Switch to Zero Setback Seatpost
 

So i was riding with a Cat 2 racer recently who said that I needed to "get in front of my gears". Meaning that I was behind my pedals and pushing instead of really riding on top of the gears and staying in front of the bike. Today I took off my 3T carbon seatpost and installed a relatively inexpensive zero setback seatpost I bought just to test this theory. It actually felt great!! Felt like I really was on top of the bike instead of riding it behind, if you know what I mean.

so, has anyone else done this, or experienced this? just wondering.......


RD

I had a similar experience. I went to a fast forward seat post and won't go back. I'm more comfortable and riding faster. This on a bike that was professionally fitted for me.

Your Cat 2 friend's advice is highly anecdotal. For more anecdotes, regard how many riders in the pro peloton ride with zero-set-back seatposts (zero).

You will undoubtedly experience higher power output, briefly. Cycling is an endurance sport and you will not be able to maintain a steady output for as long as you could with a proper seat position.

Now, this is assuming your old position wasn't TOO far back to begin with, but zero-set-back posts are usually used by triathletes converting road bikes to a tri position.

not anecdotal as much as it is based on the seat angle of the frame and femur length of the rider.

and there are a few professional riders that have ridden with zero-setback posts. e.g. Tejay VG. He has a zero setback when he was riding specialized frames when he was on HTC:

http://i.imgur.com/MHPjD.jpg

and now he is on setback posts now that he's on BMC:

http://i.imgur.com/Qzu5d.jpg

on a personal (anecdotal) :p note, I recently got a custom frame built up, and designed the geometry so that I could specifically use a zero-setback post

Saddle setback determines your balance over your cranks, which in many ways directly determines long-distance comfort and endurance.

Being more "in front of" the cranks will get you a position more akin to time-trialing, or even standing. It will also cause you to "fall" forward into your handlebars, accelerating hand, shoulder, and neck fatigue.

Your saddle setback should be in a place that allows you to ride mostly relaxed with bent elbows. If you are locking out your arms to support yourself as a result of being too far forward, you will not be happy for long. Oh, and your steering inputs will suffer.

People with short torso and long legs would benefit from being seated more to the front with road bikes. Also, if the bike is more of an upright seating type like a hybrid. Basically, it's all about the balance of your upper and lower body in relation to pedals...

Amazingly, that describes me (long legs, short torso) because I always wondered why I ride better with my saddle more forward than lots of my pals... (tho I ride a long and low position, not a sit up and beg upright position)

Your post is highly anecdotal.

what?

so why would i want to be further from the handlebars?? setback posts make no sense to me. a straight post on a non compact frame with a shorter stem seems like the way to go. meh......

I guess it depends on your particular anatomy.

rangerdavid, what is your cadence?

I fit that description, but don't fit the generalization as I run 10 cm saddle setback on my road bikes.

I think both the posters you quoted make valid points, maybe not so eloquently. Without enough setback, most will end up with too much pressure on the hands. There is also the school of thought that a more "forward" position puts a greater emphasis on the quads, while a more set-back position allows the large glutes and other hip muscles to be engaged, resulting in more energy efficency for the rider especially over the long run. I tend to believe this school of thought based on personal experience.

As mentioned before, there are many factors that affect where the rider should sit in relationship to the BB (the length of femurs, seat tube angle, personal preferences, etc.). If I recall correctly, your bikes are set up in a relatively "forward" position and that seems to work for you. On the other hand, mine are set up with the saddle 10 cm behind the BB, and that works for me. In fact, if I sit too far forward, I end up with a lot of pressure on my hands and can't generate the same amount of power for extended periods.

Anatomy, comfort, and long distance capability. The first part largely has to do with leg length in proportion to the rest of your body. After that it's the relative length of your femur to the rest of your leg. Also triathletes found that moving your seat forward uses more of your quads and less hamstrings; put your seat back and the reserve happens and you use the hamstrings more which helps with endurance

THe posts had some nonsense in them but I didn't have the inclination to address them. I agree with everything you say, for the OP's reference.

