Can't we have a non personal discussion here!

[ergott]

I have been learning a lot from the posts on the previous threads in between the other nonsence posted there.

fitters - whatever that term implies - usually are clueless
when it comes to translating the contact points into a working
relationship between it (the static position) and the design of
the bicycle.


This post really got me thinking. I admit that I don't know this aspect of the business as others, but I have to ask. Why is it that every Serotta fit person sends the entire build specs to Serotta instead of the contact points only? Shouldn't there be fewer people making the decisions on how to accomodate the contact points of a particular rider? Wouldn't Serotta have more control over the build this way? I have heard many stories about people getting fitted by two different people and getting very different results. Just because someone who is a highly qualified fitter doesn't necessarily mean they can design a frame. Why not take that aspect out of the fitters' hands so there can be more consistant results?

[Argos]

ergott,

Excellent post. I think that sometimes people have certain things in mind, both fitter and customer.

A solution like yours is nice, and allows for the builders to design the bike, set the seatpost angle, etc, based on contact points.

Perhaps the other numbers, aside from contact points, could/should be looked at as a way for the builder to interpret what was happening at the fit.

Now instead of having 3 contact points, a builder can have those important X and Y points, and as well be able to see what the stem, TT, etc were set at. Kind of giving a point of reference.

If anything ever came in that was totally whack, someone like Kelly could say, I've got your contact points, but your bike is.......[unstable, weird. wacky, brokeback]....... because of........

Then, knowing the contact points and the desired components he can move the frame around in order to better balance/create the draft.

This is kinda how it is done now, 'cept I do not know how they handle something that is whacked, cause I, myself have never sent in something too far from a normal parameter.

[92degrees]

This is a subject that always gets my attention. My Serotta was my first custom bike. IMO I'm a weird fit. I'm 5'3" with a long torso and 3 blown cervical discs. I wanted a bike that fit well, rode well, and looked good. I tried to do biz with Serotta, Seven, and IF. The Serotta fit process made me the most comfortable.

I was concerned about the bike looking "right," particularly because I spend time here and that made me sensitive to the possibility that the bike may not look "right." Admittedly, I sometimes don't see design flaws that seem obvious to others here -- more reason to be concerned.

Still, my understanding was that my fitter sent "the fit" to Serotta and then Kelly sent the "sign off" back. That form lists Kelly as the author. I have both forms here. They are not the same. Kelly made some suggestions it would seem?

[Smiley]

Eric and others why does everybody assume that every fit done by a fitter is screwed up or flawed. I have sent at least 3-4 fit sheets to Sacha White for his clients residing on the east coast and his feedback to me was that all his builds we just spot on with very satified clients . Why does everybody here just assume we're all STUPID and working in a void with Serotta. How many custom bikes get built by Serotta every year and as a percentage how many do you think are flawed ( for lack of a better word ). How many fits done by a telephone query by Seven are deemed flawed. This whole notion that FIT is a dynamic thing just does not seem to settle in most peoples mind. I know I fit Sandy on his new Ottrott NOT because his old CSI fit was flawed but because he progressed beyond his fit on the CSI. He knows he can correct his CSI fit but he won't accept a 105 degree stem rise. So a proper fit should take into consideration that we'll all be different down the road depending on how we chose to work on our core defficencies. Geez serotta has as good if not the best system on the market. They train and re-check fitters based on feedback recieved by their clients and as someone has said before CHECK the fitter refrences and make sure he's done his share of fits. I am lucky to have been doing this for over 10 years now. Done some big bikes ( Too Tall ) and done some really small ones. Its a very good system so why knock it.

[Ray]

Eric and others why does everybody assume that every fit done by a fitter is screwed up or flawed.
Smiley,

I should probably stay out of it, but I don't think anyone was assuming or stating that every fit done by a fitter is flawed. Just that SOME are. Obviously the vast majority of Serotta owners on this board and probably elsewhere (at least based on those I've talked to) are really really really happy with their Serottas. But the large number of fitters across the country, even though certified, makes it tough from a quality control standpoint. One remedy to that is the approach that some of the custom builders who hang out here have taken - to remain small and just do the number of fits and builds you can personally handle. Serotta has obviously made a decision to be bigger than that and, thus, to depend on a number of fitters around the country. Most of whom are probably great, but some of whom undoubtedly aren't.

The more humans you involve in any process, the more potential for human error, no?

-Ray

[ergott]

Eric and others why does everybody assume that every fit done by a fitter is screwed up or flawed. I have sent at least 3-4 fit sheets to Sacha White for his clients residing on the east coast and his feedback to me was that all his builds we just spot on with very satified clients . Why does everybody here just assume we're all STUPID and working in a void with Serotta. How many custom bikes get built by Serotta every year and as a percentage how many do you think are flawed ( for lack of a better word ). How many fits done by a telephone query by Seven are deemed flawed. This whole notion that FIT is a dynamic thing just does not seem to settle in most peoples mind. I know I fit Sandy on his new Ottrott NOT because his old CSI fit was flawed but because he progressed beyond his fit on the CSI. He knows he can correct his CSI fit but he won't accept a 105 degree stem rise. So a proper fit should take into consideration that we'll all be different down the road depending on how we chose to work on our core defficencies. Geez serotta has as good if not the best system on the market. They train and re-check fitters based on feedback recieved by their clients and as someone has said before CHECK the fitter refrences and make sure he's done his share of fits. I am lucky to have been doing this for over 10 years now. Done some big bikes ( Too Tall ) and done some really small ones. Its a very good system so why knock it.


I don't necessarily believe that the fit is flawed. I believe that the frame designs can be more standardized if fewer people were designing the frames. There would more consistancy in the results produced from similar contact point measurements. A customer could go to any Serotta dealer and get the same frame results provided that the contact points measure up the same. I hope it is understood that I'm not trying to knock the system, I am making an observation and stating my opinion in this matter.

[ergott]

Eric and others why does everybody assume that every fit done by a fitter is screwed up or flawed. I have sent at least 3-4 fit sheets to Sacha White for his clients residing on the east coast and his feedback to me was that all his builds we just spot on with very satified clients . Why does everybody here just assume we're all STUPID and working in a void with Serotta. How many custom bikes get built by Serotta every year and as a percentage how many do you think are flawed ( for lack of a better word ). How many fits done by a telephone query by Seven are deemed flawed. This whole notion that FIT is a dynamic thing just does not seem to settle in most peoples mind. I know I fit Sandy on his new Ottrott NOT because his old CSI fit was flawed but because he progressed beyond his fit on the CSI. He knows he can correct his CSI fit but he won't accept a 105 degree stem rise. So a proper fit should take into consideration that we'll all be different down the road depending on how we chose to work on our core defficencies. Geez serotta has as good if not the best system on the market. They train and re-check fitters based on feedback recieved by their clients and as someone has said before CHECK the fitter refrences and make sure he's done his share of fits. I am lucky to have been doing this for over 10 years now. Done some big bikes ( Too Tall ) and done some really small ones. Its a very good system so why knock it.

My idea would let fitters do what they do best, fit. It would also let Serotta do what they do best, design frames.

[Dave]

Contact points involve the seat post design (amount of setback) the handlebar reach, brand of shift/brake lever, pedal type and stem length/angle. Too many variables with no answers.

Better to fit a person with the bars, saddle, seapost, pedals and stem the they intend to use; then their shouldn't be any surprises, like how come I need 4cm of spacer under my stem (someone specified a too short head tube).

The thing theat eludes me is how a fitter knows that the dimensions that he specifies will produce a comfortable and powerful position, unless there's at least some feedback from the customer on their previous position. Riding fro a few minutes on a trainer won't guarantee the results are good after several hours of riding.

If I got a custm fit, I doubt the fitter would place my knee 1cm behind the pedal spindle, get the saddle height exactly where I like it and include a 9cm drop from the saddle to the bars on a 51cm c-c frame.

[Climb01742]

Eric and others why does everybody assume that every fit done by a fitter is screwed up or flawed. I have sent at least 3-4 fit sheets to Sacha White for his clients residing on the east coast and his feedback to me was that all his builds we just spot on with very satified clients . Why does everybody here just assume we're all STUPID and working in a void with Serotta. How many custom bikes get built by Serotta every year and as a percentage how many do you think are flawed ( for lack of a better word ). How many fits done by a telephone query by Seven are deemed flawed. This whole notion that FIT is a dynamic thing just does not seem to settle in most peoples mind. I know I fit Sandy on his new Ottrott NOT because his old CSI fit was flawed but because he progressed beyond his fit on the CSI. He knows he can correct his CSI fit but he won't accept a 105 degree stem rise. So a proper fit should take into consideration that we'll all be different down the road depending on how we chose to work on our core defficencies. Geez serotta has as good if not the best system on the market. They train and re-check fitters based on feedback recieved by their clients and as someone has said before CHECK the fitter refrences and make sure he's done his share of fits. I am lucky to have been doing this for over 10 years now. Done some big bikes ( Too Tall ) and done some really small ones. Its a very good system so why knock it.

smiley, the best fit advice i've ever gotten has come from a serotta fitter. unfortunately, what i consider some of the worst fit advice i've ever gotten has also come from serotta fitters. that poses a problem, i think. on the other hand, every serotta frame i've owned -- four so far -- has been beautifully made, beautifully painted, and every conversation i've had with a serotta employee about those bikes has been a great conversation--informative, intelligent, patient, and just plain fun. so in my experience, what happens at the factory -- be it a bike or human interaction -- has been of the highest caliber. whereas my experiences with serotta fitters has been decidely mixed. isn't that a problem?

[ergott]

Contact points involve the seat post design (amount of setback) the handlebar reach, brand of shift/brake lever, pedal type and stem length/angle. Too many variables with no answers.

Better to fit a person with the bars, saddle, seapost, pedals and stem the they intend to use; then their shouldn't be any surprises, like how come I need 4cm of spacer under my stem (someone specified a too short head tube).

The thing theat eludes me is how a fitter knows that the dimensions that he specifies will produce a comfortable and powerful position, unless there's at least some feedback from the customer on their previous position. Riding fro a few minutes on a trainer won't guarantee the results are good after several hours of riding.

If I got a custm fit, I doubt the fitter would place my knee 1cm behind the pedal spindle, get the saddle height exactly where I like it and include a 9cm drop from the saddle to the bars on a 51cm c-c frame.


Serotta's fit sheet does take into account the parts to be used in the build. The designer could easily take this into consideration.

[Serotta PETE]

The primary point of contact is between the LBS fitter and the customer. The fitter than sends the sheet into SEROTTA (most times Kelly) for confirmation and finalization. Those are the only points of contact.

It would be very difficult to cut that interface down any further. Many of us talk about what is a "good looking" bike. This has to do with sloper vs non sloper, stack height, angled stem, and to a lesser degree angles.

While I am not a fitter most of these items are based on the communications between fitter and customer. The fitter and cusomer must have good communications between them as to requirements for function, looks, etc,,,,, If this communications is lacking then we have the potential for disappointment. I will bet, that great bottle of red that I have, that Kelly does not determine the stem size, angle of stem, or height of seat post - - It is the on-site fitter. Additionally the fitter and cutomer determine sloping vs non-sloping.

A good friend of mine just recently bought a "travel" bike. This friend is very tall but it is mostly legs. He was set on getting a traditional top tube - -the fitter laid out pluses and non pluses AND then made his recommendation. Since both would have worked.

Since we have gone to non-threaded top tubes - things have become more
difficult for some.

Bob loves the looks and the ride of the Kelly/Mike (yep CYCLESPORT) designed bike.

The constant variable in fitting is always the newer riders and newer fitters. This is where the value of folks like Kelly really pay off.

Unfortunately this value can only be realized to its fullest if the customer and fitter have that communications that can quanitfy requirements both in function and looks.

Just my 2 cents..........................PETE


PETE

[ergott]

The primary point of contact is between the LBS fitter and the customer. The fitter than sends the sheet into SEROTTA (most times Kelly) for confirmation and finalization. Those are the only points of contact.

It would be very difficult to cut that interface down any further. Many of us talk about what is a "good looking" bike. This has to do with sloper vs non sloper, stack height, angled stem, and to a lesser degree angles.

While I am not a fitter most of these items are based on the communications between fitter and customer. The fitter and cusomer must have good communications between them as to requirements for function, looks, etc,,,,, If this communications is lacking then we have the potential for disappointment. I will bet, that great bottle of red that I have, that Kelly does not determine the stem size, angle of stem, or height of seat post - - It is the on-site fitter. Additionally the fitter and cutomer determine sloping vs non-sloping.

A good friend of mine just recently bought a "travel" bike. This friend is very tall but it is mostly legs. He was set on getting a traditional top tube - -the fitter laid out pluses and non pluses AND then made his recommendation. Since both would have worked.

Since we have gone to non-threaded top tubes - things have become more
difficult for some.

Bob loves the looks and the ride of the Kelly/Mike (yep CYCLESPORT) designed bike.

The constant variable in fitting is always the newer riders and newer fitters. This is where the value of folks like Kelly really pay off.

Unfortunately this value can only be realized to its fullest if the customer and fitter have that communications that can quanitfy requirements both in function and looks.

Just my 2 cents..........................PETE


PETE


Thanks for the detailed explanation. What sort of education does the fitter get on angles and how tubesets and geometry effect riding characteristics? Do fitters really get a major education on frame design? It seems that it takes master frame builders years of dedicated study to learn how to design frames that ride and handle well. The folks at Serotta have been designing frames and have it down. Why not let them do the design based on the information supplied by their fitters?

[Smiley]

Its really easy to critique what other people do , I bet most here have never taken responsibility for a bike fit / design and been responsible to see that said client leaves the shop or studio absolutely satified with his/her bike purchase. If you all don't think that slope and spacer count as well as standover and stem angle are not a BIG part of a fit discussion then your not in my sessions or other good fitters I know. Additionally we go over many bar reach and drop combo's as well as anatomic and round bend. Saddles don't get me started on saddles , use a Brooks and you better have a off-set post to use , use a skinny racing saddle and its non off-set . So yes all these contact points you all speak of are set with the fit sheet sent to Serotta. So you can duplicate these contact ponts from size cycle to bike as long as the saddle , bars and cranks are set to spec as used during the fitting .

[Too Tall]

Ever hear of Bill Boston?

[mwos]

I just had a Serotta fitting done at Bike Garage in Boulder. Keep in mind that my current bike had been refitted by a Serotta fitter in Cincinnati and I'm very happy with the fit. I've got about 8,000 miles on it since the refit. Also, since I've been riding the trainer alot lately I'm comfortable on it.

We used my saddle and pedals. The handlebars were not mine but similiar. They were the correct width and had Campy Hoods. I do not know what stem I will use on the new bike as the current stem was put on to fix the problem of my handlebars being to low, so stem length and rise is a moot issue as far as I'm concerned. The crankarms were adjustable so we could get the correct length.

Chris let me warmup for approximately 1/2 or so it seemed before he did any adjusting. The only measurements he took were inseam and shoulder width. The rest of the fitting he did by readjusting stem length, handlebar and saddle height. He adjusted until he had me in what he called "the perfect position". He said he usually has the client pedal harder then recheck but my position was so perfect he felt that it was not necessary. I didn't feel odd or uncomfortable in the position he put me in, just very natural.

The fitcycle was hooked up to and controlled by a computer.

Like 92 degrees I'm a small rider, stock frames don't fit me well.

I don't know if any measurements changed between the fitcycle and my current setup. I didn't ask because I suspect that the frame is going to be entirely different.

When I get the specs. I will post them. I have a feeling my new bike will be considered "ugly" to many of you. It will be interesting to see how my end product compares to the comments that many of you have about fitting.

Kathi

[93legendti]

Eric and others why does everybody assume that every fit done by a fitter is screwed up or flawed. I have sent at least 3-4 fit sheets to Sacha White for his clients residing on the east coast and his feedback to me was that all his builds we just spot on with very satified clients . Why does everybody here just assume we're all STUPID and working in a void with Serotta. How many custom bikes get built by Serotta every year and as a percentage how many do you think are flawed ( for lack of a better word ). How many fits done by a telephone query by Seven are deemed flawed. This whole notion that FIT is a dynamic thing just does not seem to settle in most peoples mind. I know I fit Sandy on his new Ottrott NOT because his old CSI fit was flawed but because he progressed beyond his fit on the CSI. He knows he can correct his CSI fit but he won't accept a 105 degree stem rise. So a proper fit should take into consideration that we'll all be different down the road depending on how we chose to work on our core defficencies. Geez serotta has as good if not the best system on the market. They train and re-check fitters based on feedback recieved by their clients and as someone has said before CHECK the fitter refrences and make sure he's done his share of fits. I am lucky to have been doing this for over 10 years now. Done some big bikes ( Too Tall ) and done some really small ones. Its a very good system so why knock it.

Well said. I hear ya. I think what you are reacting to are a few "voices" that are often repeated here and repeated strongly. One by a dealer that does not sell Serotta, one by a rival bicycle company and another by a poster who does not own a Serotta. Would they say these things in person rather than benefit from the Web's impersonal aspects? Who knows.

Repeating something often does not make it right, nor does stating something loudly or with the word "stupid" attached make it right. The vast majority here, well over 90% I'd say, are VERY satisfied Serotta owners. How many Forumites own more than one Serotta? (see the Forum Roll Call thread) I just bought my 6th last week. In our group, the most common bicycle is a Serotta. These are long time riders, racers and ex-racers, who ride over 6,000 miles a year and have been doing so for the last 15-20 years. Riding with this group for 10 years, 4-5 days a week, I have NEVER heard any of them complain about their fit, fitter (they bought from diffrent stores), slope, spacers, stem length, turning ability over 24mph, aesthetics, or any of the usual complaints one can hear around here every so often.

Everyone here knows, or should know, that Serotta knows what it is doing. My 1993 Legend still rides amazingly well--so well that when I had Carl Strong build me a bike 2 years ago, I asked him to use my Legend as a benchmark. 'Nuff said.

[Climb01742]

93legend, we all see things differently, and i could be mistaken, but i don't see the criticism of some fitters as a criticism of serotta. to the contary, as most posters have said positive things about serotta. it seems a fair topic of discussion because over the years, i think a fair number of owners have voiced less than perfect experiences with fitters. no system involving human beings can be perfect, and i'm not holding serotta to an impossible standard. but i do think it's possible to be a serotta fan and owner, but still question part of the process.

and smiley, given that i know you somewhat, i'd guess that your customer satisfaction rate is well over 90% and probably close to 100%. i don't believe any of this debate is aimed your way.

[e-RICHIE]

<snipped>Saddles don't get me started on saddles<cut>use a skinny racing saddle and its non off-set .

why?

[Dave]

From ergott: "Serotta's fit sheet does take into account the parts to be used in the build. The designer could easily take this into consideration."
__________________


I'd like to know how a frame builder can keep track of the many dozens of
saddle designs, where the rails are and how different people butts will fit them.

Likewise, they not only know the reach of every brand and model of handlebar, they also know how high and how far out the brake/shifters are mounted?

Somehow I doubt that. That's why a really accurate fit needs all the critcal parts mounted on the fit bike and positoned as closely as possible to the final build. Then you don't need all the dimensions.

[e-RICHIE]

I'd like to know how a frame builder can keep track of the many dozens of saddle designs, where the rails are and how different people butts will fit them.

Likewise, they not only know the reach of every brand and model of handlebar, they also know how high and how far out the brake/shifters are mounted?

Somehow I doubt that. That's why a really accurate fit needs all the critcal parts mounted on the fit bike and positoned as closely as possible to the final build. Then you don't need all the dimensions.


without a quote-er, it's hard to figure
out who you're talking to atmo.

[Smiley]

"and smiley, given that i know you somewhat, i'd guess that your customer satisfaction rate is well over 90% and probably close to 100%. i don't believe any of this debate is aimed your way."

Climb I know its not about me , its about a system I really believe in . Not all fitters are as good as others thats why YOU SHOULD ASK FOR REFRENCES . Ask for refrences of clients that meet the same fit criteria of yourself. If your a racer get racer refrences , a petite woman get refrences from petite women . Get my drift here. I just would not judge a fitter based on a diploma as I would not judge an engineer by a PE test either . Hell I checked to see if my vet knew a lot about Shar Pei before I'd trust him with my dogs , Just because he's a vet means nothing to me if he does not know my breed well. So why leave your bike fit to a phone interview or a rookie if your not comfortable with it. Get refrences please .

And by the way I am very anal about bike fits :) Ask anybody at Serotta

[93legendti]

93legend, we all see things differently, and i could be mistaken, but i don't see the criticism of some fitters as a criticism of serotta. to the contary, as most posters have said positive things about serotta. it seems a fair topic of discussion because over the years, i think a fair number of owners have voiced less than perfect experiences with fitters. no system involving human beings can be perfect, and i'm not holding serotta to an impossible standard. but i do think it's possible to be a serotta fan and owner, but still question part of the process.

and smiley, given that i know you somewhat, i'd guess that your customer satisfaction rate is well over 90% and probably close to 100%. i don't believe any of this debate is aimed your way.

Climbo, I agree -- to a point, except that the fitters are certified by Serotta for the purpose of selling Serotta bikes. (Yes, they can use the fit-bike and know-how for other brands, but the intent is to sell Serottas.)
In that sense, the fitter is at least a quasi-agent of Serottas. There have been posts that question why Serotta would build these alleged "whacked" bikes with the numbers sent in by Serotta.

I agree no one is perfect and Serotta certainly isn't either. And yes, you can be a fan and still question. To criticize is another thing--at least here, imho. Remember the thread about "stupid" offset posts? Serotta sells them and shows their Ottrott with one. Or the multiple threads about "stupid/fugly/marketing gimmick" slopers? Check the Ottrott page.

I never got an answer to why people display such anger/disgust regarding a personal decision that doesn't hurt anyone--a bike someone bought and is 100% happy with.

Anyway, this is turning ionto the 3rd thread on a subject that seems to set off sparks, so maybe I should stop before our host gets annoyed.

[dbrk]

Well said. I hear ya. I think what you are reacting to are a few "voices" that are often repeated here and repeated strongly. One by a dealer that does not sell Serotta, one by a rival bicycle company and another by a poster who does not own a Serotta. Would they say these things in person rather than benefit from the Web's impersonal aspects? Who knows.
...snip...snip...but include...[the rest too]


While the fitters seem to be taking the brunt of the criticism, I see things another way. I have no particular need for a fitter so I would go to a dealer with things in hand. That's likely not the common case since most folks would like some help in fit. Fit leads to design but fit is not the same as design. As Climb says, no one can deny that the bikes are brilliantly constructed.

It is the fit _designs_ (what I call elsewhere the "solutions") that strike me as _sometimes_ unfortunate aesthetically. Other folks may perfectly love the way their bike looks, and more power to them. For the most part folks aren't disputing that people are happy with their bikes or, in most cases, the process--- at least that's not my observation. No one here has pointed out particular bikes as "offenders" and I would never do such a thing because folks _do_ take bikes personally. No need to hurt feelings. I'm not the bike police either. I just have opinions about how I like bikes to look and how the old stock bikes in particular had a consistency of design that matched a great aesthetic. Just one guy's opinion; I'm not the least bit interested in criticizing other peoples' choices but I don't think that a crowd of pleased customers or riding mates or whathaveyou have anything to do with influencing my opinions about Serottas or any other bikes. Nor is it the case that pleased customers end the conversation or prove anything. One's observations can't be proved or disproved by numbers: they are just observations.

I'm not angry or trying to be offensive. I don't care what other people do or like. I'm just opinionated. That's what I thought we are here for.

dbrk

[92degrees]

93legend, we all see things differently, and i could be mistaken, but i don't see the criticism of some fitters as a criticism of serotta. to the contary, as most posters have said positive things about serotta. it seems a fair topic of discussion because over the years, i think a fair number of owners have voiced less than perfect experiences with fitters. no system involving human beings can be perfect, and i'm not holding serotta to an impossible standard. but i do think it's possible to be a serotta fan and owner, but still question part of the process.



I have only good things to say about my bike, my fitter, and Serotta. If I had been unhappy with the result -- even if it was caused soley by the fitter (if that's even possible) -- then that would have reflected on Serotta for me. I viewed my fitter as an endorsed representative of Serotta.

[e-RICHIE]

<snipped>Fit leads to design but fit is not the same as design. As Climb says, no one can deny that the bikes are brilliantly constructed. <cut>It is the fit _designs_ (what I call elsewhere the "solutions") that strike me as _sometimes_ unfortunate aesthetically.


well stated.
to me, the analogy would include an emotional need
to clothe oneself in a brand label or, worse yet, go to
a tailor and tell him what size to make, and - in the
end - take receipt of a loosely fitted pair of trousers with
with the suggestion that a belt or braces would keep
them from falling down.

[Ray]

Fit leads to design but fit is not the same as design. As Climb says, no one can deny that the bikes are brilliantly constructed.

It is the fit _designs_ (what I call elsewhere the "solutions") that strike me as _sometimes_ unfortunate aesthetically.
OK, question. Where does fit leave off and design begin? And who handles which pieces. Clearly, establishing the contact points is fit. And clearly, choosing between a larger frame with fewer spacers vs. a smaller or even compact frame with loads of spacers is design and more of an aesthetic issue than a ride/handling issue. But what about taking the step from determining contact points to determining where the wheels should be under a given rider (given that rider's particular build, particular strengths and weaknesses, particular medical issues, and particular preferences for how he/she wants the bike to handle) and determining whether to use X head angle with X rake mated to X cm top tube and X cm stem to make sure you get the weight distribution and handling dialed? Is that fit or design?

To me, the weight distribution (total wheelbase and front center vs. rear center) and front end geometry is as critical as getting the contact points right and far more critical than the purely aesthetic decisions. Does a Serotta fitter do this step or does Serotta handle this after they get the contact point input from the fitter? I would think a good fitter should handle all of these decisions and not just the contact points because the fitter has had the personal contact with the client and can make judgements as to what they need in this regard. In the one-person shops, the one person obviously does all of this. How do firms like Serotta and Seven, which rely on fitters out in the field, handle this?

Curious,

-Ray

[Velociotis]

I come at this from a non-industry standpoint but a pseudo-related profession. In design, our experience often tells us what is the best course of action, detail, layout etc. but as I learn through time the client often overrides the design decision presented to them regardless of process/experience. People tend to rejoice in "outwitting" professionals. Clients can be very set in their ways and reluctant to change.

I just wonder if some of the mis-fits are from people who knew what they wanted, made the bike that way, then hated it. I have no data to back this up nor do I know if serotta accounts for this.

[e-RICHIE]

To me, the weight distribution (total wheelbase and front center vs. rear center) and front end geometry is as critical as getting the contact points right<cut>
correct atmo.
and far more critical than the purely aesthetic decisions.
when (they're) arrived at correctly, you'll likely not consider aesthetics.

[zap]

No system is going to be perfect. The more levels in the decision making chain, the greater the chance for errors.

It is incumbent on the end user to make sure everything be done correctly. As Smiley mentioned, check references with peers. Communicate with your fitter about your goals etc. Go on a ride with your fitter. Double check the dims. Compare to your current ride. Test different bikes to get a better idea of what works and what doesn't.

IMO, fit can get prickly if one has a physical condition and/or trying to relieve a nagging problem. I have no idea what is taught at Serotta Fit School, but it might be a good idea to work with your PT and fitter to work out mechanics. Or not.

[satty tune]

ergott,

Apparently the answer to your question is "no."

[victoryfactory]

I think fitters can get too cute when given so many different
aspects of a bike that they can tweak.

I'd rather see them start with a "stock" bike designed and perfected by
a reputable builder with long experience, and just make subtle changes
to suit each customer's needs (when possible)

Give some people too many choices, and they get lost. I've seen quite a
few customs that, while they may be comfortable to sit on and pedal,
give up too much in handling and feel.

VF

I'm baaak.....

[e-RICHIE]

<snipped> I've seen quite a
few customs that, while they may be comfortable to sit on and pedal,
give up too much in handling and feel.







amen atmo.
let 'em hear ya' in the cheap seats.

[Ray]

I think fitters can get too cute when given so many different aspects of a bike that they can tweak.

I'd rather see them start with a "stock" bike designed and perfected by
a reputable builder with long experience, and just make subtle changes
to suit each customer's needs (when possible)

Give some people too many choices, and they get lost. I've seen quite a
few customs that, while they may be comfortable to sit on and pedal,
give up too much in handling and feel.
I think the same person's gotta do both. I've ridden any number of proven race bikes that have great geometry for a race bike, but I can't get comfortably into a racers position and, once I get my contact points established, the bikes handle like garbage because I have way too much weight on the rear wheel and not enough on the front. For stock bikes, I'm better off going with a bike with longer stays and a shorter front center so it'll handle close to right with my position on the bike. But I've never been on a bike that handled near as well as my current custom, where ALL of the key variables (except for some of the aesthetic decisions) were handled by the same fitter/designer.

Which brings me back to my question. In a larger custom outfit like Serotta, Seven, etc, does the fitter do all of this and send in a preliminary frame design or do they just establish the contact points for comfort?

Any of you Serotta fitters or employees care to chime in here - I'm really curious about how this works?

-Ray

[keno]

If it were my show, I would have pictures of the rider on the fit cycle along with the fit sheet produced by the fitter. I know TK, and perhaps others, have a distant customer send pictures with the rider on the current bike on a trainer of some kind with hands on the tops, the hoods, and the drops taken from the side (in TK's case along with the measurements of the current bike) among other information. Perfect, of course not, but to me, without a visual of some kind I find it hard to understand how a second, and non-attending, opinion is worth much as it is filtered through the point of view of the fitter by the numbers and by verbal opinion.

Sorry for the repetition if this point was made in another post.

keno

[Bruce K]

I have been to 3 different fitters over 5+ years.

1. My original Concours - the fitter is now a clothing rep.
2. A "pro fit" prior to ordering the Ottrott - 3 years later
3. A second "pro fit" because I didn't tranfer some dimensions correctly to set up my TT bike.

Basically, all 3 fits/fitters came up with the same frame sizes (both seat and top tube), and only very minor variations in stack height.

I guess I've been really lucky.

BK

[keno]

or real unlucky. (BK, if I weren't smilie averse, one would go here.)

keno

[e-RICHIE]

or real unlucky. (BK, if I weren't smilie averse, one would go here. :) :) :) )

keno



they showed up on the forum anyway atmo

[ergott]

From ergott: "Serotta's fit sheet does take into account the parts to be used in the build. The designer could easily take this into consideration."
__________________


I'd like to know how a frame builder can keep track of the many dozens of
saddle designs, where the rails are and how different people butts will fit them.

Likewise, they not only know the reach of every brand and model of handlebar, they also know how high and how far out the brake/shifters are mounted?

Somehow I doubt that. That's why a really accurate fit needs all the critcal parts mounted on the fit bike and positoned as closely as possible to the final build. Then you don't need all the dimensions.

My sheet asked what components were to be used. If you don't already know, I went a different route when ordering my bike. I told the person who ordered my frame exactly what dimensions I wanted and forwent the fit process. This is not the normal way of doing this so I missed out on the entire fit process and therefore can't speak with too much athority.

[keno]

and certainly not that one.

keno

[rpm]

It seems to me that the first question for a consumer is "Will a stock geometry work, or do I need a custom frame?" A quick screen on that question could be made from the ratio of leg length (crotch to floor) to total height (or torso+arm measurement). It would really be helpful if somebody with a vast database of customer measurements (like Serotta or Seven) published a distribution of these ratios (mean, standard deviations, percentiles) for each gender.

Sixty-eight percent of cases will fall within one standard deviation of the mean (+ or -). Unless they have something else going on (e.g., injury or lack of flexibility), they should be fine with standard geometry. They would still benefit from a fitting to get their contact points right, but the design of the frame shouldn't be an issue.

The 5% who are 2+ standard deviations away from the mean unquestionably should get a custom to accomodate their anatomic unusualness. Their designs are, by definition, likely to require more effort and to look "funny".

The people who fall between 1 and 2 standard deviations away from the mean are folks who could go either way. A number of them can probably be accomodated with some tweaks (e.g., 140 or 80 stems) or with purpose-built stock designs, like the Trek Pilot. Many, though, might be better off getting a custom.

In any event, it's likely to be, at most, one third of people who would benefit from a completely custom design.

(Incidentally, my leg length is 92.5 cm and my height is 182.2 giving me a ratio of .508, meaning that my legs are 51% of my total height. And yes, my bikes look funny)

[manet]

It would really be helpful if somebody with a vast database of customer measurements (like Serotta or Seven) published a distribution of these ratios (mean, standard deviations, percentiles) for each gender.


Fit-Kit, no?

[satty tune]

rpm,

Why are you assuming there is a normal distribution to these measurements? I'm not saying you're wrong, I've got no info one way or the other, just curious.

[dirtdigger88]

my legs are 50% of my total height and I dont think my bikes look funny-

different- maybe

funny- no!!!

Jason

[Serotta PETE]

:no: :no: :no:

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder......


Have a drink and lets go riding..... I am ole school and like the traditional BUT whatever works for someone is FINE> Lets go riding!!!


We are not the fashion police.

Drinks for all at the next pub we stop at on our ride.

[rpm]

Fit-Kit, no?

Yes, I would think so, but they don't publish their data, do they?

[manet]

Yes, I would think so, but they don't publish their data, do they?

probably held in a vault, next to the pommes frites recipe.

[rpm]

rpm,

Why are you assuming there is a normal distribution to these measurements? I'm not saying you're wrong, I've got no info one way or the other, just curious.

Why not? If you have a large N, a normal distribution should be the best assumption. The only reason not to assume that would be if you believed that most of the people who take up cycling have unusually long or short legs. My informal on-the-road observations suggest that people on bikes have less girth than say, a crowd at a state fair, but that they come in all kinds of proportions. :)

[e-RICHIE]

Yes, I would think so, but they don't publish their data, do they?


yeah - it's what many use as a baseline.
bill farrell, the inventor and a former team-mate and client of
mine, was a national class alpine skier cum bike racer who
also taught math. frustrated by what existed to bring "fit"
equations into the 20th century, he personally measured
hundreds-maybe-thousands of athletes over a several year
period, much of it as an associate of whatever the 70s usac
elite athlete program was then called, and compiled all this
info into a database that i consider the last word on the subject.
as with anything - and bill says as much on page one - it is
meant to be a starting point, not the definitive be all/end all
on "fit". using the information properly will enable the client
to enter a range from which adjustments can be made based
on fitness and flexibility.

the fruits of bill's labor revolutionized "fit" within the bicycle industry.

[Dr. Doofus]

dunno if they'd sell enough of em to justify buying the tubes and makin em

but

doof would still like to see a fierte-priced frame in the stock "race" geo.

it would be better than at least one of doof's bikes right now....

[cookieguy]

Not broken, doesn't need fixing.....

My "fitting" experience was a combination of "fit" and design.....we spent a healthy amount of time on the sizing cycle....figured out quickly that I was 42cm bars and 172.5cranks were "best" for me despite being a bit longer than "normal" for a 5'7'' slightly built guy...We also sorted out that fit wise that I down another cm and out other cm on the stem would also work...I didn't care about spacers....this year I will probably drop the bar and cut the steerer. I also liked the look of -10degree stem and a 2degree sloping top tube. In effect I ended up with close to a "square" bike (53x53). Kelly did some minor tweaks to the fork rake and angles (.5 degree ish...) to work on the balance and reduce (not elminate) toe clip overlap. Fits well, handles well...look that works for me.

[Johny]

Not broken, doesn't need fixing.....

My "fitting" experience was a combination of "fit" and design.....we spent a healthy amount of time on the sizing cycle....figured out quickly that I was 42cm bars and 172.5cranks were "best" for me despite being a bit longer than "normal" for a 5'7'' slightly built guy...We also sorted out that fit wise that I down another cm and out other cm on the stem would also work...I didn't care about spacers....this year I will probably drop the bar and cut the steerer. I also liked the look of -10degree stem and a 2degree sloping top tube. In effect I ended up with close to a "square" bike (53x53). Kelly did some minor tweaks to the fork rake and angles (.5 degree ish...) to work on the balance and reduce (not elminate) toe clip overlap. Fits well, handles well...look that works for me.

Dave Moulton got it right again. Why "fitting"?
http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm
FWIW, you can ride my bikes. :)

[1centaur]

Dave Moulton got it right again. Why "fitting"?
http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm

Per the chart on that link:

Hmm, short top tube, long stem. Where else have I heard that?

[dbrk]

Dave Moulton got it right again. Why "fitting"?
http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm
FWIW, you can ride my bikes. :)

Yikes. It's amazing the differences that turn up in fit charts. Compare Moulton's results with Daniel Rebour's guidelines in Le Petite Vivre and it's like night and day. I couldn't ride the size Moulton suggests without real discomfort (a 56cm with a 55tt) and can go _faster_ on the much larger frame that Rebour would design (a 60cm with a 58tt). Go figure. But I'm with the French guy. YMMV.

dbrk

[sspielman]

My post got lost when the last thread got blown away...amd I am feeling an overwhelming need to restate it....I have seen lots of custom frames that were some fitters "solution" to somebody's fit "problem".....Just looking at the bikes, there may be some item (or items) that just look way out of the mainstream.....a 50 mm stem on a 58 cm bike with 40 cm of stacked spacers and 50 mm of seatpost showing, etc.....If I wait to see who mounts up on the bike, I am expecting to see some horribly distorted individual....but am almost always shocked by how normally proportioned they are....and when they mount up, they just don't look balanced on the bike to me....A good rider on a properly fitted machine sits on the bike in a certain proper way. A custom fitting and frame should seek to optimise this effect....but my observation is that it is often lacking or even way off the mark.

[e-RICHIE]

My post got lost when the last thread got blown away...amd I am feeling an overwhelming need to restate it....I have seen lots of custom frames that were some fitters "solution" to somebody's fit "problem".....Just looking at the bikes, there may be some item (or items) that just look way out of the mainstream.....a 50 mm stem on a 58 cm bike with 40 cm of stacked spacers and 50 mm of seatpost showing, etc.....If I wait to see who mounts up on the bike, I am expecting to see some horribly distorted individual....but am almost always shocked by how normally proportioned they are....and when they mount up, they just don't look balanced on the bike to me....A good rider on a properly fitted machine sits on the bike in a certain proper way. A custom fitting and frame should seek to optimise this effect....but my observation is that it is often lacking or even way off the mark.


“Fashion passes; style remains.”
Coco Chanel

[sspielman]

“Fashion passes; style remains.”
Coco Chanel
...I thought that Laurent Brochard said that.....but I was mistaken....

[Grant McLean]

Not broken, doesn't need fixing.....

My "fitting" experience was a combination of "fit" and design.....we spent a healthy amount of time on the sizing cycle....figured out quickly that I was 42cm bars and 172.5cranks were "best" for me despite being a bit longer than "normal" for a 5'7'' slightly built guy...We also sorted out that fit wise that I down another cm and out other cm on the stem would also work...I didn't care about spacers....this year I will probably drop the bar and cut the steerer. I also liked the look of -10degree stem and a 2degree sloping top tube. In effect I ended up with close to a "square" bike (53x53). Kelly did some minor tweaks to the fork rake and angles (.5 degree ish...) to work on the balance and reduce (not elminate) toe clip overlap. Fits well, handles well...look that works for me.

I'm 5'7" too, none of bike bikes have anywhere near toe clip overlap, even
my smallest bike with a 53cm top tube. What size are your feet? Are
your cleats on the forward side?

-g

[OldDog]

I have an '80 DeRosa, 53 X 54 with steep angles and plenty of toe clip over lap. Size 42 shoes with 170 cranks. Ugo's attempt at a US crit bike. This was a frame I bought site unseen from Cycleart to feed my vintage lust for a DeRosa sold years ago of more laid back stage geo's.

[vaxn8r]

Yikes. It's amazing the differences that turn up in fit charts. Compare Moulton's results with Daniel Rebour's guidelines in Le Petite Vivre and it's like night and day. I couldn't ride the size Moulton suggests without real discomfort (a 56cm with a 55tt) and can go _faster_ on the much larger frame that Rebour would design (a 60cm with a 58tt). Go figure. But I'm with the French guy. YMMV.

dbrk
I think you and I are about the same size and I've ridden 59-60cm bikes, but not very fast. Give me a 56 any day of the week, for speed and comfort.

You're quite adamant about your opinions and so well respected (deservedly so) but I think sometimes people fail to realize what works for DBRK doesn't always translate. It's just an eloquently stated opinion. No disrespect meant because it's not like your opinions are formed out of thin air. Still, it's what_ you_ found works for DBRK.

YMMV??? I'm getting lost in the latin (though I understand a little medical latin), sanskrit, sometimes the english, not to mention the acronyms etc. But I do understand ATMO.

[dbrk]

snipping the nice things you said... Still, it's what_ you_ found works for DBRK.

YMMV??? I'm getting lost in the latin (though I understand a little medical latin), sanskrit, sometimes the english, not to mention the acronyms etc. But I do understand ATMO.

Ah ha!! At last!!! I got one of those Internet thingy acroynms! Your mileage may vary. I was hoping to end with precisely your point, viz., [Latin there] that what works for me may not work for you.

But with less bar/saddle drop, a longer, flatter back, and a place behind the spindle I can go much, much faster than I can on a smaller bike. Just one fella's experience, though I'd argue that it _can_ and does work for some others.

dbrk
who wants to know what atmo means...

[manet]

Yikes. It's amazing the differences that turn up in fit charts. Compare Moulton's results with Daniel Rebour's guidelines in Le Petite Vivre and it's like night and day. I couldn't ride the size Moulton suggests without real discomfort (a 56cm with a 55tt) and can go _faster_ on the much larger frame that Rebour would design (a 60cm with a 58tt). Go figure. But I'm with the French guy. YMMV.

dbrk

yes, interesting that. certainly fun to cross reference Moulton's with TK's:

11 1/2 shoe
5'10 3/4"
34 1/2 inseam

moulton: 58 cc frame
TK: 58.7 cc frame

moulton: 57 tt
TK: 56.8 tt

moulton: 13.5 stem
TK: 11.5 stem

[e-RICHIE]

dbrk
who wants to know what atmo means...



atmo redux:
http://forums.thepaceline.net/showpost.php?p=172905&postcount=78

[jckid]

[QUOTE=1centaur]Dave Moulton got it right again. Why "fitting"?
http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm

Yep. He got it right for me too. Actually my top tube is .5cm shorter, but that's a pretty minute difference.

[Johny]

yes, interesting that. certainly fun to cross reference Moulton's with TK's:

11 1/2 shoe
5'10 3/4"
34 1/2 inseam

moulton: 58 cc frame
TK: 58.7 cc frame

moulton: 57 tt
TK: 56.8 tt

moulton: 13.5 stem
TK: 11.5 stem

"For optimum handling ideally the center of the front portion of the handlebars should be directly over the wheel center as shown in the drawing. If you are slightly ahead or behind this position it should not be a big problem but if you are some way off this may determine what size frame you finally decide on. Also you could choose a slightly longer or shorter stem to get the bars nearer the wheel center and adjust the seat back or forward; the maximum I would suggest adjusting the seat would be a centimeter either way and don't do this at the expense of a good riding position."
http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm
*


*

[jerk]

who wants to know what atmo means...


the jerk thinks it's yiddish for imho.

[e-RICHIE]

the jerk thinks it's yiddish for imho.


post of last year.

[Dr. Doofus]

"For optimum handling ideally the center of the front portion of the handlebars should be directly over the wheel center as shown in the drawing. If you are slightly ahead or behind this position it should not be a big problem but if you are some way off this may determine what size frame you finally decide on. Also you could choose a slightly longer or shorter stem to get the bars nearer the wheel center and adjust the seat back or forward; the maximum I would suggest adjusting the seat would be a centimeter either way and don't do this at the expense of a good riding position."


doof was saying that two years ago -- the "hands over the hub, bub" general guidline...he was called an idiot...maybe he is...but at least somebody who knows how to build a bike says it...so maybe doof wasn't that stupid....

moulton's chart puts doof on exactly what he rides now -- the stem is a bit shorter, but 5mm of that is the effective difference between a -13 quill and a -6 stem (no joke -- to reach th esame horizontal point, the quill would be about 5mm longer...and yeah, doof used to ride a 125 stem until doof decided to listen to "experts" who then starting effin with his position) and 5mm of that is personal preference....

moulton assumes a race bike -- dbrk's guy assumes a sport-touring bike. one would work for anyone with the basic flexibility and strength to ride a race bike, and one would work for someone who wants something more relaxed. either way, the positions and the bike designs were figured out a long time ago by fat, chain-smoking french and italian guys, and there's no need for americans to reinvent a wheel that works just fine to begin with...unless you want a sport-touring bike that bears a superficial resemblance to a race machine, and need to be reassured of its quality by the fat price you shelled out for it, but that consumer trip is a different matter entirely....

[Mud]

Jerk's comment and E-Ritchie's reply are the only thing in 5 pages that have made any sense to me see Ergott's original question. I guess I just am not deep enough to understand and my yiddish stinks but I think I understand a little of Jerk.

[e-RICHIE]

Jerk's comment and E-Ritchie's reply are the only thing in 5 pages that have made any sense to me see Ergott's original question. I guess I just am not deep enough to understand and my yiddish stinks but I think I understand a little of Jerk.


you're provo worthy.

[93legendti]

Jerk's comment and E-Ritchie's reply are the only thing in 5 pages that have made any sense to me see Ergott's original question. I guess I just am not deep enough to understand and my yiddish stinks but I think I understand a little of Jerk.

a bissle of jerk

[Climb01742]

Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
a race bike is a bicycle that is properly designed for comfort, position, and efficiency. period...i daresay that a race bike is the best choice for most folks...race bikes, properly designed race bikes - are for riders. entering a race is not part of the equation.

even i understand that. so would you get your frickin' new tubes already, before i plotz. or i'll start utzing you, you mensch.

[e-RICHIE]

Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
a race bike is a bicycle that is properly designed for comfort, position, and efficiency. period...i daresay that a race bike is the best choice for most folks...race bikes, properly designed race bikes - are for riders. entering a race is not part of the equation.

even i understand that. so would you get your frickin' new tubes already, before i plotz. or i'll start utzing you, you mensch.


and all this time i had you pegged as an episcopalian atmo cheers :beer: