# Saddle Setback - Waht's Yours?



## MacB (31 Jul 2010)

as per title, just curious as to what sort of saddle setback people have and if they vary it for different styles of bikes/riding?

This is measured from centre of BB to saddle nose vertically, you can drop a plumb line from the saddle nose and measure BB to line at BB. Or you can stand bike upright with rear wheel against a wall. Measure from wall to BB centre and from wall to saddle nose and subtract the first from the second.

At 6'1" I have 80mm of setback on two bikes and closer to 70mm(due to Brooks saddle rails) on another.


----------



## ColinJ (31 Jul 2010)

I don't think that this is a particularly useful measure. 

I have Arione saddles on two of my bikes but I have a different type of saddle on my mountain bike. It has a much shorter nose and a different shape so I set its position up differently to the Ariones. 

I never go by theory, I just move a new saddle about until it feels most comfortable. I don't even know what the numbers are.
If for some reason I was replacing a saddle with another of the same type (perhaps due to crash damage), I'd get a tape measure out and copy the position. 

*PS* Still, there's no harm in telling you the numbers once I've discovered what they are! I'm the same height of you - I'll check the bikes later.


----------



## MacB (31 Jul 2010)

thanks Col, this is more about getting measurements together to avoid making ill fitting purchasing decisions. Before anyone else says it, yes I know I can get fully fitted etc. I like to tinker myself and you don't have to reply if you don't want to.  

I'm trying to get the setup right for bikes I've converted from flat to butterfly and then drop bars. This means the top tubes are quite long compared to a road geometry frame, I'm also using Midge bars which only have 65mm of forward sweep, which is pretty short.

I was curious as, no matter what way I seem to do the measurements, layback seatposts seem to be a no-no, yet I see plenty of them around. Depending on the fit calculator used, and style of riding input, I get anything from 62mm to 90mm as a setback recommendation. On most frames this sort of setback only seems to be achievable with an inline seatpost.

If anyone can be bothered I'd also be interested in the saddle nose to centre of bars measurement.


----------



## ColinJ (31 Jul 2010)

I still haven't measured the saddle position on the bikes, but I can tell you that I find a 58 cm road bike frame is ideal for me using a 110 mm stem. 

My first bike was 56 cm and I felt a bit cramped on it though I still have one that size in the Midlands. I've pushed the saddle back further than I normally would to stretch me out more on that bike. 

I had a 60 cm bike once and got on okay with it once I switched the 110 mm stem for a 90 mm one.

I have flipped the stems for a more upright position. I don't like a big drop from the saddle to the top of the bars.

My inside leg measurement is 32" which I reckon is a bit short for a 6' 1" man, so I'm probably longer in the body than most people of our height.

One day if/when I have the money, I'd like to ride over to Paul Hewitt in Leyland and have a proper bike fit done for a new bike. I'd be interested to see what position he came up with relative to what I ride now. I do suffer from back ache on long hilly rides, but I think most of that it is due to not being fit enough!


----------



## HLaB (31 Jul 2010)

I found the distance back from the BB to point where a theoretical seatpost would intersect the top of the saddle. The distance to the back of the saddle is also important. Whereas the length of a saddle may vary making the distance to the nose inconsistent. IIRC that point on my bike is about 218mm and the setback to the rear is 120mm; on one of my bikes though this is reduced by 2.5mm as its got 175mm cranks whereas my other bikes have 172.5mm cranks. btw I 5 foot 9 and 1/4 inch.


----------



## woohoo (31 Jul 2010)

I was measured before I bought my current road bike and the recommended saddle setback came out at 3.4cm. I've moved things around since I bought the bike e.g. changed the handlebars, stem and saddle and find I'm happiest with a 3.0cm setback *but* for all of my 5'6", I have a long back and short femurs.

IIRC, the UCI have a minimum standard of 5.0cm for saddle setback but exemptions are available for riders with short femurs. (I don't know if this applies to TT bikes but riders in these events always appear to be riding on the point of the saddle in an attempt to shorten the effective setback.)


----------



## GrasB (31 Jul 2010)

On Selle Italia SLR saddle with the seat tube at 78 deg I want about 10mm layback seat post & at 74 deg I use a 0mm layback seat post. This puts me further forward to the handle bars with the 78 deg seat tube but you can lower your torso more thus you want a slightly shorter reach to compensate & take better advantage of your different natural handlebar position. I don't know what the saddle setback is as I've never actually measured that.


