Road bike or Tri-bike?
Adam Katz
of years ago. Now, I want to start doing some triathlons. I'd like to
work my way up to an ironman, maybe vineman 2000.
I'm hesistant to buy a tri-bike for a couple of reasons:
* I live in San Francisco and how safe is it to commute in traffic in
aero position?
* I'd like to do some bike races and fun rides as a part of my training.
Aerobars will make my bike illegal for such events, right?
I'd like a tri-bike so that:
* I can be comfortable in an aero position pounding out 112 miles.
So... I have pretty much convinced myself that I want something somewhere
between a tri-bike and a racing bike.
Any thoughts on...
A)y suggestions regarding either...
B) Buying a tri-bike and installing standard type handle bars and STI levers
Thanks,
-Adam
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Katz (Mr.curtain)
E-mail : ad...@geekeasy.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Hickey
>I'm looking for a new bike. I've had some experience road racing a number
>of years ago. Now, I want to start doing some triathlons. I'd like to
>work my way up to an ironman, maybe vineman 2000.
>
>I'm hesistant to buy a tri-bike for a couple of reasons:
>
> * I live in San Francisco and how safe is it to commute in traffic in
> aero position?
The aero position will increase the time it takes you to get to the
brakes - not the ideal situation for commuting in heavy traffic.
AND more importantly, I personally wouldn't want to ride a tri bike in
San Francisco - at least not as an "only bike". A "real road bike"
will be much better at almost everything you need to do to stay alive
on the road there.
> * I'd like to do some bike races and fun rides as a part of my training.
> Aerobars will make my bike illegal for such events, right?
Could be... If you add some to your road bike, you can always take
'em off of course.
>I'd like a tri-bike so that:
>
> * I can be comfortable in an aero position pounding out 112 miles.
That's always nice... but you also need to be able to corner and brake
in heavy traffic on REALLY steep hills, so it's all relative.
>So... I have pretty much convinced myself that I want something somewhere
>between a tri-bike and a racing bike.
>
>Any thoughts on...
>A)y suggestions regarding either...
>B) Buying a tri-bike and installing standard type handle bars and STI levers
Personally, I'd recommend a road bike with STI (or Ergo). Add
clip-ons for now. Lots of serious triathletes use road-geometry
"tri-bikes" for very hilly courses anyway (most riders think they can
climb better in a more rearward position). Then, buy a a tri bike
later. If that seems like a lot of money, consider taking up golf or
skiing for a while, and it won't. ;-)
Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.cynetfl.com/habanero/
My ISP is having BIG problems right now.. hope to have the site and
Email back on line soon...
Enduro Sport Dan
> I'm looking for a new bike. I've had some experience road racing a number
> of years ago. Now, I want to start doing some triathlons. I'd like to
> work my way up to an ironman, maybe vineman 2000.
>
> I'm hesistant to buy a tri-bike for a couple of reasons:
>
> * I live in San Francisco and how safe is it to commute in traffic in
> aero position?
>
> * I'd like to do some bike races and fun rides as a part of my training.
> Aerobars will make my bike illegal for such events, right?
>
> I'd like a tri-bike so that:
>
> * I can be comfortable in an aero position pounding out 112 miles.
>
> So... I have pretty much convinced myself that I want something somewhere
> between a tri-bike and a racing bike.
>
> Any thoughts on...
> A)y suggestions regarding either...
> B) Buying a tri-bike and installing standard type handle bars and STI levers
Adam,
I don't live in SF, however, I would doubt that it is ever safe to commute
in traffic in the aero position. While drop bars may or may not be more
stable than aerobars you cannot cover your brakes and have less steering
control (both required to avoid being "door prized" if you know what I
mean) when using your aerobars.
Aerobars will make your bike illegal for mass-start road races and may
make it unsuitable for some group rides. Using clip-on bars with STI
shifters on your drops would solve this.
I would agree that a tri bike would be a good choice for Ironman.
There is no problem having drops/STI and clip-on aerobars on a
tri-geometry frame. If your intended use is triathlons and you intend to
ride in the aero position the majority of the time this would be a good
option to provide you with some versatility.
