The tension between comfort and aerodynamics is the most obvious: A position that maximizes wind-permeability is stretched, bent low above the handlebar and narrow. This position offers only little comfort and thus cannot painlessly be ridden over an extended period of time. Accordingly, a compromise needs to be found to release this tension and this compromise differs for each individual athlete. How much comfort is needed depends on the individual history:

– What discomfort is already present?
– Since when is the individual cycling?
– Which other sports were performed earlier or are performed additionally?

Besides the history also the individual goals play a decisive role in the bikefitting process:

– What is the overall goal in cycling? A healthier way of living or winning races?
– What distance do the envisaged goals have?
– How extensive is the envisaged training?

Bikefitting recurrently is about compromising; an example: “I would like to sit aerodynamically, but it should still be comfortable after 3-4 hours!” A solution is hard – but not impossible – to find: a position is chosen where the aerodynamics is slightly improved while the loss in comfort remains small. A position that is too aerodynamic is often not advisable due to muscular predispositions, such as a lacking flexibility in the back thigh.

Summary:
The balance of comfort, performance and aerodynamics is a guiding principle of our bikefitting. The “ideal” relation needs to be found for each athlete individually. To do so, both the history and the goals should be taken into account in the dynamic analysis.

Author: Daniel Schade