|
Articles >
Lessons
& Myths on Bike Fit, Frame Materials, Aero-positions, et
al.
|
In
my role as a coach, I am frequently asked about bike fit,
“tri-bike” versus road bike, aero position enhancement,
frame materials, etc. The motivation of most of the people
asking these questions is the desire to go faster. Certainly,
all of these factors can affect in varying degrees how
fast one races or rides.
However,
in my opinion, the single most important non-training
issue affecting how fast you will ride is a correct bike
fit. However, as in the coaching world, there is no shortage
of pseudo-qualified people offering random advice on bike
fit, and evidence of this can be seen at virtually any
triathlon event where multitudes of cyclists can be seen
struggling on bikes that have been improperly set up.
The
simplest way to see this will be to observe the large
number of people who after a short while make no use of
their aero bars. The primary reason for this will be that
they are uncomfortable in the aero position. The primary
reason that they are uncomfortable in the aero position
is that despite the general measurements that might have
been taken for them, they were not properly fit.
During
my fifteen years of involvement in triathlon and cycling,
I have ridden virtually every frame material and frame
configuration, pedal system, aero bar set-up, etc. Listed
below are lessons that I have learned, and false truths
that continue to be passed along.
|
Lesson
#1
Comfort is greatly underrated when it comes to bike fit.
If it ain’t
comfortable, it ain’t right. We all know how focused we are
in pedaling at high intensity for prolonged periods when our
butt hurts, neck aches, and back is stiff. Cycling in this too
frequent condition becomes an exercise in how many different
positions can I shift in and out of to end the discomfort---hardly
a formula for faster or enjoyable cycling.
Indeed,
it is difficult not to chuckle at the some of the extreme aero
set-ups that can be seen at the races. I have no doubt that
air disturbance in a wind tunnel is proven to be minimal in
these positions, it’s just that annoying need to pedal the bike
that concerns me. It is no wonder that riders are seen in these
aero positions only in the early miles of the race.
Lesson
#2
A bike fit which does not consider the rider’s flexiblity and
fails to observe power output and pedaling efficiency should
be termed something other than a bike fit. Unfortunately, failing
to consider these vital ingredients is what generally passes
for a so-called bike fit.
Imagine
an auto mechanic tuning your car without first knowing the make,
and then failing to use a timing device. With a bit of luck,
you might get the fit close, or maybe even just right if you
are lucky, but how will you know?
The
M2 definition of a proper bike fit:
One that takes into consideration the following:
· current set-up and what a rider feels works/doesn’t
work
· flexibility; particularly hips and ankles
· core strength
· biomechanical issues; shorter leg, etc.
And then studies the riders position on a device like a Computrainer
to determine:
· pedaling efficiency; right/left leg power output, dead
spots in power output
· power output for given heart rates
Lesson
#3
Bike frame material and design is generally one of the factors
which least affects how fast you will ride in a time-trial.
Regarding, ads that read “simply the fastest frame in the universe”
or similar, pleeeease. Is anyone that stupid?
Frame stiffness
in a time-trial event with the modest wattage #s that are generated
by 98% of the tri-community is a non-issue.
Frame weight,
while sexy, is not a big factor either as most events do not
feature significant climbing, frames do not represent rotating
weight, and far more substantial weight loss benefits are available
in most people’s midsections.
So-called
aero frames that will take minutes off of your bike split? Hmm.
Swirling winds, curving roads, Jet-stream water bottles, legs
moving up and down, a variety of torsos, yet somehow your advertised
aero frame will bring proper order to the universe. Right.
A good friend
of mine was a writer for a Spanish Cycling magazine in which
he would do frame reviews. While he would offer useful insights
into issues like geometry, weight, etc., the question would
always come back to him, “but will I be faster on this bike.”
I always liked his answer, which was if you want to believe
that a bike will make you faster, then this is probably the
best reason that it will.
Lesson
#4
The most important feature regarding frame material relative
to triathlon time-trial performance is comfort. The longer the
distance, the more important the feature of road shock absorption
becomes.
Materials
such as carbon fiber and titanium provide a “forgiving” ride
in that they absorb or dull much of the road shock which travels
up through your body. Although I do not have first-hand experience,
beam bikes have also proven to be more accommodating for some
of the older athletes I have spoken with, as well as athletes
with back issues.
Myself,
I ride a custom carbon fiber frame by Calfee Designs. Carbon
fiber because it combines the best of all worlds; shock absorption,
light weight, stiff, and Calfee because when it comes to carbon
fiber there is no one more learned than Craig Calfee. For all
the time I spend on a bicycle, wanting the best is easy to justify.
Lesson
#5
Investing in a proper bike fit is smart money.
If you are
in the market for a new bike, investing in a proper bike fit
is money well-spent as it will save you from potentially buying
the wrong bike, stem, aero-bars, etc.
A neck that
doesn’t hurt, back that doesn’t ache, butt that allows you to
sit comfortably, comfortable in the aero position, all good
things. Not constantly wondering if you blew $2000-3000 on the
wrong bike, priceless.
Myth
#1
Mo’ aero = mo’ better
Begin with reviewing Miguel Indurain and Lance Armstrong’s time-trial
positions. Definitely not the most aero of positions, definitely
the two best time-trialists of their eras. Juergen Zack and
Thomas Hellriegel have torched virtually every Ironman course
on the circuit, yet neither of their positions could be called
ultra-aero.
What do
you think the chances are that Thomas, Juergen, Miguel, and
Lance looked at their power output and overall pedaling efficiency
at their time-trial heart rates in a variety of positions? I
would venture to say that this was looked at very closely, and
that they sacrificed aero cleanliness for a position where they
were more comfortable and generated greater power and speed.
Myth
#2
Flatten your back
Sexy as it might appear, and despite the million times you have
heard this referenced, the data from the wind tunnel does not
support this myth, nor did the curved backs of Tony Rominger
and Miguel Indurain as they set the world records for the Hour
ride.
For further
argument against this pervasive myth, see again rider examples
in Myth #1. Review again the comfort concept.
Myth
#3
Tri-bike: that there is a discernible species
Perhaps the question or comment that I hear most often by new
athletes is that they have to get a tri-bike, and which one
to get, as if this were a brand all to its own.
The only
thing that defines a tri-bike in my mind is a bike which you
use with aero bars in a triathlon. A good tri-bike would be
one which also fit you and allowed you to ride comfortably both
on the drops and in the aero position (a rare commodity). However,
such a bike can be virtually anything and be correct, thus destroying
the notion that a tri-bike carries its own DNA.
For example,
my seat tube angle is 73 degrees, a standard road geometry,
but my top tube is shortened to accommodate my relatively short
torso and the need to ride on aero bars. A shorter rider with
flexible hips might do better on a steeper seat tube angle.
Another rider might do perfectly well on a standard frame, clip-ons,
and a neutral stem, and so on.
So which
Tri-bike is for you? See the M2 Definition of a proper bike
fit.
.
| 