Dan Rishworth
Enduro Sport - Your Multi-Sport Pro Shop
1.800.448.4678
http://www.endurosport.com
Dan Empfield
d...@endurosport.com (Enduro Sport Dan) wrote:
> There is no problem having drops/STI and clip-on aerobars on a
> tri-geometry frame. If your intended use is triathlons and you intend to
> ride in the aero position the majority of the time this would be a good
> option to provide you with some versatility.
i would like to take gentle exception to this comment that i've heard
quite a bit before, and certainly describes the way a lot of athletes
ride. i make my comments, by the way, with the full understanding and
acknowledgement that dan rishworth owns and runs one of the very top tri
shops not only in ontario, canada, but north america, and certainly knows
what he's talking about.
yes, you can ride with rtri bars mounted on road bars. as has been
discussed in other threads, there is a certain position that is sought
after for triathletes that some tri bikes, like the cannondale, and
especially the aegis, do not allow you to get into without, say, a look
ergostem. such is the desire to achieve a good aero position that this is
a real issue with some bikes. therefore, i don't see why one would want
to ride in the desired tri position while using road bars, since that
"good" position is so low as to not allow the use of the drops whatsoever
(since the drops will be SO low on such a set-up as to be untenable) and
the braking position in the drops is not at all comfortable or even safely
usable.
that is why pro athletes who have, in the past, opted for road bars cut
them off right after the brake hood mount, because the drops a position
they intend never to be able to use anyway (mike pigg as example). why
does he opt for this set-up? because he likes the hoods position for
climbing, which is lower than the hoods position would normally be, but it
extends him a bit, and forms nicely to his hands. it is a decent
compromise. but what he gives up is a proper braking position, he can
only brake from the hoods, which is pretty sketchy.
if you have a "proper" road bar position in relation to where your saddle
is, there is no way you can achieve a low enough tri bar position,
especially if you use syntace bars, which raise the armrests several cms
from the base bar on which they're mounted. i think if i was going to try
to use road bars, i'd find myself some of those old mavic clip-ons, which
had a million pieces that exploded in the air while you were trying to
mount them up (a real pain to work with), but you had incredible
adjustability. you could mount the bars either over, or underneath, the
base bar (the road bar in this case). if you mounted them underneath, you
could get the armrests to be just slightly over the height of the tops of
the road bar (these were the bars that were shaped like a tubular "U").
of course there is the suggestion that the average joe doesn't want a
position as low as the average pro. i account for this opinion as simply
the inability for the average LBS to adequately know how to fit someone up
on a tri bike. if i WAS an LBS, i'd have some form of fit bike in my
shop, to show people how different positions might feel. i find that when
people are fit correctly, but not very aggressively, on their bikes, and
then (with seat angle, cockpit distance, etc., properly set up) how amazed
they are when i drop their bars 4 or 5cm and they find the position is not
much different in terms of comfort, and no different in terms of power.
these are your average joe sixpack triathletes i'm talking about.
we had a guy at our road show in san diego, he had about 78cm of distance
from the BB to top of the saddle, his armrests were about 9cm below the
top of his saddle, he felt fine, and then i dropped them to 12cm below,
everything else properly fitting, and he felt just as good or better. the
only place he'll be sore at the end of his first ride will be the back of
his neck, where those muscles haven't been worked through that range of
motion.
such a guy could not achieve this set up with road bars. therefore, i
have to wonder a little when i see people riding road bars and syntaces
(or for that matter any tri bar on sale today), who also sport other
technology designed to make their rig more aero. the position they're in,
probably 5cm or 6cm higher than is necessary, would add so much frontal
profile as to make a difference of 1.5lb or 2.0lb of drag at, say, 30mph.
this is probably 20% - 25% more drag than they would otherwise have, which
is more than they'll save with all their aero technology put together.
simply put, i believe that if you use road bars in their proper position,
you're a sail, and if you use the best available aero position w/road bars
underneath, your road bar positions are useless.
qrman
mos...@rocketmail.com
QR...@rooworld.com (Dan Empfield) wrote:
> simply put, i believe that if you use road bars in their proper position,
> you're a sail, and if you use the best available aero position w/road bars
> underneath, your road bar positions are useless.
