Likes Likes:  0
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: on the merits and folly of extremes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wilder, VT
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default on the merits and folly of extremes

    Curious to read what y'all think about extremes as regards bike positioning.

    "Set the bike up as agressive/aero as possible and learn to ride it"

    vs

    "Set the bike up so the rider can comfortably put out the most power and that will be the fastest in the long run (biomechanics trumps)"

    and talking points:
    Long term benefits and long term complications;
    Who is suited to which end of the spectrum and why;
    Moderating or going for extremes;
    The change in significance when discussing time trial, road, cross, etc(meh).

    Granted these, and easily the first, can be overdone. When thinking about fitting a) yourself and b) a trusting rider/client, what might be a prioritized mental checklist to work from, and in what ways can either of these be convincingly talked about(sold) to a newer, wide-eyed rider?

    pkb
     

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Better to be ruined than to be silent atmo.
    Posts
    18,423
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pkb View Post

    "Set the bike up so the rider can comfortably put out the most power and that will be the fastest in the long run (biomechanics trumps)"

    atmo why fight it?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    DC
    Posts
    20,223
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I'll start...

    Listen to the client and don't miss details than listen to them talk some more. WATCH them move and if any way humanly possible go for a ride and get clues....than talk some more. There are truths and clues in their words regardless of experiance...riders speak what they feel and you as the guide will help to make mindful decisions about how to set them up. All you questions fit this model.

    Quote Originally Posted by pkb View Post
    Curious to read what y'all think about extremes as regards bike positioning.

    "Set the bike up as agressive/aero as possible and learn to ride it"

    vs

    "Set the bike up so the rider can comfortably put out the most power and that will be the fastest in the long run (biomechanics trumps)"

    and talking points:
    Long term benefits and long term complications;
    Who is suited to which end of the spectrum and why;
    Moderating or going for extremes;
    The change in significance when discussing time trial, road, cross, etc(meh).

    Granted these, and easily the first, can be overdone. When thinking about fitting a) yourself and b) a trusting rider/client, what might be a prioritized mental checklist to work from, and in what ways can either of these be convincingly talked about(sold) to a newer, wide-eyed rider?

    pkb

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wilder, VT
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by e-RICHIE View Post
    atmo why fight it?
    a truncated re would point first to aerodynamics, and when we're talking about rider position, this is a big deal, atmo and atwttarwr(according to wind tunnel testing and real world results).
     

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Better to be ruined than to be silent atmo.
    Posts
    18,423
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pkb View Post
    a truncated re would point first to aerodynamics, and when we're talking about rider position, this is a big deal, atmo and atwttarwr(according to wind tunnel testing and real world results).
    i don't understand what "a truncated re..." means atmo.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    City of Big Shoulders
    Posts
    6,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by e-RICHIE View Post
    i don't understand what "a truncated re..." means atmo.
    it's when Wade Patton goes over the bars and humps a log on the side of the trail.
    "make the break"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wilder, VT
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by e-RICHIE View Post
    i don't understand what "a truncated re..." means atmo.
    alternate definition from Patton's log diversions:

    shortened re[ply]
     

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Better to be ruined than to be silent atmo.
    Posts
    18,423
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pkb View Post
    alternate definition from Patton's log diversions:

    shortened re[ply]
    well then i guess i stand by my earlier re that you set the
    bicycle up to work with the rider's strengths, suppleness,
    and limitations atmo. off the point, but not really, is that
    some folks don't want to compromise on design elements
    and won't make all bicycles for all peoples. that's why god
    invented comfort bicycles atmo.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cannon County TN
    Posts
    5,750
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    That's what happens when I ride with horndog ex-presidents. (see WJC ref in getting-ugly-quickmo-thread.)


    *transition*

    Isn't another issue how far and fast the rider may progress in this continual process of improvement? If they're fitted for their right-now-today optimum, how soon until they "outgrow" it? Or if you fit them to where you'll think they're going-what if there are delays or dead-ends in development?

    Figuring this out is part of the interview process TT speaks of. Getting it right...trade-offs and experience. Some folks will build up anything the rider can sit on. Richie does not.






