Results 1 to 61 of 61
  1. #1
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,228

    Lee McCormack's Perfect Bike Setup

    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/lee-mc...ke-set-up.html

    I read this over on PB and of course measured my bikes and my RAD is about 40 to 50mm more than Lee's basic formula. Obviously Lee thinks longer front centres are not great. I'm not about to go back to a smaller sized frame since I had them for decades and prefer more RAD than they deliver.

    Is your RAD over, under, or spot on Lee's recommendation? Any thoughts on his bike fit theory?
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,443
    I read this last night and measured my RAD on my new Waltworks. It was pretty much spot on. My Switchblade was 50mm too RAD and my Les 20mm too RAD.

    Thereís no such thing as too RAD in my book but Iím happy my new custom frame is bang on!

    Thinking about buying Leeís Dialled book as Iím very interested in making bikes works the best they can for me and in bike fits in general.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Pritchett's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    161
    Front Center and RAD are not at all related, donít lump them together in any way.

    Also, I think he loses some people on how to actually measure the distance. Bottom bracket to grips, parrellell to an invisible center plane isnít the easiest measurement to get right.

    Leeís complete method includes a bunch of body measurements, which are also easy to get wrong.

    It can all add up to unnecessary confusion.

    My favorite implementation of a RAD check is to drag a couple picnic tables around so you are able to set your bike up with a pedal on each tabletop. The bike is free to pivot around the bottom bracket... the. Stand on the pedals and ďrowĒ the bike toward your hips as you stand up straight. (Iím sure this was an inspiration for the riprow...)

    Leeís RAD and RAAD dimensions make a lot of sense when combined with proper images of how a person looks when using full range of motion on a bike, compared to a person at the top of a deadlift style motion (shoulders packed, bar across thighs)

    Your hand position with the bike rowed into you, should look and feel like youíve just locked out at the top of a deadlift. If the bike feels short or long in this position, you MAY find benefit in playing with longer or shorter RAD dimensions.

    Pinkbike commenters were quick to point out the angle of the RAD and itís importance. Lee hits on this with RAAD, and it sounds like heíll be coming to his own defense with a better description soon that includes this.

    I like Leeís stuff a lot. Iíve been riding off-road for almost 20 years and have been a certified instructor for the last four. Leeís methods are slightly different from what youíll find from a typical instructor.
    His unique focus on row and anti-row movements seem to have influenced his observations on fit and fitness ala riprow.

    I think itís great to have someone putting new words to old problems relating to both technique and fit.

    And Lee is probably correct that SOME people are riding bikes too long for them. I frequently see 5í8Ē people lamenting over whether they should be on a Large or XL frame... the answer is probably Medium - unless youíre just along for the ride and donít wish to have any influence over what that mysterious contraption below you is doing.

  4. #4
    the discerning hooligan
    Reputation: MOJO K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,144
    I did not measure my bikes to find where I fit with Lee's numbers. I usually come to the conclusion that most of these fit formulas work as a neutral starting point, but not as hard fast laws. Hell, I still think saddle height and KOPS work as a good starting point for a novice rider. In Travis's example, if he corrects to Lee's formula, will he need to slam his saddle back most of 2" to get back to his preferred riding posture, and what will that do to alter his weight distribution on the bike?
    MERCY! MERCY! MERCY!

  5. #5
    slow
    Reputation: sgltrak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,620
    I just measured my 3 main bikes in my garage and all three have about 4-5cm too much RAD for me if I use the simple calculation in Lee's article.

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Chris Porter has a similar method. I would imagine those who are coming in too long for Lee's method will be very close to Chris's ideal measurements. Chris uses a larger multiplier for a longer bike, shocking, I know.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    since 4/10/2009
    Reputation: Harold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    24,402
    The measurement process seems to be overly complicated, honestly. Especially if you dive into the full calculations of "ideal" RAD that make fewer assumptions.

    But when measuring things out, my bike (which feels pretty good to me) has about 2cm longer RAD for me than Lee's calculation in the article. That said, I recently made a handlebar change (a little more rise than I used to have) and have felt like dropping it down a touch would feel better. Also worth noting, I have longer arms than avg for my height, so slightly longer RAD than the simple calculation supplies is probably also a good thing.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,443
    It should also be noted that Lenz Sports use Leeís method when fitting their bikes up for customers.

    http://lenzsport.com/bicycle-fit/

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    342
    I go strictly by ETT and reach as far as bike fit goes. 590-620 ETT and 420-460 reach. I know those numbers will fit me comfortably both seated and in the attack position. Angles donít matter as much especially since specific categories of bike have their specified ranges. Angles depend on the bike Iím looking for. Not really convinced that steep actual seat angles make climbing better or easier to be honest. I have a Slash with a real slack seat angle and an SB100 with a steeper seat angle and climbing sucks with both of them. Yes I hate climbing. All climbing sucks but is a necessary evil.
    I no longer like to party. But I like the idea of it.