----------



## e-rider (31 Jul 2010)

I use an inline post with a 73 degree seat tube if that helps - saddle rails are fairly central in the clamp.

I believe I have short femurs relative to my overall leg length so I find it easy to have too much setback (hence the inline post)


----------



## jimboalee (31 Jul 2010)

The answer to this is nothing to do with the nose or length of the saddle. It is where your butt is most comfortable on the saddle.

Saddle manufactureres think of this and design their product so that ( the average bod ) the sit bones are in the best position when the straight line up the seattube intersects the top surface half way along the saddle ( if the saddle was the shape of a Brooks ).

A fizik Arione can be made the same shape as a Brooks if you chop off the pointy bit at the back.


----------



## jimboalee (31 Jul 2010)

BTW.

5mm either way doesn't make a fat lot of difference. Your riding style adapts after a few miles.

Did anyone notice Contador constantly repositioning himself on the seat during the Individual TT on the Tour? His seat was not in the best position and he should sack his ergonomics engineer.


----------



## MacB (31 Jul 2010)

thanks Jimbo but I did really want some real world numbers, I've got various theories coming out of my ears.


----------



## HLaB (31 Jul 2010)

jimboalee said:


> BTW.
> 
> 5mm either way doesn't make a fat lot of difference. Your riding style adapts after a few miles.
> 
> Did anyone notice Contador constantly repositioning himself on the seat during the Individual TT on the Tour? His seat was not in the best position and he should sack his ergonomics engineer.



I guess my body doesnt adapt but if I put my saddle up or back too far (about 2.5mm) I stretch my calf too much (did an injury that way) but agree with you moving it forward makes no difference after all Contador and plenty of others are on the rivet one minute, the back of their saddle the next


----------



## redddraggon (31 Jul 2010)

I'm only 5'7" and have about 80mm on my Ti bike, no idea on the other bikes as I've not measured them, but they are probably less.


----------



## potsy (31 Jul 2010)

I've really struggled to get my saddle position right on my Secteur,height seems OK now but can't work out the fore/aft position at all.
It's quite far forward now yet it still feels like my legs are stretching forwards to turn the pedals,trial and error I guess I'll get it right eventually.
All these figures and measurements that MacB mentions confuse the hell out of me






On the hybrid I left it as it came out the shop and it's been fine.


----------



## GrasB (1 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> BTW.
> 
> 5mm either way doesn't make a fat lot of difference. Your riding style adapts after a few miles.


5mm can make an awful lot of difference. Set the saddle to far forward & you'll find that you get rubbing & thus chaffing. A 5mm adjustment could move the saddle far enough back to solve this. The same goes for setting it to far back, while you can ride on the nose this is uncomfortable so you move back but that means your leg line is now wrong so you move forwards... again a 5mm adjustment may put the saddle in a position which is more comfortable for the rider without this constant shuffling.


HLaB, if you move forward in the saddle & can get proper leg extension it leads to a more aero position & allows you to put a bit more power into the pedals. From what little I understand about TTing on the pro circuit the impression I get is the saddle is put in a position to maximise power output in the rules, this means tipping the saddle a little to forward so the rider will slide down it & need to reposition them selves on a regular basis.


----------



## jimboalee (1 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> The answer to this is nothing to do with the nose or length of the saddle. It is where your butt is most comfortable on the saddle.
> 
> Saddle manufactureres think of this and design their product so that ( the average bod ) the sit bones are in the best position when the straight line up the seattube intersects the top surface half way along the saddle ( if the saddle was the shape of a Brooks ).
> 
> A fizik Arione can be made the same shape as a Brooks if you chop off the pointy bit at the back.



I think this needs expanding on.

Saddle manufacturers are assuming the rider has selected the correct crank length and fitted the chainset on a frame with the correct seattube angle.
These two numbers are dependent on the riders physical dimensions.

Also, fore/aft positioning effects KOPS. There are conflicting versions of KOPS. Some bike fit instructions say its the very front of the knee while others say its the bony bit on the outside of the knee.
The difference between these two points on my knee is 30mm.
One set of instructions I've seen says "plumb line from the patella tendon", Eh, I'm a doctor, am I? 

And to confuse matter further, drop the plumbline from the bony bit if you are a spinner, and from the very front if you are a grinder.


