Factor launched a new tri bike last month and I don’t think the intention is for it to (yet) rival the P5 or the Speedmax. This is only the second iteration of the Slick, so this brand has just begun to fight in the tri space. Also, it does not enjoy a breadth of models across the price spectrum and this is a must if you want to sell in volume.

Still, the Factor Slick commands attention because of what it is and because of who is behind it. The “who” is Rob Gitelis, with whom I’ve had business dealings as a bike maker going back to 1995. He has had his own factories in Asia for most of that time and absolutely knows his way around. The head designer for Factor is Graham Shrive, who had that job at Cervelo during the post-Vroomen/White era. He didn’t just help Cervelo keep the doors open; he continued to move the brand forward with insightful design ideas. Then there’s one particular investor in Factor – Chris Froome – who was not just the world’s best cyclist in his era, but was an innovator in riding technique, notably in cadence and in descending.

What is the Slick? Think if it as Factor’s version of Cervelo’s P5D and I don’t think that’s an unfair statement for these reasons. First, it’s a World Tour TT bike dolled up with tri accessories and, if you think about Cervelo’s history over the past dozen years, that’s clearly what you all want. The Cervelo P3X was the bike specifically made by Cervelo for your use case if you’re an IRONMAN-style racer. Most of you chose the more conventional-looking bike. Why would Factor make an unconventional design when the last bike to do that successfully was Softride in the 1990s?

From a design motif, Cervelo’s experience has been instructive. Shrive was engineering project manager, and then head of engineering, at Cervelo from 2012 through 2019, formative years for the P5. It stands to reason he brought what he knew over to the Slick.

On the subject of geometry, here is the conundrum we all face today. The bike positions of the top triathlon pros have subtly changed over the last half-decade and, by my observation, the changes follow equipment. A full forearm rest serves as both a comfort feature and an aerodynamic advantage when it acts as a fairing. The rider hides behind the aerobar and this allows the bar to sit higher and tilt up. Some riders also appear to be sliding a bit forward into a pretty extreme hip position. The original tri bike, in 1989, did not invent a position; it placed a bike and a geometry where riders were already riding. The bike was “built from the bars back.”

Have we again reached a place where the bike geometry must be reimagined if these new aerobar styles inform a change in the way riders sit aboard their bikes? If what you need is a longer front center, and a higher aerobar, could you not just buy an existing tri bike in the next size up? Sure, if your position is dictated by the aerobar you use, and the bike underneath that aerobar happens to be a typical tri bike in a larger size.

Anyway, the conundrum for Factor and for Cervelo and all the brands like these is: tri bike geometries have not yet changed to match the positions dictated by these new aerobars; and the bikes built today generally don’t come spec’d with these bars. They are aftermarket purchases. It’s no different with the Factor Slick. You might even say that the OE aerobar is often a placeholder on bikes like the Slick that sell for $9,000 or more, because a purchase of this magnitude is destined to have a boutique, full-forearm armrest placed on it. So, which size do you buy? The size for the stock aerobar or the size that anticipates the use of an aftermarket bar you raise up and hide behind?

Bikes like Cervelo’s P5, and the Factor Slick – and Trek’s Speed Concept and so many other bikes – are hamstrung by their dual use cases. Aerobars and positions not necessarily legal in professional cycling are fully legal in tri. Fortunately, the Slick is designed with a standard round steerer that will accept just about any bar, because its designers knew that the bar on the bike is likely to be replaced. However the Slick is shipped with the Vision Metron TFA aerobar and, in my opinion, it’s too much bar – too much money for a bar – that isn’t full forearm. I’d rather see the bike shipped with a Drag 2 Zero or Sync or Aerocoach, or just outfit the Slick with the a cheap aerobar that everyone knows is going to be replaced.

The rest of the Slick’s details borrow from the work Shrive put into the Cervelos he made, such as generous top tube storage and hydration and additional down tube storage. It’s a well-designed and well-conceived bike served to you from an august design team that is, in every sense of the word, factory direct (not just a sales channel, but a fully-integrated, fully vertical “farm to table” bike brand).

The Slick will sell complete for US $9,200 or $10,400, and that’s with SRAM Force or RED equipped respectively (AXS electronic in each case). For only $1,200 more I’d take the RED because that groupset is a new design and its features (such as improved front derailleur shifting) haven’t yet flowed down to the other groupsets.

The post Factor’s Updated Slick first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The original Wildflower is back and “original” in this case refers to the ownership structure and the mechanics of the production.   The daughter – Colleen Bousman – of the founder – Terry Davis – of the Wildflower Triathlon was the main organizing force during this event’s halcyon years.  She reacquired the race from Motiv Sports, who had it for most of the past decade.  The most important news to Wildflower devotees is that after years of drought and atypical water management the swim venue – Lake San Antonio – is nearly full and the water release schedule for the next couple of years is minimal.   Race dates are May 2^nd  through 4^th of 2025 and registration is open.

Why is the reconstitution of any particular race worthy of a front page article?  This race is a phenomenon unreplicated in triathlon. Peak numbers were 9,000 registering with 7,500 participating and while some races have been bigger – London and Hamburg, maybe Chicago Triathlon – Wildflower was unique in that you almost had to camp and for most it was a feature, not a bug.  The organizers had a special relationship with this very large county park, as Terry Davis was a longtime Monterey County (just below San Francisco) Parks & Rec director.  Back then, and again for the race upcoming, the organizers rent out the entire Lake San Antonio park and triathlon clubs are given their own discrete locations to camp.  Typically clubs would bring their members out and in years past you’d see about 70 clubs with banners flying about their camping area.  So far more than 50 clubs have signed up to get their spots for the upcoming May race and Ms. Bousman says that this pace projects to perhaps 80 clubs by race weekend.

This race is doubly important because it’s a bellwether of the strength of triathlon in the U.S. and in particular non-IRONMAN-affiliated triathlon.  For a long time Wildflower was a Kona qualifier but when Kona slots were reallocated away from Wildflower in 2001 the race didn’t skip a beat.  Its value was intrinsic.  It wasn’t a means to another race.  It was its own reward for those who participated and the annual return rate was routinely 70 percent year-over-year.  Even plopping popular IRONMAN St. George proximate to the Wildflower weekend didn’t dent the numbers.  Only a lack of water caused Wildflower’s numbers to drop and – fingers crossed – that appears to be no longer an issue for the upcoming event.

The other important relationship that returns for 2025 is the participation of Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, the students a critical part of Wildflower’s volunteer army, with event work a part of Cal Poly SLO’s curriculum. 

Also back is the expo and drawing from my own days as a manufacturer/vendor Wildflower annually hosted the best revenue and brand-building expo of any triathlon in the U.S.  (Others may disagree but this was my brand’s experience.) This was no-doubt due to the captive audience that was typically there for 3 or 4 days rather than 3 or 4 hours.  Folks would hang out at the lawn in front of the main stage.  The bluegrass (and country and classic rock) bands will be back along with the many food vendors.

