This guide will talk you through how to set up your road bike position with a DIY bike fit – including frame size, saddle height and handlebar position – so you can ride comfortably, efficiently and injury-free.

A bike set up to fit you properly can increase speed and comfort, but more importantly, it’ll help you become a life-long cyclist – you’re less likely to stick with cycling if just riding your bike makes you uncomfortable or, worse still, injures you.

A major misconception of bicycles is that they fit right out of the box. You might get lucky, but more than likely you’ll need to try a few different positions to find the one that works for you. You might even have to assemble the bike yourself if you’ve bought it online.

If you’re new to cycling or are building up your mileage, you should expect to be a little achy – it will take a period of time for your body to adapt to the new strains and positions that riding demands.

However, you shouldn’t be in pain or picking up cycling injuries while riding your bike. Either is a sure sign that something is wrong.

There are a number of ways you can tweak the fit of your bike and all are within the reach of even the most inexperienced home mechanic.

In your quest to find the right riding position, be prepared to try new saddles, different length stems, or possibly even different handlebars. If you’re serious about your cycling, take these expenses into account when looking to make your next bike purchase.

How to find the right bike frame size for you

Road bike frames are typically sized either by their seat tube length, or as a t-shirt sizing (eg, small, medium, large, and so on).

Regardless of the methods any given brand uses to quantify a size, the effective cockpit length (from seat to handlebar), is the major determining factor for basic fit.

Most bike companies have sizing charts on their websites to get you in the right ballpark for frame size. This is usually based on your overall height.

We’ve also got a guide to road bike sizing to help you find the right frame, as well as advice on women’s bike sizing and mountain bike sizing.

If you’re buying a second-hand bike that has had the sizing sticker removed or you can’t find sizing information, check out our comprehensive guide on how to measure a bike frame.

Of course, frame size doesn’t necessarily take into account your body’s specific dimensions in terms of leg length or torso and arm length, but it’s a great place to start.

Stack and reach are a much better way to assess the overall fit of a bike, but getting your head around the peculiarities of road bike geometry is a little more complex.

The next critical measurement to look at is standover height – fortunately, this is much more basic.

Ensuring you have enough clearance over the top tube to safely get on and off the bike is key. There should be several centimetres of space between you and the top of the bike.

How to choose a saddle

Finding a good position is impossible without a seat that supports your body.

You’ve got two seat bones in your pelvis that should make contact with the bike’s saddle and support the majority of your weight.

If you’re unsure where to start, check out our guide on how to find the right bike seat for you, while we’ve also covered the basics below.

How to set your saddle height

Getting your saddle height right is an important aspect of road bike positioning (if not the most important) and is the first adjustment for building a new position.

As a general rule of thumb, your knee should have a slight bend in it when you’re at the bottom of the pedal stroke. As a starting point, you can achieve this by setting a saddle height that, with your heel on the pedal and pedalling backwards slowly, your knee just barely locks out at the point of maximum extension.

If you have to reach, it’s too high. If you don’t quite lock out your knee, it’s too low.

That’s only a brief overview – if you want to really fine-tune your position, read our in-depth guide to saddle height.

Getting the seat in the right place forwards (fore) and backwards (aft) is important, too.

The idea is to get maximum force applied to the pedals, and this is achieved when the knee is above the pedal axle when the crank is in the 3 o’clock position. Crank length and cleat position can affect this, too (more on this in a moment).

As for saddle angle, broadly speaking you have three options: flat, with the nose pointed up, or with the nose pointed down.

If you’re not sure what angle to put it to, start off flat then tweak it later if you have any issues.

How to set your handlebar height on a road bike

With your seat height and saddle fore/aft set, it’s time to move to the front of the bike.

Handlebar position has a huge impact on the overall fit of your bike. Moving just 5mm up/down or forward/back can totally change the character of a bike.

If performance and speed is your focus, getting into a low, aerodynamic position that you can maintain for a long period of time is the goal. If you’re more about all-day comfort and less about all-out speed, a more upright position that reduces weight and strain on your arms is what you’re after.

Try going out for a ride with the handlebars where they are straight out of the box as that will give you a benchmark to work from.

Be forewarned, this is not an easy process to work through. Be patient, try different things, and make some small notes on what’s working well, and what isn’t.

If you have shoulder or neck pain after riding, it’s likely because you’re shrugging your shoulders and reaching too far – try a shorter stem.

If you feel lower back pain, this could be an indicator of your handlebars being too low (or your seat too high). Conversely, if you feel upper back pain, between your shoulder blades, this could be the opposite.

Most shops will have a few inexpensive stems for you to try out (if you purchased your bike from them). Bear in mind that if you need to change your stem length significantly, you might be better off on a different size frame

The height of your handlebar is also important and, like stem length, has an impact on reach – lower the handlebar, putting it in a more aggressive position, and you’ll increase the effective reach; raise the handlebar and you’ll do the opposite, providing a more upright riding position. We’ve got a separate guide on how to raise handlebars on a bike.

Don’t compensate for a shorter reach by moving your seat forward – though one will affect the other, the lower body and upper body should be treated as separate but equal components to your position.

Equally important to the location of the handlebar is your ability to access your brakes with confidence and use your shifters with ease. Ideally, the shifters should also have a smooth and flat transition from the ramp of the handlebars to the shifters.

Though you may be able to make small tweaks, this can mean unwrapping your bars, rotating them, repositioning your shifters, and putting everything back in place.

If you have small hands and/or find the brake levers are too far away, remember you can always adjust the reach of your levers. You should be able to comfortably reach and control your brakes while still having a secure grip on your handlebars.

Fitting pedals and cleat alignment

As a final step, sort out your pedal and cleat position. Poorly positioned feet can lead to problems ranging from numbness and hot spots – inflammation of the nerves between the toes – to debilitating knee pain. Sure, you’re fixed in those pedals, but it should feel natural.

While you’re here, it’s worth weighing up flat pedals vs clipless pedals (most road cyclists use clipless pedals), and the best road bike pedals for your budget and riding style.

Why you should consider a bike fit (plus tips for a DIY bike fit)

Once you understand your position, what you like about it and what you don’t, there’s always more opportunity found from a professional bike fit. But do your homework – not all bike fit professionals are created equal.

Some are more expensive than others, and sometimes for good reason. Some bike fitters are so confident in their work they’re willing to offer money-back guarantees.

As a cheaper (free!) alternative to a professional bike fit, you could use a smartphone to assess your position when riding on a turbo or smart trainer.

With this, you can take a close look at exactly what is going on as you pedal. This is particularly useful for assessing saddle height.

The final touches

A correctly fitting and set up bike should give good handling in all circumstances. You should be able to look down the road without fatigue, and over your shoulders (to see other traffic) without straining.

Once you’ve gotten these things sorted, you’ll be enjoying your riding more every day. And on every ride, you’ll notice more about your body and your position.

Always remember, cycling shouldn’t be uncomfortable – so if you are, it’s time to start making some changes.

Whether you’ve just taken delivery of a brand-new bike or had it for years, this guide should offer some pointers on how to set up your mountain bike.

Technology such as mountain bike suspension forks requires adjustment according to a host of factors. The way the bike rides and feels is also influenced by components, from your mountain bike pedals down to your mountain bike shoes.

What’s more, the best mountain bike tyres won’t fulfil their potential – and could lack traction – unless your bike is suitably configured. Incorrect saddle height and angle can cause even the best mountain bike wheels to feel jittery on descents.

This is the procedure I use to set up test bikes before hitting the trails. It’s not going to get everyone’s bike perfect first time, but it’s a handy checklist that should put most people in a comfortable position without too much fuss.

You can either watch the video below or read the article for more detailed instructions.

How to set up a mountain bike in 7 simple steps

1. Set your saddle height

This may sound obvious, but saddle height is critical to comfort and too often adjusted incorrectly. The wrong saddle height can lead to sore knees or hips and less power to the pedals.

Read our guide on how to get your saddle height right if you’re not sure.

If you already have a bike that you’re sure has the correct saddle height, measure the distance from the centre of the bottom bracket to the top of the saddle and transfer this measurement across to the new bike.

To adjust, loosen the saddle clamp, wiggle the seatpost up or down, align the saddle with the top tube and re-tighten the clamp.

Note that it may still pay to fine-tune the height further to compensate for different saddle softness, crank length or shoe and chamois choices.

2. Set the angle and position of the saddle

Most people find the ideal saddle angle is either horizontal or angled slightly nose-down. Although I see it all the time, I haven’t met anyone who has ridden with the nose pointing up and not breathed a sigh of relief once they angle it down a bit.

If your nose is pointed too far down, it can cause you to slide forwards and put more strain on your wrists to brace against the bar.

However, on full-suspension bikes, many riders prefer to point the nose steeply down to compensate for the change in angle as the rear suspension squats into its travel, particularly when climbing.

Learning how to adjust your mountain bike saddle angle allows you to experiment and find what works best for you.

It can also pay to adjust the fore-aft position of the saddle. Sliding it forwards will effectively steepen the seat tube angle, and so help the bike climb more eagerly with less front-wheel lift. On the other hand, slide it too far forward and the cockpit can feel cramped.

To adjust this with a twin-bolt seatpost, loosen the rear bolt (anti-clockwise) to angle the nose down or the front bolt to tilt it up. While the bolts are loose, slide the saddle forwards or backwards, if desired.

Next, tighten up the other bolt (clockwise) until the desired angle is reached, then tighten both bolts alternately until they’re torqued to the manufacturer’s seatpost recommendations – or tight enough to stop the saddle creaking.

3. Adjust the bar height

Handlebar height is a key adjustment that requires experimentation to find the right posture and weight distribution.

Raising it will allow you to get your weight back on steep descents, while enabling you to push the front wheel into holes and downslopes more effectively. Too high, though, and you’ll struggle to get enough weight over the front wheel on flat turns or steep climbs.

As a starting point for trail/enduro riding, try setting the grips so they’re roughly level with (or slightly below) the saddle when it’s at full pedalling height.

To change it, remove the top-cap bolt (anti-clockwise) and loosen the stem-clamp bolts enough to slide the stem off.

Swap spacers to below the stem to increase bar height or vice-versa. Refit the stem, tighten the top cap enough to stop any play, but not so tight as to make the headset stiff or creaky. Align the stem with the front wheel and tighten the stem bolts to the manufacturer’s specs.

4. Set the bar roll

Rolling the bar forwards in the stem, so the bar tips have more upsweep and less backsweep, can bring your elbows out and encourage your weight forwards into a more aggressive position. Rolling it back towards horizontal bar tips can help get your weight back on steep descents.

If you’re unsure, start with the bar tips pointing a few degrees up from horizontal. Loosen the top two stem faceplate bolts just enough to freely rotate the bar. Look at the bar horizontally and adjust until the tips are pointing just up from horizontal, then re-tighten to the stem maker’s specs.

5. Set the position of the brake levers

Loosen the brake lever clamp bolt (anti-clockwise) enough to freely slide the lever body along the bar.

You may also need to loosen any shifters or dropper-post remotes before you can move the brake lever to where it needs to be. Don’t worry about the other controls for now, the brakes are your priority.

With your hand in its natural position on the grip, find the position where your index finger sits comfortably on the outboard edge of the lever blade for maximum leverage.

Now tighten the clamp bolt just enough to hold the levers in place, but leave them loose enough to rotate on the bar.

Set the lever angle. There’s a lot of personal preference when it comes to lever angle, but I’d suggest starting with the lever blade about 30 degrees below horizontal.

When you’ve found a position you’re happy with, re-tighten the clamp bolt to the manufacturer’s specs.

Set the other lever symmetrically. You can measure the distance between the grip and the lever body to set the same horizontal position, and judge the angle by eye so it matches the first lever.

6. Set the position of the other controls

Next, fit the shifter(s) and dropper-post remote around the brakes by loosening the clamp bolts so you can slide the controls horizontally and rotate them on the bar.

With one hand on the grip in the riding position, adjust the shifter or remote with the other hand to find the most ergonomic position.

In the case of SRAM’s MatchMaker shifters, you can swap the T25 securing bolt with the 3mm grub screw to move the shifter inboard or outboard. For some bikes, you may have to swap the position of the shifter and brake lever to get the best position.

7. Set up your suspension

We’ve made a separate video explaining how to set up your mountain bike suspension. It includes dialing in the sag, spring rate and rebound damping.

It also shows you how to test if your bike is balanced and progressive enough. It’s a good starting point that should have your suspension at least in the right ballpark before you hit the trails.

“What size mountain bike do I need?” It’s a question frequently asked – for good reason – because choosing the correct size of bike is one of the most important decisions you’ll make.

We recommend you don’t buy a bike until you’ve understood how to get one that’s the right size for your height and body shape. Our ultimate guide to bike geometry and handling will help.

The best mountain bike for you, that fits correctly and is set up properly, will be a joy to ride, making it easier to tackle trails faster with more control. But a bike that’s too small can be twitchy, nervous and uncomfortable on longer rides, technical descents or when you’re just pootling along the flat.

Read on for some advice on what mountain bike frame size you should be considering, especially if you’re in any doubt about it.

We’ll also help you understand the changes you can make to your bike’s parts to help it perform better for your measurements, personal requirements and preferred discipline. For example, the best mountain bike suspension forks can be adjusted to suit you.

And before we get started, if drop handlebars are your thing, then head to our guide to road bike sizing.

What size mountain bike do I need?

Ask an experienced rider about bike fit and they’ll tell you that all bikes feel and ride differently, even if their numbers look almost the same on paper.

Manufacturers’ listed mountain bike frame sizes can be confusing. How to measure a bike frame is not set in stone. The traditional method is to list the seat tube length, but even that varies because some are measured to the top of the seat tube and some to the middle of where the top tube joins the seat tube.

Many manufacturers simply list their bikes as S, M and L, perhaps with XS or XL at either end.

And, more recently, bike manufacturers have begun listing their bikes’ sizes based on reach figures rather than seat tube and top tube lengths.

This means they’ve been able to grow the bike’s reach figure, wheelbase and top tube length while trying to keep seat tube lengths and stack heights shorter and lower.

Smaller seat tube lengths mean that shorter people can fit on bikes with a longer reach figure because they can adjust the seat height lower, opening up the potential to ride a larger bike.

It’s still important to consider seat tube and top tube length when buying a bike. The seat tube length will dictate the lowest saddle height that can be set and the top tube length will roughly dictate how stretched out a rider will feel.

So, where do you find out what size frame you need? Like so many other things on a mountain bike, there is no one perfect solution because, within sensible limits, you can adjust your saddle, stem and handlebar to help make a slightly imperfect fit feel fine.

We’d always recommend looking at manufacturers’ own size charts, which will usually list a suggested height range for each bike frame size they produce, but here are some general guidelines:

(Bear in mind that road, cyclocross and hybrid bike sizes tend to be 8cm to 10cm bigger for riders of the same height – something that confuses a lot of riders when looking through bike listings.)

Important geometry terms and what they mean

We all come in different shapes and sizes, and so do most mountain bikes, so we recommend using the information below to help you understand what size mountain bike frame you should be riding.

First, it’s good to know the anatomy of a mountain bike, because we’ll be referring to these terms.

• A. Seatstay
• B. Chainstay
• C. Seat tube
• D. Top tube
• E. Down tube
• F. Stem
• G. Head tube

When you’re looking at buying your next bike, it’s crucial to understand how the bike’s geometry will affect how it rides and what each element of its geometry means. Understanding these terms will help you decide what size mountain bike you need.

When you’re looking at mountain bike frame size charts, these terms will also help you understand how each measurement affects the size of the bike.

• A. Effective top tube length is the length of a virtual horizontal line drawn between the top of the bike’s head tube and the centre of the seatpost at the same height.
• B. Stack height is the distance between the centre of the bottom bracket and the centre of the top of the head tube. This measurement dictates the minimum height of the bars in relation to the bottom bracket and has a relationship with a bike’s reach.
• C. Seat tube length is the distance from the middle of the bottom-bracket to the top of the seat tube. This length determines how high or low the bike’s saddle can be set, and therefore how long or short any given rider’s legs can be.
• D. Down tube length is the distance between the centre of the bottom of the head tube and the centre of the bottom bracket. Down tube length figures aren’t usually quoted on manufacturers’ size charts, but it’s an easy measurement for a consumer to do at home when comparing one bike to another.
• E. Bottom bracket drop denotes how far above or below the horizontal line connecting the centre of the axles the centre of the bottom bracket is.
• F. Bottom bracket height is the distance between the centre of the bottom bracket and the ground.
• G. Wheelbase is the horizontal measurement between the centre of the front and rear axle.
• H. Front centre is the horizontal length between the centre of the bottom bracket and the centre of the front axle.
• Reach (not pictured) is the length between the bottom bracket and the centre of the top of the head tube. Reach provides the best indication of how ‘roomy’ a bike will feel, especially when it’s being ridden standing up. Click here to find out how reach and stack height affect each other.
• Rear centre/chainstay length (not pictured) is the horizontal distance between the centre of the bottom bracket and the rear axle.

• A. Effective seat angle is the angle of the line that connects the bottom bracket to the centre of the top of the seatpost when it’s at pedalling height. Manufacturers often quote their effective seat tube angle, but the height at which it’s measured isn’t usually disclosed.
• B. Actual seat angle is the angle of the bike’s seatpost measured from horizontal.
• C. Head angle is the angle of the fork’s steerer tube measured from horizontal.

Getting the perfect mountain bike fit

Getting a bike to fit you perfectly is something you need to work at. We know riders who’ve ridden for years on what they thought was their perfect bike, with perfect reach, perfect saddle height, perfect handlebar shape, a perfectly set up fork and the best mountain bike tyres, perfectly inflated, until they discovered it wasn’t.

They discover that a basic change, perhaps even a few basic changes, to that setup seems to make them ride better.

It’ll often be something as simple as a different handlebar sweep, different tyre pressures or more or less suspension-fork sag. It’s often minor details of bike setup that change the way you ride and feel about your bike.

When we sit on a bike, we make contact in three places: our hands on the bars, our feet on the pedals and our backside on the saddle.

It’s the relative position of these three areas that governs how the bike fits and several variables influence their exact location: top tube length, seat angle, distance from bottom bracket to saddle, crank length, bar height and width, stem length and saddle angle all play a part.

Tweak your ride setup from time to time, then give yourself a few rides to decide whether you like it or not. There are some things that feel wrong when you first change them, but feel right after a few rides.

In the following sections, we’ll lay down the basic guidelines of bike fit, together with variations to consider and the reasoning behind them.

Don’t think of a bike fit and setup as something that’s carved in stone, though. Use our guidelines as a starting point, then go out and experiment.

Seat tube length and standover

When a bike is listed as ‘X’ inches, what does that mean?

In most cases, it’s the distance from the bottom bracket axle to the top of the seat tube, but it can be to the middle of the top tube or to various other places – there isn’t a universal standard.

Even if there were, it would be no indicator that you could straddle the top tube and clear it because top tube shape and bottom bracket height vary substantially.

This all relates to ‘standover height’: an important aspect of any bike fit, since it governs the clearance of your crotch!

The seat tube should leave you with an acceptable standover gap – the distance between the top tube and your crotch – and usable standover clearance.

To get this, stand back as far as you can while over the bike and ensure that there’s a minimum of an inch of room from the top tube to your crotch area.

If you adhere to this advice then your frame should provide you with a large range of adjustment at the seatpost, which is important for finding your optimum mountain bike seat height.

While this holds true for beginner and cross-country bikes, depending on the shape of the frame the rules change slightly, for example if it has a low-slung top tube or if you’re looking to buy a downhill or enduro bike – which have different geometry all together.

It’s therefore important to not use seat tube length and standover height as the only measure of a bike’s fit. It also highlights how crucial sitting on different sizes of your prospective purchase is.

Saddle height and crank length

The majority of mountain bikes have 170mm or 175mm cranks, which do the job perfectly well for most riders. But if you have short legs, you may find the cranks are too long to turn without your knee bending excessively at the top of the stroke, resulting in the wrong muscles being used.

Similarly, if you’re long-legged you may benefit from a longer crank so you can make the most of your lofty dimensions.

For general trail riding, aim to set saddle height on your bike for maximum power and efficiency. Too high and your hips will rock from side to side, wasting energy; too low and your muscles won’t deliver power effectively.

Adjust the saddle height so when your heels are on the pedals at the bottom of the pedal stroke, your leg is fully extended – this means when you move your feet to the right position, your knee won’t lock out.

If you need more clearance, drop your saddle an inch or two.

Top tube length and reach

Another important consideration is the top tube length. Together with seat height, stem length and handlebar position, top tube length dictates the comfort and efficiency of your body on the bike.

To confuse matters further, the aspect of top tube length that matters is not the top tube itself, which often slopes, but the reach number.

Although top tube length will give a good indication of how a bike will feel when you’re seated, the reach figure is most relevant for when you’re standing up and is particularly pertinent to descending, but also helps contribute to the feel of a bike’s size.

A cross-country rider may prefer a long, stretched-out position, but a beginner who has never taken a bike off-road may want to be more upright for extra comfort, with less weight on their hands and wrists.

Your reach is often a compromise between comfort, control and pedalling efficiency.

Find what works best for you, but avoid being too hunched or too stretched out, since this can cause discomfort and back problems.

Seat angle and effective top tube length

The cranks (or bottom bracket) are never situated directly below the saddle, and for good reason. If they were, you’d be placing excessive weight on your arms to support your upper body when you lean forward.

Thus the seat tube lies at an angle, which determines how far behind the bottom bracket the saddle will be and how you’re balanced when seated.

Too much can be counterproductive, but luckily the range of angles is usually quite narrow so this measurement isn’t normally that important.

If we take two bikes with the same ETT length but different seat tube angles, the slacker-angled machine will have a bottom bracket that’s further forward in relation to your saddle and vice versa.

The upshot of this is that you can have two bikes with the same reach that handle differently, due to how they distribute your weight.

One of the biggest mistakes made by beginners is to slide the saddle too far back. While it may be psychologically reassuring to sit well back from the ‘attacking terrain’ position, too little weight on the front of the bike can make the steering feel vague and stop your suspension fork from compressing efficiently.

Sit further forward and you’ll get maximum use of the fork, full use of the front tyre tread and the bike will handle better.

This is all assuming that the reach is correct for you. As a general rule of thumb, if you drop a plumb line from the centre of the saddle it should cross the chainstays almost exactly halfway between the bottom bracket axle and the rear wheel axle.

Foot position and cleats

The best mountain bike pedals can be flat or clipless. With flat or platform pedals, the ball of the foot usually drops into a comfortable position above the pedal axle.

However, clipless pedals can be more problematic to get right, so it’s essential to know how to set up clipless pedal cleats. A good place to start is to find the ball of your foot and place the cleat directly underneath.

Once you’ve found this spot, adjust back and forth – minor changes can affect which muscles are utilised and how effectively you pedal.

See what works best for you. Lateral positioning is a personal preference: a narrower stance can improve efficiency, but be careful that your shoes don’t hit the cranks during the pedal revolution.

The angle of the cleats should match the natural angle of your feet, which you can see easily if you use flat pedals.

Many of the latest clipless pedals have built-in float, which helps your foot achieve a natural angle and is a good option if you’re unsure what’s right for you.

Experiment with the final setup; once you have this sorted, the pedal stroke will feel fluid with no twisting of the ankles, knees or hips.

This can take a few rides, but is worth persevering with – when you hit that sweet spot, draw a line around the cleats for reference when they need replacing.

Women’s-specific mountain bike fit and size

A recent development in the world of mountain biking has been the introduction of women’s bike sizes and gender-specific geometry.

Because women typically have different dimensions to men for a given height, the profile of some of the best women’s bikes has been altered to give a better fit. Some brands have designed their bikes specifically for women based on body geometry data and rider feedback.

Look closely, however, and you’ll see that some brands use exactly the same frames as the men’s/unisex equivalent with just touches, such as the finishing kit, tailored for female riders.

Any one particular model won’t suit all women and some riders will find that a unisex bike is a better fit.

Most have several things in common, such as thinner grips, lighter sprung forks, women’s saddles and narrower bars. But it isn’t just the ladies who can benefit, men can also take advantage of this thinking and should check them out if they have small hands or narrow shoulders, for example.

