Alright, I'll get the ball started on this thread:

Sometimes height and weight are listed in metric, sometimes in 'Murican, sometimes in both. Why in the world can't the article be consistent in its units?

---

---

---

Take a short break from ST and read my blog:
http://tri-banter.blogspot.com/

Frodenos speedmax listed at xl is it an error a d actually L or is it a custom made?

Whose position do you like the best? Who do you think has the most room to improve?

---

Matt

Sebi's is very nice, but I don't fancy being able to plank for an Ironman distance race (semi-pink). Frodo's looks the cleanest to me, but I'm not educated about bike fits so I'm going off good ol' fashioned eyeballs aka 'if it looks fast, it probably is'

Are Frodo and Sebi riding different wheels - they appear to be the same custom tubeless not consumer available 858s, but they are not called the same thing in the article . . . I was wondering if there is a difference.

---

David
* Ironman for Life! (Blog) * IM Everyday Hero Video * Daggett Shuler Law *
Disclaimer: I have personal and professional relationships with many athletes, vendors, and organizations in the triathlon world.

Dan partly answered this on the frontpage:

[..] but as to the wheels, yes, sebi and jan used the same wheels. note that those wheels are not tubeless ready. note that both ride tubeless tires. whattup? those are not the zipp 858s available to you and me.

in almost all cases what we got was what we were sent by the athlete. and we presented it almost always that way. it is a monumental undertaking to get all of this info. you'd think it would be easy. but getting 30 athletes to respond is not easy and last year we through our hands up and set screw it because we just couldn't get them to respond.

mind, those who respond first, always and every year, are those who finish highest. jan. sebi. they're real pros. those who are hard to chase down are those who aren't near the top. that said, we got everyone's info. tim did. so, if tim didn't translate onto a common set of height/weight metrics, it wasn't out of a lack of attention to detail; but to exhaustion.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

why do you think it's an error? why do you think it's not an xl?

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

zipp 404 and 808 are tubeless ready. zipp 858 and 454 are not. yet both these guys - and brownlee i believe - are riding 858 w/tubeless. my understanding is that these are prototype wheels. so, do not put tubeless tires on your 858s.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

canyon doesn't seem to offer an XL on it's site (in Europe at least). Just S, M and L. Given Jans lenght you'd expect an XL though.

Exactly, only the budget bikes comes in xl not the highend ones

they clearly make XL frames. but the largest i see is L in the 9.0 SLX. however, i see it in the 8.0. the non-front-end-integrated bikes. so, 1 of 2 things is going on here. either there's an XL made for jan they're not making for the rest of us, or jan is simply mistaken about the bike size.

there is however this possibility. the L in the SLX has, actually a shorter frame reach (by 3mm) than the XL in the 8.0. 458mm to 455mm. so, the L in the SLX is, basically, the XL in the other bikes' sizing, lengthwise. but it's only that way in the length, not the height. the XL in the 8.0 is much taller than the L in the SLX. however, the custom front end in the SLX allows for a fair bit of messing around with pad heights.

i'll check. i'll ask. perhaps there was a special size made for jan. otherwise, my guess is that it's the L.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

So I'm same height as wurf and ride 58. Is he trolling us with 52?. What's up with these s-m-l Walmart bike sizes being used?

52 is the 2nd largest size for the Bolide TR+, roughly equivalent to a size M P3X. The sizing choice is congruent with the aerodynamic philosophy that has come out of the British Olympic/Sky program(s) which prioritizes separation of the base bar from the extensions.
FWIW, largest size Bolide isn't a heck of a lot larger, fit-wise.


I think you inadvertently showed exactly why these sizing conventions are being used! 52 is the second largest size they make in this bike... would you have asked your question (above) if they had called the bike a "large"?

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

Kienle wouldn't look out of place at the UK 25 mile championships. Everyone else looks like they have work to do.

It would be interesting to see someone with a distance TT background come up through someone like Bottrill's UK coaching for Tri. I know you still have to swim and run, but the UK 100 mile record is a 3:13. That's would be almost an hour head start on a lot of the competition.

Exactly, the high end ones only go to L while the lower end non integrated are made in XL.

