|Saddle Fore-Aft Positioning Theory - Not KOPS||Spectre|
Jun 2, 2001 10:53 AM
|I heard a theory on saddle positioning that I had not heard before. The theory was that the saddle fore-aft position that feels most natural is the one at which the rider's torso is best balanced over the pedals. This allows the rider to generate maximum power & feel balanced on the bike. For example, a rider with a short torso will benefit from a more forward saddle position, whereas a rider with a long torso will feel that a position in which their saddle is pushed back is more natural.
Any thoughts on this?
|Ignore leg length?||Kerry Irons|
Jun 2, 2001 5:24 PM
|You would think that saddle position relative to BB would be all about leg length, particularly the length of the femur (upper leg). Long femur would suggest saddle farther back, etc. It's not the least bit clear to me why torso length would figure in. That theory suggests that the handlebar position is fixed relative to the BB, and that you move the saddle back and forth based on torso/arm length. And how do you determine when the torso is "balanced over the pedals"? Unless there's more here than you have explained, it seems pretty weak IMO.|
|Ignore leg length?||Len J|
Jun 8, 2001 10:52 AM
|See my post above(Below?). Torso length determines how much counterweight (read seat setback) you need (because the longer your torso presumibly the higher the % of your weight is in your torso. therefore you need more counterbalance to have a balanced ride.|
|re: Saddle Fore-Aft Positioning Theory - Not KOPS||Len J|
Jun 8, 2001 10:50 AM
|The theory I've read concentrates on balance. Stand up. now bend forward, the more you bend forward, the more you have to stick your but behind your feet to counter balance your torso being ahead of your feet. Now think about the bike. If you simply bend forward (without the seat being back)all of your weight is on your hands. A balanced position is more comfortable.|| |