I never measured the trail, so I guess it's not on the dance card. I mean, I'm aware it exists, and I've read other wax endlessly about it, but it's something that doesn't make my radar. See the image. Those measurements are the only distances from which I add and subtract fractions in order for the position in question to overlap with what I feel is a workable frame design in that size range.
Later - time to ride atmo.
Thanks for the straightforward answers, enjoy your ride!
contact points make a lot more sense to me than the voodoo that most other fit 'systems' seem to be made of. way too much math in the first frame i built
many thanks for sharing this
contacts points are the fit 'coordinates' used to design the frame. they are not instead of fit systems and math but rather the result(however one gets there).
someone/how has to establish those points one way or another.
Nick Crumpton
crumptoncycles.com
"Tradition is a guide, not a jailer" —Justin Robinson
"Mastery before Creativity"—Nicholas Crumpton 2021
Agreed - I think. The rider needs an efficient position and the bicycle he is on also has to not only accommodation it, it must work well as a vehicle. My overarching reality check moments always involve deferring to frame design rather than position. I will never compromise the bicycle's handling or related characteristics in order to find a way to have a rider with fitness or flexibility issues, or even one who is afraid to descend fast or pedal in a corner - I will not "borrow" from the frame design pile and give it to the "rider position" pile if I think the ride will suck. That said, it's all, and always, plotted out as dots connected with lines rather than summoning up angles and using that convention as a driver. At the end of the day, it all can be measured and articulated, but linear measurements are literal to me while the angle thing is a foreign language atmo.
How do we all come to these contact points from a distance, as in not from personal contact with client?
I don't fit anyone atmo. At the most, if someone comes around and the ride they have looks effed, I just edit out the bad stuff and make sure I don't incorporate it into the commission. You have to understand, the entire concept of 'getting fitted' is not one I subscribe to. I mean - who in his right mind buys a bicycle like this (or like that, for that matter atmo...) and doesn't have a history of riding such that the important details have not been long since ironed out? And, if a cat doesn't know at all, and comes by anyway, then I use intuition, decide what he should have - since he can't - and we both get what we need.
The fitting thing has worked its way into daily conversation because it preys on the insecurities of many who feel they are not capable of knowing what is right. Wind tunnel tests notwithstanding, I think a person can easily determine what works, and what is right - all he has to do is ride a lot.
Okay, maybe I'm looking a little deep here, but how do we separate the frame design pile from the rider position pile? Bottom bracket drop, frame seatpost setback, and possible front center measurements seem like they could cross into either pile... Don't these measurements help to define the frame design as well as position the rider? And to reference a post above, doesn't this help position the rider within the wheels? Are some measurements more important than others in the design hierarchy?
thanks again!
Frames, and all moving parts on them, are symmetrical; people are not. I understand the cleat interface is the root of most known problems, since bicycles have to be pedaled to move forward. I was around when a client and team mate of mine developed The Fit Kit as a way to minimize these issues. That experience evolved into fitting folks, too. So I get that connection and all the stepchildren that came from its loins. But - and I think I wrote this somewhere else recently - if a fitter wants to suggest that a saddle move up or forward, or that a different reach is needed, I will listen. Just don't tell me how to design a frame in order to achieve those results.
Last edited by e-RICHIE; 04-30-2013 at 11:11 PM. Reason: spelling -
Richard,
This method is not dissimilar from the way I was taught. One question though...looking at your pic I see no method for locating the all important front-axle location (perhaps there is a locating screw underneath the apron). I imagine your forks all have the same span, but how are you actually measuring/setting front-center without this being a definable location?
Last edited by Jason Musgrave; 04-30-2013 at 11:32 PM. Reason: content added
laughter has no foreign accent.
Got it. Is that a Hydra?
laughter has no foreign accent.
Bookmarks