  10. #10
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,550
    While I know Lee is very popular, I donít think his fitting system fits everyone.

    For me, it caused me to be too cramped, putting too much stress on my hips and midback. It also made my bike feel too twitchy for me (shorter stem, narrower bars).

    I ended up sizing up frames when I figured out a lot of my fit problems were due to riding something too cramped and small for me.

    I do like his row/anti-row mechanics, and think there is some validity in that. But his fit? Not so much.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by stripes View Post
    While I know Lee is very popular, I donít think his fitting system fits everyone.

    For me, it caused me to be too cramped, putting too much stress on my hips and midback. It also made my bike feel too twitchy for me (shorter stem, narrower bars).

    I ended up sizing up frames when I figured out a lot of my fit problems were due to riding something too cramped and small for me.

    I do like his row/anti-row mechanics, and think there is some validity in that. But his fit? Not so much.
    That's similar to what I told him on Pinkbike. He may put you in a position for max biomechancial leverage but that does not necessarily mean it is the best position. Whether it's what you experienced or if the bike is designed in a way that does not require maximum leverage. For example, a longer, slacker, more stretched out bike is going to require much less core and upper body strength to resist going over the bars versus its inverse.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WHALENARD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    3,372
    Are we measuring middle of grip/end of handlebar to middle of bb?
    It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

  13. #13
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,550

    Lee McCormack's Perfect Bike Setup

    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    That's similar to what I told him on Pinkbike. He may put you in a position for max biomechancial leverage but that does not necessarily mean it is the best position. Whether it's what you experienced or if the bike is designed in a way that does not require maximum leverage. For example, a longer, slacker, more stretched out bike is going to require much less core and upper body strength to resist going over the bars versus its inverse.
    For years I was sizing down after training with Lee, and starting this year, Iím now on long/low/slack bikes (except the DJ), and Iím feeling much more confident. Thank you for explaining why

    Itís good to see Iím not alone. Lee and I definitely do not see eye to eye at all on fit, mainly because I think he tries to shove everyone (and every bike) into his way. Heís good at teaching people the basic riding skills ó but Lee gets so caught up in fit he forgets to teach you about riding.

    Which was the whole reason I was taking lessons from him for years, but stopped a couple years ago because all he cares about is forcing you into his fit (personal experience YMMV). And that was killing my confidence instead of improving it.

    And this fit doesnít work for everyone: people have mobility issues (myself) who arenít going to give up riding, people are built differently, and not all bikes fit into his measurements nicely.

    When I was riding closer to his fit, the bike felt too squirrelly and Iíve had quite a few crashes because I was never comfortable on it. I also went through a significant amount of stems and handlebars before finding what fit for me (which is exactly what I comfortable with in the first place).

    Itís a shame. He could really help people enjoy riding more and work on helping with confidence, but his whole bike fit is just the opposite for me.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,467
    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Are we measuring middle of grip/end of handlebar to middle of bb?
    I measured from the center of my crank spindle to the center of my bar at the stem. This is my 140mm medium trail bike with 430mm reach

    I got about 779mm with a 50mm stem. I'm 5'8"...just shy of 174cm.

    I just measured my XC bike and got 800mm with a 66mm...its got a 414mm reach.

    Lol...I think I measured wrong.

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,495
    I read and shared it with a few, found it quite interesting, found it even more interesting when I measured my 3 very different bikes (2 set for actual trail riding, 1 for commuting) and found the 2 set for trail were exactly the same, while the one set for commuting was 1cm longer.
    My measurements were quite a bit over his calculators recs, roughly 70mm for the trail bikes, 80mm for the commuter, but if I show anyone a pic of me on the bikes, they say they actually look maybe a tad small and I have brought my riding position back a whole lot over the years as I've compensated for aging, injuries/flexibility and riding style/terrain.

    The setups on the bikes are quite varied, 1 bike has the stem slammed and a 9 degree backsweep bar and is a 130/140 FS, the other has 35mm of spacers below the stem and a 16 degree backsweep bar (just installed week before) and rigid, both bars are 780mm wide, these are the trail bikes.

    You're "sposed" to measure to the center of the outside of the bar, as bar sweep does come into play in this equation.

