# 75 mm stem pics???



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

Thinking about swapping my s works 100mm stem out for a shorter one. 

Anyone have a pic of their bike running a shorter stem they can share? Im considering a 75mm but the lbs doesnt have one in stock.

Any thoughts or pics?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> Thinking about swapping my s works 100mm stem out for a shorter one.
> 
> Anyone have a pic of their bike running a shorter stem they can share? Im considering a 75mm but the lbs doesnt have one in stock.
> 
> *Any thoughts *or pics?


Is there some fit issue you're experiencing that you think a shorter stem would solve? If so, post specifics (areas of discomfort/ when they occur) and we might be able to offer some other options. 

Generally speaking, the fact that you're considering a 75mm stem might be an indicator that the frame is too large (or more accurately, ETT is too long) for you. Also, a 2.5cm change is pretty large in terms of bike fit, so depending on your specific fit issue (if any), I might suggest first trying a more moderate 90mm length, along with a more angled (up) stem, which will bring the bars back some.


----------



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

Fit is something i have been trying since i bought my bike (7 weeks ago). I bought what i thought was a 52 cm (used)and i still dont know if thats correct or not because it didnt have the size sticker on it. I guess i could take it to the lbs for sizing but my pride keeps getting in the way. My dilemma is i feel like im stretched to far. My arms are almost locked when in the hoods and in my line of sight i can plainly see my front hub. I can move my seat up a ways but i hate the look of that. My knees are in line with my pedals with the seat the way i like it, so my next thought is to get the shorter stem. Then i will consider the zero offset seat post if that doesnt do it. What do you think?


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> Fit is something i have been trying since i bought my bike (7 weeks ago). I bought what i thought was a 52 cm (used)and i still dont know if thats correct or not because it didnt have the size sticker on it. I guess i could take it to the lbs for sizing but my pride keeps getting in the way. My dilemma is i feel like im stretched to far. My arms are almost locked when in the hoods and in my line of sight i can plainly see my front hub. I can move my seat up a ways but i hate the look of that. My knees are in line with my pedals with the seat the way i like it, so my next thought is to get the shorter stem. Then i will consider the zero offset seat post if that doesnt do it. What do you think?


The simplest way to determine frame size is to measure from center of bottom bracket (at the crank bolt) to the top of seat tube (to the clamp). That'll get you close enough to narrow down the frame size from Spec's geo charts for your model.

Re: fitting, based on your description (and in all honesty) I think you should seek assistance from an experienced LBS fitter. Adjusting saddle fore/ aft to correct for reach deficiencies is not the proper method, nor is a zero setback post or the 'line of sight' measurement at the hub you speak of. 

First thing to be determined is if your frame is _sized_ correctly for you, and if it is, _then_ come minor adjustments to _fit_: saddle height, fore/ aft (KOPS +/-), tilt, then reach and drop. Most fitters have the rider test ride, then tweaks (if needed) follow.


----------



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

Just measured from center of crank bolt to top of seat clamp...52. According to spesh the bike should have a 90mm stem but it appears to be between 100-110mm depending on how its supposed to be measured (im assuming center to center).


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> Just measured from center of crank bolt to top of seat clamp...52. According to spesh the bike should have a 90mm stem but it appears to be between 100-110mm depending on how its supposed to be measured (im assuming center to center).


What year/ model bike do you have?


----------



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

2009 roubaix pro


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> 2009 roubaix pro


Unless your measurment of seat tube length is way off, 52cm might explain why your reach is long on that bike. According to Spec's geo chart, the closest measurement of STL is 515mm's... a 56cm frame size.
Specialized Bicycle Components : Roubaix Pro SL Dura-Ace

If you want to double check, measure top tube length (horizontally) running a straight edge (or similar) from top-center of head tube to center of seat post. Placing the bike on a level surface and using a level as a guide will help, because what we think is horizontal isn't always.

To answer the stem measurement question, the correct method is to measure from center of steerer tube to center of bars along the side/ center of the stem. Obviously the bars are attached, so butt the measuring tool against them and add 15.9mm's (1/2 the width of the bars).


----------



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

So if im doing my math right, I should be leaning towards 28mm that I need to make up to get this back to fitting somewhat close? Maybe the 80mm fsa os99 stem? I think that would get me real close.

I hate the fact the guy sold me a "52" but in reality its a 56!!!

