All of this talk about spooky handling makes me want to discuss rake and angles. I bet you want to too. Sure, you say.

So what is it and what does it matter? Well think of your standard triangular frame. Ditch the wheels, just look at the frame. A steep head or seat angle simply means a larger number – say 72 instead of 71 degrees. If that’s hard to imagine just think ‘straight up’ would be 90 degrees or perpendicular to the road. So a slacker angle is just another way of saying it’s a smaller number. So 71 is slacker than 72 or 73, say. And a slack seat tube produces a ‘laid back’ or comfy bike. Your typical Euro road frame is slack, like a Look, or a LeMond (yeah, yeah, he’s a Yank, but he’s in the ‘comfy’ zone of frame design).

But that’s not all. Frame designers have to consider trail, caster, center of gravity and wheelbase, amongst many other things. You may like to refer to my automotive handling guide for some more definitions and explanations (cars are just 2 bikes lashed together side-by-side after all).

Anyway, caster is like what you see on shopping trolley wheels – those wheels are even called casters. They clearly point backwards and if by chance they point forwards when you push on the trolley they swing around to point back again. This effect is called self-steering and the effect is called caster. The amount of caster you have is measured as trail. Ahhhh, now that’s a bike term.

So if you draw one line down the center of your steerer tube until it intersects the ground and then drop a vertical line from your front hub to the ground, the two lines hit the ground in different places. The difference is measured as the trail, and more trail the greater the caster effect. In other words the greater the self-steering effect and thus the more stable the bike. The opposite applies, of course, in that as you reduce trail the bike becomes progressively less stable and less likely to self-steer. It becomes twitchier, or more responsive if you like. Now zero trail would be a real handful; and if you go beyond that you’d have the bike from hell.

Now a track bike must have great stability, as you don’t want it to twitch in the middle of a fast pack of riders during a full-on sprint; and a road bike will want some stability too, but a criterium bike will want more responsiveness. So changing the trail is how you go about altering your bike’s handling. By changing the forks (easiest way) or by changing the steerer tube angle.

You get it? Combinations of head angle and fork rake will alter your responsiveness. But wait, there’s more. You are the biggest mass on a bike – by far. And where you put your weight matters a lot. If your position is rearwards then your weight will be rearwards, too. Less weight on the front wheel will lighten your steering and make it feel “twitchy” but possibly increase the understeer as well (so you’ll feel as though you are drifting wide in corners). You’ll find your front wheel lifting off the deck when you sprint, too.

The reverse is true, too. More weight over the front wheel will give you extra bite, so you’ll track truer and feel more stable. You can easily test this out by shifting your weight around as you ride, or by altering your position. Raising your center of gravity – by raising the handlebars and/or saddle will also change the relationship between you and the bike and make for increased instability. Bear in mind that a long stem will also give you a spooky ‘floppy’ feeling when riding out of the saddle… so that’s another complication!

All told, it’s the combination of all of these factors that make you feel comfortable with a bike. And the longer and more often you ride the more you’ll sub-consciously adapt to it by simply adjusting how you move your weight around on the bike. Trouble is that you may adjust yourself into a bad position that robs you of comfort and power. Which leads into the black art of position.

All of this talk about spooky handling makes me want to discuss rake and angles. I bet you want to too. Sure, you say.

So what is it and what does it matter? Well think of your standard triangular frame. Ditch the wheels, just look at the frame. A steep head or seat angle simply means a larger number – say 72 instead of 71 degrees. If that’s hard to imagine just think ‘straight up’ would be 90 degrees or perpendicular to the road. So a slacker angle is just another way of saying it’s a smaller number. So 71 is slacker than 72 or 73, say. And a slack seat tube produces a ‘laid back’ or comfy bike. Your typical Euro road frame is slack, like a Look, or a LeMond (yeah, yeah, he’s a Yank, but he’s in the ‘comfy’ zone of frame design).

But that’s not all. Frame designers have to consider trail, caster, center of gravity and wheelbase, amongst many other things. You may like to refer to my automotive handling guide for some more definitions and explanations (cars are just 2 bikes lashed together side-by-side after all).

Anyway, caster is like what you see on shopping trolley wheels – those wheels are even called casters. They clearly point backwards and if by chance they point forwards when you push on the trolley they swing around to point back again. This effect is called self-steering and the effect is called caster. The amount of caster you have is measured as trail. Ahhhh, now that’s a bike term.

So if you draw one line down the center of your steerer tube until it intersects the ground and then drop a vertical line from your front hub to the ground, the two lines hit the ground in different places. The difference is measured as the trail, and more trail the greater the caster effect. In other words the greater the self-steering effect and thus the more stable the bike. The opposite applies, of course, in that as you reduce trail the bike becomes progressively less stable and less likely to self-steer. It becomes twitchier, or more responsive if you like. Now zero trail would be a real handful; and if you go beyond that you’d have the bike from hell.

Now a track bike must have great stability, as you don’t want it to twitch in the middle of a fast pack of riders during a full-on sprint; and a road bike will want some stability too, but a criterium bike will want more responsiveness. So changing the trail is how you go about altering your bike’s handling. By changing the forks (easiest way) or by changing the steerer tube angle.

You get it? Combinations of head angle and fork rake will alter your responsiveness. But wait, there’s more. You are the biggest mass on a bike – by far. And where you put your weight matters a lot. If your position is rearwards then your weight will be rearwards, too. Less weight on the front wheel will lighten your steering and make it feel “twitchy” but possibly increase the understeer as well (so you’ll feel as though you are drifting wide in corners). You’ll find your front wheel lifting off the deck when you sprint, too.