----------



## ColinJ (1 Aug 2010)

MacB - I've decided not to measure my saddle position for you because I don't see how it helps anybody to know what I am comfortable with. You don't know any of my body dimensions (other than height and inside leg measurement) and different people are more or less flexible. I have problems with my back so I changed my position to mitigate that.

One thing I will say is that the seatposts on my road bikes have setback and I have the saddles fixed about halfway down the rails. The seatpost on my MTB is inline so I have to push the saddle further back. I think that setback looks better and it must be mechanically better to have the rails centred, surely? (Mind you - the only saddle I broke was on a road bike, so perhaps not!)


----------



## MacB (1 Aug 2010)

Ok folks, it was curiosity not a demand to descend on your garage with a tape measure and a team of helpers. I'll try to explain my thought process, for anyone interested, and why I was wanting to get other peoples setups. For those not interested I do understand that the urge to post that, and other irrelevances, is irresistable, so fill your boots.  

As mentioned I started out with a bike that came with flat bars, it is a Giant CRS Alliance in large which comes with an effective top tube of 596mm and a stem of approx 105mm. When I changed to butterfly bars I had to change to a longer stem due to the sweep back aspect of the bars. Then I start reading more and realise that I have my saddle far too low, was getting some lower back and knee issues. Raise saddle to a better height but didn't adjust fore/aft so still had it well back, on laid back seatpost, which had been needed to get distance to pedals when saddle was lower. Fortunately I then go on a social ride and Teef & Co sort out my saddle fore/aft after my knees start to really suffer on a longer ride. Thankfully the 130mm stem I had bought was adjustable so could accomodate fore aft movement of saddle. But I now found that a setback post was making it hard/impossible to get the saddle far enough forward and get saddle pack clamp on behind. Bearing in mind I'm aiming for 80mm of setback here, so not exactly time trial setup.

So that was realisation No1, I need to start at the saddle and work forward.

I buy a Surly Crosscheck frame 600mm TT and build up as per Giant with butterfly bars etc. No problems as lessons learned and so not wasting money on parts that won't work. Only tricky bit was the Brooks saddle and the very short rails on it and fitting a saddle pack. But we're getting there and I'm understanding more about how my bikes fit me and what impact changes have. Then I decide that I want to use drop bars. This is only after some, truly herculean, efforts at getting the controls on the sides of butterfly bars. Cue some expensive failures and much reading about effective top tubes, seat post v head tube angles, HT length and heights, stem length and angle...etc...etc....etc.

Next discovery is around geometry and why frames designed for flat bars have longer effective top tubes than those designed for drop bars. 

Then I realise that a longer top tube isn't always a longer top tube as the seat tube angle impacts on the reach. That's reach as measured from the BB to the HT. I note that several manufacturers now include reach in their spec charts, Cerveloe being a noteable one. Assuming that you'll be positioning your saddle in the same position relative to the BB. Then compare two frames with the same effective top tube lengths but differing seat tube angles. The one with the steeper seat tube angle will have more reach than one with a relaxed angle, as more of the top tube is forward of the BB.

Ok, I get all that but it then led to me considering seatposts and layback/inline as, when perusing bikes, I was seeing a lot coming with laid back seatposts. I then looked at my 3 bikes and I'm using inline seatposts on all of them and the saddle is slightly forward of center to achieve 80mm of setback. The seatubes are 72, 73 and unknown in degrees, now I thought that 80mm was quite high for setback. So I was puzzled as, by my calculations, a laid back seatpost will lend itself more to a 90mm+ setback and would be impossible to achieve much less than about 70mm.

This got me thinking again, am I having the saddle too far forward and vertically raised, is it more normal to have the saddle further back and lower? AND this led to me posting a thread curious to find out what others tend to have and if there is a correlation between size, ie do taller people tend to have more setback than shorter or the reverse. Maybe some people use lower and further back on some bikes and higher further forward on others, to alter the saddle height to bar height relationship depending on use of bike? But wouldn't this effect the KOPS relationship and I thought, however you work out your own KOPS, this was meant to be optimum for nearly all types of riding?(obviously I'm excluding things like time trial setups here).

Yes I can go and get a fitting etc but that will give me the optimum setup according to whatever flavour that fitter follows. I've read enough on this to realise that there is a reasonable amount of variation in the systems. I don't really want to spend a couple of hundred quid on a fitting that uses a method not best suited for me. But how to understand which one to choose, how to interpret what they tell me and how to tweak for the future. Surely this is only achievable if you properly understand the subject, I don't want to be tweaking a stem length when it should be a saddle position, or maybe just a little bit of both.

I also know that there's trial and error and that a heck of a lot of people have used this method for a very long time. Part of trial and error is chatting to others about what works for them, why they believe it works and how they go about setting things up and measuring. Some do it by feel alone, some use every measuring implement known to man. 

I could hijack passing cyclists with tape measure in hand or I could post on the web and ask for how/what/where other do it.


----------



## MacB (2 Aug 2010)

Well, the deafening silence has taught me something, it should no longer come as a surprise to me that I ended up with a career in financial analysis! I could even be approaching the anally retentive levels of boringness required to move my career in to tax accounting  

But I honestly thought that lots of people would know their saddle heights and setbacks, what do you do when you remove/change saddles, seatposts etc?


----------



## potsy (2 Aug 2010)

MacB said:


> Well, the deafening silence has taught me something, it should no longer come as a surprise to me that I ended up with a career in financial analysis! I could even be approaching the anally retentive levels of boringness required to move my career in to tax accounting
> 
> But I honestly thought that lots of people would know their saddle heights and setbacks, *what do you do when you remove/change saddles, seatposts etc?*



Guess,then spend the next month adjusting til it's right


----------



## MacB (2 Aug 2010)

potsy said:


> Guess,then spend the next month adjusting til it's right



you know, scary as my over analysis can be, I find that an even scarier prospect.


----------



## ColinJ (2 Aug 2010)

Er, I went downstairs and took a look at my road bikes and found that, actually, my saddles are _not_ set to the middle of their rails - they are both pushed forwards about 1.5 cm. I'd forgotten that I moved them because I felt that my sit bones were not sitting on the widest part of the saddles.

If your setback isn't right for you you'll either be too stretched, not stretched enough, or constantly shuffling back and forth trying to decide whether to go for a sore back, sore shoulders or a sore bum!


----------



## GrasB (2 Aug 2010)

MacB said:


> Well, the deafening silence has taught me something, it should no longer come as a surprise to me that I ended up with a career in financial analysis! I could even be approaching the anally retentive levels of boringness required to move my career in to tax accounting
> 
> But I honestly thought that lots of people would know their saddle heights and setbacks, what do you do when you remove/change saddles, seatposts etc?


I have little marks on my seat post & saddle. If you're changing a saddle for a different make/model you'll generally find that you'll sit on it differently so it'll require some adjustment time anyway.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (2 Aug 2010)

I rec you've hooked Colin now, MacB - he's fallen for it and started measuring, next he'll be there with a plumb line and a tape.


----------



## MacB (2 Aug 2010)

threebikesmcginty said:


> I rec you've hooked Colin now, MacB - he's fallen for it and started measuring, next he'll be there with a plumb line and a tape.



he's fighting it but I sense the force is weak within him

mind you I never realised I was broaching a taboo subject here


----------



## ColinJ (2 Aug 2010)

I found myself hunting for a tape measure yesterday, but then thought "What am I doing, I should be riding the damn thing not measuring it!" so I got my cycling kit on and when out for a ride instead.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (2 Aug 2010)

ColinJ said:


> I found myself hunting for a tape measure yesterday...



You'd think he'd have a plumb line and tape pack which could be sent out on a round-robin basis to all CC members. Data would come flooding back into MacB Towers and keep him happy with pie-charts, graphs and spreadsheets galore.


----------



## Aperitif (2 Aug 2010)

70mm on my work bike which I have just measured Al. We're about the same size so I guess 70mm is the optimum eh!?  (Rolls saddle - which is a rich man's Brooks... )

I'll check the other bikes when I get indoors...tip of saddle to stem nut CL is 460mm - if interested (which is more or less how I judge the fit of my bikes)


----------



## MacB (2 Aug 2010)

Aperitif said:


> 70mm on my work bike which I have just measured Al. We're about the same size so I guess 70mm is the optimum eh!?  (Rolls saddle - which is a rich man's Brooks... )
> 
> I'll check the other bikes when I get indoors...tip of saddle to stem nut CL is 460mm - if interested (which is more or less how I judge the fit of my bikes)



See Teef gets it, he's not carelessly cruel like Colin or deliberately vindictive like 3BM  Just as long as he does his further measuring before the red wine I should be ok!


