Moderator: Moderator Team
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.
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.
Ride what feels right.
So that explains the hours on a bike...
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.
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.
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.
- Similar Topics
- Last post
- 92 Replies
- 14335 Views
Last post by Conza
Mon Apr 16, 2018 1:17 pm
- 24 Replies
- 2759 Views
Last post by Timmy269
Thu Jun 22, 2017 7:40 am
F10 Disk w/ Enve SES 5.6 - Photos and Details
Last post by superdx « Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:55 pmReplies: 16
Posted in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.by davejunia » Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:54 am » in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.
- 16 Replies
- 3219 Views
Last post by superdx
Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:55 pm
My Pegoretti Ciavete MxxxxxO [lots of photos]
Last post by maverick_1 « Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:41 amReplies: 25
Posted in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.by titaniumdan » Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:07 am » in Introduce Yourself / Gallery - Please use metric weights.
- 25 Replies
- 4770 Views
Last post by maverick_1
Tue Jun 13, 2017 4:41 am
- 74 Replies
- 5037 Views
Last post by dmtevo
Tue Jan 23, 2018 10:27 am