The reverse is true, too. More weight over the front wheel will give you extra bite, so you’ll track truer and feel more stable. You can easily test this out by shifting your weight around as you ride, or by altering your position. Raising your center of gravity – by raising the handlebars and/or saddle will also change the relationship between you and the bike and make for increased instability. Bear in mind that a long stem will also give you a spooky ‘floppy’ feeling when riding out of the saddle… so that’s another complication!

All told, it’s the combination of all of these factors that make you feel comfortable with a bike. And the longer and more often you ride the more you’ll sub-consciously adapt to it by simply adjusting how you move your weight around on the bike. Trouble is that you may adjust yourself into a bad position that robs you of comfort and power. Which leads into the black art of position.

Thinking about that spooky-handling high-end bike…

I rode my wife’s track bike last Sunday and had to stop and ponder what the heck was coming loose after less than a lap. I felt unstable, wobbly, like it was about to go out of control. Nothing was loose, so I persisted and got used to it. The difference in ‘handling’ was all in my position. I was slightly lower and more forward than on my bike. I couldn’t get out of the saddle at all – it felt like I would fall if I did. To fix this ‘handling’ problem would involve firstly raising the saddle and secondly pushing it back, or perhaps changing the stem length. And testing it after every alteration, one change at a time.

My wife is entirely happy with her track bike as it is set up and it looked OK to me as well, with my short legs and all, but shifting my weight forward even slightly changed the whole feel of the thing. My point is that spooky handling can be a combination of many things, not just wheels or frame but position as well. Stem length is a big one in my book, and look at how you are distributing your weight overall, between front and rear.

Just a thought.

Thinking about that spooky-handling high-end bike…

I rode my wife’s track bike last Sunday and had to stop and ponder what the heck was coming loose after less than a lap. I felt unstable, wobbly, like it was about to go out of control. Nothing was loose, so I persisted and got used to it. The difference in ‘handling’ was all in my position. I was slightly lower and more forward than on my bike. I couldn’t get out of the saddle at all – it felt like I would fall if I did. To fix this ‘handling’ problem would involve firstly raising the saddle and secondly pushing it back, or perhaps changing the stem length. And testing it after every alteration, one change at a time.

My wife is entirely happy with her track bike as it is set up and it looked OK to me as well, with my short legs and all, but shifting my weight forward even slightly changed the whole feel of the thing. My point is that spooky handling can be a combination of many things, not just wheels or frame but position as well. Stem length is a big one in my book, and look at how you are distributing your weight overall, between front and rear.

Just a thought.

You will get the hang of what you need, bike-wise, by looking around and comparing. Feel some bikes, pick them up, sit on as many as you can, do some test rides, and, if you are lucky, buy one that fits you. Then ride it and get that immediate urge to change a few things. For which my advice is, don’t be rash. If you haven’t had a lot of experience on a lightweight high performance bike before it will feel odd. Flighty. Maybe uncomfortable. Too quick in the steering. Too…uncompromising? Just strange. You may not think so after a few hundred kilometres in the saddle, however.

I won’t attempt to give you bike set-up advice beyond my own experience, so here are some measurements that have worked for me – and probably won’t work so well for you.

I’m about 169cm tall, and for riders around that height I’d suggest frame sizes between 53 and 55cm (ie pretty small but not the smallest!). Remember, smaller frames are lighter and stiffer, but if too small will compromise balance and comfort. And you will risk damage to components as well as yourself!

Handlebars, for frames between 51 and 55cm should be about 38 or 39cm wide, but shouldn’t cramp you or spread your arms too widely. Shoulders vary in width, but generally speaking arms should comfortably fall onto the drops without any serious effort. You shouldn’t feel ‘splayed’ when you tuck down into the drops of the handlebars.

Your own dimensions are vital, but I lean towards stem extensions of about 9 or 10cm. You used to be able to buy goosenecks that allowed variation, and some modern examples exist, but are less common. Stem length alters your weight distribution more than you’d imagine – a long stem puts you further forward and you’ll get a decided feeling of flopping around when out of the saddle. Be warned, it can feel off-putting!

Cranks are usually about 170cm, however you may prefer the leverage of a longer crank, especially for road racing or timetrialling. Riders taller than myself tend towards longer cranks, and lengths from 172.5 up to 180cm are options; but you will find that you lose the suppleness of your spin and may tend towards grovelling in a big gear. Nothing worse, really.

Shorter cranks are suited to track bikes and criteriums, where touching a pedal on the banking or in a corner is not a good idea. I was once racing on a street circuit where we were sharing the road with the local Sunday morning traffic. I broke away from the bunch up a short, short rise and put a bit of distance into them. So when I arrived at the next left-turn I was alone, without the benefit of a big, highly visible bunch. Ahead of me was a car about to turn right across my path.

Many times have I been in this situation – will that car give way, or won’t it? Well, it did, but not before I was distracted enough to turn into the corner a bit late, sharpening the bend. I was riding my road bike, a Colnago, rather than my regular criterium bike and I completely forgot about the longer cranks and lower bottom bracket.

In an instant, at bottom dead centre of the left-hand crank rotation, my pedal struck the road and levered my rear wheel into the air. The bike went up and sideways in one motion, before settling. I didn’t come off but I lost time getting my balance back and found myself heading for the median strip. Rather than turn harder to the left and try to miss it, I went over it, or tried to, anyway.

When I landed I was flat on my back, the bike was up the road and I had (luckily) somersaulted a post and a small bush, to end up facing from whence I had come. The bike was in one piece, just a few scratches and nothing broken. No damage to the rider, just stunned embarrassment