I am really surprised the bike fitting/aero testing combination is so rare. If these articles ever start again, I hope they add the other dimension to the discussion.

I have been to multiple fitters (some quite reputable) and have seen many aero testers.

A competent combination of the two is REALLY rare and should be shared.

Well, I've been FIST certified since 2007 and traveling to the A2 tunnel for the last few years. I've got a January opening at the tunnel.

I no longer conduct daily fits. I have someone else conduct those. I offer one service which is a combination of fit and aero test. Here’s what I posted in another thread…

I’ve come to believe that if you’re a competitive cyclist or triathlete, you should be quantifying every change you make while riding in the real world. We have the tech to do so, and it’s time to push bike fit out of the static environment of the fit studio. I’m working on some new tech to further move this along.

Other than that, I’m working on product design, a comprehensive bike fit program for the American Physical Therapy Association, and have partnered with USC to create a High Performance Center, which launches next week at the US Olympic Training Site here in LA. This is my “retirement” I guess. Oh, and other business interests outside of the world of cycling that afford me the freedom for all of the above.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

That's sounds better than "he's basically retired" which is what the grapevine told me. Thanks.

Was just looking at your site and was going to schedule your real life aero for service

Do you only do that in CA or do you ever go to your PA location?

FL to PA on the way to NY I could see doing

FL to CA only for this would be a stretch

Thanks

Nice to be remembered!

Being a part of that series was extremely complimentary and I can’t thank Dan enough for it. There are dozens of truly fantastic fitters out there grinding, including yourself (Dave Luscan, for those of you on the east coast looking for a truly world class bike fit) who would have certainly been profiled had it continued.

Truth is, I was never as good as either Jim Manton or Jonathan Blyer when it came to the science and nuance of bike fit. Those guys are in that category with Steinmetz and Ian Murray and Phil Casanta and Todd Carver and JT Lyons and Paraic McGlynn and so many others I learned so much from over the years - each well beyond me even at my very best.

Of course, we were all novices compared to Empfield and John Cobb and the so many others who were the real pioneers (but so willing to share what they figured out so we could stand on their shoulders).

My parlor trick was I just had a quick eye. I did lots and lots and lots of retail fits for regular, everyday people. It also really helped me that I I was willing to show my work - it got attention but also kept me focused on doing my best in each fit.

As for ending my career as a fitter, I just had my fill. I’m happily working again in software management at a software startup and being a dad to three little ones. I’m in the Amarillo area these days, as the work from home world lets us live closer to extended family and further away from the concrete jungle.

One of my employees, Tommy Johnson, is still fitting regularly in the DFW area and has undoubtedly passed whatever skill I had a long time ago.

Keep fighting the good fight, Luscan. You’re one of the best in the world at what you do.

---

Trent Nix
Owned and operated Tri Shop
F.I.S.T. Advanced Certified Fitter | Retul Master Certified Fitter (back when those were things)

Well, I know where they start...

---

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/

Can you describe how you incorporate the aero component into your fitting ?

The first thing I do is simply perform an excellent aerobar fit, almost completely adhering to the FIST principles. I do quite a bit of work with crank length which isn't really a FIST protocol. The highest praise I could give myself after that bike fit would be "There is nothing else I can change on this that we wouldn't need a wind tunnel (or other protocol) to know if it was an improvement. So yes, I have some confidence in my eyeball wind tunnel. I am going for a fairly flat back and fairly narrow elbows, but I never compromise on power during a fit. I know wind is funny, so I try not to split hairs too much.

After we have that great position with established fundamentals (saddle height, setback, reach, drop), we figure out what details are on the table for the tunnel. Elbow width, forearm angle, maybe a little more or less reach. A driving principle is not to go to the tunnel to set a position. We go to the tunnel for the details. We use the bike fit and follow ups to generate a priority of testing list. Helmets, clothing, nutrition storage options, and a few positional things. I always would want to know angled or flat on the forearms. Always curious how a little more reach changes things. That's basically it.

I've fit a lot of riders who have later went to the tunnel and found very little positional gains. Justin Lippert spent hours in the Specialized tunnel after our fit and they squeezed exactly ZERO improvement out of the position I gave him. And yeah wind is funny, and I'm probably not perfect all the time. I do understand enough about what makes a position powerful, comfortable, and aero, that a fit followed by a tunnel session is probably not a waste of time or money.

Thanks. You are one of the few mixing the art and science

It's kind of what I saw between a fitter and aero tester. Of course it could be the same person

Maybe an over simplification but the fitter did seat height, fore-aft, crank length (although not usually a big deal). Kind of like your first paragraph, many of your "fundamentals", maybe minus reach and drop.

Let's say you established a "base position" using the eyeball wind tunnel.

Then the fitter provided a "range" and/or permutations/combination he wanted aero tested for the rest. Stack was a big one. (Lowest was rarely an advantage). Reach and forearm angle ranges were tried. Also a few head positions such as a shrug, turtle and where they would sight. And lots of subjective information was collected based on real riding. I think this was critical.

Rarely is the "base position" fastest/faster.

The final fit was based on the data. I don't know all the 'magic' but felt that tilt, pad width ....were more the building blocks to get the head and other in the right position.

In his case a change in helmet was not an option and comfort was negotiable due to "shorter" distance. I am guessing a helmet could complement the fit rather than the other way around. Different "subjective information" would be used if comfort was more critical.

Fit was fianlized wit the results of the various tests and subjective information.

I think it's a mistake to entirely drive a fit on the aero data. One would have to be very conscious of the quality of the data which some are not necessarily. We are still early in collecting truly actionable aero data. But I struggle to see how 'high performance fitting' can be done without an aero component moving forward.

Agreed with the need to combine fit with aero testing - the future is combining aero data, on-bike biomechanical analysis, and real-time metabolic measurement, with most of the optimization happening in real-world conditions. Though that sort of depth is not necessary for everyone. I do believe more field work, less static in-studio work, is necessary. For that, we'll need to get the necessary tech into the hands of those willing to learn how to use it, and at a price that provides a good ROI.

I find the state of bike fit in North America to be very stale at the moment. Technology has not progressed, education is lacking, and there's clearly a disconnect between what's being taught (which is a good base) and how those lessons are put into practice. Go to any triathlon and the evidence of this is quite clear. I see little in the way of furthering the development of positioning coming out of North America. There's some, but not much. Most of that is being done in Europe. I'm not sure what the definition of "elite" fitter is. I see a lot of folks trying to convince others they're one I know that. I always think the elite fitters are the ones pushing the science and art of human motion forward. Those guys and gals (we need more women in this area!) are the ones that inspire me.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

I do quite a bit of work with crank length which isn't really a FIST protocol.//

Good discussion Dave, but we absolutely have been preaching shorter cranks around here, and pretty sure we were the first over a decade ago. In fact, Dans conversations with many of the bike makers are what got some of them to spec their Tri bikes with shorter cranks, and that was no small feat. They loathe changing anything, and it took years and years for some of them to finally get it.


So yes it is in the teachings here, not sure what you mean by protocol? It is a very big reason that we insist on using a dynamic fit bike, one that you can change the crank lengths at will and quickly..All the aero stuff is quite interesting too, changing the whole fit dynamic for those that can take advantage of it. I find it sort of funny though, I look at some very optimized positions now, and I see them very similar to a lot of what we used to ride at the birth of the Tri bike position. The industry got off of it for various reasons, most of which did not have fit in mind, and now coming back full circle..Good stuff..

How much of it is people simply not seeing the value or at least not be willing to shell out their hard earned money ?

I am amazed how much people are willing to invest in training time and equipment but shy away from any type of services to optimize their time and investment.

I think that's a great point. I do believe we need to educate the consumer that the best bang for their buck when it comes to gaining performance on the bike is investing in their position, both time and money. Does it give you something shiny and new to put on your bike? Not necessarily, but the typical gains are so much greater. I don't believe we're telling that story well enough. But, then again, how many fitters are willing, or capable, of providing a service that's worth the price they charge? How many are willing to invest in the equipment to quantify the changes they're making? What equipment out there is even worth investing in for them?

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Yes, but it's like the fashion industry...what's old is new again, just better. Tilted forearms for instance. I get credited for starting that, but I didn't start anything, I just brought it back. We do it better now than "back in the day" and it continues to evolve, but it's how aerobars were first used. The whole idea was to emulate the position of a downhill skier.

Here's a fun question for the likely very few paying attention to this thread. There was one singular event that made people go to a forearm position with the forearms parallel to the ground instead of the hands being higher than the elbows. Can anyone identify it?

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

I don't know if it was cause or effect - don't know the details of rule progression off the top of my head - but Big Mig I think started the World Tour trend towards not just parallel, but even hands below elbows.

The singular event might have been the rules aimed at Obree, et al, which Big Mig then had to pretzel his body around?

Here's a fun question for the likely very few paying attention to this thread. There was one singular event that made people go to a forearm position with the forearms parallel to the ground instead of the hands being higher than the elbows. Can anyone identify it?



This is probably not what you are looking for, but I remember when Ullrich was battling Lance in the tour, and he had this bars pointed down position. From around that point, bike racers all did this, and then many triathletes too. The rationale was that you got more leverage on your pull up. And I would just tell them that if you need leverage, then probably in too big a gear. Use RPM's to speed up, not your arms to pull yourself through some big gear..What are you thinking was the event?

Miguel wasn't it. He wasn't being paid attention to by triathletes whose positions were already better evolved than pro cyclists in the 90's, though it was ironically a pro cyclist that changed it all. The UCI mandated parallel forearms in response to the mantis positions of Floyd Landis and Levi Leipheimer much later, maybe '08? I forget, but we immediately began cheating it.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

Bingo. That was the moment. Ullrich came to the Tour with his Walser TT bike and kicked the crap out of Lance in the long TT that year (60k, I believe?). Of course, he only did that because Lance bonked in the high heat, but it didn't matter because the most visually distinguishing piece on the bike was the straight sticks. Literally overnight people switched because they assumed that's why he won. We're all sheep.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

You realize it's because we're so fucking old that we remember all this, right?

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

And more recently we had Tony Martin go from flatter, to inclined, back to flatter while winning a few world TT championships along the way.

Oh hey Monty, good to "see" you. What I meant was, having being through FIST in 2008 and again in 2016, crank length was discussed the 2nd time, but at that point, it had not been integrated into the process in the same way as saddle height and drop. It was, as I recall, something like "yes, we should probably be putting riders on shorter cranks" but no clear thoughts on how to integrate and add as much of a dynamic element as possible to the choice.

I started going shorter back in 06-07, and again as I recall, it was in response to a post made on Slowtwitch by John Cobb. Always the tinkerer that guy, but what he said about it made perfect sense, and then I tried it on the bike and it was like bingo! I was on this site reading the fitting articles from about the same time, and when I went to FIST the 1st time, I already had a good grasp of the process, and I was already on 165s and trying to find 160s to fit my P3SL.

My point being, I meant no disrespect. I'm a FIST fitter and hope to be back for my 3rd soiree in the spring class. I wrote Dan a lengthy unsolicited email about the integration of crank length selection in the FIST dynamic process. Hope to hear back from him about that as well. And I could just be ignorant, having not been out your way in over 6 years. Peace out.

Here's a fun one that more people should know. What triathlete simultaneously brought the tilted forearms (back) and sleeved tri suits to the masses? He wasn't the first to use either, by the way.

---

Jim Manton / ERO Sports

You realize it's because we're so fucking old that we remember all this, right? //

Yes we have seen them come and seen them go, and now full circle to the logic we figured out in the beginning. Now to be finally caught up to the science that can prove it. I'm still waiting for that science that said an aero helmet 2 feet long saves you 12 minutes in an ironman! (-;


I suppose I should answer right away on some of these historical questions, blew up the whole game before anyone had a chance!! Good stuff Jim..