My coach wants me to start using a power meter when riding so that we can track my progress in the coming season in hopes that I can race more consistently. The two main options that I have found are PowerTap and SRM. There looks to be a pretty big price difference between these two. What are the big differences and what really matters? Thanks.

Jason , PA

Dear Jason,

Power training is becoming to the new millennium what heart rate training was in the 1990’s – the most effective way known to train. By combining heart rate and cadence data with power and performance data, athletes can learn a lot about technique and how their body performs. When done properly, power training not can not only help to make you a stronger rider, but it can also help make you a smarter rider.

There are a few popular options to record power and they each have potential benefits and limitations. While I’m only going to address units that were designed to specifically address power and that are accurate within +/- 5%, it is worth noting that companies like CicloSport offer price based cycling computers that provide estimated power output and Polar offers a basic power system that can be used with some of their heart rate monitors.

How Does a Power Meter Work? Most power meters use calibrated strain gauges to detect power output. Strain gauges are usually small metallic or wire grids whose electrical resistance varies proportionate to the amount of resistance (strain) put against them. The number of strain gauges in combination with the materials, construction and alignment used, determines how accurately a device reads.

What are the important things to consider?

Location of Unit - Strain gauges require a surface where there is pressure (strain) to gather data. On the drivetrain, there are three primary places that are used: the hub, the bottom bracket or the crank itself. Each of the three most popular power meters use a different location.

PowerTap places the strain gauges inside the hub body of the wheel. The primary benefit to this is that you can use any crank you want and, with an inexpensive additional receiver unit, a PowerTap wheel and computer head can be switched between multiple bikes. The potential limitation is that you need to use a rear wheel built around a PowerTap hub and each additional wheel you want power information from needs to be built around a PowerTap hub (starting at $420 for the hub only).

Ergomo uses a bottom bracket design. The benefits of this design is that you can use any rear wheel you want and the power reading is taken from the bottom bracket, which is close to the power source (the rider’s feet). The potential downside is that it is not easy to swap between bikes (you need to remove the bottom bracket) and while the new 2006 design is scheduled to be available in square taper, Octalink and ISIS crank compatible versions, it will not be compatible with the most recent generation of external bearing cranks (FSA Mega-Exo, Shimano Hollowtech II, etc…).

SRM is a crank mounted design. The primary benefits are that the power reading is taken directly off the crank (where the power is being produced), you can use any rear wheel you want, and switching between multiple bikes just requires an extra sensor kit and the ability to swap the crank to the other bike (under 5 minutes). The potential downsides are that some frame designs with uniquely shaped chainstays can require some creative mounting of the sensor and you need to use a crank with an integrated SRM unit in it. This being said, SRM offers a wide selection of cranks, including Octalink and square taper compatible designs as well as two of the latest and best external bearing designs on the market (Shimano’s Dura Ace and FSA’s Carbon Mega-Exo with standard or compact gearing).

Accuracy - All three brands claim accuracy that is within the needs of any athlete. PowerTap +/- 1.5% on their units, Ergomo +/- 2% and SRM +/- 5% to +/- 0.5% (depending upon unit). While there are some other differences in construction, in general, the higher the degree of accuracy a unit has, the more strain gauges it uses to read the output.

On Board Display - Each power meter computer head offers different features in regards to the data it displays and collects. All units include a full functioned cycling computer with cadence, while advanced functions like altimeters are also included with some units. Visit each company’s web site for specifics:

www.srm.de

www.ergomo.net

www.cycleops.com (PowerTap)

Dependability and Service - The units improve yearly in this regard. PowerTap had some moisture sealing issues on some earlier units, but anything available now uses an improved design to address this. While PowerTap has had some delivery delays historically, they have always stood behind the product. SRM started working with power meters in 1986 and their units are known to be dependable. SRM also has a U.S. based Service Center which turns units around efficiently and quickly if they need factory service. Ergomo recently changed distributors in the U.S. to Gita Sporting Goods and this change should help them handle any issues efficiently.