    Quote Originally Posted by WHALENARD View Post
    Are we measuring middle of grip/end of handlebar to middle of bb?
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  16. #16
    LMN
    LMN is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,285
    The RAD recommended for me is about 740. Every single bike I own has a rad of 810 to 830. I am not sure it is actually possible to achieve that RAD on any of my bikes.

    I am curious as to where he got his recommended fit numbers from. I do not think there is a single professional who is running a bike anywhere near those dimensions.
    "The best pace is suicide pace, and today is a good day to die." Steve Prefontaine

  17. #17
    Anytime. Anywhere.
    Reputation: Travis Bickle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,228
    It sounds to me that he came up with this fit method through experience.
    I got some bad ideas in my head.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Just J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    6,443
    I bought the ebook this morning and read it my my garage with my new Waltworks in front of me. I am within a few millimetres on all of Lee's recommendations which is good to know, pretty interesting too for me at least. I even noted what Lee says about bar and saddle position, his recommendation is to have the bar slightly lower than the saddle which is something I adopted for the first time on this bike. I made comment the other day about it feeling weird but something I would get used to. Exactly what Lee says on the subject.

    I have had numerous bike fits over the years, I know what works for me I guess too, so all my bike builds generally start with a few key dimensions and I go from there. Lee air's on the side of a traditional bike fit I think, but he's actually made it easier to follow and quantify so that people can work out what should work for them too.

    I suppose it makes sense that I am where I should be. I had lengthy discussions with Walt and other's when we were building my frame, I wanted to go long because everyone was banging on about it like it was the be all and end all, but Walt reigned me in and suggested a length that would be about the limit of what my dimensions should be at. He was right, I'm getting benefits I can feel but I'm not stretched out or hindered in any way.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    1,429
    I read those fit suggestions and I found them to be pretty asinine and inches too short.
    However I bet it's in the ballpark for my wife.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    It sounds to me that he came up with this fit method through experience.
    That and through applying RipRow learnings. I think it has validity but ignores the effects of geometry in chasing maximum leverage.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    320
    So my RAD number is 818 and my bike is 860. I can't imagine how crunch up I would be if my bike was at my RAD number. I'd probably need to lower by stem and shorten my bars. Two things that I'm not likely to do. I tried running a lower stem and felt too my like I would go OTB on steep spots. I run a 760 bar and like the ride feel with that bar. I read through the PinkBike comments and that was entertaining.

  22. #22
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,646
    Interesting. I'm exact with my RAD# at 800 and 800 on both my single speed hardtail and full suspension. Both frames are also custom to my numbers. It reminds me of my math sometimes. I have the correct answer but I can't tell you how I got there.
    Last edited by Vader; 3 Weeks Ago at 06:35 PM.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  23. #23
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by Suns_PSD View Post
    I read those fit suggestions and I found them to be pretty asinine and inches too short.
    However I bet it's in the ballpark for my wife.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    Interesting. Iím female and I found them to be too short for me.

    I think there are several other factors at play that this doesnít include like ape factor and body proportions.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,489
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post

    Lol...I think I measured wrong.
    You're supposed to measure to the midpint between your grips.

    I spent a month studying Lee's school and spent about two hours on the phone with him to write this: https://www.cyclinghacks.com/mountai...ills-coaching/

    Good stuff indeed. I've been saying that the long setups on many bikes is weird for a long time. My experience is that you can set up a bike that is stable and comfortable by making it long and tall. You know, like a beach cruiser. IME, long-reach bikes allowed for lazy, unskilled riding. A bike that fits the way a LLB fit does demands and empowers you to take control of the bike rather than just hanging on for dear life.

    This is where the rest of Lee's work comes in: riding technique and strength training.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,489
    Quote Originally Posted by voghan View Post
    So my RAD number is 818 and my bike is 860. I can't imagine how crunch up I would be if my bike was at my RAD number. I'd probably need to lower by stem and shorten my bars.
    RAD has nothing to do with handlebar width. It is the hypotenuse of the horizontal and vertical distance from the center of your BB to your hands. Measure from the middle of your cranks to the midpoint between your grips. Because most handlebars had upsweep, backsweep, and rise, this spot is probably behind the center of your handlebar.

    I thought my bike would be way "too long" but I ended going from 70 to 50 mm and using a wider bar to get my bike to fit by Lee's RAD measurement and it's been great since this summer.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation: RS VR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,467
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    You're supposed to measure to the midpint between your grips.
    So I measured from the center of my crank arm at the BB to the center of the grip and got ~779 on the trail bike and ~800 on the XC bike. Still the same as my original measurement. I guess I can try a 50 from a 66mm stem on my XC bike.

    My "RAD" is 773.

