Fully extended or not?

[gavroche]

When watching any professional cycling, I have noticed that none of the riders have their legs fully extended when pedalling. I was always under the assumption that the legs should go right down to the bottom of the pedal to get maximum power. I seem to have got it wrong for many years and will have to reset the height of my saddle then, although I was quite happy with my present set up. What do you think?

 

[MontyVeda]

Little bit bent as far as I'm aware.

 

[Wetdog]

Ooh good call, I to have noticed this. But I'm happy with my leg almost fully extended. Be interested in what the others say.

Mick

 

[Markymark]

Put your heal on the pedal and adjust your saddle until your leg is straight. Then when your foot is on the pedal at the correct position it'll be about right

Full extension will knacker your knees.

 

[Smokin Joe]

Put your heal on the pedal and adjust your saddle until your leg is straight. Then when your foot is on the pedal at the correct position it'll be about right

I find that too high, and from the position the pro's adopt they seem to as well. I find I get more power by having a slightly lower saddle.

 

[Markymark]

I find that too high, and from the position the pro's adopt they seem to as well. I find I get more power by having a slightly lower saddle.

Possibly is, it depends on what suits you. However, it's massively better than fully extended as in the OP and post 3 and very easily worked out at home without need for an expensive bike fit or hours of youtube videos

 

[Yellow Saddle]

I don't think it was ever fully extended but I did notice (I think) that nowadays the saddles are much lower than in the 1990s. I'll have to review some old videos to confirm this but the thought did occur to me during the recent TdF. I certainly, for years, have been riding with my leg extending further than what I now see on TV.
I doubt, @gavroche that your legs are fully extended as well. If they extend like that then your pelvis rocks with each stroke and that quickly causes saddle sores and back pain. Check yourself in a mirror, you'll see.

 

[Mrs M]

I always have my saddle as high as I can get it, while still being able to pedal.
Find that's most comfy for me, others will differ though.
Just go with what suits you personally

 

[guitarpete247]

There was a fashion in the 70's/80's to photograph your bike with saddle as high as possible and bars as low as they would go. I remember many "Readers Rides" in CTC mag looking like this. Never saw anyone ride bike with same set up though.

 

[raleighnut]

If they kept their foot level then their legs would look a lot straighter but they're pressing down with the toes to bring the calf muscles into the pedal stroke

 

[Cuchilo]

that quickly causes saddle sores and back pain. Check yourself in a mirror, you'll see.

Or ask a friend to look , it will save you rolling around on the floor with a mirror trying to get the right angle

 

[gavroche]

I don't think it was ever fully extended but I did notice (I think) that nowadays the saddles are much lower than in the 1990s. I'll have to review some old videos to confirm this but the thought did occur to me during the recent TdF. I certainly, for years, have been riding with my leg extending further than what I now see on TV.
I doubt, @gavroche that your legs are fully extended as well. If they extend like that then your pelvis rocks with each stroke and that quickly causes saddle sores and back pain. Check yourself in a mirror, you'll see.

Correct, my legs are not fully extended but a have a slight bend but certainly not as much as the pros I was watching.

 

[doog]

25/30 degree flex in the knee at 6 o'clock

or full extension with the heal pressed down.....seems to work for me in the non pain stakes.

 

[Heisenberg71]

I go for the 'nearly straight' approach, as above. Any lower and I find when down in the drops my knees start interfering with my tummy, which soon becomes annoying. I have considered shorter cranks. Many threads in the past conclude I need 167.5 or possibly 170, currently running 172.5. Shorter cranks would enable lower seat and get some of the weight off my hands that is causing an ongoing problem with my pisiform / ulna. Potentially the next big change. Maybe next new bike in 2017.

My theory is though that you find the comfortable level that suits you, don't follow fashion. If it works stay with it. If not carry an allen key in your back pocket and tweak over a ride until you're bob on

 

[raleighnut]

I go for the 'nearly straight' approach, as above. Any lower and I find when down in the drops my knees start interfering with my tummy, which soon becomes annoying. I have considered shorter cranks. Many threads in the past conclude I need 167.5 or possibly 170, currently running 172.5. Shorter cranks would enable lower seat and get some of the weight off my hands that is causing an ongoing problem with my pisiform / ulna. Potentially the next big change. Maybe next new bike in 2017.

My theory is though that you find the comfortable level that suits you, don't follow fashion. If it works stay with it. If not carry an allen key in your back pocket and tweak over a ride until you're bob on

Shorter cranks would need the seat raised as your legs do not go down as far, but would also mean they don't have to go up as far though.