Old 09-23-19, 11:35 PM
  #16  
rhm
multimodal commuter
 
rhm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NJ, NYC, LI
Posts: 19,808

Bikes: 1940s Fothergill, 1959 Allegro Special, 1963? Claud Butler Olympic Sprint, Lambert 'Clubman', 1974 Fuji "the Ace", 1976 Holdsworth 650b conversion rando bike, 1983 Trek 720 tourer, 1984 Counterpoint Opus II, 1993 Basso Gap, 2010 Downtube 8h, and...

Mentioned: 584 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1908 Post(s)
Liked 574 Times in 339 Posts
I agree with the suggestion that your saddle is (was) too high.

Saddle width --and especially "sit bone" width-- is not completely irrelevant, but I don't think it's nearly the important measurement that some people think. Look at a classroom skeleton sometime (not a Halloween skeleton). The "sit bones" are shaped kinda like the rails of a rocking chair, but backwards. Their "width" depends on the rider's position. If you sit upright, your weight goes into the sit bones at their widest point; as you pivot your pelvis forward your weight moves to a place where the sit bones are closer together.

Once you have saddle height, stem length, handlebar height, brake lever position &c nailed down, and you're pretty confident of your favored riding position on the bike, you can figure out your sit bone width. Until then, though, forget about it. It's not important enough.
rhm is offline  
Likes For rhm: