If more upright is better for technical stuff, why do people tell me to use the drops when cornering?

I didn't know bike fit was so complicated. But after reading the thread......

Your legs/feet/torso/skeleton dimensions are not going to change much. The things that can/will change is the size of your butt and gut. Your body type might have as big of an impact on your fit as anything else. I'm a Meso-Endomorph type, so nothing but French or Eddy fit for me. Find a bike in your range, and start pedaling. You can sit up like Jesus on that shirt. Start with the saddle in the middle. Adjust it up or down and fore/aft so that your pedal stroke is good and you won't do any harm to your knees. Tighten up the seatpost/saddle, take a measurement for reference and write it down. My measurement there is center of BB along ST to the top of the saddle. Get back on, start pedaling, hinge at the hips, and continue from there. Find what works for you, take measurements and write them down. The other measurements I record, are BB center to the center of the stem/handlebar and front tip of seat to the center of the stem/handlebar. After that I don't care. Those 3 measurements are the same from bike to bike to bike. Because of the different sizes of frames, some have more/less seatpost showing/drop than the others. If I lose/gain some mass in the butt/gut or change my flexibility, then maybe a seatpost/handlebar stem goes up or down some. Those 3 measurements stay the same. My frames vary from 53-56 ST but all have a TT around 56. The stems are 80-100 and the handlbars are all similar. It works for me. It's really not that hard. If I was a racer, I might make it a little more complicated. I will say that if I go with the saddle forward and a longer stem it moves the center of mass/gravity forward onto the fork/front wheel. This has a negative impact on handling/feel, especially when climbing.

i haven't done it but I know some of the mtb bike guys care more

well the drops help keep your hands planted and make brake modulation easier but that doesn't have to do with getting low. My torso position also doesn't change significantly between the hoods and drops since my fit is set up for as low of a back position as I can hold with 90 degree bent elbows on the hoods. When I'm referring to technical stuff I'm reffering to specifically cross racing type of technical descents where having too low of a front end and not being able to shift enough weight back over the rear wheel means an endo

That is the same position I ride, a Mantis on the hoods. Go to the drops and only the elbow angle changes.

...why would anyone take advice from a guy who fell off a mule ?

....a technicality.

Going back to OP's question, the problem he cites is that When I experienced that problem, I tried moving the saddle forward, and that helped a lot more than moving the saddle backwards, counter-intuitive though it was.

Leave this thread immediately. Common sense will not be tolerated here.

I agree you were not trying to get further back per se. You were just trying to get off the rivet. Moving the saddle forward put your sitz bones on the wide part of the saddle where they belong so moving back was no longer necessary.

That's not what we are talking about. We are talking about weight on the saddle and weight on the pedals and weight on the bars. Weight distribution of the body, not the bike...with or without a rider.

And no one has said what the right distribution is, even for the two wheels with rider.

You can presumably infer that in your normal position on the bike that more weight on the front wheel is from more weight distribution on the bike, or you know, just go by feel like i said. Its easy to tell if there is more weight on your hands or not. No one is arguing that there is one perfect weight distribution either, its is all a balancing of priorities for the rider. but you seem to believe that only reach and hip angle affect weight distribution and not saddle setback. Why don't you address all my other points instead of cherry picking?

Your butt has mass. Your feet are like a fulcrum. Move your butt back and your center of mass has shifted back.

Nope, I now agree that setback affects weight distribution. I just don't think it is an independent variable that you adjust for consciously. Pay attention to the rest. Weight distribution will take care of itself. Especially since you haven't been able to tell me either what the distribution should be and how it should be measured. If it is in terms of weight on the wheels, then fine, but no one has really said that. And what is the optimum ratio that you are adjusting setback to achieve?

Thst's not what I meant. Not how does a position affect balance. Rather what does balance have to do with what is the RIGHT position. I contend if you set saddle position by weight distribution, much else could be wrong. That's all.

well that is because there is no perfect number, just like there is no perfect amount of setback. How much hand pressure can you handle? Shoulders, neck? What about hip angle? For how long? What percentage of time in each position? For what type of terrain? Is an IAB position necessary?Are you racing or mostly solo? These all play a role. Talk to a good fitter and they'll get you close when you tell them the type of riding you do. Your climbing bike would be set up differently than a merkx TT style bike.

Not disagreeing.

Awww, does that mean the thread is over?

Okay. That's just not how I do it. I think you have it backwards is all.

Definitely, a setback seat post-- a 54 frame is on the small side of possible options for a person your size and with the seat already shoved all the way back it sounds like your cockpit may be a bit tight.

...but, you're 'gonna want a Ritchey Comp.

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.

I assume you mean on a trainer. I'll try it next time I have the misfortune to be on one.

Interesting! When I found that I was sliding more forward in the saddle that was comfortable, I found by experiment that moving the saddle *back* fixed the problem. My problem was saddle discomfort, and ending up with my sit-bones too far forward than was comfortable. I initially tried moving the saddle forward, thinking it would "move the saddle under my sit-bones", but I still ended up sliding forward (saddle was level).

I think moving the saddle back did one or more of the following:

1) Shifted my CoG rearward to a position that was in easier to maintain with usual pedalling cadence.
2) Allow me to "push back" on the pedals resulting in a rearward force to keep me planted to the rear of the saddle
3) Engaged glute muscles more that maybe had an effect of posture.

It goes to show that this subject has a lot of variables for the rider's physique and cycling style.

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.

i didn't read this whole thing, but here's my take....background; i'm 6'1" and i've got short femurs...kinda long torso and normal arms.
i rode 20,000+ miles on 56.5cm top tube bikes with a 100mm stem, maybe an inch or so of drop and setback seatposts. i got a specialized BG fit done few years ago and i was moved to a zero setback post and a 120mm stem with 10cm of drop. the difference was night and day. rode with my usual group the day after my dot and several people commented on my riding. not only was i more efficient, but i felt altogether stronger. it didn't feel like i was pedaling through mud anymore. i was way too far behind the spindles before and although i was maintaining the same reach, i was just moved 20mm farther forward. it moved my weight forward and made me pedal straight down, instead of pushing "forward" on the pedals as well as down.
i've ridden about 17,000 miles in this setup...rides from around the corner and up to 110 miles and i've not had any major issues. sometimes i'm more
comfortable than others, but usually i'm good to go.
i have recently moved up to 58cm top tubes and 110mm stems, but keep the zero setback seatposts.
i don't understand why anyone would want to, or it's comfortable to pedal behind the pedals instead of straight down.