How does this last statement relate to your article on retrofitting a road
bike? I've got a Cannondale w/traditional geometry and would like to set it up
in a more aero position. Do I discard the road bar for a more suitable setup?
Clay T
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Adam Katz
Dan Empfield <QR...@rooworld.com> wrote:
>that is why pro athletes who have, in the past, opted for road bars cut
>them off right after the brake hood mount, because the drops a position
>they intend never to be able to use anyway (mike pigg as example). why
>does he opt for this set-up? because he likes the hoods position for
>climbing, which is lower than the hoods position would normally be, but it
>extends him a bit, and forms nicely to his hands. it is a decent
>compromise. but what he gives up is a proper braking position, he can
>only brake from the hoods, which is pretty sketchy.
>
What about STIs on cow-horns? Don't know if that's legal in a mass-start
ride or race... but the more important question is, is it manageable in
traffic?
Thanks for the advice so far,
esv...@neotown.com
depends on what will be your main activity: triathlon or road racing. If you
like more triathlons, go for a tri-bike. Otherwise, go for a road bike. I do
not think it is a good solution to have 2 different types of bike: a road one
and a tri one. You cannot train to be efficient in both positions. You have to
make a choice.
Using a tri-bike and installing standard type handle bars and STI levers can
be a good option for the road races (removing the handle bars to have a legal
bike) and have a more polyvalent bike.
>Lots of serious triathletes use road-geometry
> "tri-bikes" for very hilly courses anyway (most riders think they can
> climb better in a more rearward position).
I do not know why most people do think so. A well built tri-bike with a good
position can be a polyvalent bike and climb very well especially with a
standard type handle bars.
Olivier
Dan Empfield
d...@endurosport.com (Enduro Sport Dan) wrote:
> If he were to
> set-up a tri bike in a good aero position with drops and STI he would have
> a _very_ deep drop section of the bar, however, his hoods would still be
> at the level of a standard bullhorn-style basebar.
no disagreement, this is sort of what i said when i indicated that some
riders, like mike pigg, have on occasion chosen this, although i would say
that if the drops are too low vs where they would be on a road bike, then
the hoods, in this set-up, are sort of between where the hoods and drops
would be on a road bike-- meaning the hoods are too low as well, but not
too awfully low.
> If you need the level
> of braking power only afforded by the drop section of the bar having such
> a low position (and a lowered centre of gravity) would not be a bad thing
> on those occasions.
i guess i disagree. i think it is an unusable position, which is why pigg
and others just cut the bottoms off. you are lower in your ctr of
gravity, but your leverage is a bit off, as your weight is well over--
meaning in front of-- your hands, as the drops in a tri position are both
very low, and quite a bit further back toward the rider. this is the case
unless you adopt some sort of hybrid position, between road and tri, which
is okay, so long as you realize there's a pound of drag you're adding,
which is probably a half a mile an hour, more/less, in a flattish time
trial.
> The way my road bike is set-up is such that I rarely
> use the drop section of my bars (basically only for descending and
> cornering) because my bars (and therefore my hoods) are set are set so
> low. Only if you had a very low aerobar height would this become a big
> issue.
when you talk abut your "road bike" i assume you're talking about your
just-road-bike (no aero bars). i subscribe to the andy hampsten
"stairmaster your way up the hill" upright style of out-of-the-saddle
climbing, and in this sense, i'd just not set my bike up the way you
describe. but it may be the difference between me, who favors a climbing
set-up on my road bike, and you, who might be favoring a road set-up that
might be more conducive to crit riding, or something like that. but i see
our point and i won't jobst on you.
