JustinNorCal wrote:
Sorry image is horrible
image is great. and thank you and it somewhat places me at ease. if we're going to prescribe a bike using a static system like this with very minimal data input, what is really a bummer is getting the X axis wrong. it's easier to change Y. you pedestal, or unpedestal. but X is hard to change on superbikes, especially if they don't have a lot of fore/aft adjustability as many of them don't.
in your case we nailed it on the Y but you had 30mm more X than our prediction and that was worrisome for the "system" devised. but looking at your position, it would be hard to prescribe this position. don't get me wrong, it's a good position. but you're quite forward it looks like to me. more so than the typical rider.
now, i'd like it if we were a little closer to this position of yours. maybe only 15mm or 20mm back of your position. but if your position was dead on center of the tri bike riding public and we prescribed 30mm rearward of that, i'd be more concerned than i am.
but this feeds into another theme of mind that i'll be publishing on within a few days, which is a worrisome trend among bike makers to shrink the fit window of their superbikes.
Dan Empfield
aka Slowman