Saddle balance position and KOPS totally different!
07-27-17, 06:24 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Saddle balance position and KOPS totally different!
I've been playing around with bike fit by adjusting stem length/angle & trying to find the optimal saddle position. I've also had lots of problem with saddle comfort recently so have been moving it back and forth trying to find the "sweet spot" of comfort and efficiency.
After changing the stem to one with a slightly shorter reach (and steeper angle) I found I was sliding forward on the saddle when pedaling, and read one suggestion to move the saddle *back* to combat this. The logic , or so I understand it, is that after a certain point behind the BB, the pedal pressure will tend to push the rider towards the back of the saddle, rather than pulling them forward.
I gave this a go, and it does seem to work, at least to some degree. It also makes sense that balance gets easier (and weight on hands reduced), the further back the saddle is.
However, what I found is that the point at which I achieve balance (or only very slightly tipping forward if I take my hands of the bars) seems to be way behind KOPS, which I used a starting point. It would seem that my knees are about 3-4cm behind the pedal spindle.
It this amount of discrepancy normal? If so, it makes a mockery of KOPS as a "starting point" - it's would be way off!
After changing the stem to one with a slightly shorter reach (and steeper angle) I found I was sliding forward on the saddle when pedaling, and read one suggestion to move the saddle *back* to combat this. The logic , or so I understand it, is that after a certain point behind the BB, the pedal pressure will tend to push the rider towards the back of the saddle, rather than pulling them forward.
I gave this a go, and it does seem to work, at least to some degree. It also makes sense that balance gets easier (and weight on hands reduced), the further back the saddle is.
However, what I found is that the point at which I achieve balance (or only very slightly tipping forward if I take my hands of the bars) seems to be way behind KOPS, which I used a starting point. It would seem that my knees are about 3-4cm behind the pedal spindle.
It this amount of discrepancy normal? If so, it makes a mockery of KOPS as a "starting point" - it's would be way off!
07-27-17, 09:57 AM
#2
old fart
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: PA-US
Posts: 379
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 119 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
For most road bike geometries, the average femur length in males results in knee being behind pedal center when "balanced in saddle" method for determining saddle position is used.
However, it is incorrect to call this a "discrepancy" as there is no need to seek convergence between the "balanced in saddle" and the KOPS methods - both have been used for long time, each has its own merits.
If you dig into kinesiology and sports medicine studies, you'd find that the majority of the population is considered to have under-developed hamstrings and glutes due to lifestyle, adopted posture, and the general nature of how humans use their leg muscles on everyday basis. Note that I am excluding "serious" recreational cyclists here, together with amateur racers and cycling pros.
This muscle underdevelopment hints that most people rely on their quadriceps, which is what KOPS mostly targets: placing the rider a bit fore dictates that the rider would predominantly engage their quadriceps.
Thus, I find KOPS justified and adequate as a good starting point for beginners, for those who ride in more upright position, as these are riders who do mostly shortish rides, and who do not chase upper-level cycling performance or endurance.
When I started riding, I was fortunate to be taught a few things by seasoned pros and a couple of extremely knowledgeable bike shop owners. That was in the mid-60s, back in Europe. These 2 shop owners recommended and applied KOPS when they sold bikes to the general public, but as I apprenticed with both of them, I realized that KOPS is not what they use when they set up and tune the pro's bikes. When I asked about this, my principals explained to me in some detail, joined by the pro riders, that KOPS simply won't do for them.
This is why I wouldn't call your recent personal findings "mockery of KOPS"; there is no mockery, just two different saddle positioning methods for two not essentially overlapping target audiences.
However, it is incorrect to call this a "discrepancy" as there is no need to seek convergence between the "balanced in saddle" and the KOPS methods - both have been used for long time, each has its own merits.
If you dig into kinesiology and sports medicine studies, you'd find that the majority of the population is considered to have under-developed hamstrings and glutes due to lifestyle, adopted posture, and the general nature of how humans use their leg muscles on everyday basis. Note that I am excluding "serious" recreational cyclists here, together with amateur racers and cycling pros.
This muscle underdevelopment hints that most people rely on their quadriceps, which is what KOPS mostly targets: placing the rider a bit fore dictates that the rider would predominantly engage their quadriceps.