> For road racing, the clip-on would be removed leaving a drop bar/STI
> set-up that would be lower than ideal, but none the less useable (and
> safe/legal). Now if you set this bike up with a pop-top ahead stem with a
> 96/84deg or 100/80deg angle you can set-up you low bar height position
> with your stem in the low angle position and when you clip your aerobars
> off you also flip you stem to the higher angle. This is a simple
> mechanical job and would take about 5-10 mins to do and would allow two
> bar heights for different uses.
it still keeps you in a steep seat angle position, though, i don't know if
i love that idea for road riding. interestingly, this brings up a point,
if you subscribe to the idea of retro-fitting a road bike toward a tri
position, has tri technology matured to the point that one might opt for a
tri bike, but have a retro-backward style option for really getting you a
ROAD bike without your having to buy a road bike? then the switch would
be equally easy to what you describe above. pop off the stem for another
pitch (stem length won't much change), and pop out the seat post/saddle,
and put in another that has a more laid back position. this of course
requires some manufacturer to make the opposite of a forward seat post (we
aren't doing that, and have no plans to).
> Once again this all revolves around dealing with a shop that has
> considered these issues and can help the rider sort through his needs and
> how to achieve the best possible position(s) for all the intended uses.
here you are THE MAN. no argument there.
qrman
Steve
Considering the new rules (in the UK at least) that ban exposed gear levers, do
you think that it's still better to have them between the aero bars rather than
at the bullhorn tips along with the breaks. The reason I ask is that once I'm
in the aero position I tend to change the gears less than when I climbing;
and changing gears from between the aero bars would destabilize me if I was out
of the saddle climbing up a hill. Obviously, if most of the courses where flat
this would not be a problem but this doesn't apply to me.
Secondly, what is you opinion on the all-in-one aero bar and bull horn setups.
Warm Regards,
Steve
Dan Empfield
> Considering the new rules (in the UK at least) that ban exposed gear
levers, do
> you think that it's still better to have them between the aero bars
rather than
> at the bullhorn tips along with the breaks.
yup, we have two set-ups for europe, bar ends stuck up the end of aero
bars in countries that don't have the ridiculous, asinine, rule-making
moron that in the UK (only one in particular, i know who he is and am not
saying), and then there is the syntace C2, w/ aeroshift and bar end
shifters, which are legal in such countries insofar as they don't protrude
past the ends of the bars (but which in reality or no more or less safe
than the thing that is banned).
> The reason I ask is that once I'm
> in the aero position I tend to change the gears less than when I climbing;
in that case, may i make the guess that you don't have bar end shifting?
if you did, you'd use it a lot, even when you are not in the hills, and
you'd save yourself a lot of energy and fatigue.
> and changing gears from between the aero bars would destabilize me if I
was out
> of the saddle climbing up a hill.
the only thing you can't do with the set-up i propose is to change gears
while out of the saddle. considering my view of climbing with a tri bike,
which is that you do it primarily in, or close to in, the aero position
(you can choke up a little on the tri bars and raise your head a few cms),
it still makes sense, even on a hill, to have the gears at the ends. the
whole world of cycling somehow got along without the need to change gears
in the middle of a hill while out of the saddle before STI. sure, this is
a great feature, but it is a poor reason for a triathlete to change his
shifting set up. in a 60 mile hilly ride, while on a road bike, i might
change gears out of the saddle twice, compared to five hundred or a
thousand times i'll change gears while in the saddle during that ride.
> Secondly, what is you opinion on the all-in-one aero bar and bull horn setups.
lack of adequate adjustability; armrests right on top, instead of behind,
the base bar; and a descending, instead of level, base bar, are the three
things that stick out about the several such systems i've seen. i'm not
against such systems, they just need to be good.
qrman
scott Schnitzspahn
Dan Empfield wrote:
>
> > Secondly, what is you opinion on the all-in-one aero bar and bull horn setups.
>
> lack of adequate adjustability; armrests right on top, instead of behind,
> the base bar; and a descending, instead of level, base bar, are the three
> things that stick out about the several such systems i've seen. i'm not
> against such systems, they just need to be good.
>
> qrman
So Dan...why don't you make one with all those features?