I guess thats what you get when buying used!

What do you think pj352??


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> So if im doing my math right, I should be leaning towards 28mm that I need to make up to get this back to fitting somewhat close? Maybe the 80mm fsa os99 stem? I think that would get me real close.
> 
> I hate the fact the guy sold me a "52" but in reality its a 56!!!
> 
> ...


Without knowing (at minimum) your height and_ cycling _inseam, I can't even guess at any of your fit requirements, but if you measured right and know that a 52cm Tarmac is what you need, you're going to be hard pressed to get a good fit out of that frame size (assuming it's a 56). 

JMO, but I'd resell a frame that was two sizes too large rather than fight to make it fit, but that statement is based on very limited info shared here. You'd know better if it's even close in fit.

BTW, it's much more important to focus on reach/ drop requirements when choosing bike geometry, because even if you're close in sizing, saddle height requirements are gemerally easily met.

EDIT: Just an afterthought, but if you purchased this bike through e-bay, you may have some recourse if the seller misrepresented the item.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> *So if im doing my math right, I should be leaning towards 28mm that I need to make up to get this back to fitting somewhat close? Maybe the 80mm fsa os99 stem?* I think that would get me real close.
> 
> I hate the fact the guy sold me a "52" but in reality its a 56!!!
> 
> ...


Another FYI....

Getting fit right isn't as easy as making up the difference in reach. All that will do is move the bars back about 2-3cm's, but the fundamental problem remains, and that's the fact that when a frame is sized incorrectly for a given rider they're not positioned correctly on it, adversely affecting f/r weight distribution, then handling. 

*IF* that's the case here, there is no real fix. Only work arounds and compromises to make it work. Rather than do that, I'd advise you to visit a reputable shop with an experienced fitter to assess the situation.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

jermsmith said:


> So if im doing my math right, I should be leaning towards 28mm that I need to make up to get this back to fitting somewhat close? Maybe the 80mm fsa os99 stem? I think that would get me real close.
> 
> I hate the fact the guy sold me a "52" but in reality its a 56!!!
> 
> ...


 I saw this a lot on Ebay when shopping. One guy tried to sell me a 50 calling it a 54 based on TT length. Problem is these new compact frame designs are just measured differently than the more traditional designs. So another way to tell exactly what you have is to measure the Head Tube and cross reference it in the Specy Geo charts. Head tubes are easy to measure because there is no random "is it Center to Center or Center to Top" measurement.

Also head tube is going to be one of the key factors in considering bar height and / or drop. A 54 F series Felt bike is going to have a 120 / 4.72" Head Tube, where a Roubaix is going to have a 165 / 6.49" head tube. That is going to make a huge diff in reach and bend IMO.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MRM1 said:


> I saw this a lot on Ebay when shopping. One guy tried to sell me a 50 calling it a 54 based on TT length. Problem is these new compact frame designs are just measured differently than the more traditional designs. So another way to tell exactly what you have is to measure the Head Tube and cross reference it in the Specy Geo charts. Head tubes are easy to measure because there is no random "is it Center to Center or Center to Top" measurement.
> 
> Also head tube is going to be one of the key factors in considering bar height and / or drop. A 54 F series Felt bike is going to have a 120 / 4.72" Head Tube, where a Roubaix is going to have a 165 / 6.49" head tube. That is going to make a huge diff in reach and bend IMO.


My experiences are similar on both e-bay and CL. Sometimes sellers just don't know what they're selling, other times they do.

Good suggestion on the HTL measurement. :thumbsup:

Re: the difference in 120 versus 165mm HTL's. I agree that it'll raise the bars ~4.5cm so yes, huge. But given HT angles in the range of 73-74*, with a 110mm -8* stem it'll move the bars ~13mm's closer.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> Re: the difference in 120 versus 165mm HTL's. I agree that it'll raise the bars ~4.5cm so yes, huge. But given HT angles in the range of 73-74*, with a 110mm -8* stem it'll move the bars ~13mm's closer.


I am having my own struggles with my new Giant Advanced Defy 3. Got it yesterday. All indications, geo and shop chats put me on a M frame. I also tried a M / L which one shop tried to push toward because it was what they had, but everything including Giants site said I was a M at 5'8".

I had been riding a Felt Z100 comfort geo 56. I looked at the Geos of both and except for the TT length being 1/2" shorter on the Giant they seemed similar. HT was only 5mm difference, the Giant being 5mm shorter. I get the Giant home to discover I can not get the bars level with the seat (my needed riding setting). Reason? The carbon Giant frame has recessed headset races, the Felts were press in. So this meant the Felt had an additional 1/2" + of "head tube" length. Not much I can do now. May have been better with the M / L as it would seem it would have been about exactly the same as my Felt. So even in the best of situations, and being pre-fit by a shop, fit is still tricky.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MRM1 said:


> I am having my own struggles with my new Giant Advanced Defy 3. Got it yesterday. All indications, geo and shop chats put me on a M frame. I also tried a M / L which one shop tried to push toward because it was what they had, but everything including Giants site said I was a M at 5'8".
> 
> I had been riding a Felt Z100 comfort geo 56. I looked at the Geos of both and except for the TT length being 1/2" shorter on the Giant they seemed similar. HT was only 5mm difference, the Giant being 5mm shorter. I get the Giant home to discover I can not get the bars level with the seat (my needed riding setting). Reason? The carbon Giant frame has recessed headset races, the Felts were press in. So this meant the Felt had an additional 1/2" + of "head tube" length. Not much I can do now. May have been better with the M / L as it would seem it would have been about exactly the same as my Felt. So even in the best of situations, and being pre-fit by a shop, fit is still tricky.


Sorry to hear about your troubles. I've come to believe that some geo just works for a given rider, while others don't. And it's the details like you describe that make it so.

I certainly don't know enough to second guess you on this, but it might be buyer's remorse playing a role in your thinking the larger size would be better, because with HTL the ETT also grows, and depending on your reach requirements it could put you in a similar situation as seems to be the case with the OP. 

Generally, I'm a firm believer in LBS's and think the reputable guys provide valuable services, but IME it takes a really reputable LBS (with a knowledgable fitter) to (first) recognize a riders specific fit requirements, (second) when it's the case, tell them they don't carry a make/ model that'll get them an optimum fit.

If it's a possibility, have you considered returning the bike and looking at other makes models?


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> Sorry to hear about your troubles. I've come to believe that some geo just works for a given rider, while others don't. And it's the details like you describe that make it so.
> 
> I certainly don't know enough to second guess you on this, but it might be buyer's remorse playing a role in your thinking the larger size would be better, because with HTL the ETT also grows, and depending on your reach requirements it could put you in a similar situation as seems to be the case with the OP.
> 
> ...


 I think you are correct about the stem length and reach and how it effects how bent over a rider is. I just swapped my stems from bike to bike. Felt had an +/- 8/16 four position 90mm stem and the Giant had an +/- 8 100mm. putting the shorter stem on the Giant and in full up right position at 16* I still cannot get the bar to seat height of the old felt ... BUT ... the reach is about 3/4 or more inch shorter ... thus the position is more upright. The Giant now actually feels more upright in spite of the fact the bars are physically 1/2 to 3/4" lower when side by side..

I think my biggest issue in the 30 mile ride last night on the new Giant after thinking about it is that the Comfort Felt Z100 also had brake levers at the flats of the bar top as well as at the shifters. Thus I could ride off the hoods and back on the flats and still brake. But this led to bad habits. Last night I spent most of my time on the hoods ... a position I was not use to spending most of the 1.5 hrs in. So switching from a 100 mm to a 90mm stem with a 16* instead of 8* rise will help, And becoming more confident in the bike and where the brakes now are will make it even better.

Heading out now for 10 miles. But yes ... it is all in the fit. And thankfully, my fit process is just beginning. I am glad I bought from a great LBS who will do a complete fit next week once I get some miles on the bike.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

Pics are up 
http://forums.roadbikereview.com/3549677-post32.html


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MRM1 said:


> Pics are up
> http://forums.roadbikereview.com/3549677-post32.html


Nice looking bike. Congrats, and good luck!!


----------



## vaetuning (Oct 1, 2009)

*Need help with buying stem*

Hi

I'm not trying to steal the thread, but I desperately need help!!

Can any body in the USA buy me the below stem in red in 120mm??

Specialized
S-Works Pro-Set Multi-Position Stem (12-degree)

Follow the below link to see the stem.

http://kozy.com/product/specialized-s-works-pro-set-multi-position-stem-12-d
egree-77575-1.htm

I can not buy this stem in Europe, and it would compliment my red / white SL3 Roubaix

I'll pay for your trouble, and obviously for the stem and the freight to Denmark!!

