The Trek SC is set up as low and as far as I can go with the Medium / Far stem. In the video and on the road I end up hanging on to the manual shifters to stretch out a bit. Judging by the position of my upper arms I think I could choke up a bit and not worry about it. Comfort wise I think I could go lower if I wanted to spend the bucks on the Low - Far stem. The saddle height looks OK to me and it matches the dimensions my fitter gave me before I bought the bike. The nose of the saddle is about 3cm behind the BB center.
I’m 67 but still pretty limber, I train about 7-9 hrs a week (approx 700Tss swim and bike) but the upside of my power increase is limited. FTP right now is around 170-175. I need to minimize my cda to get to 23 mph for an hour one way or another. So far the longest bike leg I’ve done in a race was 56 miles, most of them are Olympic or Sprint distance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyfFhG3V6rc
I do have a little bit of rock and roll in the hips, I didn’t have any resistance on the trainer when the video was made. I don’t think I do that when I’m under a normal load but I could redo it and see. The 155mm crank option is a bit expensive as it’s a Stages 2 side PM, I’d like to not go there if possible.
I’m not sure I agree that your saddle is too high, but it’s close. You get some ankle flexion at the bottom of your pedal stroke that keeps your knee angle looking good but might be you flexing to hit that saddle height (it could also just be your natural pedal motion). If you wanted to sort this out you would experiment with different heights and see what your ankle/knee extension does at those heights.
I doubt you have THAT much to gain from going lower/longer. Your helmet/back interaction is quite good already and it’s hard to say if lower would be better (nobody on this board will be able to tell you that, only the tunnel/testing will tell you that) and if it’s worth the likely loss in power/sustainability (over the short term).
Thanks for your input, I will do a new video with the trainer under load and wearing my race kit. For some reason my wife / videographer (of 34 years) no longer feels compelled to document my every attempt at fading glory but perhaps I can drag her downstairs for another attempt tomorrow. Stay tuned.
Just wanna say, at age 67, and still training 7-9 hrs per week to get as fast as possible, targeting 23 mph on the bike, and still being limber enough to get more aero on the bike = TOTAL WIN.
I hope I can be like you (but I doubt it - my ankle arthritis is almost certainly going to fell me before age 67…grrrr.)
Thanks for the kind words, I am definitely blessed with an obsessive trait or two and at least some athletically inclined DNA. Trouble is in my area of Florida there are a number of really fast old guys in the 65-69 bracket including the Aquabike 70.3 national champion. We were both in a little sprint race last weekend - he was doing the triathlon and I was doing the aquabike. I matched his swim time but he smoked me on the bike. I don’t like that. BTW my 175 watts got me to 22.5 mph for 40 minutes which is not too bad but I really think I can do better. I’m down to marginal gains, hence the plea for help.
I’m not sure I agree that your saddle is too high, but it’s close. You get some ankle flexion at the bottom of your pedal stroke that keeps your knee angle looking good but might be you flexing to hit that saddle height (it could also just be your natural pedal motion). If you wanted to sort this out you would experiment with different heights and see what your ankle/knee extension does at those heights.
I doubt you have THAT much to gain from going lower/longer. Your helmet/back interaction is quite good already and it’s hard to say if lower would be better (nobody on this board will be able to tell you that, only the tunnel/testing will tell you that) and if it’s worth the likely loss in power/sustainability (over the short term).
+1 to everything above.
Here’s a pic of the extension at 6:00. Knee angle looks good, but there is some toe pointing to keep from over-extending. I’d leave as-is though. Your upper body angles are textbook.
So after a costume change, a reversal of direction (had to zero out the headwinds) and a bit of load on the trainer (86 percent of FTP) I look pretty much the same. My back is not quite as relaxed as yesterday but I usually have to warm up and loosen up before I feel comfortable and I didn’t have that opportunity today. After I did the video I dropped the saddle by 5mm because, well this is Slowtwitch. I’ll do a few rides with it and review it later.
Based on the recent race I did (22.5 mph at 172 watts) I’m guessing my cda is about .23 That’s better than a lot of AGers but I’m not sure if there’s any more low hanging fruit to get an improvement.
So after a costume change, a reversal of direction (had to zero out the headwinds) and a bit of load on the trainer (86 percent of FTP) I look pretty much the same. My back is not quite as relaxed as yesterday but I usually have to warm up and loosen up before I feel comfortable and I didn’t have that opportunity today. After I did the video I dropped the saddle by 5mm because, well this is Slowtwitch. I’ll do a few rides with it and review it later.
Based on the recent race I did (22.5 mph at 172 watts) I’m guessing my cda is about .23 That’s better than a lot of AGers but I’m not sure if there’s any more low hanging fruit to get an improvement.
I’m not a fitter, and you’ve got Trent’s feedback there, but that seems to be one of the best positions I’ve seen in a “critique my fit”. Never mind that you’re 67. You’ve basically won Slowtwitch.
agree. that’s a good one and i think the lower saddle is noticeable (in a good way).
Awesome! I win Best Director of a Fit Assistance Video, Best Aero Position and the Slowtwitch 10/01/2020 award! The bad news is that now the only way to get faster is to suffer a lot more, I can’t wait!
Full disclose to jkhayc, the second video doesn’t have the 5mm saddle drop, the difference is probably that I’m under load but I think that’s my que to leave it the f-ck alone.
155mm might fix your saddle height issue.
A shorter crank means higher saddle in relation to BB? Which means higher pads, which leads to greater frontal area?
agree. that’s a good one and i think the lower saddle is noticeable (in a good way).
Awesome! I win Best Director of a Fit Assistance Video, Best Aero Position and the Slowtwitch 10/01/2020 award! The bad news is that now the only way to get faster is to suffer a lot more, I can’t wait!
Full disclose to jkhayc, the second video doesn’t have the 5mm saddle drop, the difference is probably that I’m under load but I think that’s my que to leave it the f-ck alone.
Thank you everybody.
That sounds like you pulled a great fit trick on me.
Customer: I really feel like I could go a bit higher
Fitter: you think? It looks really good there
Customer: let’s try higher
Fitter: ok
(Fiddles with saddle but unbeknownst to customer leaves it at same height)
155mm might fix your saddle height issue. A shorter crank means higher saddle in relation to BB? Which means higher pads, which leads to greater frontal area?
Only if you raise the saddle.
I think Jim’s point was that he could switch to shorter cranks INSTEAD of lowering the saddle…to decrease the plantar-flexion at the bottom of the stroke.
155mm might fix your saddle height issue.
A shorter crank means higher saddle in relation to BB? Which means higher pads, which leads to greater frontal area?
Not necessarily. While you need to raise the saddle in order to keep the same leg extension, your hip angle is more open at the top. In many cases, you can keep the pad height the same, and end up with a lower upper body angle and still have a more open hip angle. Or even lower the front end and have the same hip angle that you started with (this was my result)…
155mm might fix your saddle height issue. A shorter crank means higher saddle in relation to BB? Which means higher pads, which leads to greater frontal area?
Only if you raise the saddle.
I think Jim’s point was that he could switch to shorter cranks INSTEAD of lowering the saddle…to decrease the plantar-flexion at the bottom of the stroke.
