# My 3-hour bike fit in NYC



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

*My 3-hour bike fit in NYC (long post)*

As a working journo, I’ve been offered the use of a Serotta stock HSG (High-Speed Geometry) carbon-fiber frame with Shimano grouppo for a charity event I’m riding in August, the Pan-Mass Challenge. (You can see the team at www.paulsposse.com.) I told the folks at Serotta that a 52cm frame would be fine, but they’re perfectionists. They insisted that I undergo a professional bike fit at one of their dealers, Paul Levine at Signature Cycles in Manhattan. Signature is one of the charity team’s sponsors, so I could not say no.

Full disclosure: This fit process usually runs $375 (with full credit applied to anyone who buys a new bike), but Serotta insisted I get it gratis. I found Signature Cycles in a very nondescript building on West 64th St. in Manhattan. In fact, they have some interesting neighbors.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

When I got out of the elevator on the second floor, things started to improve. Beyond the industrial-strength door is a roadie’s fantasyland. Let’s start with the furnishings. A small lounge area complete with giant flat-screen monitor, video games, leather club chairs, French cycling books and a fully stocked bar complete with Johnny Walker Black. The only downside: the espresso maker (Saeco, natch) was out of service.

The facility is not crammed with bikes. Instead, these high-end steeds are positioned tastefully around the room. This seems more like a gallery than a bike shop. Serottas and and Sevens mingle amiably, along with zoot components such as Zipp wheels and Rapha and Assos apparel. The next things that jump out are the fit stations. Two large, open areas next to the sun-filled windows. The first fit station is complete with stationary trainer, Serotta SizeCycle with CompuTrainer, video camera and enough extra components to outfit a small pro team.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

I put my little, aluminum Cervelo—which by this time it is having an inferiority attack surrounded by these bling-bling bikes--on the trainer, and Paul checks me out. Paul started Signature Cycles eight years ago. For five of those years, he served as director of the Serotta Fit School, where he estimates he taught more than 500 shop owners, coaches, trainers and doctors.

After my once-over, Paul and I sit down for what I can best describe as an intake meeting. With clipboard in hand, Paul ascertains everything there is to know about me and my favorite sport. We talk about my cycling history, past injuries, my goals. It’s part interview, part Socratic lesson, part therapy session. “What do you like doing best on your bike?” he asks. “Going fast,” I answer. “My goal is to produce more power, even if I am not completely comfortable. I know cycling is about suffering.”

To my surprise, Paul says I’m not really after power. I’m after speed. Power is just one component of Speed. The others are Power, Biomechanical Efficiency, Balance, Stability, Breathing, Fuel Intake/Nutrition and, finally, Aerodynamics. Paul says he can make me faster…and more comfortable.

Paul explains that the key to all this is putting me in an efficient, stable position, then bringing the bike to me during the fit process. As we discuss posture, he invites his resident specialist, Dr. Pam Wilson, a certified chiropractor and sports medicine expert, to consult with me about the physiology behind this stable position and how achieving a “neutral spine” will improve my riding.

After about an hour of this (keep in mind my last bike fit lasted about 30 minutes in its entirety), we head to the back room, where Paul puts me on an exam table. He proceeds to stretch me to determine the flexibility of my hamstrings and hip flexors and measure angles at which (my legs hit their end range of flexibility.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Finally, we go over to the Serotta SizeCycle. On my bike, Paul explains to me that my reach is far too long. I’m forced to round my back and stretch my shoulders and arms to reach the hoods. This puts tension on the muscles and ligaments attached to my spine, inhibits my breathing and prohibits me from rotating my pelvis forward enough to effectively recruit my glutes.

My hyperextended reach, coupled with a relatively weak core, forces my hamstrings and quads to overcompensate to stabilize my pelvis and upper body. OK, I’ve always been kind of proud of my tree-trunk thighs, but not anymore. Argh. After all, as I push down on the pedals, I must be pushing against something, right? I’m pushing against my feeble pelvis and upper body, which are compromised by my weak core and poor posture. Ugh.

So one key to achieving more speed on the bike is to put me in a stable, athletic position so I can use my body to full advantage. This will enable me to rotate my pelvis forward at least 45 degrees so I can recruit my glutes. 

Now the fun starts, as Paul begins moving the SizeCycle to change my position. The SizeCycle is equipped with an integrated CompuTrainer with SpinScan software. I can see my cadence as well as my power output for each leg, as well as how I’m applying power throughout my pedal stroke. One of our goals is to make certain that cadence, power and efficiency do not tail off when the I moves from my hoods to the drops.

Paul also uses DartFish video analysis software to examine my pedal stroke in slow motion and ascertain angles and position.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Paul begins my fit at the ball of the foot and works upwards. He aligns my metatarsal heads (ball of foot) with my pedal spindles, because this is where the greatest force is generated through the bottom of the foot. At my knee, he checks for KOPS (knee over pedal spindle). My saddle height is based on knee flex, which he wants to be between 30 degrees and 35 degrees, the proper angle for the hamstring to fire efficiently, without straining the tendons and quads, to produce maximum power.

Now he’s up to my hip flexors. Recall that Paul already measured the angles at which my legs hit their end range of flexibility. Now he moves the SizeCycle’s saddle up/down and bars up/down so that my hip flexes on the pedal stroke within 5-10 degrees of that end range. “Any less, you will create resistance with you own body's ‘stopping points.’ This will cause you to rock you hips, or move your leg out laterally or roll your pelvis in a posterior direction,” Paul says. “You can go more; it just makes you less aerodynamic.”

