Custom is as custom does

Custom is as custom does

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a lot of talk that gets thrown around as to whether a "custom" is necessary or even a good thing. You even hear people state that 99.9% (or some close approximation) of the people out there don't need a "custom". "You'll just end up with a whacked out piece of crap", I've heard tossed out here as well.

First, IMO, there are two types of customs:

1.) Builds that are for people that fall outside the bell curve.
Face it, bigger bike manufacturers build what they think they can move. The frame sizes are targeted toward the masses and they build a small number of frame sizes to cover that target group. People on the fringes of the curve who are very tall, small, or have funky arm/leg/torso measurements get left out and have to either make one of those stock frames work, getting real funky with super long/short stems and flagpole or non existent seat posts, or go custom. Builds for us on the fringes can get us proportionally correct frames sizes, and proper tubing choices to match strength to weight ratios. A very small person doesn't need super strong/heavier tubes, while the Clydesdales should probably ride nothing but. Just because it's "custom" doesn't mean it won't be proportionally correct or handle correctly. Look at Curt Goodrich's 65 cm Blue & white wonder in the CPG-issimo thread. It's a good example of a custom done right. I believe the Skunkbird and her twin fall into that category of "proportionally correct" customs. In my case, custom is the only option.

2.) Frames by small builders who don't stock frames.
Each frame is built for the person ordering it. It doesn't need to be a bell curve fringe special, it can be a "regular" size and have a standard, proven (what ever you define that as) geometry. Yet, you can pick color schemes, braze on or clamp, ornate or simple lugs, fillet, tig etc.... This I also define as a "custom".

Custom isn't a bad word.


As far as the build:
I would agree that there should be some re-checks and balances between builder & fitter if some unusual measurements are being sent in for a build (for those builders that use a middle man). If they understand the relationships of the different angles, tube types and lengths involved, shouldn't they have an idea weather certain measurements will yield a crappy handling bike? If that is understood, then do they go ahead and build it anyway knowing that their name will be on a crappy handling bike? Or do they go back and ask the fitter to verify those measurements to try and get an idea of what the reasoning is behind them?

If working directly with the builder, if the customer is pushing measurements that seem out of whack, do you try to politely correct them and explain why you think it won't work? If they insist, do you decline the build, or is the customer always right and build it anyway?

William
*******************************************
true dat

odds, bigs, and smalls need em

everyone else doesn't

if ya can't "fit" on a racing bike

get a randonneur

and don't "fit" by the numbers to establish the contact points*




*this was the cause of all doof's illin...fitter moved him forward 2.5cm to achieve KOPS...which created the 58cm bike with the 62.5 f-c....

Doc Doofus
********************************************************************
"Need"? No... but maybe yes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There isn't one precise geometry that is the only one that works for any one person, I think. It's interesting to have bikes that work but have different personalities. Change the angle here, raise the front there, you stay balanced but the bike behaves differently. That's cool too.

Tom
*******************************************************************
i think the "custom" aspect of what you're refering to
has more to do with emotion than intellect, more tied
to the heart than to the head.

framebuilders are less likely to be tailors (yet knowing
about "fit" is important) and more likely to be folks that
live outside the lines of conventional industry commerce
and simply enjoy the task of trying to "make" something
really nice/precise without having to worry about the clock,
the model year, trends, the expiration date, blah, blah, blah.

often, when the client seeking something "mighty fine"
meets the maker that offers just such a tangible good,
the fireworks begin.

e-RICHIE (aka:Richard Sachs)
******************************************************************
another part of the equation is trust. who do you trust? as a few threads lately have said, riders don't always trust their fitters. or the shops and salesmen they talk to. so who, then, to trust? stock geometry is one thing to trust (or not.) i think some people go the custom route because when dealing with a certain level of builder, there is a level of trust.

climb1742
******************************************************************
"We can rebuild him....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

We have the technology. We have the capability to make the world's second bionic man. William will be that man. Better than he was before. Better . . . stronger . . . faster."

Hey pal, let us hem-in those trunks you call legs, shorten the guns, and maybe then you too can buy off the rack. You know, it might be cheaper for you in the long run. Er... short run, rather.

Kevan
****************************************************************
the problem with the whole "fitting" thing is someone is learning their craft with your money.

coylifut
***************************************************************
who are you refering to, the fitter or the builder?

e-RICHIE
***************************************************************
I'd add a third reason......

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

and that is to get a combination of otions not available on any other stock bike.