    It seems like most bike fitters fit you sitting down. Lee's method is in the standing position?

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,495
    His RAD setup is for those who ONLY ride up and down, not for those who enjoy riding a wide variety of terrain and trails, from XC to DH, he says so. There's no way I could or would want to ride my bike setup to fit his idea of what is right and that seems to be a quite widely held thought on these forums, which is strange considering how many buy bikes and only basically do the up/down thing

    Of course it does, if you increase or decrease bar width, then the measurement will do accordingly, fairly simple math - if you change the length of one side of a triangle......

    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    RAD has nothing to do with handlebar width. It is the hypotenuse of the horizontal and vertical distance from the center of your BB to your hands. Measure from the middle of your cranks to the midpoint between your grips. Because most handlebars had upsweep, backsweep, and rise, this spot is probably behind the center of your handlebar.

    I thought my bike would be way "too long" but I ended going from 70 to 50 mm and using a wider bar to get my bike to fit by Lee's RAD measurement and it's been great since this summer.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    320
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    RAD has nothing to do with handlebar width. It is the hypotenuse of the horizontal and vertical distance from the center of your BB to your hands. Measure from the middle of your cranks to the midpoint between your grips. Because most handlebars had upsweep, backsweep, and rise, this spot is probably behind the center of your handlebar.

    I thought my bike would be way "too long" but I ended going from 70 to 50 mm and using a wider bar to get my bike to fit by Lee's RAD measurement and it's been great since this summer.
    Did you remove spacers below your stem? It seems to me a lower bar height should shorten your RAD number. What size bar are you using?

    Sent from my ONEPLUS A5000 using Tapatalk

  29. #29
    the discerning hooligan
    Reputation: MOJO K's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    2,144
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    . Measure from the middle of your cranks to the midpoint between your grips. Because most handlebars had upsweep, backsweep, and rise, this spot is probably behind the center of your handlebar.

    If you wanted to pin it down, a straight edge or a string drawn between the end of the grips will give you the measuring point in that space.


    The whole discussion begs the question of how this would translate to a drop bar bike with 3 different hand positions. I probably spend more time on the hoods than the drops or flats....just measure to the preffered possition I mostly ride on the hoods), or is there a point between the 3 that averages them out?
    MERCY! MERCY! MERCY!

  30. #30
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by RS VR6 View Post
    So I measured from the center of my crank arm at the BB to the center of the grip and got ~779 on the trail bike and ~800 on the XC bike. Still the same as my original measurement. I guess I can try a 50 from a 66mm stem on my XC bike.

    My "RAD" is 773.

    It seems like most bike fitters fit you sitting down. Lee's method is in the standing position?
    Thatís correct. His fit is basically what would be optimal for you on the riprow: being able to hip hinge and deadlift within a certain range. Which is great for when youíre going over technical terrain, or going down it. And a lot of it applies to pump tracks, dirt jumps, and slope style. So for my DJ, yeah, this fit works. For trail riding, I spend a lot more time seated (I canít do standing pedaling for hours on end without a break) that his fit feels really cramped to me.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range

  31. #31
    I have Flat Pedal shame.
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    759
    I'm a little old school probably in thinking that ETT (from the seat to the stem) is the best measurement. I went from a large Stumpjumper with a reach of 442mm to a large Patrol with a reach of 475. But since Transition also steepened the seat angle, the ETT is actually about 7mm shorter on the Patrol (611 vs 618mm). I haven't measured, but I suspect the RAD is way shorter on the Stumpy than on the Patrol... even though they fit the same.
    We don't ride to add days to our life, we ride to add life to the days we have left here.

  32. #32
    No known cure
    Reputation: Vader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    2,646
    Quote Originally Posted by Thustlewhumber View Post
    I'm a little old school probably in thinking that ETT (from the seat to the stem) is the best measurement. I went from a large Stumpjumper with a reach of 442mm to a large Patrol with a reach of 475. But since Transition also steepened the seat angle, the ETT is actually about 7mm shorter on the Patrol (611 vs 618mm). I haven't measured, but I suspect the RAD is way shorter on the Stumpy than on the Patrol... even though they fit the same.
    I'm old school too. Just give me. 24" TT and I'll get to where I'm going.
    Ripping trails and tipping ales

  33. #33
    Formerly of Kent
    Reputation: Le Duke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,005
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    His RAD setup is for those who ONLY ride up and down, not for those who enjoy riding a wide variety of terrain and trails, from XC to DH, he says so. There's no way I could or would want to ride my bike setup to fit his idea of what is right and that seems to be a quite widely held thought on these forums, which is strange considering how many buy bikes and only basically do the up/down thing

