Don't want the expense of a bike fit.

[Drago]

I can't quickly find a link but the one I've been fitted with is the Shimano Bike Fit system. The blurb states this covers all disciplines. Having sat on one I can believe this.

I'm skeptical myself. How can the comfort required for an all day long distance open road event be compatible with the efficiency required with a sprint or time trial set up? They are, to some degree as I discovered first hand, mutually exclusive.

I have learned over the years from PT, physio and bike fit is professionals with a holistic approach will give one a far better result.

Quite possibly so. Sadly, many bike fit systems do not do so, preferring to prioritise efficiency or performance. As aforementioned, some bike fit systems are vague to the point of mystery as to their actual mission statement (beyond parting people from their money, of course.)

So shimano talk a good fighter here, which is a promising start. Are you able to explain to us how they reconcile comfort with performance, and how they accommodate competing and contradticory requirements of different styles of riding and types of usage in a single system?

 

[PaulSB]

I'm skeptical myself. How can the comfort required for an all day long distance open road event be compatible with the efficiency required with a sprint or time trial set up? They are, to some degree as I discovered first hand, mutually exclusive.

Clearly the two requirements are very different. This is why it is the rider's responsibility to communicate his/her objectives. I wouldn't expect the two set ups to be compatible or perhaps even similar. I feel a rider who does is not understanding the significant difference between the two styles. The other key factor is the bike. If I asked my bike fitter to set me up on a TT bike for a 120 mile day out he'd probably question my sanity. I'm an old bloke who likes to ride all day, I buy bikes and set them up to accommodate this. I don't buy TT bikes. I'm sure you would acknowledge that in any field a specialist machine will always out perform one that, in every sense, is a Jack of All Trades.

I have a buddy who TTs and audaxes. He doesn't audax on his TT bike.

Quite possibly so. Sadly, many bike fit systems do not do so, preferring to prioritise efficiency or performance. As aforementioned, some bike fit systems are vague to the point of mystery as to their actual mission statement (beyond parting people from their money, of course.)

You previously referred to the systems "mission statement" and again mention what the system prioritises. In my view it isn't about the system mission statement - can a system have such a thing? - but the professional's mission statement. If that is acceptable to the rider than he/she has to place faith in the fitter to use the correct equipment.

So shimano talk a good fighter here, which is a promising start. Are you able to explain to us how they reconcile comfort with performance, and how they accommodate competing and contradticory requirements of different styles of riding and types of usage in a single system?

You know the answer to this. No, I can't. I'm not sure Shimano make such a claim. What I can say is the jig I sat on makes numerous micro adjustments to every component associated with bike fit.. It is the fitter's skill in interpreting the rider's objectives to use those multiple adjustments to produce a fit appropriate to the rider, his/her objectives and the bike.

At my most recent fit we started with cleats and shoes and worked upwards to cover everything. I do mean everything. I would never have imagined a slight adjustment to the angle of the hoods would place my arms in their natural position thus eliminating the muscular work needed to hold my arms in a natural position. My previous hood position turned my arms out and I had to use arm muscles to turn them to their natural position! All of this is about much more than saddle height or elbow and finger tip.

 

[Happy_Days]

But which bike fit? Which system?

In my experience, the fitter’s expertise—not the bike fit system—is what counts. As in many things, the craftsman matters, not the tool they use.

I have tried more than one bike fitter and strongly recommend seeking out one significant experience of working with professional riders.

How can the comfort required for an all day long distance open road event be compatible with the efficiency required with a sprint or time trial set up? They are, to some degree as I discovered first hand, mutually exclusive.

A good bike fitter should discuss the balance between comfort and performance with you. It’s a two-way discussion to achieve your individual fit.

For example, I wanted a fit would be comfortable for long rides and minimise injury risk, yet work for triathlon.

My bike fit delivered all of this, but only because of my fitter’s expertise and the discussion about what to prioritise. For instance, I prioritised power over aero (my individual biomechanics mean that I lose power in a very aero position). But I could have discussed different priorities with my fitter.

In contrast, the previous fitter I tried couldn’t deliver a bike setup that was pain-free. It’s the fitter’s expertise that counts.

