Originally Posted by
curdog
Doesn't this thread show a fallacy with the assometer method of saddle selection. I measure to a 155, but have so far been most comfortable on a Cobb 170, which is 130 mm. Also, is the riding position being advocated one where the sit bones aren't being sat directly upon, but most contact is forward of the sit bones. I feel like I'm moving towards a "laying down" position. I hope this is descriptive enough.
I increased the drop yesterday and felt some moderate improvement. I didn't adjust the saddle at all. If I understand this thread, the next adjustment might be to move the saddle aft a bit. Does this make sense?
Believe you said it pretty well. For virtually all, independent of how wide respective sit bones are spaced, when a rider rotates more forward, the space between the sit bones becomes less. So for choosing a saddle, the position of the rider matters when choosing a suitable saddle. This btw is why the lion share of road bike saddles sold are more narrow than for a cruiser. The angle of the pelvis for each bike is different requiring a different saddle for a different riding position for even the same rider.
A question. Which saddle are you referring to...when you reference the Cobb 170? Is this a saddle 170mm wide that is designed for 130mm sit bone spacing? I didn't quite understand your reference about 170 and 130 and would appreciate a clarification.
Thanks.