There are some really boring threads on the front page right now where cycling scientists are arguing about aero wheels that are two or three watts apart in terms of performance. I can't even understand what these guys are saying, it's that obtuse. Yet I had to go to the 6th page on ST to find a thread with the word "saddle" in the subject. The search for "wheel" rendered 8+ threads in as many pages.
My contention is as follows: your most important piece of equipment in triathlon, by far, is unquestionably your saddle. rappstar made this statement some years ago and it has stuck with me ever since, even as I have not learned how true it is until recently.
I contend that this single piece of equipment, properly configured, can mean 30 watts in terms of performance, which is 10x or 15x the delta between Zipp and Yolo, or Enve and Flo, or whatever.
But to believe my contention, you must accept the following as axiomatic: the rotation of the hips (on a time trial bike), which is a function that is critically dependent on the part under your ass, has a causal relationship to power production and aero that is unsurpassed by any other component on the bike. Who vouches for that statement? I do.
My contention is as follows: your most important piece of equipment in triathlon, by far, is unquestionably your saddle. rappstar made this statement some years ago and it has stuck with me ever since, even as I have not learned how true it is until recently.
I contend that this single piece of equipment, properly configured, can mean 30 watts in terms of performance, which is 10x or 15x the delta between Zipp and Yolo, or Enve and Flo, or whatever.
But to believe my contention, you must accept the following as axiomatic: the rotation of the hips (on a time trial bike), which is a function that is critically dependent on the part under your ass, has a causal relationship to power production and aero that is unsurpassed by any other component on the bike. Who vouches for that statement? I do.