Weight - All power meters are going to add a little weight to your bike, but the information they offer more than makes up for the minor weight gain. Over a standard full Dura Ace equipped component group, Ergomo or SRM will add approximately 300g and PowerTap will add from 240g-400g, depending upon model.

Software - While all of the power meters come with software that allows you to download data into your computer, many of our clients prefer aftermarket software like Cycling Peaks (www.cyclingpeakssoftware.com). Ergomo includes a Cycling Peaks software package.

Price - If you just need to use your system with one rear wheel, PowerTap offers the least expensive options with the standard system starting around $800 and the lighter PowerTap SL systems starting at $1300. However, if you plan on using the system with more than one wheel, you need to add in the price of any additional wheels ($1500+ for a Zipp rim version). The latest Ergomo hub system is $1600 and SRM units all include a crank and range from $2100 up to $5200 for the extremely accurate (+/- 0.5%) Science version.

Power meters have gone from “high tech” concepts available only to the top pro athletes to readily available training equipment applicable to any serious athlete. All three designs offer functional and reliable power data so it comes down to where you want the data to be gathered (hub, bottom bracket or crank), how many bikes and wheels you want to use the power meter with, and what other components you want to use in conjunction.

Train hard and train smart!

Ian

Want more information on PowerMeters or want to order one of the systems discussed above? Contact us toll free at 866-833-4FIT or e-mail info@fitwerx.com.

How should a properly fit cycling shoe feel? A properly fit cycling shoe should fit much like a properly fit running shoe. It should be snug in the heel with even pressure on the instep. You should have a little toe room at the end of the shoe and the shoe should hold your forefoot stable without pinching. You should not have large areas of gapping or folds in the material. The ball of your foot should lie at the widest portion of the shoe to allow for proper cleat positioning within the shoe’s adjustment range. Also, remember that performance and comfort enhancing custom footbeds take up more room than most stock insoles and it is always good to have enough room for them. Buy comfortably snug, but don’t buy overly tight expecting them to stretch.

Do cycling shoes come in widths? Yes. One reason we carry Sidi and D2 are because they are committed to making distinct widths and lasts (narrow, standard and wide) in some or all of their models to fit all shapes of feet. Don’t suffer by being in the wrong last for your foot shape thinking that there are not options in cycling shoes! There are options and very good ones at that.

What about foot support? Just like in a running shoe or a ski boot, proper foot support in a cycling shoe is crucial to maximizing performance, comfort and injury prevention. However, most cycling shoes are fairly flat on the bottom and have stock insoles that offer little to no support. Learn more about custom cycling footbeds and consider having a pair made before you choose your new shoes as they can drastically improve a shoes performance and feel.

Why are some shoes $60 and some $500?  Fit, materials, features and quality of workmanship. The more expensive shoes are designed and built by craftsman and simply fit and feel good. High quality materials (like leather and Lorica), stiff soles, ratcheting buckles and replaceable parts all cost more to produce but add greatly to the long-term durability, performance and quality of fit of a shoe. Shoes under $100 are not designed for performance cyclists. They are designed for recreational use where walking comfort is as important as riding. Shoes in the $100-$150 range will be of reasonable quality and are designed for low to moderate mileage riders looking to enhance performance beyond what the walking/cycling shoes offer. Shoes from $170-$300 are often excellent values built with many top end features like ratcheting buckles, high quality materials and built to very high standards. $300+ shoes have all that technology can currently offer with features like ultra-light carbon fiber soles, micro-adjustable buckles, additional straps for retention, the highest quality materials and most refined last shapes technology can offer. Choose according to how the shoe fits and your intended use. Spending an extra $100 now can make your feet much happier and can keep you from having to buy another pair next year.

What about carbon fiber soles? Carbon fiber soles are usually very stiff. This can help with power transmission, but can also sometimes contribute to some problems as well. Carbon soles can sometimes be so stiff that they do not flex enough to absorb the weight and force of the rider’s body. This has led to a notable rise in the rate of painful injuries like plantar fascitis in cyclists. Using a really stiff sole without additional foot support is a lot like running on pavement barefoot – after awhile it can hurt. How can you reduce your risk?

