Tri bike vs. Road bike questions answered (Page 2)

Because the reality is, there are far too many variables that cannot be controlled so that you can isolate the single change of geometry in the seat tube.  And for someone to argue that CAN be controlled, they have very little understanding of the mechanics of the bike or of positioning.

Just for once on this site, I would love it if people would respect and actually listen to people who know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to their specialty.

Would you tell a doctor that they are full of sh-t when they see a compound fracture in your leg and tell you "Hey, your leg is broken?"  Doubtful.

So why is it that someone has to argue with someone else who has both been in the industry and raced for years as well as fit hundreds of people on bikes from beginner to elite amateur levels???

Again, there is very little realistic basis that changing the geometry on a frame makes any real difference in one's ability to run off the bike.  It is all about pacing on the bike, your fitness level in general, cycling and running economy of motion and a proper fit ....... WHICH CAN BE DONE ON ANY BIKE.

Bottom line, it's your money, do what you want.  But do it to get the best fit and position that allows you to put out the most power and be as aerodynamically efficient as possible.  For many, this can easily be accomplished on a road bike.  And for others, this can be accomplished on a tri bike with slack geometry (again, because there are numerous manufacturers who do NOT use a 78+ degree seat tube).

And you want to run well off the bike??  Slow the hell down and ride within your abilities, not what you THINK you can do (general statement, not directed towards an individual).  I have a high end tri bike ...... guess what, I don't always run well off the bike and I'm no slouch in either discipline.

/end rant

Sorry ........

I just copied my responce  from another thead:

Wifey and I did a ride yesterday, we went out for 18 miles on our tri bikes, then 12 miles on the road bikes. Our tri bikes are both QR (mine is a Caliente ~full DA, hers is a Tequlio~Ultegra/DA mix), Road bikes are both Trek (mine is a 2200~full Ultegra, hers is a 2100~Ultegra/DA mix).

We had a pretty good ride on the tri bikes, cool temps, some wind, when we got back to the house, we left right away on the road bikes. The first thing we said was, these bikes feel a lot bigger, more room (we have both been fitted on both bikes). We took the same route (just cut it a little short on second ride). We did try to keep the same pace on both bikes, around 18mph. It was funny, but we both found the road bikes to be way more comfortable, but just not as fast (quick off the line) feeling (differant gearing). My HR was a bit lower on the road bike, but the section that we cut short had a lot of side/head wind.

We compared the two bikes like this:

Tri bikes were like riding in a nice sports car (Corvette)

BTW Dan didn't compete in Kona until 1981. 

But just to keep on topic, I'm with you on this one Rick. I have neither the riding/racing experience, nor the tech/wrenching/fitting background, but I've read enough of these inconclusive studies to be able to agree with you 100% that "it is all about pacing on the bike, your fitness level in general, cycling and running economy of motion and a proper fit ....... WHICH CAN BE DONE ON ANY BIKE...get the best fit and position that allows you to put out the most power and be as aerodynamically efficient as possible...And you want to run well off the bike??  Slow the hell down and ride within your abilities, not what you THINK you can do"

(I'm assuming you're ranting at me because I'm the one who quoted you and asked a question). 

No, but if one doctor says my leg is broken and then another doctor steps in and says "that's bogus," then I'm going to question why it's bogus.  Every time.

 To me, you and Tom D are both "doctors."  When one disagrees with another, I'm interested to know why.

I was really enjoying the discussion and genuinely curious to know what was wrong with the study.  The fact that Tom Demerly quoted it in his article led me to believe there must be some credence to it (despite the fact that he potentially stands to gain from it if it leads people to buy his tri bikes).

I assume Tom Demerly has also fit hundreds of people to bikes.  As I said in my question, I was "prepared to believe you, but "just curious" why his article was wrong, since you didn't provide any explanation.

I have learned a lot from you and others on this site and I suspect that at least some of your own knowledge must have come through questioning experts to find out how they come to their conclusions.  Let me know if that's not the case.  I apologize if my post came across as calling you f.o.s.  - I sure didn't mean it that way.

The article was written to point out the differences in design of tri bikes and road bikes.  The subjective views as to the benefits are largely editorial comments based on his experience.  And I agree with most of what he says.  But the easier "running off the bike" is hogwash.

