DSC04978
  • Gavin Adkins

    Nice one Caz. Great point about getting something that might be slightly too small over something slightly too big.

    Also, if you know or meet someone that looks good on their bike (basically confident, comfortable and smiling), compliment them and ask them where they got the bike and if they would recommend a particular shop.

  • Andy B

    Is it common for womens bikes to have quite a bit of toe overlap?
    and if so do you ever notice this Is a problem?

  • nic_3

    excellent article with some great points - TIPS even! but seriously, i actually read this whole article and it was helpful, easy to follow and remember.

  • Vanessa

    I’m sorry guys but this article is average at best. It is the sort of thing you would expect to see posted on an internet forum.

    It is filled with both inaccurate and incorrect statements/opinions and the author comes across sounding exactly like the ‘bike shop guru’ she disapproves of.

    • Rowena

      I agree with Vanessa, average article, not necessarily good or quality information in there. I suspect there is perhaps too much information in the article that is not explained very well and yes the author has come across sounding exactly like the bike shop guru she disapproves of.

    • Steel

      Disagree, I thought it was excellent. I’ve recently dropped my handlebar height and now feel more comfortable on the bike over longer rides and much faster through the corners. Being a mechanical engineer I probably should have worked this out earlier, but by being more aero, substantially reduces effort and the feeling of comfort over 1h+ rides.

      That’s quite counter-intuitive and something that wasn’t pointed out to me at the bike shop when I first got fit out. In defence of the bike shops though, they did set me up when I didn’t have the same flexibility through my back/hips as what I do now.

      What is it that you don’t like about the article?

  • adrian

    I completely agree with Vanessa on this. The article is filled with inaccuracies, most people sit on the border of two frame sizes and it depends on what setup they are trying to achieve as to what frame size suits them. Go the smaller frame size and risk having the saddle way to high in comparison to the handlebars, great for a racer type only. I am a trained bike fitter and with standardized frame sizes things like stems and handlebars are commonly changed to achieve the correct setup for riders. Get your facts correct before bagging out trained bike shop professionals!

  • Ben Pilot

    well said! anyone buying a “womens specific” bike has rocks in their head…. Giant and Specialized are the worst offenders at this! sure saddles and bar widths need to change but the bike being turned into a chopper bike with some pink thrown at it does nothing for women’s cycling….

    FYI I think Specialized make the best saddles for women or men, and its the touch points that are important….

    Also think of engineering budgets? which individual frame set will have the most spent on it making it ride and handle the best?

  • Dave2020

    To be honest, this is a terrible muddle of myths and misunderstanding. We first need to define the terms we’re using:-

    1.) An “upright” position has nothing to do with frame geometry. You can sit upright on any bike, as long as the ‘bars aren’t too far forward, and even then. . . . .

    2.) What is a “relaxed” frame geometry? - a 72º seat tube is a reasonable definition.

    Therefore, logically, being upright (are you sitting comfortably?) puts more weight on your seat, while an aerodynamic position moves your centre of gravity (torso) forward, putting more weight on the hands. Clear so far?

    “endurance geometry” - What’s that? Define “aggressive geometry”. If you mean a 75º STA that’s just dumb. (sorry) There is only ONE reason to choose any particular STA and that is; it must be a match for an individual’s biomechanics. There is nothing slow about “endurance geometry” and “aggressive geometry” isn’t intrinsically fast. It’s all a pig-ignorant myth.

    The sad irony is, if you’re a short person the bike industry will leave you with the short straw. Check out the number of small frames that come with a 74-75º STA. Cervelo are right - 73º on all sizes is fine. Then see how many small bikes are spec’d with 170mm cranks, when 165mm would be correct. I built up a Boardman frame in the naive expectation that its STA was the 73º specified. Silly me; it’s actually 74.5º.

