login
Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving?
-
No new posts
|
 2013-10-01 11:24 AM |
Champion  7136     Knoxville area |  Subject: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving?In my hunt for a better (and in this case better = faster) position I've done A LOT of work with some very good fitters (and read God knows how much) and I think I have become disillusioned with fitting. Guys like Obree and Boardman had constantly evolving fits (and not just because of increased regulations) Even today's riders seem to follow "trends" more than a tried and true fit. (The new hot thing has been low base bars with a lot of stack risers under the extensions) So, are the things fitters generally suggest... knee angle, saddle setback, straight line from shoulder to pad, knee in line with pedal, etc something you are happy with "finding" and keeping consistent or do you consider it something that can be changed / improved upon? Do you follow FIST, RETUL, GURU or whatever protocol? Just bored at work I guess... |
| 2013-10-01 11:55 AM in reply to: 0 |
Champion 7036 Sarasota, FL | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I spent a lot of time with my fitter when I bought my current bike; an initial fit, computrainer sessions and follow-up fitting after I had ridden it for a 100 miles or so. It's been comfortable and I've been very reluctant to change anything. The only real change has been to move my cleats back a bit to take some of the load off my Achilles. I have been thinking about getting a new fitting, primarily due to the fact that I've lost close to 25 lbs since I had the last one done. My current fit is relatively upright and I'm thinking that I might want to try something a bit more aggressive. At the same time, I've also been contemplating buying a new bike, so I may just leave the current one as is and focus on the new one. Since I had my fit done my LBS has adopted the Specialized Body Geometry Fitting System, which I really don't know much about. Mark
Edited by RedCorvette 2013-10-01 11:59 AM |
| 2013-10-01 12:34 PM in reply to: RedCorvette |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? It's always going to change as your balance of strength & flexibilty change. Simply placing your body into a new position on the bike, even if its' optimal at that time, will force your body to begin adapting in new ways leading to possibly a more optimal position in the future. What kind of speed gains are you looking for %age wise by optimizing fit? What other places in your training could you work on to find similar gains? |
| 2013-10-01 12:39 PM in reply to: AdventureBear |
Champion 10019 , Minnesota Bronze member | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? In addition to strength & flexibility changes, weight/body comp would also affect your fit. I would expect to keep an eye on it and make changes. Then of course there are new bike seats, shoes, pedals, and any other gear that affects the fit. Yep, worth working on continuously. |
| 2013-10-01 12:44 PM in reply to: AdventureBear |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by AdventureBear What other places in your training could you work on to find similar gains? respectfully, there are no places in training that can be worked to "replace" those gains. At least imo, the two are exclusive to one another. |
| 2013-10-01 4:58 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Champion 19812 MA | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I've had my latest bike fit 4 times since I bought it in 2008. First was at the bike shop I bought it goal was to copy fit from other tri bike...they did dismal job Second went to my fit guy who does Retuel....he dialed it in to copy fit he had done before to my fit numbers Third went to a new fitter as I thought I could improve my fit....moved forward and down....my speed for my power output was improved..... Fourth saw the same fitter as #3 and had him fit me with my new custom shoes, different seatpost, new shorter cranks, and more relaxed position as I was having some hip issues not related to cycling but cycling was making it worse Fitting is part science and part art. If you got fit by 5 people your position would not be the same by all 5 fits. My fit guy I saw for years had a view on doing things, that I accepted for many years but realized there were some improvements to be made that could improve my position and drag. Newest guy agreed with me when I told him the two things that I thought needed to be changed. Be picky in who you have fit you. It can be expensive and just because they have this training or system doesn't mean they are good. If something is off after a fit contact your fitter and advocate for another look or options to make things better. As my health improves I hope to move back more to position 3 but with 150s instead of 170 crank it will be slightly different as well. |
| 2013-10-01 7:21 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Master 3205 ann arbor, michigan | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I had been very static in my fit for the last 14 months or so and was pretty happy. I went to a ST "saddle tour" event at a different local bike shop. They guy there, in the half hour we had to fit different saddles, started really tinkering with my fit. Saddle almost 2 cm lower. Armrests 7 cm lower. Saddle forward about 2.5 cm. Extensions shortened by 1.5 cm. Since it was less than a month from Tahoe I was pretty concerned about all of these changes but also got the 'sense' that this guy really knew what he was doing. The result was several long rides that were really comfortable, visually more aerodynamic (I know that visual aerodynamics are not always accurate) and no loss of power. Tahoe was completed in 6:19, and although it was a very tough ride, I can say that it was the most comfortable I have ever been on a bike for that kind of time. So, my fit is evolving. I may go back and get some more tinkering done with my fit but right now it is as good as it has ever been. |
