Timeline for Are bikes with aggressive positions required to achieve high fitness levels when training on a bike?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:52 | comment | added | ojs | I don't understand how this is related to anything I wrote. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:33 | comment | added | Rider_X | @ojs My perspective is very different as I found changing the bike simply re-enforced bad posture and bad biomechanics. What I viewed as "comfortable" was really about reinforcing my bad postural habits. Over the last 3 years I have been retraining posture and carefully assessing my biomechanics. I have gained an inch on my reach over my 20 year-old self and I can feel my core being more engaged. I think my power may be up too, but that is hard to assess given I never measured it in my 20s. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:26 | history | edited | Rider_X | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1014 characters in body
|
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:23 | comment | added | ojs | @Rider_X of course. I was assuming that this was about fitting a bike to a person and didn't think about changing the rider. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:19 | comment | added | Rider_X | @ojs My opinion is that optimal saddle setback really depends on biomechanics. For example, a shorter femur rider would want less setback than someone with longer femers. It have also found that hip angle also affects this dimension as well, where hip angle is in turn affected by a number of additional factors (saddle profile, saddle tilt and core strength/flexibility). Hip angle also affects glute recruitment, which can subtly impact power. I don't think there are any easy answers. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:13 | comment | added | Rider_X | @AndrewHenle counter balancing 64 lbs of force for an hour is non-trivial. On a fast club ride my hour average is about 325 watts, so I would be countering slightly more force. A lower body position provides a useful counter weight in this situation. At a lower power (e.g., under 200W) I agree that there is little to resist and why a higher body position is far more sensible. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:12 | comment | added | ojs | @Han-Lin moving saddle backwards moves your center of gravity backwards, so you need to pull more. Which exact muscles you use to generate the torque does not matter. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 19:04 | comment | added | Brian | What if we increase the saddle setback? Wouldn't there be less need to hold the handlebar tightly at high power outputs since the hamstrings are recruited more? | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 18:03 | comment | added | Andrew Henle | BUT The best approach is probably first to focus on just riding what ever you have, there is probably a big fit window you can explore with your existing bike. This. A thousand times this. You need to ride a lot to know enough about how you want to ride to start fiddling with the finer points of how your bike fits. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 18:01 | comment | added | Andrew Henle | (cont) Even if you double the peak force, you have to pretty strong and be mashing at a low cadence and quite a high power level to be pushing hard enough against the pedals in a pure aerobic effort to get much help from gravity. Gravity doesn't "help" because all the energy to move the bike still has to come from the rider. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 18:01 | comment | added | Andrew Henle | Under sustained higher outputs you will find that you will naturally want to lower your body trunk so you can use gravity to resist each pedal stroke rather than just core musculature. Not really. It takes about 50 N-m of torque at 60 rpm to generate 300W or so. Assuming 175 mm crank arms, that's a constant 286 N, or 64 lbs of force. At 90 RPM that drops to a mere 40 lbs of force. Under 200W at 90 rpm would be getting under 25 lbs of force. | |
| Oct 30, 2018 at 17:47 | history | answered | Rider_X | CC BY-SA 4.0 |