Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Fitting Your Bike
Reload this Page >

Saddle fore aft ? help !

Notices
Fitting Your Bike Are you confused about how you should fit a bike to your particular body dimensions? Have you been reading, found the terms Merxx or French Fit, and don’t know what you need? Every style of riding is different- in how you fit the bike to you, and the sizing of the bike itself. It’s more than just measuring your height, reach and inseam. With the help of Bike Fitting, you’ll be able to find the right fit for your frame size, style of riding, and your particular dimensions. Here ya’ go…..the location for everything fit related.

Saddle fore aft ? help !

Old 03-19-22, 04:07 AM
  #26  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 3,840
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1813 Post(s)
Liked 1,996 Times in 1,271 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen View Post
Right, there is no scientific evidence for KOPS, nor is there scientific evidence for any other 'method'. So consideration of all is possible, equally.
If you don;t understand the relationship of femur length, KOPS and ultimately cycling, then it's worth the process of thinking about it.
K. Bontrager - great guy, added a lot to bike equipment ideas, especially mtb. very glad he's been doing that - but he's never been involved in any scientific study on bike position.
so, his comments are 'opinion', from possibly his observation and thoughts, but more than any other thoughts? debatable.
There have been attempts at scientifc studies for saddle position and fore-aft.
Here are just 2 examples:
https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/cpa/a...view/4430/4120 (this one actually downloads a PDF - best I can determine is it's not infectious or virus containing... But download at your risk)
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...66337621000093
This 2nd one is mighty 'scientific' and bites a big mouthful, funny in many ways, and ultimately completely ignores fore-aft in it's summary ... meaning, they're didn;t want to wrassle that Bar... LOL!
If therez some Sigh-ENz evidence for 'balance', I'd like to see that. Same for 'Mid-rail'.
Tomato Coupe was nicely succinct - "Yes, KOP gives you a somewhat arbitrary starting point, but so does the balance method. Strict adherence to either as the ultimate arbiter of saddle position is misguided."
I cede to that plume of terse wisdom.
Ride on
Yuri
I totally agree that there is NO definitive scientific consensus to support any specific method of nailing down your saddle fore-aft position to the nearest mm. The balance method is probably the best approach as it requires some conscious thought about how you are actually dynamically balanced over your bike when pedalling. Being a mechanical engineer and well studied in vehicle dynamics, I find this kind of thing quite interesting. KOPS to me is nothing more than pseudo science. The relationship between my femur length, a plumb line down through the pedal axis and my dynamic balance on the bike makes no sense whatsoever. At best it's a coincidental relationship.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 03-19-22, 10:49 AM
  #27  
qwaalodge
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Kingdom of Qwaa
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 211 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski View Post
I totally agree that there is NO definitive scientific consensus to support any specific method of nailing down your saddle fore-aft position to the nearest mm. The balance method is probably the best approach as it requires some conscious thought about how you are actually dynamically balanced over your bike when pedalling. Being a mechanical engineer and well studied in vehicle dynamics, I find this kind of thing quite interesting. KOPS to me is nothing more than pseudo science. The relationship between my femur length, a plumb line down through the pedal axis and my dynamic balance on the bike makes no sense whatsoever. At best it's a coincidental relationship.
I agree with you. I tried KOPS and Balance for at least two months each. Now I see absolutely no reason to go back to KOPS.

The only thing going for KOPS is that modern frames have reach and stack proportions that favor KOPS instead of Balance method. Meaning riders would only need little to no other modifications to their bikes if they go with KOPS.

To do a proper Balance method on modern frames that favors KOPS, you may have to replace the stem with a shorter one. You don't just move the saddle aft, you may need to move the handlebar aft as well to compensate for the change in reach. This is meant to keep a good back posture and to open the hip angle as much as possible.

