lhill 

Wheever

philbob57

Isn't the measurement supposed to be center-to-center of the dimples?

lhill 

fietsbob

you just need to ride more saddles, to find what's 'best' for you.

Carbonfiberboy 

It occurs to me that pelvises are complicated structures. Do you sit on the saddle with the exact forward lean you assumed when sitting on the pad at the bike shop? In any case, the only thing which matters is that one gets a comfortable saddle, however that's done. LBS have charts of saddle widths against sit bone measurements on their device. I have no idea how those charts are constructed.

Kontact 

Cyclists don't sit on their "sit bones", unless they are seated straight backed like in a chair. Cyclists sit on the narrower ischial ramus.

Sit bone measuring is marketing, not science. We have many customers on our saddles that have sit bones wider than the saddle.


It is like measuring your ankles for foot size, and then measuring the outsole to determine what size the shoe is.

philbob57

For saddle theory, I suggest reading https://www.cervelo.com/en/engineeri...f-road-saddles, the Selle SMP patent (for example, BICYCLE SADDLE - SELLE SMP S.A.S. DI MAURIZIO SCHIAVON with a PDF of the figures), https://www.ismseat.com/technology/.

Kontact 

The Cervelo link is just wrong because they say cyclists sit on the ischial tuberosities, as if there was nothing between that and the pubis. Which is what happens when a company that doesn't make saddle writes articles about saddles.

There's some good research that's been done by the UW Madison Bioengineering department. I also like Finding the Perfect Bicycle Seat by Joshua Cohen

philbob57

I had to go into your profile to see that your home page is kontactbike.com, a website that sells seats and books, including Finding the Perfect Bicycle Seat.

IMO, if you have an interest in a business connected with your posts, you owe it to your readers to mention that up front. I don't question your belief in your products, but you're not completely objective. I ask you to mention explicitly your connection with kontact in, say, a tagline, which gets it into every post. I know you need to mention it explicitly in anything you post about seats/saddles.

I think your connection with kontact blinds you to the benefits of the Cervelo document. I, too, think they should have explicitly mentioned the pubic rami, but even though they did not, they posed some questions that help buyers sift through marketing crap.

Kontact 

Bikeforums has policies that mean I'm not going to post a link to my business in my posts. The picture and name are more than enough.

Joshua Cohen sells his book on my website, but I don't profit from those sales - it is a service I provide to him and his readers for free - because it is a good book.


If I wasn't objective, my post would have attacked the validity of my competitors literature - ISM and SMP. But I pointed to a problem with Cervelo, because it is a problem and Cervelo has a long history of putting baloney on their website - I worked at a Cervelo dealer for several years and am VERY familiar with some of the foolish things they do.

So a Cervelo post based on "marketing crap" about ischial tuberosities doesn't help anyone sift through marketing crap - it just reinforces the marketing crap.

Road Fan

I tried a precursor saddle to the Kontact design and it was nice, but at that time did not really work for me. I feel the Joshua Cohen book on bicycle saddles is a great resource. But there are a number of fine saddles, including Kontact, Specialized, Brooks, Selle AnAtomica, and Rivet. I haven't tried them all ... so no flames, please.

Iride01 

I've never used an assometer in a bike shop. What is the number it's telling you? The recommended saddle size or the spread of your sit-bones? Saddle size is usually the widest outer measure right? We don't want our sit bones on the edge of the saddle.

Kontact 

Your ischial tuberosities don't have much to do with saddle width, and the outer width of the saddle has little to do with how wide the seating area is. Some saddles flare out very wide while not actually being very wide on top.


Which is why I used the ankle and shoe analogy - the only part of the body you should care about is the actual part you're using, and the only part of the saddle that matters is the part you can sit on.

This is an illustration from my website, but the basic principle is true for any two saddles you want to compare the saddle on the right is wider in max width, but narrower in use. "Sit bone" in this case refers to whatever pelvic bones you're sitting on, rather than a specific bone.

Carbonfiberboy 

I have great respect for Kontact and find that he is very careful to offer objective (and very good IMO) advice on general saddle issues, never pushing or even mentioning his products. Until you brought it up.

I've found that a very important step in finding the correct saddle is to first sit on it in only thin nylon running shorts, even taking first rides on it wearing same. The pads in modern cycling shorts tend to sort of "smear" the contact area so you can't tell precisely what's pushing on what. In use on a well-fitting saddle, this is a good thing, but it makes it more difficult to assess things which might become a problem over the hours.

Kontact 

Just to help people picture the issue, here's the pelvis so you all can see the relative locations and widths of the Tuberosities and the Ramus arches. The further you lean forward, the more narrow the bottom most pelvic bones are where you press against the saddle.





@Carbonfiberboy - I appreciate your comment. Thanks.

philbob57

Am I the only one who doesn't like a personal interest to go unmentioned?