Thus, I find KOPS justified and adequate as a good starting point for beginners, for those who ride in more upright position, as these are riders who do mostly shortish rides, and who do not chase upper-level cycling performance or endurance.
When I started riding, I was fortunate to be taught a few things by seasoned pros and a couple of extremely knowledgeable bike shop owners. That was in the mid-60s, back in Europe. These 2 shop owners recommended and applied KOPS when they sold bikes to the general public, but as I apprenticed with both of them, I realized that KOPS is not what they use when they set up and tune the pro's bikes. When I asked about this, my principals explained to me in some detail, joined by the pro riders, that KOPS simply won't do for them.
This is why I wouldn't call your recent personal findings "mockery of KOPS"; there is no mockery, just two different saddle positioning methods for two not essentially overlapping target audiences.
07-27-17, 10:05 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
5 Posts
KOPS is a rule of thumb / starting point for somebody that has never ridden a bike.
People who race or do a lot of recreational riding need to understand how they fit on the bike and be willing to make changes and adjustments.
Also, "saddle balance" needs to take into account saddle tilt. Most saddles are tilted too far forward. That means you have to push the seat way to far back to be "balanced"
People who race or do a lot of recreational riding need to understand how they fit on the bike and be willing to make changes and adjustments.
Also, "saddle balance" needs to take into account saddle tilt. Most saddles are tilted too far forward. That means you have to push the seat way to far back to be "balanced"
07-27-17, 12:26 PM
#4
Portland Fred
07-27-17, 12:45 PM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: TC, MN
Posts: 39,520
Bikes: R3 Disc, Haanjo
Mentioned: 354 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 20810 Post(s)
Liked 9,456 Times
in
4,672 Posts
With as many fit issues as you've voiced, I'd be hesitant to make any declarations or condemnations just yet. Ride the bike more, feel out what actually works (as opposed to what you think works for you) and realize that mileage will vary.
07-27-17, 01:11 PM
#6
∏
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Willamette Valley
Posts: 335
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, 2011 and 2017
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Check the angle of your saddle. You should not be able to slide forward on your saddle without deciding to do so.
I recently discovered my saddle had been angled down 8° due to a mismeasurement on my part; now I set a large book on the saddle and take a measurement using a bubble level on top of the book, and angle it 3° down from there. No more pressure and numbness on my hands!
And to be clear, the 8° down saddle didn't FEEL angled down, didn't LOOK to be angled down. It just... was.
Check your angle.
I recently discovered my saddle had been angled down 8° due to a mismeasurement on my part; now I set a large book on the saddle and take a measurement using a bubble level on top of the book, and angle it 3° down from there. No more pressure and numbness on my hands!
And to be clear, the 8° down saddle didn't FEEL angled down, didn't LOOK to be angled down. It just... was.
Check your angle.
07-27-17, 03:56 PM
#7
Senior Member
Thread Starter
For most road bike geometries, the average femur length in males results in knee being behind pedal center when "balanced in saddle" method for determining saddle position is used.
However, it is incorrect to call this a "discrepancy" as there is no need to seek convergence between the "balanced in saddle" and the KOPS methods - both have been used for long time, each has its own merits.
If you dig into kinesiology and sports medicine studies, you'd find that the majority of the population is considered to have under-developed hamstrings and glutes due to lifestyle, adopted posture, and the general nature of how humans use their leg muscles on everyday basis. Note that I am excluding "serious" recreational cyclists here, together with amateur racers and cycling pros.
This muscle underdevelopment hints that most people rely on their quadriceps, which is what KOPS mostly targets: placing the rider a bit fore dictates that the rider would predominantly engage their quadriceps.
Thus, I find KOPS justified and adequate as a good starting point for beginners, for those who ride in more upright position, as these are riders who do mostly shortish rides, and who do not chase upper-level cycling performance or endurance.
When I started riding, I was fortunate to be taught a few things by seasoned pros and a couple of extremely knowledgeable bike shop owners. That was in the mid-60s, back in Europe. These 2 shop owners recommended and applied KOPS when they sold bikes to the general public, but as I apprenticed with both of them, I realized that KOPS is not what they use when they set up and tune the pro's bikes. When I asked about this, my principals explained to me in some detail, joined by the pro riders, that KOPS simply won't do for them.
This is why I wouldn't call your recent personal findings "mockery of KOPS"; there is no mockery, just two different saddle positioning methods for two not essentially overlapping target audiences.
However, it is incorrect to call this a "discrepancy" as there is no need to seek convergence between the "balanced in saddle" and the KOPS methods - both have been used for long time, each has its own merits.
If you dig into kinesiology and sports medicine studies, you'd find that the majority of the population is considered to have under-developed hamstrings and glutes due to lifestyle, adopted posture, and the general nature of how humans use their leg muscles on everyday basis. Note that I am excluding "serious" recreational cyclists here, together with amateur racers and cycling pros.
This muscle underdevelopment hints that most people rely on their quadriceps, which is what KOPS mostly targets: placing the rider a bit fore dictates that the rider would predominantly engage their quadriceps.
Thus, I find KOPS justified and adequate as a good starting point for beginners, for those who ride in more upright position, as these are riders who do mostly shortish rides, and who do not chase upper-level cycling performance or endurance.
When I started riding, I was fortunate to be taught a few things by seasoned pros and a couple of extremely knowledgeable bike shop owners. That was in the mid-60s, back in Europe. These 2 shop owners recommended and applied KOPS when they sold bikes to the general public, but as I apprenticed with both of them, I realized that KOPS is not what they use when they set up and tune the pro's bikes. When I asked about this, my principals explained to me in some detail, joined by the pro riders, that KOPS simply won't do for them.
This is why I wouldn't call your recent personal findings "mockery of KOPS"; there is no mockery, just two different saddle positioning methods for two not essentially overlapping target audiences.
Your explanation was great - two systems for different types of rider - neither one is right or wrong.
KOPS is a rule of thumb / starting point for somebody that has never ridden a bike.
People who race or do a lot of recreational riding need to understand how they fit on the bike and be willing to make changes and adjustments.
Also, "saddle balance" needs to take into account saddle tilt. Most saddles are tilted too far forward. That means you have to push the seat way to far back to be "balanced"
People who race or do a lot of recreational riding need to understand how they fit on the bike and be willing to make changes and adjustments.
Also, "saddle balance" needs to take into account saddle tilt. Most saddles are tilted too far forward. That means you have to push the seat way to far back to be "balanced"
Check the angle of your saddle. You should not be able to slide forward on your saddle without deciding to do so.
I recently discovered my saddle had been angled down 8° due to a mismeasurement on my part; now I set a large book on the saddle and take a measurement using a bubble level on top of the book, and angle it 3° down from there. No more pressure and numbness on my hands!
And to be clear, the 8° down saddle didn't FEEL angled down, didn't LOOK to be angled down. It just... was.
Check your angle.
I recently discovered my saddle had been angled down 8° due to a mismeasurement on my part; now I set a large book on the saddle and take a measurement using a bubble level on top of the book, and angle it 3° down from there. No more pressure and numbness on my hands!
And to be clear, the 8° down saddle didn't FEEL angled down, didn't LOOK to be angled down. It just... was.
Check your angle.
I found I saddle was indeed tilted slightly download - I don't know the exact angle. I put a flat boards over the saddle and have adjusted it to tilt very slightly up. My level doesn't have angle graduations, but the bubble on my 600mm level moved about 2-3mm from center.
My saddle is relatively flat (Fizik Antares), with a very slight rise at the rear, so I compensated by taking an average level from the level of the entire saddle and the front (flat) portion. I'm hoping for a 1-2 degree rise at most
I'll test ride this configuration and see how I go. What I'm trying to avoid is sliding forward and having my sensitive bits on the narrow part of the saddle. On the Fizik this position (for me) seems really critical. A centimetre of difference can make it uncomfortable on a long ride. I may also look at more curved saddles like the Fizik Aliante, which I briefly tried on a test ride, and found more comfortable - but the bike and bike fit were totally different, so who knows!
07-27-17, 04:35 PM
#8
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Southwestern Ontario
Posts: 5,126
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1581 Post(s)
Liked 1,189 Times
in
605 Posts
I've been playing around with bike fit by adjusting stem length/angle & trying to find the optimal saddle position. I've also had lots of problem with saddle comfort recently so have been moving it back and forth trying to find the "sweet spot" of comfort and efficiency.
After changing the stem to one with a slightly shorter reach (and steeper angle) I found I was sliding forward on the saddle when pedaling, and read one suggestion to move the saddle *back* to combat this. The logic , or so I understand it, is that after a certain point behind the BB, the pedal pressure will tend to push the rider towards the back of the saddle, rather than pulling them forward.
I gave this a go, and it does seem to work, at least to some degree. It also makes sense that balance gets easier (and weight on hands reduced), the further back the saddle is.
However, what I found is that the point at which I achieve balance (or only very slightly tipping forward if I take my hands of the bars) seems to be way behind KOPS, which I used a starting point. It would seem that my knees are about 3-4cm behind the pedal spindle.
It this amount of discrepancy normal? If so, it makes a mockery of KOPS as a "starting point" - it's would be way off!
After changing the stem to one with a slightly shorter reach (and steeper angle) I found I was sliding forward on the saddle when pedaling, and read one suggestion to move the saddle *back* to combat this. The logic , or so I understand it, is that after a certain point behind the BB, the pedal pressure will tend to push the rider towards the back of the saddle, rather than pulling them forward.
I gave this a go, and it does seem to work, at least to some degree. It also makes sense that balance gets easier (and weight on hands reduced), the further back the saddle is.
However, what I found is that the point at which I achieve balance (or only very slightly tipping forward if I take my hands of the bars) seems to be way behind KOPS, which I used a starting point. It would seem that my knees are about 3-4cm behind the pedal spindle.
It this amount of discrepancy normal? If so, it makes a mockery of KOPS as a "starting point" - it's would be way off!
You've an awful lot of threads on all these various issues; since no one else (I think, unless I did on another of your threads) has suggested it, read this:
How to Fit a Bicycle
07-27-17, 05:21 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,522
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1422 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
5 Posts
Well, I think I was a bit harsh in my condemnation of KOPS - I was tired and frustrated with reading contradictory advice.
Your explanation was great - two systems for different types of rider - neither one is right or wrong.
I found I saddle was indeed tilted slightly download - I don't know the exact angle. I put a flat boards over the saddle and have adjusted it to tilt very slightly up. My level doesn't have angle graduations, but the bubble on my 600mm level moved about 2-3mm from center.
My saddle is relatively flat (Fizik Antares), with a very slight rise at the rear, so I compensated by taking an average level from the level of the entire saddle and the front (flat) portion. I'm hoping for a 1-2 degree rise at most
I'll test ride this configuration and see how I go. What I'm trying to avoid is sliding forward and having my sensitive bits on the narrow part of the saddle. On the Fizik this position (for me) seems really critical. A centimetre of difference can make it uncomfortable on a long ride. I may also look at more curved saddles like the Fizik Aliante, which I briefly tried on a test ride, and found more comfortable - but the bike and bike fit were totally different, so who knows!
Your explanation was great - two systems for different types of rider - neither one is right or wrong.
I found I saddle was indeed tilted slightly download - I don't know the exact angle. I put a flat boards over the saddle and have adjusted it to tilt very slightly up. My level doesn't have angle graduations, but the bubble on my 600mm level moved about 2-3mm from center.
My saddle is relatively flat (Fizik Antares), with a very slight rise at the rear, so I compensated by taking an average level from the level of the entire saddle and the front (flat) portion. I'm hoping for a 1-2 degree rise at most
I'll test ride this configuration and see how I go. What I'm trying to avoid is sliding forward and having my sensitive bits on the narrow part of the saddle. On the Fizik this position (for me) seems really critical. A centimetre of difference can make it uncomfortable on a long ride. I may also look at more curved saddles like the Fizik Aliante, which I briefly tried on a test ride, and found more comfortable - but the bike and bike fit were totally different, so who knows!
When it was "level" I was still sliding off the back into the middle section of the saddle where I didn't want to be.
YMMV
07-27-17, 09:37 PM
#10
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I'm the same. KOPS is useless other than as a kind of base-line starting point.
You've an awful lot of threads on all these various issues; since no one else (I think, unless I did on another of your threads) has suggested it, read this:
How to Fit a Bicycle
You've an awful lot of threads on all these various issues; since no one else (I think, unless I did on another of your threads) has suggested it, read this:
How to Fit a Bicycle
The link you sent is one of the best no-nonsense, non-technical articles on bike fit that I've read - great stuff!
I think I'm zooming in on my goal now....and learning a lot about bike fit in the process.
07-27-17, 09:41 PM
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
I ride on the Antares VS. For me, I like that saddle nose up a bit to make the wide part in the back mostly level rather than the saddle being level nose to tail.
When it was "level" I was still sliding off the back into the middle section of the saddle where I didn't want to be.
YMMV
When it was "level" I was still sliding off the back into the middle section of the saddle where I didn't want to be.
YMMV
Thanks!
07-27-17, 09:48 PM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Update: think I've found the spot!
Many thanks for all your suggestions. I may have found the solution, or at least a getting closer to it.
I have now moved my saddle backward 15mm and angled the front slightly upwards (bubble on a 600mm level about 2-3mm offset). I'm now not slipping forward and my posture is more stretched out, allowing me to get a more comfortable torso to arm angle and bent elbows.
The cure for slipping may be a combination of both the angle and also the set-back so that I'm now pushing myself back into the saddle a little with each pedal stroke (or at least maintaining my position there). My balance is also much better - I've greatly reduced weight on my hands and can almost hold myself up if I take my hands off the bars. A bit more core strength and the position will be nearly perfect. I am about 3-4cm behind KOPS, but I don't think this really matters.
I'm riding my first Century tomorrow, so the proof will well and truly, be in the pudding.
I have now moved my saddle backward 15mm and angled the front slightly upwards (bubble on a 600mm level about 2-3mm offset). I'm now not slipping forward and my posture is more stretched out, allowing me to get a more comfortable torso to arm angle and bent elbows.
The cure for slipping may be a combination of both the angle and also the set-back so that I'm now pushing myself back into the saddle a little with each pedal stroke (or at least maintaining my position there). My balance is also much better - I've greatly reduced weight on my hands and can almost hold myself up if I take my hands off the bars. A bit more core strength and the position will be nearly perfect. I am about 3-4cm behind KOPS, but I don't think this really matters.
I'm riding my first Century tomorrow, so the proof will well and truly, be in the pudding.
07-28-17, 08:34 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Pasadena, CA
Posts: 4,848
Bikes: Schwinn Varsity
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1931 Post(s)
Liked 742 Times
in
422 Posts
OK, here is the deal.
Campagnolo 2 bolt seatpost.
Brooks Pro saddle
Slam the saddle all the way to the rear.
You now have the correct saddle position.
Campagnolo 2 bolt seatpost.
Brooks Pro saddle
Slam the saddle all the way to the rear.
You now have the correct saddle position.
07-28-17, 10:11 AM
#14
Senior Member
Firstly, how do you measure your knee position in relation to the pedal spindle? Just eyeing it is very inaccurate.
Secondly, did you lower the saddle any after moving it back? If you didn't, your knees are now more extended than before, and that moves them back in relation to the pedal spindles. Having the knees very far behind the spindles can be a symptom of a saddle that's too high.
Secondly, did you lower the saddle any after moving it back? If you didn't, your knees are now more extended than before, and that moves them back in relation to the pedal spindles. Having the knees very far behind the spindles can be a symptom of a saddle that's too high.
07-28-17, 10:36 AM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,764
Mentioned: 28 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1975 Post(s)
Liked 232 Times
in
173 Posts
Many thanks for all your suggestions. I may have found the solution, or at least a getting closer to it.
I have now moved my saddle backward 15mm and angled the front slightly upwards (bubble on a 600mm level about 2-3mm offset). I'm now not slipping forward and my posture is more stretched out, allowing me to get a more comfortable torso to arm angle and bent elbows.
The cure for slipping may be a combination of both the angle and also the set-back so that I'm now pushing myself back into the saddle a little with each pedal stroke (or at least maintaining my position there). My balance is also much better - I've greatly reduced weight on my hands and can almost hold myself up if I take my hands off the bars. A bit more core strength and the position will be nearly perfect. I am about 3-4cm behind KOPS, but I don't think this really matters.
