The hypothesis I am slowly arriving at is that, for me, if seat angle geometry is more conservative (maybe sub 75 degrees or thereabouts), then ETT is still a really good barometer for understanding how I will fit, especially with regard to seated pedaling behavior. However, as we move deeper into bigger travel and more radical seat angles, I am realizing that reach/stack matters more, and that those bikes are probably not designed to optimize seated pedaling (no, _really_?), and are more likely to be ridden with the seat slammed out of the way except for when they are being winched up climbs between the downs, and therefore maybe _should_ be viewed in the framework of reach/stack fit instead of worrying about ETT at all.
July 12, 2023, 11:30 a.m. - Mike Ferrentino
The hypothesis I am slowly arriving at is that, for me, if seat angle geometry is more conservative (maybe sub 75 degrees or thereabouts), then ETT is still a really good barometer for understanding how I will fit, especially with regard to seated pedaling behavior. However, as we move deeper into bigger travel and more radical seat angles, I am realizing that reach/stack matters more, and that those bikes are probably not designed to optimize seated pedaling (no, _really_?), and are more likely to be ridden with the seat slammed out of the way except for when they are being winched up climbs between the downs, and therefore maybe _should_ be viewed in the framework of reach/stack fit instead of worrying about ETT at all.