    Of course it does, if you increase or decrease bar width, then the measurement will do accordingly, fairly simple math - if you change the length of one side of a triangle......
    I never realized how many people only climb on fire roads until I started reading some of the regional forums. Similarly, I didnít understand how many people do the same laps on the same trail system over and over again on the same day. Their riding and the type of terrain they encounter never changes.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Death from Below.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Gasp4Air's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    3,261
    The quest to determine ideal bike set-up using formulas is an attempt to make the complex and subjective into something simple and measurable. There are so many factors. To name a few:

    Joint-to-joint lengths - cripes, how many would that be?'
    Weight distribution
    Distribution of strength among muscle groups
    Neural factors, such as balance, movement sensation, etc
    Types of forces encountered for the kind of riding one does
    Positions of the stars

    His criteria are height and gender. That's it.

    Then also, there are myriad ways to set up a bike to reach the same RAD. Are they all equally beneficial?

    From the post: "As your bike RAD gets closer to ideal for you, your bike will start to feel better. When you get to the last 10mm, then the last 5mm, then to perfect, something clicks. Your bike just feels right."

    Ultimately, in his own words, it boils down to what feels right.


    P.S. RAD on my own two oft tweaked bikes (Salsa Pony Rustler (MTB) and Salsa Fargo (Gravel) were both right about 95 cm - well above the "ideal" RAD. I guess, I'm one of these: "Most riders don't know any better".

    There are simpler ways to get to a starting point. Then, adjust to your liking.

    Use it, use it, use it while you still have it.

  35. #35
    Always in the wrong gear
    Reputation: Impetus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,278
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    You're supposed to measure to the midpint between your grips.

    I spent a month studying Lee's school and spent about two hours on the phone with him to write this: https://www.cyclinghacks.com/mountai...ills-coaching/

    Good stuff indeed. I've been saying that the long setups on many bikes is weird for a long time. My experience is that you can set up a bike that is stable and comfortable by making it long and tall. You know, like a beach cruiser. IME, long-reach bikes allowed for lazy, unskilled riding. A bike that fits the way a LLB fit does demands and empowers you to take control of the bike rather than just hanging on for dear life.

    This is where the rest of Lee's work comes in: riding technique and strength training.
    Am I understanding this right?
    Measuring the distance from center of bb to the imaginary (or literal) line strung between the grips?

    If I am, that seems to miss a crucial aspect of bar width as it pertains to weight bias and steering input.
    I really like the idea of just measuring the distance from bb spindle to bar end as a function of Ďareaí.
    for extreme illustration: if I mounted an 800 mm broomstick to my stem, vs a 600mm one, (to exclude the rise/sweep) the bike will feel very different on the trail.

    Having just snuck a 10mm spacer under my stem and really enjoying the positive change, Iím curious enough about my RAD to go see what it is. I want to make sure Iím using the correct points.
    Donít modify the trail to match your skills, modify your skills to match the trails.

  36. #36
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    853
    Quote Originally Posted by Travis Bickle View Post
    https://www.pinkbike.com/news/lee-mc...ke-set-up.html

    I read this over on PB and of course measured my bikes and my RAD is about 40 to 50mm more than Lee's basic formula. Obviously Lee thinks longer front centres are not great. I'm not about to go back to a smaller sized frame since I had them for decades and prefer more RAD than they deliver.

    Is your RAD over, under, or spot on Lee's recommendation? Any thoughts on his bike fit theory?
    Well over the supposedly optimal "RAD". Damn and I was having so much fun!...

    I'm guessing its not obvious but to suggest that there is a formula one could use to determine the one optimal setup for a bike is pretty ridiculous.

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,489
    Lee discussed handlebar width in a previous article. RAD measurement assumes you're riding a modern bike with a reasonablely short stem and with a rational handlebar width for your proportions, not "hotdog" bars with the grips crammed next to the stem.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by mack_turtle View Post
    Lee discussed handlebar width in a previous article. RAD measurement assumes you're riding a modern bike with a reasonablely short stem and with a rational handlebar width for your proportions, not "hotdog" bars with the grips crammed next to the stem.
    His handlebar width in that article is also way off. No way can I run ~840mm bars, can't remember the exact number but it was obscenely large. I understand what he is trying to do and academically it makes sense. In practice I think it is a big miss though due to geometry differences changing the leverage needs of the rider.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation: mack_turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    8,489
    Quote Originally Posted by MOJO K View Post

    The whole discussion begs the question of how this would translate to a drop bar bike with 3 different hand positions.
    I asked Lee about that. RAD applies to modern mountain bikes with flat bars. He's had some luck applying it to CX bikes but that's more nuanced so he makes no claims about drop bar bikes. He's used the same approach to fit some CX racers but cannot apply anything like a general theory to it... yet.