History shows that individual specialists can do well but rarely get near the best all round triathlete. The GB 100 TT champs is almost always on a drag strip and traffic assisted. 3.13 for 100 on a dual carriageway is probably similar but no better to 112 miles on the big island in 4.15 or so. Don’t under estimate just how quick these top guys (and ladies) are.

I would have assumed large is 56-60. So thats where the sml sizing system is flawed, too much variation. It only is good for walmart bikes where everything is quick release adjustable, like the seat which is easily stolen

What, exactly, do you mean by a "56-60"?

Check out the geometry chart for the Cervelo p3; do you see the number "56" anywhere on the chart for the "size 56" frame, other than the name they assign to it? By any rational system, that frame is a 54... heck, it's even a "square" 54 by traditional reckoning, with top tube and seat tube length both being 54cm.
Problem, of course, is that if you ride a road bike in size 56 you probably want the size 54 in this bike, so even though there's no 56 measurement to be found anywhere on the bike, it gets called a 56.

The 54 Cervelo is - of course - a 52 if you measure it, and that's the equivalent frame size to the Pinarello 52 in question. Which actually uses a number you can derive from *measuring* the darn thing as a size designation..

FWIW, Cervelo don't even make a bike you'll find a "60" measurement on, the frame they call a 61 - and that's an XL by anyone's reasonable nomenclature - only goes to 588 in stack.

As someone who deals with this bike geometry stuff for a living (appeal to authority fallacy or not!) I really wish that manufacturers would use numbers that actually exist on the frame to indicate sizing, or just cop to the semi-arbitrariness of sizing shorthand by going with "small, med, L, etc." It's not that S/M/L are particularly useful or sufficient to actually size a tri bike correctly, it's that they don't present the illusion of being sufficient to size a bike correctly. As it stands now, calling something a "58" is pretty much meaningless. Let's get really specific, though... you say you ride a 58; what brand/model is that 58?

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

Are you surprised that most pros were riding an 808 or equivalent front? I seem to recall Wurf talking about front wheel last year and he was adamant that a 303 or equivalent was the best option. I would think that with the wind guys would have switched to at least a 404/454.

as i recall maybe baekkegaard was the only one riding anything shallower than 60mm. maybe potts. everyone else was riding 60mm or more in the front, and only 2 or 3 guys were even riding 60 or 65 wurf one of them. most were riding enve 7.8, hed 8, bontrager, somebody's 80mm rims. and it was windy. so, it's hard to imagine anybody not riding 80s 0n the front. but when i ride out there with 80s on the front, i can't do it. i can do it, but i can do it and have fun.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

2014 felt b16
1995 fuji roubaix

The Roubaix is so old I'm not even going to try to look it up, but let's look at the Felt.

That bike has a stack and reach of 547/449. If it were a conventional road bike, that would equate to a size 54/55 road bike, and it's roughly equivalent to the Pinarello in size 55, which is 543/424.

Funny enough, though, if you look at the size chart for the Felt, you will see that the number "58" does actually appear in the size chart. If you measure the seat tube length, center to top of the seat clamp, you get 58... but this is with an extended seat tube and down-sloping top tube, which puts that "top" measurement 2.5 c above the stack measurement. The top tube of this bike is *also* 58c long... but that's with a 76 degree seat tube angle.

Here's the really interesting thing... the current versions of the Felt "B" series bikes fit very differently from what you are on now. A current B14 in size 58 is 573/436. That's almost 3c more stack, and 1.5c less reach. If you are slammed on your current bike, you'd need to go down to... wait for it... a size 54 to hit the stack number of your current bike. That bike has S/R of 535/405.

The Pinarello that Wurf rides, in size 52, has s/r of 530/405. It is, for all intents and purposes, the exact same size as the current "B" model Felt in size 54.

---

Tech writer/support on this here site. FIST school instructor and certified bike fitter. Formerly at Diamondback Bikes, LeMond Fitness, FSA, TiCycles, etc.
Coaching and bike fit - http://source-e.net/ Cyclocross blog - https://crosssports.net/ BJJ instruction - https://ballardbjj.com/

well good thing i havent purchased any new bikes. why cant the industry stick to standards (other than wheels)