The helmet that you have looks pretty good to me.
You could practice shrugging your head more to get it closer to your back, but other than that my eye ball sees no low hanging fruit there.

With regards to getting your upper body lower, It looks to me that you're about as low as you should go without losing some weight. I don't mean that in a harsh way, I say it because it seems that your quads are already meeting a lot of resistance from your stomach as the top of your pedal stroke.

Aerodynamically, you currently seem to be doing very well with what you have.

If you're looking to go faster, your lowest hanging fruit by far is weight.
Put a backpack on and fill it with 4 or 5 litres of water (in bottles, obviously), then cycle up a hill. That extra effort is the effect of 4 or 5kg.
Imagine taking away the effort required for 10kg or more, and you see where I'm going with this.

Thanks

I did hope I was pretty aerodynamically ok, I realise about the weight but it is very hard to drop that.

For the past 3 months I have cut out all sweet stuff, no desserts at all, its helped a tiny bit but I was hoping for more!

Guess I will have to keep trying.

Thanks for your input.

You might try the shorter tail on the helmet. I have helped 3 people "eyeball wind tunnel" that helmet and the fit has been much better with the low tail.

Also, try pulling the rear tensioner out of the helmet. Mine fit like crap until I removed it.

You wouldn't suggest a different helmet though?

I don't know what you weigh - I've lost 39-40 lbs in the last 10.5 months going from 203.5 to 165-ish

I've not stopped eating anything I like, but portion control, no grazing, and exercise daily - we eat out 2+ times / week - Friday I went to Hakkasan - over ate but probably compensated with long bike / long run

its not jus sweet stuff - its a function of volume - unless you're just eating rocket leaves

You can drop weight, I cant comment on the position but if you drop 10% of your body weight and your FTP remains static or just drops by 1-2% your w/kg go up significantly

I suppose that's the only answer to simply eat less.

I am currently @ 25 mins for 10 miles carrying 17 stones.

in real money thats 240-ish - I'm guessing that losing 40-50 would have all sorts of material health benefits

I'm not sure how I really got to being 210 - I was 156 10-12 years ago, it was as much a lack of exercise as it was a complete disregard for the quantity of food I consumed

I would for one week keep a food diary and take photo's of portion sizes and guess estimate your daily calorific intake using an app - I'm not disciplined or anal enough to do it daily - I did it at the outset to see where I was, I then just reduced how much I ate, didn't eat after 6pm if i could help it - I probably hit that about 80% of the time, and generally go to bed slightly hungry, not starving, just not full / sated - that was about it

Hi,

Could you explain for my understanding why you think the lower tail would be better please... dont doubt you but just want to understand!

Thanks

The tall tail section lifts the end of the helmet completely off your back. I think the tail would integrate better/smoother if you swapped to the lower/ shorter tail section. While it is impossible to tell if this would actually make you faster, the general idea is to have the tail integrate as smoothly as possible with your back.

Work on your shrug. Crane your neck forward so that your head drops between your shoulder blades.

here's some thoughts on helmet/head position:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FG5pYN43oAw

---

=================
Kraig Willett
http://www.biketechreview.com - check out our reduced report pricing
=================

As others have noted, your position looks pretty good. It looks comfortable and good for power production.

With your head position, a lot of "regular" tail TT helmets will work well; a short tail would probably test slower*. The Selector seems to fit your back reasonably well. I'm not sure how much you would gain with a P09, McClaren, Wasp, etc.

You could get lower in front, but don't do it if it means that interference with your torso forces your knees to track out. Not only is this higher drag (Phil Andersen was measured at 40W more pedaling w/knees out than in), but it also invites knee problems.

Can't comment on pad width w/o a frontal shot.

*As always this is eyeball wind tunnel. Real tunnel is the only way to be sure.

---

ECMGN Therapy Silicon Valley:
Depression, Neurocognitive problems, Dementias (Testing and Evaluation), Trauma and PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)