messing with the position

[yello]

A little whilst back, I'd considered getting a longer stem as I felt I could do with being more stretched out. I'd googled around to read info/advice generally but it never really occurred to me to ask 'why now?'... after 5 years on the same bike. Anyways, I read a couple of threads on here and remembered I'd done an on-line fit thing (as linked to by MacB) so dug it out (I keep everything!) to see what that advice was and compare it to my bike now, just to see how much I'd tinkered.

To my surprise, my saddle was some 3cm closer to the bars than the 'eddy fit' I'd started with, and the saddle setback 2cm less. So now I realised why I wanted a longer stem! But why had I done that? I found out when I tried to shift the saddle (a Brooks) back... and it was already as far back as it'd go, due to the rails. So there was my answer. I'd obviously put it on to try out before committing myself to sorting out a seat post with a greater setback (if such a thing existed). That was around 18 months. I'd obviously tinkered to get the ride position okay forgetting all about the setback issue... and hadn't really noticed any major discomfort! Moral of the story? Perhaps you can get comfortable in any number of positions??

I thought I'd play and stuck my old Spec Avatar Gel back on and wacked it right back to get my handle bar reach comfortable. That also gave it around 1.5cm more of setback than advised, at around 5cm in total. And then I test rode it for 50km. Loved it!

First thing I noticed was the saddle. It was like someone had put a suspension seat post on! I hadn't realised the Brooks was quite SO unforgiving! Ok, at then end of 50km it was no more or less comfortable than the Brooks so we'll see what my ride on Weds has to say, that'll be about 150km.

Then there was the ease of pedalling. Being that bit (well, quite a lot really, 5cm!) further back of the bottom bracket it felt so much easier to spin the pedals. Much more relaxed. Again, well see what I have to say after a longer ride but the way I'm thinking now is to either leave as it OR get a longer stem (maybe just 1cm) and move the saddle forward a little and see how that feels AND/OR get a seat post with a decent setback and refit the Brooks.

I'm glad I've messed around like I have. It's made me less afraid to play and made me think that there are any number of combinations of saddle position plus stem that can be used to find a comfortable position. There's give and take/compromise, I'm sure, with each position but that's now become part of the equation for me. You set the bike up according to your purposes.

 

[yello]

More googling around suggests I'm on a well trodden path! The CTC forum is awash with such debates. And Brooks are renowned for having (too?) short rails. A legacy thing, dating back to frame design then and now. So people looking for seatposts with greater setback are not at all uncommon. At least I have discovered some options, I like that.

I like how one little decisions opens up a new world of possibilities and questions. For instance, ditching my Brooks would require getting a new bag support for my Carradice... not a problem, that option's there too. And so each little decision you make means your knowledge of the subject increases little by little. That knowledge being just that tad more relevant because it answers YOUR question. Answers to other peoples questions can be more theoretical.

Now my decision is the one of balance, referred to by FabFoodie in the 'saddle set back' thread...

I find the Peter White article gives workable advice and the principles to get you on the road to comfort, get the 'balance' right - saddle to pedals and then bring the bars back/forward to meet. All methods are a start, the rest is fine tuning.

...in my case, what do I want to achieve in deciding my setback and keeping in mind that I'd like a little extra reach. Maybe 10mm more on the stem (to 90mm) then work back to (hopefully) get a value of setback then sets me far enough behind the BB to a position I seem to like (and is comfortable) PLUS being able to get a seat post that'll give me enough setback to use the Brooks (the latter being perhaps no real problem if it can't be achieved).

I'm enjoying this even if nobody else is!

 

[Moodyman]

I find saddle postion vary from bike to bike.

On the road bike I sit further back and can do 50-60 mph easily.

On my flat bar road bike, due it's geometry, I find the saddle more comfortable further forward.

On the rigid mtb, I prefer the saddle further back.

I guess the bike geometry plays its part.

 

[potsy]

I find saddle postion vary from bike to bike.

On the road bike I sit further back and can do 50-60 mph easily.

On my flat bar road bike, due it's geometry, I find the saddle more comfortable further forward.

On the rigid mtb, I prefer the saddle further back.

I guess the bike geometry plays its part.

 

[Moodyman]

Bloody auto-correct in Microsoft Word!

 

[tyred]

I find saddle postion vary from bike to bike.

On the road bike I sit further back and can do 50-60 mph easily.

On my flat bar road bike, due it's geometry, I find the saddle more comfortable further forward.

On the rigid mtb, I prefer the saddle further back.

I guess the bike geometry plays its part.

That's settled it. I'm moving my saddle further back...

 

[MacB]

Yello, have a look at the chart on this site, about the second page:-

http://www.prodigalchild.net/Bicycle6.htm

It's surprisingly close to the stats I get from detailed fits or from trial and error. I would get the saddle set first and work forward from there. I've had the Brooks issue as well compounded by using a clip on saddle pack where the clamp for the clip removed some of the rail space as well, making it even shorter.