| 2013-10-01 11:23 PM in reply to: 0 |
Coach 9167 Stairway to Seven | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by Leegoocrap Originally posted by AdventureBear What other places in your training could you work on to find similar gains? respectfully, there are no places in training that can be worked to "replace" those gains. At least imo, the two are exclusive to one another. Then my question was misunderstood. A great aero fit frequently compromises power output. but a slightly lower power for a slightly better aero position might be a good trade off. For a rider who can develop a lot of power and feels better more upright...don't force the aero. How about losing a kg (or more) from your body or spinning weight/wheels? Those changes can sometimes be far more than that last tweak of the aero position. What are the specific gains you are looking for from a bike fit? you suggested that "better = faster". OK, how then? More power output? reduced front end profile? Narrower handlebars? What if those things compromise power? a better power/weight vs. drag profile? How else can you achieve that? Not saying that YOU specifically need to a) lose weight b) get different wheels c) develop more power...just that there may not actually BE a perfect fit. When looking to optimize speed, there are a lot of variables that are constantly moving. Edited by AdventureBear 2013-10-01 11:25 PM |
| 2013-10-02 5:08 AM in reply to: KathyG |
Pro 5892 , New Hampshire | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by KathyG I've had my latest bike fit 4 times since I bought it in 2008. First was at the bike shop I bought it goal was to copy fit from other tri bike...they did dismal job Second went to my fit guy who does Retuel....he dialed it in to copy fit he had done before to my fit numbers Third went to a new fitter as I thought I could improve my fit....moved forward and down....my speed for my power output was improved..... Fourth saw the same fitter as #3 and had him fit me with my new custom shoes, different seatpost, new shorter cranks, and more relaxed position as I was having some hip issues not related to cycling but cycling was making it worse Fitting is part science and part art. If you got fit by 5 people your position would not be the same by all 5 fits. My fit guy I saw for years had a view on doing things, that I accepted for many years but realized there were some improvements to be made that could improve my position and drag. Newest guy agreed with me when I told him the two things that I thought needed to be changed. Be picky in who you have fit you. It can be expensive and just because they have this training or system doesn't mean they are good. If something is off after a fit contact your fitter and advocate for another look or options to make things better. As my health improves I hope to move back more to position 3 but with 150s instead of 170 crank it will be slightly different as well. Awesome advise Kathy! Completely agree. It's part science and part art. Find a fitter that you're comfortable with and truly takes the time to understand YOU. |
| 2013-10-02 5:15 AM in reply to: 0 |
Pro 5892 , New Hampshire | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? In general, I would say that any fit will be ever evolving, but we're in the area of tweaks rather than major improvements at that point. Things that will change your fit would be core strength, injuries, overall fitness (especially major weight loss), flexibility. If you change race distance, that commonly changes your fit demands quite significantly. To AdventurBear's point, a bike fit is a balance between aerodynamics, comfort and power. This is where core strength, flexibility and fitness changes comes in (power and comfort will be the primary metrics affected). Race distance change will affect aerodynamics and comfort (the longer the distance, the more important comfort will be... a 10k TT puts very different demands on your fit than a 180k Ironman, and that's before you even consider that you need to run after the bike in tri vs. a TT) Interestingly, TdF rides are not very good to look at when it comes to bike fit... for a few reasons. First, they need to comply with UCI, which changes the fit significantly compared to how you would fit if you didn't have to comply. Second, they don't really have a choice in bikes... they will ride whatever the team provides and you can see that some fit quite well, others, they're kind of between two bikes. One of the more extreme examples of this is Cadel Evans a few years back when he was on Canyon bikes... he couldn't get his arm position low enough for comfort, so they had to modify the bike to the stem attached through the head tube! http://www.bikeradar.com/us/gallery/article/tour-de-france-tech-spe... Edited by audiojan 2013-10-02 5:19 AM |
| 2013-10-02 7:43 AM in reply to: 0 |
| Veteran 353 41° 4' 36" N 71° 56' 10" W | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I tend to tweak things a bit in the winter when I am on the trainer. This feels like a better control enviornment for this kind of trial and error. For example, I moved my seat a tiny bit forward and found I could sustain a certain pace longer. Not sure if my orig fit was wrong or I just developed and now that slight mod was better. Of course if I came on the road and the wind resist nullified all this, I would change it back a little. On a related note, thinking of a power meter or some sort of a better way to assess my work output Edited by JohnP_NY 2013-10-02 7:46 AM |