I'm riding my first Century tomorrow, so the proof will well and truly, be in the pudding.
I have now moved my saddle backward 15mm and angled the front slightly upwards (bubble on a 600mm level about 2-3mm offset). I'm now not slipping forward and my posture is more stretched out, allowing me to get a more comfortable torso to arm angle and bent elbows.
The cure for slipping may be a combination of both the angle and also the set-back so that I'm now pushing myself back into the saddle a little with each pedal stroke (or at least maintaining my position there). My balance is also much better - I've greatly reduced weight on my hands and can almost hold myself up if I take my hands off the bars. A bit more core strength and the position will be nearly perfect. I am about 3-4cm behind KOPS, but I don't think this really matters.
I'm riding my first Century tomorrow, so the proof will well and truly, be in the pudding.
07-28-17, 12:44 PM
#16
Senior Member
Ell, it'll be a great test....
I hope you have a great ride, and I hope the adjustments work perfectly.
I hope you have a great ride, and I hope the adjustments work perfectly.
07-28-17, 01:33 PM
#17
Flyin' under the radar
I didn't see this mentioned above. One thing to consider if you're sliding forward while pedaling is that your saddle may be too wide. If it's too wide, the pedaling action will cause you to slide forward to a point there your femurs are no longer banging against the sides of the saddle. That point will likely be uncomfortable if your saddle was designed for hips wider than your's.
07-28-17, 06:19 PM
#18
Senior Member
I didn't see this mentioned above. One thing to consider if you're sliding forward while pedaling is that your saddle may be too wide. If it's too wide, the pedaling action will cause you to slide forward to a point there your femurs are no longer banging against the sides of the saddle. That point will likely be uncomfortable if your saddle was designed for hips wider than your's.
Last edited by bleui; 07-29-17 at 02:10 AM.
07-28-17, 08:02 PM
#19
Senior Member
wow I never thought about this. I keep sliding forward even with many extreme fore-aft adjustment, and I do have a very wide saddle (Power 155mm) compare with my seat bone width (112mm). Time to hunt for another saddle I guess.
07-29-17, 07:38 AM
#20
Flyin' under the radar
If you want to stick with Specialized, the Toupe is offered in 130mm.
07-29-17, 09:32 AM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Posts: 15,280
Bikes: Nashbar Road
Mentioned: 71 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2934 Post(s)
Liked 341 Times
in
228 Posts
112mm is in the middle of the range of medium sit bone width. Add around 30 for the saddle width. However the shape of the saddle is as important when the saddle width is in the right range. Maybe one person likes having a little more support from the sides and another needs more curved sides.
KOPS vs "balance" are both gimmicky IMHO. They describe where a good saddle position might be, but don't determine where that point is.
KOPS vs "balance" are both gimmicky IMHO. They describe where a good saddle position might be, but don't determine where that point is.
07-29-17, 05:03 PM
#22
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Firstly, how do you measure your knee position in relation to the pedal spindle? Just eyeing it is very inaccurate.
Secondly, did you lower the saddle any after moving it back? If you didn't, your knees are now more extended than before, and that moves them back in relation to the pedal spindles. Having the knees very far behind the spindles can be a symptom of a saddle that's too high.
Secondly, did you lower the saddle any after moving it back? If you didn't, your knees are now more extended than before, and that moves them back in relation to the pedal spindles. Having the knees very far behind the spindles can be a symptom of a saddle that's too high.
In any case, the century was fine with this saddle position, so I'm calling it good!
07-29-17, 05:06 PM
#23
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Not ideal, but I really needed to try something else to avoid the discomfort of the previous time. In the end it worked well!
They did, thanks! I had a bit a butt soreness, but nothing unexpected after 7.5 hours in the saddle... I could have done with applying some more chamois cream half way, so I'll need to look at getting some single-use sachets.
They did, thanks! I had a bit a butt soreness, but nothing unexpected after 7.5 hours in the saddle... I could have done with applying some more chamois cream half way, so I'll need to look at getting some single-use sachets.
07-29-17, 09:31 PM
#24
∏
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Willamette Valley
Posts: 335
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix, 2011 and 2017
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 165 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
07-29-17, 10:56 PM
#25
Senior Member
Thread Starter