  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Way outside of Philly
    Posts
    935
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pkb View Post
    Curious to read what y'all think about extremes as regards bike positioning.

    "Set the bike up as agressive/aero as possible and learn to ride it"

    vs

    "Set the bike up so the rider can comfortably put out the most power and that will be the fastest in the long run (biomechanics trumps)"
    Those aren't the extremes. The first one is one extreme, but the corresponding other extreme would be "set the bike up with the bars in the highest possible position and the saddle position as far back as possible and learn to ride it".

    Setting the bike up for the rider's abilities, desires, and goals (to the extent that these things are compatible) isn't an extreme, its the reasonable center, no?

    -Ray
     

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wilder, VT
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray View Post
    Those aren't the extremes. The first one is one extreme, but the corresponding other extreme would be "set the bike up with the bars in the highest possible position and the saddle position as far back as possible and learn to ride it".

    Setting the bike up for the rider's abilities, desires, and goals (to the extent that these things are compatible) isn't an extreme, its the reasonable center, no?

    -Ray
    I'm considering a position that completely disregards aerodynamics and does not take into account that the rider can adapt to a more efficient setup and should make some early comfort concessions an extreme.

    And I'm not arguing against feedback from clients, etc. I'm looking for opinions regarding extremes.

    -pkb
     

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ohio the police State
    Posts
    150
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default My opinion

    is that extremes are not middle of the road, unless of course you are extremely middle of the road, Bent over your TT bike cramping and chuffing but aero as hell, or on the tops threading through the trees on an overcast November, cramping and chuffing cause the air's too cold, and the roots are beating your tires against the rim, or extremely faster backward cause why are your tires so extremely skinny and why don't you use an extremely plump seat to cushie yer tushie
    no matter where ya go...there you are

    ummm welcome to the monkey house

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,374
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    there's a narrow range of hip angles where the important muscle groups can actually produce power and an equally narrow range where 700c wheels can sit in relation to each other and still allow for a bike that rides right. those ranges were figured out a long time ago. if you want to ride a road bike, you need to be in a position to ride a road bike. no one needs overthimk this shit.
     

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Wilder, VT
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jerk View Post
    there's a narrow range of hip angles where the important muscle groups can actually produce power and an equally narrow range where 700c wheels can sit in relation to each other and still allow for a bike that rides right. those ranges were figured out a long time ago. if you want to ride a road bike, you need to be in a position to ride a road bike. no one needs overthimk this shit.
    but craig, you skirt the issue: the range that you point out has extremes. The edges of the range will offer riders different things. Thinking about this could potentially be useful.

    pkb
     

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Coquitlam, British Columbia
    Posts
    8,237
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pkb View Post
    but craig, you skirt the issue: the range that you point out has extremes. The edges of the range will offer riders different things. Thinking about this could potentially be useful.

    pkb
    huh?

    please re-read craig's post until you understand it's meaning.

    -g
     

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    no shore, mass
    Posts
    12,881
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    i put a 53-12 on my bike but i sincerely do not think i could have come around cavendish at msr...maybe, but probably not.

    why is that?
    plz discuss.
     

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Better to be ruined than to be silent atmo.
    Posts
    18,423
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveP View Post
    i put a 53-12 on my bike but i sincerely do not think i could have come around cavendish at msr...maybe, but probably not.

    why is that?
    plz discuss.


    >> why is that?
    because you're old atmo.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Surf City USA
    Posts
    475
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default No, E-Ritchie

    Old is 50/34 coupled to a 13/29! :embarassed:
    Livin The Dream in Surf City USA

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Way outside of Philly
    Posts
    935
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mud View Post
    Old is 50/34 coupled to a 13/29! :embarassed:
    Nah, that's middle aged. Old is a 46-34 with a 12-34 on the road bike and a 24-36-46 with the same 12-34 on the light touring bike.

    Punk.

    -Ray
     

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ohio the police State
    Posts
    150
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default nah

    Old is a Lazy Boy and bowling on ESPN, Old people don't ride, a mature or aging cyclist does what he gots to do to keep on keeping on
    no matter where ya go...there you are

    ummm welcome to the monkey house

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •