Seat height critique please - with photos

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:30 pm

by Rick

You LOOK about right to me. But I am certainly no expert.
For me there is a "max height" that I gravitate towards where I can spin my legs around without feeling like I am "reaching" for the pedals and my hips don't need to rock. The last 2mm between too high and too low can really be felt. Foot angle can make more difference than that when trying to do "controlled" measurements, so I always go by how I feel when the pressure is really on in a race or training ride.
I probably end up a little higher than current conventional wisdom would advise. But If I go lower I feel like I am losing power.

Your current position is cetainly close enough to try for a while.

Posts: 234
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:23 pm
Location: Mal Born, Oz.

by tigoose

KWalker wrote:Using Retul I can get the same knee opening with an 800mm seatheight and 110mm of setback, 770mm seat height and 95mm of setback, or 785mm seat height and 80mm of setback. All of these fit options are very, very different. FWIW I ride the last one and determined it through trial and error. Checked it with Retul and bam, it gives almost the same angles, but the cleats feel better, im more balanced, and have no hip rocking of any sort.

Interesting experiments you've done. I've recently done changes to but the 2 changes you've done after your 800mm saddle height also have less setback.
Have i read that right?
If so i would've thought your knee angle to increase.
Anyway nice to see others experimenting like this.

Posts: 76
Joined: Thu May 04, 2006 7:16 pm
Location: Leeds, UK

by MikeM

Bear in mind that, past a certain point, any changes in saddle height are likely to be accommodated by changes in ankle angle - once you've hit the limit of hamstring/back flexibility. Personally, I think Lemond is a good ball-park and adjust from there and from my own experience fitters/fitting sessions can vary wildly. Based on Lemond my saddle height (from BB) should be around 840mm, I've one fitter (using a goniometere) suggest it should be 865mm!

Ride what feels right.
"Life without passion is empty" - Eddy Merckx
So that explains the hours on a bike...

Posts: 5858
Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2009 8:30 pm
Location: Bay Area

by KWalker

^This. I take up all the slack in my ankle, which is why Retul scans never saw why the first two fits were far less than ideal.
Don't take me too seriously. The only person that doesn't hate Froome.
Failed Custom Bike

Posts: 598
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:10 pm

by ghisallo2003

^ yes, this.

To me, your hip flexion angle looks fine, but your ankle is marginally extended.

Bottom line; what is comfortable?

User avatar
Posts: 1235
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:09 pm
Location: In the industry

by elviento

I echo the above comment.

If the toe-down position is what you are most comfortable with then, then it looks good. Generally, experienced cyclists can quickly "recognize" a most comfortable and efficient seat height, which can be confirmed or adjusted after 20 mins in the saddle. Probably more reliable than a bunch of guys typing in front of a computer.
Fast falcons:" onclick=";return false;
Facebook: falcobikeglobal

User avatar
Posts: 673
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Estonia

by rainerhq

KWalker wrote:Using Retul I can get the same knee opening with an 800mm seatheight and 110mm of setback, 770mm seat height and 95mm of setback, or 785mm seat height and 80mm of setback.

Which seatpost is used? I have 25mm setback seatpost and can get max 67mm of setback. Seat angle is 73,7.
"Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride"
Jamis Renegade Expert
Spark 900 RC

Posts: 98
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 8:34 am

by Colonia

TomUK wrote:
bikerjulio wrote:sure you are measuring inseam correctly? ie with a narrowish book jammed tight under your crotch?

something's not jibing between the ratio and the angle you are measuring.

BTW and FWIW I read Greg Lemond's book back in the stone age and have been using the 88.3% rule since the early '90's.

In your case the formula would give a lower height of 70cm, but only if you were measuring correctly.

One formula will not fit all, but IMO it's a good starting point.

Just measured again with a slim book and got 80cm, would that make more sense? Thanks for the help much appreciated!
May sound daft but im assuming I measure bare footed against a wall?

You look too high. Your pedal is not at the lowest point of travel in the photo, so the knee angle measure is wrong; plus, you have a lot of heel rise.

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Last post