 

[Drago]

A good bike fitter should discuss the balance between comfort and performance with you.

Ah, and theres the rub.

One has to know that theyve found a good fitter, and one then has to know that the system they use is able to reach a such a workable compromise.

So we'll assume for one moment thats all good, how do we knkw their system is better of worse than A.N.Other system which differs, or may even contradict, in matters of detail.

Which of these competing models is correct? They can't all be.

A lot of stars habe to align correctly here, and we don't even know we have the correct stars. You can see why there is so much skepticism, and why at the highest levels there is less store placed on these than Joe Public seems willing to bestow upon them.

 

[Happy_Days]

I understand the skepticism, as I’ve had bike fits at both ends of the expertise spectrum—useless and priceless.

One has to know that theyve found a good fitter, and one then has to know that the system they use is able to reach a such a workable compromise.

Ignore the system/model. It’s merely a tool. If I were hiring a builder, I wouldn’t worry about whether their tools were Makita or Bosch. I’d instead be concerned about their expertise and track record. Similarly, it’s the craftsman who matters in bike fitting.

I recommend focusing on the fitter’s expertise. How much experience do they have with professional riders? Have they ever worked with a pro team? Alternatively, are they a physiotherapist who offers bike fitting? Etc.

 

[PaulSB]

I believe the "elbow to finger tip" rule can be an either/or:

outstretched fingertips should just touch the centre of the handlebar where it is clamped by the stem (or reach the stem's top cap).

Out of interest I checked my three bikes each set up by the same fitter on the same jig on the same day:

Bike #1
Centre of clamp 2.5cm short
Top cap 5cm over

Bike #2
Centre of clamp 4cm short
Top cap 6cm over

Bike #3
Centre of clamp 0.5cm short
Top cap - spot on

I'm happy to accept this traditional approach was largely accurate when Bike design was very similar across many manufacturers. Today there are so many variables such a rule of thumb is unlikely to be accurate.

Alternatively my bike fitter doesn't know his job or his equipment.

 

[cyberknight]

I believe the "elbow to finger tip" rule can be an either/or:

outstretched fingertips should just touch the centre of the handlebar where it is clamped by the stem (or reach the stem's top cap).

Out of interest I checked my three bikes each set up by the same fitter on the same jig on the same day:

Bike #1
Centre of clamp 2.5cm short
Top cap 5cm over

Bike #2
Centre of clamp 4cm short
Top cap 6cm over

Bike #3
Centre of clamp 0.5cm short
Top cap - spot on

I'm happy to accept this traditional approach was largely accurate when Bike design was very similar across many manufacturers. Today there are so many variables such a rule of thumb is unlikely to be accurate.

Alternatively my bike fitter doesn't know his job or his equipment.

you have to factor in reach of the bars too as some are shorter than others , all of my bikes are set up so the tip of saddle to the base of the shifter using the same width bars are all set the same but have varying stem lengths to alter the reach even though the top tubes are all the same .

 

[bulldoze]

I tried a bike fit with Chat-GPT yesterday.

Took photos at the 3 o clock position and at full extension. I did this twice, one with the saddle purposely too high and forward and then where I normally have it set. It was surprisingly accurate and identified that the first setting was incorrect and also why.

It is telling me that my saddle and pedals are good to go but that my hoods are too far forward and suggested that I should look at changing my handlebars for shorter reach and setting the hoods further back and this does seem accurate to me as my arms are too straight on the hoods.

I was fascinated to learn how it did it as a previous attempt last year was largely hallucinations. This time it asked for more than one photo and split the picture into a grid and mapped joint and limb angles to contact points. It then asked me for a video of me cycling on a stationary stand and also one of me from the front to assess knee tracking but I do not have that equipment.

These tools get smarter every month so I would interested to see how it works for others.

 

[Happy_Days]

I tried a bike fit with Chat-GPT yesterday.

AI gets smarter and smarter!

If I were seeing someone similar today, I’d plump for Phil Burt’s remote bike fit service because of his Team GB and World Tour experience. But who knows how tomorrow’s ChatGPT will compare?

 

[MontyVeda]

As the years have gone by, my stems have got gradually shorter and higher.