-Scott
________________
Scott Schnitzspahn
USAT Level I Coach
http://www.enduranet.com
Dan Empfield
<schnitzs...@osu.edu> wrote:
> So Dan...why don't you make one with all those features?
i'm not sure i see the utility. road racers aren't asking for a one-piece
stem/handlebar, or a one-piece seat post/saddle. i think if all aero bars
were one piece, someone would come up with the bright-- and maybe better--
idea of splitting the aero bar and base bar into two assemblies.
qrman
Sandiway Fong
> There is no problem having drops/STI and clip-on aerobars on a
> tri-geometry frame. If your intended use is triathlons and you intend to
> ride in the aero position the majority of the time this would be a good
> option to provide you with some versatility.
i would like to take gentle exception to this comment that i've heard
quite a bit before, and certainly describes the way a lot of athletes
ride. i make my comments, by the way, with the full understanding and
acknowledgement that dan rishworth owns and runs one of the very top tri
shops not only in ontario, canada, but north america, and certainly knows
what he's talking about.
[..much stuff deleted..]
simply put, i believe that if you use road bars in their proper position,
you're a sail, and if you use the best available aero position w/road bars
underneath, your road bar positions are useless.
qrman
Hmm, I've been giving this issue of having a single bike with drop
bars and aerobars quite a bit of thought recently. I've been driven by
the type of ultra-distance events I do, which involve both pack riding
and solo efforts, extensive climbing as well as technical descents.
So I've always wanted to set up a bike that would not be a compromise
on either side. I've done quite a bit of experimentation in the
off-season, and my conclusion is that it's possible (at least in my
case) with a few custom gizmos to have the best of both worlds.
Details are available at my website. Here's the URL:
http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/sandiway/bike/tt/tt.html
Comments appreciated,
Sandiway
--
Dr. Sandiway Fong NEC Research Institute Inc.
(609) 951-2733 4 Independence Way, Princeton NJ 08540
(609) 951-2482 (FAX) sand...@research.nj.nec.com
http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/sandiway/
Dan Empfield
> Details are available at my website. Here's the URL:
>
> http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/sandiway/bike/tt/tt.html
>
> Comments appreciated,
very nicely done website. you understand the issues, for sure. my
comments are:
on your tri bike, i think your position is correct, in particular the
distance from your saddle to the ends of the aero bars. but i think your
aero bars are too short for you, and your top tube too long. if you took
4cm off your top tube, added two to your stem, and two to your aero bar
length, your bike would handle a little more quickly, and your armrests
would be more toward your elbows, less toward your wrists. you'd have
more of what gerard refers to as tiller, that's an honest difference of
ride preference between he and i. your weight displacement front to rear
would be the same.
i could understand how the bike needed to be built your way if you had
long legs and a short torso, arranging to put your armrests further up
your arm would keep your knees from hitting the back of your armrests when
you're out of the saddle. but you don't appear to have that problem,
hence you don't have that need. otherwise, i like your bike, your
position, and your analysis. you truly get all the issues in tri bike
fit, it seems to me, and my "improvements" are ultra-picky in what is
otherwise a nicely set up bike.
i'm not that fond of the aero position on your road bike, but you really
do understand the problem, and yours is an admirable & ingenious fix to
it. one reason i don't like your position, though, is that it is more
aggressive, with a saddle position that is necessarily more rearward,
instead of more forward (if you truly want to keep your "colnago" road
position and handling, as you state). i also wonder about the safety
factor, the ability to get out into a braking, and stable, position in a
hurry in case of emergency.
but i like the idea.
qrman
Rick Denney
>In article <4xaex8g...@bmb.nj.nec.com>, sand...@research.nj.nec.com wrote:
>
>> Details are available at my website. Here's the URL:
>>
>> http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/sandiway/bike/tt/tt.html
>>
>> Comments appreciated,
>
>very nicely done website. you understand the issues, for sure. my
>comments are:
>
>on your tri bike, i think your position is correct, in particular the
>distance from your saddle to the ends of the aero bars. but i think your
>aero bars are too short for you, and your top tube too long. if you took
>4cm off your top tube, added two to your stem, and two to your aero bar
>length, your bike would handle a little more quickly, and your armrests
>would be more toward your elbows, less toward your wrists. you'd have
>more of what gerard refers to as tiller, that's an honest difference of
>ride preference between he and i. your weight displacement front to rear
>would be the same.
