Would like to point out that if you’re insanely long leg/short torso then you could end up with less setback and be correct on dave kirk test, since dave kirk test is measuring C of G.
Imagine your average dude in in a decent position and where his C of G is. Now keep all the angles constant and stretch the legs out. What happened to the C of G? It went up and back with the saddle. Now shorten the torso and C of G goes yet further back, also less torque necessary to keep upper body supported.
Run the dave kirk test on it and it’s gonna tell you that you can go forward to maintain C of G balance over the cranks.
Specificity is achieved by satisfying the AEPF/PV relationship and has fuckall to do with bike fit. Dudes on recumbents and tri-dorks are perfect examples of the fact that fit doesn’t correlate to power production. Nor does crank length for that matter. Obviously, leg extension will need to be right, but that’s about it.
is your pedal stroke uneven from one leg to the other? does it cause pain? if not, just let it be brah.
obsessing about your pedaling style versus a pro’s is unproductive atmo. those dudes are at the highest level, looking for whatever edge they can get, so if their physiology allows 2% more power if they toe pedal, thats a huge gain. average joes like you and I just (echoing some populist crap here i know) need to ride a little more to see gains.
but that aside, bro i get it
thinking about this stuff is cost-free
and anything that promotes “mindful pedaling” is only good atmo
[quote=CheshireCat]also, another bad fit. we should tell jeremy powers that he’d have been faster if he slid his seat back.
edit: the saddle isn’t even behind the BB. I don’t even know if that’s uci legal, or is that only in road racing now?[/quote]
bro i think that’s atleast 4cm of setback
your eyes
check 'em
Obsessing about fit versus a pro’s is unproductive as well unless one is doing a similar kind of riding. The pro peloton is moving 30mph on any kind of flat terrain. As such, the bike fit must be setup such that the rider can be comfortable for the duration of the stage, produce adequate power, and have the least aerodynamic drag in the event that the rider ends up on the front.
Specificity is achieved by satisfying the AEPF/PV relationship and has fuckall to do with bike fit. Dudes on recumbents and tri-dorks are perfect examples of the fact that fit doesn’t correlate to power production. Nor does crank length for that matter. Obviously, leg extension will need to be right, but that’s about it.[/quote]
So if we put a tridork or 'bent programmer on a road bike, will they be able to produce comparable wattage?
I ride faster-backwards setups, but lately I’ve been experimenting with (relatively) lower bar heights. I removed 10-15mm of spacers on the Salsa, and I can definitely feel that I have more power output (average pace quantified by my GPS). The Rawland’s bars are approx 1" lower than the Salsa, and have an effective reach that’s 1cm longer. That setup needs some brake lever position tweaking (it has v3 Campy compared to the Salsa’s v2 Campy), but that setup feels like it allows me to ride harder/faster. Not sure where the stems/bars will end up relative to the saddles, but slowly but surely they’re moving down.
It may not look like it but I do have 6cm of setback as well.
I dismiss collective knowledge because I really hate the “Internet fit” or “slamdatstem” mentality that has taken over cycling. I know someone who took the Internet fit advice right into the hospital for a bulging disc. He’s of similar build to me. Long legs short torso.
Also Heath: a dude on a recumbent will not produce the same wattage. Different muscle groups.
Same deal with fit. If you make a large adjustment there will be a period where it makes you less coordinated. Same deal with crank length. It will usually take a few days to adapt to a change from 175 to 165.
I’m not sure where I read that but I know my old coach showed me that. He was a big trackie. I don’t make any power on 165 (which I’m riding now on gf bike)
Really the best way to do a fit would be with a electromyogram seeing overall depolarization of muscle groups and how fit changes that.
This is why I like having a powertap. It tells you definitively if you are making more power.
Its true that being back should help you get lower. If I rode a 54/55cm bike I could get back more and have more drop for an aero fit. My touring Panasonic is a 60cm and level saddle and bars and fits fuckin great too, but unaero as fuck
this is the truth — with the saddle a cm further back your hip angle changes enough to naturally put your shoulders a couple cm lower and further forward
it’s why pushing the saddle forward to reduce reach isn’t just wrong, but actively counterproductive
(this is if your bars are within several inches of your saddle height, shit works out differently if you’re way high or way low)
Eyo kids I’m on my phone so I’ll keep this short. Keep cx race bikes out of this- they are not the same as road bikes. You ride less setback for two reasons:
So your legs can manage running up hill
Sitting further forward allows one to stay seated up steep shit and maintain traction.
Riding a cx setup on the road is dumb as it loads your knees up unneccicarily- keep it to racing.
Is there something wrong with scooting forward on the saddle?
Having xtreme setback is going to hamper your ability to get up and behind the saddle MTB-style but you rarely encounter that level of gnar in a cross race. This is also the reason very few people bother with interrupter levers.
i think, from a purely racing perspective, there is a bit to be said about entering the mindset of making incremental gains once you hit a certain category of racing (obviously depending on your genetic limitations and after you iron out the fundamentals of training and diet over the years) where working to optimize your position and get it as low as comfortably maintainable yields a good bit in terms of competitive advantage.
[quote=tarckeemoon]Is there something wrong with scooting forward on the saddle?
Having xtreme setback is going to hamper your ability to get up and behind the saddle MTB-style but you rarely encounter that level of gnar in a cross race. This is also the reason very few people bother with interrupter levers.[/quote]
Read my post- sitting further forward is correct for cross racing
[quote=catdrew f][quote=tarckeemoon]Is there something wrong with scooting forward on the saddle?
Having xtreme setback is going to hamper your ability to get up and behind the saddle MTB-style but you rarely encounter that level of gnar in a cross race. This is also the reason very few people bother with interrupter levers.[/quote]
Read my post- sitting further forward is correct for cross racing[/quote]
My point is you can scoot forward on the saddle for situations that require it. The main limitations are the length of your saddle and the fortitude of your tenderhole.
I tend to use the drops more than most when racing so more setback feels more appropriate. Maybe that in itself is “wrong” but that’s how I do it.