Now for my cockpit. Paul determines the fore-aft position of my saddle using KOPS. The fore-aft position of my handlebars is determined by the angle created between the upper torso and humerus.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

This is me before my bike fit.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Below is me after my bike fit. My saddle, Paul says, is completely off. It’s slammed all the way back, but he moves it almost all the way forward. It’s aesthetically horrible, but it’s correct. With an inline seatpost, we could center the clamp on the rails, but Cervelo only makes set-back seatposts. Then Paul raises my handlebars about 1 centimeter. He uses a nifty Serotta tool to transfer the geometry of the SizeCycle to my Cervelo.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

The next day, I put Paul’s new position to the test on a 60-mile ride. For the first 39 miles, I feel great. It feels like I’m right over my pedals, which allows me to spin easier. But by mile 40, my back is screaming in pain. By mile 50, I’m ready to get off and walk. The next day, I e-mail Paul, and his answer is no surprise. “You overdid it. You need to ease into it,” he replies.

The next day I ride 40 miles and I feel great. Much less pain. Now I am 250 miles into my new position and I feel great. I’m still making a conscious effort to rotate my hips. Remember, this bike fit only enables me to improve my posture, it does not do it for me. Can I tie statistical improvement to this fit process? Nope, I’m not a data head. But I do feel stronger on the bike. 

Is it worth $375? I'm not going to get into that, because everyone has their own definition of value. But, personally, I feel like I'm benefitting from one of the most experienced bike fitters in the country.

Thanks for reading.


----------



## bikeboy389 (May 4, 2004)

*Nice post!*

I had a Serotta fitting too (it was a bit cheaper, being out in the wilds of Maryland, and not including a chiropractor) a couple of years ago. While I didn't wind up buying a Serotta (meaning I was out the full bucks), I did use the form and numbers to get a custom built. It's super comfortable, and just feels right, and I was glad to go into the process having done a thorough fit first.

Like you, I can't say I recommend that just anybody throw down that kind of money on a fitting, but if you're looking at a custom of any kind, it's probably a reasonable investment.


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

Are you going faster?


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

Any chance of removing this post, a sticky, and lock on this excellent thread?


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Good question. Wouldn't you know that my iBike computer snapped off 100 miles after this bike fit and I have yet to replace the mount. So this is hard to answer, as I can't track average speed on my rides. But for the 100 miles I had my computer, it seemed I was able to hold a higher average wattage on certain roads. One on particular hill near my home that is 1-mile long, I always try to maintain at least 280 watts. Climbing that hill at 280 watts now "feels" easier.

As I noted in the text, I was way behind my bottom bracket before my fit. Paul moved my saddle as far up as it can go to get me over my bottom bracket. I "feel" like this improves my power.



StillRiding said:


> Are you going faster?


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Yep, Paul provided me with all my data on spreadsheets so I can use it wherever.



bikeboy389 said:


> I had a Serotta fitting too (it was a bit cheaper, being out in the wilds of Maryland, and not including a chiropractor) a couple of years ago. While I didn't wind up buying a Serotta (meaning I was out the full bucks), I did use the form and numbers to get a custom built. It's super comfortable, and just feels right, and I was glad to go into the process having done a thorough fit first.
> 
> Like you, I can't say I recommend that just anybody throw down that kind of money on a fitting, but if you're looking at a custom of any kind, it's probably a reasonable investment.


----------



## drewmcg (Sep 19, 2005)

The before/after pictures are pretty subtle. I think I do notice a small bend in your arms @ the elbow in the "after," with locked arms in the "before".

Did your upper arms (or hands) ever hurt on long rides before? If so, do they hurt less after?


----------



## brianmcg (Oct 12, 2002)

You do look a whole lot more comfortable in the second pic. Not nearly as stretched out as in the before pic.

There is a funny trend I have been seeing in people that get a serotta fitting, (or any other fancy fitting for that matter) ended up getting fit with a much shorter reach and higher bars.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

The good thing is I had no pain prior to my fit. That's why I told Serotta in the first place that I did not need a bike fit. But they insisted...



drewmcg said:


> The before/after pictures are pretty subtle. I think I do notice a small bend in your arms @ the elbow in the "after," with locked arms in the "before".
> 
> Did your upper arms (or hands) ever hurt on long rides before? If so, do they hurt less after?


----------



## Reynolds531 (Nov 8, 2002)

*very skeptical*

I'm very skeptical about these fit systems. There's a false appearance of science, with a very precise measurement system for the inputs, and no measurement system at all for the outputs that matter--real world on-the-road comfort, speed, and endurance after the body readjusts to the changes. I think that feed-back and adjustment is a much better system, it's free, and it takes a good 500 miles on the real roads to get it right.

I don't believe that there is any measurements and adjustments that can be made in 3 hours that can begin to account for human variation. This is marketing, not science.


----------



## Bertrand (Feb 1, 2005)

Great post! Reminds me of my own recent experience. A lot of expertise and careful analysis brought to bear. This resulted in seemingly minor changes that have resulted in significant improvements in comfort and power. I had been trying to puzzle through this myself for some time, but really needed the expert eye to make the difference.


----------



## bikeboy389 (May 4, 2004)

brianmcg said:


> You do look a whole lot more comfortable in the second pic. Not nearly as stretched out as in the before pic.
> 
> There is a funny trend I have been seeing in people that get a serotta fitting, (or any other fancy fitting for that matter) ended up getting fit with a much shorter reach and higher bars.


I've noticed this too. My custom's top tube is almost 2 cm shorter than my seat tube, and my headtube is reasonably tall. I have another friend who got fitted and bought a custom Serotta, and his setup is even more this way. Though he's got some injuries that made the more extreme setup necessary, I think he'd still have wound up on a short top, high bar bike.

I've also seen when I go looking at older Italian steel that it's not uncommon for the bikes to be square or even undersquare (short in the top) by a cm or two, whereas anything in the last three or four years tends to be oversquare (long on the top) and the question is only by how much.


----------



## tigerwah (May 27, 2007)

> The before/after pictures are pretty subtle


I think it's a pretty drastic change. It looks like your saddle came forward about two inches. BTW thank you for the excellent rundown. I've been thinking about having a fitting. As brianmcg stated I've also noticed that many people run an incorrect reach. I recently used the Competitive Cyclist fit calculator to change my position. According to them my reach was way too long. I've shortened it up quite a bit and I feel much more comfortable. Although it does feel a little strange. Have you gotten used to the set up yet?


----------



## innergel (Jun 14, 2002)

bikeboy389 said:


> I had a Serotta fitting too (it was a bit cheaper, being out in the wilds of Maryland, and not including a chiropractor) a couple of years ago. While I didn't wind up buying a Serotta (meaning I was out the full bucks), I did use the form and numbers to get a custom built. It's super comfortable, and just feels right, and I was glad to go into the process having done a thorough fit first.
> 
> Like you, I can't say I recommend that just anybody throw down that kind of money on a fitting, but if you're looking at a custom of any kind, it's probably a reasonable investment.


I did the same thing as you. It helped me a lot once I adjusted to the new position. I still refer to the sheet that was given to me and I used the data to get my track frame built. I'd highly recommend a fit session to anyone. 

And I'd agree with whoever made the comment that a lot of people end up with a shorter reach and higher bars after a fancy fit session. I guess we're not as flexible as we thought we were.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

tigerwah said:


> Have you gotten used to the set up yet?


Yes and no. So far I'm a believer in Paul's (Serotta's) system, so I am really concentrating on keeping a neutral back with my pelvis rotated forward. As of today it's not second nature. If I don't think about it, I tend to slouch.


----------



## tigerwah (May 27, 2007)

> OK, I’ve always been kind of proud of my tree-trunk thighs


I'd be proud of them too. My legs are sticks.



> KOPS (knee over pedal spindle)


Hey if it's ok to divulge this info, I'd really be interested to find out how they measure this?


----------



## CoLiKe20 (Jan 30, 2006)

thanks for good read.


----------



## daneil (Jun 25, 2002)

Nice post man. I've been meaning to get a fit over the winter for the past few years. Maybe I'll actually do something about it this year and give Paul a call. 

BTW, I'm not going to be able to do the ride, things are a bit hectic to say the least. But I might be out on Sat at Prospect if you're coming. I've also meant to tell someone, I like the new kit. Much better than the old green ones.

-Dan


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Hey if it's ok to divulge this info, I'd really be interested to find out how they measure this?[/QUOTE]

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=85009&highlight=measure+KOPS


----------



## StillRiding (Sep 16, 2006)

Reynolds531 said:


> I'm very skeptical about these fit systems. There's a false appearance of science, with a very precise measurement system for the inputs, and no measurement system at all for the outputs that matter--real world on-the-road comfort, speed, and endurance after the body readjusts to the changes. I think that feed-back and adjustment is a much better system, it's free, and it takes a good 500 miles on the real roads to get it right.
> 
> I don't believe that there is any measurements and adjustments that can be made in 3 hours that can begin to account for human variation. This is marketing, not science.


I'm with Reynolds531 on this one. There are a few commonsense measurements and formulas that can get everyone close. After that, it's small changes made on the basis of on-the-road experience that will result in a good fit. All the gurus have different theories, but only the guy pushing the pedals can say what really feels and works best.


----------



## fuzzalow (Mar 13, 2007)

This is an interesting write up, thanks for sharing. Just to add another point of view in the interest of fair and balanced.

I am in the camp with those that do not believe there is such thing as a science of bike fitting but also accept that a rider should do what is necessary to get their position dialed in. Some riders. as say Eddy Merckx was reputed to do, will tweak their position obsessively untill they think it's right. Others might use a coach or fitting service. I think the only way that a fitting service can work is if you are prepared to believe and trust in the the methodology used by the coach/fitter in determining your position. I couldn't use a fitter because I'm not prepared to drink that Kool-Aid.

For example and on a simple level, I think that the pics of the hands positioned on the hoods is a mistake in indicating an improved position - I'd guess the position in picture 2 would actually be too short in the drops which would be further exacerbated under load. On a racing bike the primary position to be optimized is always the drops with all the other hand positions compromised backwards from that point. Just my opinion.

Ultimately, use what works but there's more than 1 way to skin a cat and this ain't no science.


----------



## Gripped (Nov 27, 2002)

fuzzalow said:


> Ultimately, use what works but there's more than 1 way to skin a cat and this ain't no science.


Biomechanics is a science. And the fitter was using power data to each leg to guide in optimum position. I'd say that an experience fit person can use science and empirical data to determine a much more efficient position than most individual riders can by fiddling.