Kids’-specific mountain bike fit and size

Many of the same rules apply for the young ’uns, whatever their age, but there are also a few extra considerations to be aware of.

The best kids’ bikes are usually sized by their wheel diameter, from 12in up to 26in. As with an adult, top tube clearance and reach are very important.

However, unlike most adults, it’s essential a child can reach the floor when seated for control and safety.

Never be tempted to buy a size up for ‘growing room’, it can be both uncomfortable and dangerous. Take a look at the controls: can they reach and operate them effectively?

It’s paramount that the brakes work well and can be easily squeezed with weaker hands. Take a look at the shifters too: are they struggling to push a thumb lever? If so, go for twist grip-type gears because many kids find the ergonomics easier to handle.

Gears and cranks are also often overlooked, with a considerable number of bikes sporting adult-length cranks and full-sized chainrings. Look for a good range of smaller gears instead, which will ensure they don’t struggle on the inclines.

Once the bike’s sorted, our beginner’s guide to cycling with kids will get you on track.

Problems caused by the wrong size mountain bike

If you do end up on the wrong sized mountain bike, whether that’s too small or too large, you could end up not enjoying yourself as much or, as a worst-case scenario, injuring yourself.

Aches and pains can be caused by aspects of bike setup, but also by other things, so don’t take this list as gospel; it’s a rough guide.

See your doctor if something is really hurting, especially if it continues to be painful after riding and it’s not solved by the adjustments mentioned here.

Be aware that a lot of your aches and pains on a bike are simply caused by insufficient muscle support. In other words, you may just need to ride more and do some core muscle training to work things out.

Here are some common ailments and their causes:

• Knees: Knee pain when riding can be caused by your saddle being too high or too low, or your shoe cleats being poorly adjusted. Some riders find that a pedal/cleat system with more free float gets rid of knee pain.
• Back: Back pain during/after riding will often be related to poor core muscle support, so there may not be a quick and easy setup fix. But try changing the position of your handlebars and/or your reach from the saddle to the bars. We know a lot of riders who’ve solved lower-back pain simply by putting the stem up or down by half an inch, or getting a handlebar with more backsweep. Back pain can be indicative that your bike’s frame is the wrong size.
• Shoulders/arms/neck: We’re putting these three together because it’s often similar aspects of setup that cause aches and pains in these areas, namely too much stress being placed on these bits of your body. This may be caused by being sat too far forward on the bike, but it can also be down to sitting too far back, making you curl your shoulders and preventing you holding the bar properly. Experiment with stem height and saddle-to-bar reach. Try different bar shapes: a lot of riders find that more backsweep or upsweep on a bar will make them feel far more comfortable. Also try anatomically shaped grips, which support your hands better. If your shoulders, arms or neck are hurting, they could be telling you that your bike is either too big or too small.
• Hips: A lot of hip problems among cyclists are caused by the saddle being either too high, too low, tipped too far back or forward, or not offering the right sort of padded support.

When your bike is the correct size:

• Arms: Good bike position results in relaxed shoulders and slightly bent elbows.
• Saddle: Correct saddle position is essential for balance, control and pedalling efficiency.
• Knees: Having very slightly bent knees at the bottom of each pedal stroke is perfect.
• Frame: Getting the correct frame size is essential, but it’s only a starting point for perfect bike setup.
• Shifters and brake levers: Don’t just leave them in one position. Experiment with setting them further in on the bars or tilting them.

Although everyone is different – some folks may have longer legs and a shorter torso, while others may have long arms and short legs – starting with the correct-sized frame allows you to further tune the position using stem, bar, seatpost and saddle tweaks.

How to get the perfect mountain bike fit

Follow these tips on how to adjust your bike so that it fits you better.

Mountain bike saddle height

When answering the question ‘what size mountain bike do I need?’ what really matters is how the bike feels when you sit on it and ride.

The first thing you need to do, in the shop or on a demo ride, is set the saddle at the right height. If you can’t get the saddle to a comfortable height then the bike you’re riding could be the wrong size.

A rough approximation of maximum seat height for efficient pedalling is your trouser leg measurement plus 13cm (5in) from the centre top of the saddle to the centre top of the pedal.

To work it out more accurately, with comfort and efficiency in mind, sit squarely on your saddle with the cranks in a straight-up/straight-down position.

The saddle is at the right height when your heel just touches the top of the lower pedal with your leg straight; your crank should be right at the bottom of its stroke.

If you have to tilt to one side on the saddle to achieve this position, then the saddle is too high.

Place your foot on the pedal in the ready-to-pedal position. If your leg is straight with your heel on the pedal, it should be slightly bent at the knee in a pedalling position. You should never feel as if you’re being forced to rock your hips from side to side on the saddle while pedalling.

You may need to make adjustments to this position according to confidence and comfort preferences, and depending on what shoes you wear.

And keep in mind that this is all based on efficient pedalling for cross-country trail riding. You will want to set your saddle lower for difficult descents – a job taken care of by dropper posts.

Mountain bike saddle position

As a rule, start with your saddle as level as possible on the top. This is an efficient cross-country position, but some riders will prefer a slightly tipped-back saddle for tricks, stunts and/or steep downhill work.

A few will prefer the nose of the saddle slightly tipped down for climbing or a more forward-biased ride posture – or if your bike’s seat tube angle is particularly shallow. But dead flat is right for most riders.

Saddle rails have a lot of fore/aft slide adjustment, and not all seatposts are created equal.

Some have set-back clamps, others have clamps in line with the top of the post. This has a bearing on the position you’re trying to achieve with your saddle.

Set the saddles too far back and it’ll make the bike feel back-heavy, possibly even too light at the front especially when you’re climbing.

A saddle set too far forward can cramp your ride position and make you feel as though you’re putting too much body weight on the front of the bike.

In theory, if a bike has exactly the right reach for you, and the fork is set up properly, you’ll probably end up with the saddle set dead centre on its rails. If you’ve got long arms for your height, you may end up with the saddle set well back: short arms and you’ll be looking at inline seatposts and your saddle forward.

You can use stem length and handlebar position to fine-tune the way you sit over the bike too.

How far away should the handlebars be from the saddle?

If you have access to different stem lengths and different-shaped handlebars, experiment with different ride positions, adjusting your saddle accordingly.

Arm, leg and torso length will vary between riders of the same height, and body weight distribution can have a major bearing on setup.

A starting point to work out the correct saddle to handlebar reach for XC or light trail bikes is to put the tip of your elbow on the nose of the saddle and see how far your longest finger reaches along the stem; forearm length is generally a good indicator of full arm and torso length.

Most riders looking for a fast and efficient trail riding posture will discover that their longest finger reaches to almost exactly halfway between the top of the steerer tube and the handlebar centre.

You can fine-tune ride feel from that point by adjusting your seat position, stem length and height, and handlebar type.

Some handlebars have a more generous backsweep than others, and you can turn bars in the stem to tune your hold position/wrist angle. We know riders who like their bars straight and others who find a 25-degree backsweep their ideal solution.

Keep that elbow tip to finger tip measurement in mind when working out whether a test bike is the right size for you.

It’s also worth considering the type of riding you’re going to be doing because while this rule of thumb works for disciplines where you spend a lot of time pedalling seated, it’s less appropriate for hardcore trail, all-mountain, enduro or downhill.

Mountain bike handlebar height

How high you have your bars is a function of stack height, steerer tube length (and the number of adjustment spacers on it), stem height and rise, and handlebar rise.

Some riders feel relaxed with their bars at roughly saddle height, others (particularly cross-country racers) have them way below saddle height to achieve a flat-backed streamlined posture on the bike.

Control positions

Brake levers and gear shifters can be put in different positions on the bar. On most brakes, you can adjust lever reach too, and on some you can adjust the point of contact where the brakes compress the pads.

We know riders who put up with their thumbs rubbing on their gear shifters for years before realising that setting them half an inch further inboard on the bars solves the problem without making them harder to use.

Bar width can be trimmed too: cutting an inch off either end of a handlebar might make a difference to your ride comfort.

Equally, you might benefit from better control with a wider bar. Swivelling bars a few degrees back or forth in the stem can also make a difference.

Don’t be afraid to try something different, but try it for a few rides in order to find the pros and cons of a new setup.

Components that affect comfort and control

Tyres: Tyre compounds, as well as pressures, will affect the way a bike feels on the trail. Cleverly treaded dual-compound tyres with a high TPI (threads per inch) carcass construction will generally deform more over rough terrain, and so grip better, without any increase in rolling resistance.

Cheaply made tyres tend to grip less and are more prone to losing traction when under pressure, especially in wet conditions.

Grips: Soft or sticky compound handlebar grips, or grips made from soft foam, might not be as hardwearing as others but they’re far more comfy, absorbing vibration and making you feel more at ease on the bike on rough terrain.

Find out which grips top our list of favourites here.

Saddle: The right sort of surface material and the right sort of padding on a saddle is obviously going to make a huge difference to the way you feel about your bike.

As a rule, you should be able to move easily on the surface of a saddle; fancy embroidered graphics aren’t always conducive to this. And don’t assume that more padding is always better.

Slimline saddles with minimal padding in just the right places are often more comfy than big bouncy affairs, which will often chafe after a while.

Pedals: The efficiency of your pedal/shoe interface has an impact on how you ride.

Stiff-soled shoes with inset cleats fixed to clipless pedals will make you a more efficient ‘full circles’ pedaller. But read instructions carefully when it comes to cleat position because poorly positioned cleats can cause problems, especially with knees.

Most riders start with their cleats set dead centre in the shoe recess, but that doesn’t feel right for everyone, and some cleats/pedals offer more free float movement than others.

Tyre and suspension setup and pressures

Your tyres, suspension fork and rear shock effectively provide an adjustable cushion between your bike and the ground.

Being able to set up your mountain bike suspension properly underpins your overall control and comfort. The same applies to mountain bike tyre pressure.

Big-volume tyres can be run at lower pressures than small-volume ones, and big-volume tyres with a low knob profile will often roll just as fast as, and offer more comfort and control than, skinny tyres.

Tyre pressures need to be adjusted to suit your riding style, the width of the tyres fitted to your bike, the width of the rims the tyre’s seated on and the conditions or trail-type you’re riding on. And of course, it depends if you’re running tubeless tyres. There is no universal rule.

However, if you feel that your bike is getting pinged around on the trail and you’ve verified your suspension is set up correctly, then your tyres might be too hard.

Equally, if it feels as though your tyres are squirming or rolling on the rim in turns, then they could be too soft.

Fork and shock settings will vary according to make and model, so consult manufacturer guidelines to find out how you should be dialling in your suspension.

Get an expert opinion from a bike fitter or reputable bike shop

Even if you feel overwhelmed after reading all of this information, fear not. Any reputable bike shop will be able to help you with finding the right size mountain bike for your needs.

Some shops even offer a professional bike-fitting session to really help you nail down what size bike you need and how you can modify your current bike to fit you better.

Don’t be afraid to head to your local bike shop to find out more.

It’s long been assumed that stiff clipless cycling shoes offer increased performance and efficiency benefits compared to more flexible shoes. However, a new study from the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Colorado suggests that’s not always the case.

In an analysis of the measurable advantages of cycling shoes and clipless pedals used by competitive and recreational road cyclists, researchers found no hard evidence that a super-stiff sole is a winning choice for sprinting.

How was the study conducted?

Sports scientists measured the mechanical power outputs, velocities, and cadences of 19 healthy male cyclists during a series of 50m flat-out sprints.

The riders trialled three shoes, all with identical uppers, that were attached to soles with very different grades of stiffness – the most flexible shoe used injection-moulded soles, the second set a carbon-fibre/fibreglass blend and the stiffest shoe featured a full carbon fibre sole.

All of the cyclists rode outdoors on a paved asphalt road with a steady, uphill gradient (4.9 per cent) and used the same clipless pedals throughout all tests.

What were the findings of the study?

No difference was detected between the three shoe soles.

Measurements for average and peak power, average and peak cadence, maximal sprint velocity, acceleration and crank torque were almost identical throughout.

“We found no difference in performance between less stiff and stiffer road cycling shoe soles during short uphill sprints in recreational/competitive cyclists,” concluded lead researcher Rodger Kram.

According to their research, the stiffest cycling shoe soles, when compared both to a moderately stiff and the least stiff road cycling shoe offered by a “well-known manufacturer” showed no performance benefits in:

• 50m average and peak one-second power
• Average and peak change in velocity
• Maximum velocity
• Peak acceleration
• Peak torque

The researchers also expressed surprise at the uniformity of findings through the short sprints.

Does this mean flexible shoes are just as fast as stiff shoes?

Before you cancel your order for those stylish stiff-soled Giros and opt for your old-school plimsolls, it’s worth remembering that this is also only one trial, among a small group of trained riders focused upon ‘longitudinal sole stiffness’ and its impact upon a few seconds of all-out sprinting.

Over longer time periods, differences in sole stiffness might produce benefits. Some bike-fitting specialists agree.

“Sprint performance normally isn’t the main reason for selecting a stiffer shoe, at least not from a bike-fitting perspective,” suggests Innes Ogilvy of Edinburgh-based bike fitter Bramblers Cycling. “And the findings of this study probably won’t help people find the right shoe still.”

“I think the reason for designing a stiff shoe or buying one should be to improve comfort,” adds Ogilvy. “In my experience, those who have intentionally opted for more flexible cycling shoes tend to have had bad experiences with stiff shoes because they bought something that didn’t fit, not because it was stiff.”

The latest study has raised a few eyebrows among the creators of cycling shoes. “If their argument was true, you could easily race in a pair of running shoes, which is obviously not the case at all,” insists Istvan Nemeth, CEO at Bont Cycling.

Kram’s own previous research backs up this claim.

A study published in 2019 that compared the results of 12 cyclists testing stiff-soled shoes and clipless pedals against running shoes – which typically have next-to-no longitudinal stiffness – and platform pedals found stiff clipless shoes produced much better performance stats and were shown to positively improve cycling performance during high-power, uphill sprints.

Broadly speaking, this suggests that while there is an advantage to be had by choosing stiffer shoes, the returns in performance become vanishingly small past a certain point.

The 2020 study was unable to define where this critical point lies but, for most of us, it’s likely safe to assume that even entry-level shoes will provide all of the stiffness we need from a performance perspective.

What about fit and comfort?

Stiff shoes may have advantages beyond performance for some riders, however.

Critically, because the clipless pedals are so small (compared to flat pedals), a stiffer shoe helps spread out pedalling forces across the whole foot. If your clipless shoes were as flexible as a running shoe, you would be driving your pedalling force into a small area, which is likely to be both inefficient and very uncomfortable.

Both Nemeth and Ogilvy point out that, stiffness aside, the key to getting the right shoes is having a proper bike fit. “We emphasise mainly anatomical fit, structural support and stiffness in that order,” adds Nemeth.

“Turning the pedals is a cyclical movement, good sprinters understand the importance of the upstroke as well as the downstroke… Apart from the sole stiffness, to support the foot on the upstroke you also need proper structural support on the top of the foot.

“In addition, having structural arch support that stops the foot from pronating and acting as a dampener, and having shoes that allow your foot to spread effectively inside the shoes, all go a long way to increasing efficiency.

“Simply stiff shoes are not enough and having stiff shoes without the other two parts done correctly will cause issues and discomfort.”

So does shoe stiffness actually matter?

In summary, when compared to riding in flexible running shoes with flat pedals, a stiff clipless-pedal shoe will provide a tangible performance benefit.

However, the majority of clipless shoes on the market are likely to be stiff enough for most riders (though exactly how much ‘enough’ is isn’t clear).

More critical is that you get a shoe that is suitable for your chosen cycling discipline, that also fits and supports your feet well.

Making sure your bike helmet fits you correctly is vital in ensuring maximum protection.

A loosely-fitting helmet may not remain in place during an accident, increasing your risk of a dangerous head injury. On the other hand, an excessively tight-fitting helmet, or one that is too small, will be both uncomfortable and possibly unsafe.

In this guide, we will take you through how to correctly size a road bike helmet or mountain bike helmet.

How are helmets sized?

Size notation on helmets varies between manufacturers.

While more affordable helmets sometimes offer a one-size-fits-all design, many bike helmets come in a range of sizes, which in turn helps provide a secure and comfortable fit.

Some opt for a range of head diameters (for example, size 52-56cm), while others go for variations on a small/medium/large scale.

For those manufacturers that denote their sizing in words rather than a numerical value, they are always linked to a sizing chart, from which you can find the diameter range of each size.

MET, for example, offers three sizes for its Trenta MIPS road helmet: small, medium and large, corresponding to head diameters of 52-56cm, 56-58cm and 58-61cm respectively.

All sizing charts are brand-specific and many produce size guides for individual models of helmet, so do check before you buy a new helmet.

The majority of bicycle helmets, with the exception of some full-face downhill models (which come with replaceable internal foam pads of different thicknesses), come equipped with some form of adjustable cradle to accommodate a variety of head sizes within a defined size range.

Finally, not all heads are the same shape, and, in a similar vein to cycling shoes, helmets can also vary in shape from one brand or model to the next. Once again, it’s best to try before you buy to find the perfect fit.

How to measure your head for a helmet

If you’re buying a new helmet and want to find the correct size, it’s advisable to measure you head and check it against the brand’s size chart.

Helmets are designed to fit just above your eyebrows and ears, and as such this is the best place to measure your head to guarantee proper fit.

The best thing to use is a flexible fabric tape measure (dig around in a sewing kit that doubtless lurks in a biscuit tin to find one).

If you don’t have one of these, then a viable alternative is to use some string and to measure it afterwards.

The fit of a helmet should be snug, but not constricting, so take this into account when measuring.

Avoid using a metal tape measure from the toolbox – they aren’t designed to measure curves and won’t lie flat around your head, meaning you may get things wrong.

How to adjust the fit of a helmet

If you’ve correctly measured your head, there should be minimal adjustment required to fit it correctly.

Simply pop it on your head so it sits above your eyebrows and ears, and adjust the cradle, usually with a dial at the rear. The adjuster on the rear of the helmet will either tighten the cradle or, on some helmets, tighten a band that runs around the full circumference of the helmet.

There will also often be the option to adjust the rear of the cradle up or down to fit comfortably. The chin strap should be snug, but not constricting.

If the helmet features replaceable padding to adjust the fit, you may have to try several iterations to get it right.

The fit should be snug and the helmet shouldn’t be able to rotate in any direction. As mentioned, it should sit just above your eyebrows and shouldn’t be tilted back or forward on your head.

If you want to learn more, check out our comprehensive guide on how to (and how not to) wear a helmet correctly.

Does MIPS affect helmet sizing?

Recent advancements in tech have resulted in helmets where the outer shell has some freedom to rotate independently of the cradle, which is claimed to improve the overall safety of a helmet.

The most common form this takes is a MIPS liner (the yellow part in the photo above).

When MIPS was first introduced, the technology was retrofitted into helmets that were already available on the market. This impacted the size of the helmet because MIPS was adding a 0.5 to 0.8mm layer, which reduced available headspace.

This is no longer the case because MIPS now works with brands from the development stage of producing a helmet, so the technology is integrated into the overall design.

MIPS will introduce a small amount of movement to your helmet (around 10 to 15mm of overall movement), which can be slightly disconcerting when initially adjusting a helmet.

However, as long as this is small, and confined to the outer shell and not the cradle, you’ve nothing to worry about.

Can I have a ponytail or wear a hat with a helmet?

Some things can prevent you from getting a proper fit with a bike helmet, a ponytail being the most common.

While some helmets are designed to accommodate this hairstyle with a large exit port at the rear, some aren’t. As such, you may have to style your hair to accommodate the helmet, or choose a helmet designed to suit.

Thin hats and cycling caps can be worn under helmets if needed, as long as they don’t alter the fit.

It’s best to avoid wearing a beanie or hood under your helmet for safety reasons. The thickness will also affect the fit of the helmet.

Riding your bike is a wonderful thing, but discomfort as a result of a sub-par bike fit or setup will totally undermine your enjoyment of the activity.

However, consider reading this guide before you put your bike on eBay and head off to the shop to try to find a more comfortable model.

There’s a lot you can do to make your current bike more comfortable to ride, from tweaking your body position to careful component selection.

One change might be all that is needed, or perhaps a few combined will do the trick. However complex the problem, this guide should help you recognise and address the issue(s), and pave the way toward more comfortable, more enjoyable and faster riding.

Get your position dialled

The first port of call for a comfortable ride is to make sure that your position is right for you.

We have a detailed piece on how to set your road bike position and another for mountain bike setup.

Key points are that you want your legs to be fairly extended at the bottom of the pedal stroke, without your hips rocking, so getting your saddle height right is very important.

You should be positioned correctly over the pedals too, which means getting the saddle fore and aft positioning correct.

You also need to be able to stretch to your handlebars comfortably, so bar height and stem length are important.

Finally, if you’re riding clipped in, you need your cleats set up correctly to avoid foot, leg and back discomfort.

If all that seems daunting, a professional bike fit is a very worthwhile investment to get expert help and advice.

Handlebar height

Handlebar height alters quite a few things that affect your ride comfort.

There’s the obvious one of how bent over you are as you ride. Being bent over too much can affect lower-back, shoulder, arm, hand and neck comfort.

On the other hand, your bike will handle, climb and brake better if more of your weight is over the front wheel, plus you’ll likely be more aerodynamic, so there’s a trade-off to be made.

Secondly, altering your bar height will affect the reach from your saddle to the bars, so you might need to alter your stem length to compensate, although changes will usually be small.

Our piece on how to adjust handlebar height will give you all the tools you need to make adjustments. It’s worth considering fitting a riser stem or flipping your existing stem over if you want to get the bars higher than the steerer tube will allow.

Saddle positioning

There’s a lot of adjustability in your saddle position and it’s easy to get it wrong.

Saddle height will affect how extended your legs are when cycling, how effectively you can pedal and how much stress you put on your muscles and joints to deliver power.

You also need to ensure your fore and aft saddle positioning is correct, so you’re sitting over the pedals rather than too far behind them.

Finally, your saddle angle needs to be right, so that you’re not continually slipping forward or backward as you ride and needing to haul yourself back into the centre of your saddle.

Cleat position

With clipless pedal cleats limiting how much you can move your feet around as you ride, if you’ve got it wrong this can be reflected in aches and pains in muscles and joints right up the legs.

It’s also worth bearing in mind that whether you ride a 44cm or a 64cm frame, all bikes of the same model have the same-width bottom bracket. That’s not going to give the best stance width for everyone across that size spectrum.

There are only two ways to increase your stance width: fit your cleats further inboard or look for pedals with longer spindles.

Shimano Ultegra and Dura-Ace pedals, for example, give you the option of a 4mm longer road pedal axle.

Speedplay pedals also used to give you axle length options, but has now standardised on one length, although there’s lots of lateral adjustability in its cleat positioning.

For more info, check out our detailed guide on how to fit and adjust your clipless pedal cleats.

Change your handlebar

Fitting more comfortable mountain bikes handlebars

On mountain bikes, your handlebar needs to match your riding style, in terms of width, rise and sweep.

The shape of the bar will also affect how the bike handles, because it will change your position on the bike and the steering geometry. So a bar swap is one way to fine-tune your position if you’re not comfortable. The degree of backsweep will also determine your hand and arm position, so more backsweep may help if your hands, wrists or arms aren’t comfortable.

Also note that you might need to swap your stem to a shorter one if you fit wider bars, or bars with a different backsweep, because this will increase your effective reach.

Read our guide to choosing a mountain bike handlebar to learn more.

Fitting more comfortable road bike handlebars

For road bikes, the shape of the bar needs to be comfortable for you in a range of grip positions.

Most road bike handlebar designs now feature shallow drops, so it’s easier to ride in them for longer periods – a necessary feature to get the most out of your road bike.

If hand discomfort is an issue, look for a bar with a flattened top rather than the traditional round profile, as it will distribute pressure much more evenly, although really wide aero tops can be difficult to grip if you have smaller hands.

Some bars have a forward or reverse sweep, which will alter wrist, arm and shoulder position. A backsweep will tuck your elbows in more.