If I want all of the following on a bike:

1.) Fender eyelets
2.) Pump peg
3.) Ability to handle 28 tires
4.) 3 bottle mounts for long unsupported rides
5.) Longer headtube to eliminate spacers
6.) Slightly upsloping TT to improve aestetics
7.) 72.5 degree ST angle to fit perfectly with a Brooks saddle.

You have to go custom, don't you.

Len
***************************************
i'm speaking in very general terms here -

agreed. the stew of options make it harder to find a stock
bicycle that will suit. rivendell would be one choice. i know
of few others. otoh, the ability to braze up a frame that
incorporates the laundry list of desires doesn't guarantee
that it'll all work. as climb infers, the trust has to be there.
the client needs to trust that the end meets the fantasy.
the builder needs to trust that he client "really" wants
all this. and the fitter, well...

e-RICHIE
***************************************************************
couldn't agree more.......

I was trying to point out that the more one off things you want (many not related to fit), the fewer selections are available in the marketplace.

I don't happen to like grant's fit philosophy for me, so a riv, while a great bike, is not something that works for me, so what do I get?....obviously custom.

I see these blanket statements like "99.9% of the people don't need custom" as if fit is the only reason to go custom.

Trust is implicit....I wouldn't buy a custom from someone I didn't trust to deliver a bike that works as the minimum.

Len
**************************************************************
""I see these blanket statements like "99.9% of the people don't need custom" as if fit is the only reason to go custom.""


agreed 118%!
(the extra 18% is for my jewish brethren during our holiday.)

e-RICHIE
*************************************************************
There's a picture on the web of a happy customer and a bike, built by a seemingly well credentialed builder. The saddle is literally pushed as far forward as its rails allow. Bad design? Poor communication process? Inexperienced customer? [shrugs]

bluesea
*************************************************************
""I see these blanket statements like "99.9% of the people don't need custom" as if fit is the only reason to go custom.""


Right on!

For those of us to are fortunate enough to fit on stock bikes, and for those of us (like me) who want to ride stock geometry, there are still great reasons for custom. I love the ability to pick my own paint (or lack of paint), decals, and assorted braze ons.

I think that there are two parts to custom, fit and finish. I agree that ninetysomeodd* percent of people don't need to design thier own fit, but I think that almost everyone should design thier own finish if possible.

Who wants to pay thousands of dollars for a bike and say "it rides great, I just wish it looked a little different?"


*genetic freaks like King Kong and William certainly need to go custom on fit. Hmm, now that I think of it, has anyone seen King Kong and William in the same room?

Bradford
*********************************************************
[QUOTE=Bradford]
I think that there are two parts to custom, fit and finish. QUOTE]



and mebbe design and construction too!

e-RICHIE
********************************************************
I was thinking of design as part of fit and holding construction constant.

Just for the record, I agree with your philosophy on custom bikes; if I were to go custom, I'd go to someone like you, answer all the questions you asked, and then ride whatever you made for me.

Bradford
*******************************************************
Well, there's custom builders like Sach's and Kellog, Holland (and some others). IMO you could pretty much trust any of them to get it right. It's not like you see many of these up for resale which is a testmament to their work.

IMO a step down is Serotta custom, I mean Ben isn't actually watching and talking to you (though he does travel around and get personal with his customers and perspective clients). At least Serotta have a tool (size cycle) that ought to be fairly consistent in fit though it depends a lot on the fitter's personal interpretations and biases. It also means a dealer has to be super invested in selling Serotta because the dealers have to invest so much money in the machine and in attending yearly workshops. Seven has a tool too in their fit by numbers.

Then there's Calfee, Moots, IF and a ton of others who do anything you want but you and your shop better know exactly what it is you want. This is plenty good for a bunch of us who have ridden many bikes over many tens of thousands of miles. The best of these builders also offer stock bikes in every cm dimension (not just 5 sizes in 2 cm increments) so they truly can fit 99.9% right off the shelf.

But I think some of us buyers are too confining in where we are willing to look. Even on this forum the same 6-7 names keep coming up over and over. Believe me there is some pretty nice work being done by others and it's not all just racer oriented. Co-Motion comes to mind and I'm not talking tandems. They get it when it comes to bikes, racer or multipurpose (think Dirt's Kirk).