----------



## SantaCruz (Mar 22, 2002)

Reynolds531 said:


> I'm very skeptical about these fit systems. There's a false appearance of science, with a very precise measurement system for the inputs, and no measurement system at all for the outputs that matter--real world on-the-road comfort, speed, and endurance after the body readjusts to the changes. I think that feed-back and adjustment is a much better system, it's free, and it takes a good 500 miles on the real roads to get it right.
> 
> I don't believe that there is any measurements and adjustments that can be made in 3 hours that can begin to account for human variation. This is marketing, not science.



$375 and 3+ hours to move your seat forward and tell you to rotate your pelvis. 
Since you had no pain before, and after years of riding I'd be skeptical to make changes. Hope you recorded the position of your original set-up. 

I've had a couple of short fit sessions in 20 years of riding as an adult and I'm not likely to change my position on anybody's recommendation - but then I'm not after faster speeds unless it's due to better conditioning of the engine. I'd rather spend the $ on experimenting with different saddles and/or expensive shoes and/or expensive shorts.


----------



## mandovoodoo (Aug 27, 2005)

Interesting to go through the exercise with pictures before and after. My wife and I had to look at our own positions after this! Fortunately images are online from professionals shooting travelers on a nearby sporty road. I seem to be quite nicely positioned, but we decided she is really just a bit stretched out. Breaking the position down by just looking at lower back, then upper back, knee extension etc was pretty easy on the images, too. Very helpful. 

So that might be useful to folks. Getting shot when not aware of exactly when the images are being made under real cycling conditions. Gives a chance to stand back and really look.

So I'm going to go square 55 next time. My position is nice, but I'd rather have a shorter top tube and longer stem. Thought about doing that and looking at the images reinforced that impression.


----------



## djg714 (Oct 24, 2005)

Sorry guy. Just center the saddle rails on the seatpost and send me the 300 bucks....:lol:


----------



## CXinME (Oct 12, 2004)

Whoever left you leaving the shop with the before setup is a nucklehead. Looks terrible.

Not sure about your core strength, but looks as if you need another cm on the stem in the after photo. Certainly looks a lot better than before. I assume you core is weakish since you report back pain after a short distance (40?). If so, the stem might just be right.

But the bottom line is whatever works for you is best.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

CXinME said:


> Not sure about your core strength, but looks as if you need another cm on the stem in the after photo.


Good observation. The fitter e-mailed me after the fit session and did suggest that I could try another 1cm or even 2cm on the stem length. I'll see how it feels and get back to him. I suppose the good thing about a $375 fit is that this fitter will stay in touch and respond to questions long after the fit session.


----------



## AlanS (Feb 5, 2003)

I have been fitted by Paul and had him 'blueprint' a frame for me. Excellent service and the results were 'spot-on'. After seasons of riding ill-fitted bikes, I made the move to meet him and have him do his magic. Now, I get on my bike and it fits like it should... And the service doesn't end there... Paul has extended himself to assist in e-mails and phone calls (I try not to abuse the privilage). I have referred at least 4 other riders to him, all with the same result- excellent. SO, call it science, call it experience, heck...call it Vodoo...you get what you came to see him for--- a bike that fits you, not forcing YOU to fit your bike.


----------



## fuzzalow (Mar 13, 2007)

Gripped said:


> I'd say that an experience fit person can use science and empirical data to determine a much more efficient position than most individual riders can by fiddling.





team_sheepshead said:


> The fitter e-mailed me after the fit session and did suggest that I could try another 1cm or even 2cm on the stem length. I'll see how it feels and get back to him.


The situation as noted above is illustrative of my view that the fiitter is not working from science. 

I don't have a dog in this fight and think it more important to get a setup that allows you to enjoy the bike - however way you choose to get the result. As the OP seemed an experienced rider, I'm more perplexed that a position change would be desired when there wasn't a problem. Yeah yeah, the OP wanted speed, who doesn't? If that was the goal then the fitter would be more useful in adjusting the road position to an optimized Time-Trial position; but to change a fully adapted road position under the promise of more speed is disingenuous. Pretty seductive, the promise of more. Sorry, can't drink the Kool-Aid.

Maybe I'm setting the bar too high on this report. If it were written by a novice cyclist for a general publication, I could ignore the hyperbole and the half-truths. Neither of which is the case here so I'm logging the counterpoint. So there you have it, in the interest of fair and balanced.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

I don't see how power can be used to determine position in the short run--you'll obviously be more power efficient in your original position simply because your made a neuromuscular adaptation to it over time. Changing position, especially by 2 inches in saddle fore/aft will result in the recruiment of different pathways that will take time to adapt to (hence the soreness you feel in the first rides getting used to it). 

I also don't see how being too extended (per your original position) results in a rounding of the back. The whole point of a Lemond style stretched out position is to flatten the back (Lemond was largely the guy who inspired us all to move back our seats and go for long toptubes).

It's also highly debatable whether the pedal spindle over the ball of the foot is the most powerful. Goetz Heine, Friel and others actually advocate a midsole cleat position (under the arch!), so there is a lot of folklore going into fitting systems. 

I'm always amused by how fit systems and various formulas go to the third or more decimal place (such as inseam X .883) then fitters come back with stuff like slap one a 1-2cm longer stem and see how it feels.