Carbon bars are a pricey upgrade that can help with vibration damping, although if you’re looking to up comfort, a one-piece carbon bar stem might not be the answer because it will limit adjustability, in particular of bar angle.

Like mountain bike bars, gravel bike handlebars are becoming increasingly wide.

That might work for you on a road bike too, as it can give you more leverage so you don’t have to grip the bars so firmly to steer, but as with mountain bikes you might find that it leads to hand, wrist, arm or shoulder discomfort. You may need a shorter stem to compensate too.

Also note that the extreme flare of some gravel bike bars will put your brake lever hoods in a position that might not be optimal for comfort if you ride on the hoods. The levers are designed to be most ergonomic in a near-vertical position.

Sort your control positioning and lever reach

If you’re having to stretch out your fingers to reach your shifters or brake levers, it can be tiring on your hands, particularly when braking on long descents.

For mountain bike brake levers, you generally want your levers to sit roughly parallel with the ground. Rolling them too far forward puts an unnatural bend in your wrist and can make it harder to control your bike in steep terrain.

On a road bike, you want your levers to be positioned so that they form a flat top surface that’s a continuation of the tops of the bends in the bars. This means your wrists won’t be too bent up or down when resting on the hoods.

You also need to adjust the reach to your brake levers so that you can reach them easily, which can be a particular issue if you have smaller hands.

Both mountain bike and road bike brake levers have built-in reach adjustment, usually via a screw in the lever body that lets you adjust reach. Make sure that the levers don’t bottom out on the bars when fully applied though.

The shift to hydraulic disc brakes has made braking action a lot lighter and less tiring than with older cable-operated brakes.

You want to be able to use your shifter levers without too much hand pressure too, so well set up, clean and lubricated derailleurs and cables will help alleviate hand strain. Expensive as it is, electronic shifting is the ultimate in this regard.

Swap your bar tape or grips

You can do a lot for your hand comfort by upgrading your bar tape or grips.

In both cases, it’s something that is of variable quality on new bikes. Some brands fit nice plushy tape or ergonomic grips to their bikes, whereas for others it’s an item that’s easy to scrimp on and save a few bucks.

The best mountain bike grips will increase shock absorption and grip on a mountain bike (or any other flat-bar bike).

Most quality grips will lock onto your bars, so you don’t have to worry about them rotating in your hands. If you’ve got large hands, a longer grip may help with comfort too.

Turning to drop bars, the best handlebar tape will have the same impact on comfort as upgrading grips on flat bars, adding extra grip and shock absorption.

Quality bar tape is quite technical, often with a core that’s designed to add comfort, wrapped in a grippy outer layer. Thickness varies greatly between tapes too – a thicker one will be more plushy than a thin one.

You can also buy gel inserts that sit under the tape, providing extra cushioning.

As a last resort, follow the example of the pros on the cobbles at Paris-Roubaix and double-wrap your bar tape.

Fit wider tyres

Fitting wider tyres is an easy way to up the comfort of your bike, particularly with road and mountain bikes.

In both road riding and mountain bikes, tyres have been getting wider for years, with 28mm tyres now the norm on new road bikes in place of the 23mm tyres specced only a few years ago.

Mountain bike tyres are getting wider too, with it rare to see anything narrower than 2.4in specced these days.

There are many hybrid commuter bikes with wide 35mm-plus rubber now and most gravel bikes enable you to fit gravel tyres 40mm wide or more.

The increased volume of a wider tyre will help isolate you from imperfections and bumps in the road surface or on the trail.

More expensive tyres – particularly the best road bike tyres – are also typically more compliant than cheaper ones, with higher thread counts in their casings and better-quality rubber that’s less rigid, both making for a more comfortable ride.

Bike brands tend to be conservative about just how wide you can go, and often you can fit a wider tyre in a frame without clearance issues – unless you’re riding somewhere where you will pick up mud.

If you’ve got a rim-brake bike, it’s often the brake caliper that’s the limiting factor in slotting in a wider tyre.

Reduce tyre pressure

With more air volume under you, a wider tyre can be run at lower pressure without the risk of bottoming out on the rim. Lower pressures mean the tyre can deform around road imperfections rather than bouncing over them. That reduces vibration transmitted through the bike to you.

Recommended road bike tyre pressure and mountain bike tyre pressure are both lower than they used to be. That’s in part due to running wider tyres on wider rims, but also thanks to a general shift in mindset across all disciplines.

Try a different saddle

There are hundreds of saddles available, designed to cater to different uses and, more importantly, to different sit bone anatomy. So if your saddle doesn’t agree with you, it’s worth considering a swap to choose the right bike saddle for you.

That doesn’t need to cost the earth, because saddle brands typically offer the same saddle profile at a range of price points, so if you’re not weight-obsessed you can pick up a new saddle relatively cheaply. If you like it, you can always upgrade to a more expensive model later.

Most big saddle brands have their own fit systems. They’re usually quite straightforward and you can run through the modeller online or visit a shop that has the fit system for the saddle brand you’re interested in. There’s often the option to try before you buy or return a saddle within a specified period if you and it don’t get along. Saddle choice is something that a professional bike fit will also usually address.

Add suspension

Mountain bike suspension is incredibly good at keeping you comfortable, but you need to fine-tune your setup to get the most out of it.

Start with our 10-minute suspension setup guide, then take a deep dive on how to adjust your fork settings. If you want to get your head around how it all works, check out our in-depth look at the most common rear-suspension systems.

If you’re on a road or gravel bike, there are various components you can buy that are designed specifically to add some shock absorption.

To start, in general, a carbon seatpost will be more compliant than an alloy one. A narrower-diameter seatpost will flex more than a wider one too, so if your road bike has a 31.6mm post a swap to a 27.2mm post with a shim in the top of the seat tube might offer more saddle comfort.

Beyond that, there are proprietary seatpost designs such as the split-shaft Canyon S25 VCLS 2.0 CF seatpost, which you can fit to any bike designed for a 31.6mm post and the Redshift Sports seatpost.

Up-front, FSA’s new NS VAS stem includes a vibration-absorbing bushing that helps isolate the bars from the steerer, and the Redshift Shockstop stem offers true suspension with hinged sections and an elastomer damper that sits within the pivot.

Still not happy? You could always fit the SRAM XPLR suspension fork or a Lauf Grit fork.

Consider your kit

Bike discomfort isn’t always the bike’s fault, sometimes it’s what you’re wearing.

It’s worth considering whether you’ve got it right if you’re sore after a ride.

The best bib shorts for men and the best women’s cycling shorts can be pricey, but they’ll usually have a high-quality seat pad that’s designed to keep you comfortable no matter how far you’re riding.

The fit will usually be better than a cheaper pair of shorts too, and there will be features such as flatlock seams, so you’re less likely to experience chafing on the bike. The best chamois cream can help here too.

A good pair of road mitts (or full-finger road cycling gloves in the winter) or mountain bike gloves will help with handlebar comfort too. They’ll typically have extra padding strategically placed to absorb vibration and shocks and protect the nerves in your palms, while still keeping your grip. Your hands will also be protected if you have a crash.

Our guide on what to wear on a bike ride takes you through everything you need to know.

Upgrade your shoes and insoles

They’re pricey to swap, but properly fitting shoes that suit your foot profile, whether road cycling shoes or mountain bike shoes, can make a lot of difference to ride comfort – not just in your feet but right up your legs and into your hips.

If your feet are wallowing around in your shoes, you’re not going to pedal as efficiently as you might, and badly aligned feet can show up in pain further up the legs and into the hips.

If you need to screw down the closures tightly for your feet to be held in place, this can put a lot of pressure on the top of your midfoot, which again can become uncomfortable and cause cramps.

Conversely, too tight a shoe will squeeze your feet, potentially restricting blood flow and could cause cramps.

Recognising this, some brands make wide-fit as well as standard-fit versions of some of their shoes, although make sure you need this because it could exacerbate the twisting problem noted above.

Good-quality footbeds can make a lot of difference to foot comfort too. Often, cycling shoes come with quite flat, unstructured insoles.

Since your soles are transmitting all your pedal power to the bike, they need to be well supported. They’re stuck in one position too, whereas when you walk or run, you spring off the forefoot, which stretches the bones and tendons, and that static position can also be a cause of cramping in the midfoot.

A good-quality footbed can help alleviate this. It will be more structured, may have swappable arch supports to suit the height of your instep and will often have a bump under the midfoot that helps keep the bones splayed out so that circulation to your forefoot is improved. Read our guide to quality replacement footbed options for more info.

Also, as mentioned above, make sure that your cleats are set up optimally. A pro bike fit should help here.

If you’ve been helmet shopping in the last few years, the likelihood is you will have seen a MIPS-equipped helmet, recognisable from the yellow liner and small yellow dot on the outside of the helmet.

But what is MIPS and why do so many helmets now have this technology?

We spoke to MIPS and were guided around its HQ in Stockholm, Sweden (via video) to understand what MIPS is, how it works, the history of the technology, and whether it is worth getting a helmet with MIPS.

What is MIPS?

MIPS stands for Multi-directional Impact Protection and is an ‘ingredient’ safety technology that over 120 brands incorporate into their helmets. In 2020, there were around 729 helmets with MIPS on the market and 7.3 million units sold.

MIPS is used in many cycling helmets, but it is also used in equestrian helmets, construction helmets and motorbike helmets.

The MIPS system itself is a low friction layer that sits between the EPS foam and the helmet liner, and allows for a sliding motion of 10 to 15mm in all directions. This aims to reduce the transfer of rotational motion onto your brain.

While linear, or straight-on, impacts can lead to skull fractures and bleeding, MIPS says studies show rotational impacts can lead to concussion and serious traumatic brain injuries.

How does MIPS work?

In short, MIPS works by using a moving layer to prevent rotational impacts from passing onto your brain. But, as you might have guessed, it’s all a bit more complicated than that.

At its core, MIPS technology mimics your head’s own protective structure. Between your skull and your brain is a layer of cerebrospinal fluid, which allows your brain to slide inside your head, protecting it from rotational forces caused by oblique impacts.

MIPS says that while most helmets are designed to deal with linear forces, its systems account for these rotational forces.

It makes sense when you think about any time you’ve crashed a bike, or even just fallen over. The likelihood of you dropping vertically onto the ground being exposed only to a linear force is incredibly slim – there is almost always an angle involved.

Peter Halldin, chief technical officer at MIPS, explains what happens when you fall at an angle and how the MIPS system counteracts the rotational forces caused because of this:

“When you fall to the ground, we have the horizontal speed forward and the impact to the ground, and during that impact, there is a tangential force that will lead to rotation of the helmet and the head.

“What we actually do with the MIPS system is mimic a fall on ice. So instead of [the head] grabbing into the ground and experiencing rotation, it’s more like we slide on ice and continue in the direction we were supposed to go.”

By introducing the sliding layer into the helmet, the head and brain are given a better chance of continuing in a linear direction during the impact, as opposed to being exposed to dangerous rotational forces.

It’s also worth noting the time frame in which a helmet can actually do something to help prevent serious brain injury is slim.

“It is a very quick impact,” explains Halldin. “The duration of the impact is about 5 to 10 milliseconds. During this very short time, the force and the acceleration on the head is very high. It’s like having more than ten people standing on your head.”

Halldin says MIPS allows your head to keep moving even with this amount of pressure applied and stresses how a helmet without a low friction layer wouldn’t be as able to move around on your head.

Why is protecting against rotational force so important?

There are two analogies used by the team at MIPS to help explain what’s at stake, and why preventing rotational forces from transferring to the brain is important.

“The human brain is very similar to water when it comes to shear properties,” says Halldin.

Like water, the brain cannot be compressed. If you expose a bowl of water or a human head to a linear force, Halldin says you will see very low deformation figures for the central part of the bowl of water and the brain. However, if you introduce a rotational force you will see higher strain values on the centre.

Marcus Seyffarth, head of product development at MIPS, uses the analogy of stretching a rubber band to explain the effect these strain values can have.

The more you stretch an elastic band the less likely it is to return to its original shape, and the same can be said for rotational forces in the brain.

“If you get a little bit of rotational motion in the brain, nothing will happen. If you get a little bit more, you might be a little bit concussed, but you’ll be ok. But if you get a little more than that you might get a severe traumatic brain injury.”

This severe traumatic brain injury can manifest in different ways. The axons, or the nerve fibres, in your brain can shear causing diffuse axonal injury (DAI), or the veins can tear leading to a subdural haematoma, where blood collects between your brain and skull. This can lead to various symptoms from feeling sick to paralysis on one side of the body.

Who created MIPS?

MIPS’ origins extend back to 1995 when Halldin, a PhD student at the time, was researching the biomechanics of head and neck injuries.

“I understood that the brain could slide inside of the skull in the cerebrospinal fluid. So I asked my supervisor Hans von Holst, the brain surgeon, if this safety system could be applied in a helmet and he said ‘that’s a great idea’. So we started to work on this idea and found that it probably had a good potential to increase safety in helmets.”

The pair started to research the types of impacts experienced by bicycle and motorcycle helmets as well as the current test standards.

Through this, they realised the standards tested only for linear impacts rather than rotational forces, and came up with the idea for MIPS in 1996. The first scientific publication regarding MIPS was published at the beginning of the 2000s.

Halldin and von Holst then founded MIPS AB in 2001, and in 2007 launched the first MIPS helmet, which was actually an equestrian helmet.

The company released the first third-party helmet with MIPS a few years later. They realised there was greater potential to get MIPS into helmets if they worked with other helmet manufacturers, as opposed to producing their own. This is a business model much like Gore-Tex or Polartec, which sell their fabrics to different clothing companies.

“We were a small company,” says Halldin. “It takes quite a lot of effort to get your product in different helmet segments.

“At that time in 2010, we felt we had a better possibility to save more lives if we became an ‘ingredient’ brand. As a result, we’ve been able to integrate into many, many more helmets than we would’ve done if we were just a helmet brand ourselves.”

Now, MIPS works with helmet manufacturers to include MIPS technology in their helmets from the very beginning of the design process, and the company also works with brands to advise on other aspects of helmet design.

Does MIPS really work?

The question of whether MIPS really works is a complicated one with different research bodies and MIPS itself making various claims around the effectiveness of the safety system.

MIPS’ own testing

A lot of MIPS’ time is dedicated to testing its technology in its own laboratory. In fact, testing has been core to MIPS’ activities right from its inception. When we spoke to MIPS it was just about to pass 48,600 completed tests.

MIPS’ own testing shows that a helmet fitted with MIPS leads to a significant strain reduction compared to the same helmet without MIPS.

MIPS measures the strain caused by an impact by using dummy heads that have the same kinematics as a human head and are fitted with six accelerometers.

The dummy heads are used in a variety of tests, including dropping the heads at a speed of 6.2 metres per second onto angled surfaces.

The tests are recorded with high-speed cameras to ensure consistency across tests, so unexpected outcomes can be analysed.

The data recorded by the accelerometers is then fed into the company’s FE (finite element) model of the head and brain, which can model what would happen in a crash.

“For each impact, we save 1,875 data points per accelerometer,” says Seyffarth. “So there’s a lot of data we put into the FE model, and we do a step-by-step millisecond simulation if this had been an actual human having that impact.”

Seyffarth says any helmet available on the market with the MIPS yellow dot has been tested by the company and passed the standards it requires for release.

“Whenever we are releasing or approving a helmet for production, we have an internal protocol where we require at least a 10 per cent reduction in strain in every impact location, every helmet and every size.

“But that’s the minimum. We see everything from 10.1 per cent to 75 per cent reduction in strain. I would say the most common is somewhere in the area of 25 to 30 per cent reduction in strain.”

You might argue that a 10 per cent reduction doesn’t seem like a lot. But if you imagine the scale of brain injury as starting with a steep section and then proceeding to level off, you can begin to see how that 10 per cent is critical and, as Seyffarth says, can be the difference between riding tomorrow or not.

MIPS is keen to stress it can only really verify the system is safer in the lab conditions.

“Every helmet is different, every accident is different and every person is different,” Seyffarth explains. “So when we test helmets, we test them in an isolated way to make sure our system works.

“We look at the actual number when we approve a helmet, but the absolute numbers might differ between different helmets and helmet brands.

“Whenever we approve helmets, we only use data from the same day. We would really like to have helmets made from the same batch, in the same exact humidity, and all that, so we get rid of as many factors as possible.”

Seyffarth says comparing helmets isn’t like comparing “apples to apples”, and this is why MIPS will never claim one helmet to be 30 per cent safer than another, for example.

External MIPS testing

But what do other people say about MIPS safety?

Virginia Tech tech has tested over 130 cycling helmets across all disciplines since 2019 and MIPS-equipped helmets have consistently dominated the top rankings, with the top ten helmets in the road, mountain bike and urban helmet categories all featuring the tech.

Folksam, a Swedish insurance group, came to similar conclusions about MIPS with its 2020 helmet test. In total, eight helmets were given Folksam’s “recommended” label, and five of these were fitted with MIPS. It said that the eight helmets performed 18 to 76 per cent better than the average helmet.

Others, however, disagree on the effectiveness of MIPS.

The Bicycle Helmet Safety Institute says its testing “has shown that MIPS does reduce rotational acceleration. But when the head is constrained – as by a neck – MIPS does not perform well. That does not happen in the field, where heads are attached to the body. We still think your helmet, with a normal scalp under it, will move anyway.”

The institute has published a response from Halldin on the same page where he says: “We do have more than 17,000 tests done in Sweden showing that all helmets with MIPS are significantly better than helmets without MIPS. We do have scientific evidence that a helmet with a low friction layer will make a difference in a test including a tangential force.”

Do I really need MIPS and is it worth it?

Extra safety is no bad idea in our eyes, and MIPS builds a convincing case for why taking measures to protect yourself against rotational impacts is wise.

While MIPS technology often tends to add extra cost to a helmet, it isn’t a huge increase in price and there are a number of helmets with MIPS for under £100.

MIPS alternatives

There are a number of alternatives to MIPS that also protect against rotational impacts, with brands opting for in-house solutions to rotational impacts, such as Kask’s WG11 rotational impact test and POC’s Spin technology (although POC is transitioning to MIPS across all of its helmets).

Many helmets with these alternative systems rank just as well as other MIPS helmets in testing, and sometimes better.

One alternative system is Bontrager’s WaveCel technology, which has been said to reduce rotational forces by 74 per cent and be 48 times more effective in preventing concussion compared to helmets without it.

WaveCel’s inventors, Dr Steve Madey and Dr Michael Bottlang, authored a study claiming WaveCel is safer than MIPS.

“WaveCel,” says Sam Foos at Bontrager, “is a collapsible cellular material that is designed to be more effective than traditional foam helmets in protecting your head from injuries caused by certain cycling accidents. It works by going through a three-step change in material structure to help absorb the rotational force of impact before it reaches your head.”

Foos also says that WaveCel-equipped Bontrager helmets have been given “top honours” by Virginia Tech.

But Bontrager doesn’t just use WaveCel, with the brand opting for MIPS in some of its helmets too. When asked why, Foos said Bontrager “offers a range of products that align with riders’ needs and combine the best balances of performance, comfort, price, and style.”

There are factors beyond safety that influence which technology is used, then.

Outdated safety standards?

One of the most common responses to the question of why a helmet does not have safety features that protect the wearer from rotational impacts is that the helmet already exceeds the required safety standards.

However, the standards for helmet testing and safety currently set out by the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) do not include rotational force parameters. This means a helmet does not have to be tested for its protection against oblique angle impacts to be approved.

Halldin is part of a working group to change the safety standards to include testing of rotational impacts across all bicycle helmets.

“We are proposing – as a complement to the current standard – an angled impact where we drop the free-falling head form at a 5-degree impact angle to the surface.”

Others, such as Lazer, have come out to say they support rotational injury standards and, beyond cycling, FIM (Fédération Internationale Motorcyclisme), the motorbike racing equivalent of the UCI, also wants to make it part of its testing.

Halldin says the ball is already rolling and we will likely see updated standards in a few years.

In theory, this could mean that some helmets do not pass the safety standards and will need to be redesigned. But Halldin says: “you could probably pass the test without a system like MIPS, as it will be a lower standard. But I think it’s important that the safety standard includes rotation anyway.”

Best MIPS road bike helmets

Many of the best road bike helmets use MIPS technology, and this is our pick of five of the best, as rated and reviewed by the BikeRadar team.

Bell Avenue MIPS

• £65 / AU$120 as tested
• Low price and user friendly
• Not that light

At £65 / AU$120, the Bell Avenue MIPS is one of the most affordable helmets with MIPS safety technology.

This lid is user-friendly, too, with easy adjustment on the dial retention system and the glides on the straps make getting the fit around the ears simple.

It’s not the lightest, but the weight penalty is justifiable considering the safety you get for the price.

• Read our full Bell Avenue MIPS helmet review

Specialized S-Works Evade with Angi

• £230 as tested
• Safety features match fit and performance
• Built-in crash detection system

The Specialized S-Works Evade uses a combination of MIPS and Angi tech for high safety levels.

Angi is a helmet-mounted device that pairs with a smartphone and will set off an alarm on your phone if it detects the forces associated with a crash.

If you’re okay you can simply turn the alarm off. If you are not, the phone will send a text to a previously selected emergency contact.

Away from safety features, though, the fit and performance of the Evade is a top-notch aero helmet.

• Read our full Specialized S-Works Evade with Angi review

Bontrager Circuit MIPS

• £100 / $160 / AU$200 / €150 as tested
• Boa retention system and good ventilation
• The shape might not be popular with everyone

The Bontrager Circuit MIPS helmet is designed for a variety of riding, whether that’s road, gravel or commuting.

It has a race-like profile, with the MIPS system adding minimal bulk, and large vents providing lots of ventilation.

There are some well-thought-out touches to the Circuit including a Boa dial for easy adjustment and soft webbing on the straps.

• Read our full Bontrager Circuit MIPS helmet review

Giro Helios Spherical

• £230 / $250 / €250 as tested
• Fit, look and performance are all good
• It’s expensive

The Giro Helios is said to be a premium design that isn’t meant for pros and has an emphasis on gravel riding. This translates into a design with less focus on aerodynamics and cooling, and more muted colours.

The helmet looks good and is supremely comfortable with minimal padding offering ample cushioning and channelling inside to keep air flowing across your head.

A hardshell keeps all the EPS foam covered, protecting it from any accidental knocks.

• Read our full Giro Helios Spherical helmet review

Scott Centric Plus

• £150 / $200 / AU$300 / €200 as tested
• Excellent cooling and fit
• Will need a hat when it’s cold

The Scott Centric Plus provides an excellent fit, in part thanks to the retention system with over 4cm of vertical adjustment.

Inside, padding is minimal but well placed and integrated with the MIPS system. This also helps improve ventilation and airflow isn’t restricted at all. This does mean you’ll need a hat or cap to keep your head warm in cooler weather.

Overall, the finish is excellent with soft straps and Y-shaped sliders. The Centric Plus is also light at 272.3g for a size large.

• Read our full Scott Centric Plus review

Best MIPS mountain bike helmets

When it comes to off-road lids, brands use MIPS across their open-face mountain bike helmets and full-face helmets.

Lazer Chiru MIPS

• £60 / $60 as tested
• Comfortable, neutral fit
• Can get hot on long climbs

The Lazer Chiru MIPS helmet costs only £60 / $60, which is impressive for a MIPS-equipped helmet.

We found the helmet to be exceptionally comfortable to wear, with no hot spots, and a retention system that allows for incremental adjustments to the fit.

The Chiru is quite hot to wear and the pads don’t absorb a lot of sweat, but these are minor niggles for what is an otherwise comfortable, safe and well-priced helmet.

• Read our full Lazer Chiru MIPS helmet review

Smith Mainline

• £275 / $300 / €300 as tested
• Solid design and vents well
• Not as lightweight as some

The Smith Mainline fits a growing category of full-face helmets that are lightweight but still suitable for multiple disciplines, making the high price tag feel a bit more justifiable.

Smith supplies the helmet with pads in different thicknesses, and once we played around with these we were able to get a good fit.

The helmet also offers good ventilation and it never felt claustrophobic in testing.

The Mainline might not be as light as the Troy Lee Designs Stage helmet, but its robust design and safety features give some good peace of mind out on the trail.