One thing old timers will find somewhat different is attention on events for those not racing triathlons.  It’s not Wildflower Triathlon anymore, but Wildflower Experience.  The spectator-to-participant ratio at Wildflower was a very high 3:1, which meant 75 percent of those camping in the park had no events for them and in peak years the park hosted 30,000 total attendees.  Accordingly, in recent years a 5k, 10k, trail run and open water swim race was added mostly for these folks who were so-inclined and Wildflower pros who’ve gone on to excellence in other single-sport endeavors – like Angela  Naeth and Heather Jackson – may participate in bringing gravel and/or ultra trail runs to this weekend (in future years).

A lot changed at that park over the last 6 years.  What kind of shape is the park in?  Are the facilities still there?  The answer is yes and no.   Over the last 3 years Monterey County has been  refurbishing the park, focusing on water, sewer and the trail system.  But race management will have to augment with extra facilities and anticipates spending $40,000 to do that beyond what’s normally in the race budget.  The County pulled out half the cabins but did replace those with pull-in RV hook ups and there are additional lakeview RV spots.  For those who just don’t camp there are vacation (e.g., Airbnb) rentals  at nearby Oak Shores and Lake Nacimiento and it’s off season so the rates are attractive.

Let’s talk about reg fees because this race is an example of the changes so many of us have asked for for decades.  In part this is due to very recent changes in California consumer law, mostly a response to the practices of Ticketmaster. The price you see is the price you get.  No “convenience fee” at the end.  The long course (identical to the 70.3 distances) is $384.75. Olympic-distance course is $238.50.  The Offroad Sprint (where you will find me) is $176.10.  Another feature worth noting:  If you enter and find you can’t use your registration, you can transfer yours to another for a $25 fee.

Because there is no annual in-person industry trade show for triathlon, and other annual meet-ups have ceased, Ms. Bousman noted that “people have missed a place to gather.”  She’s right.  I used to see my friends and contemporaries a half-dozen times a year and now I don’t see them at all.  Ms. Bousman’s event was one of those times and in her vision it will be again.

Of course, Wildflower’s events were never easy.  “When you come to WF you have to check your ego at the door, because of the nature of the course,” Ms. Bousman said.  “It’s a hard race to do.  But it’s also not just about you.  You cheer on your teammates.  It’s good for peoples’ souls.  You feel good on Monday morning, not hungover.”

The post Original Wildflower Back On the Schedule first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Leisha raced Kona last year on what she called “a roll roll roll down slot – in the batch they sent out in July to fill the race.”  It was her first time racing in Kona, but she’d been there spectating previously.  Leisha stayed at the Courtyard King Kamehameha’s Kona Beach Hotel, known by us all as the “King Kam,” where the race starts and finishes.  In Nice she stayed at the Anatara hotel, “which was right at the Expo and Transition; very central location.”

Kona is an easier trip for her as she lives in the Bay Area and flies from SFO.   For Nice, her itinerary was SFO to Charles De Gaulle (Paris), and then south.  Also worth noting is Leisha’s throttled-back ambition for this race due to injury.  “Multiple fractures in my toe in my qualifying race so I had no idea if I was going to finish the run. I went by feel and enjoyed every moment, which maybe unless you are going to win your AG is the right way to race.”

Here is Leisha’s comparative analysis of the two events. 

What Kona did better:  

1.  Practice swims every day with bag check.  In Nice you could swim anywhere there was not a centralized place.   In Kona you just ran into everyone at the swim  – that was fun. 

2.  Gear check in.  In Kona it is a big deal, at Nice more like regular IRONMAN and this was a bit disappointing but I was also disappointed last year when no vendors showed up to gear check in.  Pre-Covid you got free stuff if you had the vendors gear.  

3.  Post finish line experience.  In Kona there were tons of people just hanging out.  In Nice it was pretty empty.  Maybe it was my later finish time.

4. In T1 and T2 Kona had volunteers.  I am pretty much self-sufficient so this is really a push for me, but Kona had water and wet towels.  This was really nice.  Nice should have had a least water in T1 and T2. 

5. Sponsor parties.  PH had a house at Nice, but not sure of any other sponsors who had houses or events.    

What Nice did better:

1.   The swim is a push – but I’ll take  Nice (open exposed swim) over Kona.  I would have preferred no wetsuit. 

2.   The bike – hands down hard and fun and technical – Kona is just plain boring.   

3.   The run is also a push – 4 laps is hard – but other than going into and out of the Energy Lab at sunset Kona is not pretty and is boring; Nice is gorgeous in the day and the night.  

4.   You are in Nice – work kept us from staying longer, but we did pop into Monaco for dinner one night and saw a UAE rider on the way – not to mention George Hincapie was staying at my hotel.  Next time we would probably stay longer  and explore more of the Cote D’Azur.  

And also…

“The expo: Kona’s might have been bigger – but Nice was fine – and Nice had better finisher gear on Monday which I thought was interesting, though it could have been a reaction to poor supply at Kona.

“What I was not expecting in Nice were large amounts of tourists still around and clueless to the race.   I don’t view this as a plus or minus – just was not expecting that.  But I did like that we did not take over the town and we could blend in.  There was a race vibe near the race, and then it was just being in Nice away from the venue. There was also a very high level of security anywhere near the venue; bags were always checked going into the expo. There was also high security getting into T1 on race morning.

“Kona or Nice: If I could only do one I would pick Nice every time, and am planning on going back in 2026 It is just cooler. I can’t explain it and I know it will take time to weaken the hold Kona has, but I would hope that true triathletes would want the best WC course that the World has to offer. I think there is a place for Kona, but for the sport to flourish IRONMAN has to look beyond Kona as the sole WC location.  

“On the Women/Men split: I love having my own day. As a FOP swimmer, racing with men is just not fun. But I do think that IM should try to get us on the same continent.   

“Finally, one thing stands out to me regarding my comments above:  Kona has a lot of ‘experience’ in putting on a WC and Nice is in the beginning stages.  Perhaps IRONMAN lost money on the women’s race in Nice, but change is not going to happen overnight. I do hope that IRONMAN gives Nice the time to shine for the women.”

If you wonder about Leisha’s tri background, “first tri was Escape from Alcatraz in 1997.” She was a short-courser until IRONMAN Canada in 2006 and since then mostly all 70.3s and Fulls except for Escape from Alcatraz annually if not injured. Nice was her 12th IRONMAN.

The post More Color on the Women’s Races in Kona and Nice first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The Coros Dura and I have gotten to know each other over the last 6 weeks.  Coros did the opposite of Wahoo, which started with a GPS head unit and went to the watch.  Coros is already a fixture in GPS watches.  Users include Eliud Kipchoge, Jakob Ingebrigtsen, Eilish McColgan, Alex Yee, Emma Coburn and Kilian Jornet (look at his just-completed Alpine Connections).  It has now gone the other way and released a bicycle GPS head unit.