----------



## Forrest Root (Dec 22, 2006)

StillRiding said:


> I'm with Reynolds531 on this one. There are a few commonsense measurements and formulas that can get everyone close. After that, it's small changes made on the basis of on-the-road experience that will result in a good fit. All the gurus have different theories, but only the guy pushing the pedals can say what really feels and works best.


+1. And as far as the Serotta fit goes, I had one done, and tried for quite a while to adjust to it. In the end, I couldn't. The Serotta fit caused more pain. It was definitely a waste of money.


----------



## The Flash (May 6, 2002)

As for proper fits in general, my fitter is Matt Moss at Florida Bicycle Sports and he made subtle changes with me that have completely changed my riding. My legs used to always feel cramped and tight and now they feel great after the ride. The advantage was more profound on my TT bike where I saved almost a minute in my 15k TT last night!

My biggest issue was trying to look "pro". I can look that way, but I can't breathe and I make no power. When set up correctly, I look OK, but ride much better...

Flash


----------



## benInMA (Jan 22, 2004)

I had a Serotta fit and I pretty much "knew" where to put myself. I knew where I wanted to be but I couldn't get there on my old bike. I got the impression Serotta's system does not always try to force people into large changes if the fitter recognizes people have adapted over years. For some people they will say "You ride wrong" but realize you either can't or won't be willing to put the work in to truly correct the issues, so they try to accomodate it and make smaller changes.

I really don't see this type (Serotta) of fitting as "punch the #s and come up with a fit." My session had plenty of back and forth. Measurements were used to verify some things and come up with recommendations for others but at no point did the fitter go to a computer and come back with all the numbers.

Fit Kit and some of the others are very very much that kind of thing and I agree, they can be a waste of money. I've had 2 bikes that were fit that way and both were fairly "wrong" for me. If anything is a scam it's paying to have someone do the quick and easy #s game and come up with your bike fit.

If this guy refunds your money with a bike purchase he's a good deal.. my fit was 1/3 his price but no refund with a bike. And he seems to have the whole 9 yards. Where I had it done they had the power meter but it wasn't working and/or the fitter just wasn't using it as they had an inexpensive power meter and he didn't find it useful. There were no video cameras either.. though I'm not sure I believe they are necessary.

I've tinkered with my fit/position endlessly and to me it seems like a great way to waste lots of time... a good fitter can get you closer more quickly.. and when people say "I have no pain" I think it can be a sign that cyclists have high pain thresholds. I wouldn't have said I was in pain before.. but I'm clearly far far more comfortable now that I've gotten good advice. The biggest issue I see with trying to adjust your fit yourself is you are re-inventing and trying to learn much of the knowledge that fitters, bike companies, and long time cyclists have already learned. Your idea of "correct" will adapt over many years and over time you will end up where the fitters would have put you in the first place. Paying for a good fit is just taking the easy way out and relying on the prior knowledge of others.


----------



## lv2ride (Sep 7, 2006)

*my experience*

I had a bike fit done a couple of years back. They ended up moving my saddle forward, adjusting cleat on shoes and putting a 120mm stem on instead of the 100mm.

right from the get go I could tell that the stem was not going to work. I could only ride on the tops. Hoods or drops were way too stretched out and uncomfortable. Last year I experimented with saddle heigth adjustment. I ended up raising my saddle 3/4 inch. 

In my experience I have found more value in adjusting the bike on my own than doing the fit

FWIW


----------



## ahhchon (Apr 16, 2007)

team_sheepshead said:


> Yes and no. So far I'm a believer in Paul's (Serotta's) system, so I am really concentrating on keeping a neutral back with my pelvis rotated forward. As of today it's not second nature. If I don't think about it, I tend to slouch.


rotating your pelvis forward is the last thing you want to do. that's assuming that forward means the asis is moving anteriorly and your rear end is moving posteriorly. this creates an increased lordosis of the lumbar spine, resulting in compression of the lumbar and sacral nerves. one nerve being compressed are the components that make up the sciatic nerve and femoral nerve. 

irritation of these nerves will lead to lower back pain, hip pain (referred), leg pain, foot pain (all referred) and weakness of the innervated muscles. i'de advice you to NOT use an anterior pelvic tilt while riding. (it also keeps your quads and iliopsoas at a much more shortened position, therefore making them less efficient).

best of luck

john


----------



## CFBlue (Jun 28, 1999)

I did one and it certainly improved my comfort and speed.. The saddle was moved closer, the reach was shortened, i could have made a very similar report, but two years of riding has proven results, The 30 minute fit when the bike was sold to me was not very good.


----------



## FlatlandRoller (Jan 22, 2004)

Mixed thoughts here too....

KOPS? Well, maybe but not on a TT or Tri bike...maybe it's just a starting point?

Power monitoring during the fitting? Well I have a computrainer and ride about 1000 miles on it each year. I can tell you, MANY factors will vary your watts by 3-4%, placebo factors can account for much more. You run 280 watts, I say "try this position, it should increase your power by about 2%", then you run 285 watts, this does not prove the position is better or worse. And if you compare power to heartrate, well, I can tell you mine will vary a lot

Getting you into a more comfortable looking position-yeah, I think you look better, no doubt. 

But a more upright position should be slower....unless you are pumping out more power...so does this translate to speed? Initially you said "give me speed, I can take a little discomfort" and the changes improved your comfort and increased your drag.

So if you walked in without ever riding and you ended up in this position, you'd save a TON of futzing around for years to end up there. But if a guy could get you close and you kept screwing around, you could find it too.

