Thorn Cycles Forum
Community => Non-Thorn Related => Topic started by: Andre Jute on December 09, 2017, 10:26:59 pm
-
We all agree your bike must be right for you. For me the fit, or the capability to tailor the bike to fit me to within a millimeter, is the most important thing. The way some people are obsessive about having a clean bike, especially the transmission, I'm obsessive about having precisely the right relationship between saddle, pedals and handlebar grips.
All of that said, my last three bikes I bought sight unseen, unridden, on the reputation of their makers -- and I've been very happy with them after a bit of light reengineering.
Of course, that happened after a dozen years of educating myself with the wrong bike, buying my physio every new BMW that came out.
After I didn't visit her for more than a year, she stopped me in the street to ask me, "What happened to your old purple Peugeot bike?"
She sounded rather bitter. Probably lost face driving a two-year-old Bimmer.
Hurrah!
-
Initially, it is achieving a similarly good fit, then suitable gearing
Both are important to me because cycling is a pursuit that involves a lot of repetition. Get it wrong, and it is easy to incur a repetitive stress injury, especially if you are a high-mileage rider as I am.
Once the bike is properly setup, then I turn my attention to keeping it cleaned and well maintained. Goes back to the old mantra, "take care of your tools and they'll take care of you".
Best,
Dan.
-
well not really obsessed but i do have it in pristine condition before and after a ride ;) i also use quality gear wheels and tyres are important to me ,
i was always a strong little fecker so i could ride near enough any size of bike but not anymore the fit has to be spot on if it's not i suffer like a dog so worth getting it right, you will most certainly pay for a bad fit sooner or later.
good fitting bike
keep her spotless at all times ,
don't let it out of your sight . ;)
anto.
-
...don't let it out of your sight . ;)
Yeah, that too! For sure! Absolutely for me!
So ingrained and natural, it didn't even come to mind till Anto said it. :D
All the best,
Dan.
-
On a new bike, absolutely everything has to be the best it can be, I'll change anything and everything until it's just right. I like neatness and a zip tie on display is to me a sign of failure, I'll change screws till they're the perfect length to not stick out anymore than necessary. When I've finished adjusting and changing, which can take days or months, that's it, that's the way it'll stay, there's nothing more to do except routine servicing and maintenance and replace parts as they wear out. Once it's done it's done, it goes from being all about the bike, to all about the cycling. It'll often be dirty, it'll pick up a few knocks, it'll be locked up all over the place and if someone wants to start a conversation about it I'll try and steer it away from the tech and onto the riding.
I sort of enjoy the new bike experience, but not as much as I like it being done with.
-
I sort of enjoy the new bike experience, but not as much as I like it being done with.
I used to have a shortlist, every year in December, of bikes that I might like to have, but then the question would arise: where will I ride it and how often? Eventually the list shrunk to two bikes and then to another one of a bike I already had, but in a different frame color. I couldn't even come up with a component I would change. That was ridiculous, so I gave it up. My everyday bike hasn't had a new component for several years now, same reason as you: it's just right. And anyway, I'd rather give the time to riding.
-
My bike focus is not primarily not on the bike but rather on cycling with it. I'm obsessive about not setting goals, especially speed and distance goals. Men can get ridiculous about that and I think it closes the potential to really enjoy the trip and be in the present.
But in regarding the equipment, since that is the real intent of the question, I think my focus now is to not worry about striving for bicycle and gear perfection. It does not exists, except as an illusion. Perhaps it's better said as "adapt for the trip, rather than wrestle with mechanical details. Woman two wheel travelers seem to get that part so right. Why can't us men seem to just hop on and not over-think things?
-
Woman two wheel travelers seem to get that part so right. Why can't us men seem to just hop on and not over-think things?
It being Christmas Day still (somewhere near the dateline), we'll forgive you for bringing up sex.
-
Perhaps it's better said as "adapt for the trip, rather than wrestle with mechanical details. Woman two wheel travelers seem to get that part so right. Why can't us men seem to just hop on and not over-think things?
Pavel, I think you're touching on something very important here in terms of how cycling resources have been divided (and made available) according to gender (and stature). Bike fit -- for anyone -- is so important to enjoyment, endurance, and injury prevention. I think that's what so many people obsess over it...when solutions are in reach.
Some ruminations...
Back in the day (late 1970s, early 1980s), I led tour groups professionally. Typically, the men in the groups had their bikes all personalized as to fit and components, yet continued to fuss with setup, trying one thing after another "to fine-tune and improve performance". At that time, the female members of my groups were saddled (sorry!) with equipment that was unsuitable at the most basic level: Bikes were too tall or mostly too long and when the top tubes were suitably short they had wicked toe overlap (falls were frequent and terrible) because the frame geometry was "off". Handlebars were too wide, brake levers too big, cranks too long...but the "problems" were not because they were women. The problems occurred because at the time most production bikes sold in 'Merka were a) made for men of average dimensions (not ideal for the extra-large or small riders) and b) it was cheaper to make all frames with the same length top tube and parallel angles, so frame sizes could be adjusted simply by making the seat and head tubes shorter. These "one size for all" top tubes were too long for short people, too short for tall people and really only close for those in in the middle. Really short stems were hard to come by and taller riders fitted stems that looked like tillers in order to stretch out properly as they reached for the handlebars.
