versus a "normal" road frame geometry. I'm sure there are countless posts on variations of this question, but I'm interested in knowing a riders perspective of the benefits of a TT frame (for time trialing of course) vs. how they felt their position differed on a normal geometry road frame.
I've tweaked on my road frame as much as possible...seat forward, seat up, tilted down, in order to get as forward as possible but when I look at my posture, my position is still fairly upright and I'm guessing its the seatpost angle that places me back a few degrees. Has anyone made the switch from road geometry setup to a true TT frame and how did it change your position/time? :idea:

I noticed that I needed a steeper geometry doing hard intervals (using aero bars) where I kept scooting forward to a point where my saddle couldn't be moved further forward. You could of course find a forward bend seatpost but then you wouldn't have an excuse for buying a TT frame. Also, a normal frame may prevent you from getting your bars low enough. For TT setups you shouldn't be afraid to pay for a good fitting.

I've tweaked on my road frame as much as possible...seat forward, seat up, tilted down, in order to get as forward as possible but when I look at my posture, my position is still fairly upright and I'm guessing its the seatpost angle that places me back a few degrees.

You can simulate the steeper seat tube angle with a reversed post to get the saddle further forward.

You can simulate the steeper seat tube angle with a reversed post to get the saddle further forward.
That's why I keep a Control Tech SP around... for that stage race TT.

Haven't done any in a while, but having the SP means I don't 'need' a TT bike...

M

..... nothing if you don't get a professional fitting.

..... nothing if you don't get a professional fitting.


it is as though God himself has spoken. take your 21 posts and stick to dishing out
"advice" that actually helps people with questions, not redirects them toward the obvious. professional fits are to determine frame size...I know that...what I don't know and cannot know are changes in handling, rider position, and general likes/dislikes...

I'm inquiring to those people who have switched out standard frames for TT specific frames and what they experienced....I didn't ask for an LBS plug.

The biggest difference I have noticed is being able to hold a lower, more aero, comfy position. I can achieve almost the same low position on my road bike, but it is uncomforatble because my hip angle is so tight. The TT frame moves you more forward (steep seat angle and shorter top tube) over the bottom bracket and opens up the hip angle so you can breath better.

One thing to keep in mind though, is the UCI rule about the seat nose in relation to the bottom bracket. I believe that the rule is that your seat nose must by 5 cm behind the bottom bracket (sometimes called "big slam" position). Therefore, on a steep seat angle frame, you may end up sliding the seat backward to make it TT legal in a UCI race. For triathlon, you don't have to worry about this rule.

switched from Trek road to Cervelo TT frame.
Noticeable:
- much better handling in aerobars
- much better comfort, can stay in the aero position far longer
- about a minute faster over 40k, 1:08 to 1:07 (in tris) though how much of this is the aero frame and how much the steeper lower position is unknown

You can get quite close to the TT position with a road bike and forward seatpost, but typically the handling gets sketchy. I TT'd on the road bike for several years.