One of the biggest issues in custom is when the buyer has way more money and pride than sense or experience. There is not a thing wrong with starting out on a Giant or Trek or Cannondale. I know a bunch of these guys who started out this way and 1-2 decades later are still more than happy with these bikes. The truth is there are a lot of good bikes out there but you wouldn't know it if you just hung out on this forum.

vaxn8r
********************************************************
thinking und ranting.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

underneath all these discussions i tend to hear a kind of of bullish stupidity coming from the consumer (something like: 'here i am entertain me'). i think we've developed this attitude of entitled helplessness when it comes to our purchases. there are too many guys in porches that can't drive, too many dudes on fast motorcycles that don't know how to corner, and too many folks on bikes that blame everyone but themselves for the fit.

it takes work, intellectual curiosity, maybe some mentoring, and a lot of energy to enter a bike shop with a grounded but basic knowledge of 1) who you are on a bike, and 2) what parameters constitute fit. even if you are starting as a total beginner.. there is a burden of knowledge one has to develop. you don't sell a superbike to a 15 year old kid that's never ridden a moto and expect good things to happen. and yes there are some buidlers whom you just let do their thing (dario and e-richie for example).. but finding them takes a little knowledge and they don't make it easy just by the nature of the time it takes to survive the list (i mean that in a good way). getting their frames requires commitment and a kind of informed surrendering.

any given fitter is selling you a system of fit (personal or informed by a culture like serotta or seven) and it's really that the buck stops with the consumer. you can't show up like a dumb mule and leave with a good fit. maybe you can in cases like serotta but even then you are buying blindly into someone elses methodology.. no matter how well intended or supported by stats in the end.. your bike fit is up to you. i love serotta but i see many folks on them with what i think are horrendous positions on the bike... it has to be hard to fit a guy that rides a bike versus fitting a cyclist. i'm sure they are among the best at it.

i found myself saying this earlier in the week in another post.. one of the beautiful things about cycling is that it is a skill. yes you can just sit there and pedal... but really.. it takes time to become a cyclist. and it does take a certain amount of intellectual effort and rigour just to understand how and why to sit on a bike. it's like being an artist.. any jackass can wake up one day and proclaim themselves an artist... but really... i think it takes a lot more than that. anybody can ride a bike.. but being a cyclist is not easy. i'm willing to say only 33% of the guys that think they are cyclist are in fact cyclists.... because they haven't done the work, the light isnt on. they might be strong and even fast... but what they are doing has nothing to do with cycling. they are bike riders.

in a post lance era.. 80% of the guys i see riding in a peleton training have no idea that they have no idea how to ride in a pack. they think because maybe they are fit and have the gear that all you have to do is sit there and not overlap wheels.... and they are blind to the whole beautiful vocabulary of riding in a pack. it's an entire language unto itself... and like all languages you have to be internally driven to learn how to speak it. you have to be humble and patient (and curious) and know how to sit on back and see all of the details unfolding in front of you. the peleton is an epic tale and not a trashy novel. there is so much going on if you can see it.

the option of a custom fit is awesome and only limited by the lack of knowledge of the guy being fitted. the more you know the better your bike will fit. its not that you need to be a fitter yourself.. its that you need to know who you are on the bike. that being said.. any stock bike that fits is just as good as custom if its the right bike for you. it's literally all on you. rather than buyer beware.. i think it's fitter beware.. the fitter needs a customer that knows who they are and what they want in order to give the ideal fit. being a cyclist is truely a skill unto itself.

no matter how good you are... there is more to find out on every ride. even the way you break your wrist in the drops can be honed.. so that you learn to ride in a way that makes it impossible for you to be hooked. so much going on... every pedal stroke... even moving up through the pack and being that guy that is the smoothest wheel to be on.. takes a kind of intellect. fit certainly does. the custom or stock stuff is secondary to all of this.
oh and a shout out to tom kellogg.. i'd let him just look at me on the bike and do whatever he wanted.. i can see that he gets it too. cycling is a kind of thinking.

Inomalley
********************************************************************
Posted by lnomalley
i think we've developed this attitude of entitled helplessness when it comes to our purchases.

I like a good steam of conciousness free of qualifying statements.

coylifut
*******************************************************************
It always kills me when I hear the phrase "99% of us don't need custom". As if 'need' were the only reason to go custom. What about 'want' as a valid reason?? I wanted custom so I could get the aesthetic I wanted without messing with the frame designers critical handling numbers.

My frame has some very specific and subtle adjustments made to the std Serotta measurements that allow me to get EXACTLY the saddle-bar drop I wanted and EXACLTY the aesthetic I wanted (very slight, almost unnoticeable tt slope, paint options, etc). Otherwize, the handling measurements (trail, front center, etc etc) are exactly the same as the proven Serotta std geometry for a 58cm frame.

