Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21964461)

has anyone given this a thought, or do we all subconsciously pedal with our feet placed wherever we feel is right? Who has experimented with different foot positions and what were your observations?

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21964461)

- I've learned that pedalling more with the balls of your feet (such as when using toe cages, clips, or pedal straps) requires you to set the seat somewhat higher than baseline to achieve a normal leg extension.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21964461)

- I find that i can sort of "compensate," or adjust the "effective" reach of a bike with a longer reach figure, such as a mountain bike, by pedalling closer towards my heel over the pedal.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21964461)

It seems to have taken some stress of my knees, while allowing for me to ensure ideal leg extension with a lower saddle height.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21964461)

I've read somewhere that the back of your knee should roughly lineup with your heel as you pedal. Is this true? If so, would this be a good indicator of your ideal reach measurement paired with where you should be placing your foot on the pedal?

Originally Posted by aniki (Post 21965196)

Surprisingly YES! many have indeed 'given this a thought'; pretty much since the start of the 20th century billions of cyclists have been paying attention to their foot / pedal relationship.
You'll find that the vast majority of road cyclists use a clipless pedal and cleat system to ensure that their feet are always positioned in the same position over the pedal axle and hopefully, although not always, in the optimum position. Now although the 'optimum' position is a contentious subject (with a couple of exceptions) there isn't that much variance.
This page will explain in perfect detail:-
https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com...leat-position/
Any fitter of any worth will always start with the feet; then saddle then front end. If the feet are wrong, it can throw out everything else. This is why, other than for casual riding; most people don't use flat pedals.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21966514)

So why Do people use the heel to pedal method as a general baseline for seat height if you are supposed to be pedalling with the ball of your foot

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21966514)

I think i will need to raise my seat a bit more then, because I'm still getting a bit of pain in the front of my right knee when pushing up windy hills. I realized that, within one minute of moving my feet slightly backwards on the pedal so that the balls of my feet were inline with the pedal axle, the knee pain completely disappeared.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21966514)

so I imagine that the reach and top tube are the main factors which determine where you will place your feet over the pedals

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21966514)

and after that it's up to the rider to select an ideal fore/aft saddle position to maximize power transfer?

Originally Posted by aniki (Post 21966786)

If you have absolutely no idea where your saddle height should be, this is generally accepted good starting point. You should not be able to actually pedal with your heels on the pedals; or at least not without difficulty. When you pedal, assuming your foot position is correct, you should have an angle of approximately 145 to 155 degrees between your femur and fibula at full extension.
As I said earlier, your heel is nearer your saddle than your toes; so, to establish an approximate starting point, set your saddle height so that with your heel on the pedal your knee is almost fully locked out at full extension. You will then find that when you move your foot back into the 'correct' position, at full leg extension you should be somewhere in the ballpark mentioned above. Again, this is just a starting point, depending on your flexibility you may benefit from going slightly higher / lower (There are many reasons why you may benefit from adjustment outside of this range but we're just looking at the basics here)



Your comment merely suggests that pedalling with the middle of your foot you were over extending your leg and 'reaching' during the pedal stroke. By pulling your feet back you are reducing the distance between the seat and your foot and no longer over-stressing the hamstrings / knee flexors etc. This is a good example of why your saddle height and foot position should be relatively 'fixed' unless just riding casually. If you want to pedal with the middle of your foot, move your saddle down.


NO! Reach and top tube length have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with where you should be placing your feet on the pedals.

Fore and aft is set to achieve balance over the bottom bracket (and to encourage pelvic rotation but that's another tangent) nothing more, nothing less. Too far forward and you will likely have too much weight on your hands and shoulders, your pelvis will not rotate forward (meaning your back will with either be too upright or rigid or bent in the wrong place or all three!) and your pedal stroke can become too quad dominant.
Too far back causes less problems but if you disengage the quads too much your pedal stroke will be less powerful.
When adjusting fore and aft, remember that it you move the seat back you are effectively making it higher and similarly if you move it forward it becomes slightly lower so re-check the height after fore and aft adjustments.

Once you have established a pedal position and then a saddle position; only then should you adjust your reach using stem length / stem height / hood position / handlebar drop and reach based on your preference and to a large extent your flexibility.

This is all 'baseline' stuff and much will depend on your individual proportions / strengths / weaknesses / preference etc. So it's all up for debate to some degree but if you really have no idea where you should be on the bike or why you can adjust certain things in different directions then it should get you in the right ballpark.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21966768)

I'm noticing a very specific trend with the style/genre of commenters who dislike my posts which otherwise lead to an advancement of education.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21967011)

I noticed that when I am placing my feet over the pedals as normal (balls over pedal axle, by keeping my calves flexed (using ankle flexion to keep your foot pointed downwards) I have noticeably more of a bend in my knee then if I was to pedal with my foot more or less perpendicular to my shin.