I'm betting way too many people settle for a less--than-perfectly-comfy setup or maybe believe that they are as comfy as they can be. At least...I know I did...heh, maybe *I* should have gotten a fitting years ago!


----------



## MaddSkillz (Mar 13, 2007)

Wow, being a newb to this, it really shows all the things that are considered when being fitted to a bike. I have not been fitted, I need to do that!


----------



## Bob Ross (Apr 18, 2006)

stevesbike said:


> I'm always amused by how fit systems and various formulas go to the third or more decimal place (such as inseam X .883) *then fitters come back with stuff like slap one a 1-2cm longer stem and see how it feels*.



Well, _any_ professional bike fitter will tell you that *the rider is complicit *in the outcome: regardless of how Objective (sic) the supporting data is, the bottom line _always_ comes down to "How Does It Feel?" The difference between a $375 fit @ Signature and the fitting that your LBS includes free with every bike purchase is how much data is gathered _before_ the fitter asks "How Does It Feel?" 

If Paul Levine/Signature was gathering all this data via his hi-tech methodology and _not_ asking "How Does It Feel?" he'd be an irresponsible and unconscionable businessman. Frankly, I'd rather have a fitter base his recommendation on repeatable and verifiable information than _only_ on my answer to his "How Does It Feel?" query. I don't mind being complicit in the outcome, but I want to know _why_ a certain change is recommended before I worry about whether I like it or not. And I like the idea of proactively recommending "solutions" rather than "fixes", which is what the DIY folks who advocate the Just-Tinker-Until-It-Feels-Right school are doing.


----------



## benInMA (Jan 22, 2004)

FlatlandRoller said:


> Mixed thoughts here too....
> But a more upright position should be slower....unless you are pumping out more power...so does this translate to speed? Initially you said "give me speed, I can take a little discomfort" and the changes improved your comfort and increased your drag.


He only posted the picture of his position on the hoods.. the difference is slight, drag is probably not up much.

The big thing is whether he can ride in the drops more comfortably when he needs to without compromising power. That translates into much more speed then a slightly more aggressive hood position but difficulty riding in the drops.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

*What.......*



ahhchon said:


> rotating your pelvis forward is the last thing you want to do. that's assuming that forward means the asis is moving anteriorly and your rear end is moving posteriorly. this creates an increased lordosis of the lumbar spine, resulting in compression of the lumbar and sacral nerves. one nerve being compressed are the components that make up the sciatic nerve and femoral nerve.
> 
> irritation of these nerves will lead to lower back pain, hip pain (referred), leg pain, foot pain (all referred) and weakness of the innervated muscles. i'de advice you to NOT use an anterior pelvic tilt while riding. (it also keeps your quads and iliopsoas at a much more shortened position, therefore making them less efficient).
> 
> ...


been riding this way for 25 years......who knew I was in pain?:mad2: 

Rolling your pelvis forward and flattening your back is the correct way to ride a bike.

Len


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

benInMA said:


> He only posted the picture of his position on the hoods.. the difference is slight, drag is probably not up much.
> 
> The big thing is whether he can ride in the drops more comfortably when he needs to without compromising power. That translates into much more speed then a slightly more aggressive hood position but difficulty riding in the drops.


ben is correct. As I wrote above, "One of our goals is to make certain that cadence, power and efficiency do not tail off when the I moves from my hoods to the drops."

I am now much more comfortable in the drops.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

FlatlandRoller said:


> Power monitoring during the fitting? Well I have a computrainer and ride about 1000 miles on it each year. I can tell you, MANY factors will vary your watts by 3-4%, placebo factors can account for much more. You run 280 watts, I say "try this position, it should increase your power by about 2%", then you run 285 watts, this does not prove the position is better or worse. And if you compare power to heartrate, well, I can tell you mine will vary a lot
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> Flatland, you raise a good point. I should have been more clear in my original post, but I feel the placebo effect was minimal if anything. While I could clearly see the monitors in front of me, I was not at all clear what I was seeing--I had never seen the SpinScan interface before. Paul the fitter actually told me he did not want to tell me exactly what I was looking at while I was spinning. As he adjusted the SizeCycle, he kept a close eye on the data, particularly to make certain I did not lose power when I moved to the drops.


----------



## iherald (Oct 13, 2005)

I'd be into doing this at some point. Right now I'm comfortable and enjoying my positioning, but I tend not to change things that are working. That's not to say I'm in the best position. I went to see a friend who worked at a LBS who wanted volunteers to learn to fit, and he made a few recommendations that have worked out well. 

According to his calculations, most things on my bike were close to 'correct'. So that worked out well.


----------



## Dumbod (Dec 31, 2004)

*My $0.02*

I had a fitting with Paul about 6 weeks ago.

I don't think it's far to describe him as a strictly by the numbers type. There was a great deal of "subjective" change as well as measuring everything. The most important tool that he used, to me, was the power meter that showed power on each pedal throughout the stroke. He did a lot of tweaking to get me to my best "circular" stroke. He also gave me some informal coaching about my approach.

I can't give you a cause and effect on the fitting because I changed a lot of variables in addition to the changes he recommended: I had a frame failure a week after the fitting so I had to replace the frame (using his measurements on the build) and I am consciously trying a different pacing technique. After six weeks, however, I'm consistently 1-2 mph faster around Prospect Park than I was before the fitting.

I believe.

(Hey Paul, now can I get that free Parlee?)


----------



## nd_1975 (Nov 17, 2006)

This is an interesting thread. I am a triathlete and my wife and I have been fitted on almost 5 different bikes by Paul. Most recently I just bought a new Meivici and while the bike rides amazing I can tell you that the fit is what made all the difference. Constructing a custom frame to get me in the right position has consistently put me 1-2 mph faster in my 6 hour training rides. I would never have imagined that I could take that amount of time off, just from getting in a better, more aggresive position. 

The interesting thing is when Paul and I were working through the fitting, I could physiologically have gotten lower, but it created some "subjective" issues with my fit and the power started to wayne just a little. There is truely a lot of subjective here in addition to the objective. 

In the past I have been fit for a custom Cyfac and that is a different system all together. There it is all about the numbers, while forgetting that how I sit on the saddle may be different from how someone else does. 

All in all, I think Paul does a great job and his fitting is well worth the money, in a sport where we spend lots for small time gains, a good fitting is one of the most economical spendatures around.

Just my 2 cents. 

Neal


----------



## pdxtim (Nov 15, 2004)

bikeboy389 said:


> I've noticed this too. My custom's top tube is almost 2 cm shorter than my seat tube, and my headtube is reasonably tall. I have another friend who got fitted and bought a custom Serotta, and his setup is even more this way. Though he's got some injuries that made the more extreme setup necessary, I think he'd still have wound up on a short top, high bar bike.
> 
> I've also seen when I go looking at older Italian steel that it's not uncommon for the bikes to be square or even undersquare (short in the top) by a cm or two, whereas anything in the last three or four years tends to be oversquare (long on the top) and the question is only by how much.


I'm thinking the same as bikeboy389 recently. I have a Gunnar Crosshairs and Lemond Alpe d'Huez, both are 55 cm frames with 565 cm top tubes. I've been professionally fitted on both but still seem a little too stretched out and experience some anterior (front) shoulder pain and low back pain with long rides and after hills. I have a triple crank on both bikes. I'm looking into a 55 cm Jamis Quest which has a 550 top tube and a longer head tube, hoping that will allow me to ride more comfortably. Anyone know of other bikes/frames that have short top tubes in relation to the seat tube?


----------



## Dumbod (Dec 31, 2004)

pdxtim said:


> I'm thinking the same as bikeboy389 recently. I have a Gunnar Crosshairs and Lemond Alpe d'Huez, both are 55 cm frames with 565 cm top tubes. I've been professionally fitted on both but still seem a little too stretched out and experience some anterior (front) shoulder pain and low back pain with long rides and after hills. I have a triple crank on both bikes. I'm looking into a 55 cm Jamis Quest which has a 550 top tube and a longer head tube, hoping that will allow me to ride more comfortably. Anyone know of other bikes/frames that have short top tubes in relation to the seat tube?


Unless you're really jonesing for a new bike, you could try a shorter stem or one with a steeper angle. Both would make the effective top tube slightly smaller.


----------



## pdxtim (Nov 15, 2004)

Yeah, you're right, but I have a relatively short stem already (either 90 or 100 mm) and the stem angle is pretty significant too.


----------



## Chain (Dec 28, 2006)

team_sheepshead any updates you would like to share. How well is the new position working?


----------



## J24 (Oct 8, 2003)

pdxtim said:


> I'm thinking the same as bikeboy389 recently. I have a Gunnar Crosshairs and Lemond Alpe d'Huez, both are 55 cm frames with 565 cm top tubes. I've been professionally fitted on both but still seem a little too stretched out and experience some anterior (front) shoulder pain and low back pain with long rides and after hills. I have a triple crank on both bikes. I'm looking into a 55 cm Jamis Quest which has a 550 top tube and a longer head tube, hoping that will allow me to ride more comfortably. Anyone know of other bikes/frames that have short top tubes in relation to the seat tube?


I had a 97 Alpd'Huez; at that time Lemond geometry was different from the norm with a long TT and slack seat angle. Shop recommended it after a fitting since I have a long torso. 
Worked OK for me.....don't know how it well works for the average body or shorter torso and longer legs.


----------



## gregz (Jun 29, 2006)

*My two cents*

My two cents

I’ve had problems with road bikes as long as I can remember. At 6’4 my body just doesn’t agree with cycling. 

Last season my knees started to hurt to the point where I couldn’t ride anymore. After being forced off the bike for a week due to knee pain I made an appointment with the local Serrota fitter.

The fit cost me $200 and took approximately 2 hours. During the fit I got the impression it was more flash than substance. I’m a very skeptical person and won’t believe things unless I can see analytical data to back them up. The fitter placed dots on my elbows shoulders, hip, neck, knees, etc. She took a picture of me on the bike and tried to measure angles off the computer screen after drawing lines between the dots. I didn’t think she had taken enough time to place the dots in a precise location, especially for the kind of significant figures she was carrying through her calculations. 

The fitter used a plumb bomb to set up the position of my seat. Yet it wasn’t clear as to where she would place the plumb bomb on my knee. Was it meant to be placed in front of the patella, under the patella, or on the inside of the knee?

The end result of my bike fit was the seat was brought all the way forward on its rails. At 6’4 I have long femurs and this surprised me. My handlebars were also moved up, and I was placed in a completely recreational positions. Being tall I’m already a parachute in the wind, now I was in a very upright position. 

