Pro bikes: where have we gone to?...

[Avispa]

Man, sometimes I do not understand the fitting of these new pro riders and their bikes!

It seems as if the manufacturers no longer care about proper fitting and make the riders use whatever is available! Look at the saddle position and the stem length... The saddle alone is installed such a way, that Fizik will shiver over it!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/photos/tour-tech-scott-project-f01-aero-road-bike/128754

Just take a look as these pictures...

..A..

[oldpotatoe]

Man, sometimes I do not understand the fitting of these new pro riders and their bikes!

It seems as if the manufacturers no longer care about proper fitting and make the riders use whatever is available! Look at the saddle position and the stem length... The saddle alone is installed such a way, that Fizik will shiver over it!

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/photos/tour-tech-scott-project-f01-aero-road-bike/128754

Just take a look as these pictures...

..A..

Short femurs, long torso...Plus a propriatary seatpost, no zero setback available. Of COURSE they 'make' the riders ride what's available. Like the TdF ads where these guys say they 'chose' sram..righto..their team is paid to ride sram, and that's what they ride, are paid to ride.

Win on sunday, sell on monday...

[Mike748]

At least his hoods are level.

[bobswire]

At least his hoods are level.

Not in relation to his saddle.

[Ralph]

Years ago....NASCAR actually raced mostly stock cars, modified to hold up to racing demands RE durability, modified for extra HP and speed, and modified a little to improve driver safety. Now....A NASCAR racer in both Sprint Cup and Nationwide series is a pure race car. Not one single part comes from a production street car. Racing needs are just too specialized to use any parts from a street car. They remind me of a race bike.

I'm believing the same is now true in the bycycle world. None of the bikes I see in the Pro series are bikes I would choose for my kind of riding. Bikes for daily riding, bikes for long distance comfort for riders of more modest abilities and strength. Bikes with gearing suitable for more ordinary mortals. Bikes where you can break a spoke and still ride it home. I like bikes with frame material that can take a fall or minor crash. And on and on and on etc.

A racing bicycle at the Pro level has become a very specialized machine. A terrific machine for it's intended purpose. I'm not knocking them. They remind me of a pure race car....not much good for anything except racing. Just look at the strong riders on this forum that choose bikes for riding.....like some of the Serotta's or custom TI or steel. The gap between riding and racing bikes reminds me a little of how race cars departed from street car designs. Like most things....there are exception to my statements. MHO

[mike p]

Maybe the other option is even more setback :)

Mike


http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/photos/tour-tech-scott-project-f01-aero-road-bike/128761





Short femurs, long torso...Plus a propriatary seatpost, no zero setback available. Of COURSE they 'make' the riders ride what's available. Like the TdF ads where these guys say they 'chose' sram..righto..their team is paid to ride sram, and that's what they ride, are paid to ride.

Win on sunday, sell on monday...

[Louis]

I thought this thread was going to be about the plastic BMCs.

So much weirdness to choose from...

[fourflys]

well, if the guy that rides that bike is a professional bike rider, I'm not going to question his set-up... I'm guessing they know what works for them (saddle slammed forward, long stem)...

[Elefantino]

Interesting. I would never choose a race bike to ride, period. I don't need the stiffest platform on earth and I certainly don't want to feel every pebble, which I do when I ride top-end carbon.

Not to dis top-end carbon. If you want to put maximum power to the pedals, there's nothing better than a good, stiff Scott or Merckx or Cervelo or Pinarello or Giant or Trek or Ridley or Specialized or BH or Orbea or anything else.

But if you don't have maximum power in the first place, and your goal is to win an occasional town sprint and ride fast, comfortable centuries, then of couse you look elsewhere, like to a Serotta.

That said, some of them there race bikes are ug-lee, but some are shore purty.

[soulspinner]

Interesting. I would never choose a race bike to ride, period. I don't need the stiffest platform on earth and I certainly don't want to feel every pebble, which I do when I ride top-end carbon.

Not to dis top-end carbon. If you want to put maximum power to the pedals, there's nothing better than a good, stiff Scott or Merckx or Cervelo or Pinarello or Giant or Trek or Ridley or Specialized or BH or Orbea or anything else.

But if you don't have maximum power in the first place, and your goal is to win an occasional town sprint and ride fast, comfortable centuries, then of couse you look elsewhere, like to a Serotta.

That said, some of them there race bikes are ug-lee, but some are shore purty.