• Read our full Smith Mainline full-face helmet review

Smith Session MIPS

• £140 / £160 / €160 as tested
• Great cooling and compatible with goggles
• Fairly pricey

Designed for all-mountain riders, the Smith Session helmet combines MIPS with another third-party safety technology, Koroyd, which is designed to crumple in a controlled way.

The helmet has a deep fit, extending low on the head, and is comfortable to wear. Vents, paired with internal channels, help achieve excellent cooling.

Over rough terrain, the helmet stayed nicely in place, even with goggles stowed on top.

The Session is fairly pricey but it’s packed full of features and would be a good choice if you’re looking for a lid that will help keep your head cool.

• Read our full Smith Session MIPS helmet review

Troy Lee Designs A3

• £200 / $220 as tested
• Great fit and superb comfort
• Doesn’t work with all glasses

The Troy Lee Designs A3 helmet builds on the success of the brand’s previous open-faced trail helmet, the A2.

The A3 retains the A2’s distinctive looks and has a deep coverage design for extra protection.

The helmet uses the MIPS B32 system, which means the retention cradle is integrated into the protection system.

The helmet has a snug fit and the liner gives a good amount of cushioning and dries fast, too. The Sweatglide system prevents sweat from dripping down your forehead and into your eyes.

It’s not the lightest, but with tip-top comfort, loads of protection and some nice features, there is a lot to like about the A3.

• Read our full Troy Lee Designs A3 helmet review

Troy Lee Designs D4

• £500 as tested
• Decent venting, great comfort and looks
• Not cheap

The D4 may have taken design cues from the original 1996 Troy Lee Designs Daytona helmet – and it looks great – but thankfully safety, comfort and ventilation are all up to date.

The helmet combines a host of materials and features for safety, such as EPS foam collarbone protection, TeXtreme carbon fibre and, of course, MIPS.

Packing the helmet full of safety features hasn’t prevented Troy Lee Designs from keeping this downhill helmet light, with a claimed weight of 960g for a size medium.

This is one of the best full-face helmets on the market, with top safety features, materials and lust-worthy looks.

The high price tag might not be a surprise considering all of this. If you can’t stretch to £500, TLD does make a composite version of the D4 that costs £375.

• Read our full Troy Lee Designs D4 helmet review

Narrow handlebars for road bikes may finally be getting their moment in the spotlight.

Away from steep hills, aerodynamic drag is the biggest force slowing a cyclist down, but despite the best aero road bikes seeing almost all of their parts painstakingly optimised to slice through the wind as cleanly as possible, stock handlebar widths have been largely unchanged for years.

Like crank length and, more recently, saddle length, with the trend towards short-nosed saddles, road bike handlebars do come in a range of sizes, not to mention shapes, yet stock bars have remained steadfastly in the region of 40 to 44cm.

Enterprising riders like Adam Hansen used to be able to experiment with component sizing, but with ever-increasing integration on road bikes, this is much more difficult for riders tied to proprietary cockpits or sponsor-correct setups.

However, to get around this, many pro and amateur racers have turned to rotating their brake hoods inwards to achieve a narrower, more aerodynamic position, while earlier this year Ribble-Weldtite rider and aero aficionado Dan Bigham was spotted riding a road handlebar that measured only 27cm between the hoods.

Since then, Jan-Willem van Schip, a rider who has long used a narrow handlebar on the road, has debuted Speeco’s Aero Breakaway handlebar. The Dutch company’s design is custom-made but promotes a narrow, aero riding position thanks to the built-in forearm extensions and flared drops – though van Schip was disqualified from the 2021 Belgium Tour for using the aforementioned extensions.

But what about the rest of us?

Typically, handlebar width increases with frame size. Smaller bikes often come specced with a 40cm bar, anything around a medium will get a 42cm bar, and larger bikes typically get a 44cm (or wider) bar.

With the rider’s body contributing around 80 per cent of the total aerodynamic drag, could there be some low-hanging aero fruit to be gained from going significantly narrower at the front end of your road bike?

Even if narrow handlebars are more aero, are there any downsides to using them? How narrow is too narrow in the real world?

To answer these questions, I spoke to aerodynamics expert Dr Xavier Disley of AeroCoach and product developer Jos Koop of PRO, a leading manufacturer of road bike components, to get their views.

I also called in the narrowest drop handlebar I could find, measuring just 26cm at the brake hoods, to test the concept for myself in the real world.

What are narrow handlebars?

Let’s start by defining what constitutes a narrow road handlebar.

There’s no industry-wide accepted definition, but given the standard handlebar sizing range for road bikes is 40 to 44cm, I would define a narrow handlebar as anything narrower than 40cm.

On the flip side, a wide handlebar would be anything wider than 44cm by my definition because it falls outside of the standard range.

Typically, you’re more likely to find wide handlebars on gravel bikes, where the extra width can contribute to greater slow speed and off-road control.

Those are just my personal definitions, however, in regards to road bikes. In reality, whether a handlebar feels wide or narrow will depend on the characteristics of any given cyclist, to a degree.

A 40cm handlebar, for example, might feel relatively wide to someone with narrow shoulders, but could also feel relatively narrow to a rider with broad shoulders.

I’ve no doubt mountain bikers also have their own ideas on what’s narrow or wide when it comes to MTB handlebars.

Why might you want to use a narrow handlebar?

Bike position aside, the primary reason to use a narrower handlebar is to lower your aerodynamic drag.

Your body is the largest contributor to aerodynamic drag in the rider plus bike system and, as a result, anything you can do to improve the aerodynamic profile of your body, particularly on the leading edge, can lead to easy gains.

According to Dr Xavier Disley, the gains – or power savings, to be more precise – to be made by switching to a narrow handlebar are in the region of 0.5w per 10mm narrower at 30kph, or 2w per 10mm at 45kph.

Swapping from a 42cm handlebar to a 38cm handlebar, for example, is worth around 7 to 8 watts at 45kph – roughly equivalent to switching from an 80mm rear wheel to a disc wheel on a time trial bike.

This is likely to be obvious to anyone who’s watched or taken part in a time trial in recent years. Time trial bikes have become significantly narrower at the front end, with the top riders often adjusting the armrests to make their forearms sit as close together as physically possible.

That’s why we saw so many of the world’s best track cyclists using extremely narrow handlebars at the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games.

The wattage savings at lower speeds are less impressive at a surface level. This is always the case with aerodynamic improvements, though – at slower speeds you save fewer watts because the power required to overcome aerodynamic drag is proportional to the cube of velocity (this is one reason why manufacturers love to do aero testing at 50kph – it makes the “watts saved” figures much larger).

That said, a slower rider typically ends up saving more time than a faster rider from aerodynamic improvements, for a given course.

Even though the absolute wattages saved are smaller, a slower rider is on the course for longer and therefore has more to gain, in terms of time, from the same percentage reduction in aerodynamic drag.

If you’re happy with the handling and fit of a narrow road handlebar, it can be a relatively cheap way to make you and your bike a bit more slippery (providing your bike doesn’t have an expensive integrated handlebar that would need completely replacing).

How does a narrow handlebar affect handling?

Given I’m not a professional bike fitter or designer, I also spoke to Jos Koop, product developer at PRO, for his view on the topic.

Koop concurs that there is likely an aerodynamic advantage to be had from using a narrower handlebar. He cautions, however, that any resulting riding position needs to be sustainable for the duration of the event, and not have real-world implications that outweigh any aerodynamic advantages.

Anything that’s too uncomfortable, or makes the bike too difficult to handle, is ultimately going to increase fatigue and slow you down.

With regards to handling, there are, according to Koop, “two things at play with narrow handlebars. Steering torque and force input accuracy.”

Having learned some track riders are now using handlebars in the mid-20s, I asked Koop to compare a standard 42cm road handlebar to a super-narrow 26cm one to understand the influence of handlebar width on both of those factors.

Steering torque

Steering torque is how much force is required to turn the handlebar by a given amount.

As most people know, longer levers increase leverage. Wider handlebars, therefore, require less physical effort to turn than narrower ones.

Comparing a 42cm handlebar to a 26cm one, the turning circle “decreases by about 20 per cent”, Koop says. So “the [rider’s] force input would need to increase by 20 per cent to have the same torque applied”.

This is something that could be “trained up” or adapted to, “to a certain extent”, says Koop. Increasing stem length or handlebar reach would also negate this effect by increasing the size of the turning circle to compensate.

But, Koop nevertheless says: “If you have a lot of steering to do, you can be sure to get more tired riding a narrower handlebar.”

A super-narrow handlebar might be fine for track and time trial racing, then, but might not be the best choice for ultra-endurance cycling.

Again, the key thing for any rider is to weigh up the potential benefits against any disadvantages.

It’s not uncommon to see narrow handlebars in the professional peloton, but pro riders are also known for having little regard for comfort or, to a certain extent, fit in pursuit of performance gains.

Force input accuracy

Force input accuracy is how precisely your steering inputs translate to the handlebar – how easy is it to make the exact steering adjustment you intended to.

The ends of a wider handlebar, for example, have to travel further when turning, which slows down the speed of steering for a given force input. This should make it easier to steer the bike accurately and not over or understeer.

Let’s take the same 42cm versus 26cm handlebar comparison and consider force input accuracy.

“In the same way as the torque decreases with a smaller steering radius (considering equal applied force), the distance travelled with the hands to achieve a certain steering angle is also decreased by 20 per cent,” says Koop.

“This creates quicker handling (because of the shorter distance to get the handlebar rotated into the correct position), but is also more prone to small variations.”

He adds: “If your natural riding style includes some motion of the arms that push/pull on the handlebars, switching to a narrower handlebar will cause a bigger unwanted steering output.”

Because of this, Koop recommends narrow handlebars are “best suited to a more steady riding style” and more experienced riders.

Again, this is likely something that can be adapted to over time but, Koop says: “someone with less strength and motor skills is better off selecting a wider handlebar”.

How narrow should you go?

If, at this point, you’re intrigued by the prospect of some easy aero gains, the obvious follow up questions are: “How narrow should I go?” and “How narrow is too narrow?”.

After all, if a 36cm handlebar is better than a 42cm handlebar, is a 32cm handlebar even better, and so on? Where’s the limit?

In terms of aerodynamics, track testing by AeroCoach shows an 11.3w saving at 45kph when switching from a 38cm to 28cm handlebar, with even greater savings at higher speeds.

For those of us who like data, we thought we would share some numbers with you from our day with @AeroCoach

The benefit of Alpina 33cm Carbon Sprint Bars over a 38cm Wide bar

Looking to upgrade to our 33cm Bars check out our British Nationals Offers, https://t.co/eyi9p5Q4lA pic.twitter.com/sS4qDfbzNQ

— Dolan Bikes (@Dolan_Bikes) January 26, 2019

Is it actually sensible to use such narrow handlebars on the road, though?

To attempt to answer this question, I acquired the narrowest drop handlebar I could find – a Worx track handlebar, which measures 26cm (centre-to-centre) at the brake hoods and 33cm at the drops.

Having long been a fan of 36cm handlebars (which, in my opinion, have no detectable drawbacks for road riding versus standard-width drop handlebars), I’ve spent the last few months using the Worx handlebar on my Giant TCR Advanced Pro 2 Disc long-term test bike.

And the result? Well, here’s how my experience played out on the road (with the caveat that I am, as you might have gathered by now, someone who is interested in experimenting with this kind of thing).

The good

As you might expect, when you’re riding along on flat or rolling roads, handlebars this narrow offer a noticeably more aerodynamic position.

Riding with a power meter makes it obvious that less effort is required to maintain typical riding speeds, which probably won’t shock anyone.

The biggest surprise was how relatively normal they feel, though.

Before testing, I was concerned such a narrow handlebar would make the bike difficult to handle, but my fears were misplaced.

Yes, handlebars this narrow do change how a bike handles, but I was surprised both at how small the change felt and how quickly I got used to it.

Essentially, after about ten minutes or so of riding, the bike felt surprisingly normal most of the time.

This makes sense once you remember that, on a road bike moving at speed, a lot of steering is performed by leaning and counter steering – you don’t actually need large steering inputs at the handlebar, except at slow speeds.

Because of this, the effects on steering torque and input accuracy mentioned by Koop don’t come significantly into play all that often.

When you’re making sharp turns at slow speeds, it should theoretically make a bigger difference, according to Koop’s calculations, because you’re mainly turning the handlebar in order to change direction in those situations. But, I can’t say I ever really noticed it except for when climbing out of the saddle (more on this later).

I did appreciate the extra width on the flared drops when descending at speed. At 33cm, it’s still narrow enough to offer a tangible aerodynamic benefit, but the increased stability and force input accuracy afforded by the extra width compared to the hoods position is good to have for descending and high-speed cornering (because the consequences of a steering error become more dangerous at higher speeds).

The combination of a narrow hoods position for straight-line cruising, and a more normal (in relative terms) drops position for descending and high-speed cornering, was welcome, then.

It is important to acknowledge I am an experienced road cyclist. I also have narrow shoulders and am used to riding TT and aero road bikes, and came from a starting position of already using narrower than standard handlebars.

That said, I’m no Peter Sagan when it comes to bike handling (I can’t even wheelie). However, if you were to switch to a narrower handlebar than what’s specced on your bike as stock, my experience suggests the difference isn’t beyond the ability of an average cyclist to adapt to.

The bad

The first and most obvious drawback is that a handlebar this narrow dramatically reduces the amount of available space on the tops of the handlebar.

As a consequence, you essentially lose the tops of the handlebar hand position, unless you don’t mind putting your hands right up against the stem, and you’re left with very little room for handlebar-mounted accessories (such as bike computers, bells or road bike lights).

If you need to mount a light, you might have to attach it to the underside of an out-front computer mount, for example.

For me, these aren’t major issues, but if you like climbing with your hands on the tops, or simply find it a more relaxing, upright position to ride in, you might feel differently.

Climbing out of the saddle on steep climbs is also less comfortable than with wider handlebars.

You have to use more upper body strength to stabilise the bike because your hands are so much closer together.

It isn’t bad enough to be a deal-breaker for me, and I found it was only noticeable on gradients that were steep enough to be a generally unpleasant experience anyway.

It’s also possible to get around this issue by selecting easier gears and climbing seated because that’s usually more efficient from a physiological and aerodynamic point of view. This depends, of course, on how low your gears go and how steep the gradient is.

Nevertheless, if you regularly ride lots of very steep climbs or if you have a strong preference for climbing out of the saddle (efficiency be damned), then I can see this being less enjoyable and more tiring.

The ugly

Let’s address the elephant in the room. Handlebars like this do look… unusual (I’m being charitable).

I’ve ridden this bike a couple of times recently in unrelated videos, over on the BikeRadar YouTube channel, and the handlebar has attracted its fair share of comments.

If looks alone are enough to put you off then so be it.

It’s probably the reason the POC Tempor wasn’t a hit when it was first released back in 2012, despite it being a very aerodynamic helmet in the right conditions.

A lot of people think aero road bikes, with their boxy tubes and odd shapes, can be a bit ungainly too, compared to classically styled bikes like the Specialized Aethos.

Ultimately, it depends what you’re willing to sacrifice in order to potentially ride your bike a bit faster.

How narrow is too narrow?

Am I suggesting everyone switch to handlebars this narrow, then? No, and I don’t think I’ll be sticking with them either. For general riding, 26cm at the hoods is probably too narrow, even for me.

I didn’t have any major issues using a handlebar that narrow, but it does make for a very aggressive riding position, with no space on the tops for a relaxed, upright position, for example. A narrow bar is all race, all of the time, and even a performance weenie like me enjoys riding slowly sometimes.

I won’t be going back to anything wider than 36cm (which, amusingly, feel very wide when coming straight off the Worx handlebar), though.

It’s horses for courses then.

For road bike time trials (where clip-on aero bars are banned) or hill climbs (with the exception of the steepest hills), I would definitely use a handlebar this narrow. If you can hold the more aerodynamic position, they are faster.

But, if you’re not racing those specific disciplines, they’re a bit too aggressive – even for me.

Ultimately, “how narrow is too narrow?” is a question that each rider will have to answer for themselves.

I’m confident handlebars in the region of 36cm to 40cm are unlikely to cause any handling issues for the majority of cyclists, though, and, providing you have no issues with the fit, they should make you a little faster for no extra effort.

For me, a narrow bar is an obvious upgrade for an aero road bike or any kind of go-fast road bike build.

I’d like brands to not just doggedly stick to the way things have always been done, or to at least offer more choice when it comes to component sizing.

Credit to Ribble for offering its new Ultra SL R aero road bike with handlebar widths of 33cm, 36cm and 38cm, for example. I haven’t had a chance to test that bike yet, but I think the narrower handlebar options will prove to be a smart move.

I’d also like to see a greater range of component sizes from third-party manufacturers because there aren’t many options available for those wanting to go narrower than 38cm.

36cm road handlebars are starting to become more common, thanks to the influence of the pro peloton, but if you want to try anything narrower than that, there’s almost nothing available.

I understand the economic arguments against doing this. Making components in the three or four most popular sizes makes financial sense, but maybe narrow handlebars don’t sell in huge numbers because hardly anyone sells them? Someone has to take the plunge.

ENVE offers its carbon SES aero road handlebar in a size with 35cm hoods and flared 40cm drops, but at $400 it’s also hideously expensive.

PRO’s new Vibe aero alloy pursuit handlebar comes in a 36cm width, offers flared drops and has an RRP of £100, which is more palatable. It also offers a 12-degree sweep on the tops, which PRO says “encourages riders to maintain a highly efficient, aerodynamic position on the bike”. On paper, this all sounds great.

I’d have loved to have seen a version with a 34cm or even a 32cm hoods position, but I’m nevertheless looking forward to trying that one out.

Until then, my current handlebar of choice is the Rose Race Attack GF Aero in a 36cm width, which I previously had on my Giant TCR Advanced Pro 2 Disc long-term review bike.

It has a 36cm hoods position with 40.5cm drops. It lacks internal cable routing and the drops don’t have the traditional bend I’m fond of, but it costs just €23.95. An absolute bargain (purchased before Rose stopped selling bikes and parts to the UK).

If you’re thinking of buying a new bike, or a first bike, understanding the key measurements that define your frame is important to ensure that you get a machine that fits you and works for the type of riding that you intend to do.

And if you’re planning to rent a bike, it’s useful to know your frame’s key measurements, so you can make sure that your rental will be comfortable to ride and can be adjusted to fit.

Not all manufacturers measure frame sizes in the same way, so you need to look at a few fundamental measurements to ensure that you’re comparing apples with apples.

Read on to find out how to size up your road bike or mountain bike frame. Also check out our comprehensive guide to mountain bike geometry, which tells you how these measures affect handling; even if you’re a roadie most of the measurements are still as significant.

We’ve also got advice on how to choose the right size frame for road bikes and mountain bikes and specific advice for choosing a women’s bike.

Key numbers that define your bike

What you’ll need to measure a bike frame

• A tape measure
• A clinometer to measure angles (there are free smartphone apps you can download)
• A long spirit level (or you can use the clinometer app and a straight piece of wood)
• A plumb line (or you can improvise with string and a couple of blobs of Blu Tack)

Most bikes, whether road or mountain, are now measured in metric units, but you may find some manufacturers that still size mountain bikes in inches. Some brands, such as Moots, even mix the two!

We highly recommend you stick to metric units to keep things consistent. If you really must, you can always divide centimetres by 2.54 to switch to inches.

You will usually be able to find a geometry chart for all sizes of a current frameset on a maker’s site. If your bike is still a current model, it’s worth taking a copy of this because it will be more accurate than your measurements and likely a handy reference down the line.

How to measure top tube length

Once, bikes all had horizontal top tubes. Now many bikes’ top tubes will have a slope.

If you look at a bike geometry table, it will usually include the real top-tube length. But for a consistent measure, regardless of the top tube angle, you need to measure the horizontal top tube length, called the effective top tube length or virtual top tube in many geo charts.

That’s the horizontal distance between the centreline of the head tube and the centreline of the seatpost. Measuring it correctly will mean using your spirit level or the clinometer app, to ensure that your measure is really horizontal.

Many manufacturers size road bikes by top tube length. That’s not true of mountain bikes, where the frame size is usually marked S, M, L etc. That’s a system used for some road bikes too: Merida’s road bikes go through S, S/M, M/L and L.

Of course, this measurement is up to each brand’s interpretation – Ridley’s size S frames have a top tube around 54cm, which is equivalent to many brands’ size medium frames.

It’s worth noting that not all brands measure virtual top tube length in the same way either.

Colnago, for example, records the horizontal distance from the head tube to a vertical projected up from the top of the seat tube, so it doesn’t take account of the further backward projection of the seatpost and its numbers will come out smaller than other makers’. A 50s Colnago is equivalent to a 54cm top tube.

How to measure seat tube length

Seat tube length is the straight line distance between the centre of the bottom bracket and the top of the seat tube.

Again, it’s trickier than it sounds: some bikes like the Trek Madone have a considerable extension of the seat tube above the top tube junction while others use a seatmast, so it’s difficult to compare with an alternative’s dimensions.

Plus, mountain bikes in particular often have a kink in the seat tube, so you don’t want to follow the line of the tube itself, which will be longer.

Line up your straight edge with the bottom bracket centre and the top of the seat tube and measure along this, if you’re not sure you’re following the right line.

How to measure reach and stack

So we’ve seen that top tube and seat tube lengths are a bit of a minefield if you want to compare frames. For more consistency, most manufacturers will now show reach and stack values for their bikes.

These have the advantage of being independent of frame design and measure the perpendicular distances between two key contact points: the bottom bracket and the top of the head tube.

We’ve published a more detailed explanation of why reach and stack are important here.

In brief, the reach is the horizontal distance between the two. To measure it, you’ll need your spirit level again.

Attach a plumb line to the end of the level. If you’re using Blue Tack, make sure that the blob at the end of the string is fairly symmetric and your string hangs down straight otherwise your measure may be off.

Align the top edge of the level with the centreline of the top of the head tube. Then move the level back and forward until the plumb line intersects with the centre of the bottom bracket spindle. Now just measure the distance between the top of the plumb line and the head tube and you’ve got your reach.

Another option is to push your bike up against a wall, measure the distance to the top of the head tube and the distance to the bottom bracket, then subtract one from the other. You’ll still need to make sure that your measurement is horizontal though.

The stack is the vertical distance between the bottom bracket and the top of the head tube. So once you’re set up to record your reach, you should also be able to measure your stack, following the plumb line.

An alternative method is to measure the vertical distance from the ground to the top of your head tube, then measure the height of your bottom bracket from the ground and subtract this.

Both reach and stack are quite fiddly to capture; you’ll probably need a second pair of hands if you use the plumb line method and it’s worth repeating to ensure you’re consistent.

How to measure wheelbase

Your frame’s wheelbase is the distance between the front and rear axles. It’s a key determinant of a frame’s ride quality and will vary with frame size too.

It’s fairly easy to measure, although you need to set the fork straight ahead or your measurement will be incorrect.

Like reach and stack, it’s worth repeating the measurement several times to make sure you get the same number. Accuracy will also be increased if you measure the wheelbase on both sides of the bike and take the average because this will compensate if the fork is not quite straight.

How to measure chainstay length

Chainstay length is one of the two components that make up your wheelbase and, again, contributes significantly to your frame’s handling characteristics. A frame with shorter chainstays will typically feel more lively than one where the stays are longer.

The chainstay length is the straight line distance between the centre of the bottom bracket axle and the centre of the rear dropout, so it’s fairly easy to measure with a ruler.

How to measure front centre

The other component of the wheelbase is the front centre. That’s the equivalent of the chainstay length but measured from the axle to the front dropout.

Again, it affects handling, as well as toe overlap with the front wheel. It’s not often quoted by bike makers, but BMC, for example, shows it on its geometry charts.

Note that the wheelbase is not the sum of the chainstay length and the front centre, as neither of these is measured horizontally.

How to measure seat tube and head tube angles

The seat tube and head tube angles are two of the most important factors to determining handling, with more upright tube angles typically leading to more nimble handling. Your clinometer app will come in useful here.

If you’ve got a straight seat tube, you can measure the seat tube angle by lining up your smartphone and reading the number off the clinometer app. Make sure your bike is vertical and standing on a horizontal surface for an accurate reading.

If there’s a kink in your seat tube, you’ll need to use a straight edge to follow the line between the bottom bracket shell and the top of the seat tube, then line up the phone with this.

Most newer bikes will have tapered head tubes, so the angle of the front of the head tube will not be the same as the angle of its centreline.

You can get close to the latter by holding your phone at the angle of the centreline, or by using a straight edge to line up with the centres of the top and bottom of the head tube.

If you have straight fork legs, without an angle at their crown, the angle of the legs will be the same as the head tube angle, so you can measure this instead. Again, it’s important to have the bike standing vertically.

You can also measure head tube angle by lining up the clinometer with the steerer extension above the head tube.

How to measure bottom bracket drop

The bottom bracket drop is the difference between the height of the wheel axles and the centreline of the crank axle.

You can measure it by finding the height of the rear axle and the height of the bottom bracket, then subtracting one from the other. It’s another key measurement quoted by bike brands on their geo charts.

How to measure bottom bracket height

Finally, the bottom bracket height is the distance from the ground to the centre of the bottom bracket shell. So that’s quite easy to measure, although be careful to keep your bike straight upright for an accurate reading.

Unlike bottom bracket drop, it will be affected (slightly) by your tyres too, so inflate them to your usual running pressure.

So now you’ve got all the measurements you need to size up your frame. Keep your numbers somewhere safe though: you don’t want to have to repeat the process.

Here we look at the areas of the knee where pain might be felt when riding a bike, and the specific conditions that can lead to knee pain when cycling.

Elsewhere we take a close look at the inner workings of the knee, and how cycling overuse injuries can lead to problems that stem from three broad categories.

All of them will have contributory factors from these three problem domains: changes in training intensity (cycling-specific); changes in equipment (bike-specific); and our intrinsic anatomical and biomechanical make-up (cyclist-specific).

The key is to identify which of these is most relevant to you and make a change.

The four main areas of knee pain for cyclists

There are four areas of knee pain: anterior, posterior, medial/lateral and illiotibial band syndrome. Let’s look at each of those in turn.

Area 1: Anterior knee pain

Pain at the front of the knee – on and around the knee-cap (patella) – is the most common presentation of cycling overuse injuries, in part due to the anatomy of this area.

The large quadriceps muscles attach to the shin bone via the patella, so the forces of pedalling are transmitted across the patello-femoral joint whenever we bend our knees, essentially squashing it back against the thigh bone.

Although more common in explosive sports, the part of the tendon attaching the patella to the bony prominence below the knee-cap can become inflamed (patellar tendonitis). If this area is persistently sore to the touch it’s definitely worth seeking medical help. It should respond to ice, anti-inflammatories and physiotherapy, with or without strapping.

However, if you’re reading this and you have anterior knee pain from cycling, chances are you’ve got what’s known as a ‘patellar compression syndrome’.

The scourge of cyclists and runners alike, it can completely floor you, causing pain when off the bike and ride-stopping agony when on it.

During the push phase of pedalling, we seldom complete the last 35 degrees of knee extension; a movement which is largely under the control of the vastus medialis oblique (VMO) muscle.

This means that over a long period of time, and often in spite of outward appearances, the muscles down the outside of the thigh become much stronger and tighter than these less-used medial muscles.

The patella is pulled subtly off-kilter and forces through the patello-femoral joint increase, causing diffuse pain anywhere around the knee-cap. The soft tissues around the lateral aspect of the patella slowly shorten over time, and make strengthening exercises of the VMO muscle alone largely ineffectual.

4 ways you can look after and treat anterior knee pain when cycling

The key to treating such a condition is to loosen off the lateral structures before attempting to redress the balance and concentrate on building medial muscle bulk.

There are various methods for doing this, all of which aim to reduce the forces through the patello-femoral joint:

• Try to keep your leg out straight, if you’re troubled with anterior knee pain of this type, whenever you have the choice.
• Be aware of bike-specific problems. Make sure your saddle is set to the right height. Pushing too big a gear or using excessively long cranks can also be a problem.
• Building up the vastus medialis oblique muscle can also help. After a week or so of regular stretching and self-massage, work on building up the vastus medialis oblique muscle to balance out the stabilising forces on the patella. It’s slow and can feel pointless initially, but persist with loosening the lateral side then strengthening the medial side, and in a couple of weeks you’ll feel a difference.
• There’s not much point in taping up the patella because the forces generated when cycling are too great and the taping just won’t hold. Particularly resistant cases can be tackled by a sports physio who can work specifically on mobilising the tight lateral tissues around the patella.

It’s also worth pointing out that cycling isn’t the only time we bend our knees and stress the patello-femoral joint.

Crouching down to pick something up and tackling stairs are more obvious activities, but sitting at a desk with feet underneath the chair (or in a cinema seat) for prolonged periods will produce the same effect.

Area 2: Posterior knee pain

Pain behind the knee is far less common, and much more straightforward. It’s almost always due to over-extending the knee.

• Bike-specific problems to look for: a saddle that’s too high or too far back, although these are just as likely to cause pain further up the hamstrings.

Persistent pain behind the knee should be looked at medically to exclude a Baker’s Cyst.

Named after the chap originally describing them and nothing to do with making bread, they’re a harmless bulging of synovial fluid into the space behind the knee. Your doctor can discuss treatment options with you.

Area 3: Medial and lateral knee pain

Pain at the sides of the knees is fairly common and the culprits here are almost always the feet, or more specifically, incorrectly fitted pedal cleats.

To this end, such pain is often noticed during or after the first ever ride with cleats, or with a new pair of shoes or replacement cleats.

The structures causing the pain are most often the collateral ligaments, which sit on the outsides of the knee joint, stopping them from bending the wrong way.

• Bike-specific problems are usually to blame here: badly placed cleats will either affect the Q angle (how far apart your feet are positioned) or cause excessive rotation of the knee joint, stressing one or other of the collaterals. The Cleat Position and Knee Pain diagram (below) describes the usual culprits and what to do with them.

2 ways to avoid and treat medial and lateral knee pain when cycling

• Check cleats for excessive wear regularly. Always make sure you draw round cleats with a felt tip pen to mark position before replacing them, and experiment with different cleat types until you find one with the right amount of float for you (too much or too little can both cause problems).
• Get off on the right foot. If you’re new to cleats, one tip for getting a good starting position is to sit on the edge of a table with hips, knees and ankles relaxed at 90 degrees. Look down: whatever angle your feet naturally dangle at should be replicated by the cleats.

Area 4: Iliotibial band syndrome

Another painful condition that’s very closely related to patellar compression syndrome is called ‘iliotibial band syndrome’.

The iliotibial band is a thick fibrous strap of tissue that runs all the way down the lateral thigh, from the pelvis to just below the knee. It’s the structure that has a habit of tightening up over time and pulling the patella off centre if your vastus medialis oblique muscles aren’t strong enough to counteract.

Because of where it sits, as the knee is repeatedly bent and straightened, it moves back and forth over the knobbly end of the thigh bone just above the knee, cushioned by a fluid-filled bursa. It’s at this point that inflammation can occur, which is then irritated each time the knee is bent.

Most commonly seen in runners, it’s an unpleasant condition thought to be exacerbated by weakness of the gluteus medius muscle – another essential core muscle that gets neglected by cycling – and also by wearing cleats that point the toes too far inwards.

How to manage iliotibial band syndrome

In the acute phase of the injury, the mainstay of its treatment is the same as any for an inflammatory condition: rest, ice and regular anti-inflammatory medications such as Ibuprofen, if tolerated.

Rehabilitation after this is very similar to that described above for patellar compression syndrome, but with a focus on building up the gluteus medius muscle instead of (or as well as) the vastus medialis oblique.

Near-religious stretching, especially of the iliotibial band, should precede strengthening exercises. A return to normal activities should be phased in gradually, being guided by (a lack of) pain. Incredibly resistant cases can be operated on, but it’s rarely required if the above regime is followed.

Gluteus medius strengthening exercises for cyclists

The following exercises are all designed to strengthen the gluteus medius muscle – an important core abductor of the hip, often neglected by cycling.

It’s a smallish muscle which, when contracting, can be felt as a lump at the top of the “scoops” of your buttocks – it’s a good idea to place a hand on this area when doing the exercises, to make sure you’re exercising it.

1. Side-lying leg lifts

An exercise performed by lying on your good side, with lowermost leg bent for balance.

Keeping the uppermost leg straight, and with the foot rotated out to 45 degrees, raise it up and slightly backwards, holding just for a couple of seconds. Lower the leg and repeat, feeling for the contraction of the muscle with your uppermost hand.

2. Rotating dip

Stand sideways on to a wall, balancing on the affected leg, with the unaffected leg lifted just off the ground and pressed against the wall for support. Now slightly bend the standing knee, dip down by a few inches and hold this position.

Keeping your weight on the outside of your foot, now try and twist the knee outwards, stabilising yourself against the wall with your other (raised) leg.

This is an excellent way to build the gluteus medius, has the added advantage of also indirectly stretching the fibres of the ITB and what’s more can be done while cleaning your teeth!

4 strategies for loosening tight lateral muscles of the thigh

As well as the usual stretches for quads and hamstrings – always a good idea – there are two stretches that target the lateral structures, in particular the iliotibial band.

Contrary to popular belief, it is possible to stretch the lower end of the iliotibial band.

1. Lower iliotibial band stretch

Lie on your good side, in a straight line along the edge of a bed so you’re looking across the bed.

Hold on to the end of the bed with your lower arm for support.

Reach behind you with your upper arm and pull your foot to your bottom, as if you were doing a regular quads stretch. Keeping your foot against your bottom, gently increase the quads stretch by pulling your leg backwards. You’ll feel it along the front of your thigh – let yourself relax into this stretch.

Still holding this stretch, and making sure you don’t tilt your hips backwards, now very gently push your knee down towards the floor.

At a certain point you should feel quite a sharp stretch down near the knee – perfect for lengthening those tight soft tissues around the lateral aspect of the patella. It’s important to keep your whole body in line and perpendicular to the bed during the stretch.

If you’re lucky enough to be able to enlist the help of a patient friend, then ask them to place one hand on your hips (to stop them from rocking backwards) and push down – very gently! – on your knee with the other. This produces a better stretch, since you can completely relax the leg as it’s being pushed down.

2. Upper iliotibial band stretch

Standing upright, cross your bad leg behind your good one, making sure you keep it locked straight.

Then, without bending forwards, gently lean sideways from the waist over to the good side.

You can support yourself against a wall by leaning away from it. You should feel this stretch over the outside of the hip and upper thigh.

3. Massage

You can do this yourself, after a ride or a hot bath. With the leg locked out straight, rub with firm pressure all along the outside of the thigh. This is most easily achieved by using the palm of your hand to rub a squash ball in a circular motion over the muscles.

Alternatively, use a little oil and the flats of your fingers or thumb. If you’re really lucky, you’ll have a willing helper to do it for you.

4. Trigger points

This doesn’t work for everyone, but applying deep, sustained pressure (for up to 30 seconds) with a thumb over particularly tight or painful areas along the lateral thigh can sometimes work wonders. Sit down, lock your leg out straight to relax all the quads and find problem areas by massaging.

Pressing hard can cause your eyes to water if you’re feeling particularly tender, but persist with it and you’ll often feel tight spots twitching in submission and relaxing under the pressure.

An indirect and effective way of pinpointing these trigger points is to lie on your side and gently lower the weight of your leg on to a tennis ball. Be warned though, it’s not for the faint-hearted.

The handlebar is one of the most important components on your road bike. Along with your saddle and pedals, it’s one of the three major contact points and, crucially, it also controls your steering and how the bike handles.

The handlebar also plays a role in determining your frontal area and, as a leading edge (in aerodynamic terms), is often a prime suspect for an upgrade on performance road bikes, with many riders also tempted by the thought of adding a little more carbon to their bike.

The best road handlebar for you should offer a comfortable transition between the tops, hoods and drops, and a drop shape you are capable of using effectively. Being able to use the drops is critical, as it offers the greatest leverage possible on the brake levers when descending.

However, the wrong setup could lead to pain on the bike, including neck pain and back pain, as well as the risk of developing more serious issues like handlebar palsy or ulnar neuropathy (numbness of the two smallest fingers due to compression or traction of the ulnar nerve as it passes across the wrist into the hand, with or without hand muscle weakness).

Like saddles (but unlike pedals), all bikes come with a handlebar but the only real way to find out which size, shape and type works best for you is to try out a number of different options, either at home or with the help of a professional bike fitter.

However, we’ll get you in the right ballpark with this guide to handlebar width, shape, setup and material.

How to choose the width of your handlebars

It’s often said handlebars should match shoulder width, though in reality too much fuss is made about the importance of shoulder width when choosing a bar.

While it may be a decent starting point (as we’ll come on to), sizing handlebars using this method isn’t likely to result in an optimal setup for most riders.

Off-road, for example, handlebars have become increasingly wider in recent years as riders look for increased stability on rough terrain. The same applies on the road, where a broad handlebar slows down steering and can offer stability and confidence to an inexperienced rider, regardless of their size or shoulder width.

Riders looking to take on mixed terrain, rough roads or gravel tracks may also look for a slightly wider handlebar, or one with flared drops (common on gravel bikes).

Wider bars may also help riders who suffer shoulder tension, neck pain, jaw pain or hand fatigue from the ‘death grip’ they have due to riding narrow bars. This can be most notable on many women’s bikes, which often come stock with narrow handlebars to suit narrow-shouldered riders.

However, for more experienced riders, or riders with a naturally slimmer grip, narrow handlebars can offer some benefits. If you find your wrists splay outwards to the brake hoods, you might consider trying a narrower bar.

Handlebar width can have an impact on your aerodynamic drag, too. In general terms, narrower = faster.

If you’re currently riding 44cm bars and would like a little free speed, consider moving to 42cm or 40cm bars, for example. Likewise, if you’re currently using a 42cm or a 40cm bar, you could try a 38cm or even a 36cm bar (the 32cm bars Jan-Willem van Schip uses might be a little extreme for most amateurs though).

Assuming you get on with them in terms of comfort and control (that, of course, is vital), a change of handlebars can potentially be a better value upgrade than a new bike or a set of fancy road bike wheels. If you’re racingm it can also make moving through the bunch a little easier.

How to choose the shape of your handlebars

It took a long time, but around the early 2000s manufacturers finally realised that the bulk of bike sales are not made to elite bike racers.

Until that point, most bikes catered to the racing fraternity, with short head tubes combined with bar and stem setups that were thought to offer the most aerodynamic position possible when riding in the drops.

Drop and reach were usually deep and long, the idea being that the more you stretched out you were, the faster you’d go.

This all changed when FSA and 3T offered up the Omega and Ergonova handlebars respectively, triggering a trend of short-shoulder, shallow drop (or ‘compact’) bars on new bikes.

This more ergonomically considered hardware, especially when paired with ‘endurance’ bike geometry, allows even the most dedicated office worker to be comfortable on weekend rides when on the hoods. It also puts the drops in a much more realistic location for the average cyclist.

As already noted, this is crucial because it’s the point where brake leverage is maximised, which is vital for safe descending.

For those interested in riding fast (or with a little less effort), wind tunnel testing has shown that riding on the hoods with your elbows bent and horizontal forearms is similarly aerodynamic or, in some cases, even more so than using deep drops.

As we’ve seen in time trials, the goal is no longer to simply get as low as possible, but to get into a compact and sustainable position that allows you to keep you head in line with your torso. This is why we see some of the fastest riders in the world with a healthy amount of stack height on their handlebars nowadays.

How to set up your road bike handlebars

Road bike handlebars can dramatically affect your comfort and control on the bike.

Most riders will likely be better off with compact bars and a longer stem rather than a shorter stem with a bar with long reach and deep drops. Opting for the former allows easy access to the controls when riding on the tops, as well as improved bike handling, a good torso posture, and easy access to the brake levers when riding in the drops.

If you’re new to road cycling, start with a bar that’s slightly wider than your shoulders, then aim to get narrower as your skills improve.

You should position your hoods so that there is a continuous, level surface from the bar’s shoulder onto the hoods. Make sure the transition from the bar shoulder/hood surface is a degree or two up from horizontal. This allows a good platform for the hand and puts your wrists in a far more natural position when reaching for the controls.

Handlebar tape also has a huge impact on hand pressure and fatigue. We recommend cork or other easy-to-grip tape. Gel inserts can also be used to absorb road vibration, but make sure they are positioned such that they don’t cause pressure points.

In terms of overall fit, the height of your handlebar can have a bike impact on your road bike position. Raising the handlebar will reduce reach, while lowering it will increase reach and put you in a lower, more aggressive riding position. We’ve got a separate guide on adjusting handlebar height.

When it comes to bar selection, it’s usually best to avoid anything too fancy if you want any flexibility in your setup. Full carbon integrated bar-stem units may save a few watts and get the conversation started at the coffee shop, but as their position is fixed, they are a bike fitter’s nightmare.

Anything aerodynamic might also neglect ergonomics – those with smaller hands might find the flat top section of a wing-shaped handlebar uncomfortable – and if the internal cable routing hasn’t been smartly thought out it can create serious hassle for mechanics, and even negatively affect shifting quality if not set up properly.

It’s for this reason we’ve started to see many brands (including Giant, Specialized, and Felt) moving back to semi-integrated handlebar setups on aero bikes.

Carbon vs aluminium handlebars

Carbon handlebars are becoming an increasingly common sight on high-end road bikes. It’s easy to see why in some senses. As well as undoubtedly looking cool, carbon can be moulded into whatever shape a manufacturer likes and it also has the potential to shave off a little weight.

However, as we explained in this video on expensive road bike upgrades you don’t need, if you haven’t got carbon bars, don’t feel like you should rush out and buy some.

For the relative cost, the weight saved by switching to carbon bars is fairly minimal and humble aluminium bars offer essentially the same performance at a much lower cost. An aluminium handlebar is also less likely be get damaged beyond repair in a crash.

Thanks to advances in manufacturing techniques, you can even get aluminium bars with aerodynamically shaped top sections these days.

‘I’m a woman on the hunt for a new bike; do I need to buy a women’s-specific bike’? It’s a good question, and one that understandably gets asked a lot.

So if you want to know whether women need to ride women’s-specific bikes, read on, because while the short answer is no, the longer answer is… maybe.

First, the short answer. Women can ride any bike they want and feel comfortable on. After all, a women’s bike is any bike being ridden by a woman.

But – and here’s where it gets interesting – while anyone can ride any bike, if you’re looking for the best fit possible, which can translate to better comfort, better performance and a better experience on the bike, some women find that women’s-specific bikes work better for them, and here’s why.

However, before we get started, if you want to know more about how different brands consider women’s bikes, we’ve got a separate article on the five approaches to women’s bike design.

It’s the fit that is important

If you want to have the best experience on a bike, getting the right fit is the most important thing. This is true whether your focus is comfort, speed or performance, and if your bike is a hybrid for commuting, a mountain bike for trail riding or a road bike for speed on tarmac.

The fit starts by having the right size frame. Bike brands provide height guidance for each size bike they produce though it’s always worth a test ride if you can. This is usually something your local bike shop can help with.

Next, the fit can be tweaked and tailored to your exact needs. This will be based partly on your height, but also elements such as how long your legs and arms are, how flexible you are, whether you have any injuries and so on. Most shops offer detailed bike fits that will help you find the perfect position for your needs.

Some of the things on a bike that can be changed or altered to make the rider more comfortable and able to perform better include:

• A saddle that’s comfortable and works with a women’s genitalia
• A handlebar that is the right width and in the right position
• Cranks length that works with the size of the bike and rider to feel better when pedalling
• Suspension (on mountain bikes) that works better with the lighter on average weight of women compared to men
• Brakes that are easy to reach and control without having to stretch the hands

Some of these are just a question of moving things about a bit on the bike; for others, products will need to be swapped out and new products bought – saddles and handlebars being good examples.

This is where women’s-specific bike design comes in

There are (confusingly) a few different ways bike brands define what makes a bike ‘women’s-specific’, but in simple terms most women’s bikes are either:

1. A unisex frame with women’s-specific finishing kit such as saddle, handlebar and, if it’s a mountain bike, a lighter tune on the suspension. Brands taking this approach include Juliana Bicycles, Ribble and Scott.
2. All the above, but based around a frame that is specifically designed for women using data from women cyclists. Liv Cycling is the biggest women’s bike brand.

The idea with a women’s bike is that, at a minimum, it gives women a better fit without having to invest in additional products on top of the cost of the bike.

For example, unisex bikes are usually fitted with a handlebar that suits an average male rider. Women on average tend to have narrower shoulders compared to an equivalently-sized man, so the chances are the handlebar on a unisex bike will be too wide.

Therefore, either a new handlebar will need to be bought or, if it’s a flat handlebar, cut to size. Some unisex bike brands such as Ribble, or Specialized specifically for certain saddles, do offer a swap over for products in the bike price, but not many.

Women’s bikes also run to smaller sizes to cater to the on average height range for women being smaller than men.

The second approach is much more involved, using data from women riders and creating specific frames to suit those riders.

The idea here is that the data used will help give women a better experience on the bike, according to their needs. A few examples include greater flexibility, a lower centre of gravity and more lower body strength than upper body strength, all of which can subsequently affect the design of a frame.

However, a lot of brands have abandoned the idea of women’s bikes altogether, and only produce ‘unisex’ bikes, and then recommend a bike fit.

Myth-busting

Women’s-specific bikes have been around a while and, in all honesty, a lot of the previous ideas of what women needed and wanted from a bike weren’t well understood, for numerous reasons, and weren’t necessarily well-executed.

The result was a lot of the products were often not particularly good, and were just the same model only a bit smaller and painted pink (the ‘shrink it and pink it approach’), were pricier than the ‘unisex’ equivalent, or were only available in a lower-spec build, so women looking for high-performance bikes had to go ‘unisex’.

However, as the women’s market has grown, women’s competitive cycling has got more support and coverage, and with more and more women working in the bike industry itself, things have changed and are changing.

Nowadays, you can find high-performance road and mountain bikes with women’s-specific designs, the equivalent unisex and women’s bikes within ranges are (mostly) priced the same, and a lot more research, design and development has gone into them.

So should all women use women’s-specific bikes?

Like any group of people, women are not one homogenous mass and there are significant differences between individuals. What works for one woman may not work for another.

Saddles are a perfect example of this; ask any group of women what their favourite saddle is, and the chances are you’ll get a different answer from nearly every person.

While some women get on really well with women’s-specific bikes and absolutely swear by them, others have no issues at all with unisex bikes. Some riders may also choose a unisex bike, make some of those tweaks we mentioned earlier and have an excellent experience.

The important thing is that women have more choice than ever before. There is no wrong answer here.

So long as the bike you ride feels comfortable, isn’t causing you pain, and is fun to ride, then it doesn’t ultimately matter whether it’s a ‘unisex’ bike or a women’s-specific bike.

Cranks are one of the most important parts of your bike, allowing you to convert the power produced by your legs into rotational motion that drives the bicycle forward.

Cranks come in a range of lengths, like handlebars and saddles, so knowing what crank length is right for you can be a bit of a minefield.

Given that cranks are levers, and we know that longer levers amplify the effect of a given input force, it’s tempting to conclude that longer cranks might increase your power output, but is that really the case?

Or could using cranks that are too long actually make it harder to pedal because your joints are forced through a greater range of motion?

Is there an optimum crank length for every cyclist?

To solve these and other crank length questions we spoke to Phil Burt, a leading physiotherapist and bike fitter, and Shimano, the world’s largest manufacturer of bicycle components.

Why are standard cranks the length they are?

The three most common crank lengths for bicycles are 170mm, 172.5mm and 175mm. What size your bike has will likely depend on what size the frame is. Small bikes tend to come with 170mm cranks, medium with 172.5mm and large with 175mm.

Shimano and other major component manufacturers, such as SRAM and Campagnolo, do offer cranks as short as 165mm at most groupset levels, and up to 180mm in some cases. Additionally, specialist manufacturers like Rotor make cranks as short as 150mm.