  40. #40
    Ride On
    Reputation: geraldooka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    853
    Yup, then throw in the other important factors like:

    Terrain
    Riding style
    Preferences

    Even if his formulas are based on a thousand use cases of individuals (which apparently it is) AND he separated and analyzed each of these other extenuating factors (which he didn't) it still would not be possible to determine the perfect fit for any one individual based on this formula. Because one's bike happen's to fall into the range of what is considered acceptable by this formula and you happen to enjoy riding said bike does not suddenly make it "correct".

  41. #41
    Always in the wrong gear
    Reputation: Impetus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Posts
    2,278
    Interestingly, this actually came out really close.
    I did my best to measure my bike and got 78.5 cm.

    Iím 5í9Ē (176cm), so my RAD is something like 786mm

    Given that I *just* bought a new fork (same A2C) but added 10mm more of spacer under the stem and found I climb and descend faster and with more confidence, it seems like this works for me, on a singlespeed.
    Donít modify the trail to match your skills, modify your skills to match the trails.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by geraldooka View Post
    Yup, then throw in the other important factors like:

    Terrain
    Riding style
    Preferences

    Even if his formulas are based on a thousand use cases of individuals (which apparently it is) AND he separated and analyzed each of these other extenuating factors (which he didn't) it still would not be possible to determine the perfect fit for any one individual based on this formula. Because one's bike happen's to fall into the range of what is considered acceptable by this formula and you happen to enjoy riding said bike does not suddenly make it "correct".
    Agreed. I also noticed, if you see Lee on his bike in pics or videos it appears to fit smaller than racers (enduro & DH) fit on their bikes. It doesn't look too small for a trail bike but he does seem to have a narrower hip angle than you see on racers. Anyone else notice this?

  43. #43
    Interplanetary Poultry
    Reputation: scatterbrained's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    413
    Out of curiosity I measured my bike from the crank spindle to the virtual point between the grips. His recommendation (based on the article) would see me at 761mm, whereas I was actually almost 100mm longer. Instead of 76cm my RAD is closer to 86cm. I can't imagine moving my bars down and back 10cm.
    Editor In Chief, "Internet Tough Guy Magazine"
    "Home of Chuck Norris' Keyboard"

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    6
    I measured up my Sawyer and was very surprised to see the RAD exactly where Lee predicted. I did no math in my set up, totally instinctual but I'm happy see someone else agrees with my preference, lol.

  45. #45
    always licking the glass
    Reputation: stripes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    1,550
    Quote Originally Posted by scatterbrained View Post
    Out of curiosity I measured my bike from the crank spindle to the virtual point between the grips. His recommendation (based on the article) would see me at 761mm, whereas I was actually almost 100mm longer. Instead of 76cm my RAD is closer to 86cm. I can't imagine moving my bars down and back 10cm.
    He has a lot of his students turn their handlebars upside down (especially if they have a rise) and/or trim them, and slam the stem to the head tube to get them in the correct RAD.
    Guerrilla Gravity BAMF, Colorado Front Range

  46. #46
    sbd
    sbd is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    671
    Both my bike are way longer than the recommended RAD and I can't imagine them being shorter. Not my cup of tea.

    Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    1,248
    There is another bike fit "guru" Chris Porter I believe is his name. He uses a multiplier of about 5, or half of your height, and has overall recommendations longer than what Lee suggests. Not saying one way is right or wrong but making the point that this is far from consensus within bike fitting experts, so lets not take it as gospel. FYI I come in 65mm longer than Lee's suggested RAD. My previous frame would have been closer to my "ideal". That bike was more playful (also 26"), this bike is more stable....all depends how you want your bike to behave.

  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,099
    After 20 years of working pt in 2 shops I can tell you that every BODY is different.

    What works for him, won't work for me. Or you, or her...

    Here's something to think about--
    My 6" travel (17") frame has a reach of 420mm

    My HT has a 150mm fork and a reach of 435mm (15mm longer).

    I put a 60mm stem on the 6" dual suspension and a 45mm stem on the HT. This should make the bikes feel similar (sag and st angel taken into consideration before buying the components and setting my stem height).

    Yet the HT feels like I'm reaching about an inch farther!

    The kicker? The RAD is the same!

    Why do you think they feel so different? Because the angle of the rad is different. That's why.

    Edit: FWIW, I'm fine with the way the bike feels since they're 2 completely different rides.