Originally Posted by aniki (Post 21967158)

Stop worrying about flexing your calves and don't point your toes up or down. Just let your feet rest wherever they naturally want to be!
A smooth and efficient cadence comes from experience; there's no short cut. If after several months and several thousand miles your body doesn't make at least some adaptations, try using smaller gears and / or shorter cranks*

* I say this based on the fact that we know you currently have a low natural cadence and the cranks you are using are more than likely already too long.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21967415)

Anyways, so once you begin to have trouble reaching the pedals with your heels, this is roughly the indication that you're at, or close to an ideal saddle height? What if you need to go higher based on the way you naturally place your foot over the pedal?

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21967496)

I know that no matter how much you adjust your saddle fore and aft, if your top tube isn't the correct length, there's no compensating for that.

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21967496)

.... which is why is bears no meaning on foo placement, correct?
For example, my gt has a top tube length of 590mm and the Nishiki is 580mm. How exactly can you increase the reach figure of a frame by 90mm of the top tube is only 10mm longer? And how would the the bottom bracket being 90mm closer toward the rider (on an otherwise similarly long top tube) bear no meeting on the way your feet naturally come into contact with the pedals? Please explain

Originally Posted by philbob57 (Post 21969175)

I've drafted several responses and backed out, Let's try this....

Your legs are not supposed to be fully extended with heels on the pedals. It's 'heels-on-pedals-pedalling-backward-without-rocking-your-hips.' Full leg extension is not the ideal, and I believe research has shown it's not the way to get the most power out of your legs (though I hesitate to write that, since I can't cite the research).

Here's what I read in your posts: you ride, feel discomfort, attribute the discomfort to an adjustment on your bike, and adjust based on something you've read or, possibly, misread. Then you ride more, feel more discomfort, adjust your bike, rinse, and repeat. And you've ended up with a strange looking bike and strange ideas - for example, that foot placement on the pedals is related directly to TT+stem+handlebar measurement. You jump to conclusions that are unexpected, to say the least. You get dogmatic about those conclusions. And you continue to ride without satisfaction. What you're doing isn't working for you, so do something difference.

I think you need to go through some sort of reset in your head and your body.

Why not start with seat height? Assume that you're probably average, so some small variation on the 3 major rules of thumb for setting seat height will work for you - 109% of cycling inseam from seat to pedal, or LeMond's rule of thumb (.883 * inseam from seat to center of BB), or heels on pedals, or the average of all of them. Ride ... this is new to you, still, so expect some discomfort. If your knee(s) hurt, see if you can avoid the pain by changing your foot position. If you can't, make one small change. One small change. Test. Adjust.

Stop assuming that discomfort is due to something wrong with your bike. Riding takes conditioning. If you're not conditioned correctly, cycling will hurt. You may be great climbing hills, but hills are different from headwinds. You may be great going downhill, but that's different from riding on a road. Your core strength may be great, and you may be great aerobically, but your butt still has to get broken in for the saddle to be comfortable.

Reset your head. Stop jumping to conclusions.

BTW, for me, LeMond's .883 x inseam, 109% x inseam, and heels on pedals yield results that are within 1 (one) CM. I can ride comfortably anyplace within that 1 CM range.

Originally Posted by philbob57 (Post 21969175)

...dogmatic...

Originally Posted by aniki (Post 21969687)

That's an excellent word and I think is really at the crux of a lot of the problems with keyboard bike fitting.
As I've tried to point out in my responses to Moisture; regardless of precisely what your preferred method is of achieving a basic starting point, it is still only and exactly that; a starting point.
With saddle height; you can get in the right ballpark using fairly crude methods but then pelvic rotation, hip / knee / ankle flexion, foot position, leg length, body symmetry, injury etc. plus several other factors can ALL influence your final optimal position and realistically that can take some time to achieve.
Once in the right ballpark you really only have two options; go out and ride and adapt and make changes where necessary but understand WHY and HOW certain changes to the bike will affect you. OR go to a bike fitter.
And I'm not talking about a bike fitter who also happens to sell bikes and works behind the counter in the local bike superstore or the guy with a loft, a laptop and a goniometer I mean; well basically someone who understands bikes AND understands bio-mechanics. Or just see Steve Hogg or anyone who uses his methods!

Originally Posted by Moisture (Post 21970796)

Thanks Aniki. You've helped to share some invaluable information within the community.

So other than the fore aft position of the saddle, anything else that directly impacts how your feet come into contact with the pedals? How would one type of frame achieve a different foot placement over another?