I disagree with the idea of forward being better. I'm 169cm tall with an 83cm cycling inseam and 73cm saddle height. That's a short torso with long legs. I have an 11cm drop from the saddle to the bars. I don't believe that KOP or femur length has much to do with where to put your saddle and neither do many respected fitters. I believe that the rider's weight balance over the saddle is more important. I use a 25 or 32mm setback post and have the saddle about as far back as it will go. FWIW, my knee is 1-2cm behind KOP. With that position, I can ride with a very low torso angle and not have to use my arms to support my upper body.

Of course, most frames in my size have relatively steep STAs, in the 74-74.5 degree range, but it would take a very slack angle of 72-72.5 degrees to be able to use a zero setback post, since each degree moves the seat rail clamp back about 12mm. The problem with that is it requires a longer chainstay length to keep the tire from hitting the seat tube. Most maufacturers want a chainstay length in the 405-410mm range and that requires a steeper STA, unless the seat tube is actually moved forward of the BB centerline. Some manufacturer's do this, but then you find out that the real STA is only around 71 degrees, but listed as 73, because the saddle rail clamp ends up at a position, similar to what would result from a traditional 73 degree STA, through the BB centerline.

It's impossible to generalize this. it's all about getting the rider in the best position in relation to the pedals. Whether that requires a setback post, depends on the frame angles, the particular rider's anatomy, and the amount of adjustment you have available in the seat rails.

FWIW, On my road bike, I've got a set back seat post with the saddle pushed pretty far forward on the rails. On the tandem, I've got a no setback seat post, with the saddle about as far back as it can go on the rails. I've got the same position in relation to the pedals on both bikes.

Just get one of these: http://www.syntace.com/index.cfm?pid=3&pk=1615 and put the saddle where it works for you.

hmm, short torso and long legs? i guess i never really thought about that angle. that kind of describes me too. im built like an orangutan. 6'2 but all legs and arms....and my bike set ups always seem weird. 60 cm frames, no setback with seat forward and short stems....maybe i need smaller bikes????

This describes me, too, and during a professional Guru-system fitting this spring, the fitter had me switch to zero setback. He did, however, emphasize to me that the decision was based entirely on my personal measurements compared to my specific bike, not some universal factor favoring that type of seatpost.

http://imageshack.us/a/img116/3324/img2279kh3.jpg
I noticed a difference\improvement but when I switched to the zero set back seat post I also switched to a new custom bike.

That's all that matters :thumb: Keep riding!

I have no opinion on this but if anyone wants to try a zero setback post Nashbar makes a nice carbon zero setback post for $40. The two bolt design allows infinite adjustment of the seat angle. It must be popular since it's constantly on back order.

http://www.nashbar.com/bikes/Product...11_-1___202452

You are right. It's not really universal. I should have thought it out more. Weight and build of the body needs to be distributed over the bike equally to get maximum comfort and efficiency. There are factors that need to be counted in...Type of riding... Strength of upper and lower body (which is subject to change). Arm length... Age,,Etc. However, more often than not you'll find it to be the case because of physics that are involved with striking that balance when it comes to those types of bodies.

I have relatively long torso compared to my legs and since I do my own fitting, I did experiment a lot with being more forward. Anytime I did, I would initially be faster, but after some time my body would get beat up fairly badly... I would feel pain in my back, knees, shoulders and I would sit more on sensitive areas because the weight of my upper body would tilt me forward naturally, which would also force my back to be more bent.

With me being more to the back, it's so much more comfortable and I've been noticing that there is some kind of supportive connect between my upper an lower body when pedaling in a way that I use the weight or maybe even muscles from my upper body to make pedaling more efficient somehow.

I would imagine that the opposite would most likely be relatively true with long legs and a short torso in most cases.