Serotta geo-Market driven?

[zap]

A few recent posts and articles indicate, at least to me, that Serotta prefers riders to have a more upright position. Seems like shorter and higher is very much the norm here.

Head tube angles have gotten slacker compared to a few years ago as well.

Why is that? Is it due to market demographics to which Serotta is responding too or some "new" fit philosophy? It appears it doesn't matter how fit or flexible the rider is. Shorter-higher is better.

I have additional thoughts on this matter, but I would like to see what other formites think about this, especially from Serotta fitters.

[Kurt]

for the time I have known about them they have offered pertty much square frames, which is great for women for sure. The have gone from 7-8 on the bb drop and maybe slacked the hta .5 but nothing else has changed much. I view serotta as a custom house and don't think of the geo much anyway and yes they do cater to an older rider I think or @ least one that has some :banana: laying around.

[LegendRider]

They appear to have slackened the head tube angle a touch. My Legend was standard geometry and it was 73.5 for a 58cm. I see it's now a 73 - I think that's a good move. In fact, add the head tube extension and you get Pegoretti geometry (at least in my size range 57/58) except for the bb drop.

[RichMc]

It seems to me that a lot of it is due to the physical characteristics of the rider/buyer. Could be more of the "older" crowd getting them where some strength and flexibility may be factors. I think the fitters are somewhat predisposed to setting up for comfort rather than performance. The buyer should be careful about what they emphasize in their answers to the interview questions. For instance "What type of riding do you primarily do?" for which the reply might be "I do some serious recreational riding, a couple of centuries a year and maybe a race or two." That may prompt a whole different frame geometry than the answer which goes like this, "I do mostly fast training and serious recreational riding. There usually is a couple of centuries a year but I like to do some races too. I'd like something that would allow me to maximize my body's power. I want something that handles great but is still a little on the comfortable side." I think you have to be very clear with the fitter as to what you want. Of course, what you think you want and what may be best for you might be two different things.

When my Seven was built for me I think it was designed more for comfort. Although it works real good I am right in the middle of a project with it that will get me a little more forward and lower, which I think I might like better. There will be a story and pictures later. Based on my Seven specs and the interview/Serotta fit cycle work my Serotta fitter spec'd a more agressive frame geometry than Seven did. The Serotta geometry seems to work better.

[Wayne77]

My very inexperienced take:

Perhaps it is not so much a case of Serotta's fit preferences changing as it represents Serotta building more frames for the less knowledgable and less opinionated customer, and proportionaltely less for die-hard racers and long-time enthusiasts, who know what geometry they need. It's very easy for someone who doesn't really know what they want to get onto the fit cycle and insist that the more upright position feels better. Ideally, the best fitters would use this oportunity to educate the consumer (assuming there aren't back injuries, etc) that a more laid out postion would be better. In reality however, this probably doesn't happen as much as it should.

I would guess that any custom frame builder wanting to grow over time would experience this shift in its target market (if growth is indeed the primary objective, which for many builders it is obviously not)

I did the custom thing thing for the first time a few months ago for a Concours and I ended up with a much more laid out position than what I had been riding with on my Klein. I find this position to be significantly more comfortable and efficient for me. Maybe I was lucky to get a great fitter, I don't know..

OT: I am certain that I could have managed with a stock frame, but the custom experience has been wonderful. I was able to get some subtle adjustments done to the TT angle (2deg slope) and HT length (1 cm extension) so I only need to use a 1cm spacer and 120 cm -10 deg stem to get the bars where I like them, and I still love the aesthetic of the frame. If I had gone with the CT-2 'Nago I was looking at, I would have had a 4cm stack of spacers to preserve the 9cm of saddle to bar drop I like on a 58cm frame.

Ok, I see that I have wandered wildly off topic...back to market dynamics and Serotta geometry...

[zap]

Despite what the title of the thread stated (my bad), I'm also refering to a "preffered" rider position. As the Ottrott review from the UK points out, the one linked from the Serotta home page, they indicate a desire to get riders h/bars positioned higher and closer. Back to where everyone was when they used quill stems!

[Smiley]

Zapper , I want to see you when you get OLD :banana:
I have done low and long and high and short . Kind of like BURGER KING , Have It Your Way . So variety is the spice of life .....

[bcm119]

I don't quite agree with you from my experience with Serotta fitters. I think their general philosophy is higher but longer. It seems they are trying to get the rider to open up their chest and roll their hips forward. This fit has worked for me- my custom fit lengthened my reach about 1 cm and raised the bars about 1 cm.

As for HTAs, I think they give you whatever you want... alot of demo bikes I've seen have 73.5.

[Wayne77]

I don't quite agree with you from my experience with Serotta fitters. I think their general philosophy is higher but longer. It seems they are trying to get the rider to open up their chest and roll their hips forward. This fit has worked for me- my custom fit lengthened my reach about 1 cm and raised the bars about 1 cm.

As for HTAs, I think they give you whatever you want... alot of demo bikes I've seen have 73.5.

I agree with the higher and longer. I am also slightly higher, and much longer with my serotta fit

[Dr. Doofus]

1) Serotta is not "driven" by a market. They were quick to jump on a growing market that was not adequately met, namely,

30-50+ somethings with substantial disposable income
who no longer have the flexibility or core strength to ride a traditional
racing bike without flipping the stem and piling on the spacers, but
who still want a "racy" looking bike, rather than an audax or touring
bike.

2) Many fitters take this relaxed position as a gospel after coming back from fit school, and set up everyone this way. If the fitter has the talent to become more than a re-cycler of formulas, eventually s/he adapts and begins to look more expansively at the fit process.

3) Serotta can build a bike for Sandy or for the Jerk (whyyouaintanswerrinmyPMs, bud?), it all depends.... A bike for the doof would probably be 73/73.5 58x57 no HT extensionand a -6 130...a bike for his pop would probably be 73/73, 58x56.5 with 2cm extension and a + 6 100...its all good if the fitter knows his or her craft and doesn't "paint by the numbers" screw it up.

[Serotta_James]

1) Our fit system doesn't take any preconceptions - we let the body dictate the fit and then factor in preferences to the build (crit racer, road rider, Tri, etc).

2) It seems to me that the idea behind this thread is motivated from our preconceived concepts of what a racing/high performance bike necessarily should be - longer and lower. In many cases this is not optimal for a particular rider - in many cases it is. Again, no preconception.

[zap]

James, there are no preconceived notions regarding bike fit from this corner.

[Sandy]

I know that you think that I would be faster if I had a longer and lower position. Do you think that I could adapt and be as comfortable as I am presently? I know that I sit much more upright than many and the air resistance must be significantly more than many, but I am comfortable.


Spinning Serotta Stretched?? Spinning Serotta Shorter???

Snail Slow?? Supersonic Spaceship Speedy??


Serotta Somebody

Please say hello to the quilter for me.

[Wayne77]

Snipped: [QUOTE=Sandy]I know that I sit much more upright than many and the air resistance must be significantly more than manyQUOTE]

As far as air resistance goes, it would help if you removed the drag-chute from your bike.

[Climb01742]

for what it's worth...in my experience, having seen a whole bunch of fittings done at wheelworks while i was just hanging out...not once did i see a fitter "push" a rider toward a preordained position...they simply worked with the rider's body and riding style, and tried to find something that worked. even more personally, thom norton spent almost two years tweaking my position based solely on my messed up biomechanics and body, and his vast knowledge. just my experience.

[Sandy]

Great idea! I am going to replace it with a drag-strip motor. :) :)

Speedy Sandy

[Skrawny]

This may seem OT, but I think the sentiment is apropos:

I saw an interview with the head of Porsche when they came out with the Caynne (SUV). I intervewer asked about the fact that an SUV seems against the race-inspired ideals of Porsche. The head of Porsche (I forget his name) said: "It allows us afford to make more 911s"

-s