Bikeradar's soft-riding road seatposts test

[kgt]

Still, I don't think that the best way to make a frame comfortable is through a deflecting seatpost.

I prefer a more sophisticated design of the rear triangle that slightly deflects and tracks the tarmac better as well. My older Wilier 101 was and exceptional example of how to make a frame stiff and ultra smooth by design (even with an integrated seatpost).

[Marin]

I want to disagree here, I think making frames and wheels light and stiff is good enough, and leaving the comfort aspect to the tires, post, saddle and shorts is a great approach.

The real problem is, what do you sell?

[kgt]

A stiff and comfortable frame is doable.

[53x12]

There are no pros riding the test winner post either

Interesting to go back and read the history of Zipp Wheels (Josh Poertner) trying to convince the classics riders to use carbon tubular wheels for the classic races. It was like trying to pull teeth as the pro riders had a false preconception (bias) about carbon rims vs. the traditional aluminum wheels they had been racing for so long. Now look at what kind of wheels the pros race.

Cycling is full of herd mentality and pros are no better. Too much old wives tales and incorrect opinions. However I agree that for comfort you can get more from proper wheels, tire, tire pressure, saddle, seatpost and quality bib shorts.

[Marin]

I think it's perfectly possible to do it in the frame - I have 2 full suspension MTBs after all.

I just don't think it's a good design goal for a road bike with the listed options being available.

However, it's hard to put 3500$ markup on a seatpost or tire, but it's obviously easy for a frame

[Stolichnaya]

BikeAnon, I have one of those older Specialized posts, mounted for a look-see once, never ridden.
If you need another one, PM me.

[Calnago]

Trek does exactly that (build the comfort into the frame) with their Emonda. I generally hate integrated seatmasts, but Treks approach, with the "topper" seatpost, is kind of a hybrid and does two things. First, it allows for significant adjustability in saddle height versus having to cut a seat mast to within a very small range, which is a big deal if you've ever travelled with a large frame or should you want to sell it ever. Secondly, it frees up the entire seat tube to be "tuned" along with the frame as there now is no long seatpost extending halfway down your seat tube to where the bottle cages might be. And it works. There is significant, but not disconcerting flex, that can be felt while riding compare to my bikes with a traditional seatpost setup. In fact, for a road bike I think it is all I would want, as opposed to going to their "isospeed" bushing in the seat cluster area (Domane for example). The new Madone also employs the isospeed technology but unlike the Emonda, it's more aero tube shapes are undoubtedly more difficult to build that kind of vertical compliance into, so the isospeed technology probably works well there I would suspect. I've only ridden the Emonda and Donane for first hand experience.

[Zigmeister]

Still, I don't think that the best way to make a frame comfortable is through a deflecting seatpost.

I prefer a more sophisticated design of the rear triangle that slightly deflects and tracks the tarmac better as well. My older Wilier 101 was and exceptional example of how to make a frame stiff and ultra smooth by design (even with an integrated seatpost).

First, Trek has shown another method with the decoupler seattube/post setup that is effective. Pro proven and agree it works.

OTOH, why wasn't the Felt rubber/seat one tested? Because they only used a round seat post that is generic and can work in the non-aero frames?

Maybe proprietary wasn't the objective....the complaint is with Aero road bikes typically, not round rube/regular frames where the tube shape is much easier to design, and by nature, flexes under stress.

With aero bikes now, you see most have moved to dropping the rear stays lower, to allow the seat tube/post/and stay to flex and allow for more compliance. Scott Foil etc..

I have to say, IMHO, this is kind of a useless test, since the issue and complaints are primarily associated with Aero road bike frames and their tube shape by nature making the ride brutal compared to a round tube.

[tinozee]

I use the ritchey and can't imagine more flex would be good. On a Evo Himod it's plenty soft for full blast 120 mile race stages on New England roads. But I think that mostly durability is built up - in the human body - over time and lots of hard miles. So during a year with injury and fewer miles, say 5000 for the year, I'm way more likely to feel beat up after a hard century than during a season where I do weekly races and ober 10K miles. It's like a night and day difference in durability. I guess I sort of feel like this comfort side of the bike marketing is aimed at weekend warriors who will really feel a big difference. Nothing wrong with that but the context mentioned earlier - pro vs Joe, is somewhat interesting here.

[kgt]

I agree with Calnago and Zigmeister.
Trek's view on comfort is more sophisticated than the 'skinny flexy seatpost'. I just don't like Trek's outcome in terms of aesthetics. But that's just me.

[fa63]

Not to defend Specialized (I dislike the brand quite a bit personally), but I imagine the point of inserts like the Zertz is not to induce more deflection but to remove high-frequency vibrations.

Edit: I just read the original article and it seems the Specialized post didn't do very well in that aspect either

P.S. Saying more deflection is better is like saying more BB stiffness is better. There might a threshold above which "more" of something doesn't necessarily make it better.

[davidalone]

I thought this seatpost test:
http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/12/ ... t_267560/1

was much better. The bikeradar guys are rarely the most technically inclined, so I'd take their tests with a pinch of salt.

[kgt]

Microbac Laboratories did the test:
http://www.microbac.com/our-laboratories/boulder-co/
Bikeradar just covered it.

[BikeAnon]

The praise for Trek's integrated seatpost/seatmast is making me worry less about my new (to me) Madone 7.9.

I need to wait for weather to break before I can find out.

fa63, I agree about the Zertz. But I popped the Zertz out of my post for an entire season and can't say if it made the slightest difference on the butt-o-meter.

[Calnago]

For Trek's system, the aesthetics of it can really vary depending on what size frame you have, the saddle height, and whether you use the shorter or longer seat topper. In my case, with a 60cm H2 Emonda SL and a saddle height of 805mm, the aesthetics don't bother me at all. In fact, I think it looks great. I'm thinking of cutting off the excess of the seatpost tubes that I don't need on my Colnagos now, but I've been lazy about that...


I'll also say when I was looking for frames and before deciding on the Emonda, I test rode a Giant Advanced Defy with it's "D-Fused" seatpost system or whatever they call it. That almost felt like I was riding a suspension bike under me. But it seemed to be a little too mushy in the rear while the front was nice and tight. I thought the Emonda was better balanced in that regard.