Please somebody - help me!!

Thanks in advance

Mads


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

vaetuning said:


> Hi
> 
> I'm not trying to steal the thread, but I desperately need help!!
> 
> ...


Perhaps post this in a new thread


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

Your link doesn't work as posted. 

This will:
Specialized S-Works Pro-Set Multi-Position Stem (12-degree) - Kozy's Chicago Bike Shops | Chicago Bike Stores, Bicycles, Cycling, Bike Repair


----------



## digibud (Oct 26, 2010)

I would suggest just buying a stem and trying it. I put a 75 on my Roubaix. The smaller frame made for a better TT length but I'm an older rider and some physical limitations made it harder for me to deal with the lower handlebars on a smaller frame. I went with a larger frame and a shorter stem and it fits just great this way. My wife did similarly and loves her fit. If I were 40 years younger I would have definitely bought a smaller frame. Chose a stem based on the ride, not the looks.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

digibud said:


> I would suggest just buying a stem and trying it. I put a 75 on my Roubaix. The smaller frame made for a better TT length but I'm an older rider and some physical limitations made it harder for me to deal with the lower handlebars on a smaller frame. I went with a larger frame and a shorter stem and it fits just great this way. My wife did similarly and loves her fit. If I were 40 years younger I would have definitely bought a smaller frame. Chose a stem based on the ride, not the looks.


yes i am still wondering that myself. Had I gotten the M/L instead of the M I would have been too long, BUT would have gotten the taller head tube and thus higher bar height that I am at this point unable to achieve. Problem is, if I do ever get over this shoulder pain, I would want the longer stem again, and then would have a problem dealing with the top tube. Fitting a bike does seem to have relative trade offs involved.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MRM1 said:


> yes i am still wondering that myself. Had I gotten the M/L instead of the M I would have been too long, BUT would have gotten the taller head tube and thus higher bar height that I am at this point unable to achieve. Problem is, if I do ever get over this shoulder pain, I would want the longer stem again, and then would have a problem dealing with the top tube. *Fitting a bike does seem to have relative trade offs involved.*


IME fit is all about compromises, and the smaller the compromises, the better the overall fit is apt to be. 

That's why it's important for LBS's to recognize that just getting sizing right isn't enough. The bikes geo and riders proportions have to be fairly well matched, or it's best to move on to another brand/ model. 

I've ridden bikes that fit me fine, but didn't fit me really well. Long term and on longer rides, that matters.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

I did 62 miles on Saturdays group ride and my should pretty much burned the last half. Seems I have too much weight on my arms. But I cant say this is uncommon for me. My past bike that had the bars higher than the seat did this, but reach was farther. And my race Mt bike which has them level does it too. I am beginning to think my issue is reach more than drop.

As to fit, I feel pretty confident in my LBS's fitter. He did a good job, especially in generalities ... I am just not typical. This is the main reason I walked away from the first shop who tried to get me on a M/L giant, when I was sized for a M ... even though he was going to charge me $150 less for the bike ... but no fitting involved.

But more important, my shoulder pain is a multi-sport issue, So I do not think the bike fit is the issue as much as one bike set up may make it more tolerable than another. But cycling is not the cause, just one of many irritations


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MRM1 said:


> I did 62 miles on Saturdays group ride and my should pretty much burned the last half. Seems I have too much weight on my arms. But I cant say this is uncommon for me. My past bike that had the bars higher than the seat did this, but reach was farther. And my race Mt bike which has them level does it too. I am beginning to think my issue is reach more than drop.
> 
> As to fit, I feel pretty confident in my LBS's fitter. He did a good job, especially in generalities ... I am just not typical. This is the main reason I walked away from the first shop who tried to get me on a M/L giant, when I was sized for a M ... even though he was going to charge me $150 less for the bike ... but no fitting involved.
> 
> But more important, my shoulder pain is a multi-sport issue, So I do not think the bike fit is the issue as much as one bike set up may make it more tolerable than another. But cycling is not the cause, just one of many irritations


Your anatomical issues aside, and talking strictly 'best practices', shoulder pain is an indication of improper reach. Whether you scoot forward in the saddle (excessive reach) or back (cramped cockpit) will give a clue to which it might be. 

Just as a FYI, arm/ hand numbness usually indicates excessive frontal weight, and requires leveling and rearward saddle adjustments to move the rider back. You mentioned too much weight on your hands, but if you don't experience numbness, this probably doesn't apply to you.

Physical issues can play havoc with even the most experienced fitters, so all things considered, yours is probably doing you right. Still, if you're serious about sticking with cycling, it might be worth your while to consider a pro fit at some point in the future. Beats riding in discomfort, IMO.


----------



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

Thought I would give you all a follow up with my stem situation (origina poster).

I recently installed a 6 degree 80 mm stem and used the negative angle for a lower set up. Immediately I felt more comfortable with the shorter reach, I did move the bars lower by moving a spacer above the stem as well and my hands are not getting near as much numbness. 

I rode 42 miles the other day, and during the ride I noticed with my elbows closer to my body, I was able to relax my shoulders as well. Overall, i think this move was something that I had to do and it seems to be working.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

jermsmith said:


> Thought I would give you all a follow up with my stem situation (origina poster).
> 
> I recently installed a 6 degree 80 mm stem and used the negative angle for a lower set up. Immediately I felt more comfortable with the shorter reach, I did move the bars lower by moving a spacer above the stem as well and my hands are not getting near as much numbness.
> 
> I rode 42 miles the other day, and during the ride I noticed with my elbows closer to my body, I was able to relax my shoulders as well. Overall, i think this move was something that I had to do and it seems to be working.


Sounds like your initial thoughts to go with a shorter stem were on track, so I'm glad it worked out for you.

I suspect that if an 80mm stem got your reach right, maybe the frame wasn't as large as we were thinking? 56cm, if memory serves...


----------



## jermsmith (Jul 30, 2011)

Definitely a 56. If i feel like i want to get my set up a bit more racey, i could always get some shorter cranks as well which would allow me to raise the saddle.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> Your anatomical issues aside, and talking strictly 'best practices', shoulder pain is an indication of improper reach. Whether you scoot forward in the saddle (excessive reach) or back (cramped cockpit) will give a clue to which it might be.
> 
> Just as a FYI, arm/ hand numbness usually indicates excessive frontal weight, and requires leveling and rearward saddle adjustments to move the rider back. You mentioned too much weight on your hands, but if you don't experience numbness, this probably doesn't apply to you.
> 
> Physical issues can play havoc with even the most experienced fitters, so all things considered, yours is probably doing you right. Still, if you're serious about sticking with cycling, it might be worth your while to consider a pro fit at some point in the future. Beats riding in discomfort, IMO.


Thanks so much for you insight. You are confirming what I am feeling. I do find myself scooting back in the saddle as I have frequently slid forward. I am thinking it is saddle tilt ... at least as a start point. I also have numbness, mostly in my left hand. I am thinking I will give a 70mm 25^ rise stem in the next week.

Seems like once or twice a year, the University of Florida offers a full lab fit for $100 to our club. I may watch for this and get signed up next time it comes around.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

MRM1 said:


> Thanks so much for you insight. You are confirming what I am feeling. I do find myself scooting back in the saddle as I have frequently slid forward. I am thinking it is saddle tilt ... at least as a start point. I also have numbness, mostly in my left hand. I am thinking I will give a 70mm 25^ rise stem in the next week.
> 
> Seems like once or twice a year, the University of Florida offers a full lab fit for $100 to our club. I may watch for this and get signed up next time it comes around.


A couple of thoughts...

I always say there's more gray than black and white when it comes to bike fit, meaning that conventional wisdom or what generally (or likely) will work for one may not work for another because of differences in anatomies, preferences, riding styles (among other factors). Add to that the fact that I've never even seen you on a bike and the result is that I offer my best guesses.

That said, there can be one or more reasons why you're finding yourself scooting back in the saddle. I agree that the place to start would be to level the saddle. But if it's already level, tilt the tip up _slightly_, but make small adjustments, slowly because you don't want to shift saddle weight forward of the sit bones. This might also explain the numbness you're experiencing, so I'd also recheck KOPS and keep it slightly behind pedal spindle.

JMO, but if you're sized correctly, I think going with a 70mm stem is on the short side. Most people resorting to such lengths generally do so to compensate for excessive reach because they've been fitted to a too large frame. Since you've just recently purchased a new bike, I hope that's not the case here.

Whatever changes you decide to make, I suggest keeping them small and making one at a time. Otherwise, you run the risk of not only losing track of what you did, but the results of any one will be unknown.

Re: the Universities fitting, as long as it's done by an experienced fitter, I think it's a good idea. If OTOH it's done by coaches, I suggest having it done at a reputable LBS instead.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

PJ352 said:


> A couple of thoughts...
> 
> I always say there's more gray than black and white when it comes to bike fit, meaning that conventional wisdom or what generally (or likely) will work for one may not work for another because of differences in anatomies, preferences, riding styles (among other factors). Add to that the fact that I've never even seen you on a bike and the result is that I offer my best guesses.


I could get you some pics, but the fitter I worked with (who claims he has done well over 400 fits and I have no reason to doubt him - he is well respected in the local cycling community), He says I look "good" on the bike as it is set up now. Not to far forward and balanced. He also liked my peddle stroke, but said my cadence was a little slow.



PJ352 said:


> That said, there can be one or more reasons why you're finding yourself scooting back in the saddle. I agree that the place to start would be to level the saddle.


It is presently tilted slightly "nose down". I use this "system" pictured below and to go level I have to lift the level about 1/8th of an inch. Good news, The Giant has a very tunable seat post.



PJ352 said:


> I'd also recheck KOPS and keep it slightly behind pedal spindle.


Shop did the KOPS. Right now it is about spot on, or maybe a touch forward. But I have no knee pain, etc. I had to lift the saddle up an 1/8th of an inch from the fit because I was getting hip joint cramps. I seem to have long legs and a short torso. 33" Wrench Science style inseam (no shoes/feet 8" apart/book in crotch like a saddle)



PJ352 said:


> JMO, but if you're sized correctly, I think going with a 70mm stem is on the short side. Most people resorting to such lengths generally do so to compensate for excessive reach because they've been fitted to a too large frame.


I feel the size is right, based on my height of 5'8.5" and Giant's fit chart, Shop pre-fit, and the geo of my previous bike. I was on a Z100 56" Felt. Felt really stretched out on the 560mm top tube. Now my Top tube is 545mm. But I cannot get the seat up as high or level with the bars due to Head Tube being shorter on the new bike. (Giant Defy Advanced 3 medium). Pic below shows the highest I can get the bars for my needed seat height - about an inch lower than the seat. See pics below. Stem on there now is a 90mm Specialized stem with a 21* rise.

Thanks again for the feed back. I did not expect you to comment so thoroughly. The sparing is helpful.


----------



## PJ352 (Dec 5, 2007)

I think you misunderstood my comment re: seeing you on the bike. I was actually saying that what I've offered is only based on your input and 'generally' works given the fit issues you describe. OTOH, your fitter has seen you and worked with you one on one, so s/he's the one that (along with your input) should be the driving force, not me. 

That said, JMO's, but two things I'd change is 1) level your saddle and 2) move KOPS slightly behind pedal spindle. Those two adjustments would tend to move your weight rearward slightly and (hopefully) alleviate (or at least minimize) both numbness and the sliding forward. But IMO you should discuss this with your fitter beforehand.

Re: your bikes geo, I'm not trying to be a defeatist, but IMO your set up tells me that this bike isn't the ideal match for your anatomy. Seems to me that you need a taller HT and _possibly_ a shorter effective top tube. As an aside, I can't imagine how the Felt fit you considering you're now running a 90mm stem on a bike with a 1.5cm shorter ETT. There's more to calculating reach than just that measurement, but still.... 

Anyway, if I'm correct, by necessity your fitter is put in the position of making compromises that wouldn't normally have to be made. A pro fit might help, but there's a point where (given this bikes geo and your anatomy) the best fit may never be the optimal fit.


----------



## MRM1 (Sep 13, 2008)

Was not trying to pit you against the fitter. Sorry if it seemed this way.

Yeah I know, Finding the right size for me is a pain ...  But this HT was the largest one I could find in this size top Top Tube. If I would have went with a M/L Giant instead of the M the frames geo would have been almost exactly like the Felt, A tall HT but long TT. This is why I went with the M. And this Giant at this size TT has tallest HT I could find. So it seemed to be a system of trade offs: 

And you are correct, the Felt did NOT fit well ... at all. 

Will take your input and make changes one at a time and see how it goes. Going back to the shop on Thursday to do some more tweaking with the fitter.


----------

