Spacer in those Aheadset

Artoi said:

I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flat bar
on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else? Is it
correct to say that lowering the handle bar below that of the seat
height has no additional efficiency benefits? Is there any negative to
getting the bar lower? Is there some guideline to this setting?

The big factors are aerodynamics, power output and comfort.

Having the bar too low will impair breathing and stress the back and legs.
Having it too high will lessen your leverage and may be less comfortable.

The more upright you sit, the more weight is on your bottom bits. If you pedal
hard while sitting too upright you'll find the saddle in an uncomfortable
location. Saddle width, lean angle, bar height and how hard you pedal are all
linked. Oh, and then there's aerodynamics.
Ron

In article <[email hidden]>,

RonSonic said:

Artoi said:

I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flat bar
on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else? Is it
correct to say that lowering the handle bar below that of the seat
height has no additional efficiency benefits? Is there any negative to
getting the bar lower? Is there some guideline to this setting?

The big factors are aerodynamics, power output and comfort.

Having the bar too low will impair breathing and stress the back and legs.
Having it too high will lessen your leverage and may be less comfortable.

The more upright you sit, the more weight is on your bottom bits. If you pedal
hard while sitting too upright you'll find the saddle in an uncomfortable
location. Saddle width, lean angle, bar height and how hard you pedal are all
linked. Oh, and then there's aerodynamics.

Thanks. I lowered 5mm by taking out one of the spacer, and it was clear
that I am using my arms to prop myself up more, and there's more strain
on the shoulder/elbow/wrist. Not sure if it's a good position for me.
--

Artoi said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

RonSonic said:

Artoi said:

I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flat bar
on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else? Is it
correct to say that lowering the handle bar below that of the seat
height has no additional efficiency benefits? Is there any negative to
getting the bar lower? Is there some guideline to this setting?

The big factors are aerodynamics, power output and comfort.

Having the bar too low will impair breathing and stress the back and legs.
Having it too high will lessen your leverage and may be less comfortable.

The more upright you sit, the more weight is on your bottom bits. If you pedal
hard while sitting too upright you'll find the saddle in an uncomfortable
location. Saddle width, lean angle, bar height and how hard you pedal are all
linked. Oh, and then there's aerodynamics.

Thanks. I lowered 5mm by taking out one of the spacer, and it was clear
that I am using my arms to prop myself up more, and there's more strain
on the shoulder/elbow/wrist. Not sure if it's a good position for me.

Try it on the road and see how you feel. It will make a difference whether you
are pedalling with your usual cadence and power. If you pedal harder then that
will take weight off your hands and butt. Also depends on how warmed up you are.
My road bike feels terribly stretched out when I get on it and then feels neat,
comfy and compact about twenty miles later.

Ron

In article <[email hidden]>,

RonSonic said:

On Sun, 17 Sep 2006 00:37:04 GMT, Artoi <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thanks. I lowered 5mm by taking out one of the spacer, and it was clear
that I am using my arms to prop myself up more, and there's more strain
on the shoulder/elbow/wrist. Not sure if it's a good position for me.

Try it on the road and see how you feel. It will make a difference whether
you
are pedalling with your usual cadence and power. If you pedal harder then
that
will take weight off your hands and butt. Also depends on how warmed up you
are.
My road bike feels terribly stretched out when I get on it and then feels
neat,
comfy and compact about twenty miles later.

I did for a slowish cruise of 10km at that position yesterday afternoon
and came back with sore wrist/elbow/shoulder. But that was because I
took my son on the ride. I'll try the position on a more regular ride
and see.
--

Artoi said:

I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flat bar
on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else?

NO-it is about fit and comfort, not aewrdynamics...particularly on a
flat bar bicycle.

Is it

Quoted message said:

correct to say that lowering the handle bar below that of the seat
height has no additional efficiency benefits? Is there any negative to
getting the bar lower? Is there some guideline to this setting?

See above, it is about your fit on the bicycle, nothing else even comes
close in importance.

Quoted message said:

Thanks.
--

Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm said:

Artoi said:

I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flat bar
on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else?

NO-it is about fit and comfort, not ae[ro]dynamics...particularly on a
flat bar bicycle....

Here is a highly aerodynamic rider/bicycle combination that has flat
handlebars: <http://tinyurl.com/h6dpa>.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Artoi wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else?

NO-it is about fit and comfort, not aewrdynamics...particularly on a
flat bar bicycle.

