Curved saddle - which part to level?
 

The stock saddle that came with my bike is a Giant Approach and it's one of those curved types where the rear flares up. If I want to set it level, do I measure the sitting area near the center or the front? Here's a picture of the saddle with the center part close to level:

https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...6f2813027c.jpg

As you may see, doing so puts the nose of the saddle ever so slightly upward. Is this by design? On the other hand, if I level the nose of the saddle with the ground, I find myself gravitating towards the front (probably because the flared rear gets more pronounced).

Any advice? Should I get a flat saddle?

I prefer a more flat profile. But it's definitely a individual thing. Some are more comfortable on saddles with a rise in the back others aren't. Some can do either.

If the rails are level, that is probably how the maker imagined it for most of it's users. At least the saddles I've had seem to appear that way. But you can certainly go either way that suits you. Just try and see what works.

I wouldn't get another saddle till you ride this and figure out that it won't work for you. Don't change it because you can't figure out what level should look like with it.

EDITED.

Its all up to your pelvic position. I use a level to fast track.

But, you do you. Whatever is comfy.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...642b043abf.jpg

Start with post 3, ride it that way for a few days, then adjust as seems good to you. If you are well balanced on the saddle so that your hands feel light on the bars, you shouldn't be sliding forward on the nose

I agree. Post #3 is probably your best starting point.

I recently changed the saddle on my new road/gravel bike to a Selle SMP Stratos, which, with the exception of the nose, has a somewhat similar profile to the stock saddle on your Giant Approach. When I initially installed the saddle it was probably pretty close to the photo in post #3. On the hoods the saddle felt fine, but in the drops I felt too much pressure on my soft bits. I gradually lowered the front end until I was comfortable on the hoods and in the drops. I then tested that position over the course of several rides and the saddle now feels perfect. The photo below shows my current position after lowering the nose by a few millimeters.

While you have different anatomy I think this basic method should work out well for you, and you should quickly be able to dial in the correct position to maximize your comfort on the bike. Happy riding! :thumb: :ride:

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...859bb856e.jpeg

Your saddle looks nose high to me.

As other have posted, use a scrap piece of timber and a level across the entire saddle. I recently upgraded to a digital level that works even better for my OCD, you can use the level app on your phone.

Start at level and go from there. On most saddles 2 degree nose down is about what you need, however this depends on your seat height, fore/aft etc.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...2f5bfae41c.jpg

^ With that massive piece of particle board over your saddle we have absolutely no idea as to the shape of your saddle. Unless you're riding around on top of that board, which I assume you are not. :lol:

The shape of the saddle is irrelevant. It's a common mistake people make, I know I did, trying to guesstimate the 'level' position on the saddle. If you use a piece of board that covers the entire saddle you have the identical reference point every time you adjust your saddle. Start at 0 degrees and go from there.

The shape of the saddle is absolutely not irrelevent. I do not disagree that using a board and a level will provide a point of reference for adjustment, but the shape of the saddle will influence the fit.

The shape of the saddle is irrelevant as a single point of reference. The shape of the saddle is just another variable, just like cleat position and saddle height. You can have a saddle of one shape that 'fits' at a certain saddle height and not at another saddle height. The 'fit' is a combination of all these variables. Fit your cleats first, then your saddle height, then seat fore/aft, then seat tilt, repeat until you have it suited to the rider. Hence why I suggested, once all the other variables are set, start with the saddle at 0 degrees and go from there.

Agree 100%.

HUH? :foo: Fitting a saddle (or any other aspect of bike fit) is not a linear process. Yes, there is a chronology of basic steps one might go through at the outset, but to claim that the process starts with cleat position and ends with seat tilt does a disservice to the OP. And to advise someone to start with a 0 degree tilt regardless of saddle shape also does a disservice to the OP.

Do you also recommend that everyone start the fitting process on the same frame size regardless of height "and then go from there"? No, that would be silly. So why take this approach with saddles? :foo:

Getting the fundamentals setup is a linear process, then it is a cyclic process to tune until the fit is perfect. Starting at 0 degrees is an initial reference point if the OP doesn't already have a reference point from other fits or bikes. Sure if the OP was getting a bike fit from a professional they would have the knowledge to start somewhere else. From the original question the OP was looking to adjust his saddle at home, hence my 0 degrees reference point.

So you're recommending that someone start at 0 degrees for a saddle that no one rides at 0 degrees. That's just awesome advice!!! :thumb: NOT. You might as well tell her to start at any random angle and adjust from there.

Sarcasm and jokes aside... while starting at 0 degrees won't do any harm, it's not a logical starting point for a curved saddle. Does common sense not have any role in your linear process? <-- That's a serious question.

As I stated earlier it's a starting reference point I use for any saddle on any bike, I have a few bikes of varying types and saddle styles.