If you do those things, the only difference between Balance method and KOPS would be the rider's body angle against the ground. The shoulder and hip angles would be the same, even the frontal area for aerodynamic drag. Theoretically, you should make the same amount of power and cruise at the same speed. I found that to be true in practice but Balance method is better due to superior comfort. If anyone is making less power in Balance method than KOPS, it's likely they didn't change the stem length when it was needed and possibly problems with pedaling technique.
qwaalodge is offline  
Old 03-19-22, 08:09 PM
  #28  
pakossa
Full Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 211
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 9 Posts
What you may want to try are some uphill repeats: adjust the saddle 5 mm each time, keeping an eye on your speed/power/cadence. For me, adjusting the saddle fore/aft (or height) by 5 mm can literally double my speed or cut it in half going up a 12% grade! I'd use that as a determination for position well before using some formula.
pakossa is offline  
Old 03-20-22, 12:54 PM
  #29  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,790

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2407 Post(s)
Liked 4,224 Times in 1,716 Posts
Originally Posted by pakossa View Post
What you may want to try are some uphill repeats: adjust the saddle 5 mm each time, keeping an eye on your speed/power/cadence. For me, adjusting the saddle fore/aft (or height) by 5 mm can literally double my speed or cut it in half going up a 12% grade! I'd use that as a determination for position well before using some formula.
5 mm => double your power output? Astonishing.
tomato coupe is offline  
Likes For tomato coupe:
Old 03-20-22, 02:41 PM
  #30  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 3,840
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1813 Post(s)
Liked 1,996 Times in 1,271 Posts
Originally Posted by pakossa View Post
What you may want to try are some uphill repeats: adjust the saddle 5 mm each time, keeping an eye on your speed/power/cadence. For me, adjusting the saddle fore/aft (or height) by 5 mm can literally double my speed or cut it in half going up a 12% grade! I'd use that as a determination for position well before using some formula.
In contrast, for me, adjusting the saddle fore/aft by 5 mm can literally make no difference whatsoever to my seated speed up a 12% grade.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 03-20-22, 08:00 PM
  #31  
qwaalodge
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Kingdom of Qwaa
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 211 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
5 mm => double your power output? Astonishing.
It's actually quadruple the power output!!

KE=1/2 MVsquared. Velocity is squared. If you double speed that means at least quadruple increase in power!!!! And that's ignoring other factors like aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance of tires, etc!!!!
qwaalodge is offline  
Old 03-20-22, 08:13 PM
  #32  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,790

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2407 Post(s)
Liked 4,224 Times in 1,716 Posts
Originally Posted by qwaalodge View Post
It's actually quadruple the power output!!

KE=1/2 MVsquared. Velocity is squared. If you double speed that means at least quadruple increase in power!!!! And that's ignoring other factors like aerodynamic drag, rolling resistance of tires, etc!!!!
Ummmmm ... no. Kinetic energy is not power. Velocity pretty much scales linearly with power on a steep slope.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 03-20-22, 08:25 PM
  #33  
qwaalodge
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Kingdom of Qwaa
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 211 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
Ummmmm ... no. Kinetic energy is not power. Velocity pretty much scales linearly with power on a steep slope.
Seems your right. Just checking if anyone's still sharp on their math!
qwaalodge is offline  
Old 03-20-22, 08:27 PM
  #34  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,790

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2407 Post(s)
Liked 4,224 Times in 1,716 Posts
Originally Posted by qwaalodge View Post
Seems your right. Just checking if anyone's still sharp on their math!
It's physics, not math.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 03-21-22, 08:27 AM
  #35  
pakossa
Full Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 211
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 36 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 9 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski View Post
In contrast, for me, adjusting the saddle fore/aft by 5 mm can literally make no difference whatsoever to my seated speed up a 12% grade.
This might indicate that your fit isn't quite in the ballpark. For instance, say your fore/aft is off by 20mm. If you adjust it by 5 mm, you're still off by 15 mm, so there probably won't be much difference. Whereas, if you're off by only 5 - 10 mm, you should notice a difference. (This assumes saddle height or bar positioning isn't significantly off . . . one of those could be the reason, too.)
pakossa is offline  
Old 03-21-22, 09:25 AM
  #36  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,790