>
I agree with Dan about the pads being closer to the elbows. This has
been a key element in my own positioning, and when I help people fit
on their bikes, I always recommend that the pads be just a wee bit
forward of the elbows, rather that 2-4 centimeters that we usually see
from Yurrupean pros with aerobars on their road bikes.
I tried to get into the same position as Mr. Sandiway. When I
converted my Trek 5500 to a forward position, I could do this, because
it has a dropped top tube. And, after you consider the effective
shortening of the top tube by the forward seatpost, it's not all that
different from the positions espoused generally by Dan and Gerard.
(Weight balance and handling is a separate issue).
But I could not get anywhere near as low as Mr. Sandiway. I tried. I
used a flat Salsa stem to get the bars as low as possible. I had an
effective 78 degree seat position, and the saddle was even a bit
forward of that. And my knees banged into my ribs. I went to a longer
stem with the same result. I went to a shorter stem with no help. I
was riding like a duck, and still cramping the muscles in my upper
back by arching enough to make clearance. (There was another problem,
too, which I refuse to go into). By the time I was done, I had a 16 cm
stem on the bike, and the handling was what you could only call evil.
So, when I bought the Habanero, I specifically wanted a higher front
end so that I could relax my back and suspend it between the saddle
and the shoulders instead of having to arch it. I wanted my elbows
right at the pads so I would not have to have the Death Grip on the
fronts of the aerobars. But, even without a "dropped top tube" I could
have achieved the same fit as on a QR with a Habanero. I would have
bought the 54 instead of the 58, and used a 14 cm stem instead of a
10. With the lower front end, I could probably have used a 12 or 13
instead of the 14, because it's so low that the elbows are precessing
back as they get lower. I would have been showing 3 or 4 more
centimeters of seatpost than on a QR, but the effect of that I can't
imagine. The results would have been entirely in the humanoid range,
except that my damn knees would have been pounding my ribs again.
Despite all that, though, there is no question that I very much lower
and more aero than in a road position on the tops. I may not be lower
than a road position on the drops of deep handlebars like we used to
use, but that position is hard on the arms and hands, which get relief
when in aerobars instead. When I ride in the cowhorns, I'm about in
the same position as in the shallower drops of my current road setup.
My cowhorns are dropped more than Dan likes. When I'm dead and need to
sit up, I put my hands on the pads. Otherwise, my only reason for
using the cowhorns is in tricky handling situations where I want
better control and access to the brake levers.
I envy these little guys, I really do.
Rick "Wishing bikes were sized by the top tube and not the seat tube"
Denney
Sandiway Fong
Sandiway
r...@odetics.com (Rick Denney) writes:
QR...@rooworld.com (Dan Empfield) wrote:
>sand...@research.nj.nec.com wrote:
>
>> Details are available at my website. Here's the URL:
>>
>> http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/sandiway/bike/tt/tt.html
>>
>> Comments appreciated,
>
>on your tri bike, i think your position is correct, in particular the
>distance from your saddle to the ends of the aero bars. but i think your
>aero bars are too short for you, and your top tube too long. if you took
>4cm off your top tube, added two to your stem, and two to your aero bar
>length, your bike would handle a little more quickly, and your armrests
>would be more toward your elbows, less toward your wrists.
I agree with Dan about the pads being closer to the elbows. This has
been a key element in my own positioning, and when I help people fit
on their bikes, I always recommend that the pads be just a wee bit
forward of the elbows, rather that 2-4 centimeters that we usually see
from Yurrupean pros with aerobars on their road bikes.
Yes, I agree with both of you about getting the rests closer to the
elbows. But I'm already using the longer version (13") of the Scott
RCOs. The pads are behind the attachment point, I can still reposition
it a bit further back. I wanted slightly slower steering for the aero
position. It's a bit sensitive on my road bike. I know I lose a little
on the drops. But nothing objectionable so far in my testing of the
experimental setup.
