Bike meet Rider or Rider meet Bike?

View Poll Results: Should the bike fit the rider, or the rider fit the bike?

Voters
8. You may not vote on this poll
  • Option A: Bar drop? We don't need no stinking bar drop!

    3 37.50%
  • Option B: Do some situps, ya pudgy bastard...

    2 25.00%
  • Option 3: Beige.

    3 37.50%
Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    What the what???
    Reputation: Opus51569's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,542

    Bike meet Rider or Rider meet Bike?

    Amongst the myriad threads devoted to bike fit, it seems the advice boils down to one of two options:

    Option A: Adjust the bike to fit the rider (i.e. bar height, saddle height, stem length & angle, etc.)

    Option B: Adjust the rider to fit the bike (i.e. stretching exercises, core strengthening, etc.)

    But it's more than just physics or biology, there's a philosophical question at work here too.

    Option A suggests you place your requisite comfort above the design of the bike. Option B suggests you place more importance on perceived technique and will change yourself accordingly.

    Obviously, professionals and those with medical problems have very specific reasons for choosing what they do. For everyone else, though, I'm curious whether you subscribe more to Option A or B. Should the bike come to you, or should you go to the bike?
    Last edited by Opus51569; 03-09-2011 at 06:51 AM.
    The Law of Headwinds states: If the ride out is easy you better leave something in the tank for the turn...

  2. #2
    Burning Fists of Love
    Reputation: ttug's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    6,899

    option c

    Quote Originally Posted by Opus51569
    Amongst the myriad threads devoted to bike fit, it seems the advice boils down to one of two options:

    Option A: Adjust the bike to fit the rider (i.e. bar height, saddle height, stem length & angle, etc.)

    Option B: Adjust the rider to fit the bike (i.e. stretching exercises, core strengthening, etc.)

    But it's more than just physics or biology, there's a philosophical question at work here too.

    Option A suggests you place your requisite comfort above the design of the bike. Option B suggests you place more importance on perceived technique and will change yourself accordingly.

    Obviously, professional and those with medical problems have very specific reasons for choosing what they do. For everyone else, though, I'm curious whether you subscribe more to Option A or B. Should the bike come to you, or should you go to the bike?

    I think its option C, if the frame fits you and a NORMAL/barring odd physique, set up. OK. HOWEVER, Option A, can suck as well. How many adjustments can one make before the this is the wrong frame dawns.....
    This old anvil has cracked alot of hammers

  3. #3
    Windrider (Stubborn)
    Reputation: Len J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    22,018
    Neither.

    For me, I start with my optimal position, which I know from years of riding. I then evaluate bikes as to what I would have to do to the bike to get my 3 contact points in the proper position....i.e. stem length, spacers, bar reach, seat-post setback amount etc. I then look at how that will balance me over the bike.........will that put me with more weight over the front wheel, back wheel or centered.

    I then choose the bike that
    a.) I'll be best balanced over &
    b.) that will appeal to my sense of aesthetics.

    That's the bike I will buy.

    Most people buy the bike based on brand or looks or whatever, and then try to make it fit. IMO, that's bass ackwards.

    IME

    Len



    "Evil....is the complete lack of Empathy!"

    ""We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit. " Aristotle

    No one is as bad as the worst thing they have done & no one is as good as the best thing they have done.........think of that when you feel like you understand someone.

  4. #4
    corning my own beef
    Reputation: JustTooBig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    5,713
    for me, it's more of A. Lots more. But I would add another element to the equation: what is the purpose of the bike?

    I know that fit-wise, I have position X that is where I can produce the most horsepower. Then I have position Y, which is as comfortable as an easy chair. The intended purpose of a given bike will influence where, along that spectrum between X and Y, the fit (or maybe I should say, "geometry") should be.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    People who say, "Laughter is the best medicine.." have never been on the receiving end of a morphine drip..

    ноожеяз ай вщоw?
    -VaughnA


    A fool and his money were damned lucky to have bumped into each other in the first place.

  5. #5
    waterproof*
    Reputation: Creakyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    41,589
    1. There is no such thing as a single correct fit setup for a person. This is easily proved - the same person can be "comfortable and efficient" on a TT bike, Road bike setup for racing, a touring bike, an upright commuter, or a recumbent. Usually the only thing those positions have in common, is leg extension (but not always and not exactly the same).

    2. There does exist a fairly broad range of positions that are closer to optimal - more of a zone than a point.

    3. Within this zone, one can spend a lot of time and effort chasing "optimal" without gaining much real-world improvement.

    4. Bodies are not static. The cycle of the seasons, fitness, life/job/ exercise volume, means that "optimal" will change over time. I commonly move my saddle fore and aft, up and down several times during the season as my fitness and flexibility changes. If I was more persnickety about my position, I'd also move my bars around.

    5. To answer the OP, it's "both" and "neither". A fit, lean, flexible rider can get into a more aerodynamic position than a fat couch potato. But the couch potato may not care about aerodynamics, so why should he bother trying to stretch out and drop the bars?
    * not actually a Rock Star

  6. #6
    Old and Fixed, Moderator
    Reputation: Dave Hickey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    20,473
    ..............THIS...................

    Spot on Len......
    Dave Hickey/ Fort Worth

    My 3Rensho Blog: http://vintage3rensholove.blogspot.com/

  7. #7
    eminence grease
    Reputation: terry b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    18,538
    Agree with this except that I start with the aesthetics and then decide if I can make it work. With custom, you can have it both ways from the start. With rack you can also have it all assuming your physical confirmation is close to the standards that are used to design bikes.
    You'd be better off with a netbook, they do everything better.

    My travel blog: http://tbaroundtheworld.blogspot.com

  8. #8
    What the what???
    Reputation: Opus51569's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    10,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Dave Hickey
    ..............THIS...................

    Spot on Len......
    But you and Len are essentially arguing for Option A, aren't you? You may not change a bike to suit your physical needs, but you'll make sure the bike you buy already does. You make the bike come to you...you just do a better job of making that happen at the start.
    The Law of Headwinds states: If the ride out is easy you better leave something in the tank for the turn...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT ROADBIKEREVIEW

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.