I always wonder when people ask about which bike they should get and people chime in pick the one that fits. And by fit they are not talking about the correct size but rather the “correct” frame, as if one could fit better on a P3C and not a P2C, etc.
How does this aspect jibe with the fact that many pro triathletes and cyclists switch bike companies all the time with different geometries and seem to fit quite well and go quite fast.
Look at Norman, he was on the both a medium and large size Kuota, the kueen K, and now the scott. Other riders too have switched.
most pros are not going to have back issues, whine about comfort etc…
they are set up by professionals with the ability to change any thing they need (stems, cranks, aero bars, etc…)
most of the people doing tri’s are not flexible or powerful enough to get away with what the pro’s use and they’re more constrained by OEM equipment. So while it is possible to take a rider off of a Kalibur and put him on a P3C (or vice versa) and make it work, it takes more knowlegde and tweaking than most amatures have time or budget for.
The human body is flexible and adaptable so many people can fit on many different frames, that’s why I always tell people to buy a bike shop not a bike. I think you’ll find a bike you like in most every shop so pick the shop you like. That said, whenever I ride several bikes, one always just feels the best to me – don’t you notice the same thing-- and that’s the one I buy.
Any bike can be made to fit a person. Does not mean it is the best bike for that person. That is why Dan developed the stack and reach list from each mfg, and uses it in his FIST method of fitting. When you are a professional athlete, much of it comes down to sponsorship, and which company is offering the best deal. I would think that plays a large role it what bikes they decide to ride. I am sure the bike companies also have a certain amount of athletes they will sponsor too. Does not mean they are riding the bike that would be the best fit for them.
as if one could fit better on a P3C and not a P2C, etc.
These two frames are very different, and would only fit the same person with some rather non-optimally-sized added components.
It’s pretty simple, really. While I *could *ride just about any bike out there, there are bikes that **will **fit me better than others. But if you pay me enough I’ll ride anything.
The biggest difference between those two bikes in any one size is 1.5cm in stack and .5cm in reach. I wouldn’t call that “very different.” Is a .5cm longer stem considered a non-optimally sized component?
They are both very different from a Scott Plasma maybe, but not from each other.
The biggest difference between those two bikes in any one size is 1.5cm in stack and .5cm in reach. I wouldn’t call that “very different.” Is a .5cm longer stem considered a non-optimally sized component?
They are both very different from a Scott Plasma maybe, but not from each other.
And 2.7cm in top tube length, IIRC, making the P3C lower and that much longer. I had the choice between a P2SL and a P3SL, and it was clear that only the former would fit me.
If you showed up to work one day and they had a new chair for you, you would be upset (or maybe not) because you really liked your old one.
You go to work every day and you would tweek the height of the chair and the back rest and your body adapts, so eventually you would be just as productive in that new chair.
This must be what it is like to be a pro. Only their chairs are cool.
The biggest difference between those two bikes in any one size is 1.5cm in stack and .5cm in reach. I wouldn’t call that “very different.” Is a .5cm longer stem considered a non-optimally sized component?
They are both very different from a Scott Plasma maybe, but not from each other.
It’s probably enough to make a big difference, actually. When we put together ATH (Air Transportable hospitals) tents in the AF, they would cover several hundred square feet, and there was a TOTAL tolerance of +/- 6 inches. If you were more than six inches off over the whole layout, then doors wouldn’t match and there was no way to stretch/make them fit.
If you are optimally sized at one frame, and go to a different size frame, then you have to play with components to get the same fit, whether it’s stem, whatever. I think that’s what klehner is talking about.
Funny thing about pro cyclists, they have to use the bikes of whomever is paying them (usually; there’s the caveat of re-badged Walsers and the like uses by some teams in TTs). I remember seeing pics of riders on the now-defunct Wurth team, which was sponsored by BH bikes; BH had only managed to get one size of their HOT NEW frame to production, so the small guys were running -20 degree stubby stems and no seatpost at all, while the big guys had +20 degree 15cm stems and 18" of seatpost.
This by way of saying that for most pros, riding the bike you’re sponsored by is part of the job, and a way to pay the bills. Adapting fit and body to non-ideal sizes and geometries is part of that equation; if they’re paid enough most pros would ride just about anything, I think.