The Dura is worth your knowing about for 2 reasons beyond any others:  first, the Dura costs $249; second, battery life.  That $249 is really inexpensive  when you consider the 2.7” screen size is the same as Wahoo ROAM’s screen.  Wahoo’s BOLT has a 2.2” screen and at $279 is in the same price region as the Dura.

As to battery life it’s claimed at 120 hours to a charge and I don’t really know if that’s accurate because I have not been very successful at running this battery down.  Over the past weeks I’ve been riding with the Dura it’s been very sunny and not shaded and the darned thing keeps recharging because of the solar panel built into the unit.  Note the image above. An almost-90 minute ride chewing up zero battery. Further below you’ll see a 2 hour ride, same thing.  So, I don’t know that “battery life” is an applicable metric any longer.  Maybe a new metric is needed like “recharge cycle” or “power scheme.”  It’s like the thing has an alternator.  You can see how compelling that might be.

This is a very new product and if you’ve been following DCRainmaker’s comments (he’s been all over the Dura) you can see that this company has had a few false starts, both with hardware and software.  Let’s tackle the hardware first, both the way this product works and why it’s had a spotty start (and how to maximize your experience if you think you’re a candidate for a Dura).

If you’re a Coros watch user you’ll find that the Dura uses a similar motif, in that there are 2 buttons and 1 of those buttons is a scroll wheel that is also a button.  Imagine a Wahoo for example, where you have up and down buttons that cycle you through a list of menu options.  You do that here with a scroll wheel and when you turn that wheel to your chosen option you then push the wheel, like a button, to select it.  The other button is the back button (same thing for both the watch and the head unit).  The head unit’s face is also a touch screen which is also scrollable (so you have 2 ways to scroll). As you see, the screen is color and also backlit.

You mount this unit using the same quarter turn motif as a Garmin and that’s handy If you have more than one head unit and you don’t need to keep changing the mounts.  Now, as to that hardware hiccup:  There was an issue with the tabs breaking on the unit itself, but only with arcane and off-brand mounts.  The Dura reportedly worked fine on standard quarter-turn mounts as well as popular accessory brands like K-edge, and it worked fine on my Zipp Quickview (The Dura is mounted on my Quickview in these images).  New units shipping later this month will have something I wish all head units had:  the tabs are replaceable (with 2 screws), so a broken tab on the Dura no longer means you trash the whole device.  Kind of like replaceable derailleur hangers on bike frames.  The enterprising customer takes possession of his Dura in about 2 weeks from this writing, when the units with replaceable mounts will begin to ship.

Software:  Every function I want and that I use – data and navigation – is available with the Dura with certain exceptions which I’ll list in a minute.  Coros has a web interface you can log into and there’s a bunch of performance software there.  For the purpose of configuring your Dura I use the Coros app and it’s pretty similar to the ELEMNT app I’d use for my Wahoo devices.  

I won’t go into a step-by-step process for how to configure the Dura but I found it pretty easy to set up the pages I want – data and navigation – and all of my sensors were supported, including my Garmin Varia radar.  Just enabled is the ability for Shimano and SRAM controls – what SRAM calls its bonus button on the shifter hood – to toggle pages on the Dura but I have not yet tested this.  Map navigation of routes was fine and the Dura didn’t break a sweat as I downloaded several maps that total the United States.  Which took maybe 2 minutes.  There appears to be enough hard drive space to hold pretty much all the maps of all the places you’d want to ride.

I will now list the things I would like to see that I don’t yet see, with an estimated delivery time.

If you’re a STRAVA segment hunter that’s a necessary page on your head unit.  The Dura is not there yet, but that is apparently imminent.  You would invest in your Dura and then wait for a firmware patch that gives you that.  Maybe 1 to 3 months out.

Integration with RideWithGPS.  I like to build my routes in RWGPS and then I sync them down to my (let’s say) Wahoo ROAM.  There are 2 ways to handshake with 3^rd party integrations with the DURA and one is to select the integration from a long list of participants you’ll find in the Coros app.  RWGPS is not one of those.  But if you go in through RWPGS and choose a hardware maker to sync to, you’ll see Coros appearing and you make your integration that way.  That has been possible except that a few days ago the integration broke.  Since it did work I can assume fixing what broke will take days or a very few weeks again allowing you to sync down routes to the Dura from RWPGS. (Maybe it’s already been fixed.)

If you want a proper climbing page, which has a silhouette of what you did just climb and what it is that’s in front of you to climb, I don’t believe this is here yet on the Dura but it is promised and coming.

Finally let’s talk about “route to start” and “rerouting.”  This of course being part of the navigation suite.  These are really, really hard tasks to get a bike computer to perform.  When these tasks are needed the Dura needs your handheld to perform that task.  The Dura queries your iPhone (let’s say), the iPhone does your rerouting, sends the answer to the Dura, which patches it into your navigation.  This works pretty seamlessly to you except when your handheld has no connectivity. The only problem is when you don’t have cell connectivity, or you don’t take a handheld with a GPS with you when you ride.

I’ve been out there riding with a head unit costing 40 or 50 percent less money than the others I own and other than the STRAVA segments thing – which I have to wait for – I don’t feel that I’m out there with a lesser device. Let us take a moment to consider the Dura… that done, we can now return to our regularly scheduled inflation woes.

The post Coros Dura, Inflation Beater first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

I rely a lot on BicycleRollingResistance.com. But a drum roller like the one BRR uses is only a proxy for tire speed and is limited in what it can tell you. For example, it’s a good process for sussing out who’s got the best “compound” (tread material) and who makes a good casing.

On a drum roller a 28c tire will outperform its 25c cousin every day and twice on Tuesday when the tires on the testing unit are pumped to identical pressures, but the casing on that 28c tire at that higher pressure is too stiff to be fast on the road. So you take air out of the 28c tire to normalize. Drum rollers are not just terrible, but worthless, at helping you choose your optimal tire pressure.

What are you normalizing for when you take air out of a 28c tire to reach its ideal pressure? Casing tension. You want the same casing tension in the 25c tire as the 28c tire, the 30c and 32c tire, and each wider tire needs a correspondingly lower pressure. One way to know how much to depressurize a larger tire is to use a proxy for casing tension, and one such proxy is what people call “sag” or “drop”. This is how much the tire sinks down when its rider hops aboard. Frank Berto’s data from the 1990s still holds up for high-quality, supple tires: The drop should be 15% of the measured width (assuming we’re taking really high quality, supple tires). But measuring drop is hard. Here’s the easy way to identify the right pressure: Attach yourself to an online air tire pressure calculator you trust and follow that calculator’s guidance. (More on which calculator below.)

Why a wider road tire is more comfortable

At face value it might seem that a wider tire should be no more comfortable (nor should it be faster) than a thinner tire, because the wider tire is depressurized to hit that optimal casing tension and be its “best self.” But there’s more to it. One way to look at a wider tire is to think of it as a shock absorber. The larger volume in a wider tire is like a shock with a longer stanchion. It can suck up more positive space (bumps, rocks) above the road as the tire rolls overtop, and the “preload” (remember that 15% drop?) is better able to fill negative space (holes in the road).

Why a wider road tire is faster

What makes the tire more comfortable – explained above – also makes it faster. But even on smooth roads the prevailing theory concerns the shape of the contact patch. A narrower tire has a more oval patch, longer front to back, narrower in width. The shape of that patch generates more friction than the rounder contact patch formed by the wider tire.

So, why not just make the tire really wide? For us oldster today’s road tires already are. For the last 15 years of the 20th century a 20mm tire was considered by many the fastest TT tire. The tires ridden today in road races (from 29mm to 31mm measured) and more increasingly in time trials or triathlons (29mm measured) are already 50 percent wider than they were back then and pressures, instead of being in the 120psi or 130psi range, are now often in the mid-50s psi. But the rolling resistance value of the wider tire isn’t infinite. You get a little less benefit every time you go wider. The Crr savings of a 34mm-wide tire over a 32mm tire is much less than a 28mm tire over a 26mm tire.

While Crr savings when you go wider diminish, the extra width is absolute and there is a point where the weight of the wider tire and even more so the aerodynamics of the wider tire overwhelm the rolling resistance savings. Where is that point where the aero and weight penalties forestall going wider?

What is the optimal tire width for road and TT?

What is the optimal tire size for road racing? This is a moving target for sure! One very clued-in observer, a former professional cyclist who now manages the careers of top athletes said to me last week, “Now when I look at a 28mm tire it seems skinny.” To me, the really stunning event of 2024 was Tadej Pogacar winning the Giro on a 28c tire during the road stages and then winning the Tour on what is reported to be a 30c version of that tire. I think we’re at the point where 28c is the thinnest tire that makes sense in road racing and draft-legal triathlon.

For tri and TT? A very popular combo these days in pure TT is 25c front and 28c rear. The idea is that a 28c system is faster, so use it when aero is of less importance. Use the 25c in the front. But this is easier on a TT than on a tri bike, where you probably don’t want to carry spares in 2 sizes. For tri, it is my guess that many or most of us will be riding 28c on equipment we’re buying new between now and 2 years from now.

Just, let us for a moment revisit the topic of pressures. We can’t really think of riding wider tires until we settle on a process for choosing the right pressure. I referenced the Silca calculator. The other end of the spectrum is the Rene Herse calculator which, like the Silca tire pressure calculator, is based on roll-down testing. You’ll note the Rene Herse values are quite a bit lower, as in, 10 to 15psi lower. (Rene Herse claims that Pogacar uses the Rene Herse pressure calculator values as guidance.)

How do you square the difference between 2 calculators that were constructed using the same process? I don’t know. In my own rolldown testing I come up with values more in line with Silca for these wider tires. It’s at that Silca calculator pressure my tire rolls down the hill fastest, but only by a minor amount and when I ride at those higher pressures on my local roads I get the livin’ jeebus beat out of me. So for my own riding I favor a lower pressure and in the loops I ride I’m actually faster at the lower pressure. Your best pressure might depend on how much abuse you can take; or how much vibration absorption there is in your equipment. In any case just note the for a 28c or 30c tire the optimal pressures are low, as in, the right pressure might be 75psi (that pressure in a 28c tire is makes for a hard tire!) and it might be 55psi but whatever it is it’s lower than you’re used to riding if triathlon is your activity.

How Systems Inform Ideal Tire Width

Here’s a by-product of disc brakes in road and tri bikes: You can run whatever fork blade width and shape you want, and you can do whatever you want to the rear triangle of the bike because you don’t need a rim brake caliper anywhere. This has led to bikes that have grown wider but remained aero and this even includes track bikes that have no brakes. (Did you see those wild Lotus bikes the UK team was riding on the velodrome in the Paris Olympics?) Blades, stays and wheels are all free to live their best individual aero lives. Wheels have changed as well because their designers are not burdened by rim braking surfaces. As a result the wheel/tire combo can become wider without an aero penalty (or with a very slight penalty that is more than compensated for by the faster rolling tire).

Here's what this means for TT and tri: If your bike, and your wheel, is optimized for a 25c tire your fastest tire is probably that size. If your wheel and, ideally, the bike the wheel goes into is optimized for a 28c tire then the fastest tire is 28c. If you are riding a late model Canyon Speedmax, a current model Trek Speed Concept, BMC or Cervelo P5, these bikes are either optimized for 28c or they are can at least be ridden with 28c tires with no penalty that flows from the design of the bike itself. Likewise, certain wheelsets are designed around 28c and Zipp is one obvious example.

I have never seen tire size as a driver of bike design. Until now. Whether for road, tri or gravel riders – and because of this bike designers – start with one design input that is paramount and can’t be ignored: tire size (which is tire width but also tire height, as wider tires are also taller tires). Riders choose their tire size and this allows or disqualifies the wheel; and likewise the bike that best mates with that wheel. Tires are growing wider and they’re doing so at a faster clip than I’ve ever seen. Pogacar, for his road races, appears to have graduated from 25c to 28c to 30c inside of about a year. I can’t tell you for sure where it’ll end up in 5 years. But I don’t think 28c for tri and 30c for road is a bad bet, especially when the entire bike is optimized for these tire sizes.

The post Why Wider Tires Are Faster and More Comfortable first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Running the right pressure all the time might seem like a chore. Easier said than done you might think. In truth it’s pretty easy and learning to know the right pressure, and run the right pressure every time, it will take you about 7 minutes if you continue on below to the finish.

First you need to accurately know your tire’s pressure. Unfortunately no, your floor pump is not very accurate. Besides, floor pumps have been in my rear view mirror for decades now except when I travel. I always inflate with a small compressor and this method has the added advantage of allowing you to seat the beads of a cranky tubeless tire. If what you need is a lot of volume into your tire quickly, you take out the presta valve core and shove a bunch of air into your tire using your compressor. I also use compressed air to dry my bike after I wash it. If you do use a compressor this means you need something not your floor pump to measure the pressure in your tires.

Standalone presta valve gauges are really cheap. Pictured here are 4 of them you can get on Amazon and the expensive one is the Topeak digital gauge which all-in, tax included and delivered, cost me $33.87. This is accurate to +/- 1psi and I would expect it to be because it’s from Topeak, the Taiwan-based bike tool company that has been making really first-rate tools and accessories since the brand debuted in the mid-1990s.

The other two units shown are the GODESON analog gauge at $10.99, which goes up to 100psi and the JACO RDX-160, which as the model indicates goes up to 160psi and sells for $22.90. There’s another gauge below I’ll write about and I’ll continue discussing these gauges below but if you just want to know what’s the best bang for your buck get the GODESON. They’re all good. Three have, based on my use of them, measure to about +/- 1.5psi if you’re measuring pressures under 80psi, and the JACO appears to measure high by 3 to 5 pounds (which is still better than a lot of floor pumps).

I always measure tire pressure before I ride. I always measure after I inflate with a pump or a compressor. (And theoretically after a CO2 inflation on the road but since changing to road tubeless 5 years ago I haven't had a flat.) Pinching with your fingers doesn’t tell you. Pinging the tire doesn’t tell you. Only direct measuring tells you.

What pressure?

I’ve published a suggested pressure for select tires that go on wheels with hookless rims. My pressures are a bit lower – 7psi to 8psi – than what you’ll find on the highly respected and often used Silca tire pressure calculator. Bookmark the Silca calculator, because either its right or I’m right and if you think it’s right just use it. If I'm right you still may want to use it.

Why are my suggested pressures lower? I'll explain.

First thing, make sure you use the Silca calculator right (many don’t). It says there right on the calculator “measured” tire width as an input, not “nominal” tire width and nominal means the named size on the tire. A 27c tire is supposed to measure 27mm; a 30c measures 30mm, and many or most people just think, “How much difference can it be? (Besides, you don’t have a caliper to measure your tire’s width accurately, right?) You’ll just plug the nominal tire size into Silca’s calculator.” Let me tell you why that’s usually wrong if you’ve recently purchased race wheels. The ETRTO and the ISO (Euro and US standards bodies respectively) say that if a brand makes a 25c tire it should measure 25mm on a rim that measures 19mm in width from bead to bead. If it’s a 27c up to 30c tire it should measure that width on a rim with a 21mm internal bead width. Many road rims today have internal bead widths from 22mm up to 25mm, and for every 2mm of extra bead with the inflated tire diameter grows by almost a millimeter.

For this reason, the 30c tires Tadej Pogacar rode front and rear on almost all of his road stages in the most recent Tour de France measured 31.5mm in width, because they were mounted on ENVE SES 4.5 rims which measured 25mm between the beads. Plugging 32mm into the Silca calculator will give you a 7psi lower recommended pressure than plugging in 30mm on that Silca calculator (for Pogacar, for his 30c tires on the ENVE wheels, Silca on worn roads recommends 63psi/61.5psi rear and front). So, you might want to invest in one more tool. Yes, you can get a Mitutoyo digital caliper for $118 (that brand is the gold standard) but I own a Neiko digital caliper that reads imperial and metric and it’s crackerjack at $23.99 (and is pictured here).

Still, why are my pressures lower, even if only by 7psi, than Silca? First, there’s rarely one pavement condition during a ride but your option with Silca is to choose one condition. You might choose to pressure your tires for the condition you find most often, but be careful there. Let’s take Paris Roubaix and yes this is an extreme example and I use this to make a point. That race is 160 miles of mostly moderate, reasonably smooth pavement. But just under a quarter of that race are pavé. These pavé sectors influence tire model, width and pressure much more heavily than you'd think when you contemplate that 125 miles of the race is pretty smooth tarmac and only 35 miles are cobbled. What you lose by being 5psi or 8psi underinflated for a smooth road is extremely minimal and that’s if you’re underinflated at all, which we’ll discuss. What you lose by being overinflated for a rougher section might be ten times that, and that’s the case whether road race, TT, tri or gravel.

There is probably an algorithm (which I don’t have) that says, “so many miles of smooth pavement, so many miles of rougher pavement, ” pothole sections, freeze cracks and so on and the algorithm weights the rougher pavement much more heavily than it does the smooth sections. Plug in the numbers and your pressure spits out. Because of how heavily I weigh rougher sections of road I end up with a lower pressure.

But even so, you’d be surprised how low the pressures are even for top TT specialists. At last year’s cycling World Championships American Chloe Dygert won the women’s elite, riding 55psi in her front tire and 58psi in the rear, both tires 28c in width. Antonia Niedermaier, World U23 champion in that race, also rode 28c tires and had 58psi in the front and 59psi in the rear. A combo by at least one US rider in the women’s Olympic Time Trial were 30c tires pumped to 55psi, acknowledging that spec chosen because of the rain.

Hooked or Hookless Beads?

I have no data that says the pressures change based on bead type. I have heard – but only anecdotally – that hookless beads call for pressures maybe 3psi lower than hooked, and the reason could be that the tire stands up better in the rim. Is not pinched at the waist. But I cannot get any wheel company that makes hookless rims to say their rims take a different pressure than a hooked bead with the same spec. Maybe the reason I’ve heard this is that road rims with hookless beads are universally made with wide inner bead widths (22mm to 25mm), and just that means the tire will inflate wider than on a thinner rim with a hooked bead, and any tire measuring wider on the rim needs a lower pressure.

The Biomechanics of a Rough Ride

In recent years we’ve begun to see scholarship on the effect of vibration on cyclists, including a paper on what happens to riders during Paris Roubaix. What we’ve seen in both running (HOKAs, supershoes) and in cycling over the last decade is the recognition that repetitious ballistic forces on the human body require an energy expenditure that does not contribute to forward propulsion.

Look at this this way: There’s a posture you strike aboard your bike. On your tri bike this is your aero position. Any time you go over a bump, however large or small, your head is forced downward. This requires a contraction of your suboccipital an trapezius muscles and that’s pretty obvious. It’s like a little tiny whiplash. You’re less aware that it’s not just your neck, but muscles throughout must contract to stabilize your body. A paper last year sought to quantify the effects of vibration and there’s a metric these academics now use called Vibration Dose Value (VDV). Reducing this to math gives us a chance to think about a global equation for speed that incorporates drag, Crr and biomechanics when we optimize racing equipment.

What makes this hard to measure for us is the time it takes for these micro insults to manifest themselves. I look at it like a boxing match. Absorbing 1 jab over 8 rounds probably won’t affect your ability to prosecute your battle. Five or 10 might not matter. But 40 or 50 jabs over 8 rounds may well ruin your plan. In our world it’s hard to imagine putting a relevant sample of athletes through a relevant number of several-hour bike rides, unless you’re a classics racer and you’ve learned the hard way what tire widths and pressures not to ride over the cobbles.

Stop Writing! Just Tell Me What Pressure Should to Run!

There are people whose job is just this – determining proper tires and pressures for the conditions – who disagree with me. I always feel that I’m not on stable ground when I disagree with people who do something for a day job. But here goes. I think it’s a wise move – and those experts to whom I allude would probably not disagree with me – to just use the Silca pressure calculator. Or to at least start with it. Just remember, it’s measured width, not named width.

When I plug Chloe Dygert’s values into the Silca calculator and use 30mm measured for her 28c tires on Zipp’s current wheels (that tire will measure close to 30mm in width) and I choose “worn pavement / some cracks” I get a pressure of 68.5psi. As we see she was riding about 10psi lower and I typically find that I ride about 7psi lower than the Silca recommendations. So, to hedge your bet maybe Silca minus 3psi to 5psi?

The Best Air Pressure Gauge

My favorite for years has been the Accu-Gage. It’s small, accurate, and its accuracy does not degrade over time. It $14.67 today on Amazon and my only beef with this particular gauge – which goes 0psi to 160psi – is that it’s not as easy to read as some others. (Nope, we don't get a commission on any product listed here; buy whatever you want from whomever you want.)

