A wildcard in positioning over the BB is crank length. Also foot placement on the pedal.
Letting the bar/stem combo dictate saddle fore/aft is backwards though. Been there and done it with many bike of yore when I was using frames that didn't have enough reach to begin with and was already maxed out in stem length. I would always end up too far back of center-bb and my pedaling efficiency/effectiveness suffered, especially uphill. I found myself standing most of the time, as that got me over the BB. Otherwise I felt like I pedaling from a lounge chair, just too far back and the wrong angle. Maybe some people have a muscle structure that works with that, but I do not. I even went so far as going to 150mm cranks and pedaling midfoot, which work for me most wonderfully, despite size 14 feet and a 36.5" pubic bone inseam. It's no wonder I struggled climbing so much using long cranks even with steeper STA's of racing frames. Maybe if I rode bikes with a 75d or more STA that would have worked. There's a Bicycling! article of yore about Alexi Grewal who had a Clark-Kent frame made for him with a 78d effective STA, as he too struggled with getting the proper hip angle to exert force to the pedal without injury. That's the kicker in pedaling a bike, we'll all been told about "longer cranks = more leverage". That's not really true though, having more bend to the knee is less efficient. *Less bend has more leverage. *Try standing on the bike on top of the BB and accelerate hard, now try it seated. See which one is more effective. Being more forward in the saddle, especially with shorter cranks, is literally more like standing over the BB. That's how track sprinters, time trialists and triathletes can produce so much power in the saddle , their bikes have steep STA and some use shorter cranks. I suspect Alexi Grewal would have done well with shorter cranks to begin with, but those would have been custom back then, if possible at all. Hip angle and knee bend, less is stronger in my experience. I'm no body builder though, I suppose those that can squat 500 pounds would argue otherwise, but that's not me and I assume, the average cyclist. Cranky length theory dies hard though, it's so often repeated despite being woefully misrepresented. I suspect more short cranks will be made as the veil is uncovered, so to speak. I know all this seems out from left field but it's really a long winded way of saying don't use bars and stem as the starting point for your saddle fore-aft. It's the other way around. In moving myself so far forward I found out some interesting things. First, it lightens the load on the hands, even with drops below the saddle. The trunk and legs are supporting most of the weight, the more forward I am the less reach to the bars I need also. No upper body strain at all. The "upright" riding equating to less strain is another myth that has me scratching my head how it so often repeated. Cycling, and Life, is full of many unchallenged assumptions . Do question the validity of statements, even this ! On Friday, August 8, 2025 at 8:41:05 PM UTC-4 Ted Durant wrote: > On Friday, August 8, 2025 at 7:28:10 AM UTC-5 Garth wrote: > > In regards to saddle and rail and forward positioning, of the saddles I > have, the Ergon SM and WTB Volt inherently are the most forward positioned, > combining rails with the shape of the saddle itself. > > > This is a part of bike fit that I find frustrating. Saddle makers > typically give you only the width and length of the saddle. But those two > dimensions tell you almost nothing about how the saddle will work for you, > except for comparing two widths of the same brand/model of saddle. The most > important dimensions, in terms of fore/aft fit, are 1) where is the point > of butt contact with the saddle relative to the center of the clamp area of > the rails, and 2) what is the length of the clamp area of the rails. I > measured these on the small collection of saddles I have and they vary > widely - we're talking centimeters, not millimeters. If you have a saddle > with a 35mm clamp area and a seatpost with a 25mm clamp, you have +/- 5mm > of latitude in fore/aft placement. You can change your fore/aft placement > by 20mm, easily, swapping to a different saddle. Good luck finding that out > without first laying out the cash for that saddle! > > And, on the post topic, I second the vote that saddle position relative to > BB has made a fair amount of difference for me in finding long-distance > comfort. > > Also, I have found that fascial counterstrain PT has made an enormous > difference for my comfort on the bike, correcting a long-term hip tilt and > associated issues, as well as helping recover from a couple of compression > fractures in my vertebrae. After a couple of treatments I felt symmetrical > on a bike for the first time ever. In my experience, pain issues have > developed over time without me really recognizing them until they get to > the point where I can't ignore them. So, I've gone for extended periods > with bike fit issues that took a while to manifest into real discomfort. > > Ted Durant > Milwaukee, WI USA > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rbw-owners-bunch/39493921-2ce1-44e1-b3d3-f44454ca5b0cn%40googlegroups.com.