Extra small frames (typically those with a top tube of 50cm or shorter) are increasingly coming fitted with 165mm cranks, but it’s rare to see 167.5mm cranks, or anything longer than 175mm, specced as stock on frames of any size.

However, given people can vary in height and leg length quite significantly, why is the typical variation in cranks across the size range for most bicycles limited to just 5 to 10mm and at those precise lengths? Is there actually any evidence that suggests this is the optimum range or is it just tradition?

When we put this question to Shimano, it told us: “170-175mm cranks provide an optimal balance between rotational inertia [the torque required to turn the crank], rotational speed [i.e. cadence – shorter cranks have to be spun faster to achieve the same power output and vice versa], frame design [longer cranks require a higher bottom bracket to achieve the same pedalling clearance] and biometric issues [longer cranks place greater demands on joints and muscles as the turning circle is larger]”.

Basically, Shimano thinks 170 to 175mm is the Goldilocks zone of crank length for most people and most bikes.

Is there an optimum crank length?

Maybe, but probably not.

One notable study, by J C Martin and W W Spirduso, suggests the optimum crank length for maximal cycling power production (sprinting) is “20 per cent of leg length or 41 per cent of tibia length”.

Having tested crank lengths of 120mm, 145mm, 170mm, 195mm and 220m, it also noted the highest sprint power numbers recorded in the study were with 145mm cranks, and that “power produced with the 145- and 170-mm cranks was significantly (P < 0.05) greater than that produced with the 120- and 220-mm cranks.”

Measuring leg or tibia length can be tricky for amateurs, and what if your precise optimum crank length isn’t available to purchase? Good luck trying to get hold of 145mm cranks.

On top of that, maximal cycling power production isn’t the main concern for every cyclist. Other considerations such as bike fit and cycling discipline can also influence choice.

Shimano believes “there is no right or wrong and no holy grail in the discussion about crank lengths. The choice for the specific length changes by application, riding discipline and the physiological background and attributes of the athlete.”

If you’re thinking about a change, then Shimano says the best method of determining what’s best for you is to “define your riding style and preferences, then use bike fitting and pedalling analysis, such as that provided by Shimano’s bikefitting.com network, to study your power output at different crank lengths.”

• 6 simple tweaks to get the best bike fit

Given all of this, Phil Burt says the short answer to the question ‘is there an optimum crank length?’ is “No.”

The longer answer is, naturally, more interesting, though. According to Burt: “There are likely wrong crank lengths for you, but not necessarily a right one”.

He continues: “Bikes are designed on the normal distribution curve on height, but it makes a big assumption on the proportions of people’s limbs relative to their height, and that’s where issues can arise.”

For Burt, crank length issues – such as an inability to spin high cadences, difficulty breathing, joint or muscular pain, or the rider’s knees hitting the chest or handlebars when riding in an aerodynamic position – almost always stem from riders using cranks that are “too long” for their bike position or physiology.

In contrast, he doesn’t see many problems arising from riders using cranks that are shorter than typical.

As you might have worked out, the likelihood that your cranks are too long for you largely depends on your leg length. This is because standard cranks make up a larger percentage of a shorter rider’s leg length.

A 175mm crank is likely to be a much smaller percentage of a very tall person’s leg length than a 170mm crank is for a comparatively shorter person. Again, though, each person’s individual limb proportions will be different, so it’s hard to make generalisations.

“The question should be, ‘are you using the wrong crank length?’” Burt says, following up with a neat analogy: “If I have a big box and a small box, and I ask you to jump on one of them 100 times, which one would be easier? The small box. That’s crank length.”

How does crank length affect power output?

But wait, surely it can’t be that simple – won’t a longer crank help a rider produce more power because it’s a longer lever?

Actually, no. Archimedes was correct that levers amplify an input force, and that longer levers increase that effect, but the world is not a bicycle.

“The science is clear,” says Burt, “crank length is not important in sub-maximal power production, within a range of 80mm to 300mm.”

The key detail is that the power you can produce on a bicycle isn’t solely dependent on torque (the amount of force you can apply to the crank lever in isolation). Your power output is determined by torque multiplied by cadence.

While longer cranks do produce more torque, they also decrease cadence for a given effort because the turning circle is larger.

Likewise shorter cranks produce less torque, but cadence increases for the same effort because the turning circle is shorter. The net effect on power output of crank length (within the 80mm to 300mm range) should be negligible.

The only real exception to this rule is “sprinting from a standing start on a fixed gear bicycle”, Burt says, because the increased leverage of a longer crank can make it easier to get a massive gear off the line.

Everywhere else, though, it doesn’t really matter. “When you change your crank length, you’re effectively just changing your gearing. A longer crank essentially just gives you a slightly easier gear, and vice versa”, says Burt.

“If your bike has multiple gears, though, you can just change gear to compensate for that change and pick the crank length you want for other reasons.”

Are there any benefits to using longer cranks?

What we define as a ‘long’ crank will depend on how tall you are and how long your legs are, but the benefits of using longer cranks appear hard to pin down.

Shimano suggests that “mountain bike riders may choose a longer crank to help them generate more torque at lower cadences on steep or technical terrain”.

It’s worth noting that another solution to riding on steep or technical terrain would be to simply use an easier gear, especially now that wide range cassettes are readily available on both mountain bike groupsets and road bike groupsets.

It’s also clear that using cranks that are too long for you or your riding position can potentially introduce other issues surrounding high cadences, breathing, joint or muscular pain, knees hitting the chest or handlebars, as already discussed above.

So, unless you’re a track sprinter or BMX racer, there’s very little reason to move to a longer crank, it would seem.

Are there any benefits to using shorter cranks?

Conversely, switching to shorter cranks could potentially have some benefits.

“If you struggle with knee or back problems on the bike, shorter cranks might help”, says Burt. “Not because they directly fix the problem, but because shorter cranks put less load on your joints and hip flexors.”

From a mountain biking perspective, shorter cranks also increase ground clearance, meaning “fewer worries about clipping pedals constantly”, according to Rob Weaver, technical-editor-in-chief of BikeRadar and Mountain Biking UK magazine.

A study on the influence of crank length on performance of cross-country mountain bikers also suggested there may be performance advantages to shorter cranks (170mm) because they improved the time taken to reach peak power with “no impediment to either power output produced at low cadences or indices of endurance performance using the shorter crank length”.

Alternatively, if you race road or time trial events in an aggressive aero position, short cranks might also be a marginal gain.

• Best aero road bikes

“For aero or time trial positions, short cranks are 100 per cent the way to go”, Burt says. “If you’re riding in an aggressive position using long cranks, you’re going to be closing up your hip angle. This can constrict your breathing and negatively affect your power output.”

Burt also suggests there could be a small aerodynamic gain to using smaller cranks because “the smaller turning circle is punching a slightly smaller hole in the air”.

Indeed, for the Rio Olympics in 2016 the Team GB track team switched to 165mm cranks for the men and 160mm cranks for the women, in order to improve their efficiency in the highly aggressive aero positions that wind tunnel testing suggested they adopt.

Similarly, in the build-up to Bradley Wiggins’ hour record attempt, he switched from using 177.5mm to 170mm cranks. Burt says Wiggins (who is 190cm tall) was able to improve his aero position by around “3.5 per cent” as a result of the increased saddle to bar drop and reduced hip closure angle.

Another noteworthy example is Canyon‘s most recent update to its Speedmax triathlon bike, where stock crank lengths have been reduced across the sizing range by 2.5mm, on average.

This follows a growing trend on dedicated triathlon bikes (which are designed purely around riding in the aero position) where seat tube angles and crank lengths have got progressively steeper and shorter respectively, compared to road bikes or UCI legal time trial bikes.

Seat tube angles over 78 degrees are common, for example, with Canyon’s latest Speedmax range offering a seat tube angle of over 80 degrees across all sizes. Contrast this to road bike geometry, where the typical range for seat tube angles is in the low to mid 70s.

As with the other examples cited, the idea is to move the rider forward and up over the bottom bracket. This helps reduce hip closure and improve the recruitment of the gluteal muscles, and there are even studies that show it might help improve pedalling efficiency, rider aerodynamics and the transition between running and cycling (if you’re into that sort of thing).

Burt has another helpful analogy: “If you’re trying to stamp on something, would you generate more power if you were standing directly above the object, or if you were behind it and trying to reach it at a distance? It’s the former, and that’s why we see track sprinters and the like trying to get their saddles as high and as far forward as possible, within UCI rules.”

What crank length should you be using on your bike?

To summarise, there’s no ‘right’ crank length for every cyclist and or cycling application, but cyclists of all types and disciplines should be wary of picking cranks that are too long.

“From my point of view,” Burt says, “the only downsides to switching to shorter cranks are the potential cost [if you’ve invested in a crank-based power meter then replacing it may not be cheap] and the small knock on effect it has on your bike fit, but the latter isn’t difficult to remedy – you just need to adapt your saddle height and fore/aft setting up and forward a bit.”

Burt’s ultimate view on the subject is: “If you haven’t got a problem, you don’t need to change your crank length. If you do, try something 5mm shorter.”

Phil Burt is a consultant bike fitter and physiotherapist. Having spent 12 years as the Head of Physiotherapy at British Cycling, as well as five years as Consultant Physiotherapist at Team Sky (now Team INEOS Grenadiers), he now offers his services to cyclists of all levels. For more information, head to philburtinnovation.co.uk

A road bike frame is essentially three big tubes stuck together in a triangle, four thinner ones to support the rear wheel and a fork to hold the front wheel and allow it to turn.

But it’s a lot more subtle than that, with the lengths, angles and shapes of the tubes making a huge difference to how the bike rides, its aerodynamics and what it’s useful for. Those measurements add up to the bike’s geometry and can be tweaked by the designer to define the ride characteristics and fit of a road bike.

It’s important for the bike buyer to understand geometry, too. While all road bikes may look very similar at a quick glance, subtle changes in geometry can have a big impact on whether a bike is right for you.

Broadly speaking, road bikes can be grouped into two geometry categories: race and endurance. A race bike will have a more aggressive geometry for improved aerodynamics, while a bike with an endurance geometry (or ‘sportive’ geometry) will be shaped for comfort, with a more upright riding position.

Manufacturers will include a geometry table for each model on their websites. That includes measurements for each tube and angle that makes up the bike’s frame. It looks complex, but it’s useful to be able to decipher at least some of these numbers and their effect on your ride when shortlisting potential bikes to buy.

In this guide, we’ll explain why geometry matters, and provide an overview of the key measurements to look out for and the impact they have on the bike’s fit and handling.

We’ve also got a separate guide on road bike sizing, and an in-depth explainer on the nuances of mountain bike geometry.

Why is geometry important?

A bike’s geometry determines two very important things: how the bike handles and your position on it. At one extreme are bikes designed for racing. Their geometry will typically give you more edgy handling for a ride that’s more responsive. The ride position will usually be longer and lower too, flattening your back and giving you more of a bend at your hips.

That lowers your frontal profile for less wind resistance, lowers your centre of gravity, and weights the front wheel more to add traction, but may put more stress on your shoulders, arms, neck and wrists. You might find this tiring over longer distances.

Race bikes will often have steeper, twitchier steering angles and longer stems to enhance that aggressive feel further. Add shorter, stiffer rear ends and the increased use of deeper, often more rigid-feeling aerodynamic tube shapes, and you’re looking at bikes that are very fast and efficient, but potentially unforgiving on longer rides.

At the other extreme are endurance bikes. Their geometry favours stable, predictable handling and promotes a more upright riding position.

That’s good for comfort on longer rides, but means you’re less aerodynamic and the bike’s handling might not be as sharp. With the rider contributing around 80 per cent of the aerodynamic drag when cycling, you’re likely to be a bit slower too.

That’s not an absolute distinction and you’ll find pro-level race bikes that even a novice would be happy to ride all day, while some bikes labelled “endurance” will give you quite a sporty ride. So it’s important to hunt down reviews of the bikes you’re interested in and to test them yourself, to get an insight into their real-world riding characteristics.

• Best road bikes tested by BikeRadar
• Best mountain bikes tested by BikeRadar
• Best gravel bikes tested by BikeRadar

How to choose the ‘right’ geometry

We spoke to Claudio Salomoni of prestigious brand Wilier, and Dom Mason of Mason Cycles, one of the UK’s most experienced bike designers, to get their insights on how a bike rides and fits.

Despite the very different types of bikes they make, both emphasise the bike’s stack, which measures how tall a bike is, and its reach, which measures how stretched out the rider will be, as crucial measures of how a bike feels to ride (see below for more explanation).

Mason advises using a bike fit to establish the reach and stack that will work best for you, then looking at a few bikes with numbers close to those measurements.

When Wilier introduced its NDR endurance models, it increased the stack compared to its more racy frames, and also increased the length of the wheelbase for more stability. Salomoni says that it’s important to be honest with yourself about the type of riding you’ll want to do and your skill level. “Does a high end-racing bike really match your needs?” he asks.

Mason, meanwhile, emphasises the importance of not being too upright on the bike. “It’s not so good for acceleration and climbing if your arms are too high,” he says, so he prefers to keep the head tubes on his bikes a bit shorter.

Mason also highlights head-tube angle as an important determinant of handling. “This used to be quite steep, but with newer bikes designed for multi-surface riding and carrying luggage, a lower angle works better. It’s more confidence inspiring and handling is more dependable when cornering.”

• How to measure a bike
• Women’s bike size guide

How frame size affects geometry

Besides longer tubes, there are more subtle effects of frame size on a bike’s handling and geometry.

Since wheels stay the same size on the vast majority of road bikes, bike designers need to tweak other aspects of the bike so it will fit the rider. The most tricky is wheelbase; if it’s too short you’ll get toe overlap with the front wheel, which means that your foot might rub against the tyre as you turn.

Toe overlap doesn’t make a bike dangerous or unridable, but if you have it you need to be cautious during low speed manoeuvres when you’re turning the bars a long way off-centre.

Typically, the smallest sized frames have a slacker head tube (i.e. a lower number – there’s more explanation of these terms below) to ensure the wheelbase is long enough and toe overlap doesn’t happen.

It’s also why Canyon, for example, switches to smaller 650b wheels on its smaller sized bikes. It says that this allows it to keep handling more consistent across the size range.

Frame rigidity is also likely to be different between smaller frames with shorter tubes and larger ones with longer ones. Many bike brands have some variant of what Wilier calls ‘Balanced Design’, where tube sizes and wall thicknesses vary between frame sizes, for a more consistent ride feel.

Road bike geometry measurements and why they’re important

A typical geometry chart for a bike will include a wide range of measurements. Here’s a run-down of those you’ll usually find for a road bike and why they’re significant.

Seat tube length

It’s pretty self-explanatory, but not as useful a measure as it used to be, when top tubes were horizontal. The advent of sloping geometry (where the top tube slopes downwards towards the rear of the bike) and compact framesets mean the measured seat tube length is no longer a good indicator of frame size.

A sloping (or ‘compact’) frame will mean that you have a longer section of seatpost above the top of the frame. That leads to more opportunity for it to flex and potentially a more comfortable ride.

It’s often augmented by a carbon fibre seatpost and sometimes by a design aimed at providing more compliance, such Canyon’s VCLS split seatpost or Giant’s D-Fuse, which features a D-shaped cross-section to add rearward flex.

Top tube length

Like seat tube length, top tube length is affected by whether the frame has a compact or semi-compact geometry. If a bike has a sloping top tube, as the majority of the latest road bikes do, manufacturers may quote both top tube length and effective top tube length.

Effective top tube length is the more important consideration here and is measured in a horizontal line from the head tube to the seatpost, thus discounting the actual tube’s slope.

Top tube length has a big impact on the reach of a bike and, as a result, it’s fit. Too long and you’ll be overreaching for the handlebars, which could cause discomfort or adversely affect the handlings; too short and you may be cramped on the bike.

Endurance bikes tends to have a shorter top tube, combined with a taller head tube, while race bikes opt for a longer, lower position.

You can fine-tune a bike’s reach with the length of the stem, although this will usually be pre-determined by frame size when buying a bike, so changing to a different stem will cost you extra.

Reach and stack

Most manufacturers will quote reach and stack numbers for their bikes. A bit more technical than tube lengths, the reach is the horizontal distance between the bottom bracket axle and the top of the head tube, and the stack is the vertical distance between them. Some manufacturers will include the headset in these measurements, which makes a small difference, so it’s worth checking how they’re measuring.

Reach and stack give you an absolute value for how your frame will fit (although things like stem length and spacers under it can be used to adjust this). Once you know your preferred reach and stack figures, it should be easy to compare one bike’s geometry to another.

In general, a higher stack will be paired with a shorter reach on a more comfort-focused endurance bike, while a lower stack and longer reach will make for a more racy ride position. As mentioned above, these are very useful measurements to determine how well a bike will fit you and the sort of riding it’s good for.

Wheelbase

The length of the bike’s wheelbase (the distance between the hubs of the two wheels) will affect how the bike handles.

A longer wheelbase will add stability, with endurance bikes typically over a metre. Racing bikes typically have a wheelbase under one metre (for a 56cm frame) for increased responsiveness.

Head tube length

Head tube length will determine how low you sit on the bike: a racier frame will tend to have a shorter head tube, while an endurance bike will have a taller one.

Taller head tubes (160mm or longer on a 56cm frame) naturally mean a higher cockpit position and, therefore, a more upright posture than a shorter head tube (140mm or lower).

Sitting more upright places less strain on hands, wrists, shoulders, neck and spine and creates a more relaxed ride but obviously creates more aero drag, which slows you down.

While head tube length is fixed, the height of the bars can be fine-tuned by adding or removing spacers from under the stem. We’ve got a guide on how to adjust handlebar height.

Wilier’s Salomoni points out that there’s no point in buying a bike with a short head tube then putting a large stack of spacers on top of it to raise your bars.

It doesn’t look pretty but, more importantly, handling may not be as crisp as a bike with a longer head tube and fewer spacers, which has a stiffer front-end as a result. There’s a 30mm difference in head tube length between Wilier’s race and endurance bikes, to let you sit more comfortably.

Head tube angle

Another simple measure that hides a lot of complexity, head tube angle decides how far in front of you the front wheel is. Again, this affects stability: further in front (and thus a slacker head tube angle) will give calmer, slower steering.

However, the fork will also have a bend in it once it leaves the head tube and this too will affect handling, via the fork’s offset and the bike’s trail. It’s a complex area, but suffice to say that greater offset makes the bike more stable.

Head tube angle is particularly significant for mountain bikes and the trend over the past few years has been for shorter stems, longer wheelbases and slacker head angles. However, some endurance road bikes and gravel bikes have trended in this direction too, albeit to a lesser degree.

• Pushing the limits of mountain bike fork offset: an experiment

Seat tube angle

The seat tube angle measures the angle between the tube and horizontal. A steeper seat tube (around 73 degrees is typical for race bikes) will put you more over the pedals.

It’s a popular position for time trialists and triathletes, whose bikes tend to have very steep seat tube angles. It puts less strain on the thigh muscles in a ride position that is typically very low and held for long periods.

Mason points out that seat tube angles have increased (steepened) in modern mountain bike frames, so that the rear wheel is more tucked in, while Wilier’s Salomoni reports that pro road racers are increasingly moving their saddles forward to increase the effective angle, so it’s an area of bike design where we’re likely to see subtle changes in the future.

Chainstay length

The length of the chainstays contributes to the overall wheelbase of the bike and, therefore, to its handling. It’s another area where bike designers need to balance competing demands.

Ideally, you’d keep the chainstays short on racier bikes to keep the wheelbase in check and for snappier handling, but the trend to wider tyres means that chainstays are getting longer, to provide enough clearance for the 28mm+ tyres now compatible with most race bikes.

Again, it’s not such an issue on more endurance-focused bikes where you want more stable handling.

Bottom bracket drop

Bottom bracket drop is another of those cryptic measurements you’ll see on many geometry charts, and another that affects a bike’s stability.

The bottom bracket drop is the distance between the centre of the crank axle and a line drawn between the wheel axles.

A larger drop will put the pedal axle closer to the ground. This adds stability by lowering your centre of gravity, but reduces ground clearance. Less ground clearance in turn means the frame is more likely to bottom-out over obstacles – a more significant issue for gravel and cyclocross bikes.

But even for a road bike, it’s something to be juggled; too great a drop and the pedals are more likely to ground if you’re making fast turns. You’ll also lose agility.

Bottom bracket height

Sometimes you’ll see bottom bracket height quoted rather than drop. Measured vertically from the ground, this is essentially a different way of expressing the same measurement.

However, bottom bracket height varies depending on the size of the wheels and tyres fitted to the bike, whereas drop is a fixed number determined by the frameset’s geometry.

Front-centre

You’ll occasionally see ‘front-centre’ quoted on geometry charts, which is the distance between the crank spindle and the front wheel hub (sometimes measured horizontally from the axle to an imaginary vertical line passing through the bottom bracket).

Front-centre has an impact on a bike’s handling and, crucially when it comes to sizing, can affect toe overlap.

Tyre clearance

Not strictly part of your bike’s geometry, you’ll nevertheless see plenty about tyre clearance on manufacturers’ sites. That’s because road bike tyres are getting wider and you’ll want to make sure you’ve got space to fit your tyre of choice.

Even a race-oriented bike will often come with 28mm tyres, up from 23mm just a few years ago, and many endurance and gravel bikes will go much wider.

Look for ample clearance if you want to fit wide tyres to up your comfort levels and grip on looser surfaces.

It’s another area where road bike design has changed radically in the last few years. Mason points out that the advent of disc brakes on road bikes and single chainring groupsets has really changed how much clearance a bike can offer for wider tyres, and subsequently what a modern road or gravel bike is capable of.

Standover

Standover measures how far off the ground the top tube is. There isn’t a completely standardised method for measuring it, but it’s usually taken to be either just in front of the saddle, or at the midpoint of the top tube.

You’ll want a frame with enough standover that you can comfortably put both feet on the ground when you’re not sitting in the saddle, so standover can be an important measure to consider when determining what size bike you need.

On modern compact frames with a sloping top tube, standover tends to be generous enough not to be a factor in choosing a bike, but it remains relevant with some designs, and is a particular issue if you have relatively short legs compared to your height.

Riding a bike that doesn’t fit is no fun. It’s uncomfortable and you risk injury from being too cramped or too stretched out, but knowing what size bike you should buy can be a bit of a minefield. So here’s some advice to help you find the right size road bike.

Finding the right bike starts with the frame shape — traditional, semi-compact or compact — and size.

Two bike models of the same stated size can also result in very different positions, so it’s well worth reading up on the key numbers that affect road bike geometry, what they mean, and how they affect fit and handling to ensure you’re buying the best road bike for your needs.

Getting a good fit means more than just having the right size frame. It also means your bike fits at all the main contact points: saddle, handlebars and pedals. Have a read of our guide to finding the perfect road bike position.

Beyond the main contact points, standover is also important. You need to be able to place both feet flat on the floor with at least a centimetre or so to spare at your crotch when standing astride the top tube.

Of course, we’re not all the same shape and size, so use the information below as both a starting point and a guide. Once you’ve found the right size bike and got your position close, you can make smaller adjustments to fine-tune the fit. You’ll be able to get bike fit advice in person from a bike shop.

We also recommend taking any bikes you are considering buying for a test ride to gauge how they feel in action. You want to make sure you’re comfortable on a bike and check its handling.

You’ll also want to make sure there’s enough range of adjustment for you to tweak the fit once you’ve bought the bike. Once again, a reputable bike shop should be able to offer impartial advice, and you can also read our guide on how to buy a bike.

Manufacturers’ size guidelines

The simplest way to determine what size bicycle to go for is to use the guidelines bicycle manufacturers typically provide, which correlate various height ranges with different bike sizes.

However, as we’ve already alluded to, there are no standard sizes between the bicycle manufacturers. Each will have its own approach to bike design, so it’s useful to have an overall understanding of bike geometry.

How one brand sizes its bikes may be very different from another, so don’t assume one model has the same fit as another, even if the stated size is seemingly the same.

Many manufacturers size road bikes by seat tube length (or a nominal seat tube length that imagines the bikes has a horizontal top tube, even if it doesn’t), whereas mountain bikes are usually sized as S, M, L etc. That’s also a system used for some road bikes too. Confusing, eh?

Most bike makers will also quote stack and reach figures for their bikes because they are a useful way of comparing bike sizes and geometry between brands.

The advantage of using these figures is they are independent of frame angles – two different frames might have two different top tube lengths, but the same reach, with a difference in angles making up the difference.

If you’re planning to buy a bike on the internet, it’s even more important to make sure that you’ve got your size right. Many web-sales brands will suggest a bike size based on your height and a few other measurements.

That might be fine if your build is pretty average and you’re in the middle of a suggested height range, but if you’re an outlier, we’d strongly recommend a bike fit and a test ride to make sure that you buy the right size.

Anatomy of the bicycle frame

Bike manufacturers will usually list the measurements for each element of a bike’s geometry, so knowing what each measurement refers to is the first step.

Use the diagram below to help you identify the different tubes used on the frame of a road bike.

Seat tube length is often used to denote size, but top tube length is the more important number for establishing the right fit.

However, it’s also worth noting that two top tube lengths may be quoted on a bike’s geometry chart: the length of the tube itself and the effective top tube, which concerns bikes that have a sloping top tube (road bikes with a semi-compact or compact geometry).

We’ll take a closer look at that next.

Frame geometries: traditional, semi-compact and compact

There are three main geometries of frame to consider when buying your first bike: traditional, semi-compact and compact.

Traditional bicycle frame

Traditional frames are characterised by a top tube that runs parallel to the ground. There is a reduced space when standing over the bike, though, so sizing can be more critical here.

Traditional frames were popular in the past, as you’d expect, but it’s much more common to see compact or semi-compact frames on the latest bikes.

Compact bicycle frames

Compact geometry frames are characterised by a sloping top tube, shorter wheelbase and smaller rear triangle of the frame. The result is more standover clearance than a traditional geometry frame and possibly a stiffer, more responsive ride.

Giant introduced the compact frame shape with the launch of the TCR (which stands for Total Compact Road), and compact or semi-compact designs are now ubiquitous across the latest road bikes.

With the sloping top tube, expect to see an extra two to three inches of seatpost showing when compared to traditional bikes with a horizontal top tube.

Semi-compact bicycle frames

Semi-compact geometry is similar to a compact with the only difference being that the sloping angle of the top tube is not as great, so the standover clearance is reduced and the effective top tube distance is slightly longer.

The difference between a semi-compact and compact frame will often be quite subtle, though.

Top tube length

The most important consideration to make as you decide which frame to go for is the effective top tube length: the distance from the head tube to the seatpost on a bike with a sloping top tube, or simply the length of the top tube on a road bike with traditional geometry.

If the top tube is too long, you’ll be overreaching to the handlebars, and your riding position will likely be more aggressive, which could be uncomfortable on longer rides.

If you’re looking for a more comfortable riding position then you may wish to go for a shorter effective top tube length.

Road bike size chart

Use the chart below for a rough guide on the frame size to go for. Again, we’d emphasise that this is a guide and should be used as a starting point. If you’re unsure, seek further advice from your local bike shop.

Tweaking the bike fit

Once you’ve decided on your frame size you can fine-tune your bike fit.

The next critical adjustment to make is setting the bar and saddle height. We’ve got guides to adjusting handlebar height and setting the right saddle height.

You may also want to adjust or change the stem length because that can also affect your reach – how far you are reaching forward to the handlebars – and also the handling and performance of the bike.

Further tweaks can include adjusting the fore/aft position and tilt of your saddle, the angle of your handlebars and the distance to the brake levers. If the handlebar shape isn’t right for you, you may want to consider upgrading.

Don’t forget about your pedals either. If you’re using clipless pedals, the position of your cleats can have a big impact on your overall comfort on the bike.

Many of these changes can be made in a good bike shop, though a bike fit is also worth its weight in gold if you really want to dial-in your position. As part of a bike fitting session, bike fit experts will get you riding on a fixed trainer to check your bike position and ensure everything fits you perfectly.

Women who have opted for a unisex bike may find our guide to the most common adjustments to make bikes more female-friendly useful, while we also have a guide to women’s bike sizes.

A bike’s geometry is perhaps the most important aspect of its design.

Below, we define the important measurements that dictate the shape, fit and handling of a mountain bike, and explain how they affect the ride.

We’ll start with the basics, including their less obvious aspects, before discussing some rarely mentioned but equally important geometry topics. At the end, we’ll dive deep into how the often-misunderstood concept of trail affects handling.

• How to measure a bike frame
• Mountain bike size guide

Seat tube length

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The seat tube length defines the size of the bike in a more meaningful way than the ‘Small, Medium or Large’ size structure. This is because it dictates the minimum and maximum height the saddle can be set, and therefore the height range of riders who can comfortably ride the bike, or how low they can drop the saddle for descending.

Two Medium frames, for example, will often have different seat tube lengths that will fit different riders. While the seat tube length doesn’t directly affect the handling of the bike, important measurements for handling and fit, such as reach, must be compared to the seat tube length to define how long the bike is relative to the height of the rider.

The ratio of reach to seat tube length is particularly useful – some modern bikes have a longer reach than seat tube measurement.

Effective top tube length

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The effective top tube (ETT) provides a better idea of how roomy a bike will feel when you’re sitting in the saddle, rather than using the basic top-tube measurement (from the top of the head tube to the top of the seat tube).

Taken together with the stem length and offset of the saddle, it provides a good approximation of how stretched out the bike will feel to ride in the saddle.

Stack height

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

This determines how low the bars can sit relative to the bottom bracket. In other words, it determines the minimum bar height, with no spacers under the stem. Stack also has an important but rather unintuitive relationship with reach…

Reach

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Of all the commonly available numbers in a bike’s geometry chart, reach provides the best impression of how a bike will fit. Along with the stem length, it defines how roomy the bike will feel when ridden out of the saddle, and alongside the effective seat angle, it determines how roomy the bike will feel when in the saddle too. There is one small caveat to that though, and it’s to do with the stack height.

Take two identical bikes, then make the head tube of one bike taller, so it has a higher stack height. Now if you measured the reach of those two bikes, the one with the extended head tube would measure shorter. That’s because the head angle is not vertical – so, the longer the head tube, the further back the top of it becomes, and so the shorter the reach measurement. But if you used headset spacers on the original bike, such that the bar height was the same, both bikes would feel identical to ride.

This demonstrates how reach measurements are affected by stack height. When comparing reach between bikes remember the one with the higher stack height will feel longer than its reach figure would suggest.

The easiest way to measure reach is to butt the front wheel against a wall, then measure the distance from the wall to the bottom bracket and to the top of the head tube, then subtract.

Down tube length

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Like reach, down-tube length provides an indication of how roomy the bike will feel, but it too is complicated by other factors.

In much the same way as reach is affected by stack height (the difference in height between the bottom bracket and the top of the head tube), down-tube length is affected by the difference in height between the bottom bracket and the bottom of the head tube.

This means down-tube length is only useful when comparing bikes with a similar wheel size and fork length – such that the bottom of the head tube is at roughly the same height. In this case, down-tube length can be a more useful (and measurable) number than reach.

Front-centre

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The longer the front-centre, the less prone the bike will be to pitching forwards when faced with large bumps or hard braking. This is because the rider’s weight will naturally sit further behind the front contact patch. This is why enduro and downhill bikes, meant for rough and steep terrain, have long front-centres.

For a given rear-centre length, a longer front-centre reduces the proportion of the rider’s weight supported by the front wheel. This can reduce front-wheel traction unless the rider moves their riding position forwards, or the rear-centre is made longer too.

Rear-centre

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Because the front-centre is usually significantly longer than the rear-centre, mountain bikes tend to have a naturally rearward weight distribution. This can be countered by the rider consciously putting pressure on the bar, but doing so can be fatiguing and takes practice.

The ratio of rear centre to the total wheelbase defines the front-to-rear weight distribution when all the rider’s weight is on the pedals.

A typical mountain bike’s rear-centre is about 35 per cent of its wheelbase, so the “natural” weight distribution is 35 per cent front to 65 per cent rear, before the rider puts some weight on the grips.

Having 50 per cent or more weight on the front wheel is usually ideal for cornering, so bikes with shorter rear-centre:wheelbase ratios require more pressure on the grips to achieve this.

On steep descents, the weight distribution becomes more forward-biased anyway, particularly when braking, so this is most relevant for flat corners.

Longer rear-centres therefore make it easier (less tiring) to achieve a more balanced weight distribution, which benefits front wheel traction in flat corners.

However, the longer the rear-centre, the more the rider’s weight must be lifted (with the bottom bracket) to lift the front wheel. A shorter rear-centre therefore reduces the effort to manual, but increases the effort required to properly weight the front wheel through the bar.

Wheelbase

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

It’s difficult to define the effect of wheelbase on handling. Because the wheelbase is made up of the rear-centre and front-centre (the latter is, in turn, determined by the reach, head angle and fork offset), different combinations of these variables could produce the same wheelbase, but different handling characteristics.

Generally, though, the longer the wheelbase the less the distribution of the rider’s weight is affected by braking, gradient changes or bumpy terrain. In this sense, a longer wheelbase increases stability; there’s a larger window between the rider’s weight being too far forward (pitching over the bars) or too far back (looping out). This can be a bad thing because it takes more effort to manual or nose-pivot.

There is also a downside in tight corners. The longer the wheelbase, the greater the angle through which the bars need to be turned (known as the steering angle) for the bike to follow a corner of a given radius.

Also, the difference between the arcs taken by the front and rear wheels will be greater. This is why long-wheelbase vans are prone to clipping their rear tyres on the inside of corners. Of course, mountain bikes can be cornered differently to vans or even motorbikes – the back wheel can be hopped or skidded round tight corners if need be.

Bottom-bracket height

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The higher the bottom-bracket height, the higher the centre of mass of the rider, and so the more the bike tends to pitch when faced with bumps, hard braking or steep gradients. In this sense, a lower bottom bracket improves stability in much the same way as a longer wheelbase.

Counterintuitively, a lower bottom bracket also makes the bike more agile when turning. When a bike leans into a corner, it pivots around the roll axis (the line connecting the two contact patches along the ground). By lowering the rider’s centre of mass so it’s closer to the roll axis, the amount by which the rider’s mass drops as the bike leans into the turn is reduced, and the inertia of the rider when changing lean angles (when swapping from turning left to right, for example) is reduced.

The height of the centre of mass of the rider and bike above the roll axis is called the roll moment – the longer this distance, the slower the bike is to change the direction of lean.

As a result, bikes with lower bottom-bracket heights are generally easier to move in and out of turns.

Bottom-bracket height is affected by suspension sag and dynamic ride height, so longer-travel bikes need higher static bottom-bracket heights to compensate for the increased suspension travel. See the sections on sagged and dynamic geometry below.

The disadvantage of a low bottom bracket is obvious; it increases the chances of catching pedals or chainrings on the ground.

It’s also worth remembering that the centre of mass of the bike and rider is typically well over a metre above the ground, so lowering the BB by a centimetre (an amount which will noticeably increase pedal-strikes) makes a small percentage difference.

Bottom-bracket drop

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The bottom-bracket drop itself is less important than some people have supposed. The distance by which the bottom bracket hangs below the wheel axles is seen by some to directly determine the stability of the bike in turns, as if the bike’s roll-axis (the line about which it turns when leaning into a corner) was at the height of the axles.

This argument was used in the marketing of 29in wheels, claiming that because the bottom bracket sat slightly below (not above) the axles, the bike was far more stable.

In fact, the roll axis is – roughly speaking – the line connecting the tyre contact patches. The important measurement for cornering is the height of the centre of mass above this line, and not the height of the bottom bracket relative to the axles.

Fitting smaller wheels reduces the bottom-bracket height but doesn’t affect the bottom-bracket drop. This makes a bike significantly quicker to change direction of lean because the centre of mass of the bike and rider is lower.

Interestingly, some bikes (such as Pivot’s Switchblade) feature height-adjustable ‘chips’, which compensate for different wheel sizes. Using these, the bottom-bracket height remains similar with the smaller wheel size, but the bottom-bracket drop changes.

This results in a much smaller change in the bike’s handling, suggesting bottom-bracket height is important, not bottom-bracket drop.

Bottom-bracket drop is still a useful measurement, though. Bottom-bracket height is affected by not only wheel size but also tyre choice – comparing bottom-bracket drop between bikes of a given wheel size removes this variable.

Head angle

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Head angles affect bike handling in a few key ways.

First, the head angle affects the distance by which the front axle sits in front of the rider’s hands. All things being equal, a slacker head angle increases the front-centre, making the bike less prone to pitching forwards on steep descents, but reducing the proportion of the rider’s weight pressing on the front contact patch. Therefore, the rider may need to put more pressure on the bar to avoid understeer in flat turns with a slacker head angle.

Second, slacker head angles result in more trail. (See the section on trail below – this is also affected by fork offset and wheel size.) More trail means a slower, but calmer, steering response. This is why slack bikes tend to have heavier but less twitchy steering.

Third, the head angle also affects the steering response directly. Imagine a 90-degree head angle; if you turn the bars 10 degrees from straight ahead, the contact patch will turn by 10 degrees about the vertical axis relative to the ground, and the bike will steer in that direction. Now imagine a 0-degree head angle, so the steering axis is horizontal; now when you turn the bars the contact patch won’t turn at all about that vertical axis relative to the ground, so the bike will go straight ahead.

So, the slacker the head angle, the less the bike steers for a given steering angle at the handlebar. With a 63-degree head angle, turning the bars by 10 degrees will steer the contact patch by 8.9 degrees about the vertical axis; with a 70-degree head angle, the contact patch will steer by 9.4 degrees. In other words, the steeper the head angle, the faster the steering response.

Fourth, telescopic suspension forks operate parallel to the head angle, so the head angle also defines the axle path of the front suspension. The slacker the head angle, the more the axle moves backwards, and the less it moves upwards for a given fork travel.

This is why slacker bikes are less good at dealing with flat landings (because the suspension is stiffer in the vertical direction) and why many bikes have longer fork travel than rear travel. A 170mm fork at a 64-degree head angle will provide 153mm of vertical travel and 67mm of rearwards travel.

Actual seat angle

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The actual seat angle alone tells you very little about how a bike will ride. For that, look at the effective seat angle (see below) and ignore the actual seat angle.

The shape or offset of the seat tube will affect the position of the rider as much as the actual seat angle. The effective seat angle takes both factors into account.

Effective seat angle

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Unlike the actual seat angle, the effective seat angle (ESA) gives a true indication of the seated position of the rider’s hips relative to the pedals. Note that moving the saddle fore and aft on its rails does allow the ESA to be adjusted by around 3 degrees.

For bikes with a straight seat-tube, the ESA is the same as the actual seat angle. But for those with a kinked or offset seat tube (this applies to most full suspension bikes), the ESA is steeper than the actual seat angle.

This means the ESA becomes slacker the higher the seatpost is set, so taller riders will usually experience a slacker effective seat angle than shorter riders.

On static bikes (like you’d get in a bike-fit or a spin class) most people find an ESA of around 72 to 73 degrees provides the most comfortable, ergonomic and powerful position. This varies depending on an individual’s flexibility and physiology.

However, many mountain bikes are designed to compensate for uphill gradients, as well as suspension sag.

Climbing a 10 per cent gradient effectively slackens the angles by around 6 degrees. For full suspension bikes, the rear suspension sags far more than the front suspension when in the saddle, especially when going uphill. For a typical 150mm travel bike, this could slacken the ESA by a further 3 degrees or so.

Along with the rear-centre, the ESA also determines where the rider’s mass is positioned between the front and rear axles. As a climb gets steeper, there comes a point where the rider’s centre of mass is directly above the rear contact patch. At this point the front wheel will lift, unless the rider deliberately moves their weight forwards, usually by dropping the shoulders and sitting towards the nose of the saddle.

The longer the rear-centre and the steeper the ESA, the steeper the gradient that can be ridden before this issue arises.

The ESA and the rear-centre also determine the horizontal distance between the rear axle and the rider’s weight. The further in front of the rear axle the rider sits, the less they are affected by bumps from the rear wheel. This is because when the rear wheel hits a bump, the chassis of the bike pivots around the front axle.

Therefore, the closer the saddle is to that pivot point, the less it will move up and down for a given movement at the rear axle, and so the more comfortable the ride.

For these reasons, it’s becoming more common for full-suspension bikes to have an ESA considerably steeper than 72 to 73 degrees.

Bar height

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

This is arguably the most underrated aspect of bike handling. Handlebar height can be easily adjusted by switching spacers from above and below the stem, or if necessary, by swapping between handlebars with a different rise.

Raising the bars enables the rider to move their weight back more easily. This may reduce arm fatigue, make it easier to manual and can improve confidence on steep terrain.

On the other hand, a lower bar height encourages a more aggressive stance, which can help to weight the front wheel in flat turns, quickening changes of direction.

Bar height also dictates how bent the rider’s elbows will be in the attack position, and this determines how far the rider can push the front wheel into holes or absorb impacts.

Stem length

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

The longer the stem, the roomier the cockpit will feel for a given bike. It may also make it easier to weight the front wheel through the hands on flat terrain by forcing the rider’s weight forwards and decreasing the horizontal distance between the rider’s hands and the front axle.

Shorter stems move the rider’s weight further behind the front contact patch, helping to tackle steep and rough terrain without pitching forward, while reducing the effort required to manual.

However, the shape of the bar is important too. A handlebar with more backsweep has a similar effect to shortening the stem because it puts the rider’s hands further back.

The grips can sit as much as 30mm behind the stem’s bar clamp. This varies greatly between handlebars and is also affected by the roll-position of the bar in the stem.

Fork offset

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Fork offset is made up by the forwards sweep of the fork crown and the placement of the axle in front of the lower legs.

Fork manufacturers now offer some forks with multiple fork offset options. RockShox produces 37mm and 44mm offsets in 650b, and 42mm or 51mm in 29in forks. Fox forks have similar numbers.

Fork offset affects the trail (see below). Longer offset results in less trail, which makes for a lighter but twitchier steering feel. Conversely, shorter offset forks increase the trail, which makes for more stable, heavier steering especially in steep corners or bumpy sections.

The fork offset also affects the front-centre (shorter offset means a shorter bike), as well as the distance between the rider’s hands and the front axle. For this reason, increasing the fork offset can feel a bit like a shortening the stem, in that the front wheel is further in front of the hands.

Ground trail

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Ground trail gives an indication of how stable a bike’s steering will be. It’s technically less accurate than mechanical trail (see below), but it’s easier to visualise and it’s the measurement you’re most likely to find in a bike’s geometry chart, listed as ‘trail’.

It’s affected by three factors: wheel size, head angle and fork offset. The slacker the head angle, the shorter the offset or the bigger the wheel size, the more trail.

Generally speaking, the more trail, the more stable the steering. This is because there is a restoring force when the steering is turned away from straight ahead, which acts to self-centre the steering to straight ahead. This force is related to the ground trail, but as I’ll explain, mechanical trail is a better measure of this.

Mechanical trail

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Also known as ‘real trail’, mechanical trail is closely tied to ground trail in that an increase in one will lead to an increase in the other.

Ground trail is a good analogue of mechanical trail, but mechanical trail is a more relevant measurement because it relates directly to the self-centring effect or caster effect.

The caster effect in a bike is like that in a caster wheel – as you would find on a shopping cart or office chair. The caster wheel is mounted on a link that swivels on a vertical axis relative to the cart, such that the contact patch trails behind the axis about which the link rotates. Because of this, the wheel self-aligns with the direction of travel.

If it steps out to the side, there is a restoring force on the contact patch that pushes it back into line behind the steering axis of the link. The greater the angle between the direction of travel and the wheel (known as the slip angle), the greater the restoring force that acts to reduce this angle. This self-steering effect applies to bicycle steering too.

A bicycle front wheel is similar in that the contact patch trails behind the steering axis. If the wheel is out of line, a restoring force acts to keep it in line with the direction of travel.

The mechanical trail is just like the link connected to the caster wheel. You can think of it as a ‘virtual lever’ that connects the contact patch to the steering axis. The longer this lever, the less the steering angle will be affected when the wheel is knocked off line by a given lateral distance (by a rock, for example).

Or, if the steering assembly is knocked off-line by a given angle, there will be a stronger restoring torque acting to straighten it out again, simply because the force at the contact patch acts through a longer lever.

For this reason, a higher mechanical trail figure implies the steering tends to stay straighter in rough terrain. But by the same token, more steering torque needs to be applied to the handlebar to initiate a turn because the contact patch needs to be moved relative to the frame via a longer (virtual) lever.

So, in other words, longer mechanical trail implies more stable but heavier steering.

The main reason for designing bikes with longer mechanical trail, however, is to reduce the chances of the trail becoming negative when hitting a bump, a change in gradient or a tight turn. Negative trail sends the caster effect into reverse, making the steering unstable and hard to handle. More on this later.

Mechanical trail is also one of the commonly cited prerequisites for a bicycle to be stable enough to ride no-handed. When a bike is leaned over to the right, the weight of the bike and rider acts downwards through the steering axis which is now tilted to one side; the steering axis being in front of the contact patch, this causes the steering assembly to turn to the right.

Alongside the gyroscopic force on the front wheel, this is one reason why a hands-free bike is able to steer into the direction of lean, thereby correcting the lean and remaining upright.

On the other hand, recent research has proven that it is possible to build a self-stable bike with negative trail, and with neutralised gyroscopic forces, but I wouldn’t recommend building a bike like that!

Wheel flop

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

Flop is a little-discussed but important aspect of steering geometry. And, like the caster effect discussed earlier, flop is determined by the mechanical trail. But while the caster effect relates to the horizontal component of the mechanical trail, flop is to do with the vertical component.

When you turn the bars without the bike leaning over, the head tube will drop slightly. This is because the steering axis is on a slope (the head angle), so the bike tips downwards as the steering axis rotates about the stationary contact patch. The mechanical trail is the lever about which this arc takes place.

Imagine a head angle of zero degrees, such that the fork was horizontal. Now it’s easier to picture that as you turn the handlebars, the head tube will move in a downwards arc as the steering angle is increased.

For normal head angles, the amount by which the head tube drops is proportional to the vertical component of the mechanical trail, which depends on the mechanical trail length and the head angle.*

Flop is the result of a torque on the handlebars acting to increase the steering angle (away from straight ahead), due to the weight of the bike and rider trying to achieve the lowest position.

This is aided by the fact that the bulk of the steering assembly – the handlebars, wheel and fork lowers – is placed in front of the steering axis, and so their weight creates a torque about the steering axis, which also acts to turn the assembly away from straight ahead. This contributes to flop but is a smaller factor than the weight of the rider.

Flop is a destabilising force (it acts to increase any steering angle, pulling the steering further away from straight ahead), while the caster force is stabilising (it acts to pull the steering towards straight ahead). Increasing the mechanical trail, whether by slackening the head angle or shortening fork offset, increases both of these effects.

When riding at speed, the caster effect dominates, but at slow speeds and high steering angles, the flop force becomes important.

This is why slack bikes take more effort to keep the steering from flopping to the side in slow, tight turns – but at higher speeds, especially in rough terrain, the steering assembly remains more stable and straighter with a slack head angle or short offset.

*Shorter fork offset combined with a steeper head angle will result in less flop and more stable steering than the same amount of mechanical trail achieved with a longer fork offset and a slacker head angle. This is because the vertical component of the mechanical trail is less pronounced in the former configuration than the latter.

Sagged geometry

Jack Luke/Matt Orton

So far, I’ve talked about geometry measured when the bike is unloaded. This is known as static geometry, and it’s what you’ll usually see in bike geometry tables. But when the rider mounts the bike, their weight will settle the suspension into the sagged position. This changes most of the above measurements.

In the case of hardtails, the fork compression steepens the head and seat angles, lowers the stack height, shortens the front-centre and lowers the bottom-bracket height slightly.

With full suspension bikes, the rear suspension will generally settle further into its travel than the fork. Therefore, the angles will slacken slightly, and the bottom-bracket height will drop significantly.