For this reason I lean a little toward the GODESON and while its 100psi max used to be a limitation in cycling it no longer is unless you’re on a velodrome. These gauges come with little tire tread covers. If you take the little tire treads off they pack smaller, as in, if you take the cover off the GODESON it looks and packs pretty much like the Accu-Gage. I really like the Topeak and if you look at the back of it you see the familiar, comforting door that you know hides a 2032 coin cell battery. The only thing about the Topeak is this: There is a post on every tire gauge of any type that hits the part of the valve core that depresses air. Pushing that presta valve plunger allows air to pass out and into the pneumatic reservoir (the tire in this case). That post is a little proud on the Topeak and if you’re not diligent you’ll let some air out just before the presta valve is swallowed by the rubber gaskets that make the seal between the gauge and the valve. If you don’t want that leak of air you have to line the gauge up and push it on quickly, before any air escapes.

All 4 of these gauges come with a pressure stop, meaning that you don’t need to read the pressure as you’re taking it. Get your pressure reading, read the pressure at your leisure, press an air release plunger on the gauge to zero the reading.

The post Always Run the Fastest Tire Pressure first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

The American bicycle components company SRAM launched a new groupset today, an expansion of the XPLR series. It is SRAM RED XPLR AXS and to recap RED is SRAM’s flagship, topline groupset, AXS denotes electronic and XPLR is 1x (1 chainring, no front derailleur). This groupset is 13-speed and the cassette gearing is 10-46.

This groupset continues to prosecute SRAM’s belief in 1x even as SRAM made significant improvements to its front derailleur shifting when launching its new RED 2x group in May.

This new XPLR upgrade is gravel-oriented and will appeal to serious gravel riders, both the functionality of the groupset itself and the mounting platform it uses. SRAM has its own standard for how rear derailleurs mount to frames, called UDH, which stands for Universal Derailleur Hanger though in fact direct-mount derailleurs omit the hanger from the system (which can be seen from the images herein). OPEN Cycles describes UDH as it explains why it has chosen to begin making its frames with the UDH standard.

SRAM’s 1x RED XPLR groupset shares certain components with its 2x RED road groupset: the controls (shifters), brake calipers, brake rotors, and Flat Top chain. The heart of this system is the rear derailleur and cassette and the RD is entirely new. While MTB has been using UDH for years this new RD is not the same as that on the SRAM Transmission. That MTB rear derailleur, called Eagle Transmission or just Transmission for short, also uses the UDH interface. This new XPLR groupset takes the UDH into gravel and like other UDH derailleurs it has no b-tension and no hi- or lo-limit screws. The difference between the groupsets and, specifically, the RDs is that Transmission prioritizes shifting under load whereas RED XPLR prioritizes shift speed. There is a clutch in the RED XPLR RD, but it is tuned for gravel. Like SRAM’s Eagle and Transmission RDs there is a cage lock for wheel removal.

The 10-46 cassette is just that: a single gearbox option. It fits into a standard-spaced frame and can mount on an XDR driver body because the UDH’s hangerless design allows the clearance for the 13th cog. This cassette weighs 288g and the first 3 cogs are aluminum. One other major departure from Transmission is that all SRAM’s MTB products use the Eagle chain while XPLR – this group included – use the Flat Top chain, which has previously been pretty much road-specific.

RED XPLR’s crankset has a Q factor of 150mm which is just like road, as opposed to the 170mm or 175mm Q found on MTB groupsets. Crank lengths range down to 160mm. The power meter is a threaded, spin-on, rather than the more familiar 8 bolt direct mount. This allows the chain rings to be replaced. Claimed accuracy on the PM is +/- 1.5% and of course the PM tech is driven by Quarq, long a member of the SRAM family. Chain rings range from 38t to 46t, with available aero rings from 48t to 52t.

Is this a tech for tri bikes? It could be with one exception: The minimum chain stay length is 415mm. This would work fine for a Canyon Speedmax, which has an unusually long 425mm chain stay, but a lot of tri bikes do not have chain stays as long as 415mm. (This is one reason Canyon athletes Jan Frodeno and Lionel Sanders could successfully ride 1x drive trains for years.)

Could this be a future tri bike groupset? Its 13 speeds are compelling. It would mean that tri bike makers would incorporate 2 changes in their designs: longer chain stays (which would not impede the handling of the bike and might improve on handling) and the incorporation of the UDH system, which is not a problem because the insertion of a derailleur hanger into the UDH hole converts a frame to a standard road motif.

Is this SRAM’s best gravel 1x option? Maybe. SRAM still offers the “mullet” config, which is MTB behind the crankset and road from the crankset forward. The rear of the bike would use the Transmission RD and cassette and the Eagle chain and would also mount directly to the UDH hole in the frame. The advantage to the mullet is the wider gear range (10-50 or 10-52 cassette). The advantage to RED XPLR is 13 speeds, a tighter ratio gearbox, and the features written about herein.

The post SRAM Drops 13-speed RED XPLR AXS first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

Peter Hurley, the owner of American Bicycle Group (ABG), under which are the brands Quintana Roo, Litespeed and OBED, passed away this morning from a heart attack at the age of 67. He had just finished a run with his wife Lorraine.

Peter came to the bike and triathlon industry from a career in investment banking, specializing in mergers & acquisitions. He was a cultured, erudite New Englander who began as a minor investor in ABG, thrust into sole ownership when his business partners tired of the idea of owning a bicycle company. Peter did not tire of this business and has owned and led it for 18 years.

Peter did not take the route of so many who entered the business from a “higher” industry. While he was more business educated than many or most of his contemporaries, he took himself to school on exactly how the bike business worked. To my reckoning somewhere between his 2nd and his 8th year of ABG ownership Peter Hurley learned bikes, learned triathlon, caught up to his industry contemporaries and rode right past them in knowledge and acumen.

I believe he tired of my writing about this. Peter would have wished me to write about the strength of his products and strong products his company did (and continues to) make. But what made Peter Hurley’s brands stand apart was the skill of the ownership and the management. He was very simply the smartest executive in the bicycle business and not just retrospectively on this occasion. I wrote it in these pages, while he was able to read the words himself and, I think, to his chagrin.

Peter became a much more avid cyclist and triathlete as a part of his self-mandate to learn his industry. He finished several full and 70.3 IRONMAN races and was a gravel rider as well, annually at Unbound Gravel, SBT and elsewhere. His interest in outdoor athletics stemmed in part from a quadruple bypass surgery at the age of 45, so he was in one sense living on borrowed time and by my reckoning he made the most of it. In the image below I’m riding behind Peter in Kona. The occasion was the launch of a new Quintana Roo bike. I wasn’t riding 2nd wheel out of deference – I was happy to keep up.

Peter and I are weeks apart in age so he and I often spoke of life in this business, mortality, and what the future may hold for us both. Even in the post-COVID industry doldrums Peter seemed to me at peace with what he had achieved, his legacy, and where his business stood. I think it’s because, while everyone struggled during the pandemic, his brands weathered COVID better than most and I think that’s partly because of the way he sagely reconstructed his business, and also because of the man he was. Peter was among the smartest, most interesting, transparent, principled people I knew and his agile mind, sense of humor and ability to foster and animate his friendships very simply meant that tie went to Peter if you were a pandemic-era supplier. You wanted to do business with him. You rooted for him to win.

Peter Hurley leaves behind his wife Lorraine Hurley, daughter Bryanna, son Branden, stepdaughter Naomi and brother Dennis; also the 80 employees to whom he was a great employer, and many heartbroken friends.

The post ABG Owner Peter Hurley Passes Away first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

I didn’t expect much when I agreed to give Canyon’s new cycling shoes a go. My everyday shoes for road riding are Shimano S Phyre and it’s hard to improve on those. But my new everyday road cycling shoes are Canyon Tempr CFR and I’ll tell you why they work so well for me, but let’s start with a paragraph about the development of this shoe.

Canyon looked to Eric Horton, former design chief at Giro (we talked to Eric when he was at Giro), and Carl Bird who ran equipment at Specialized for the last 10 of his 23 years at that company. These two joined forces during the pandemic and started a design firm called Form8ion, and it was here that the Canyon Tempr series took shape.

There isn’t a vertical lineup, as in, the cheap model has 2 velcro straps, the midrange 1 velcro and 1 BOA, and the top a pair of BOAs. There is just the top-level shoe. Just the double-BOA closure scheme and there’s both a road and an MTB version.

I guess I think Bont started something when it brought its more rigid inline skate boot style to cycling. The S Phyre borrows a bit from that motif. Some cycling shoes don’t open or close very much in my experience and my Shimano S Phyre road shoes are like that. The Tempr CFR does not share either of those design motifs. Its upper is softer and in that way is more like Shimano’s comfort-focused SH-RC702 (RC7 for short). The Tempr CFR is extremely forgiving, with a lot of range and what I mean by "range" is this shoe's ability to fit a wider and narrower foot, high and flat arch, with the same shoe model.

But it isn’t just the softer upper material. It’s the choice to join the left and the right sides of the upper with an elastic fabric and that’s missing in most cycling shoes. None of my road shoes have this design. They’ll have a tongue between the left and right sides of the upper, like what you’d see in a running shoe (the RC7 has this). Or, one side of the shoe simply overlaps the other. I believe some triathlon cycling shoes might’ve used an elastic piece like this, tho rooting around in my workshop has failed to produce an example. This elastic seems to me to make this more of a universal shoe, fitting a wider range of foot types.

My first ride in the Canyon shoe felt a little strange. The next day my feet hurt. I’m not the only person to whom I’ve spoken that had this experience. After my second ride my feet didn’t hurt and since then it’s been clear sailing. This has been my go-to road shoe since that second ride and I think that – while the shoe is forgiving – my feet have become less as I’ve “seasoned.” My feet are more easily insulted now by footwear. I have Joe Biden’s feet. This has narrowed my choice of available cycling shoes.

More on this: When you put this shoe on your foot has a lot of room. This shoe has very good volume, in height and in width, for reasons described above. As you tighten the BOA closures the designers of this shoe have done a nice job handling with the excess material. I think Canyon does this a little better than Shimano (though I’m still a fan of the RC7). When the closures are tight the shoe is snug but without any puckering or bunching of excess material.

These shoes are available in Euros sizes 39 to 48, half sizes from 40 thru 47. They fit true to size. Cleats are 3-hole native and as you see they accept an adapter for Speedplays.

Advertised are “Custom” Solestar® insoles but – in the spirit of “words mean things” – no, they are not custom, as they are not molded to my feet as are my Sidas or Footbalance (actual custom) footbeds. These are production. But they are good footbeds and I have not found the need to replace these with my customs. One last thing about these footbeds. They are structural. I think it's why my feet hurt after that first ride. (But only after the first ride, just as my feet are sore after my first run in a fresh orthotic.)

Advertised is a 260g weight to, for example, the S Phyre’s advertised weight of 225g. But in my (larger) size, with (identical Speedplay) cleats on, with the Tempr CFT road shoe I pay a fewer-than-10g penalty per shoe versus the S Phyre.

This shoe retails for $329.99 and that appears to be the price whether in the U.S., in US Dollars or whether it’s in Euros for those in Europe. What you see here is not an in-line color. As well as I can tell the road shoes are white and as mentioned there’s a Tempr CFT offroad shoe as well, in black. If you go to the US site and see all the sizes sold out it’s that the site isn’t live for selling yet. Give it a few days to kick start.

I only have miles in the road shoe and the photos here are not of a pristine shoe. I have about 500 miles in them, pretty hard miles, on the road and on gravel, through driving rain, 1-hour rides and 6-hour rides. (Yes, I should’ve taken my pics before I began riding in this shoe. That… didn’t happen.)

As a tri shoe: Yes, this is a viable IRONMAN shoe. In fact, I think it’s a great IRONMAN shoe because it’s not at all a hot shoe and if you find your foot expanding or for whatever reason needing a bit more volume partway through a ride this shoe would be great for that. I think it’s best as a shoe you put on in transition before you run out; attaching these to the bike, trying to get in while you’re riding, I don’t know that this is the fastest way into them. It’s not a short distance tri shoe.

By design or by sheer luck – every company needs it’s fair share of luck – I suspect Canyon has developed a shoe that works perfectly for its broad audience because of its sales model. The very best shoe for a consumer direct market is one forgiving enough to fit a range of foot styles and this shoe will absolutely do that. I’m usually a snob about brands and brand congruity. I won’t put a Felt stem or a Cannondale crank on my Cervelo bike. So much more so with Canyon, in particular because I have a beef with that brand (I stand in religious opposition to their habit of putting integrated stem/bars on their road and gravel bikes, which is a sin magnified for a consumer direct brand). Why would I ride a Canyon shoe when aboard my Cervelo bike? My feet dig the shoe. Sue me. (Or sue my feet.) Besides, wearing this shoe allowed me to congruently ride with the 2 pairs of Canyon socks that had been languishing in my drawer.

The post Canyon Tempr CFR Road Cycling Shoes first appeared on Slowtwitch News.

I’m writing about a major change in road bike positions today, but there is a message here about tri. In fact, you could say that tri positions when understood correctly offered glimpses into the changes we’re seeing in road bike position.

Hips moving forward in the saddle is the biggest positional change in road bike racing since the 1970s when I started riding. If you’re watching the Tour (ongoing as of this writing) look at how many of the racers who have their saddles pushed forward, maybe all the way forward, on the rails. What’s that about?

This is my explanation, based on both what I see and experiments with my own road position. You can decide yourself whether you believe hips – and saddles – are more forward now than they were, say, a half-dozen years ago. Also my opinion: Two equipment changes working in tandem have changed the way today’s best riders sit aboard their road bikes: the comfort of today’s hoods; and the achievable high cadences while climbing due to recently available lower gears.