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2407 Post(s)
Liked 4,224 Times in 1,716 Posts
Originally Posted by pakossa View Post
This might indicate that your fit isn't quite in the ballpark. For instance, say your fore/aft is off by 20mm. If you adjust it by 5 mm, you're still off by 15 mm, so there probably won't be much difference. Whereas, if you're off by only 5 - 10 mm, you should notice a difference. (This assumes saddle height or bar positioning isn't significantly off . . . one of those could be the reason, too.)
It might also also indicate you’re the only one that can double your power with a 5mm saddle change.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 03-21-22, 09:43 AM
  #37  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 3,840
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1813 Post(s)
Liked 1,996 Times in 1,271 Posts
Originally Posted by pakossa View Post
this might indicate that your fit isn't quite in the ballpark. For instance, say your fore/aft is off by 20mm. If you adjust it by 5 mm, you're still off by 15 mm, so there probably won't be much difference. Whereas, if you're off by only 5 - 10 mm, you should notice a difference. (this assumes saddle height or bar positioning isn't significantly off . . . One of those could be the reason, too.)
lol

I've actually got a Wahoo Kickr Bike, so it's very easy to do a full sweep of saddle fore/aft position, which I've done several times. It also simulates gradients up to 20%. My own conclusion was that saddle fore-aft position is not super-critical. It's more about finding a well balanced riding position rather than variation in power output. If you are seeing literally 100% power variation between 5 mm positions, then maybe some of your leg muscles are missing?

Last edited by PeteHski; 03-21-22 at 09:54 AM.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 03-21-22, 09:47 AM
  #38  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 3,840
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1813 Post(s)
Liked 1,996 Times in 1,271 Posts
Originally Posted by tomato coupe View Post
It might also also indicate you’re the only one that can double your power with a 5mm saddle change.
Too right. To double my speed on a 12% gradient means going from 250W up to 500W. Now if I could only get that sort of power gain from a 5 mm saddle setback change. Or any change whatsoever.
PeteHski is offline  
Old 03-21-22, 09:51 AM
  #39  
tomato coupe
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,790

Bikes: Colnago, Van Dessel, Factor, Cervelo, Ritchey

Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2407 Post(s)
Liked 4,224 Times in 1,716 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski View Post
Too right. To double my speed on a 12% gradient means going from 250W up to 500W. Now if I could only get that sort of power gain from a 5 mm saddle setback change. Or any change whatsoever.
I’d lop 5 mm off my **** if it would double my power.
tomato coupe is offline  
Old 03-21-22, 10:32 AM
  #40  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,160

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 432 Post(s)
Liked 503 Times in 349 Posts
Originally Posted by PeteHski View Post
lol

I've actually got a Wahoo Kickr Bike, so it's very easy to do a full sweep of saddle fore/aft position, which I've done several times. It also simulates gradients up to 20%. My own conclusion was that saddle fore-aft position is not super-critical. It's more about finding a well balanced riding position rather than variation in power output. If you are seeing literally 100% power variation between 5 mm positions, then maybe some of your leg muscles are missing?
so you have a KICKR CLIMB trainer ?

Ride On
Yuri
cyclezen is offline  
Old 03-21-22, 11:45 AM
  #41  
PeteHski
Senior Member
 
PeteHski's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2021
Posts: 3,840
Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1813 Post(s)
Liked 1,996 Times in 1,271 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen View Post
so you have a KICKR CLIMB trainer ?

Ride On
Yuri
No, one of these:-



Makes bike setup experiments very simple. I can change saddle setback on the fly in a couple of seconds.
PeteHski is offline  
Likes For PeteHski:
Old 03-22-22, 01:36 PM
  #42  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,261

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked 497 Times in 376 Posts
Originally Posted by qwaalodge View Post
I tried both KOPS and Balance at least two months each.

I end up being faster on balance method due to greatly improved comfort and possibly more aerodynamic position.

I had to reduce stem length on my bike though because my balance position is significantly behind KOPS position. The balance position made me feel overstretched so I went for a shorter stem.
Similar experience here, though most of my riding over my past 2 years has been on trainer. After moving my saddle (a Selle AnAtomica with very soft stretched-out skin then a B17 Imperial, then a nearly unused Brooks Pro) back to where I can easily lift my hands, for example to turn the pages of a book, I found my hands migrating back over time, and no longer in contact with the hoods. I'm on the lookout for a vintage-looking compact bar to take teh place of the long reach randonneur bars I now have. I have not taken that step yet.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 03-22-22, 06:56 PM
  #43  
qwaalodge
Banned.
 
Join Date: Jan 2022
Location: Kingdom of Qwaa
Posts: 307
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 211 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 61 Posts
Originally Posted by Road Fan View Post
Similar experience here, though most of my riding over my past 2 years has been on trainer. After moving my saddle (a Selle AnAtomica with very soft stretched-out skin then a B17 Imperial, then a nearly unused Brooks Pro) back to where I can easily lift my hands, for example to turn the pages of a book, I found my hands migrating back over time, and no longer in contact with the hoods. I'm on the lookout for a vintage-looking compact bar to take teh place of the long reach randonneur bars I now have. I have not taken that step yet.
I went for much shorter stem and short reach compact dropbar to compensate the aft adjustment with balance. That really completed the balance method. You will feel a huge improvement.
qwaalodge is offline  
Old 03-26-22, 05:59 AM
  #44  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,261

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked 497 Times in 376 Posts
Originally Posted by qwaalodge View Post
I went for much shorter stem and short reach compact dropbar to compensate the aft adjustment with balance. That really completed the balance method. You will feel a huge improvement.
Thanks! With my experience with other bikes, I expect the same. Right now my impediment is laziness!
Road Fan is offline  
Old 03-26-22, 06:18 AM
  #45  
fujidon
Junior Member
 
fujidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central NJ
Posts: 149

Bikes: Fuji Pro, Raleigh Team, touring bike, hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked 76 Times in 44 Posts
I think I may have set up my bike many years ago using KOPS as a random starting position. Then I rode... a lot.

What I noticed was that whenever I pedaled above tempo was that I moved forward on the saddle. So I moved the saddle forward a little at a time until I longer slid forward for more power and was still comfortable all of the time.

I'm probably forward of an average fore-aft position, but it works for me.
fujidon is offline  
Old 03-26-22, 06:24 AM
  #46  
Road Fan
Senior Member
 
Road Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 16,261

Bikes: 1980 Masi, 1984 Mondonico, 1984 Trek 610, 1980 Woodrup Giro, 2005 Mondonico Futura Leggera ELOS, 1967 PX10E, 1971 Peugeot UO-8

Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1594 Post(s)
Liked 497 Times in 376 Posts
This bike has a pretty long TT, probably longer than I should have, but it's a good ride, very supple and responsive. I already have a "7" shaped stem on it, 7 or 8 cm, so it would be hard to go much shorter. I think I need it to be about between 2 and 4 cm closer, so I should be able to accomplish that going from a V-O rando bar to a true compact, but we'll see. I may also convert the stem to a quill mast topped by a threadless stem. That has worked well on a different bike faced with a reach tuning task

But with 650b, relatively low trail, 747 standard tubing and the ability to host 38 mm and 42 mm tires, I still have a few variables to play with.
Road Fan is offline  
Old 03-26-22, 04:13 PM
  #47  
cyclezen
OM boy
 
cyclezen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Goleta CA
Posts: 4,160

Bikes: a bunch

Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 432 Post(s)
Liked 503 Times in 349 Posts
Originally Posted by fujidon View Post
I think I may have set up my bike many years ago using KOPS as a random starting position. Then I rode... a lot.
What I noticed was that whenever I pedaled above tempo was that I moved forward on the saddle. So I moved the saddle forward a little at a time until I longer slid forward for more power and was still comfortable all of the time.
I'm probably forward of an average fore-aft position, but it works for me.
Yeah, 'On the rivet' is very common, when an effort is hard and maintained for a period longer than what a rider might be accustomed to...
If you mean cadence 'tempo' (used often in the quite older days of racing) or the more modern usage regarding 'tempo' as high effort, steady state riding - as "David Formolo riding tempo for Pojacar"; or 'Tempo training" - that being a hard effort, steady pace.
In any case, a hard, sustained effort, which is quite below 'sprint', but 75 to 90% of max effort (still aerobic) will often have riders sliding onto the nose of the saddle. One can see that often happening to riders in a TT ride.
Most often its a combination of keeping a high cadence as well as using a bigger gear - its more than just 'spinning'. It's what Eddy Meant by 'Spin a Big Gear'.
Conversely, when a rider requires to 'push' a gear, seated - the rider may slide backward a bit and press hard against the saddle back. The idea of saddle designs like the COncors was to facilitate more 'support for for that pushing, with the slightly higher turned saddle back. Some like that others don't.
Saddle fore-aft has a spectrum of what works. Not uncommon, I had a number of bikes, each with different setup. For Criterium racing, I had my crit bike set with my saddle 1.5 cm further forward than I would normally call my primary saddle position - because Crits often required a very frequent high level effort, with high 'tempo' coming thru and out of every corner. Not unusual to be on the saddle nose for 60% of the race time. So a 'forward' position was needed and worked well. Not so for a circuit/road race, where a more balanced position was more desirable.
If the more forward saddle position works for a rider - no reason not to use it, especially riders who commonly 'spin' higher cadences.
If one is like me, I spin, but also will 'push' if there's a short section which can be ridden with more power than cadence. 'Pushing' for me is usually a cadence below 70, spiinning higher cadence is usually well over 100. In any case, I prefer my saddle position to allow both. SO not 'forward' or 'back', but in my' middle' - right where it is now.
Is it KOPS? I wouldn't know, since I haven't really checked for that in 45-ish years. Is It the Balance Method? I guess so, since I feel 'balanced' even when I'm on the rivet, or against the back of the saddle.
The Point - how one initially starts to set saddle position is just a start point, not cast in stone. Rider riding, over time, usually gets one to where it ends up. open your softboiled egg from either end - the result is going to be the same.
Ride On
Yuri
cyclezen is offline  
Old 03-26-22, 05:17 PM
  #48  
xroadcharlie
Full Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Windsor Ontario, Canada
Posts: 469

Bikes: 2018 Giant Sedona

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 151 Post(s)
Liked 99 Times in 83 Posts
I had some knee pain after riding so thought I would check my saddle fore and aft position. It was off by a couple cm based on KOPS. After setting it correctly the knee pain stopped.

There is no better place to start then using the KOPS method as a starting position for the initial fitting. In many cases it's all that's needed, Make adjustments from there as you see fit.

The balance method is a non starter for me since I don't have a trainer and will not ride on the street no hands.

Last edited by xroadcharlie; 03-27-22 at 06:12 AM.
xroadcharlie is offline  
Old 03-26-22, 05:18 PM
  #49  
fujidon
Junior Member
 
fujidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central NJ
Posts: 149

Bikes: Fuji Pro, Raleigh Team, touring bike, hybrid

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Liked 76 Times in 44 Posts
Originally Posted by cyclezen View Post
If you mean cadence 'tempo' (used often in the quite older days of racing) or the more modern usage regarding 'tempo' as high effort, steady state riding - as "David Formolo riding tempo for Pojacar"; or 'Tempo training" - that being a hard effort, steady pace.
Yuri
I used "tempo" in the sense that it's an effort level that can be maintained for the duration of a long ride. For me, "tempo" is not 90%. That's much too high. 75% is probably closer.

We can also discuss what me mean by a "long ride", but for me, it means several hours. Definitely more than 3 and probably less than 8 including rest stops.
fujidon is offline  
Old 03-28-22, 01:41 PM
  #50  
Calsun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 546
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 224 Post(s)
Liked 119 Times in 93 Posts
I want to have my butt centered on the widest part of the saddle and be able to comfortably reach the handlebars while having my back at a 45 degree angle. When riding, having warmed up for 10 minutes, I want the saddle to handlebar distance to feel right and by that I mean that I do not feel the need to slide further back or further forward to have support from the seat and be able to pedal effectively.

What is also important for me is the seat angle and usually I have it set at a 4 degree down angle from being perfectly horizontal but it varies by seat. I take a hex wrench and make adjustments as I ride a section with flats and hills.

So I adjust seat height first and then make a preliminary seat position of 24 inches from butt center to the top of the stem, and then I ride and adjust, ride and adjust until it is right for me. Doing this adjustment sitting still on a bike in a shop is not the best way to do this.

Race cars have their suspensions tuned in much the same manner where the driver takes it out on the race course and then based on what the driver reports the mechanics will make adjustment and this process is repeated again and again. And it is not done with the car up on a rack but with it out on the road.
Calsun is offline  
Likes For Calsun:

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.