The problem with this argument occurs when we fail to differentiate between those adjustments that do not affect the designers tried and true critical handling numbers and those that do.

I completely agree that it is VERY risky when the fiter or customer changes things that affect handling metrics. Perhaps a good piece of advice to the novice getting a custom frame is to compare things like trail, front center, etc on the proposed custom frame with those same measurements from the stock frame. If they are different, the fitter better have a good reason that they need to be or I'd go find someone else.

Yes, there are some clown-bikes out there...however some of them just look funky due to crazy high rise stubby stems, but the handling measurements tied to the frame may be fine - a stem change is an easy remedy. The unfortunate examples are those $8000 custom rigs with crazy numbers that don't come close to resembling a proven geometry to solve a fit problem that could have been remedied by a more experienced frame designer in a better manner.

Wayne77
***************************************************************
[QUOTE=Wayne77]It always kills me when I hear the phrase "99% of us don't need custom". As if 'need' were the only reason to go custom. What about 'want' as a valid reason??QUOTE]



from post #4 above:
i think the "custom" aspect of what you're refering to
has more to do with emotion than intellect, more tied
to the heart than to the head.
etc.

e-RICHIE
*************************************************************
o'malley is so right

doof did his first race in 1982

he once had a cat 2 card

he has always been a bike rider

he has never been a cyclist

he is trying

but he is not even close
__________________
you're very special

now shut up

Dr Doofus
************************************************************
quote;
i'm willing to say only 33% of the guys that think they are cyclist are in fact cyclists.... because they haven't done the work, the light isnt on. they might be strong and even fast... but what they are doing has nothing to do with cycling. they are bike riders.

What???? What does this mean? A bike rider can't be a cyclist without pack racing skills?

Quote;

the option of a custom fit is awesome and only limited by the lack of knowledge of the guy being fitted.

Or the fitter..

I went to Michael Sylvester a super star fittter who I was told could help me figure out my bike set up.. I was going to surrender to his knowledge.
I left feeling more than confused....knowing that his philosophy of "fit is the most important part" (more important than bike handeling), clashed with my idea that performance is everything..

I'd let Dario or e-Richie do their thing...They wouldn't desin a piece of junk.

Shinomaster
**********************************************************
to wit...
there is no reason to sweat any of this if you
don't trust yourself first. climb touched on "trust".
ask yourself, "what do i know?". sometimes, learning
more means getting experience, not paying someone
to tell you stuff. imo, this is particularly telling when
it comes to "fit". i'm amazed how many get a really
fine bicycle and, prior to that, get "fitted". wtf? isn't
there/shouldn't there be a timeline or learning curve
during which one finds out what works and what doesn't
before spending long on a nice ride? it seems counter-
intuitive that there'd still be "contact point mysteries"
when you've already had a small fleet over the years.
pay attention. ride lots. if you want to move up the
price point food chain, take your hard earned knowledge
and trust in yourself and --- go wild.

e-RICHIE
*********************************************************
some of us don't sweat money, so have to be carefull because every bike is a big expense...If I was loaded I'd try everything till I got it right. No big woop.

Shinomaster
********************************************************
Posted by shinomaster
some of us don't sweat money, so have to be carefull because every bike is a big expense...If I was loaded I'd try everything till I got it right. No big woop.


why not derail the maytag and make your own?
there is precedence, i'm told.

e-RICHIE
*******************************************************
everyone here knows the jerk's opinions on "fit" and "custom" bikes. check the archives. here's a modest proposal;

when an out of shape, inflexible person comes into one's shop or one's workshop, or factory looking for a bike; take some measurements, plug them into the old coni formulas or just give him a racing bicycle that has worked for countless other people of his height, body type and intended use.

it takes only a few hours a week to gain the flexibility to maintain a generic racing position on a racing bike. if the individual in question is going to use the expensive "made to measure" bicycle a few times a week in its intended role, he'll grow to love it. if he doesn't use it at all at least he'll have a great looking bike to look at rather than some travesty designed for someone who doesn't ride. his friends who read the robb report won't make fun of him, the fact of the matter is, if one is not going to ride, one can not ride anything. you might as well not ride a bike that looks good, would handle well and will be there for you should you ever start riding.

otherwise just get the right type of bike for the type of riding you are going to do.

jerk
******************************************************
I have less knowledge/experience than the previous posters, but I can present more of a "newbie" opinion.

I got a Serotta because I liked the fitter, if he would've sold Indy Fab or Seven I would've went with those. Not knocking Serotta (and I'm very glad I went with Serotta, knowing what I know now), but to me the fitter was most important--and I'm not saying fitter IS the most important, but purchasing from a company where the fitter is your only contact, well the dude better be good. In a perfect world we'd all fly up to NY and deal with Kelly

Stock frames fit me weird because I have a long torso (which is much cooler than saying "I have a short inseam for my height" ), but even my Lemond fit weird. The bike itself (the Lemond) was probably "too small", but I could barely clear the top tube.

I got a Serotta with a 5.5° slope, pretty slight and only noticeable if you see it from a profile view. I also opted for less head tube than they suggested, told him I would rather deal with spacers for now.

I'm still not totally comfortable with the slope, but if it works

To get a "stock" geometry bike would be something like Giant-type geometry, or like a Trek Pilot--and that's WAY too much slope imho. So I compromise and get slope but not as much.

My question is, how will a framebuilder deal with my inseam/and/reach on a horizontal top tube frame? Surely people of my dimensions (hey--I look normal, never even knew about this until I started shopping for road bikes) have been riding bikes longer than slopers have been around. How else could the fitter have dealt with this?

Anyways, I'm happy with my bike--just a few thoughts I had.

21 Grams was too disjointed for me, Annie Hall is always great "But Alvy, even Freud speaks of a latent...".


and ps, I think a lot of folks here probably are like me--and want to spec everything how they like it, not only stock geo--but a stock bike (frame+components) was out of the question. I even checked out some of the Lemond slopers but I would've sold or tried to swap out 90% of the components, and the colors I liked didn't come with the gruppo I liked--so yeah, "custom" means different things to different people

Serpico
*****************************************************************
Fittings...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About a month ago, I was fitted at a well known bike shop in Boston and the next day I was fitted at a well known bike shop in Connecticut. Both shops had the Serotta fitting bike. At the end I was more confused than ever because I got two very different recommendations. One recommendation was for a small frame (52) and 110 stem; the other for a larger frame (54) and 110 stem.

I don't believe that there is anything flawed about the fitting bike concept, I think rather that the input from the rider is extremely important. By input I mean past experience, how he feels on the bike he's presently riding, what actual use he'll give to the bike he is buying, physical condition, how long and often he plans to ride, and so on. If the buyer has no idea of any of the above, then any frame that is not extremely large or small will do in terms of helping him for setting a benchmark.

Of course, even if the rider can answer the questions above, the fitter must have a great deal of experience and training to be able to interpret the information and come up with a sensible recommendation. In few words, I believe that a great deal of experience from the rider and the fitter is needed in order to achieve a good fit. Of course, we can define experience right after we define good.

Catulle
*****************************************************************
Posted by shinomaster
quote;
i'm willing to say only 33% of the guys that think they are cyclist are in fact cyclists.... because they haven't done the work, the light isnt on. they might be strong and even fast... but what they are doing has nothing to do with cycling. they are bike riders.

What???? What does this mean? A bike rider can't be a cyclist without pack racing skills?



yep

doof knows physiology, but that doesn't make him a coach

a guy who knows brazing and has memorized the pegoretti geos is not a freame builder

you can take five years of classes and not be a potter

a guy can shoot and dribble and be no "balla"

you can be strong and fast and have a fly rig, but if your understanding of a pack is "don't overlap wheels and take your turn at the front" because that's what you've done on every stupid group ride with the "fast" guys for the last ten years, you still don't have a clue and you're not a cyclist

Dr. Doofus
*****************************************************************
Alright, Doof, state the obvious for idiots like me

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You said: "if your understanding of a pack is "don't overlap wheels and take your turn at the front" because that's what you've done on every stupid group ride with the "fast" guys for the last ten years, you still don't have a clue and you're not a cyclist"

Speak some on the understanding of a pack. You've piqued my curiosity.