    His RAD equation is just what HE feels is perfect for where he rides and how he rides.

    Ttyl, Fahn
    Hubbard Bike Club

  49. #49
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,495
    While it would not completely make up for the "inch" longer feeling, don't forget you're sagging the fork on the HT about 25-40mm, which is going to effectively lengthen your reach as the back does not sag, then you most likely run a bit more sag in the rear of the FS vs front, which then shortens the effective reach, so I'm guessing that's what you're feeling.

    You just can't setup a HT and FS the same way, need to do adjustments for how they are effected once you're on board, try raising the bar on the HT 10-15mm and see if that feeling doesn't go away or at least lessen.

    Quote Originally Posted by LarryFahn View Post
    After 20 years of working pt in 2 shops I can tell you that every BODY is different.What works for him, won't work for me. Or you, or her...

    Here's something to think about--
    My 6" travel (17") frame has a reach of 420mm
    My HT has a 150mm fork and a reach of 435mm (15mm longer).

    I put a 60mm stem on the 6" dual suspension and a 45mm stem on the HT. This should make the bikes feel similar (sag and st angel taken into consideration before buying the components and setting my stem height).

    Yet the HT feels like I'm reaching about an inch farther! The kicker? The RAD is the same! Why do you think they feel so different? Because the angle of the rad is different. That's why.
    His RAD equation is just what HE feels is perfect for where he rides and how he rides.

    Ttyl, Fahn
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  50. #50
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LarryFahn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    2,099
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    While it would not completely make up for the "inch" longer feeling, don't forget you're sagging the fork on the HT about 25-40mm, which is going to effectively lengthen your reach as the back does not sag. The you most likely run a bit more sag in the rear of the FS, which then shoterns the effective reach, so I'm guessing that's what you're feeling.

    You just can't setup a HT and FS the same way, need to do adjustments for how they are effected once you're on board, try raising the bar on the HT 10-15mm and see if that feeling doesn't go away or at least lessen.

    "sag and st angel taken into consideration before buying the components and setting my stem height".
    Hubbard Bike Club

  51. #51
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nauc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    3,039
    ride what feels good to you. who cares what others do. everyones bodies are different. some people are more flexible or stronger or have injuries etc

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation: movingmountain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    382
    I took one of Lees classes last year. Did some work on the ripmo, pretty interesting Class was good. He said my bike was too big for me with his measurements..his sizing itís not for me Iíve tried a smaller bike. He also thought I should be on narrower bars with more sweep, tried out his recommendation I didnít like them. He said I should also be on shorter cranks. Which I switched too, which I did like better. His classes are good. Maybe not so much his bike fit measurements. There were three guys in our class not of our bikes fit his RAD
    Four wheels move my body Two wheels move my soul

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jeremy3220's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by movingmountain View Post
    I took one of Lees classes last year. Did some work on the ripmo, pretty interesting Class was good. He said my bike was too big for me with his measurements..his sizing itís not for me Iíve tried a smaller bike. He also thought I should be on narrower bars with more sweep, tried out his recommendation I didnít like them. He said I should also be on shorter cranks.
    You sure he wasn't trying to abduct you into the circus?
    Name:  China01_350.jpg
Views: 306
Size:  74.1 KB

  54. #54
    Barely in control
    Reputation: Schulze's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,016
    Arm angle and center of gravity are not accounted for. I don't see how this fit system could be relevant.

  55. #55
    Professional Crastinator
    Reputation: Fleas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,270
    This all sounded interesting so I measured:

    Height=75"=1905mm --> x .447 = RAD = 851mm (33.5")
    Bike = 32.5-32.75 (that's as close as I can measure) or 825-832mm. I think my hand position can vary by more than that just due to the size and width of my grips.

    I ride a 19" frame, which is the smallest I can ride. It is set up with a relatively high bottom bracket and a slammed 90mm stem with flat bars (and a 400mm seat post).
    I recently tried to buy a 21", but they were out. The head tube would have been 5mm taller. The ETT would have been 50mm longer, but I had a 40mm stem to maintain the same reach.

    Either way, going longer, esp. a full inch, would not work for me.

    I think I could see the value of riding a larger frame, but I think the front end would ride lighter - for better or worse.

    -F
    It's never easier - you just go faster.

  56. #56
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleas View Post
    This all sounded interesting so I measured:

    Height=75"=1905mm --> x .447 = RAD = 851mm (33.5")
    Bike = 32.5-32.75 (that's as close as I can measure) or 825-832mm. I think my hand position can vary by more than that just due to the size and width of my grips.