Plus one

[David Kirk]

I'm going to go way out on a limb here and risk many a raised eyebrow but - FWIW, many pros have a ****ty fitting bikes. There, I said it.

Brave of me to say that eh? Not really. All one needs to do is watch Tour and look critically at the fit of the various riders to see great examples of a rider can be very fast even with a poor fit. We all have the local cat 1 or 2 guy who can break the legs off most of the other guys in town yet they look like crap on their bikes - pros are the same way but with more fitness.

Some pros care about fit and balance and handling to the extreme and some couldn't care less. I worked with a Coors Light guy many years ago who was a great example of the later - his bike fit like crap and worked even worse (rattles and squeaks and really bad shifting/braking) and yet he could ride with the strongest guys on the planet.

One thing I'd like joeblow local guys to understand is that just because some Europro sits on a bike a certain way it does not make that a good way to sit. Very often they go really fast despite the fit and they just aren't detail oriented enough to care. The problem comes in when the 150 mile a week guy tries to look like Thomas Voekler (sp?) thinking that looking a certain way on the bike will make them fast.

I just got back from a rough road ride (50 - 50 paved/dirt) and looked like Bernard Hinault in my minds eye and that made me wicked fast....... so there.

dave

[false_Aest]

Pro: "A person engaged in a specified activity as a main paid occupation rather than as a pastime."

-----

"You get PAID to GO FAST on THAT bike."

-----

1) Go fast
2) Make it work
3) Go faster.

[Charles M]

Bullshot...


Grab an extreme case photo and imply it's some kind of trend...

Then state the obvious about sponsorship as if anyone doesnt realize that sponsorship is a large a prt of cycling as it is any other sport.




Walk the race start and the vast majority of guys fit just fine on the bike they have...


Nothing at all to do with "today's" pro riders or bikes... Guys have been working around these issues for decades. It's just that the internet makes for fast easy sensationalizing of pretty meaningless exceptions...

Then poof. it's a thread.



As for feeling every pebble because of Top end carbon...

Interesting...

Post up the pictures of a few of your Meivici, Z1SL, Z4 or 5, Crumpton, Colnago c40, C50 or EPS, Look 585 or 566, Cyfac Absolu or Gothica... It would be good to qualify such a broad complaint... And determining your definition of "top end" and the relatice experience you have in that top end would help...

[rustychain]

I think lots of amateurs ride extremely poor fitting bikes based on my observations. Perhaps its a trend? That said IMO lots of amateurs ride better bikes then the some of the pros. I'll take my bike over any pro set up I've seen but I have a pathological condition that makes me spend stupid money on bikes. :bike:
More interesting is the bike collections that some of the pros own. Now I've only seen one well known pros garage but it had some surprising bikes. I suspect that when he retires he will be riding something other then the pro bike he is sponsored to ride. I have heard gossip about other pros bike but have no real knowledge if its commonplace for pros to own fleets of bikes

[ahumblecycler]

I'm always entertained and sometimes annoyed how some people feel they can assess another person's fit based on a photo.

I am not going to say every Pro or any cyclist is properly fitted, but I am not going to comment on their fitting. The only fit I am concerned about is my own.

As for the Fizik Arione CX being improperly installed, I call BS. For anyone who has experience with the carbon fiber rails also knows Fizik engineered to where a seat post clamp will only clamp in Fizik's safe zone.

I am going to echo Pez's comments regarding high end carbon fiber.

Also, I find some Serotta's ugly as well as bikes in all manufacturer's range.

And my parting thought is focused on "fittings." I find a professional fit to be a bunch of crap. As someone who averages more than 400 miles per week, I find how I ride a bike to vary based on how I feel. I suspect Pro's and other cyclists are no different. I listen to my body; I do not listen to stats and measurements that tries to dictate my ride.

[Volant]

Perhaps that fits for that rider? My question would be, if the fit is poor, how can they ride so well? I've been on a poor-fitting bike (in a race) and it was down-right painful!! If they're riding on the same, they couldn't ride so well. Or, at least, I can't fathom how they could. So, my conclusion is that must be what works for that rider.

[nm87710]

If one bothers to read the article and look at the pictures it's pretty clear the bike pictured is a new test mule bike from Scott. Never intended or fit for a specific rider to use long term. Probably lots of team riders tested the bike and provided feedback. It certainly is not a Pro's primary bike.

:crap: :crap: :crap:

P.S. Actual picture of seatpost says Scott will offer 2 seatpost options for that frame when produced. Prolly one at -1.5cm offset and one at 0 :) Doubt they had both available for the mule frames.

[BCS]

Maybe I am cranky because fireworks got rained out and my kids are going bananas but threads like this as well as the SV bashing are wearing on my nerves.

The SV is IMHO a bad ass looking race bike, regardless of the paint or lack thereof. I personally love the faux-industrial look, hate the "martha stewart" pastels and would race the hell out of one if I was inclined to race at this stage of my life. Don't mean to bash our host (I own 2 Serottas) but if you want to see an ugly bike, check out the faster-backwards HSG recently posted. Retail price more than a speedvagen and a half.

As to high end carbon being too harsh, "feeling every pebble", I am calling BS. Find a saddle that works for you, optimize your fit, go get some 25mm tires, ride a lower pressure and stop worrying about what the frame is made of. These are not my original thoughts--they have been gleaned from this forum. I hope we are not regressing.

[Peter P.]

I fully agree with what David Kirk said, but my opinion carries much less weight because I'm not a framebuilder with tons o' experience like him.

Just because these guys are fast doesn't mean they know anything about fit. Heck; they may not know much about training or diet, either. They're just 20-30 year olds just like us but with much more talent. Try to remember how much YOU knew about bike fit at those ages.

The other problem is the market will have you believe that miles of saddle to bar drop is a MUST for a good racing bike, or at least a slammed down to the headset stem. I'd argue these racing bikes should all have the max number of spacers under the stem and there'd be no loss of aerodynamics or handling, but better comfort over the long haul.

But as they are used, pro racing frames and the resultant position they put the rider in, must be more than tolerable because the pros train and race incredibly long miles/hours on them. If there was obvious discomfort, there would have been design changes long ago.

[ahumblecycler]

@BCS ... I agree that is seems the forum as a whole tends to bash anything outside their own personal acceptable norm. I find it both disheartening and curious, and often leads to me to think ... oh never mind as I do not want to get banned.

And the rain started about 1 hr ago ... just in time to ruin the fireworks here.

@Peter P. ... I do not believe bike manufacture marketing portrays images such as increased saddle-bar drops. After all, the trend appears to be longer head tubes and compact bars. Furthermore, more and more manufacturers are competing against Specialized's Roubaix ride style. Personally (and I do emphasize this word), I feel manufacturers are showing off the bikes they sponsor, which happens to be set up to the Pro's (to whatever extent) specifications.

On a parting note, I am watching "The Empire Strikes Back," and I wonder how often I have watched this movie (as well as others). Many people enjoy the series, but some viewers including myself are guilty of criticizing Lucas's micro-management and lack of script writing skills. And yet here I am enthralled. Bringing the example around, I suspect many members have a passion for bikes, and perhaps their passion blinds them. I wonder how many members have multiple bikes set up identical to each and every other bike their own so that when they get on one it feels the same as any other ... perhaps this is best for another time.

[Joellogicman]

And my parting thought is focused on "fittings." I find a professional fit to be a bunch of crap. As someone who averages more than 400 miles per week, I find how I ride a bike to vary based on how I feel. I suspect Pro's and other cyclists are no different. I listen to my body; I do not listen to stats and measurements that tries to dictate my ride.

Sell standard sizes?

[Joellogicman]

I feel manufacturers are showing off the bikes they sponsor, which happens to be set up to the Pro's (to whatever extent) specifications.

the rest pack most likely have little say

On a parting note, I am watching "The Empire Strikes Back," and I wonder how often I have watched this movie (as well as others). Many people enjoy the series, but some viewers including myself are guilty of criticizing Lucas's micro-management and lack of script writing skills. And yet here I am enthralled..

Enjoyed the first one, but then I was a kid. Took my high school significant other to the 2nd. Had she not dressed so there was a real question whether she was wearing one garment up top or two, the boredom would have killed me. I've not seen any of the others. (Nor any of the middle earth stuff for that matter)

[Elefantino]

As for feeling every pebble because of Top end carbon...

Interesting...

Post up the pictures of a few of your Meivici, Z1SL, Z4 or 5, Crumpton, Colnago c40, C50 or EPS, Look 585 or 566, Cyfac Absolu or Gothica... It would be good to qualify such a broad complaint... And determining your definition of "top end" and the relatice experience you have in that top end would help...
OK, you got me, sort of. I haven't ridden any of those. My recent carbon ridings are limited to a DeRosa King, a new Litespeed, a Cannondale SuperSix and a Trek Madone 6.9. I'd consider the DeRosa to be top-end; not so much the Litespeed, 'Dale and Trek, because they don't keep the company of those others you mentioned.

But I could feel the road imperfections — expansion joints, bumps — more on those bikes than on my two tis. Maybe it's psychological or maybe it's because my broken back never healed correctly and I'm more sensitive. I do know that I've never climbed more effortlessly than I did on the DeRosa, though.

That said, if someone were to dump a King on my doorstep, I'd be happy riding around at 90psi. :D

[rwsaunders]

More pro bike photos...check out Wiggo's TT bike and try that position.

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2010/05/08/bikes-pros

[fourflys]

More pro bike photos...check out Wiggo's TT bike and try that position.

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2010/05/08/bikes-pros

Interesting mix of set-ups on there... Did you see Cadel's TT bike from the Giro???!!!

I also noticed Modelo's Colnago wasn't set up with extreme saddle to bar drop as some bikes are, his almost looked like a regular bike that you or I would ride... although I'm sure his would go MUCH faster... ;)

[zap]

No comment on the op pic but my observation is that pro's have moved to a more forward position. I'm thinking tt is having an impact here, hip angle and the desire to go fast.

Hinault/Lemond positioning guidelines just might be a thing of the past for the go fast crowd but I would defer to the folks that work with pro's.

RW-thanks for the link-just saw my new bike-Look 695SR :banana:

[Charles M]

And when you defer, and people take a loot at the whole instead of taking a tiny piece and assuming it's indicative of a trend, you'll find that most of the assumtions made here about some new fitting trend are BS...


There is not such thing as "Pro" fit. The riders are generally more flexible and better cinditioned and that generally makes for a more agressive position, but there are exceptions and fifferent fits throughout.

The guys generally find a reasonable position on the bikes they race.

They're not moving (limited) to one of: "moving forward" or back or laying out or stacking up the head tube...


They're doing what they need to find the right position to produce performance for the conditions presented in the race. be it one day or 20, on smooth roads or cobbles.


Pro riders are taking a lot more interest in fitting and gear today than they were a decade ago...

But they're not trending in any direction except the one that best suites their particular body and riding style to the bike they need to use.



And it doesn't change based on material... That's an equal portion of BS...

[EDS]

Interesting. I would never choose a race bike to ride, period. I don't need the stiffest platform on earth and I certainly don't want to feel every pebble, which I do when I ride top-end carbon.

Not to dis top-end carbon. If you want to put maximum power to the pedals, there's nothing better than a good, stiff Scott or Merckx or Cervelo or Pinarello or Giant or Trek or Ridley or Specialized or BH or Orbea or anything else.

But if you don't have maximum power in the first place, and your goal is to win an occasional town sprint and ride fast, comfortable centuries, then of couse you look elsewhere, like to a Serotta.

That said, some of them there race bikes are ug-lee, but some are shore purty.

I have a carbon Giant, same frame used by Rabobank, that is no less comfortable than my titanium Serotta. I don't think either would be out of place on a century ride. Same saddles on both bikes and the two sets of wheels I own get swapped back and forth between them, for what it is worth.

[flydhest]

only vaguely on topic because it is about people judging other people's fit, but last week at lunch was doing some sprint laps . . . just jumped in with some guys who were out. Out of the blue, some guy rolls up next to me and tells me that my bars are too narrow and it is making me ride awkwardly. I did not tell him it is my current state of being a bureaucrat and insufficient miles this year that is making me ride "awkwardly" if, in fact, I was, which I doubt. Regardless, he was somehow not on the group the next lap when I took an even longer pull, so we didn't have a chance to talk. :no:

TooTall, formerly of here, now of across the hall, made me hip to one of my favorite cycling phrases. We've all heard of taking yourself to your aerobic threshold, it's always good to take an assclown to his verbal threshold.

. . . and then upshift.

[johnnymossville]

I think this guy is just trying to make an off the rack bike fit and work best for him, nothing wrong with that.

I used to get the impression that since the late 1990's many pro riders set their bikes up as a fashion statement first and as a comfortable racing tool second, with those huge drops and long reaches. But then anyone who spends as much time as those guys do in the saddle every day better set the bike up so it works for them. "Works for them" are the key words here. We don't have to like it. I'm done trying to second guess their motives.

[RonW87]

More pro bike photos...check out Wiggo's TT bike and try that position.

http://www.bikeworldnews.com/2010/05/08/bikes-pros

Scrolling down to the Specialized from American Flyers, the saddle to bar drop looks as large as on the modern bikes.

Also, keep in mind that, on the older bikes, the brake hoods are installed halfway down the bars, are less comfortable than the hoods today, and that more time was probably spent in the drops. So modern bikes will certainly look like the saddle to bar drop is larger.

R.

[jbay]

Also, keep in mind that, on the older bikes, the brake hoods are installed halfway down the bars, are less comfortable than the hoods today, and that more time was probably spent in the drops. So modern bikes will certainly look like the saddle to bar drop is larger.

R.Roger (http://www.pezcyclingnews.com/photos/races06/zurich06/preview-roger.jpg) suggests otherwise.

-- John

[RonW87]

Au contraire! Monsieur Paris-Roubaix makes my point. The position of the rider is the same, but the apparent saddle-to-bar drop on the bike is much less on his beautiful Gios Torino (because the brake hoods are lower).

R.

[sg8357]

Remember that very little braking power is available from the hoods
on old bikes, definitely "speed modulators", braking is from the drops.

Older Maes pattern bars have a flat ramp that is like the hoods position
on a current bike, upright, comfy, but no brakes.

[Vancouverdave]

Is this maybe why more pros are using bars with shallow drop--a combination of controls with hoods that are much more comfortable to ride on, and frame sizing that is halfway to BMX?

[jbay]

Au contraire! Monsieur Paris-Roubaix makes my point. The position of the rider is the same, but the apparent saddle-to-bar drop on the bike is much less on his beautiful Gios Torino (because the brake hoods are lower).The point I was making was that Roger used his hoods a lot.

That said, I also believe that saddle to 'bar drop is increasing, regardless of hood shape and position or 'bar shape and inclination, as evidenced by Bradley Wiggins' change in position. (http://theinnerring.blogspot.com/2010/03/bradley-wiggins-low-down.html)

I have to agree about the Gios Torino though!

-- John

[palincss]

Is this maybe why more pros are using bars with shallow drop--a combination of controls with hoods that are much more comfortable to ride on, and frame sizing that is halfway to BMX?

Brake levers with comfortable hoods to ride on and brake levers that will let you apply full power from the hoods have been available certainly since 1991 or earlier. Of course, the shape of the brake hood has changed and grown enormously: what used to be enough to fit a thumb and two fingers is now as large as the grip on a .45 cal automatic pistol.

[Avispa]

If one bothers to read the article and look at the pictures it's pretty clear the bike pictured is a new test mule bike from Scott. Never intended or fit for a specific rider to use long term....

True... But what about this (just look at the saddle! :eek: ):
http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/photos/pro-bike-mark-cavendishs-htc-columbia-scott-project-f01

And when you defer, and people take a loot at the whole instead of taking a tiny piece and assuming it's indicative of a trend, you'll find that most of the assumtions made here about some new fitting trend are BS...

Just reminds me of the days when the "jerk" was around.... remember: "your stem is too short...." :D

One thing is certain, perhaps with the exception of the bikes for the cream-of-the-crop riders. Bike makers, especially those that mass produce bikes want everyone to just to ride their "S", "M" and "L"... forget about custom or a proper fit! This, in my opinion, has also been carried out to some less prominent pro riders and they have to make improper adjustments for their bikes to fit.

I agree, there is no such thing as a "pro fit", but certainly there is a way to fit someone on a bike professionally! If not, much of the bike industry, including all the so called "tech" (pronounced "mar-ket-ing") featured on some web sites is as much BS as was stated on my opening post! And to say that "...the fact that a guy can ride a bike hard and fast has nothing to with proper fit" is also a lot of BS, no? How many pros have made "proper" adjustments (better fits) to their position just to find that they are riding much better after doing so?

It's very true, it's almost stupid when one posts something of this sort on a forum... But it's even more ridiculous when some have a blog or web site and they automatically become an unquestionable authority on whatever topic is contained on their site!

On a good note... there is a little clip for all to enjoy, look at the fit of these guys, they look just perfect:
http://www.nfb.ca/film/60_cycles/

:D :D

[fourflys]

marketing is always mostly BS, it's part of the game...

As far as S/M/L/XL bikes... most people will fit on one with no problems whatsoever with a minor stem or set-back adjustment... sure, you could get a custom bike and I encourage you to do so if that's what floats your boat, but I bet most people wouldn't ride any better or faster....

*** some odd to fit people (Bill Walton) certainly need custom, but they are few and far between...

anyway, that's my uninformed take...