Frame advice in respect of NOTICEABLE difference.

[night cycler]

Vickster: Can you tell me about the layback seat posts please -I had not heard of them.

Vantage: My saddle has a 2 piece clamp that has 2 small nut & bolts holding the clamp to the saddle rails. (I will make the effort this weekend to turn the post around if you guys also feel it is facing the wrong way based on these photos).

 

[vickster]

Yes that’s a layback and it’s back to front

 

[Vantage]

Agreed with vickster. That's impressively the wrong way round.

 

[Banjo]

If you need to do that to make your bike comfortable it suggests its too big not too small.

Also theres not much seatpost showing which again suggests you don't want a bigger frame.

Turning the saddle and post to the usual way round will increase the reach by about 2 inches which will be massively noticeable when riding the bike.

Good Luck its worth perservering to get it set up right. Maybe your bike shop could offer a bit of advice ,try and pop in when the shop is quiet.

 

[night cycler]

It will be interesting to see what the fit feels like when I turn the post around.

All that time and never knew it was wrong. Maybe it's a universal one

 

[Pale Rider]

The saddle will sit a little further back, but you have adjustment on the rail so can largely compensate for that if you want to.

My view is reach is not quite so critical with a flat bar bike which inevitably has a more upright riding position.

You can always twist the bars a bit in the stem clamp if that look like it would improve the position.

Like the other posters, I suspect you are stuck with toe overlap - my Rose flat bar bike also had it, even worse with mudguards.

You might be able to find a similar spec bike from another brand which doesn't have toe overlap, but i suspect most such bikes in your size will have it.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

I'd suggest the OP simply bought the wrong kind of bike in the first place, and should have got something with a longer wheelbase and more relaxed frame geometry. I don't see how getting another one much the same is going to help much. Toe overlap would really get on my nerves, but fortunately the sort of machinery I own is long wheelbase so it just isn't a problem.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I have toeverlap on two bikes that fit me perfectly. Makes turning on the fixed at low speed a sometimes challenging experience.

 

[smutchin]

Surely the way to reduce toe overlap is not to buy a larger frame but to fit shorter cranks?

They don't specify the crank length on the bike's spec on the Rose website, but I bet they fit the same crankset across all sizes, or at most offer two or three variations for the whole range of sizes.

 

[Cycleops]

Agreed with vickster. That's impressively the wrong way round.

No it’s not, it’s a lay front.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Surely the way to reduce toe overlap is not to buy a larger frame but to fit shorter cranks?

They don't specify the crank length on the bike's spec on the Rose website, but I bet they fit the same crankset across all sizes, or at most offer two or three variations for the whole range of sizes.

Is that not to confuse the "correct" crank length, apparently needed for correct pedalling dynamics to prevent one's knees from bursting into flames with the length of the wheelbase? (and pedal strike on corners if you've a lowish BB)

 

[smutchin]

Is that not to confuse the "correct" crank length, apparently needed for correct pedalling dynamics to prevent one's knees from bursting into flames with the length of the wheelbase? (and pedal strike on corners if you've a lowish BB)

I simply don't believe that most bikes are sold with the 'correct' crank length anyway, any more than they are sold with the 'correct' stem length or 'correct' handlebar width – sizes of stock components on off-the-shelf bikes are all chosen based on averages, not individuals. To exacerbate that, small frames IME often come with the same crank length as medium frames, simply because it's cheaper for manufacturers to buy one size in bulk than it is to buy a whole range of sizes to suit different frame sizes. 'Correct' doesn't come into it.

I also doubt that the average rider gives much thought to the effect on pedalling dynamics of crank length, and usually will just stick to what comes with the bike, regardless of whether it is 'correct' for them or not.

On a bike with lots of gears, shorter cranks shouldn't be detrimental to the knees anyway. On a fixed gear bike, you can compensate for shorter crank length by fitting a larger sprocket. (Sheldon Brown famously takes crank length into account in his highly idiosyncratic gearing calcuation methods, so it's worth reading his thoughts on this matter.)

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I simply don't believe that most bikes are sold with the 'correct' crank length anyway, any more than they are sold with the 'correct' stem length or 'correct' handlebar width – sizes of stock components on off-the-shelf bikes are all chosen based on averages, not individuals. To exacerbate that, small frames IME often come with the same crank length as medium frames, simply because it's cheaper for manufacturers to buy one size in bulk than it is to buy a whole range of sizes to suit different frame sizes. 'Correct' doesn't come into it.

I also doubt that the average rider gives much thought to the effect on pedalling dynamics of crank length, and usually will just stick to what comes with the bike, regardless of whether it is 'correct' for them or not.

On a bike with lots of gears, shorter cranks shouldn't be detrimental to the knees anyway. On a fixed gear bike, you can compensate for shorter crank length by fitting a larger sprocket. (Sheldon Brown famously takes crank length into account in his highly idiosyncratic gearing calcuation methods, so it's worth reading his thoughts on this matter.)

My whole post was tongue-in-cheek.

I think there is no science to any of it, crank length, stem length, lay back, bar width/drop/reach, et cetera, the lot. All bollox based on some conservative consensus-driven nonsense and what-the-pros-do and fashion and what makes the max profits for the manufacturers and retailers. All bollox.

As you say "correct" don't come into it.

 

[bpsmith]

My whole post was tongue-in-cheek.

I think there is no science to any of it, crank length, stem length, lay back, bar width/drop/reach, et cetera, the lot. All bollox based on some conservative consensus-driven nonsense and what-the-pros-do and fashion and what makes the max profits for the manufacturers and retailers. All bollox.

As you say "correct" don't come into it.

Is this another tongue-in-cheek post?

I hope so.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Is this another tongue-in-cheek post?

I hope so.

Show me the science!