1) Have a custom cycling footbed made to keep your foot from over-flexing and potentially injuring itself on an overly stiff sole.

2) Consider a shoe with a slightly more forgiving sole than the full carbon soles some companies use. One reason we often recommend Sidi and Carnac carbon soled shoes is that they use a bi-injected carbon sole. Bi-injection mixes a more forgiving plastic or multiple densities of carbon in the sole to provide a bit more flex in the sole to protect the rider’s foot while still enhancing the torsional stiffness of the shoe beyond what a standard plastic sole can offer. Power transmission is great, but not at the expense of injury.
Contact us at (866)833-4FIT (4348) or by E-mail for an appointment or to order or discuss shoes and pedal systems in more detail.

What is Performance Analysis?

Performance Analysis uses quantifiable computer data to improve your efficiency and speed through positioning. Your efficiency and speed on a bicycle is determined by four main variables: power, oxygen transfer, technique and aerodynamics. You don’t want to just maximize one at the expense of the others. Instead, you want to find the right balance. Performance Analysis is an exclusive step-by-step protocol that we’ve developed that uses computer software and the Serotta Size Cycle to accurately test all four variables simultaneously to build the most efficient riding position possible for you.

A) Power. Compared to many things, humans do not put out much power, so it is really important that we maximize the small amount that we have. We measure power in watts. For example, if you average 180 watts of power while riding, you put out enough power to light three 60 watt light bulbs. If we are able to increase your power by 20 watts, you will be able to light up 3 1/3 light bulbs. That extra third of a light bulb is over 10% more power - a notable increase. By testing you in a controlled environment, and making position changes with the Serotta Size Cycle, we will build the position where your power output is maximized.

B) Oxygen Transfer. Breathing directly relates to power output and endurance (not to mention the ability to make good decisions). By using a protocol that analyzes your heartrate, we can see how changes in position effect your ability to breathe efficiently. Note on lactate: Some coaches and fitters use lactate testing in their fitting procedures. We do not use lactate testing in our protocols. After speaking with numerous exercise kinesiologists and researching how lactate testing works, we determined that lactate testing can actually be less accurate for the type of testing we perform as it really only gives feedback at a given point in the test (when the blood is actually drawn). Lactate testing has not proven to be particularly accurate when performed by basic/affordable testing equipment, and does not give insight into how effort varies during the rest of the testing session - an important variable. For these reasons, we have chosen to continue to use heart rate.

C) Technique. The biomechanics and position of your limbs in relation to each other are very influential on your efficiency and endurance while riding. We look at fundamental angles, as well as graphically analyzing your spin and torque, to arrive at a position that maximizes the efficiency of your muscle recruitment.

D) Aerodynamics. 65-70% of your energy (power) is used to overcome the air resistance created by your body and equipment. Aerodynamics in cycling is effected by two main items: frontal surface area and shape. We analyze both. We are also one of a very limited number of places in the country that offers Digital Aerodynamics Analysis, which uses computer software and controlled digital images to quantify your aerodynamic efficiency in a position.

Details: Performance Analysis is a great value. A good set of aero wheels costs around $1350 and will take 1 minute 3 seconds off the average rider’s 40km TT time on a varied terrain course. The average Performance Analysis session costs $395 and takes off 1 minute 36 seconds on the same course for that same rider. If you have to choose, Performance Analysis takes off more time for less money.

Performance Analysis: A focused Performance Analysis session takes about four hours. Price: $395.

Digital Aerodynamics Analysis: We have advanced surface area analysis software that we use to turn digital imagery, taken in a controlled environment (like a Performance Analysis session), into accurate frontal surface area numbers. You will receive your frontal surface area results as well as a virtual race scenario comparison of your existing position and the aerodynamically optimized position. Price $250.

Take more time off in a few hours than you’ve been able to in the past year of training. Contact us toll free at 866-833-4FIT (4348) or by E-mail at info@fitwerx.com for an appointment.

Because I work with a large range of athletes, from pros and top age groupers to people buying their first road or tri bike, I thought a bit of perspective on positioning might be helpful as there is a lot of often contradictory information about proper positioning and fit technicians out there.

Many industry triathlon and cycling people advocate aggressive forward and low positions. This can work quite well for some riders. However, it does not work well for everyone and many riders simply do not have the mileage and riding experience, core strength, or range of motion in their body to be able to hold this position. In other cases there are medical reasons (sciatica, for example) or injuries that often do not make a real forward and low position a smart decision either. Regardless of whether you are a first-timer or can turn a sub-nine hour Ironman, you should not base your riding position purely upon the positions that a pro athlete or editor of a magazine or web site is able to ride successfully. What works best for them doesn’t work best for everyone.

Just because someone has their arm pads or handlebars only a few centimeters below their saddle height, it does not necessarily mean that they are set-up poorly or inefficiently for what their body and conditioning are currently capable of and for the courses they race on. I’ve had more than a few people who had been riding their bikes set-up with low (arm pads/bars 10-17cm below the top of saddle) that they simply could not hold. These riders usually had back and neck pain and (in some severe cases) found themselves crashing when trying to ride in the aerobars. In many cases, the only position they could ride comfortably and confidently in was with their hands resting on the top of the armpads (which certainly isn’t very aerodynamic). Based upon principles of biomechanics and flexibility, I often change many aspects of these rider’s position. Often this we raise some rider’s armpads so that the rider is able to comfortably and efficiently rest in the aerobars without pain because they are within their range of motion and strength capabilities. They also gain more confidence in the aerobars as their weight becomes more evenly distributed on the bike for their level of experience and the events they are participating in. This greatly helps their efficiency as the aero position is only aero if you can hold it and you are on two wheels…

So what position should you be riding? I can’t make an accurate recommendation without seeing you. However, I can offer some insight into how to find someone to help you out. The first is to ask questions and make sure they understand the big picture. For example, two very important principles that many fitters and fit systems do not pay much attention to, or always have a very good understanding of, are how your range-of-motion/flexibility and core strength/cycling muscle development effects positioning. If a rider has only 55 degrees of motion in their hip flexor(s) and can not touch their toes, how are they ever going to hold and ride efficiently with the bars 10-15cm below the top of their saddle? Such a position will almost certainly cause them back pain and cause excessive pelvic rock which can be both inefficient and can contribute to repetitive use injuries as well. Common sense says that if your body can’t go that low off the bike, it probably isn’t going to go much lower on the bike. Find out if your prospective fitter understands this or not.

One of the most important things for a good fitter to understand is that every rider is unique and everything is related. Based upon the type of competition they will be involved in, their body’s capabilities and structure, I set some folks up 10-15cm below the top of the saddle, some 1-9cm below and a few with short humerus bones and acute comfort issues end up with their saddle even with their bars. With time and work on the athlete’s part, they might be able to move towards a lower position as they gain flexibility and strength or an injury heals. But in the meantime, you have to go with where you are at now. While lower might be faster for some, it most certainly is not for others.

Humans and their riding positions are dynamic. This is why computer and “tradition based” fit formulas do not work consistently. The best way to be positioned properly is to search-out, find and travel to someone that understands fits with a rider first approach that takes your individual needs directly into account. If a qualified technician places you in a more upright position or further back than what many advocate, realize that they probably did so for reasons beyond just aerodynamics (which is only one variable of many in positioning) and, depending upon your situation, you can be faster and more comfortable because of it. Also realize that, with work on strength and flexibility, as well as just putting in the miles, many riders can achieve a more aggressive position with time as their bodies adjust and strengthen. Because of this dynamic element to human existence, having your position readdressed at least once a season (especially if notable changes in mileage, an injury, or increased strength work and flexibility have occurred) is recommended.

In the end, there is not one position that works best for everyone. However, there are technicians that can help just about everyone. The better the technician understands the principals of biomechanics and skeletal structure/alignment, how well they interview and listen to the individual rider, and the better they understand the bike(s), technology and events/rides the rider is involved with, the better your position will be and the faster you will ride in comfort.

Ian
Fit Werx

As a solo rider, you do not have the benefit of being protected from the wind by a peloton of other riders as you would in a road race. When you are riding on your own, overcoming air resistance uses 65-70% of your energy. An aero position is designed to help you maximize your aerodynamic efficiency by reducing your frontal surface area through a lower torso position. However, aero positions have some risks associated with them too and two of the more common discomforts and injuries riders experience are to the hamstring and erector spinae muscle groups. These injuries are primarily caused by the muscle groups being put into positions that stretch them beyond their capabilities.

Lowering the torso into a more aero position, without making other changes simultaneously, is a lot like doing a deep toe touch - the lower you go, the more strain is placed on the erector spinae and hamstrings and, if you go too far or too fast, you can tear one. In its simplest terms, when strain on a muscle exceeds its capacity to stretch and support, pain is the result and injury may occur. How to address this from a cycling position perspective is a more complicated subject.

There are four primary, and individual, items that should be addressed to reduce strain on uncomfortable or injured lower spinae and hamstrings in an aero position:

1. Proper saddle height.
2. Proper saddle fore/aft positioning.
3. Proper arm pad height.
4. Proper bike length.

1) Regardless of the other potential solutions, riding with an appropriate saddle height is crucial to comfort and power. A saddle that is too low can prevent the lower spinae from extending fully and thus effectively cramp the muscles while a saddle that is too high can overextend the muscles and repetitively pull on them. Both can lead to discomfort. Because of the greater pelvic rotation encouraged by a lower torso position, most triathletes should be riding with a saddle height slightly below what they would ride on their road bike. Flexibility and alignment are variables that should be assessed and considered before determining proper saddle height.

2) If you are riding on a more relaxed seat angle road bike (<76˚ seat angle), or with your saddle far back on its rails on your triathlon specific bike, moving the saddle forward can take load off strained hamstrings and lower spinae. As the saddle is moved forward, it relaxes the angle created between the lower back and the leg. This can not only takes strain off the lower spinae, but can also reduce pull where the hamstrings attach to the ischial tuberocitis on the pelvis. Moving the saddle on the rails should be done with care as it will also effect the length of the bike and the relation of the knee to the foot while riding. Both of these items can directly effect other aspects of comfort and performance while riding.

3) If you are already riding in a forward seat angle and are experiencing hamstring or lower back pain, you will want to look at the height of your aerobar arm pads. Many athletes, in their quest for speed, are riding bikes with very low arm positions. Regardless of forward seat angles, this can still put a lot of load on the musculature of the lower back and hamstrings. Except in very rare circumstances, the solution is to raise the arm pads until the height places the torso angle within the rider’s comfort zone for their flexibility and strength.

4) A bike that is set-up too short from saddle to handlebar can cause the spine to curve and will load up the lumbar and lower thoracic areas causing discomfort. For riders in this situation, the length of the bike needs to be extended. Depending upon the situation, this is best accomplished through a saddle adjustment, longer aerobars or a longer stem.

There is a small segment of riders who simply cannot ride comfortably in an aero position. These people may have severe sciatica or other mitigating factors (like an injury) that limit them. Riding technique can effect comfort and efficiency too, but these are beyond the scope of this article.

Figure 1

The most efficient aero positions (figure 1) possible require excellent flexibility and strength to be held comfortably and without risk of injury. If you want to ride in such a position, it is important that you consistently focus on stretching and strengthening the associated muscle and tendon groups (erector spinae, hamstring, psoas, iliotibial tract and hip flexor). Many inexperienced riders and riders with lower flexibility, should start riding in a more upright and relaxed road based position that places less strain on the lower back musculature and hamstrings (figure 2) until their riding experience, cycling strength and flexibility develop. As they progress, a program to develop into a more aggressive position can be instituted over time.

Figure 2

Regardless of experience and flexibility, if you want to maximize your power, aerodynamics and efficiency while riding, it is crucial that your position is built around what your body is capable of holding comfortably. Your position should address your individual needs and physical capabilities. Your flexibility, core strength, body measurements and alignment, riding experience, and any other mitigating factors (injuries, mileage…) must all be assessed before a position is built. Once these variables are established, a qualified technician can combine the information into a dynamic session on a fit cycle where angles can be polished and your body can be balanced until a position that will keep from straining muscles, while maintaining an efficient and powerful pedal stroke, can be constructed. For strong and experienced athletes, computer based assessments of aerodynamics, power output and efficiency, and oxygen transfer can also be integrated into an advanced fitting session to further perfect the rider’s efficiency.

Like hair style, position is dynamic and will change as you age, gain experience and your body changes. Also like hair, it is a good idea to have it touched up and reviewed periodically by a well-trained specialist. What works now might not be optimal in a year or two and trying to fix it on your own can often create more problems than it solves.

By Ian Buchanan

Much of the bicycle industry has done a good job of creating the impression that different materials offer different ride characteristics. Aluminum is supposed to be stiff and light, but is also known for diminished durability and harsh ride quality; Titanium is supposed to be light, durable, comfortable and compliant, but a little flexible; Carbon fiber is supposed to be light and comfortable while simultaneously enhancing drivetrain stiffness; Steel (Chromoly) is supposed to be “real” and provide a comfortable and snappy ride, but is known to be a bit heavier and more flexible than other options. Right?

Not necessarily.

All manufacturers are trying to build that perfect combination of ride characteristics where stiffness and responsiveness are maximized, while the ride is still kept silky smooth and comfortable. It is not too hard to find claims of a frame being stiff, yet compliant and comfortable, with fantastic vibration damping characteristics. However, the bicycle industry has never had a good baseline testing protocol to quantify how various materials and designs actually perform in regards to specifics like stiffness and comfort. Everything has pretty much been based on “feel”, which is not a very scientific or reliable way to test a piece of machinery. Automobiles provide a good model for how unreliable “feel” can be. A BMW 745i can cruise along the Interstate at 95 mph without feeling like it is going that fast, while a compact Ford Aspire will comparatively feel like it is going pretty fast at 95 mph. Likewise, a bicycle frame that is really stiff and transmits a lot of road shock, can feel fast while a frame that feels more comfortable and compliant can feel slower. However, as the car analogy demonstrates, such feelings can be misleading. I was involved in a test that was designed to find out a little more about what the reality behind the materials and designs is. We tested the stiffness of some common frame designs and material applications in both horizontal (power transfer) and vertical (comfort and compliance) plane. Some of the test results are below:

Torsional Stiffness of the Rear Triangle:

This test applied pressure to the frame’s rear triangle side-to-side and measured how far the frame deflected in inches (moved) under a set pressure. The lower the number, the stiffer the bike is side to side, the less flex it will have, and the more direct the rider’s power will be transmitted to the drivetrain.

Rear Triangle Torsional Stiffness

Cannondale CAAD 3 Oversized Aluminum .038”
Softride Rocket R1 Aluminum .039″
Serotta Legend Ti OS: Oversized Butted Titanium down tube and chain stays .045”
Marinoni Lugged Butted Reynolds Chromoly .045”
Trek OCLV 110 Carbon .052”
Klein Quantum Pro Oversized Aluminum .054”
Seven Axiom Butted Titanium .057”
Kestrel KM40 Carbon .060”
Generic Welded Butted Chromoly Frame .066”
Litespeed Tuscany Production Titanium Frame .074”

Vertical Frame Compliance:

This test was conducted in a similar fashion to the torsional stiffness test, but it measured vertical deflection in inches. The numbers directly relate to a frame’s comfort and ability to absorb vibration. In this case, the higher the number, the more flexible, compliant and comfortable a frame’s rear triangle will be up and down.

Vertical Frame Compliance

Softride Rocket R1 Aluminum 1.4”
Litespeed Tuscany Production Titanium Frame .064”
Generic Butted Chromoly Frame .061”
Kestrel KM40 Carbon .060”
Seven Axiom Butted Titanium .057”
Serotta Legend Ti OS – Oversized Butted Titanium down tube and chain stays .054”
Marinoni Lugged Butted Reynolds Chromoly .052”
Trek OCLV 110 Carbon .052”
Klein Quantum Pro Oversized Aluminum .052”
Cannondale CAAD 3 Oversized Aluminum .049”

The results of the tests demonstrated a correlation between vertical compliance and torsional stiffness. With little variance, and the notable exception of the one suspension frame we tested (Softride Rocket R1), the frames that were stiffer torsionally were also stiffer vertically and the frames that were more compliant vertically were softer torsionally. There was also a good deal of range within materials depending upon their application in design. For example, both the Kestrel KM40 and the Trek OCLV 110 are made of carbon fiber, however the seat tubeless KM40 was softer in both the vertical and horizontal plane than the seat tube equipped Trek OCLV 110. Likewise, the Titanium Serotta Legend Ti OS, which was specifically engineered for bigger riders, was one of the stiffer frames in the test while the Titanium Litespeed Tuscany was one of the most flexible.

Over a decade ago, Holland Cycles did a similar test on a wide variety of frames and our results supported what they found: the material itself matters little in regards to torsional stiffness and vertical compliance (responsiveness and comfort). What does matter is the size, shape and wall thickness of the tubing used and the manufacturing technique (carbon lay-up, lugged or welded…) and design of the frame.

There are no bad frame materials - there are only poor applications. Any material can be built to have characteristics that are on the other end of the spectrum of what is commonly thought. Aluminum can be soft and flexible (you may remember aluminum frames made by Vitus in the ‘80’s and early ‘90’s) and Titanium and carbon can be made so stiff and harsh that they would be unrideable. So, why do materials each have their own reputations in regards to ride characteristics? Certain materials lend themselves to certain production designs and it is these initial designs that deserve the credit, or the rap, for a material’s general ride reputation, not the material itself.

When choosing a frame or new bike, do not spend time making judgments about ride quality based upon the materials used to build a frame. Instead, approach your frame decision as an individual. Only consider frame options that fit you well, and then look at the design details and tubing to find the ride characteristics that will best match your needs, body and riding style. Finally, don’t forget that a bicycle is a sum of its parts. The other components (especially the wheels and the fork) that you use effect the way it will ride as much as the frame does and should be chosen based upon how they relate to the other parts around them. If you remove yourself from the advertising claims and choose your bike through a process that considers the big picture, I can promise that you will be happy with the long-term results of your new ride.

Important Considerations for Bigger or Smaller than Average Riders (under 150lbs and over 170lbs):

Keep in mind that most production frame tubing is designed for the “average” rider – usually a male who fits on a 55cm frame and weighs around 160 lbs. As production frames become bigger or smaller than this, or a rider heavier or lighter, the ride quality of the frame is going to change too. For better or for worse, when compared to the spec size (usually about a 55cm) a smaller than average production frame is going to be stiffer and less compliant while a larger than average production frame is going to be softer and more compliant.

If you are a larger than average rider, you need to be cautious of many of the more vertically compliant (more flexible) rigid frame designs on the market. While frames like Kestrel’s KM40 or a Litespeed Tuscany might be a good option for a lighter rider, as a larger more powerful rider, you could over-flex it. This can not only prematurely fatigue the frame but can also lead to shifting and stability issues while sacrificing your power because of too much flex. Lighter riders want to be wary of stiffer frame options as they become even more stiff in smaller frame sizes and a lighter rider simply does not have the mass to flex a stiff frame the way a heavier rider does. A Cannondale with its oversized tubing might not be the best decision. Without flex, a frame will transmit a lot of road vibration and will not be very comfortable. This is one reason we often recommend custom builders like Serotta, who not only build custom geometry frames, but also custom tune the ride by offering a variety of tubing size and shape to match your specific needs and frame size.

When looking at designs, keep in mind that the ride quality a frame is known for is usually based upon the experience of an “average sized” rider. What can ride great under a 160 lbs rider, might be too mushy for a heavier rider or might be too stiff and uncomfortable for a smaller rider. If you are bigger or smaller than average cyclist, it is even more important to approach frame and component decisions based upon your individual needs so that you don’t end up with a bicycle that is too stiff or too soft for your size and power.

Copyright 2003 – Performance Specialties, Inc.