How does a cyclist lower their center of mass? Well, you can be shorter, that works pretty well. Or cut yourself off at the knees, but that has other side effects that I don’t want to get into right now. You could also lower the bottom bracket like Look and Eddy Merckx used to do (I think they raised their BB to the standard height recently).
Buth the real solution is that in most cases – at least in the cycling world, taller means lankier and that means that proportionally, the distances and angles between legs, arms, handlebars, saddles, and pedals start being very different – and should be much more extreme – than the scaled-up picture model of the 5’10″ rider on a 56.
I have found over the last 23 years of riding that when I lower my bars, two things happen. First, I have better control over my machine. Second, I go faster. After having my bars as low as they would go on my R3 and consistently feeling they were a bit too high, I bought a 17 degree stem for my R3 which lowered my bars by 2cm- more than I thought I wanted. The results were astounding. Not only does my bike handle better, but I ride about 1-2kmph faster on flats and on climbs. The speed factor can be attributed to freakish bio-mechanics (that may be unique to my physiology) and/or increased aerodynamics, but the bike handling is, I believe, directly related to my lowered center of mass. In fact, John – who is also an Eros Poli-sized rider such as myself – noticed how good a low, aggressive position feels after borrowing one of my bikes during a visit to Seattle.
The bottom line is that you have to be comfortable on a bike, and that means different things to different people based on their size, flexibility, and style of riding. That said, I urge tall riders to experiment with riding the smallest frame you can while still getting enough saddle height and top tube length needed to ride efficiently – and then ride your bars as low as you can. If you need an example from the pros, take a look at Axel Merckx’s position (at the top of this post, as well as compared to Floyd Landis above), or keep in mind that Greg Rast on team Astana had Trek build him a frame with the dimensions of a 61cm frame with the head tube height of a 56cm frame – and slams his handlebar stem right down on his top tube.
It’s all about your center of mass, baby.
Posted in: Bike Setup / Racing / Technology
I’ve been wondering about this more and more. I stand 5’10″ and ride a 56cm frame, so I don’t have that extra height or lanky issue, but I’ve always wondered if I wouldn’t be more comfortable and efficient on a 54. As it is, I barely have my handlebars the requisite 4cm below the seat, but any more and my shoulders get stiff for days.
Oh Joyyyyyy! I hadn’t seen this post. I’ll go and get my notes.
But remember kids, the most important thing is that you have to look good on the bike. For the Velominatus, there is normally always a compromise to be had, unless you go the custom frame approach and even then, those with less fortunate physiologies will still have to compromise.
I recently flipped my Deda stem over so that it has zero rise. I don’t know if I go faster but I feel more like a racer than an “enthusiast” now. Come to think of it – after some issues with speed wobbles on my old frame I’ve become quite the pussy when it comes to descending – last Wednesday was the first time I did a big descent since flipping the stem over and it was the first time I have felt comfortable at 80kph in a long time. I’m usually OTB on long descents and this time I stayed with the leaders.
@Steampunk
A lot of that has to do with your flexibility; if you can’t go lower, then why bother? Also, you’re on a 56 already, so your center of mass won’t be too high. In a case like mine, that starts being a really seriously issue – as is the distance from the bars to the ground if they are too high; you start really having shimmy issues at speed. If you don’t have problems, i wouldn’t worry about it. But, Steve Bauer had a build like what you describe of yourself, and he always went small on his frames, so it is something to consider.
@Jarvis
Absolutely agree 100% (not sure how I missed your comment before?!) on all counts. Looking forward to you finding a minute and revealing to us what lies in those mysterious notes of yours!!
@Cyclops
This is exactly what I’m talking about! If you’re tall and have stability issues, go low!!
@frank
Thanks. My flexibility is getting better, the bigger issue is that it feels like I’m extending too far forward to rest comfortably on the drops. Maybe this is a flexibility thing, but I also wondered if they bars were just too far away and a 54cm would help me to be more comfortable. That, and Bauer is pretty cool. Still a legend in these parts, of course, too.
@Steampunk
Bauer is LEGEND. What a stud! I have to do a piece on him. Of all the whinny bitches complaining about “bad luck”, I’ve never known a happier, more talented cyclist with more truly – genuine – bad luck than Steve Bauer. I would have his kids in a heartbeat.
One thing about “going low”. I think one of the reasons – aside from lowering the center of gravity, is that you gain extra distance in your reach by dropping lower; so you are compensating for a relatively shorter top tube by going extra low to get some additional extension. So, if you are going low, you may want to get a shorter stem, too. Or use this as an excuse to get a new frame.
@frank Good advice on the stem. I just wanted to chime in and give some praise to Bauer. As an amateur he was already a hardman winning races and time trials by minutes and on top of that he was a really nice guy.
Oh and Frank if you had his kids they would be some weird looking trolls…
(I am throwing up all over the room)
@Steampunk
@frank
Have you guys read the latest Zinn letter over at Velonews? Pretty interesting related to tall riders and much more involved than bar/frame hieght. In fact, he posits that has much less to do with stability than other things. Good read: Zinn
@Rob
What a stud that guy was! Man-oh-man! And we would handsome children.
@Marko
Yeah, thanks for posting that, it’s an interesting read. John and I were discussing it a few days ago when everyone was in town.
Honestly, I can’t understand how this guy is considered to be the expert he is. In my humble opinion – and based off my own experience (above) he’s so far off the mark, I can’t begin to describe it.
He is talking about exactly the oposite of what I’m covering here; he just keeps scaling up the frame/cranks etc to match the size of the rider, which is exactly what you don’t want to do. (I think John figured Zinn would put him on 220mm cranks!) I’m about as tall as both those guys, and I’ve never experienced any of the handling problems they describe, in fact, my bikes handle incredibly well. Just drop those bars, baby!
But, to be fair, this is just my theory – and it works for me – but that’s really as far as it goes.
@frank
I’m with you on the crank arm length. But what he says about weight distribution not being too far back and/or being too far aft of the pedal spindle seems to make sense. If that’s the case, my simple mind thinks dropping the bars accomplishes the same thing. It shifts your weight and your mass forward. I think to the point, it may be a false assumption to say that larger frames handle worse than smaller ones and is more an issue of weight distribution and balance. Anyway, this could easily turn into one those long diatribical threads.
@Rob @frank
One of his yellow jerseys is enshrined at my local coffee shop. Very cool.
@Marko
Thanks for the link. More for Frank than me, and he does seem to be talking about fit rather than performance, which was Frank’s theme above. I can’t really comment one way or the other; I just see pics of Frank’s seatpost and I feel so, well, inadequate…
@Marko
You hit the nail on the head, I think – and you have a point with being too far back over the wheel being odd, but I haven’t seen that happen on my bikes, but maybe they all have steeper seattube angles. But I think you nailed it; it comes down to weight distribution and being well-balanced on the bike, which is impossible with the high center of mass that comes with having the bars and the “normal” height that you would for smaller riders on a smaller frame. What’s even worse is bike shops that set big riders up with extra high stack-heights to put the bars up even with their saddles; I’ve seen 6cm stacks; I shudder to think of the speed shimmy associated with that!
I’m going to go online and order me some 345mm cranks and see if I can pop a reverse wheelie every time I pedal.
@Steampunk
Did I mention it’s a 31.6?
@frank On your side, Frank, I suggest the handling problems of tall lanky guys may have nothing to do with the physics of the bike. It didn’t take us shorter, more muscular guys very long to figure out when we were growing up that the taller, lankier kids lacked all coordination, balance, and power. I used to love ripping tall, lanky wide receivers in half on the football field. They seemed so helpless out there. The fact that you don’t have that problem may mean you are one of the few of them are fortunate to have normal coordination and balance. To explain it, I would suggest it may be due to your big head. More neurons and sheeit devoted to motor-control, or else simply an inflated ego that will not allow itself to believe it’s not superior in some respect.