Saddles have been edging forward for several years, I just think the dam broke in the last year or so. I suspect this will cause frame makers to rethink their seat post geometries. I think frame geometries are fine but the seat posts need a rethink, especially because so many road frames (regrettably) come with seat posts that can’t be changed. (The same thing happened with tri bike seat posts 10 or 15 years ago.)

Just to be clear I don’t think the entire cockpit is moving forward and let’s define terms. Cockpit in cycling has two meanings. Cockpit Position: the relationship between the saddle and the handlebars. Cockpit Hardware: the stem, handlebar, hoods. If you alter your cockpit position you might – for example – increase or decrease the distance from the saddle to the handlebars. A tight cockpit means you’re riding kind of scrunched and Pogacar is my best example of a tight cockpit.

While other riders might not be riding Pogacar tight in their cockpits I don’t believe handlebars are moving forward the same distance that saddles are moving forward. In fact, while saddles are coming forward a centimeter or two – or three – I don’t think handlebars are moving forward at all. I base this on how much of the hood the riders are grabbing as they’re riding. In particular on seated climbs. In my own case, my Web X measurement remains 600mm, which it has been for many years. To measure Web X, you note where the web of your hand meets the pommel of the hood. Web X is the “run” – the horizontal distance – between the BB and the midpoint between the pommels of each hood. I place a lace lock over my hoods, run a plumb line through the BB, and measure from that plumb forward to the centerline of the lace lock.

While I haven’t moved my handlebars anywhere I’ve moved the saddle closer to the bars. This is what I believe the pro peloton is doing. In my own case, the nose of my saddle has been routinely about 85mm or 90mm behind the BB and while saddle geometries have changed I’m riding the same saddles now that I rode 15 or 20 years ago. My saddles are now 65mm to 70mm behind the BB. This has moved my hips forward and tightened the cockpit. Note that my riding out of the saddle hasn’t changed because I haven’t moved my handlebars; the change is that my hips are less behind my cranks when I’m seated.

Moving the saddle forward may place more of your weight – more pressure – on your hands. This is fundamental to why saddles were further back for the last – oh – 100 years. If you haven’t ridden new SRAM RED (highest pic above), or current Dura Ace (pic just below that), you can’t appreciate how much more comfortable these controls are. Even SRAM RIVAL and Shimano 105 (the image just below) are really comfortable, and promise to become more so as hood shapes – and the handlebars to which they mate – get more comfortable. (See Zipp’s road bar that was made to mate specifically with new RED.) These new hoods mean that if there is a slight bit more weight on the hands (which is questionable) this does not discommode the rider.

Have you noticed how much more time the top riders spend on the hoods these days, even while seated climbing? Perhaps only oldsters like me notice this. Search Greg Lemond or Bernard Hinault “climbing” and hit the Images tab. You’ll see a lot of photos of riders with their hands on the “tops”. Hands on the hoods when seated on a climb were the exception in the 1970s and 80s. One reason was hood discomfort for sure, but another is that the cockpit position was too long back then. Saddles were rearward and hoods were further forward on the bars. Even with today’s hoods it would’ve been a big stretch – literally – to ride with hands that far in front of the rider’s trunk and torso.

Comfortable hoods allow you to ride more forward. But they aren’t the only (or the main) reason riders are pushing their saddles forward. When I entered the cycling scene in the late ‘70s the typical freewheel was a 5-speed made by Regina that began at 13 teeth and ended at 21 teeth. Chain rings were either 52t or 53t for the big ring and 42t or 39t for the small ring. Exceptionally, for really steep hills, you had a 13-23 available. The absolute lowest gear you could put on your race bike was a 39×23 (if you rode Campagnolo/Regina, which almost all of us did). But the roads and hills remained as steep then as they are today, as well as the power required to ride up them. Power equals torque x cadence and what you didn’t have back then was cadence riding those pitches with those gears. So, you made do with torque. That required leverage. You sat back in the saddle, hands on the tops, and mashed your way up hills too steep to spin up (or you rode out of the saddle). You don’t see anyone mashing in the pro peloton today.

I’ve got both a SRAM and a Shimano road bike in my garage and the Shimano (11-34 cassette above) has a 34×34 as the lowest gear. My race bike in 1980, on which I rode the 1981 Hawaiian IRONMAN in the pic highest above had a 42×21 as the lowest gear (you probably can't even see the cogs in that pic they were so small). Easy to figure out by looking at this that 34×34 can be called a 1:1 ratio while the smallest gear on my bike 45 years ago years ago was a 2:1 ratio. This lower gearing has been a revelation. It has completely changed the way I climb on my bike, because the gearing allows me to ride the cadence appropriate for the effort.

My SRAM bike has an even smaller gear: 33t ring and 36t small cog (SRAM’s 10-36 cassette below). Riders today spin up even the 24 percent grades they see in the Vuelta. Everything can be ridden at cadence.

What you’ve seen, if you think about it, is that cadence, effort and hips position all scale together. Think about this in the context of riding on the flats. The harder the effort the more you ride toward the nose of the saddle – “He’s riding on the rivet!” – and the faster your cadence. No leadout rider hauls his sprinter to the front of the peloton riding “on the rivet” at 70 beats a minute. That cadence is around 100 beats a minute but that same rider when riding easy may well sit back, sit a little higher up, and ride 75 or 80 beats a minute. The advent of lower gears allows riders to sit a bit forward on the saddle even during sustained climbs, hands on hoods, because that faster cadence is rideable even on steep pitches. Pogacar is the most obvious example and the harder he rides – even up steep pitches – his hips are forward, his cadence is quick, and his hands are draped over the pommels of his hoods. But look at the other riders; they’re riding more or less similarly.

In triathlon we have known for decades that as effort goes up cadence goes up and hips move forward. On our tri bikes our hips are way forward. We can do this because we rest the upper body on our bikes skeletally, laying our forearms on the aerobars. There’s only so far forward you can move on a road bike because we need to hold our upper bodies up muscularly. Not too much weight can come down on our hands. Lower gears mean we can ride steeper hills at cadence and that higher cadence is best ridden with hips further forward than they used to be. You stick your saddle there and that means you’re able to ride in the hoods without feeling stretched. The ergonomics of today’s hoods allows you to ride there 90 percent of the time.

And finally…! (And please pardon the aside.) What I've written above explains why I'm so dead-set against integrated cockpits (and by "cockpit" I'm talking now about the physical product: handlebars and stem smooshed together into one thing). I've been riding road bikes for a while (that bike you see in the pic highest above I got 45 years ago). I ride a sound, orthodox position. Bike fit has been a subject of interest for me for decades. Yet I still find bike position to be a moving target, with the emphasis on moving. You can't alter unalterable positions.

The post Have You Noticed Hips Moving Forward in the Peloton? first appeared on Slowtwitch News.