I've learned from kontact's posts, and I assume I will continue to do, especially since I now know about the commercial connection.

I doobt anyone can be unbiased about things s/he sells.

Kontact 

I'm sorry I offended you. But my handle is "Kontact", my icon is of a Kontact saddle and the link I provided is to the Kontactbike website. Just how sneaky does that make me?

Maybe I've stated who I am enough times in the past that I just didn't realize it could be a mystery. In any case, mystery solved.


And I am not unbiased - I believe we sell the finest solution to sitting on an upright bicycle yet developed. But we offer trials because no one solution works for everyone, and I regularly recommend against my product and for other companies. I don't know how much more stand-up and honest you require me to be.

philbob57

Ah ... light dawns over marblehead.... I missed your previous self-identification. As I say, I've found your posts informative - enough to wonder why you call yourself 'kontact'. Now I know.

BTW, when I was fighting my perineal numbness a couple of years ago, I came across your website and put your saddle on my list for possible use. A very cheap and new Selle SMP came my way and solved my problem, so I stopped looking.

Back to the Cervelo piece, the benefit it offers IMO is that it cuts through some - not all - crap. I read the 'rules' more as questions or 'areas of concern' that go beyond sit-bone width, and too many cyclists think the ass-o-meter is the last word on saddle choice. Also, I found the pressure maps useful, even though the only map meaningful to an individual is the individual's.own map, and I found the statistical data on sit bone width useful as well..

Um...I prefer reading to videos, which is why I place high values on Selle SMP's patent and ISMseat's tech section from their website.

Onegun

hehe! Not very! But ... I believe I would make a signature for my posts in your control panel that states that you are the owner, CEO, salesman, floor sweeper, or bottle washer for Kontact saddles. That actually does a couple of things for you. Firstly, it appends that sig automatically to every post you make, so you never have to answer this question again. Secondly, it appends that sig automatically to every post you make so that even if the post is about the muddy conditions on the Appalachian Trail, people will see it and go, "Hmmm. Kontact saddles. Never heard of them. Let's have a look!" The sig method not only passes every "full disclosure" test, its passive advertising, as well.

Kontact 

As I intimated earlier, using a sig line like that likely runs afoul of forum rules about advertising.

It is also oboxious.

Onegun

I don't see how since a link to your site is specifically allowed in your sig. You're not trying to sell product in the sig, just making full disclosure.

As for obnoxious, so is taking up forum forum bandwidth for discussions like this when there is an easy fix. And personally, after 10 years on these forums, I have yet to be offended by a sig. To each their own. I was just making a suggestion.

Kontact 

https://www.internetbrands.com/ibterms/

But as you are the first person to ever make an issue of this, I agree that this is a waste of bandwidth since I already explained why I don't have it in a sig.

Onegun

Wow. You had to back up to the parent company to find justification for your opinion? You said earlier that a sig line link "likely runs afoul of forum rules about advertising". Well, I've already pointed out that it doesn't, but here's a link to those forum rules.
https://www.bikeforums.net/faq.php?f...atures_avatars The first line in that section states:
'Signatures' contain information that you want to include at the bottom of all your posts. This might include pictures, links to your site(s), quotes, etc.

As for parent companies, they generally have people who read every word of the acquisition's rules, regs, TOU, etc, and if they disagree with anything, it gets changed quickly. They often simply allow subsidiaries to continue with the method of operation that made them successful enough to be a target for acquisition in the first place.

Now, on to your second incorrect assumption, i.e., that I am the first person to make an issue of this. In spite of your attempts to deflect and make this about a simple sig line identifier, it's not. The original issue is whether or not your efforts so far are adequate in identifying yourself as having a vested interest in a particular company. This issue has been discussed on this board time and time again. Hell, philbob57 discussing it in this thread was the catalyst for this conversation. So I am far from the first person to make an issue of it.

Lastly, I cannot understand why you are being so argumentative about something like this, except for the possible explanation that you are the type that has to have everything their way. I understand that you were banned from this board a couple of times this year, once for being argumentative. Amazing. I wonder why your saddle endeavor has never really taken off? I mean, after all this time, you still only make 2 products ... well, OK, one product in two different colors. Yet your name isn't KontactSaddle, it's KontactBike, so it would appear you had grander plans than just a single product. If you behave in all your dealing with other people as you do here, it's no wonder your little company has gone nowhere. And now you've lost one more customer before he ever tries your product. Me. You can bet I'll never buy one, no matter how good they are, just because they're yours.

I'm done with this nonsense. I'll be blocking your posts immediately, so any followup comments I won't see. Goodbye.

Kontact 

Lot's of people have personal websites that aren't related to commerce. Mine is. Rules are rules and I want to be able to participate here, so I obey those rules. If you want to demonstrate that the rules that I posted don't apply to me, please do so. Otherwise, I don't understand why you are being such a pain.