    I ride a 19" frame, which is the smallest I can ride. It is set up with a relatively high bottom bracket and a slammed 90mm stem with flat bars (and a 400mm seat post).
    I recently tried to buy a 21", but they were out. The head tube would have been 5mm taller. The ETT would have been 50mm longer, but I had a 40mm stem to maintain the same reach.

    Either way, going longer, esp. a full inch, would not work for me.

    I think I could see the value of riding a larger frame, but I think the front end would ride lighter - for better or worse.

    -F
    I would think it's going to make the front heavier since your entire mass will be shifted forwards.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  57. #57
    Professional Crastinator
    Reputation: Fleas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,270
    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    I would think it's going to make the front heavier since your entire mass will be shifted forwards.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    I think not...

    The chainstays are equal, so my saddle position relative to the rear axle is the same. The front (reach/ETT) is longer (so the wheelbase is longer), but my hands are not farther forward due to the 50mm-shorter stem. The farther the front wheel goes out, the less weight will be on it.
    The biggest attraction for me going to the next size is to get the latest model which is lighter and a tad flexier, and has a more dropper-friendly seat tube. I think they knocked a degree off the HA as well (which lengthens the WB even a tad bit more).

    I'll have to check my fatbike. I'm guessing it's shorter still. Although it is taller, so it might be a wash.

    -F
    It's never easier - you just go faster.

  58. #58
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by Fleas View Post
    I think not...

    The chainstays are equal, so my saddle position relative to the rear axle is the same. The front (reach/ETT) is longer (so the wheelbase is longer), but my hands are not farther forward due to the 50mm-shorter stem. The farther the front wheel goes out, the less weight will be on it.
    The biggest attraction for me going to the next size is to get the latest model which is lighter and a tad flexier, and has a more dropper-friendly seat tube. I think they knocked a degree off the HA as well (which lengthens the WB even a tad bit more).

    I'll have to check my fatbike. I'm guessing it's shorter still. Although it is taller, so it might be a wash.

    -F
    The idea that putting the grips in the same spot makes everything equal is a bit of a misnomer. It does and it doesn't. One way it doesn't is your body's relationship to the head tube of the bike. On a shorter stem bike you will have more mass centered over the bike but also be able to add more weight to the front when needed because of this.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  59. #59
    mtbr member
    Reputation: LyNx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    23,495
    Actually, I do believe you have that backwards - with a bike with longer stem=shorter Reach, you will be able to weight the front easier as the actual HT will be closer to you and the weight you're putting on the bars will be further forward relative to the HT, all other things being equal.

    Quote Originally Posted by tuckerjt07 View Post
    The idea that putting the grips in the same spot makes everything equal is a bit of a misnomer. It does and it doesn't. One way it doesn't is your body's relationship to the head tube of the bike. On a shorter stem bike you will have more mass centered over the bike but also be able to add more weight to the front when needed because of this.
    One day your life will flash before your eyes, will it be worth watching??

  60. #60
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    2,369
    Quote Originally Posted by LyNx View Post
    Actually, I do believe you have that backwards - with a bike with longer stem=shorter Reach, you will be able to weight the front easier as the actual HT will be closer to you and the weight you're putting on the bars will be further forward relative to the HT, all other things being equal.
    I didn't say easier. I said apply more weight. With the ability to transfer your weight back more quickly you can recover more easily and will be less prone to an endo all things equal.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

  61. #61
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    723
    put my Patrol on the saw horses and did the stand up method he shows. my RAAD in this case was spot on. i didn't use the math formula. at 6 5 long and lanky, i don't expect to fit into any models, nor would i ride a bar over 780 in length, etc. i appreciate his attempt and think there's some wisdom in the ideas, especially for bmx but trail riding, body shape, strength and fitness, trail riding vs max DH stability, way too many factors for anything precise.

Similar Threads

  1. Lee McCormack clinic STOKE!
    By AlliKat in forum Riding Passion and Stories
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-14-2015, 09:33 AM
  2. MTB Skills Clinics w/ Lee McCormack October 10, 11, 12
    By colbatguano in forum California - Socal
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-03-2014, 11:42 AM
  3. Lee McCormack skills clinic at Demo
    By carlineng in forum California - Norcal
    Replies: 55
    Last Post: 04-01-2014, 08:57 AM
  4. Lee McCormack just posted a vid from Santos
    By Jem7sk in forum Southeast/Midsouth - GA, TN, AL, FL, MS, LA, AR
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-06-2014, 06:36 PM
  5. Anybody know Lee (Lee McCormick or Mac)
    By mtnbkrdr98 in forum Colorado - Front Range
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-31-2005, 11:48 PM

Members who have read this thread: 298

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.