----------



## threebikesmcginty (2 Aug 2010)

A-ha that's where you're wrong wrong wrong because I've been down the 'shed' and dutifully measured my two road bikes.

Nose to c/l BB is 45mm on the steel racer, which is a 57cm with a 120mm stem.

Nose to c/l BB is 50mm on the Planet X, which is a large frame with a 120mm stem.

Nose to c/l stem (I have 120mm because I've always had 120mm




) is the same for both at 540mm so quite stretched out.

One day when I can get around to it I'll finally get measured properly, probably at about the same time I get measured for my coffin...

Hope this helps with you scientific research.


----------



## redddraggon (2 Aug 2010)

I thought I was inflexible with my paltry 70mm setback and 120mm stem, but then there's really tall people using the same as me on here (albeit with longer TTs)


----------



## MacB (2 Aug 2010)

You see, this is what's puzzling me, I've moved mine a bit to between 70 and 75mm on each bike, two with inline seatposts and I'd struggle to get it much further foward. With laid back seatposts it would be impossible to achieve these shorter numbers. 

The other bike I had to switch to a 15mm laid back post due to the Brooks saddle, with inline I can only get it to 65mm, with laid back I can't quite get it to 70mm. Bloody Brooks saddle rails.

I understand if someone is using a track frame for general riding, maybe a 76deg seatpost then they'll need a lot of lay back in a seatpost. But with 73 deg, or less, for the seat tube it doesn't seem to pan out. Maybe I'll just stay confused.

By the way, 3BM I take it all back you're a gentleman amongst scholars.


----------



## GrasB (2 Aug 2010)

Has anyone here realised that as you'll sit on different saddles in different places measuring where the nose is becomes a pointless exercise for saddle position comparisons.


----------



## redddraggon (2 Aug 2010)

MacB said:


> You see, this is what's puzzling me, I've moved mine a bit to between 70 and 75mm on each bike, two with inline seatposts and I'd struggle to get it much further foward. With laid back seatposts it would be impossible to achieve these shorter numbers.
> 
> The other bike I had to switch to a 15mm laid back post due to the Brooks saddle, with inline I can only get it to 65mm, with laid back I can't quite get it to 70mm. Bloody Brooks saddle rails.
> 
> ...



I have the smallest PX Ti, and I have to run a 25mm laid back post, with an arione slid all the way back on the rails to get my ~70mm


----------



## MacB (3 Aug 2010)

GrasB said:


> Has anyone here realised that as you'll sit on different saddles in different places measuring where the nose is becomes a pointless exercise for saddle position comparisons.



possibly though I have measured all of my saddles front to rear and they are the same. It's also a useful thing to know if you're trying to duplicate setups across multiple bikes using the same saddle.


----------



## MacB (3 Aug 2010)

redddraggon said:


> I have the smallest PX Ti, and I have to run a 25mm laid back post, with an arione slid all the way back on the rails to get my ~70mm



Ok so I can see how that would be, the amount of setback provided by the seatpost angle is a variable that will depend on combined length of seat tube and exposed seatpost. I hadn't factored that in and can't get my head round the maths at this time of night, but thanks that helps explain at least some of it.


----------



## potsy (3 Aug 2010)

Moved mine forward about 5mm today and i think I'm there now,much better on the commute.
Certainly felt like I was sat on the correct bit of the saddle and not perched on the nose like I was for the 1st few days






Can't believe you've got Col to fall for your wicked ways Mac,always thought he had more sense than that


----------



## Aperitif (3 Aug 2010)

MacB said:


> See Teef gets it, he's not carelessly cruel like Colin or deliberately vindictive like 3BM  Just as long as he does his further measuring before the red wine I should be ok!



You would have been better served had I been under the influence of the Friday Night Red as, out of interest I did measure...
All straight seatposts: Look Carbon 65mm - Selle Italia Turbomatic4. Veneto Alu (which I might have classed as the best fitting bike  until ejection onto the tarmac) 80mm - San Marco Era. Planet X Ti = 95mm  (I'm blaming the Thoork saddle for that - not quite 100% in the right position yet - the right position might well be in the dustbin).

Well, I'll leave all that for my raffle accountant - have fun Al!