I tried to get into the same position as Mr. Sandiway. When I
converted my Trek 5500 to a forward position, I could do this, because
it has a dropped top tube. And, after you consider the effective
shortening of the top tube by the forward seatpost, it's not all that
different from the positions espoused generally by Dan and Gerard.
(Weight balance and handling is a separate issue).
But I could not get anywhere near as low as Mr. Sandiway.
I envy these little guys, I really do.
When I first did some research on low positions, I did ball park
measurements from photos of people like Eric Wolhberg and Colby
Pearce. They get significantly lower than me, so my position is
nothing compared to theirs. I couldn't pedal when the drop was that
far. I felt a little frustrated I couldn't emulate their
positions. They can somehow arch their backs like a cat. This is the
key to avoiding knees smashing into your torso on every stroke.
Unfortunately, I can't do it to save my life. I'm a flat back guy.
>i also wonder about the safety factor, the ability to get out into
>a braking, and stable, position in a hurry in case of emergency.
I am also very worried about this. I will have full control of both
brakes on the aerobars as well as on the drops. The aerobar system
will be slaved to the road levers. So safety will not be significantly
compromised.
Rick Denney
>When I first did some research on low positions, I did ball park
>measurements from photos of people like Eric Wolhberg and Colby
>Pearce. They get significantly lower than me, so my position is
>nothing compared to theirs. I couldn't pedal when the drop was that
>far. I felt a little frustrated I couldn't emulate their
>positions. They can somehow arch their backs like a cat. This is the
>key to avoiding knees smashing into your torso on every stroke.
>Unfortunately, I can't do it to save my life. I'm a flat back guy.
>
Removing that arch was the motivation to a taller front end for me.
Not only do I prefer a flatter back, even if it has to be tilted up,
but I'm more like a tired old horse--my back has to sag a little in
the middle.
Rick "They used to call it 'sway-back' when I was small enough to be
emotionally crippled by such labels" Denney
Ron Williams
like you do. I too have a flat back, and I have found that using my normal
road bike set-up (trek 5500, 120stem) with the seat moved a little forward
(less than an inch). I then attach TTT bio arms to my regular drop bars and
drop my stem one inch. Note that my aero-bars are cut down over 2 inches,
as I have found that I rest my wrists on the aero-pads, and really don't use
all the length of the bar. Also note that I ride a 56cm trek 5500, which
is only 53 cm Center to Center, and is 56 cm accross the top tube.
This setup is quite a bit like Luc Van Liedre, and numerous other Euro pros
that I have seen. Since I also race Cat2 on the road, I feel that utilizing
my road spin position in a time trial works really well. (Chris Boardman
uses his road seat position also - while dropping his front)
It also has a lot to do with what you are riding on every day. Since I do a
majority of my training on a road bike, It does not make sense to change it
up on race day. (Although, I hear that Jurgan Zach does! He trains on a
road bike, and races pretty extreme forward on his Softride, maybe that is
why he has problems on the run?)
Also, Peter Reid uses a pretty relaxed angle with his Specialized. I have
heard that he really likes this setup too. Although, he sometimes does
utilize a forward seat post, as the Specialized that he uses has a very long
top tube over 60 cm.
When I started Tri's back in 1990, I was a firm believer in forward
position, and I did ride a Cannondale Tri bike, forward seat post, for 4
seasons. As soon as I started road racing though, and I switched to 700c
wheels, I stopped having back pain and my bike times drastically improved.
(This could have a lot to do with the road bike racing too)
But I think that a lot of people get set up on Tri Bikes improperly. Last
weekend at the 1st L.A. Triathlon, I noticed a lot of big people (over 6ft)
riding tri-bikes w/650c wheels. There position looked really cramped, and
does not look very efficient at all. I also noticed that bike handling was
a big issue for many forward seat tri-people.
I think that we could learn a lot from watching the Euro pro's and their
riding style. Luc Van Liedre trains with Frank Vandenbrouke of the Cofidis
Pro Cycling Team on occasion, and I think that it really does show is his
spin and biking ability.
I have rambled on alot, but I hope this helps a bit! BTW, a dual purpose
bike is most achievable...
Ron Williams
Prescott Valley - Arizona
iron...@northlink.com