Question from a p5 (11 years old) rider who just ordered a ku tf1:
Are generally the bikes not configurable such that you can achieve exactly the same body position on two different brand bikes ? (of course assuming you have basic frame sizes suitable to your body dimensions).
I’m looking forward to my new bike. Ku wants a fitting before the frame is made, and the resulting body position is quite different from the one I have on my P5 (which I configured myself without any fitter)
I often ride the same course with a power meter, and am already very curious how the power and Ø speed on that course will be with the Ku. Difficult to compare maybe because I have a power2max on my current bike and will have a sram pm on the Ku.
IMO my Ku is more adjustable than my old Felt, but that probably has more to do with the specific aerobars.
It’s odd that a bike fitter would put you in a position much different than your current position. TBH i’d try out that position on your current bike before ordering a new expensive bike bespoke to the new position. Or at the very least order a frame sizing that gives you the option of reverting to your current position. (Assuming your current position isn’t something terrible, which since you’re buying a fancy new bike I’ll assume it’s not).
Ku is a very good tri bike but it’s not a magic bullet. One of their greatest assets is the customized frame sizing, which allows you to go more outside-the-box in terms of position. I was able to slap a massive reach onto my smaller bike that’s impossible with any normal tri frame (this may be changing, slowly).
It’s hard to gat A vs. B testing data on youself unless you take two bikes to velodrome and get all coordinates exactly lined up. Generally Ku comes out faster, how much of that is due to intrinsic design and how much is due to positional changes is up for debate. If Trek made you visit a bike fitter and do aero testing then their bikes would probably be in a similar spot.
All said, it’s a good company who makes good bikes. Even if the frame specific aero is the same I’d rather send my money to a small startup like Ku than a shareholder-driven value extractor like Trek.
Thanks for your insightful answer.
I do not regret that I accepted the difference in position with my present one, as a matter of fact I look forward to it.
My present position is rather low, but I noticed that the power I can exert in aero is a lot lower than when I get upright.
The position the fitter gave me is more modern, higher, as seen on most of these pictures:
Only Sanders’ position in those pictures looks a bit like mine now.
The fitter talked about “increasing the hip angle” which makes sense to me. Advising a somewhat smaller cranklength also makes sense in this respect.
Your position looks pretty good but also falls in line with the standard triathlon thing where it’s set up a lot like a road bike with clip ons. The fitter is 100% on the right track with hip position.
I like to imagine tri/TT fit as taking a road bike hoods/drops position and rotating it forward around the bottom bracket. So your hips move from 1:00 to 12:00, shoulders move from 11:00 to 10:15. The actual angles should stay roughly the same, it’s all just rotated forward.
A lot of people see the low position and try to emulate that by lowering their bars with no other changes, leading to a less than ideal hip extension angle (closed, as some might say). Rotating forward places a lot of weight on your shoulders/front end, but that’s more easily trainable than pedaling with an acute hip angle.
The new position looks better in the hips but very upright, it may be an illusion of your head angle tho.
Yes the picture on the fitter machine was made when I put my head upright sighting, and I remember when the picture on the p5 was made (during a race) I noticed the photographer and put quickly my head down (but like that I cannot see the road).
What is in line with your remark about rotating the body around the bb is that the fit ended up with a saddle angle of -6°. I always used to just have the saddle horizontally
Your saddle height looks on the very high end of the spectrum looking how extended your leg is. Did you do the fit already in mind with buying the Ku through one of their fitters? Or did you decide to buy this model after your bike fit? The reason I ask if it was specifically done with that bike in mind it is weird that the fitter not put on either the Zipp extensions or the FastTT extensions to make sure all details are dialed in perfect.
I also feel you are lacking some reach. Did you tried more reach but went back because it was less comfortable? Especially when you go the ‘modern’ position route. That position is higher and at the same not. Because what you go up also comes down again because of the extra reach. And that measurement you want to have perfect on that bike. You are higher now but look likes you are lacking enough reach.
It varies a fair bit. The design philosophy of the bike is definitely to put more frame under a rider than with most brands, so the high top tube is a feature not a bug. At the final design stage, post fit, there are different frame options that determine just how much margin for adjustment there is, and it would certainly be possible to run into problems here if you were pushing up against the edge of the fit envelope for a given frame module size.
IME with KU/Richard, they’re pretty darn on top of this (I’m a Ku fit provider, just fwiw).
Could be, can’t tell without all the other data and how it in the end will be designed. By design you can say that the longer the bike becomes the higher the top tube comes up. With the Ku you want to do the fit with the Zipp extensions or with the FastTT to have dialed in those details perfectly and in the end get your bike so that your armpads have some space to go up or down.
But this saddle height is very high, looks like at least 10 mm
co-sign on the importance of fitting the KU with the bars (and saddle, and crank length) you’re going to use with the final product. Both the Zipp and FastTT bars are a wee bit idiosyncratic in the way fit coordinates line up.
Yes I measured my saddle is on the fitting machine about 2 cm higher as on my current setup, which I found a bit strange too. Anyway, I do not panic because the bike should be adjustable enough. Maybe my saddle is also too low at the moment. I never went to a fitter before: I made the current setup seen on the picture myself.
To answer another question: this was the initial fitting from which the results are used for the manufacture of the tf1.
What the cockpit is concerned you might be right, I do not know if the position on the Retül machine can’t exactly be achieved by the zipp vuka shift extensions. We’ll see.
Looking at how extended your leg is I would certainly change that in the fit report to how your bike is built. In that Ku the seatpost it is easier to go up then to go down by design.
And your fitter put you up to high for sure.
But I don’t think your saddle was too low on your current bike at all so if you go lower in your saddle back to what you used on current bike it means the rest of your data is also incorrect and should be changed.
The fact that weren’t’ given the opportunity to have the set up immediately right with either the Zipp Vuka’s or the FastTT is just laziness from the fitter or they were just to lazy to invest in the bars. You are buying a great bike for a significant amount of money so better make sure the details are all correct. It is much less adjustable then you are thinking right now. For that kind of money spend you want nothing less then to feel the right extensions, get all the coordinates right and know you like in fit and feel what you are buying.
Go back to the fitter, and check saddle height again, or you can set up the measured saddle height on your current bike and ride it fir a few times, you will not like it. No doubt.
Dial in how it should be with saddle height correct, right type off extensions, right reach and get the new form with data to Ku so your dream bike will not become a nightmare……