----------



## threebikesmcginty (3 Aug 2010)

Now this is all quite interesting these 70mm or more setbacks so I had a look at John Franklin's *doffs cap* tome last night and he suggests a 50mm setback is about right - my edition is quite old so I don't know if this number has been revisited.

I know I'm on the right size frame at generally 57 - 58cm (I'm 6' with 33" inside leg) but I can't get the saddle to c/l stem/bar measurement right, using the cubit system, unless I had say a 50mm stem or shorter top tube, which would probably mean a custom frame 

Maybe I've got really short arms, they do have trouble reaching the bottom of my pockets when I'm in the pub! 

The main thing is the set-up must be about right as I can cycle a reasonable distance without too much back ache and knee ache apart from that associated with not being a spring chicken any more.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Aug 2010)

GrasB said:


> Has anyone here realised that as you'll sit on different saddles in different places measuring where the nose is becomes a pointless exercise for saddle position comparisons.



Quite correct.

The IMPORTANT part of the saddle is where your 'sit bones' contact.

AND... I can guarantee to everybody that on a 50 mile ride, you WILL without realising, shift your position on the saddle more than 5mm back and forth.
You will sit differently when climbing and you will shift back on the saddle when freewheeling.

Asking other riders their measurements IS pointless. Do they have the correct crank length and correct seat angle?

Seat rails are to allow for cranklength choice and seat angle discrepencies.

The optimum distance between pedal axle ( at point of maximum torque application ) and Hip ball joint is only obtained after extensive ergometer testing. 

KOPS using the little boney bit is a good approximation and works with most riders.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (3 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Asking other riders their measurements IS pointless.



Come on - where's your sense of fun, besides it keeps MacB off the streets.


----------



## jimboalee (3 Aug 2010)

threebikesmcginty said:


> Come on - where's your *sense of fun*, besides it keeps MacB off the streets.



Go for a ride in the nude and make a note of whereabouts your anus leaves a stain on the saddle. That is more applicable than the distance between saddle nose and handlebars.


----------



## potsy (3 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Go for a ride in the nude and make a note of whereabouts your anus leaves a stain on the saddle. That is more applicable than the distance between saddle nose and handlebars.



There you go MacB,something for you to do this weekend


----------



## threebikesmcginty (3 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Go for a ride in the nude and make a note of whereabouts your anus leaves a stain on the saddle.



Obviously 'fun' has a different meaning on your planet


----------



## jimboalee (3 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Go for a ride in the nude and make a note of whereabouts your anus leaves a stain on the saddle. That is more *applicable* than the distance between saddle nose and handlebars.




'Relevant'. There's a much better word for the occassion.


----------



## threebikesmcginty (3 Aug 2010)

Jimbo's quoting his own posts now ... quite clearly a nutter


----------



## Aperitif (3 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> Go for a ride in the nude and make a note of whereabouts your anus leaves a stain on the saddle. That is more applicable than the distance between saddle nose and handlebars.



That's a cr*p way to take a measurement Jimbo - MacB will be looking at log tables next...


----------



## GrasB (3 Aug 2010)

jimboalee said:


> AND... I can guarantee to everybody that on a 50 mile ride, you WILL without realising, shift your position on the saddle more than 5mm back and forth.
> You will sit differently when climbing and you will shift back on the saddle when freewheeling.


Jimbo, you seem to be stuck on the fact you move around the saddle a lot & not actually registering that small position changes the centre point that you're moving around is the key here. If you move the saddle to far forwards by 5mm while you may be able to find a comfortable position when cruising you may well find that come to a hill you're rubbing the back of your legs on the saddle & thus you end up in the wrong position.


----------



## ColinJ (3 Aug 2010)

potsy said:


> Can't believe you've got Col to fall for your wicked ways Mac,always thought he had more sense than that



I haven't actually done any measuring, I just looked at my saddle and noticed it was further forward than I remembered! It was then that I recalled thinking it was about time I started sitting on my sit bones rather than effectively on my perineum - ouch!


----------



## potsy (4 Aug 2010)

ColinJ said:


> *I haven't actually done any measuring*, I just looked at my saddle and noticed it was further forward than I remembered! It was then that I recalled thinking it was about time I started sitting on my sit bones rather than effectively on my perineum - ouch!



Not yet you haven't,wait til Mac starts quoting more facts and figures,you can run but you can't hide


----------



## threebikesmcginty (4 Aug 2010)

It must be Jimbo's skidding on bikes that has made MacB abandon his own thread which is a shame after I did some homework and extra reading.

I've a related question too - has anyone ever had a professional bike-fit, did you benefit from it and was it worth the money? I'm thinking about it, It's expensive but long term might be for the good and interesting too. I've had a look around and there's one that I've seen some good reviews of called 'Bike Dynamics', not too far from me either.


----------



## Aperitif (4 Aug 2010)

threebikesmcginty said:


> It must be Jimbo's skidding on bikes that has made MacB abandon his own thread which is a shame after I did some homework and extra reading.
> 
> I've a related question too - has anyone ever had a professional bike-fit, did you benefit from it and was it worth the money? I'm thinking about it, It's expensive but long term might be for the good and interesting too. I've had a look around and there's one that I've seen some good reviews of called 'Bike Dynamics', not too far from me either.



Luke -redjedi had one (at Specialized I think) and has since fallen off his bike twice...  He'll be along to verify in a mo'


----------



## MacB (4 Aug 2010)

Not abandoned just shellshocked by the extraordinarily helfulness of Jimbos latest reply, but I'm still not convinced. For some reason I prefer the idea of taking precise measurements to assist with future saddle/seatpost/frame changes rather than always relying on skidmarks.

Mooching around the web, as you do, I've come across a fair view threads/posts that go along the lines of - couldn't get comfy on X bike despite saddle being same hegiht, and distance from bars, as my comfy bike. Then found that saddle was Y forward/backward of saddle position on comfy bike. Moved that and then adjusted bars to match reach and all is ok now.

I found the Comptitive Fit website gave some reasonable numbers, or ranges to work within:-

http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=FIT_CALCULATOR_INTRO&INTRO_LINK=NOREDIR

as with any of these things taking your measurements is tricky and you've also got to decide which of the 3 fits most closely match your needs. I like this as it give the alternatives, rather than just a race fit, and you can see what changes for which fit and how they link together. 

Nothing wrong with Jimbos ride and tweak until feels right approach, but also nothing wrong with then taking detailed measurements. Equally nothing wrong with using those measurements as starting points for other setups or trying to understand the impact that any changes make via geometry, handling and comfort.

Teef will remember well nursing me through my first century and, when my right knee was giving out, sorting out moving my, ridiculously far back, saddle forward. The knee pain didn't kick in until about 60 miles and, without riding that sort of distance, I could have used the saddle in this position for quite a while. The danger being that the knee problem build up gradually into something far more serious and long lasting. This would never have happened had I understood saddle fore/aft and what sort of range was operational for me.

On a final, sad, note, I believe that Potsy's stirring has hardened Colin against me and turned him away from the light


----------



## Aperitif (4 Aug 2010)

> Teef will remember well nursing me through my first century and, when my right knee was giving out, sorting out moving my, ridiculously far back, saddle forward.



Forgot all about that actually - but I do remember the speed for the last 1/2km and the grin on your face as we hit the City!

Seems like only yesterday...


----------



## woohoo (4 Aug 2010)

threebikesmcginty said:


> It must be Jimbo's skidding on bikes that has made MacB abandon his own thread which is a shame after I did some homework and extra reading.
> 
> *I've a related question too - has anyone ever had a professional bike-fit,* did you benefit from it and was it worth the money? I'm thinking about it, It's expensive but long term might be for the good and interesting too. I've had a look around and there's one that I've seen some good reviews of called 'Bike Dynamics', not too far from me either.


I did (see post #6), but IME, it provides a good starting point and not the "perfect" solution. In my case after raiding the parts bin and swapping bars, stems and saddles from other bikes, I found that I preferred to be further back on the bike and preferred the slightly quicker steering with a shorter stem.

So, in future (I might get a new frame), I would check the TT and head tube lengths, have a look at the angles to make sure they're not too extreme then buy it, ride it and forget about the "perfect" fit (actually that last bit isn't true; I'm sure I would still tinker around with it.)


----------



## MacB (4 Aug 2010)

Aperitif said:


> Forgot all about that actually - but I do remember the speed for the last 1/2km and the grin on your face as we hit the City!
> 
> Seems like only yesterday...




That hurts mate, a momentous event for me forever etched in my memory, though I appreciate you popped in a little sugar coated pill at the end there


----------



## Aperitif (4 Aug 2010)

What I mean Al is that you're an old pro...and tempus fugit etc...


----------