Depending on the axle path of the rear suspension, the rear-centre may also become longer at the sag position, but in most designs, the rear-centre will shorten again further into the travel. The front-centre will always shorten at sag, especially with slack head angles.

The amount of travel and therefore the amount of sag determines how much the geometry will change.

Dynamic geometry

Because compression damping is typically much lighter than rebound damping, mountain bikes tend to sit deeper into their travel when riding through rough terrain, so the dynamic ride height is typically deeper into the travel than the sagged position.

Dynamic geometry relates to this average suspension position. Clearly, this is not something that is practical to measure without suspension telemetry, and it’s affected by many factors including rider position and line-choice.

Dynamic geometry is most useful as a qualitative (rather than quantitative) concept, for comparing different setups. For example, increasing compression damping in the fork will raise its dynamic ride height in rough terrain and so raise and slacken the bike’s dynamic geometry.

Part 2: Why does trail matter in the real world?

As discussed above, the weight of the rider creates a force, known as flop, which acts to turn the steering assembly away from the straight-ahead position. But when riding at speed, this force is small compared to the caster effect which acts to self-centre the steering assembly towards straight ahead. That’s why your handlebars (usually) don’t veer off to one side when you let go of them.

As long as your bike has some mechanical trail, the steering will remain stable, at least on smooth ground.

However, there are a few real-world conditions in which the caster effect is diminished or even reversed, resulting in unstable steering, which acts to exaggerate the steering angle away from straight ahead. This is usually referred to as the front wheel “tucking under”, and it’s not much fun.

First, when the front wheel hits a large enough bump, the contact patch moves in front of the steering axis. This results in negative trail, which causes the caster effect to go into reverse.

Like trying to push a shopping cart wheel ahead of the shopping cart, the wheel will try to exaggerate any steering angle, away from straight ahead, until the bump has passed behind the steering axis. This is one reason why bikes with low trail figures can suffer from jerky steering in bumpy terrain.

Second, a change of gradient causes the trail to change. Imagine going from a steep downhill slope to a flatter one – a situation that occurs regularly when mountain biking.

Here, the head angle becomes steeper relative to the ground under the front wheel. This effective steepening of the head angle reduces the trail. If the change of gradient is sufficient (typically around 20 degrees), the trail will become negative. Fork suspension compression will steepen the head angle further.

Third, as the steering angle is increased towards 90 degrees, there comes a point where the caster effect goes into reverse even on flat ground.

At low steering angles, the contact patch trails behind the steering axis, on the opposite side to the direction of steering. So, as the handlebars are turned left, the contact patch trails on the right, thus acting to turn the handlebars towards the straight-ahead position.

But when the steering is turned very far, say to the left, the contact patch crosses over to the left of the steering axis, due to the fork offset, which moves the whole wheel to the left. (This is difficult to visualise unless you picture a steering angle of 90 degrees. Here, the contact patch is directly to the left of the steering axis by a distance equal to the fork offset.)

Beyond this point, the caster effect will be reversed, acting to push the wheel even further from straight ahead.

You’ve probably experienced this when turning very tightly. Beyond a certain point the wheel ‘tries’ to steer even tighter and “tuck under” on its own accord. The shorter the bike’s trail figure, and the longer the fork offset, the lower the steering angle at which this effect starts to occur.

When negotiating tight, steep turns, these factors combine. A change of gradient and compressed fork steepens the head angle relative to the ground under the front wheel, reducing trail and often making it negative. When the handlebars are turned, the caster effect goes into reverse at much smaller steering angles.

This acts to pull the front wheel into the turn further than intended. Often, the rider can overcome this simply by holding the bars steady (hence the popularity of wide handlebars), but in some situations the torque on the steering assembly can be enough to make this difficult especially for unskilled riders.

Longer trail, particularly when achieved with shorter fork offset, makes this reverse-caster effect less common. For a given amount of mechanical trail, a shorter offset/steeper head angle configuration will produce less flop, and require a greater steering angle before the caster effect starts to go into reverse.

It will also result in a shorter front-centre than a slacker/longer offset configuration with the same amount of trail. For these reasons, more brands are experimenting with shorter offset, rather than slacker head angles, to achieve more trail. But how effective is this?

How much difference does fork offset make in practice?

A few years ago, I tested multiple fork offsets on a Specialized Enduro 29. The difference was immediately noticeable – on the track in question, I preferred the increased trail provided by the shorter (37mm) fork offset because it resulted in calmer steering.

The bike’s head angle was 67.5 degrees and I swapped from 51mm offset to 37mm, taking the mechanical trail from 92mm to 106mm. That’s a difference of over 15 per cent.

More recently, I tested the 42mm and 51mm offset versions of the 2019 RockShox Lyrik on a Transition Sentinel. With 29in wheels and a 64-degree head angle, the Sentinel has around 113mm of mechanical trail with the 51mm offset, and 122mm with the 42mm offset. That’s around a 7.5 per cent difference.

After swapping from 42mm to 51mm and back again, performing multiple timed runs with each offset on three familiar test tracks, there was surprisingly little difference in the handling.

With the longer fork offset, I was aware of my hands being further behind the front wheel, as if using a shorter stem. This appeared to make it slightly harder to weight the front wheel in flat turns.

The steering with the shorter offset felt slightly weightier and smoother when cornering very hard, but this was only noticeable in rare situations, and was a very subtle difference. I’d say changing the bar-roll by a couple of degrees makes more of a difference.

From this I would suggest that changing offset makes more of a difference to bikes with steep head angles, where there is less mechanical trail to begin with.

With such slack bikes, like the Sentinel, the difference between the fork offsets offered by Fox and RockShox (around 9mm) is simply too small to notice in most riding situations. Perhaps the back-and-forth flex of the fork drowns out such a small difference in offset too.

It seems there is a law of diminishing returns. Going from 92mm to 106mm felt hugely beneficial, while going from 113mm to 122mm was barely noticeable. Clearly more investigation is needed!

Acknowledgements

While all the opinions expressed above are my own, much of the information and terminology presented here were learned from the books Motorcycle Handling and Chassis Design: The Art and Science by Tony Foale and Motorcycle Dynamics by Vittore Cossalter.

This is the ultimate guide on how to set up new cleats for road cycling shoes, including Shimano, Speedplay and other systems.

There’s nothing more important than your feet when cycling. That may sound like a grandiose claim, but you generate hundreds of thousands of pedal strokes in any given ride. And how do you deliver your effort? Through your feet, of course.

I can say, with utmost certainty, that cleats can influence positively and negatively the following: feet, ankles, knees, hips, the lower back and everything in between.

Experienced fitters will tell you this is not the end of the list, and I agree, but that should be sufficient for you to take notice.

• Best road bike pedals 2020 | 5 top-rated clipless pedals for your bike
• Best mountain bike pedals — 16 of our favourites tried and tested
• SPD vs SPD-SL pedals: what’s the right system for you?

Pedalling dynamics – a brief explainer

Your foot experiences movement in all three planes when cycling, despite its fixed trajectory. In addition, the complex motion of the knee has to be taken in to consideration.

The knee joint comprises four bones: the femur, tibia, fibula (technically speaking) and patella. It’s also an organized chaos of connective tissues, cartilage, menisci, fluid sacs, and then some – it’s complex.

As such, its motion is also equally complex. It is not a simple hinge. Rather it engages in a choreographed arrangement of gliding, translating, pivoting and rotating.

Although explaining the dynamics of the knee is too complex for this article, what is important to know is that it is complicated and there’s plenty of room for error.

• Why do my knees hurt? Cycling knee plain explained, and how to treat it. 

“I like my current cleat placement” – how to replicate cleat fit on new shoes

If you already have your preferred shoe and pedal/cleat setup going that’s great. If you don’t have symptoms telling you otherwise, by all means, don’t fix what’s not broken.

Re-creating a placement using an existing shoe is simple with a Sharpie-style marker.

Trace the outside of your cleat on the bottom of your sole and you’ve got your template. Some folks just pick an edge or two, but my experience is that covering the entire cleat surface prevents any uncertainty.

Some companies offer template stickers that go over the existing cleat, but I’ve not had the most luck getting it just right.

The marker method is pretty much foolproof, unless you’re finicky about marking the bottom of your shoes (that no one will ever see… ever).

One thing to note when replacing bike cleats: they aren’t going to behave exactly like your old cleats.

Accept this and make adjustments accordingly. If you have a huge event coming up, the night before is not a good time to replace your cleats. Allow a few easy rides to get things sorted – 100 to 150 miles should be sufficient if all other things stay in the same.

The (three) axis of power

Mounting cleats to cycling shoes requires attention to all three axis/planes: fore/aft (sagittal), float (transverse), and angular (frontal).

For clarity, fore/aft refers to how close to the heel or toe the center-line of the cleat is located.

Float refers to the movement of the shoe once it’s engaged in the pedal body – the ‘heel-in’ and ‘heel-out’ motion – and the static orientation that allows it.

Last but not least is the angular position of the shoe compared to the pedal axle (aka ‘cant’, or ‘roll’, or ‘varus/valgus’).

To the front or back? How far forward or back should I fit my cleats?

The fore/aft position of your cleat is potentially the easiest to set.

In my experience, it is the least likely of the three to lead to any injuries if it isn’t just right on the first try.

The most common methodology today is to set cleats in the area of the metatarsal-phalangeal joint (MPJ) of the third toe, based on a guesstimate.

Have a look at the image above that shows the MPJ of the 1st and 5th toes. Put your shoe on and find these two bony landmarks and put a small mark to indicate their location. Somewhere between the marks is the location to centre your cleat fore/aft as a starting position.

From there, it’s been my experience that, for riders who engage in solo or long efforts – think triathlon, breakaway specialists or just-riding-my-damn-bike – moving things more to the heel is better.

For riders waiting for that burst of sprinting power in the last 200 metres, moving things towards the toe allows for a bit more springing ‘snap’.

There are other ideas to consider. The evolution of this methodology was never based on research and has only been validated by research as an artefact of its use.

I’m willing to argue that there is room for improvement in this realm and some progressive shoe manufacturers feel the same as they continue to move their cleat mounting holes towards the heel.

If you are craving a more rearward position, with most pedal and cleat systems there is no option. However, Speedplay offers a fore/aft extender plate that adds an extra 14mm of rearward placement possibility, and relatively speaking, that is a lot.

Save your knees – How much float should my cleats have?

Float is the next consideration, and this can be very tricky.

Before we even begin mounting cleats, are you aware that not all pedals are created equal when it comes to float? Some offer none and others as much as 30 degrees. Most people feel comfortable in the 6- to 9-degree range.

My key suggestion for setting cleats rotationally is to evaluate in a standing position first.

March in place a few steps and then once standing still, view the alignment of the kneecap and feet. Do they point in the same direction? Then look exclusively to the feet – are they pointed straight ahead or to one direction?

Another test: get into a seated position with your feet hanging off the edge of an assessment table or even a bedside.

Sit upright with the feet at 90 degrees to the tibia, then roll forward at the hip, do the feet rotate in or out?

Based on what is seen, set cleats to mirror the position of the feet or to facilitate the movement of the second test. Do some pedalling and see how it looks and feels. Do the pedalling feet look like the standing feet? What about the knees, do they have the same alignment they had when standing?

Medial or lateral knee discomfort as a very dull ache is a pretty good indicator you’ve not got it just right, yet.

Pretty much every system is capable of the adjustments above, with accessories. Unfortunately, only one pedal system available today (to my knowledge) is capable of managing these planes independently. The keyword is ‘independent’.

Speedplay Zero pedals allow float to be determined once on the bike. This doesn’t affect your already determined fore/aft position (or stance width), which could be compromised in a three-hole system.

Between you and your shoe

Fore/aft and float are simple in comparison to varus/valgus, roll, cant, or whatever name you give it.

If your ankle complex is not vertically stacked, you may benefit from varus/valgus wedging.

If your ankle is not vertically stacked, it is very likely that your entire foot has an angular component, and it will not sit flat on the pedal body. Due to the restrictions of the fixed trajectory, you’d be only loading one side of your foot, and this can be problematic.

Trying to decide whether you require varus/valgus wedging is no easy task. I highly recommend professional advice, but the rationale behind cleat wedging is fairly straightforward.

Again, this is an opportunity to complicate things for yourself, and it’s incredibly difficult to assess your ankle complex alone. With varus/valgus cleat wedging I strongly encourage you to seek feedback from a qualified professional.

It’s also important to mention that cleat wedging is not the same as forefoot wedging – this is a cleat setup article, so we will not address forefoot wedging today.

How to determine stance width

‘Stance width’ is the term used to describe the distance between your feet when engaged in the pedals.

When assessing the knees and feet that I described earlier, did you naturally stand with your feet wide apart or close together? When you pedal, do you feel like your feet are underneath your knees?

There really is no method for determining stance width. To some extent it’s just trial and error. Pressure mapping can add a bit of science, but that’s a fairly uncommon piece of tech for anyone to have access to.

If you suffer from IT Band issues, increasing stance width can be a useful adjustment.

If you move your knees outward at the top of your pedal stroke, moving cleats out can be helpful.

If your stance width is wide (lots of space between your shoes and the crank arms) and your knees dive inward, try a narrower stance. Note that this isn’t a catchall solution and there could be several other things going on.

Aside from fore/aft, float and canting, stance width is often overlooked, or a victim of the other three adjustments.

• Stance width: what it is and why you should care

However, if you’ve maxed out cleat adjustment, several companies purposefully offer different axle lengths to help (Speedplay, Keywin, Shimano and a few others).

Are your legs not symmetrical?

There’s one last thing to consider: you are not symmetrical.

There is a vertical component to evaluate as well, and it will require knowledge of your structural and functional anatomy to manage.

Perhaps you don’t sit squarely on your saddle or perhaps you have two different length legs (functionally or structurally). There are vertical stack spacers available to help accommodate this.

While I strongly recommend professional advice, this won’t negatively influence you nearly as much as wedging if you’ve made a poor decision. At least not in terms of a physical manifestation of pain, but that’s not saying it doesn’t influence you, because it will.

If you think you’re over-reaching on one side but the other side is better, try adding a spacer. If it feels smoother or more natural, go with it. If your body ends up telling you it’s no better than before, you’ll make an adjustment at the knee (or ankle) without even knowing, but remove the spacer if you don’t need it.

You’ll very likely need new bolts to accommodate your stack spacer, which aren’t expensive, and when it’s the right move are well worth the money.

Setting up mountain bike cleats

So far all content has been three-hole (road) focused. All the same information applies to off-road (two-bolt systems) in regards to fore/aft, float, and stance width procedures.

However, creating varus/valgus is pretty challenging on mountain bikes because the cleat contact is so minimal and the shoe/pedal contact creates stability of the system.

Furthermore, off-road riding is much more dynamic and most riders don’t find they even notice it, and subsequently don’t need it like they might on the road. Try it if you like, the wedges do exist.

Since I’ve pointed it out before, Speedplay again stands alone. It offers off-road pedals (the Syzr) that do in fact offer cleat-based canting.

Maybe it’s not important for mountain biking, but with the increasing popularity of gravel road riding and the use of mountain bike shoes, I see the feature-benefit for sure.

Check your cleats for wear

Cleats are a wear item, regardless of brand. The same can be said for pedals, with some holding up better than others.

Be mindful and check cleats once a month to look for signs of wear so you don’t find yourself in a pinch the night before your big event.

I have one request for you: keep a journal of how you’ve decided to go about messing with your cleats (or any other position metric for that matter). The above is powerful information and should be leveraged in a responsible way.

Making changes and not documenting what you’ve done leaves you armed with only the ‘ignorant shrug’ as a tool of communication and it’s scientifically proven 100 per cent ineffective, 100 per cent of the time.

This article was last updated in March 2020

A sore bum, and more specifically labia, is the bane of many a female cyclist, but the quest for a comfortable saddle may have come closer with Specialized’s new Power Saddle with Mimic.

The Mimic is based around the original Power saddle design, which has proved immensely popular with female cyclists, including those on the BikeRadar team. The extensively updated design includes a number of innovative elements, but the most interesting is the new softer foam padding used on the nose, which is designed to ‘mimic’ the density of the soft tissue resting on it — hence the name.

• Christmas gift ideas for female road cyclists
• Bike industry women: the designers and engineers of Liv cycling
• 11 of the best women’s road bikes

Extensive research and development

Women can suffer everything from pain, swelling and numbness through to more long-lasting damage in the worst case scenario as a result of a poorly-fitting or uncomfortable saddle. It’s a topic of conversation that comes up again and again among many female riders, so it’s great to see Specialized attempting to solve this problem.

Plus, Specialized claims that this is one of the “most tested” saddles in the company’s history, and is a saddle “truly designed for women”.

At the beginning of the process Specialized recruited a team of 20 women from a wide range of different cycling disciplines to provide extensive input, testing and feedback.

Within Specialized, the design team was led by Dr Andy Pruitt of the Boulder Centre for Sports Medicine. Pruitt has worked with Specialized for many years, notably on its Body Geometry fit system, and is an expert in bike fit.

Using various techniques, such as pressure mapping, heat mapping and rider feedback, Specialized says it recorded some surprising observations. This included the discovery that for some women the central cut-out caused the labia to swell through it rather than relieve pressure, as designed.

Mimic technology

The first Power saddle was originally designed for women with input from American professional road-racer Evelyn Stevens, and featured the eye-catching truncated nose and wide back and flared wings that it’s now known for.

Based on Specialized’s research, the Power saddle has evolved further with Mimic. It now features firm, supportive padding for the sit bones at the rear and softer, layered padding on the nose. This softer padding, developed by Pruitt and his team, uses a soft, density-matched memory foam that provides support without adding pressure, to prevent any potential labial swelling.

The wings have also been tapered to prevent rubbing, based on feedback from riders of the original incarnation of the saddle.

But does it work?

Specialized concluded its research with a ‘triangle test’, a type of blind test that was designed to see if those riding the Mimic could feel the difference between it and another product. The nine women who took part in this test had no involvement with previous testing and development.

The results indicated, Specialized says, that the new Power with Mimic saddle was statistically more comfortable than other saddles tested.

Of course, we don’t have access to the full testing protocols, but we will be testing the Power with Mimic saddle ourselves on BikeRadar, so stand by for a full review.

And what about men? Specialized has also mentioned that initial feedback suggests that men find the saddle comfortable too, but Specialized says it is yet to conduct extensive research.

Specialized Power with Mimic price, size and availability

It’s good to see that Specialized has introduced the Mimic saddle at a range of price points, which makes it accessible for more riders — especially if it really is the comfort revelation that Specialized promises.

They range from the entry-level Power Comp with Mimic with Cro-mo rails through to the range-topping S-Works model with carbon rails and shell. All models feature the Mimic upper and are also compatible with Specialized’s SWAT storage systems.

There are four models available:

• Women’s S-Works Power with Mimic: £220 / $300 / AU$350
• Women’s Power Pro with Mimic: £175 / $225 / AU$270
• Women’s Power Expert with Mimic: £100 / $150 / AU$180
• Women’s Power Comp with Mimic: £80 / $120 / AU$130

Each saddle comes with three width options: 143mm, 155mm and 168mm.

If you aren’t sure what width to go for, pop into a Specialized store or dealer and they’ll able to measure it for you using a simple pressure pad that you sit on. This measures the width of your sit bones, which is what determines the size of saddle you need.

The Power Mimic saddle is available now via the Specialized website,

Rockshox believes that coil shocks aren’t just for downhill and enduro bikes and has today announced the expansion of its Super Deluxe range which now includes coil shock options for trail bikes all the way through to the longest travel downhill rigs.

• Six top suspension maintenance tips
• Quarq ShockWiz first ride review

The Super Deluxe name isn’t new for Rockshox, originally appearing on the brand’s top-end coil shocks back in the day and has been used on its air shocks in more recent years.

There has been a coil shock offering from Rockshox in the form of the Kage and the Vivid for the last few years, but the Super Deluxe Coil is the first metric sized coil shock from the brand.

• Rockshox Deluxe heralds the era of metric sized shocks

Topping the range of coil shocks is the Super Deluxe Coil RCT which features independently tunable compression circuits, a two-position ‘threshold adjustment’ and Rockshox’s ‘Counter Measure’ technology, which is used to reduce breakaway force.

Interestingly, the Super Deluxe Coil RT Remote also has an option to run a remote ‘lockout’ which allows you to switch between the two ‘threshold modes’ — fully open and ‘pedal’ (think Fox’s ‘trail’ mode) — at the bars.

Cane Creek also offer a bar mounted lockout for its Double Barrel Coil shock with its OPT remote, but aside from this it remains a rare feature in this segment.

• Cane Creek introduces new DBAir InLine shock plus OPT remote

No weights have been announced for the new shocks, but given they’re aimed at the trail/enduro market, we expect them to be competitive.

Steel springs will be available for the Super Deluxe Coil in 50lb increments from 250lbs to 650lbs depending on the length of the shock. Helpfully, a sag gradient chart is also printed on the shaft body of the shock.

The air sprung versions of the Super Deluxe have also seen a refresh (a breath of fresh air?), with the Super Deluxe RC World Cup replacing the Vivid Air for downhill duties.

The line has also seen the introduction of more stroke lengths, with a new 75mm option.  

All air shock models now also have a stroke indicator printed on the bottom of the damper body which is used to facilitate proper setup by indicating that you are using the full travel of your shock.

Initially the new shocks are only going to be available as OEM spec, but selected aftermarket options are set to be announced. It’s a safe bet that you’ll begin to see these shocks specced on new bikes from now.

Can you see yourself changing out your trusty ol’ air can for a coil shock? How do you think the Super Deluxe Coil will stack up compared to the competition? As always, leave us your thoughts in the comments below.

Have you shopped for a new helmet recently? If so, there’s no need to point out that one company’s so-called ‘medium’ doesn’t necessarily feel the same as a medium from another brand, yet they both have the same size label. I don’t know about you, but I think that seems kind of silly – but there’s an easy way to fix the issue.

For the most part, the conventional three-shell (or unfortunately, sometimes just two) system of helmet sizing seems to work reasonably well, especially in conjunction with modern retention devices. Giro’s new Synthe, for example, covers a rather wide head circumference range from 51 to 63cm.

That said, retention systems can only do so much and while it’s nice that companies typically pair their sizing labels with numerical values, those numbers don’t tell you anything about how the helmets are shaped. One person’s 60cm noggin might seem perfectly at home in a bowling alley, for example, while another rider’s 60cm skull might look like something dreamed up by HR Giger – yet, by most helmet companies’ sizing schemes, they’d both fit into a large.

These helmets are all labeled size ‘small’ but they all fit differently – and judging by the boxes they come in, you’d have no idea how

Several months ago, I stumbled upon the web site of Japanese helmet company Kabuto, whose helmets are claimed to better fit the typically rounder-shaped heads of Asian riders. I apparently don’t fit that stereotype myself but all the same, it’s the first time I’d seen a company specifically draw attention to the shape of its helmets – and if Kabuto hadn’t outlined this trait explicitly, potential buyers would be just as in the dark about these might fit as with any other company.

Let’s perhaps try this, then: along with the numerical circumference range for each helmet size, how about companies also include a metric that describes the relative interior length and width of those sizes?

Looking at a few examples illustrates the idea well:

All of these helmets are size ‘small’ with very similar circumference ranges, yet they fit quite differently, as the calculated length-to-width ratios illustrate. Out of these four examples, the Giro uses the roundest headform, followed closely by the Louis Garneau and POC. Both the Bontrager and Specialized, on the other hand, are notably more oval and given my rather oblong noggin, it’s no surprise then which of these fits me best (sorry, I didn’t have a Kabuto on hand).

Head circumference only tells part of the story

Without this sort of info, I’d essentially be guessing as to which shell would most closely approximate the shape of my skull – as would anyone else who might be in the market for a new helmet. This information would most obviously benefit someone shopping over the internet but even brick-and-mortar customers might at least like to be able to narrow down which helmet brands will work best before driving all over town.

I don’t have the data to say that a better-fitting helmet would protect you better than one that doesn’t fit as well (although it seems intuitive that the former case is preferable). However, I do know that I’m happier in a helmet that feels more like it inherently fits my head than in one that has to be adapted to work, and I’d rather not go through a big trial-and-error process to get there.