As for the study?  An average of 5 minutes in a 10k by just changing the geometry of the frame???  That is about an 11% improvement for changing one variable (assuming a 45 minute 10k run).  The number alone raises a huge red flag.  And if they were truly limited to 70% of their VO2 Max on the bike (one can only assume they had accurate VO2 baseline tests and did both "test" for the bike to run in exact same conditions and state of rest and used both a HRM and oxygen testing apparatus to verify the max of 70% ........ no idea since that was never listed), what sort of "control" was given to them on the run?  On any given day one could have a better or worse run based on a huge number of factors that can never be controlled.  The paragraph quoted above in the abstract or whatever it was shows that there are far too many variables that were unaccounted for.  To make the conclusion that switchting to a "tri bike" will give you a 10+% increase in one's ability to run off the bike is borderline absurd.  The reality is that the main variable changed was the frame geometry which also can easily be done with a road bike.  It is NOT tri frame specific.

There is no magic "angle" that everyone should use.  If this were true, again, every manufacturer would use the exact same geometry in their bikes.  Which they don't.  Many of the European manufacters stick to more UCI legal stuff and end up with 73 - 75 degree tubed ...... cough cough on their tri and TT bikes.  And there are pros that ride them and do extremely well on the run.

However ...... what can (and has been) taken from the study is that by changing the angles of the rider's hips/body line/arm can have an affect on the athlete's ability to run well.  THAT is what fitters can take from it.  The study really does not address "tri bike" versus "road bike" so much as it addresses positioning in general, which as already has been mentioned is critical in ALL bikes to be the most efficient.

The thing to take from this is NOT whether you are on a tri bike or a road bike, it is how you are FIT to that bike.  I am 100% in agreement with that.  But given the right bike paired with the right person, you can do that with ANY bike.

I go back to the "not everyone should be on a tri bike to begin with" which revolves around fit and ability to hold the position.  This is a realllllllyyyyyy long thread, but covers a ton of stuff on fit and tri bikes:

http://forum.slowtwitch.com/gforum.cgi?do=post_view_flat;post=2103746;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;

The best bike brand for you is the one that fits the best. Check around and see if you have a good bike shop in your area.  A proper fitting bike is the best place to start.  A good shop will help you get a proper stem and be able to fit aero bars to you be it a road bike or tri bike.

Bike brand is secondary to fit.

x2 with Bee

the fit is the most important, no matter what. also, you can certainly get aerobars for your road bike, and if you feel too streched out, you can get a FastForward seat post or something like it. they are specifically designed to move your seat forward to simulate a more upright seat-tube angle and so you arent so streched out in the cockpit. they can also be adjusted so that you can move the seat back to where it would be if you left your regular seatpost in, into regular road geometry. 

this is what i plan to do once i get the $$. but as of yet, i have neither the seatpost or the aeroars. so i ride a straight up roadie. 

Thanks for the article and all of the helpful rants info in this thread...

At first, I was seriously considering buying a tri bike, but most of the races I've participated in (georgia) are not flat and require some maneuvering. I also intend on starting group rides this coming year.

That, on top of the recommendation by my LBS that I go with a roadie, have helped me decide.

I love how everyone is so confident in there answers.  Like they know 100% for sure that they are right.  There hasn't been enough evidence either way to know for sure.  Just because one person experienced something one way or another does not make it the law.

I know positively, 100% without a doubt, that I am right when I say that I am confused.

I don't know how I could prove to everyone that I'm 100% not sure, but I bet no one out there could prove 100% that I am sure.

..

Well, based on a similar post over on the other forum where Tom D. posted an answer where he put big azz bold assuming proper fit in his post, my guess is he already got shelled about the article over there and had to modify his stance a little.  Especially since the article is a few years old!!

He even put "there are some studies that suggest" which made me giggle even more as the tune is not "you will run faster of a tri bike" as people seem to believe over here.

I posted in that thread my thoughts, he never got back to them.

You want to find out for sure???  Go get a tri bike, get fitted properly to it AND to your road bike.  Then go out and ride a 40k at the same set HR for each and follow it with a 10k as hard as you can sustain.  I'll put money down that your times are going to be pretty darn close off the bike in both cases.

Fit is fit is fit.  If you are fit well to a road bike you can run off of it just as well as you can when you are fit well to a tri bike.  It is not that hard of a concept to understand.

But what about the study?

Kidding  - I appreciated the detailed explanation above.  I feel slightly wiser now.  Or slightly less ignorant anyway...

Another Slowman-ism:

"Tunnel is for show, racing is for dough."

Just change "tunnel" to "study."

It probably comes down to money. If you can afford a new bike, ge the tri specific machine. If not, a retrofit with your road bike will serve you well.

Matt Cazalas
Technical Writer

Network Cables

PennState - 2008-12-09 6:31 PM  Feel free to dis-regard everything else he says  though.... (j/k)

Well, if it is about swimming, MAF, weights, stretching, tatoos, IM branding, supplements, electrolyte pills or other things maybe.

But I'm pretty solid on the running information.