My goal is to really add some cross training to my running
schedule. Previously my knees were getting sore (whether it was runners knee or
I just over did them walking in Spain a week before a half marathon, I’m not
really sure) so I started doing more trail runs and exercising on my recumbent
bike. However, I just always preferred going out and hitting the very hard
concrete sidewalks. With my pelvis still recovering, my hip just will not be
able to handle the pounding of running 5 times a week.
I view this as also the push I need to start training for
triathlons. I have zero swimming ability… like if you ask me to jump in the
deep end I’ll be fine, but if you want me to do laps in any stroke other than
doggie paddle, forget it.
Trek Lexa SLX
Trek Lexa SL
Giant Avail 2
Cannondale CAAD8 6 or the women's version Cannondale Synapse 6
I have been practicing the motions on the spin bike at the gym. In an attempt to use multiple muscles while cycling, I bought clipped triathlon cycling shoes. I also purchased cycling shorts.
My PT reluctantly agreed to let me test out the bikes. She is worried about my balance and strength on my right leg. I took her words to heart and waited almost two weeks to test ride them out. The test rides were a little shaky at first. I am not used to riding and had not even ridden a bike in years. The one bike shop did mention that they just had a lady who had a broken pelvis and hip come in for a bike. She apparently could barely step up the stairs to get in the shop. This made me a bit more hopeful that my injury would not hold me back. I would swing my bad leg over the bike so I used my good leg for balance. I also would lean slightly to the left when stopping so I would use my good leg to get off the bike or in case I need to quickly put my leg down.
Narrowing down:
While I liked the other bikes,
I narrowed down my list to the Trek Lexa SL or SLX. Unfortunately the bike shop
did not have the SLX in my size (between a 47 and 50 in Trek; 48 in Cannondale…
yes I’m short with short legs!). I really wanted to see if there would be a
difference in the feel of the ride with the SLX’s ISO Speed decoupler. My
pelvic bones could really use a smooth ride. There also is a step up in the
quality of the parts on the SLX vs the SL. I just needed to determine if these
are worth the extra cost especially considering this will be secondary to
running.
Decision time:
Unfortunately it was raining by
the time I got to the bike shop to test ride the SLX. I did get to try it out
on the trainer (really want to invest in one of them). The SLX has a different
frame and fit than the SL so the 47” was way too small for me. The 50” seemed
to be the middle ground between the 47” SL and the 50” SL. I felt like
Goldilocks saying it was just right. I should mention that these bikes were the
2013 models. The bike shop had an excess and were trying to get rid of them.
Since this is my first bike and I really wouldn’t notice the difference between
the 2013 and 2014 models, I decided to save a few (hundred) bucks and go with a
2013 model. The SL model they had was white and teal, however, it had the teal
were prints of flowers (really Trek? Just because it is a women’s specific bike
doesn’t mean it needs to be girly). I like white. I like teal. I do not like a
flowery print. The SLX models were in a dark red and white and a black and
gold. I loved the red and white, but they only had it in 47”.The 50” was almost
all black with just an outline in gold of flowers (at least it wasn’t as
noticeable!). In the end I decided on the 50” Lexa SLX. The extra $250 it cost
me seemed to be worth the Iso Speed decoupler plus the upgraded Shimano 105
parts vs Tiagra. Also the frame was made out of a lighter aluminum.
I have two races on my radar:
Once I get some miles on my bike I'll be able to determine if they are doable races. Until then- New Jersey Half Marathon relay here I come!
No comments:
Post a Comment