    Have you all noticed how many cyclists sit ‘on-the-rivet’ when trying hard? Makes a nonsense of carefully selecting your ideal saddle if you don’t stay where it gives you comfortable support!! It’s incontrovertible evidence that your position is wrong for your biomechanics, or your biomechanics are weak/unbalanced in technique, which often amounts to the same thing.

    This whole article is meaningless without well-informed advice on the rider’s position and their biomechanics. If you can convey an understanding of that, THEN people can figure out for themselves what suits them best. e.g. KOPS is another pig-ignorant myth. Google it and ignore everything you read that says it is ‘correct’.

    “on steep ascents, you need your weight on the front wheel as much as possible.” - Nonsense: You need to find an equilibrium, with as much weight on the back wheel as possible, consistent with not doing an accidental wheelie. On a steep climb of 25-40% (up to my front gate) one would have to stand up to get that balance, so the saddle position becomes irrelevant!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYu4M2PsWkI

    • lulu

      I agree with Vanessa and Rowenna, and suggest that anyone who wants to buy a bike test rides one/ borrow from a shop for a week. If you are gong to spend upwards of $2000 you want something that doesn’t suck. I love my women’s specific frame, and my very little girly handle bars that allow me to break when heading down hill at 60km per hour. I also own a non- women’s specific cyclocross - that a bike shop sold me - and it is too big, and my mountain bike is too small. My suggestion is to get along to as many test ride days with as many different bike brands over a few months and give a few different things a go.

      As for the suggestion for getting electronic groupset - you have got to be kidding! there are better things to spend money on like a good light frame! wacko article thats for sure.

      • Dave2020

        Hi Lulu,

        The skeletal differences between men and women don’t support this daft idea of a woman-specific frame geometry! I’m sure many girls agree with you, but your “love” is misplaced.
        http://www.humankinetics.com/excerpts/excerpts/see-the-skeletal-differences-between-women-and-men

        What the industry is selling you is a small-person geometry, AND there’s NO reason to advocate a steeper STA on little frames. I have no connection whatever to Cervelo - they’re too expensive for me - but they are absolutely right on the question of geometry. Every novice should go for 73º and experiment around that. If you have short legs, fit short cranks.

        Also for NO good reason, mountain bikes were, and often still are, fitted with longer cranks than road bikes. I see track bikes on sale claiming that 170mm cranks give more torque!! The industry has too many guys who don’t have a clue and don’t care. The only reason to spec’ a ‘standard’ crank is to improve their profit margin.

        I know it’s counter-intuitive, but to stop the tendency to slip forward on the saddle, you’ll need to put it further back and lower. THEN you can START to learn how to pedal with souplesse and at a higher cadence (= better acceleration AND better endurance.) than you otherwise would. You may need a set-back seat pin, and to keep the same reach, fit a shorter stem - simples! Ignore those who advise building a strong ‘core’ so you can ‘push harder’. They’re idiots. Your back and shoulders must be relaxed. Be sure to keep everything supple and you’ll avoid the common rider aches and ailments. Be patient; even if you know what to aim for (in pedalling ‘style’) it’ll take several years of skill training to perfect your co-ordination.

        I remember once seeing Tim Don ride for miles with one foot out of his shoe. That’s a sure sign that his biomechanics are naive - basically push-push, instead of being in tune with the circular action of an efficient pedalling style. He should’ve stopped and put his shoe on.

        The extreme climbing in the video clip is only possible with cleats. I feel like a fish out of water without them. When you feel the same, even for leisure riding, then you’ve got it right.

        “I have a lifetime of bad habits in dance terms. For example, zero flexibility in the feet, because as a cyclist, having stiff ankles is an advantage.” - Victoria Pendleton. Sorry Vicky; your stiff ankles were a big handicap. How often were you in physio’, treating all the damage inflicted on your body by BC’s ill-advised (macho!) weight training regimes?

        “I think the staff [at GB Cycling] are quite traditional. It would have to be an infusion of new staff to run the women’s side.” There’s more to that than mets the eye. . . .
        http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/nov/30/lizzie-armistead-marianne-vos-united