|
|
|
|
#1
02-06-2006, 02:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thor's bike
The following link shows Thor Hushovd's Look:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/tech/2006...e_look_hushovd Is anyone surprised that a 6'1" pro rides a bike with a 56cm top tube and a 76cm saddle height? I presume he is fit well, but the numbers seem small. I've never noticed him looking like Sean Kelly (i.e., cramped). 
|
|
#2
02-06-2006, 02:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
that looks like a jerk-approved stem...looooooong.
|
|
#3
02-06-2006, 03:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It's a 13cm - which is long but not extreme. There are plenty of pros with 14cm and 15cm stems.
|
|
#4
02-06-2006, 03:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
long torso -- check out the saddle-to-bar center and long stem
also, his saddle is well back on that look post -- more saddle setback = less height.... doof 1m84 and rides a height of 78.6, 7.2cm of saddle setback, 56 reach -- short torso all relative man thor is a flippin beast and one of doof's favorites...like another doof favorite --gert steegmans -- thor isn't super low, but about as low as that bike will let him get. his upper back is flat when in the drops, but his lower back is pretty curved...he's got that slightly scrunched belgian power thing going...good on him. guys who look like that tend to get up the koppenberg faster than guys who look like petacchi.... Last edited by Dr. Doofus; 02-06-2006 at 03:05 PM.
|
|
#5
02-06-2006, 03:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
as an aside, given his height wonder how long his arms are? maybe kinda short?
|
|
#6
02-06-2006, 03:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
climb-o -- just do a google image serach and look at him on his bike
|
|
#7
02-06-2006, 03:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
bro nice stem and H.bars those look like his training wheels what do you think? i know he needs stiff wheels cheers
__________________
Life is perfect when you Ride your bike on back roads
|
|
#9
02-06-2006, 03:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
like boonen, he is a big, muscular guy -- hard for those guys to get long and low and pretty like, say bobby j (one of the lowest positions...and sooo fluid). also, he's a powerful all-rounder with a sprint -- he's not a pure sprinter like mcewen or petacchi....he's the budget boonen, which sucks because his career has to occur at the same time as the top of the line model. but yeah, his back is a little curved and he isn't as stretched (though he's as stretched as a guy with his build is gonna get) when in the drops...there's a good pic of him on the champs in the drops last year that shows that...and one of him on the hoods in G-W.
some thor pics for you kids
|
|
#10
02-06-2006, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
flexibility isn't the key to tom's success either.
|
|
#11
02-06-2006, 03:49 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
 Jason
__________________
Jason©™®
|
|
#12
02-06-2006, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thor and I are . . .
exactly the same size and weight and our bike specs are identical too. Answer, looong torso. (Do I need to add that he's a pro and I suck more than doofus (much more I'm afraid)).
Quote:
His tip of saddle to c of stem clamp is 610 is pretty long and not consistent with a 56 + 13 (unless tons of setback, but the article says he sticks to the middle setback position). But 610 is long even with a 58 + 13. My bike with a 58 + 13 is a little less than 600, I think. Also, sexy bars from ProUK! And 32/36 handbuilts. ProUK rims. Are any pros riding pre-builts this Spring?! Somebody answer my question about Boonen's Spring rims (not Fulcrums, the 36 s ones). I heart the guy and want his wheels and his haricut and legs and lungs (but NOT his girlfriend, Yeesch. I'll keep my wife, thx). Also, "C of front wheel to top of bars: 595mm" I can't believe there's a new measurement I've never ever heard of. C of front wheel to top of bars! I'm racing home to measure my bikes! More useless bike sh*t!
__________________
PeterW Charleston, SC
|
|
#13
02-06-2006, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
bear in mind the middle setback positino on that look post is still pretty far back -- look at the st in line with the saddle rails
its a 56 effective top tube. doof could ride thor's bike, but with a 120 stem, move the saddle up a cm, and slap 40mm of spacers under the bars or 30mm and rotate em up like he was on medicare...dofo is what saunders complains about on his site, even though doof runs 92mm of drop: quote from the e-rok: rant... i remember back in the days when you used to could get handlebars that actually had drops that went down.. nowdays all bars are so shallow that the drops are just the same as the tops as the hoods... and i blame old guys with bad backs... it used to be that you could get a 73 degree stem too... but now you can only get stupid up-stems... because of all the old guys with bad backs... and bikes these days have taller and taller head tubes because of the old guys with bad backs... whats the net effect?.. if you are a bike racer who is young and flexible you cant get a bike where you have low drops for being aero.. because bikes dont have real drop bars anymore and they have up-stems and tall head tubes.. i remember before a-head you couldnt catch any self-respecting biker dead with an up-stem on his bike... but now thats all you get... only the italians still will give you some deep old school bars.. everybody else just has one bar.. and thats for OE becuase people want to be "comfy"... seriously.. its jacked up that racing bikes these days are set up so that they are comfy at 20mph... when really on a racing bike you should have it set up to be comy at 30mph... which isnt really the same thing...
|
|
#14
02-06-2006, 05:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Anybody wonder how that bike gets up to 17.8 pounds? My bikes that have frames weighing 1300 grams weigh less than 17.8 pounds with Neutrons/clinchers, DA10, Flight Deck - he's got no obviously heavy parts unless the wheels are unusual, or unless the paint on that frame weighs a pound.
|
|
#15
02-06-2006, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On face value it looks too small for a guy who's 6ft 1ins, but it does at the very least suggest he doesn't have the long legs typical of guys over 6ft.
His seat isn't what I'd call terribly set back, either. No being a road bike specialist, can someone explain to me why (especially sprinters) have such long stems? To parallel mountain bike evolution, they started with long stems but now total cockpit length is achieved with stems typically 10-20mm shorter than "traditional", with that extra length being achieved in the frame, ultimately resulting in what i think is better weight balance. Can anyone with fit/vehicle dynamics experience shed some light?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