That's not totally true is it? I note that at 30km/h, 70% of the air
resistance comes from the rider.
--

In article <[email hidden]>,

Burke Gilman said:

About the particular hybrid (flatbar) roadbike in question, I think it
likely that attention to the fore/aft saddle position has been
overlooked.

As the bars were moved forward and down, the rider's center of gravity
was moved forward, thus distributing more weight through the wrists,
arms, and shoulders. If the saddle is now moved rearward, doing so will
tend to return the rider's center of gravity back to its original
position. Depending on other factors, such an alteration may provide
the desired fit. Regardless, I continue to assert that subtle factors
ignored -- either because they were either not readily apparent or were
too quickly dismissed -- can still be factors significant to the fit of
the bike to the rider.

To sum it up, I usually start the fit process by locating the saddle
where I want it over the crank (in consideration of both dimensions).
If the OP has started out with a focus on the bar height without prior
adequate attention to saddle position and concurrent attention to other
factors, then the ideal fit may prove continually elusive.

Thanks to your reply.

I did start my fitting by the standard taught process of,

1) seat post height (based on stretched heel length without shoes and
review of hip movement on back peddling)
2) seat fore/aft position (based on lining up the tibial protuberance
with the pedal axle at the horizontal pedal position)

And now that I've started to play around with the spacer in the
Aheadset, it would appear that I'll need to readjust item 2.

I just hope that I am doing it right and not creating some monster.
--

"Artoi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Burke Gilman said:

About the particular hybrid (flatbar) roadbike in question, I think it
likely that attention to the fore/aft saddle position has been
overlooked.

As the bars were moved forward and down, the rider's center of gravity
was moved forward, thus distributing more weight through the wrists,
arms, and shoulders. If the saddle is now moved rearward, doing so will
tend to return the rider's center of gravity back to its original
position. Depending on other factors, such an alteration may provide
the desired fit. Regardless, I continue to assert that subtle factors
ignored -- either because they were either not readily apparent or were
too quickly dismissed -- can still be factors significant to the fit of
the bike to the rider.

To sum it up, I usually start the fit process by locating the saddle
where I want it over the crank (in consideration of both dimensions).
If the OP has started out with a focus on the bar height without prior
adequate attention to saddle position and concurrent attention to other
factors, then the ideal fit may prove continually elusive.

Thanks to your reply.

I did start my fitting by the standard taught process of,

1) seat post height (based on stretched heel length without shoes and
review of hip movement on back peddling)
2) seat fore/aft position (based on lining up the tibial protuberance
with the pedal axle at the horizontal pedal position)

And now that I've started to play around with the spacer in the
Aheadset, it would appear that I'll need to readjust item 2.

Why?

Quoted message said:

I just hope that I am doing it right and not creating some monster.

You have to give an adjustment some evaluation time. You have to keep in
mind what the purpose is of the change and how you judge the effect.

Lou

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm said:

Artoi said:

I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flat bar
on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else?

NO-it is about fit and comfort, not ae[ro]dynamics...particularly on a
flat bar bicycle....

Here is a highly aerodynamic rider/bicycle combination that has flat
handlebars: <http://tinyurl.com/h6dpa>.

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

I know how to spell it, can't type...NOT saying a flat bar bicycle
can't be aero but moving spacers around to 'get more aero' as if that
is the rpiority is mistaken, IMO...Bike fit is key and if yer comfy,
you probably will be faster.

Artoi said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Artoi wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else?

NO-it is about fit and comfort, not aewrdynamics...particularly on a
flat bar bicycle.

That's not totally true is it? I note that at 30km/h, 70% of the air
resistance comes from the rider.
--

Closer to 85% but just gettin' aero at the expense of comfort and fit
will do more than anything to take you off the bike...

Artoi said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Burke Gilman said:

About the particular hybrid (flatbar) roadbike in question, I think it
likely that attention to the fore/aft saddle position has been
overlooked.

As the bars were moved forward and down, the rider's center of gravity
was moved forward, thus distributing more weight through the wrists,
arms, and shoulders. If the saddle is now moved rearward, doing so will
tend to return the rider's center of gravity back to its original
position. Depending on other factors, such an alteration may provide
the desired fit. Regardless, I continue to assert that subtle factors
ignored -- either because they were either not readily apparent or were
too quickly dismissed -- can still be factors significant to the fit of
the bike to the rider.