| 2013-10-02 7:51 AM in reply to: audiojan |
| 257 | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I'm glad to see this discussion because I'm having issues with my bike. I'm not sure if its a fit issue or I need a new bike. When you get your first bike you have no idea what to expect. When the fitter asks you 'how does it feel' - what kind of generic question is that? Sure it feels fine... but I think any bike I sat on would feel 'fine' because I had no idea what I'm suppose to feel! I purchased my bike from the store I went to because they were the best fitters in the area. However, I'm so tempted to do Retul fit at a place in FL while visiiting family to get an unbiased print out of bike frames that best match me. Its been a year with my bike and it still feels 'off''. I was told it takes time to acclimate yourself to cycling. I've even gone back and ask them to check my fit because I start to feel squished after 60-90min of cycling. Always I'm told the fit is good and that I need more core training. Really? is that it? more strength training? PS. Sorry for the rant. This issue exasperates me. |
| 2013-10-02 8:37 AM in reply to: audiojan |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? In the beginning (for me) I was (like most) pretty uninformed. The shop I went to sold me *the perfect bike* for me (coincidence... it was the only tri bike they had.) which, all said and done (and years later) does *FIT* me. By who's standard? Knowing what I know now, I was fortunate that they had a 54cm S32 (by felt's standard/measurement) to sell me. There was nothing done for a *fit* more complex than a standover before I swiped my credit card. Uninformed impulse shopping at it's finest. The bad news was, at the time, being an unconfident cyclist (and especially in aerobars) the S32 was very much the WRONG bike. To get in a position I was comfortable with, I did NOT need a long/low bike (like the felts/cervelo's of the time.) So when we tell people to get FIT FIRST what are we really telling them? Especially new riders who likely don't have the disposable income to go through multiple bikes/fit sessions. From the picture below (Oldest picture I can find - I know, the fit as a whole isn't very good.) it's pretty easy to see that a 54 Felt, while within my range, wasn't probably the best bike. So I ask again, if FIST/RETUL/GURU puts you on one bikes stack/reach, do you think that it is your static stack/reach needs? to be continued... but I'd rather see what people's thoughts are on that first... (bs002.jpg) Attachments ---------------- bs002.jpg (132KB - 11 downloads) |
| 2013-10-02 8:38 AM in reply to: BikerGrrrl |
Member 522 Saint Paul, MN | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by BikerGrrrl In addition to strength & flexibility changes, weight/body comp would also affect your fit. I would expect to keep an eye on it and make changes. Then of course there are new bike seats, shoes, pedals, and any other gear that affects the fit. Yep, worth working on continuously. Yeah over the last couple months, I got new shoes and a new saddle. I am going in on Saturday for a follow up to adjust my fit. |
| 2013-10-02 8:43 AM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Member 522 Saint Paul, MN | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I don't think fit is static. An athlete's flexibility changes through training, aging, etc..I think fit is a dynamic and should be tweaked over time. I mean someone just getting into the sport may not be able to get into a really aggressive aero position like someone who has been riding a TT bike for years. |
| 2013-10-02 12:07 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? 5 pages discussing going faster by lifting weights 15 posts discussing going faster by fit.  |
| 2013-10-02 12:30 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
| Master 10208 Northern IL | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by Leegoocrap So when we tell people to get FIT FIRST what are we really telling them? Especially new riders who likely don't have the disposable income to go through multiple bikes/fit sessions. From the picture below (Oldest picture I can find - I know, the fit as a whole isn't very good.) it's pretty easy to see that a 54 Felt, while within my range, wasn't probably the best bike. So I ask again, if FIST/RETUL/GURU puts you on one bikes stack/reach, do you think that it is your static stack/reach needs? to be continued... but I'd rather see what people's thoughts are on that first... Well, as someone develops they may be able to work with a more aggressive setup, but that doesn't mean the original fit goes bad. It just might not be the most optimal one they're capable of. If the fit and resulting bike selection are done really well, there could be some room for this development without much work. |
| 2013-10-02 12:36 PM in reply to: brigby1 |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? what do you consider "good?" what do you consider "bad?" Ex. If somebody is within the accepted "tolerable" range for hip/knee/shoulder, does that mean their fit is "good?" |
| 2013-10-02 4:15 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by Leegoocrap what do you consider "good?" what do you consider "bad?" Ex. If somebody is within the accepted "tolerable" range for hip/knee/shoulder, does that mean their fit is "good?" Good : be able to hold the aero position for the duration of a HIM Optimized : highest watts/cda ratio Bad : not be able to hold the position and being so upright that you might as well be riding a road bike. If your seat is slammed in either direction and you require 4 inches of spacers to achieve good, the fit is good, but the bike is wrong. To your original question, yes, it's ever evolving. It's ensure comfort, test power output, test aerodynamics, adjust...over and over. To find the perfect fit you would need to be fitted in a wind tunnel, with a ergometer and a continues blood lactate measurement device :-) |
| 2013-10-02 4:47 PM in reply to: marcag |
Member 124 The 951 | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? I ride with my hex wrench set. |
| 2013-10-02 5:20 PM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? for the sake of being combative... I've been to a wind tunnel and I don't think my current fit is my best potential fit. Unfortunately I don't know what that fit is. Honestly I think it would involve an old "funny" bike (650c front wheel 700c rear) with a sloping top tube. That's just guessing (and looking at old pictures of Kent Bostick) though. |
| 2013-10-02 5:41 PM in reply to: Leegoocrap |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by Leegoocrap for the sake of being combative... I've been to a wind tunnel and I don't think my current fit is my best potential fit. When you say "best potential fit", you mean the one that yields the lowest cda or the one that you can generate the most power with ? I remember when Lance went to the tunnel with John Cobb and they came out agreeing he was not in the most aero position, but he was in the position that had the right mix of aero and power. They didn't slam his front but they shortened his cranks to open his hip angle. |
| 2013-10-02 6:08 PM in reply to: marcag |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by marcag Originally posted by Leegoocrap for the sake of being combative... I've been to a wind tunnel and I don't think my current fit is my best potential fit. When you say "best potential fit", you mean the one that yields the lowest cda or the one that you can generate the most power with ? I remember when Lance went to the tunnel with John Cobb and they came out agreeing he was not in the most aero position, but he was in the position that had the right mix of aero and power. They didn't slam his front but they shortened his cranks to open his hip angle. Thin ice when I say best potential... The one that got from start to finish the fastest after the required adaptation period while still being able to "safely" operate the bike in a triathlon. I think basically as long as you aren't pushing thigh into chest (pretty much hips above shoulder if you drew a straight horizontal line, considering you could get the front low enough of course...) you can still at least consider more aggressive positioning with a long enough adaptation period. Of course at a certain point you would start showing more surface area with your back. If I wanted the absolute Fastest I'd rig up some form of EGG, which is basically the best tested position ever... but that's unrealistic for a busy course (imo at least) I think the Lance example is a good one for most of the (even very competitive) population, but Lance wasn't out there to win the time trials, he was there to win the tour. He didn't have the need (or time) to adapt to something the same way somebody like Obree or Boardman did. (again - I know UCI rules were cracking down at this point, just an example) What do you think of Castroviejo's position from Worlds? He's very close to level hips/shoulders. Obviously he wasn't the big winner, but I don't think anyone expected him to be competing with the "names" that were there this year. (castroviejo.jpg) Attachments ---------------- castroviejo.jpg (52KB - 8 downloads) |
| 2013-10-02 6:31 PM in reply to: 0 |
Extreme Veteran 5722 | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by Leegoocrap I think the Lance example is a good one for most of the (even very competitive) population, but Lance wasn't out there to win the time trials, he was there to win the tour. He didn't have the need (or time) to adapt to something the same way somebody like Obree or Boardman did. (again - I know UCI rules were cracking down at this point, just an example) Actually, the episode I described was when he came into tri. He had to find that balance of power production, aero and being able to do something after biking. The thing that blew me away was the Cervelo Engineer that said 1cm lower = 1.5 watt saving. At one point 1 more cm is costing more than 1.5 watt in power production Edited by marcag 2013-10-02 6:32 PM |
| 2013-10-02 6:47 PM in reply to: 0 |
Champion 7136 Knoxville area | Subject: RE: Bike Fit... sweet spot or ever evolving? Originally posted by marcag Actually, the episode I described was when he came into tri. He had to find that balance of power production, aero and being able to do something after biking. The thing that blew me away was the Cervelo Engineer that said 1cm lower = 1.5 watt saving. At one point 1 more cm is costing more than 1.5 watt in power production hmm, at a point, but what point? How long do you give yourself to adapt? 1.5w savings is a BIG savings over a race, if all it requires is for you to suffer on the trainer for a couple of hours a week to get used to it. LA's position has always seemed the same to me... (I know he's been to the tunnel more than most) like from 1988 to 2012 he looks pretty static. Hump back, arms a little further out than 90° Maybe a little worse when Trek was rocking those miserable TTT bikes that fit exactly nobody but overall you could almost impose the triathlon picture from the 80's over his triathlon picture recently and you'd get the same lines. Edited by Leegoocrap 2013-10-02 6:48 PM |
|
|
|
|
| |||
| |||
| |||
| |||
|
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK