Tom,

Another good piece of work from you. I am curious about the way you took the pictures shown on the article. It seems to me like the bike and body angles would be better shown if you lowered the camera. You could have the lens parallel to the floor at about the height of the aerobars. Would you like to comment on that?

Thank you,

---

-
[pink]I don’t use pink font[/pink]

You said,

---

The only other way of altering the knee angle at the top of the stroke would be to go to shorter cranks. However, even a dramatic change by cyclists standards (e.g., from 175 down to 165 mm) would have very little effect on knee angle. So, regardless of appearances in the photo, if the knee of his downside leg has a pretty normal angle (if anything, I'd say he's reaching a bit for the pedal), then the knee of the upside leg is going to have a pretty normal angle as well.

---

Crank length change is not the only way to alter the knee angle. Two things can change knee angle... 1) raise seat (as been mentioned) 2) shifting the seat back (i.e., reduce angle of seat tube). In short, go to a more roadie like bike position (Sacrareligious as that may sound).

Finally, you stated that my concern for injury is overstated. O.K, I'll bite....You may be correct and you may not be correct. Quantifying injury is something I did not nor intended to do. By the same token, I would never say that runners become bikers because it is easier on the knees. I know of know no studies (or experience) to verify this as to be true.

On the other hand, to say biking places a different type of joint stress on the body vs. (say) running is an accurate observation. However, saying those stress changes (i.e., resulting from running to biking) reduces injury (or potential for injury) is not saying something very convincing. In fact, you may simply be exchanging one type of injury for another. Whether or not that is the case depends upon fitting and biking technique issues (and, (if you want) training issues as well).

To keep my thoughts simple, My original post simply meant the following: Knee injuries from biking are a by-product of poor fit AND poor spinning technique. This is a simple fact. For me to overstate a fact relating to what causes injuries is contrary to logic. So, I stick by my original post... steep knee angles is a contributing factor to serious knee injuries. How often this occurs is not relevant. It's prevention of this injury that is relevant.

FWIW Joe Moya

Fitting is less of a science... instead, it's more like an art.

You're right. The darn store is so small I was actually on top of the sales counter (leaning on it, I'm not kidding) taking the photos. Maybe we can improve that in the future. Good point though.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

"The "original" triathlon bike had a seat tube angle of 90 degrees, then was dialed back to 80 degrees, then 78."

a little clarification on this. back in '88 two bikes came out at the same time, the holland desert princess, designed by ralph ray, and the superform, designed by me. the desert princess had a 90-degree seat angle, the superform an 80. the desert princess was too steep, and it never got traction. i dialed the superform back to 78 degrees, but with the advent of the zero setback seatpost (dean at the time, now most often thompson) it's just about the same as 80 degrees with a setback post.

that's about where i think bikes oughta be, more or less. 80 degrees is a good angle.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

First, thanks for posting the article and getting this discussion going.

It appears to me that his position on the Softride achieved both a flatter back and a less cramped cockpit. What happened to the generally accepted rule that the ear should be directly over the crook of the elbow? Todd's ear has got to be at least 5 cm. ahead of the elbow crease, indicating he should have a longer stem, n'est pas?

The position looks like it is designed for good power and comfort with good joint angles, but I agree there seems to be a disconnect between how far forward and how un-aero/low he is.

---

American's are definately infekting the world with there English grammer.