Hi guys, thanks for all your insights. Just an update, I rode with the setup that I have on the OP with the curved part more or less level and the nose slightly up... yeah, it didn't work very well. I noticed lower back pain a few kilometers in and it got worse during climbs. It also got really uncomfortable on the drops. So I went back to the more or less level nose setup. Again, I tended to gravitate towards the nose, especially when in putting in power. Come to think of it, isn't that normal? On long rides I do get some saddle pain on the road but moving around the saddle and switching positions on the bike alleviates it. When I get home, no part of my body really hurts.

I'll borrow a relatively flat saddle from a friend and test it over the weekend.

(For context, I'm 165 cm tall with a short torso and longer than average arms and legs. I use a 100 cm stem (51 cm top tube) and I don't really feel stretched out or anything. My saddle to bar drop isn't that significant.)
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/bikefor...d44ce3f6ac.jpg
P.S. I took the pic with the nose of the saddle pointed upwards.

If you are moving forward in the saddle while pedaling at normal to slightly higher power, then I'd be of the opinion that you have too much reach on your bike. Maybe even the frame too big for you.

But are you certain the saddle isn't too high? And I'd never have the nose up on my saddles as yours ever so slightly is. Though I know some like that.

If your aim is to have the saddle level over having the saddle positioned for best function, then I advise throwing the level away.

After adjusting the saddle over time to get it under your butt, & so that you don't slide forward or backward in a variety of body positions,

a good way to record it's position is to put a straightedge e.g. 4' level, over the saddle & note the relationship to the bars.

For my SMP saddles with raised rear, the straightedge lines up with the top of the bars, so it's easy to eyeball, but for a flatter saddle it might be inches above the bars depending on saddle to bar drop.

This turns out to work for different bar or saddle heights- lowering the bars leads to tilting the saddle down slightly, at least for me.

My personal preference is to have about as much nose up as you did in the first photo. I wouldn't expect to feel the effects of nose up in my lower back. If you have a 51cm top tube then an 80mm stem came OEM. I would think 100cm would induce some stretch in someone who characterizes their dimensions the way you do. Nose up is to keep you back in the saddle so you don't fall forward. Pulling forward means there is too much stretch in your setup regardless of how good it feels. IMO flat, not flat, isn't so much the issue. Where you sit should be more or less level. Where you sit should be the widest part of the saddle. How well does your setup do at passing the casual fit tests that have become established over time? Yes, I mean the silly ones like 'elbow at the saddle nose'. That saddle does look high and if it ain't, then the bike is too small.

Wait, so if the bike is too small for me, and I get the next largest size which is S with a top tube of 53 cm and a stock stem of 90, wouldn't that stretch me out even more? I guess it looks small because of my exposed seatpost, but I still have 60 mm before the minimum insertion. In any case I've read you shouldn't be basing on the seat tube height anyway.

I will try using a 80 mm stem again.

lower back pain? would that be your pelvis trying to rotate forward but something is stopping it, so it shows up on the lower spine?

happens when the saddle position is restrictive(or having that as side effect from something else), and you cant extend your legs. +1 on high saddle.

The STARTING POINT for measuring saddle height is your inseam in cm x 109%. top of the pedal spindal to top of saddle. It doesnt need to be correct at first, just for REFERENCE. Just need to ballpark to see if you still get lower back pain with that "rough" "reference" saddle height.


https://www.cyclingabout.com/saddle-...touring-seats/

Do I need to measure my inseam with my cycling shoes and shorts?

Most methods never specify. If pressed, more will say no shoes. Only a few say shoes. Try it both ways. I'm not sure it really matters. Your legs never reach full extension. Whatever method you use be consistent and repeat the measuring procedure at least three times and average the results. Always use a book up against your pubic bone and take the reading off of that, and it's best if you have someone to help.
Edit: One way to test fit: when you take that first push off and are settling into the saddle. It should be right there, just under you. You should not have to skooch higher to reach it or drop down because you were a little to high, it should be right there.

You might just move your saddle all the way forward and see if that helps. If it does, then find a seat post with zero to very little offset. Riding with your saddle at the limits of the rails probably will stress the rails more and they might break when you are in the least possible moment to be able to deal with it.

Broken record here stuck on the same old groove. This fascination with "level". I've been riding 50 years and started racing 45 years ago. I've never leveled a seat. I adjust them until they fit right. For me, that is the most critical adjustment on the entire bike. I have 2-bolt seatposts on almost all my bikes so I can get that last little bit to perfect while on the road.

I've occasionally placed a level on the seat just for fun but would never use it to set a seat up unless I happened to remember "oh yeah, this seat happened to be dead level the front half when I laid the level on it two years ago". (Not very likely!)

Level seats are like 10D shoes. They might be "right" but they don't work for everybody! (My feet have been measured at 10D many times. Many of my shoes aren't. My feet rule here like my butt does on the bike.) Likewise, the saying when I raced was that God and Eddy Merckx rode 120 stems. I do on one bike (designed around a -17 120 so stems wouldn't be hard to find).