Tom
*****************************************************************
tools or toys ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

bro this is a hard crowd i.m.h.o. cyclist can get the most out of any bike , bike rider needs all the help he can get ,cheers

Fixed
****************************************************************
Posted by Tom
You said: "if your understanding of a pack is "don't overlap wheels and take your turn at the front" because that's what you've done on every stupid group ride with the "fast" guys for the last ten years, you still don't have a clue and you're not a cyclist"

Speak some on the understanding of a pack. You've piqued my curiosity.



its a mystery to doof

that's why doof is a moron with good LT power

its just called talent

a parallel

doof was the killinest and illinest passer from the wing and the baseline on his HS bball team

but

he never, never, never understood basketball as more than a 2 or 3 man game

fool just never saw the whole floor or understood how offenses really work

definition: the limit of one's talent

doof knows what cats in the carolinas are always in the right move -- and they see it before it happens

doof sees it after...waaaaay after

he doesn't see the pack

they see the pack

just like a real passer sees the floor, and sees the opening before it happens

(larry larry larry bird/game's so well rounded its absurd*)
Dr. Doofus
*****************************************************************
Posted by Tom
You said: "if your understanding of a pack is "don't overlap wheels and take your turn at the front" because that's what you've done on every stupid group ride with the "fast" guys for the last ten years, you still don't have a clue and you're not a cyclist"

Speak some on the understanding of a pack. You've piqued my curiosity.



If I'm not mistaken, the main point is to use your *own* mind and senses to learn and figure things out for yourself. Kind of like the Japanese carpentry apprenticeship I had to go through, where questions were extremely and abusively discouraged in the early stages. The one's who were unable to progress in this manner were deemed unsuitable for the trade. Competence and focus is demonstrated by the types of questions asked.

bluesea
****************************************************************
>>Posted by Serpico

Stock frames fit me weird because I have a long torso (which is much cooler than saying "I have a short inseam for my height" ), but even my Lemond fit weird. The bike itself (the Lemond) was probably "too small", but I could barely clear the top tube.

I got a Serotta with a 5.5° slope, pretty slight and only noticeable if you see it from a profile view. I also opted for less head tube than they suggested, told him I would rather deal with spacers for now.

My question is, how will a framebuilder deal with my inseam/and/reach on a horizontal top tube frame? Surely people of my dimensions (hey--I look normal, never even knew about this until I started shopping for road bikes) have been riding bikes longer than slopers have been around. How else could the fitter have dealt with this?

Anyways, I'm happy with my bike--just a few thoughts I had.>>



You're happy with your bike so you are home free. I won't pretend to fit you to a different one, but I, like you, have a longish torso/shortish legs and I, like you, do not have this imbalance in an extreme, Yosemite Sam, two standard deviations kinda way. Jeans off the rack. No small children pointing, gawking, or shouting rude remarks in public. Normal lookin', at least as far as the legs go. As a consumer--not a builder--I don't find a horizontal top tube to be a problem. I have a little less seat post showing than some folks might want to see (although rather more than Dbrk's fistful francais) and a little less "clearance" than some folks recommend, but none of this is a problem as far as I can tell. I'm easily and safely able to ride, mount, and dismount my bike(s). I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with the sloping solution at all, and if Mr. Kellog wants to build me one at the long-lost-bro discount, I'm interested. I'm just saying that I haven't found that I need a sloping top tube to get the reach I want. Stock nag, off the peg, in a 56 (which is kinda like a 54.5 c-c) works, which may sound a hair tall for somebody just a hair over 5'8", but which is just fine for me, with the saddle where I want it and a reasonable stem.

I think folks are being pretty hard on those who seek expert advice on fit. Sure, people have the capacity to learn, and sure, folks should pay attention to what works and what doesn't work. But things change for people over time--families, careers, schedules, bodies, injuries, recovery time and, for many, commitment to, and time for, cycling. It's easy to develop a problem or to find that what once worked doesn't seem to work as well anymore. Or folks get used to a series of compromises and wonder if there might be something better. So they look for help. I dunno, I'm not a pro cyclist but I'm a pro at something. I sometimes seek advice in my work, which I'm supposed to know pretty well. It's not considered slacking.

djg
**********************************************************************
I know I've asked some dumb questions here but the last time the jerk shot me down pretty hard. So I went to the search function and found out that I knew the answer all along, but had been lazily looking for someone to *dictate* a solution and therefore relieving myself of the need to think, analyze, discriminate, experiment. Not that I won't ask a dumb question again, but I'm working on it.

bluesea
*********************************************************************
coming late to the party....

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think that two points have been made about experience.

First, if you're a newbie, it makes sense to talk to a "fitter" with lots of experience.
Second, if you are experienced yourself, you likely don't need
someone to tell you what works. Bottom line: experience.

Re: who "needs" custom? I say, why not custom, everything "should" be
made to measure. Why are there expensive stock bikes? They have
nothing to do with riding bikes, and everything to do with selling bikes.
Who would choose stock over custom? Not me. Maybe someone who
doesn't know exactly where they want to sit.

Personally, I've spent the better part of 30 years riding and thinking about
bikes, and my position on the bike, and the aesthetics of the bicycle, so
hopefully i've learned something about myself, and what I like.

Ever watch a great musician play an instrument? It's really the same as
watching a great rider do their thing. No one would expect you to be
able to play the violin just becuase a musician handed you one! And you wouldn't
be able to make great music just becuase you had one custom made.
In both cases, you would be hopeless.

Ride yer bike!

-Grant McLean
*********************************************************************
Posted by e-RICHIE
why not derail the maytag and make your own?
there is precedence, i'm told.


I saw Graham Obree ride against Chris Boardman in, ah, Winter 94-95. What a guy. His bouts with depression are terrifying. He's one of my favs!

Anyway, this is the best thread I've read. I have two friends that had some money and bought their first bikes custom. They are miserable on them. Why, because they don't know how to ride. Jerk's so right. Put them on a standard bike, rather than one built to be comfy. There is no way to be comfortable on a road bike unless you ride one a lot and know what you want. And what you want will probably be like the bike Jerk would put you on in the first place. These high-dollar comfort bikes are nasty looking.

Peter W.
*******************************************************************
I’m just going to chime in something that hasn't been said yet (after 5 pages!!!). There are some people with health issues that can't be on "standard" geometries regardless of how much they ride/train. Many people have back issues from injuries such as fused vertebrae or herniated discs. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Not everybody is biometrically compatible. I would venture to guess that we are looking at the classic bell curve. Ale-Jet is closer to one end and someone with serious back issues is on the other. That's why most bike geometries are aimed at somewhere near the middle of the curve. No need to get all touchy-feely about it.

That said I got my Serotta custom because I already had a geometry that handled the way I wanted it so I didn't want any surprises. I just wanted a different "feel" to the bike that wasn't offered in the previous bike's lineup at the time.
__________________
-Eric aka: Ergott
******************************************************************
Originally Posted by ergott
I’m just going to chime in something that hasn't been said yet (after 5 pages!!!). There are some people with health issues that can't be on "standard" geometries regardless of how much they ride/train. Many people have back issues from injuries such as fused vertebrae or herniated discs. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Not everybody is biometrically compatible. I would venture to guess that we are looking at the classic bell curve. Ale-Jet is closer to one end and someone with serious back issues is on the other. That's why most bike geometries are aimed at somewhere near the middle of the curve. No need to get all touchy-feely about it.

That said I got my Serotta custom because I already had a geometry that handled the way I wanted it so I didn't want any surprises. I just wanted a different "feel" to the bike that wasn't offered in the previous bike's lineup at the time.



Eric,

I don't think anyone should need to explain ordering a made to measure
bike. Maybe the other way around. Why get a stock one? What benefit
for the rider is there by ordering a frame designed with no one particular
in mind?

-Gee
****************************************************************
Not an expert, but I think that handling dictates the geometry on many high end bikes that have been in the peleton for a while (Colnago, DeRosa, Merckx etc.).
__________________
-Eric
****************************************************************
Originally Posted by ergott
Not an expert, but I think that handling dictates the geometry on many high end bikes that have been in the peleton for a while (Colnago, DeRosa, Merckx etc.).



I'm not sure we are on the same page.
Geometry and fit are related, (but seperate) issues.
A made to measure bike can be designed to fit differently
than a stock bike, and ride the same. Or it can be designed
to ride differently, and fit the same as a stock bike.

Or both.

Also, just because the pros ride it, doesn't mean it's good.
Every Colango comes with a 43mm rake fork, regardless of size.
That makes no sense, unless someone can explain to me the "magic" that one.
All the different size bikes have different amounts of trail,
and thus handle differently, since Colnago changes the head tube angle,
and not the rake.

-Gee
****************************************************************
Originally Posted by ergott
Not an expert, but I think that handling dictates the geometry on many high end bikes that have been in the peleton for a while (Colnago, DeRosa, Merckx etc.).


if you make a frame designed for someone with physical
limitations that won't allow him/her to assimilate what
might be considered a "normal" riding position, more often
than not the details that affect how the bicycle rides and
behaves are skewed. sometimes, in order to concede to
a pre-existing condition, "fit" details can turn "handling"
details into a nightmare of a bicycle. sure, the client is
happy that he/she can ride comfortably, but the satisfaction
with the bicycle itself is not always 100%.

e_RICHIE
***************************************************************
Originally Posted by Grant McLean
I'm not sure we are on the same page.
Geometry and fit are related, (but seperate) issues.
A made to measure bike can be designed to fit differently
than a stock bike, and ride the same. Or it can be designed
to ride differently, and fit the same as a stock bike.