The one thing that I think was worthwhile with the fit was the cleat position. The fitter set up my cleats to my nature riding position was in the middle of the pedal float. This seemed to really help with my knee pain.

In the end the fit didn’t work for me. Yes the fit remedied my knee pain, however my neck started to bother me while riding. Unbearable pain would develop between my shoulders after only 1 hour of riding. This seemed strange since the position was more upright. After a month of suffering I contacted the fitter. She suggested moving me more upright. Since I was already very upright I decided it was time to find another fitter.

Looking for a cheap solution I went to a local bike shop for their $30. Unfortunately they were more concerned with trying to sell me a new seat post and new stems than my actual position on the bike.

After being in agony on the bike for several months. The owner of my cycling team and our team chiropractor decided to watch me ride the trainer. Right away they commented that I looked like a tri-athlete, my position was ridiculously forward. The two of them had me riding a compu-trainer and looked to see power increase. Anyone who trains with power would most likely agree that looking for an increase in power wrt to position is useless. It’s almost impossible to maintain a steady effort. You wouldn’t have a good reference to base the power increase on. Some fits try to use HR, but HR moves around so much it’s not a good reference. Anyway back to my story. This fit seemed to help. They moved my seat back and lowered my bars, putting me in more of a classical position. My neck still hurts on extended rides, however it’s bearable. 

In the end my views on bike fitting is people are too different to use a plug and chug method of fitting. Also asking someone what they think of a position after riding on the trainer for 5minutes is useless. It usually takes hours if not several rides for pain to develop. I think there are too many variable to simply take a few measurements and plug them into a formula. My team’s chiropractor thinks these formulas get an average size person into what he calls the “good enough” position. He says the formulas break down on short or tall people. My experience agrees with his thoughts. Currently I train with my bars at the top of the steer tube. When racing I lower my bars to achieve a more aero position.


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Chain said:


> team_sheepshead any updates you would like to share. How well is the new position working?


Hate to admit it, but I have not been riding the Cervelo much lately. My computer mount broke off two weeks ago and I'm slow about installing another one. But...I've been riding my custom steel bike and I do notice a difference. The steel bike does not feel too stretched out, but the bars do seem too low. It will be interesting to get back on my Cervelo and compare watts and speed.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

*Why...........*



team_sheepshead said:


> Hate to admit it, but I have not been riding the Cervelo much lately. My computer mount broke off two weeks ago and I'm slow about installing another one. But...I've been riding my custom steel bike and I do notice a difference. The steel bike does not feel too stretched out, but the bars do seem too low. It will be interesting to get back on my Cervelo and compare watts and speed.


Does the lack of a computer preclude yu from riding the cervelo?

Don't get this.

Len


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

On the Cervelo, I was trying to track power data before and after the bike fit. But without the computer mount, I sort of lost the impetus to do it and thus switched to the steel bike. Not that I have data from the steel bike, it will be interesting to try to track it on the Cervelo.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

*It seems to me.........*



team_sheepshead said:


> On the Cervelo, I was trying to track power data before and after the bike fit. But without the computer mount, I sort of lost the impetus to do it and thus switched to the steel bike. Not that I have data from the steel bike, it will be interesting to try to track it on the Cervelo.


That much of the benefit of any fit change can't be reqalized until acclimation occurs......wouldn't riding the Cervelo in the new position, even without the mount, facilitate acclimation?

Len


----------



## team_sheepshead (Jan 17, 2003)

Len J said:


> That much of the benefit of any fit change can't be reqalized until acclimation occurs......wouldn't riding the Cervelo in the new position, even without the mount, facilitate acclimation?
> 
> Len


Agreed. But after putting several hundred miles on the newly reconfigured Cervelo (and then breaking the mount) I felt it was time to check out my position on the steel bike and try to ascertain any significant (perceived) differences.


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*Name that bottle!*



team_sheepshead said:


> When I got out of the elevator on the second floor, things started to improve. Beyond the industrial-strength door is a roadie’s fantasyland. Let’s start with the furnishings. A small lounge area complete with giant flat-screen monitor, video games, leather club chairs, French cycling books and a fully stocked bar complete with Johnny Walker Black. The only downside: the espresso maker (Saeco, natch) was out of service.
> 
> The facility is not crammed with bikes. Instead, these high-end steeds are positioned tastefully around the room. This seems more like a gallery than a bike shop. Serottas and and Sevens mingle amiably, along with zoot components such as Zipp wheels and Rapha and Assos apparel. The next things that jump out are the fit stations. Two large, open areas next to the sun-filled windows. The first fit station is complete with stationary trainer, Serotta SizeCycle with CompuTrainer, video camera and enough extra components to outfit a small pro team.


Challenge for someone to name that bottle on the counter.


----------



## Len J (Jan 28, 2004)

team_sheepshead said:


> Agreed. But after putting several hundred miles on the newly reconfigured Cervelo (and then breaking the mount) I felt it was time to check out my position on the steel bike and try to ascertain any significant (perceived) differences.


Cool.

Len


----------



## Jesse D Smith (Jun 11, 2005)

*Who are you gonna trust?*



Len J said:


> been riding this way for 25 years......who knew I was in pain?:mad2:
> 
> Rolling your pelvis forward and flattening your back is the correct way to ride a bike.
> 
> Len


A fit expert, your own experience, or an individual on an internet board with less than 25 posts? Trust us, we're doctors.


----------