The women in my tour groups did not have these bicycle fit problems because they were women, but because they were smaller in stature and a majority of bikes were not sized ideally for them. One man in the group was similarly small and had the same difficulties. A taller woman in the group was able to ride a borrowed men's bike and she found it a remarkably good fit. I usually brought a number of stems of various lengths with me to try, but in the days before hatch-plate stem clamps the changeover was time-consuming -- moreso once the "aero" craze took hold and cables were routed under handlebar tape.
When there are no alternatives for bike fit -- and you very much want to ride or have paid the money to do so -- you soldier on with what you have and usually in some degree of pain, which means doing the ride and putting aside insofar as possible what can't be changed. The "average" size guys in the group were spoiled for choice finding any number of bikes that could be fitted pretty easily...and had the luxury to fine-tune them to the nth degree as they sought perfection. I think it is true that once a bike fits properly, then ever smaller niggles become apparent. For example, my sister found a ready fit in the rear compartment of my tandem so the basics of posture and reach were quickly sorted for her; not so the saddle. We went through more than 30 of them before she found a good match. Now she has it (Bell Sports from Walmart at $18), she increased her distance/endurance by about 5x simply 'cos saddle-caused pain was no longer the limiting factor. Once that was resolved then things like stoker grip position could be fine-tuned. These lesser things seemed fine initially because they were overshadowed by the saddle pain.
Me? Over time, I "tune the pain" out of all my bicycles. While I readily concede I get tired and muscles may hurt from use and exertion, I don't believe the bicycle itself should hurt the rider and cause pain. If it does, then adjustments need to be made till it does not. My particular bugbear was always quill stem height -- until Nitto's Technomic arrived, an awful lot of stems stopped at 150mm above the insertion mark and I needed 180mm to get the handlebars level with the saddle-top or no more than 2in below on a properly fitted frame. Thank goodness for the long, uncut steerers available on some threadless forks these days. Their hatch-plate stems also make swaps miraculously quick and easy these days.
Sizing and fit are where Thorn really excels in offering a generous range of seat tube lengths and top tube lengths -- and components -- to match their bikes to riders' body types and make rider-specific bikes. In general, there's a lot more awareness in the market now of how important bike fit is and there are more ready means to achieve it -- so we can and do...or come ever closer as we search for that pain-free ride. Still, it is not always so easy and sometimes a person has to think unconventionally to solve the problem. Some examples for riders at the edge of the fit margins:
http://dirtragmag.com/feature-coming-up-short-in-search-of-the-truth-about-womens-specific-bikes/
https://www.bicycling.com/bikes-gear/bike-fit/why-men-should-try-womens-specific-bikes
http://www.bicycle-touring-guide.com/difference-between-men-womens-road-bikes/
https://www.icebike.org/the-womens-mountain-bikes-scam-why-you-should-not-buy-a-womens-mountain-bike/
https://momentummag.com/find-bike-short-people/
http://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/are-women-specific-bikes-necessary-164672
Even when the bike is professionally fitted, other factors come into play...personal preference, what makes one comfortable, even style/fashion. For example, a change of handlebars can make a world of difference toward comfort or discomfort...or add novelty by making a bicycle feel totally new and fresh. Fitness plays a role too. My bikes always feel "wrong" when I start putting in higher mileage at winter's end, but always feel "right" after I have been on them awhile. Bike fit is the most important factor in each of my bikes and once I get that sorted, I am obsessive about marking things like seatpost height, saddle rail placement and angle, and so on. Cycling is a repetitive-motion activity and if things are a little off, joints and such take a pounding. Same for posture on the bike. You've got to be comfortable in terms of where you sit and how and the longer distances you ride, the more important fit becomes.
Best,
Dan.
-
Total silence 8) 8)
-
Total silence 8) 8)
Completely agree, any rattles or squeaks ruin a ride for me!
-
Riding at the optimum angle for my back.
-
Riding at the optimum angle for my back.
Try a racing set up back as flat as you can go ;)
-
Riding at the optimum angle for my back.
Try a racing set up back as flat as you can go ;)
Worst possible advice. The racing posture -- down on the drops, back flat -- is not a natural position but one painfully learned when young for aero advantage, not the benefit of your back. I cannot conceive of any posture more likely to wreck your back. That it's comfortable for middle-aged cyclists is a matter of habit, and probably fused vertebrae, nothing to do with ergonomics and kinesthetics.
Go stand beside the road when whatever Tour is nearest to you passes. Note how many of the contestants ride on the hoods for most of the race, rather than on the drops. They're resting their backs, because their backs know down on the drops isn't a natural or normal position for a human being. If you don't have that opportunity, check out http://coolmainpress.com/BICYCLETourofIrelandwithLance&Andre.pdf, which has a humorous intent but shows that only Sean and Alberto, out in front, are on the drops, almost all the others are on the hoods on a rough section of road. There's a reason for that.
-
I prefer the "Dutch" style of riding i.e. 60 degree plus. Not very aerodynamic I know but at the speeds I cycle at it doesn't matter. The main advantage is that at the end of the ride I have actually seen the scenery !
-
as you know Andre im a long time lower back moaner ::)
before i got the Probike fit done i was near enough sitting up straight.
The guy dropped me down a good 2 inches not exactly flat back but year a lot lower than i was riding, it took all the pressure of my spine works fantastic .i still suffer back pain when cycling but nothing like before the bikefit. ;)
oh i ride the hoods most of the time never on the drops these days my belly gets in the way. ;D
anto.
-
Sheldon Brown had the perfect solution, drops to make him look fast, flat bars to save his back, both on his Thorn Raven's steering tube.
https://sheldonbrown.com/org/thorn-index.html (https://sheldonbrown.com/org/thorn-index.html)
Note also the layback seatpost to position his wrists and back just so.
-
a fella would get arrested if the cops seen him ride that yoke . :'(
sheldon should have bought a frame that fit's him instead of making a pigs ear out of a lovely frame ah well horses for courses .
anto.
-
Perhaps Sheldon was proving a point with that setup. It does rather look like a Frankenbike.
-
Hosing the salt spray off , as soon as possible when winter riding.
Inc cleats and everything!!
Plus as I get older (and wiser?!!) its not really about the latest , flashiest bike ( that's the hobby/ enthusiast bit) ,its about the journey and wearing the right kit for the conditions, that can be obsessive too!!! Maybe that should be another question too!!
-
Never having a break down while making parts last as long as possible, I ride 9.7Km each way to work and obsess about never being late, and getting maximum miles between service. To the point of keeping records, I can even feel anxiety just typing this, starting to consider getting help?
-
You've come to the right place, Aggs and Marlo!
-
Fit, biomechanical efficiency and drawing it in BIKECAD. Proportional crank length, the right back angle, trick BB and wheel bearings, light and wide tyres (lightwall Compass Bon Jon Pass). I've no care about aerodynamics but with the drivetrain almost lossless and the fit to a tee, turning a corner to catch the wind behind you and feeling the bike just go and go and go is just wonderful!
-
how puncture proof are those compass ,have to say they look class on a good set of hoops.
anto.
-
In a full year of year-round riding (though not commuting), they have never punctured. The manufacturer says they purposely have no puncture protection belt because they sap performance. Instead they get natural resistance through being light, very flexible and wide, meaning they run at low pressure. Mine run at 3 bar rear, 2.5 front (I'm 65kg). I use latex tubes, which also add a bit of puncture resistance for the same reasons.
-
Thanks for that i ride 700x 28 the max for my audax.
yeah i was very tempted to buy compass but there expensive and the roads here in Ireland a dire rough tarmac seldom come across a smooth road.
guess i'll stick to the conti gatorskins .
anto.
-
Probably a good idea in 28s. Yes they're a pretty penny all right
-
Be more than a bit mindless to put expensive tackies without puncture protection on your bike on our roads here in Ireland.
As for puncture protection "sapping performance", I don't see it, at least not on properly designed tyres. The three big secondary advantages of banding tyres is that the stiff contact surface sticks a lot of rubber to the road, that the softer sidewall possible with a good protection band conforms that protection band consistently to the road's undulations, and that on wider tyres the lower inflation pressure possible sticks even more rubber more conformingly to the tarmac. Every auto racer knows -- and I don't know why it is so difficult to explain to bicyclists -- that keeping the tyre's contact patch as flat and large on the road as possible makes for less rolling resistance and thus better power transfer. In technical, engineering terms, the power transfer between tyre and road is limited by the friction between the materials, same as in braking, so the larger the surface in constant contact between tyre and road, the greater the power transfer possible.
The case against the protection band, given only that it is competently designed and installed, is its weight (pretty much irrelevant unless you're racing in the TdF) and its image among the roadies, nothing more.
The same arguments underlie the case for treadless tyres for tarmac use (and most other bicycle applications as well) for which even the great Jobst Brandt, trying to explain to bicyclists on a socalled "tech" group, suffered considerable frustration. Those landmark treadless Avocet tyres that the senior roadies here will remember were designed by Jobst.