would be a good candidate.

hope this helps
cdr
 
dannyyy said:
Thanks for all your replies. :)

My bike does fit me perfectly, but I was just wondering what else I can do to make it more aero AND fit perfectly
More aero?

Try narrower handlebars ... if you're a Flatlander, then YOU (at 5'7") probably don't want anything wider than 40cm c-c ... you might be able to go to 38cm c-c.

Lower your stem (remove any/all headtube spacers ... restack them above the stem for the time being ... you may not like the lower position) ... by my semi-scientific test during a long descent WHILE COASTING with my hands on the hoods the speed was ~36mph & while on the drops it was ~38mph -- this was repeated several times, and the results were the same ... about 2+mph variance in the two positions.

I got similar results on a long false-flat ... I think it might have been something like ~12mph & ~15mph (tops & drops, respectively).

So, the smaller & lower your frontal profile, the less air resistance YOU will create.
 
I too was after aerodynamics due to the fact I am a larger rider. My solution was to obtain a couple frames (road and tt) that have very short head tubes relative to their seat tube size (i.e. 150cm head tube on a 60cm seat tube for my road bike). This is Trek's mentality, but I can't afford their stuff...:cool: