# Wheel hitting shoe?



## TheMasterG (Sep 8, 2006)

Hi,

When I'm at 3 and 9 on the pedals, if I turn the front wheel the tire hits the front of my 3 O' Clock shoe, fairly sure this isn't right? What needs to change????

/G


----------



## asciibaron (Aug 11, 2006)

that's normal


----------



## Allez Rouge (Jan 1, 1970)

That's called "toe overlap" and while I wouldn't say it's _normal_, I will say it's not _unusual_. It's a function of frame/fork dimensions and geometry; some frames have it, some don't. Some riders are bothered by it, some aren't. It's generally only an issue when maneuvering at VERY low speeds, during which times you have to remember the overlap is there and allow for it by coordinating your pedal position with your steering.


----------



## Cory (Jan 29, 2004)

*Agree--very common, almost never a problem*

Happens on a lot of bikes, and while I'm sure somebody somewhere has fallen because of it, I've never seen it. My all-time favorite bike, a Motobecane I had about 20 years ago, had a bad case of overlap (my size 15 feet didn't help) and I wasn't even aware of it until somebody pointed it out. I'd ridden it for a couple of years, thousands of miles, and never touched a toe to the tire.
If you watch the angle of your front tire when you're riding, you'll see one reason: You very rarely turn the bars more than a few degrees even in a sharp turn. Don't worry about it.


----------



## TheMasterG (Sep 8, 2006)

Yep, not a problem when on the move, but track standing feels well dodgy


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

*Overlap is a crock*



TheMasterG said:


> Yep, not a problem when on the move, but track standing feels well dodgy


On the bike I have with toe-clip overlap, I've gone through 3 front fenders. Sooner or later, my foot grabs the fender when I'm trying to do a track stand, and it breaks.

I haven't figured out why the front wheel has to be so close in, that it hits the shoe. My all time favorite bike, a DeRosa built in '84, has the same wheelbase as the toe-clip overlap bike, but avoids this problem by lowering the bb, therefore the radius of the crank circle, and also by extending the top tube another centimeter. The front tire clears the shoes by about 1/4" when doing a track stand.

This bike achieves excellent fore-aft balance, and does everything well. This is the bike that earlier today I dropped a young guy on a late model Trek, drafting me up the overpass on Route 28. I let him get about a half mile ahead, then caught him a mile before my turn-off. He was working his butt off, because he was surprised to see me as I edged past, then waved a congratulatory acknowledgement as we parted ways. But I digress.

A designer at Specialized once said, for a high performance road bike to handle right, there might have to be toeclip ovelap. Someone please explain why? I think its a deficiency with no compensating advantages.


----------



## i heart riding (Feb 5, 2006)

easy solution............ride barefoot.........................


----------



## Mr_Snips2 (Jun 26, 2006)

its to keep the wheelbase short. Hop on a touring bike and most likely there will be no overlap. Also, a compact geometry doesnt help.


----------



## KonaMan (Sep 22, 2004)

*Time and practice...*



TheMasterG said:


> Hi,
> 
> When I'm at 3 and 9 on the pedals, if I turn the front wheel the tire hits the front of my 3 O' Clock shoe, fairly sure this isn't right? What needs to change????
> 
> /G


I used to have that problem a lot on my airborne, I just learned to adapt to it and rarely if ever have the toe overlap issue.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Right and wrong*



Fredrico said:


> A designer at Specialized once said, for a high performance road bike to handle right, there might have to be toeclip ovelap. Someone please explain why? I think its a deficiency with no compensating advantages.


One could go into a long dissertation about frame angles, fork offset, tube lengths, wheelbase, BB height, and so on, but apparently you wouldn't believe it. The fact that this is a VERY common situation might suggest that it is a result of the many compromises that must be made when building a bike to get the desired handling characteristics. I'm going to make the wild guess that, collectively, all of these frame designers know more than you do


----------



## wim (Feb 28, 2005)

*Track stand rule # 1:*

Right crank forward with front wheel turned right, left crank forward with front wheel turned left.

If your foot's grabbing fenders, you've got the rule backwards.


----------



## TheMasterG (Sep 8, 2006)

Was think about that today at a set of lights, think I need to relearn track standing with front wheel turned towards my 3 O' clock foot - doesn't sound too nice though :blush2:


----------



## zooog (Mar 18, 2002)

The dreaded toe overlap....gotta live with it just try to remember it is there...


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

*Speak for yourself.*



Kerry Irons said:


> I'm going to make the wild guess that, collectively, all of these frame designers know more than you do


After 23 years enthusiastically devoted to cycling, and seeing the results of many designers, I'm going to make the wild guess that many of them are out of touch with some practical considerations, such as toeclip overlap, rear wheel clearance behind seattube, and overall fore-aft balance of the rider . I've found that many of them overdesign for certain handling characteristics, and often purely stylistic ideas, and don't even think about what they're compromising, or if they do think about it, don't place any importance on it.

If my bike with no overlap handles better than the one with overlap, I have good reason to feel at least skeptical.. It would not require a long dissertation to explain why there should be overlap on a bike in a given frame size with a given wheelbase. We're only talking two dimensions, a simple matter of geometry in one plane.

I explained why my 54cm. (c-c) DeRosa did not have overlap: a low bb and long (55cm c-c) top tube, but must add that it has a steep (74 degree) seat tube angle, which may put the bb a bit further back than on a slacker seat tube. It may also be true that a larger frame will have a slacker seat tube angle to accomodate long femurs, and that, in order to keep a short 39 inch wheelbase, there would simply not be enough room for a larger foot to clear the front tire. I do seem to remember, however, that a few builders have added an inch to the wheelbases of their larger frames, not only to avoid toeclip overlap, but also to maintain a good fore-aft balance with the larger rider. The fit would be the same, proportionally, as a smaller rider on a smaller bike.

C'mon, Kerry, you can do better than simply appeal to authority. What would you be giving up by throwing the front wheel a half inch further out in front? Too much weight then over the rear wheel? Move it back a little, lengthen the chainstays, as Klein has been doing for years on his "Quantum"? If the front wheel is so close as to have overlap, isn't there too much rider weight over the front wheel, making handling skitterish, especially on descents? What is the value of such a handling characteristic?


----------



## Allez Rouge (Jan 1, 1970)

Mr_Snips2 said:


> Also, a compact geometry doesnt help.


I don't understand this comment. How does compact geometry -- meaning a sloped top tube-- affect toe overlap?


----------



## danl1 (Jul 23, 2005)

Fixing the head tube angle to simplify the discussion, the BB drop and the TT length (frame reach really, but no point in going there) determine the overlap. TT length is possibly the most important measure for frame fit, so to suggest a change there to avoid overlap is to give up proper fit to 'fix' a non-problem. That leaves BB drop to mess with.

On a touring or casual bike, a low BB is beneficial for both comfort and handling. On a race bike, a high BB improves cornering clearance and (in conjunction with other parameters) improves handling as that need dictates, but increases the chance of overlap - which doesn't matter at all to a fast mover.

One doesn't handle 'better' than another (given proper fit and construction), though they will handle quite a bit differently.


----------



## Kerry Irons (Feb 25, 2002)

*Shoe size?*



Fredrico said:


> If my bike with no overlap handles better than the one with overlap, I have good reason to feel at least skeptical.
> 
> C'mon, Kerry, you can do better than simply appeal to authority. What would you be giving up by throwing the front wheel a half inch further out in front? Too much weight then over the rear wheel? Move it back a little, lengthen the chainstays, as Klein has been doing for years on his "Quantum"? If the front wheel is so close as to have overlap, isn't there too much rider weight over the front wheel, making handling skitterish, especially on descents? What is the value of such a handling characteristic?


Have you ever considered that shoe size has a significant impact? Someone on your bike with bigger feet might well have their toe touching the front tire. Now your bike that solves the problem, doesn't solve the problem. You can complain all you want about the handling and deficiencies of bikes where there is toe overlap, but my succession of three bikes all handled just fine, all had toe overlap, and I can't remember toe overlap being any kind of problem when riding the bike.

Appeal to authority is a perfectly rational thing in this case, where we have a huge number of excellent bikes that have toe overlap, and we have you telling us that the designers of those bikes are all dolts.


----------



## Fredrico (Jun 15, 2002)

*If I may make a value judgement:*



danl1 said:


> TT length is possibly the most important measure for frame fit, so to suggest a change there to avoid overlap is to give up proper fit to 'fix' a non-problem.


So now we have a basis for discussion: TT length, or fore-aft balance, is "the most important measure for frame fit." Why? Because no bike will handle very well with the center of gravity too far forward or too far back. But how does one determine the ideal reach for a given rider? Triathletes, steering with their elbows require a very short reach, and shallow headtube angle to put the front wheel forward for balance and stability. They would also probably benefit from placing torsional loads on a low bb. Road racers would also enjoy low bbs but would be more comfortable stretched out on longer top tubes, coupled to steeper, more responsive steering geometry. In neither case would toe-clip overlap have to be a problem.



> On a race bike, a high BB improves cornering clearance and (in conjunction with other parameters) improves handling as that need dictates, but increases the chance of overlap - which doesn't matter at all to a fast mover.


You refer to "criterium geometry," super short chainstays for fast acceleration, short wheelbases and high bbs for pedal clearance scribing tight turns in parking lots. This has been the bane of high quality light weight American road bikes since the late 70s. Criterium bikes aren't very versatile as road bikes. Their short wheel bases, high bbs and steep steering angles, makes them skitterish and nervous. They're finessed for muscular riding, as if that were the only personality American road bike buyers were looking for. That may very well be true, but it would be hard to tell, because there are so few other options as readily available.

The new "comfort bikes" are an attempt to fill the void of what used to be called "fast touring" road bikes, lightweight racing bikes with lower bbs, slacker angles and maybe even slightly longer wheelbases, intended to be ridden slightly more upright on higher handlebars, but not necessarily less reach--and with no toeclip overlap. Maybe these "comfort bikes" will bring an end to this obsession with high-strung criterium bikes that so dominates the American high-end road bike market.


----------



## zooog (Mar 18, 2002)

I once posted that my calfee that was semi custom was built with no toe overlap. I got jumped on the like monkeys jumping on the banana delivery truck. I was told it was ridiculous to have a bike built with spefics for no toe overlap....hell I didn't even know what toe overlap was. Isn't it sometimes just what happens. I cannot say my calfee handles better than my other bike with toe overlap. Neither is faster or has really any riding difference.


----------



## California L33 (Jan 20, 2006)

TheMasterG said:


> Hi,
> 
> When I'm at 3 and 9 on the pedals, if I turn the front wheel the tire hits the front of my 3 O' Clock shoe, fairly sure this isn't right? What needs to change????
> 
> /G


Patient: Doctor, it hurts when I do this.

Doctor: Don’t do that. 

As others have pointed out, it will only occur when you're making sharp turns at very low speed. Get in the habit of making those turns with one pedal up, one pedal down- left turn, left pedal up; right turn, right pedal up. That'll keep you from dragging a pedal or catching a shoe in any sharp turn situation, regardless of speed or bank. 

(Personally I've had bikes that do it, and don't. I've never had a crash because a pedal caught a shoe.)


----------

