GOTHICA CLM OVERVIEW
For the "race of truth" we go a few steps beyond the wind tunnel and look at the interface between rider and machine to formulate your optimal design.

First off, proper rider position:
An aero-proiled, sleek, and stealthy looks great. But, it must properly meet a rider's individual positioning needs to perform best. Steep seat angles? Not necessarily. The idea that a 78 degree (or steeper) seat angle properly positions the rider for speed is unfounded. Physiologically speaking, this type of angle forces the rider forward, putting him onto the nose of the saddle and actuating muscles that aren't best adapted to cycling. Additionally, the hip-to-torso angle has an adverse affect by impacting the proper flow of oxygenated blood to muscles needing it most. The overall damage to energetic efficiencies far outweighs any benefits of aerodynamics.

Most riders think that they need a steeper seat angle if that are moving forward on the saddle already. The thought is that a steeper seat angle will get the saddle farther forward and underneath the rider more. Wrong. In fact, the steeper seat angle forces the rider to go to the nose of the saddle even more, as it rotates the pelvis towards the front of the bike and, by physics alone, pushes the rider forward.

A lot of cycling pundits point to the success of riders using super steep seat angles. You will note that many have their saddles pushed all the way back on the rails in an attempt to get closer to a 74 degree seat angle (the cyclist functions best with a seat angle between 72 and 74). Consider too that two of cycling's greatest against -the-clock performers had these values in their time trial positions:

-EDDY MERCKX
1969: Tour de France TT Créteil -Paris

Seat Angle: 72°
Head Angle: 71.5°
Saddle to bar height difference: 4cm

-MIGUEL INDURAIN
1992 : Tour de France TT Luxembourg-Luxembourg

Seat Angle: 71°
Head Angle: 71.5°
Saddle to aero pad height difference: 1cm

Frame design:
The proper rider position is key. Any good frame design proceeds from this principle.

The bike needs to fit your position.You should't have to confirm to the position the bike dictates. Many riders are lucky enough to fit stock geometries. If not, consider a custom frame. The investment and the corresponding increases in performance and comfort are worthwhile. A frame that fits the rider, allowing him or her to exploit proper physiological function is ideal. The frame (and resulting bike) should handle correctly, allow for proper weight distribution, and cause no constraints to the rider's function on the machine.

For time trial and triathlon frames we favor angles that respect this principle. Time trial means an all-out 100% effort for the rider. Stability in aero bars, handling on technical courses, and the ability to go "a bloc" is the point. Aerodynamics is important but not to the detriment of the rider, his position, and the performance of the frame in real-life riding. We hold true to this. In triathlon, we respect the running leg to follow the bike portion. The aggressive position found on a time trial frame will be tempered, as the triathlete isn't going all-out, needs to maintain some reserves, and is looking for some increases in energetic efficiencies.