Originally Posted by
rpenmanparker
I honestly don't get what you are talking about. You set the saddle with respect to your legs. You set the reach with respect to your torso length, arm length and preferred torso angle. The weight distribution between saddle and bars is whatever it comes out to be. To say that weight distribution between the saddle and the bars is more fundamental than the reach requirements of your body measurements is absurd.
Originally Posted by
Fiery
I'd just like to say that it is very cool that you did the chair test and updated your opinion based on the results. Regarding the best approach to setting up saddle position, I'm personally not a fan of doing it based on perceived weight on the hands as a primary driver either. However, from what I've picked up, when going by weight on hands, the goal is to be able to hold torso position with hands off the bar, without sliding in the saddle or rounding the back, while riding at a hard but not too hard pace (whatever that might be) and an 80-90 RPM cadence. Some variation of this test is typically used to determine if setback is correct according to this approach. None of this has anything to do with the correct weight distribution between the wheels, of course.
This point is actually more relevant than the weight distribution, and is what I understand by "balance" - a neutral position that you can maintain without effort and various levels of exertion and body posture. It doesn't necessarily mean that weight is equally distributed between bars, saddle & pedals in some perfect equilibrium. What we're trying to achieve is a stable and comfortable cycling position that *allows* for shifts in weight distribution without upsetting the position or compromising comfort.
My whole investigation into this subject has been based on trying to get comfortable primarily, whilst maintaining reasonable performance.