To sum it up, I usually start the fit process by locating the saddle
where I want it over the crank (in consideration of both dimensions).
If the OP has started out with a focus on the bar height without prior
adequate attention to saddle position and concurrent attention to other
factors, then the ideal fit may prove continually elusive.

Thanks to your reply.

I did start my fitting by the standard taught process of,

1) seat post height (based on stretched heel length without shoes and
review of hip movement on back peddling)
2) seat fore/aft position (based on lining up the tibial protuberance
with the pedal axle at the horizontal pedal position)

And now that I've started to play around with the spacer in the
Aheadset, it would appear that I'll need to readjust item 2.

I just hope that I am doing it right and not creating some monster.
--

I've found the following fit procedure to work fairly well. This
presumes that you're "warmed up" at least enough to become limber (a
good spin for 20 minutes).

Start with the saddle height as in 1) in your post. Then put your
shoes/cleats on. Ride the bike, raise/lower saddle to a position just
a tad short of when hips start rocking in your "optimal" cadence on
level road.

To determine initial saddle fore/aft position, start with the saddle in
as aft a position when riding "no hands" becomes possible, w/o losing
control of bike. You might have to adjust saddle height again if your
hips start rocking (if you had to move the saddle aft). Forget about
"knee over pedals."

Then determine reach/saddle height empirically (i.e. trial and error).
Ideally you want to the position where it is easiest to turn the bike
by leaning, w/o turning handlebars. (You're using a flat bar, but if
you had drops you check to see if the drops and brake lever reach are
comfortable at this stage.) I've found this to be generally the ideal
starting position for fine tuning.

The above three steps will get you fairly CLOSE to your sweet spot.
Further tweaking will be still necessary. You also want to try this
position on some extended hills, to see if it is sufficiently
comfortable on climbs and controllable in descents. I've generally
found that nothing is ever more than 5mm off from this initial starting
point.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Artoi wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's not totally true is it? I note that at 30km/h, 70% of the air
resistance comes from the rider.

Closer to 85% but just gettin' aero at the expense of comfort and fit
will do more than anything to take you off the bike...

Good point. Too many variables to consider. Struggling away... 🙂
--

In article <[email hidden]>,

damyth said:

I've found the following fit procedure to work fairly well. This
presumes that you're "warmed up" at least enough to become limber (a
good spin for 20 minutes).

Start with the saddle height as in 1) in your post. Then put your
shoes/cleats on. Ride the bike, raise/lower saddle to a position just
a tad short of when hips start rocking in your "optimal" cadence on
level road.

To determine initial saddle fore/aft position, start with the saddle in
as aft a position when riding "no hands" becomes possible, w/o losing
control of bike. You might have to adjust saddle height again if your
hips start rocking (if you had to move the saddle aft). Forget about
"knee over pedals."

Then determine reach/saddle height empirically (i.e. trial and error).
Ideally you want to the position where it is easiest to turn the bike
by leaning, w/o turning handlebars. (You're using a flat bar, but if
you had drops you check to see if the drops and brake lever reach are
comfortable at this stage.) I've found this to be generally the ideal
starting position for fine tuning.

The above three steps will get you fairly CLOSE to your sweet spot.
Further tweaking will be still necessary. You also want to try this
position on some extended hills, to see if it is sufficiently
comfortable on climbs and controllable in descents. I've generally
found that nothing is ever more than 5mm off from this initial starting
point.

Thanks for the tips. Tweaking away...

But to clarify, how do you define "it is easiest to turn the bike by
leaning, w/o turning handlebars"? I don't quite understand how this is
assessed.
--

In article <[email hidden]>,

Lou Holtman said:

"Artoi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And now that I've started to play around with the spacer in the
Aheadset, it would appear that I'll need to readjust item 2.

Why?

Because people suggested that the spacer also induced alteration in the
reach and the saddle position may need to be further adjusted.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I just hope that I am doing it right and not creating some monster.

You have to give an adjustment some evaluation time. You have to keep in
mind what the purpose is of the change and how you judge the effect.

It would appear that people are suggesting that comfort is the major
factor. Yet again, I am not sure if the new muscle ache after a ride is
due to poor ride position or a combination of ride style/poor
conditioning. And then there's the issue of fit vs efficiency. Does a
good fit (comfort) always correlate with efficiency?
--

Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm said:

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman said:

Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm said:

Artoi wrote:
> I've finally reached the question of height of the handle bar (flatbar
> on a road bike frame) for my new bike. And the question is how I should
> play around with those spacers in the Aheadset.
>
> Is it correct to say that the height of the bar is more directly related
> to the aerodynamics of the riding position than anything else?

NO-it is about fit and comfort, not ae[ro]dynamics...particularly on a
flat bar bicycle....

Here is a highly aerodynamic rider/bicycle combination that has flat
handlebars: <http://tinyurl.com/h6dpa>.

I know how to spell it, can't type...NOT saying a flat bar bicycle
can't be aero but moving spacers around to 'get more aero' as if that
is the rpiority is mistaken, IMO...Bike fit is key and if yer comfy,
you probably will be faster.

My comfort point is having the BB about 15 to 20-cm (6 to 8 inches)
ABOVE seat height, with the seat reclined 30-40° from the horizontal.

As always, YKMV,

--
Tom Sherman - Here, not there.

Artoi said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Lou Holtman said:

"Artoi" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

And now that I've started to play around with the spacer in the
Aheadset, it would appear that I'll need to readjust item 2.

Why?

Because people suggested that the spacer also induced alteration in the
reach and the saddle position may need to be further adjusted.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I just hope that I am doing it right and not creating some monster.

You have to give an adjustment some evaluation time. You have to keep in
mind what the purpose is of the change and how you judge the effect.

It would appear that people are suggesting that comfort is the major
factor. Yet again, I am not sure if the new muscle ache after a ride is
due to poor ride position or a combination of ride style/poor
conditioning. And then there's the issue of fit vs efficiency. Does a
good fit (comfort) always correlate with efficiency?

Efficiency for a given power output level, yes. A fit that is most efficient for
pedalling to work at 12 mph without sweating will be the most comfortable at
that effort level. A fit that is most efficient at pounding out a sustained 500
watts in a time trial will also be the most comfortable for that level of
effort. Piddling along on the latter bike the saddle will feel like the fabled
ass-hatchet and your neck will ache. Trying to deliver power on the former bike
will have you pedaling like peewee herman.

The most efficient fit for a given application will be the most comfortable when
used in that application.

Ron

Artoi said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

damyth said:

I've found the following fit procedure to work fairly well. This
presumes that you're "warmed up" at least enough to become limber (a
good spin for 20 minutes).

Start with the saddle height as in 1) in your post. Then put your
shoes/cleats on. Ride the bike, raise/lower saddle to a position just
a tad short of when hips start rocking in your "optimal" cadence on
level road.

To determine initial saddle fore/aft position, start with the saddle in
as aft a position when riding "no hands" becomes possible, w/o losing
control of bike. You might have to adjust saddle height again if your
hips start rocking (if you had to move the saddle aft). Forget about
"knee over pedals."

Then determine reach/saddle height empirically (i.e. trial and error).
Ideally you want to the position where it is easiest to turn the bike
by leaning, w/o turning handlebars. (You're using a flat bar, but if
you had drops you check to see if the drops and brake lever reach are
comfortable at this stage.) I've found this to be generally the ideal
starting position for fine tuning.

The above three steps will get you fairly CLOSE to your sweet spot.
Further tweaking will be still necessary. You also want to try this
position on some extended hills, to see if it is sufficiently
comfortable on climbs and controllable in descents. I've generally
found that nothing is ever more than 5mm off from this initial starting
point.

Thanks for the tips. Tweaking away...

But to clarify, how do you define "it is easiest to turn the bike by
leaning, w/o turning handlebars"? I don't quite understand how this is
assessed.
--

Had a brain fart in my original post. The line that states "Then
determine reach/saddle height..." should instead read "Then determine
reach/STEM height..."

But to further clarify, you are looking for a steering/balance position
that is most responsive to body English without being squirrely.
Builders like Al Eisentraut says: "You want the bike and body to
experience a turn at the same time. This occurs when the inner ear is
aligned with the steering axis. If the inner ear is in front of the
steering axis than the bike could feel sluggish and if behind than the
bike would feel squirrelly. The bike fits when you stop thinking about
it." Of course Eisentraut was referring to frame geometry, but there
is no reason this should not apply to fit as well.
http://www.bicycletrader.com/archives/21articles.html#01

In article <[email hidden]>,

RonSonic said:

The most efficient fit for a given application will be the most comfortable
when
used in that application.

Deep and meaningful... I give up as it's coming round a full circle. :P
--