 

[HLaB]

A word of caution Yello; my Saddle on my sirrus was set up to a bike fit (or so I thought) with a saddle set back of 120mm
and 769mm from the BB. I developed a weakness in the back of the calves (it felt like something was trying to pull it off). Then I realised the bike fit was for 172.5mm cranks so I moved the saddle forward and down by 2.5mm (both dimension) and within a week this long running problem dissappeared. There might be no connection but then again there might I'd just advise from putting your saddle too far back in one go. Good Luck!

 

[Sleeping Menace]

There's lots to be gained by experimenting with position.. huge amounts really.
Although I've found most online fit calculators to be rubbish, this one actually has quite a bit of redeem.
http://www.competitivecyclist.com/za/CCY?PAGE=FIT_CALCULATOR_INTRO

Like with any of them.. take the time to measure accurately, and feel free to tweak it a bit. but I've found for establishing a very healthy baseline from which to work,, this seems to be the best one out there..

just my 2c..

........................
http://anotherdooratthe.endoftheinternet.org

Cycle related blog entries, including a few 5 minute reviews:
http://anotherdooratthe.endoftheinternet.org/category/cycling/

 

[yello]

I'd just advise from putting your saddle too far back in one go. Good Luck!

Good advice. I've actually edged it forward 2 cm so I'm not now riding with such a big change.

There's lots to be gained by experimenting with position.. huge amounts really.

Indeed. I'm enjoying it too, it adds to my understanding of position and frame geometry. Btw, that was the bike fit calc I eventually used when setting up my bike in the first place. Like you, I set up within the advised ranges and then tweaked from there... in truth, forgetting all about where I started from and just made changes that felt right!


MacB, I had a quick look at the Moulton frame specs table (thanks for the pointer) but I must admit to not understanding it at first glance. I've downloaded it and will spend more time on it later... sadly, it takes me a bit longer to understand things these days!

 

[cyberknight]

Yello, have a look at the chart on this site, about the second page:-

http://www.prodigalc...et/Bicycle6.htm

It's surprisingly close to the stats I get from detailed fits or from trial and error. I would get the saddle set first and work forward from there. I've had the Brooks issue as well compounded by using a clip on saddle pack where the clamp for the clip removed some of the rail space as well, making it even shorter.

Good find it works very well for me as well

 

[MacB]

MacB, I had a quick look at the Moulton frame specs table (thanks for the pointer) but I must admit to not understanding it at first glance. I've downloaded it and will spend more time on it later... sadly, it takes me a bit longer to understand things these days!

It just looks more complicated than it is, you only have to do some thinking if your inseam, height and shoe size are on wildly different rows. I found it after doing the competitive Cycling one then tweaking through trial and error and was surprised by how this simple table would have given me the same starting point. Understanding frame geometry does help for the tweaking though as the Moulton table is based on racing geo, but again it's not too tricky.

Like you I enjoyed this and it helped hugely when it came to agreeing the CAD drawing for my custom frame.

 

[yello]

I've gotten my head around that table now... it once again confirms what I've sadly long known; I've got little legs! Based on inside leg, I'd ride a 48cm c-to-c frame. Based on height and shoe size, it'd be a 51cm! My audax bike is actually a 50, and I'm comfortable on it.

The Spec Avatar Gel wasn't comfortable after the 150 on Weds, so I've put the Brooks back on having swapped seatposts with one of my other bikes. That post had around 30mm of setback and allowed me to get the Brooks to around 4cm behind the bb (flaring the sides of the Brooks a little, and then lacing it back up around the seat clamp! It's a B17N btw). That'll be enough of a setback I hope, it certainly puts me back into 'Eddy fit' range. I also swapped the stem for the one on my fixed (so now I have the funky One-On character on my sane audax bike!) just as a try, from 8cm to 9cm. It felt okay just as a quick pootle up and down the road but I've yet to test it properly. That'll probably be next Weds now since I'll be taking the fixed on the Sunday club ride.

 

[MacB]

Ah, so you're towards the other end of the scale to me, hence your Brooks needs a setback seatpost to get it back whereas I need minimal or zero offset to get it right, depending on frame angles. By way of an attempt at illustration:-

take a 73 deg seat tube and a saddle top at 80cm measured from BB centre to saddle top along line of seat tube the seatpost saddle clamp would be further back of the BB than if the height measurement was 70cm.

Relaxing the seat tube geometry will increase the variance that the height makes and the making the angle steeper would decrease the variance.

With my Surly I had a 72 deg ST and an inline seatpost for the Brooks with the saddle as far back as poss, the Vaya has a 72.5deg ST and this meant the saddle was too far forward with the same seatpost so I've got a 10mm setback one. However I was also limited by using a saddlepack with a clamp fitted to the rails and I've now got a clip on saddlepack. So I can actually use the whole of the rails now but I do prefer a seatpost with a twin bolt adjustment. The 10mm setback one is a twin bolt Easton, I know you can get the Thomson Elite twin bolt with 16mm setback, but most seem to be single bolt.