Or both.

Also, just because the pros ride it, doesn't mean it's good.
Every Colango comes with a 43mm rake fork, regardless of size.
That makes no sense, unless someone can explain to me the "magic" that one.
All the different size bikes have different amounts of trail,
and thus handle differently, since Colnago changes the head tube angle,
and not the rake.

-Gee



What I meant is that let's say for example, a Merckx and DeRosa have different geos, but both can be made to fit a rider that fits on one of them. I think that the difference between the two (barring materials) would be the handling. Then again I really don't claim to be an expert here. I'm just trying to learn more.
__________________
-Eric
*****************************************************************
Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
if you make a frame designed for someone with physical
limitations that won't allow him/her to assimilate what
might be considered a "normal" riding position, more often
than not the details that affect how the bicycle rides and
behaves are skewed. sometimes, in order to concede to
a pre-existing condition, "fit" details can turn "handling"
details into a nightmare of a bicycle. sure, the client is
happy that he/she can ride comfortably, but the satisfaction
with the bicycle itself is not always 100%.



Interesting.
Thanks.
__________________
-Eric
*****************************************************************
Originally Posted by ergott
Not an expert, but I think that handling dictates the geometry on many high end bikes that have been in the peleton for a while (Colnago, DeRosa, Merckx etc.).


Except that....
...many of the bikes in the peloton are custom made for each rider. Or made by a custom maker and painted with someone else´s colors because they are sponsors footing the bills (as was the case with Lemond).

Catulle
****************************************************************
Originally Posted by Catulle
...many of the bikes in the peloton are custom made for each rider. Or made by a custom maker and painted with someone else´s colors because they are sponsors footing the bills (as was the case with Lemond).



True enough!!
__________________
-Eric
*****************************************************************
Originally Posted by Catulle
...many of the bikes in the peloton are custom made for each rider. Or made by a custom maker and painted with someone else´s colors because they are sponsors footing the bills (as was the case with Lemond).


i'd normally defer to the lad in the panama hat, but i think
pros in the peloton are now more likely to have their own unique
scents brewed by the local nose-meister than they are to have
specially made frames. with the exception of some high profile
prima donnas, most of these paid racers are on bicycles made
in asia and decorated with french and italian sounding names.
bananas, okay!??

e-RICHIE
***************************************************************
Originally Posted by ergott
What I meant is that let's say for example, a Merckx and DeRosa have different geos, but both can be made to fit a rider that fits on one of them.


Ok, I see what you are saying.

Yes, that's correct.

-Gee
**************************************************************
Originally Posted by e-RICHIE
i'd normally defer to the lad in the panama hat, but i think
pros in the peloton are now more likely to have their own unique
scents brewed by the local nose-meister than they are to have
specially made frames. with the exception of some high profile
prima donnas, most of these paid racers are on bicycles made
in asia and decorated with french and italian sounding names.
bananas, okay!??


e-Richie is right. Today, it's pretty rare to see a division 1 team not
using their sponsors gear. It can still be custom. But "generally"
it's not a "re-badged" frame from another builder. For example, Lampre guys
really did ride Cannondale bikes, but most were custom sizes or geometry.

I do remember seeing photos in BiciSport of Andrea Tafi riding a "cervelo"
that for sure was a C40 repainted. And Tyler Hamilton riding a "Look" that
was clearly a Cervelo P3. But beyond some custom TimeTrial and
special purpose bikes, I believe that to be uncommon
in 2005. Bianchi built those FG lite's for DiLuca, and they don't even
sell that frame (without carbon seatstays) But they are Bianchi's.

Anyone know of a specific example from the last year or so of a top rider
who rides something that's "undercover"?
_gee
***************************************************************
Originally Posted by Grant McLean

Anyone know of a specific example from the last year or so of a top rider
who rides something that's "undercover"?
_gee


yeah i do. maybe you have read that cipollini sonny bono-ed
a tree two days a go while skiing. his boards had dynastar
graphics but they were really volants.

e-RICHIE
**************************************************************