Fore/aft position on saddle when climbing.

[thirty-six]

I don't really know what to make of this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6QvK1NXINY&feature=player_detailpage#t=93s

My concerns over crank length (too long) are possibly partly addressed
with this varying technique. As I have said in the crank length
thread, my saddle position is currently restricted due to the crank
length, but it appears that my physiological limitations may not be so
restricted as I thought.

So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from the
quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings. So with high
power levels I want to bring myself forward on the saddle to avoid
overuse of the hamstrings. Yep, this sounds like normal practice, but
it unbalances the pedal stroke. That can't really be helped with high
outputs though, can it?

[Steve Freides[_2_]]

thirty-six wrote:

> So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from the
> quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings.

My understanding is the opposite, assuming "to bias" means "to favor" as
you're using it here.

Cyclists tend to have better quad strength and runners tend to have
better hamstring strength. The more forward position of a triathlete
takes advantage of the addition hamstring strength developed through
running.

-S-

[thirty-six]

On Aug 10, 8:45*pm, "Steve Freides" > wrote:
> thirty-six wrote:
> > So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from the
> > quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings.
>
> My understanding is the opposite, assuming "to bias" means "to favor" as
> you're using it here.

What about the video clip?
>
> Cyclists tend to have better quad strength and runners tend to have
> better hamstring strength. *The more forward position of a triathlete
> takes advantage of the addition hamstring strength developed through
> running.

I had both as a cyclist, but had not developed the co-ordination so my
maximum cadence at peak power was around 118rpm on the flat. Starting
with relatively weak muscles, I trained easily. After six weeks my
maximum speed was in excess of the prior level of 38mph by a
considerable amount (est 44mph by gear choice). There had been no
muscle mass development. It seems that peak muscle strength is
irrellevant in cycling (ignoring track sprinting) and that a balanced
pedal torque is key to economy of movement, acceleration and high
speeds.

[Steve Freides[_2_]]

thirty-six wrote:
> On Aug 10, 8:45 pm, "Steve Freides" > wrote:
>> thirty-six wrote:
>>> So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from
>>> the quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings.
>>
>> My understanding is the opposite, assuming "to bias" means "to
>> favor" as you're using it here.
>
> What about the video clip?

I couldn't tell you. Maybe there's a difference between how you fit on
a bike and what you do in terms of favoring one muscle group or another
while you ride. The explanation I gave you was given to me by a bicycle
frame maker.

-S-

[thirty-six]

On Aug 11, 7:52*pm, "Steve Freides" > wrote:
> thirty-six wrote:
> > On Aug 10, 8:45 pm, "Steve Freides" > wrote:
> >> thirty-six wrote:
> >>> So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from
> >>> the quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings.
>
> >> My understanding is the opposite, assuming "to bias" means "to
> >> favor" as you're using it here.
>
> > What about the video clip?
>
> I couldn't tell you. *Maybe there's a difference between how you fit on
> a bike and what you do in terms of favoring one muscle group or another
> while you ride. *The explanation I gave you was given to me by a bicycle
> frame maker.
>
> -S-

I'm not sure it is clear cut. I believe the detail is in training but
I was looking for personal experience of the described technique and
relevant comments.

[Fredmaster of Brainerd]

On Aug 10, 12:45*pm, "Steve Freides" > wrote:
> thirty-six wrote:
> > So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from the
> > quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings.
>
> My understanding is the opposite, assuming "to bias" means "to favor" as
> you're using it here.
>
> Cyclists tend to have better quad strength and runners tend to have
> better hamstring strength. *The more forward position of a triathlete
> takes advantage of the addition hamstring strength developed through
> running.

Muscle strength typically is not the limiting factor
in what you can do on a bike; it's fatigue. I don't know if
that changes this particular piece of lore. I usually read
the lore the other way around - triathletes are claimed
to use a more forward position to save their hamstrings
for the run.

I don't know if that's true, as I will run (ugh) but am not a
triathlete - my ancestors evolved to walk on solid ground
and I wish to respect their traditions. Water is evil and
may kill you.

Fredmaster Ben

[Simply Fred]

Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
> I usually read the lore the other way around - triathletes are claimed
> to use a more forward position to save their hamstrings
> for the run.

Ask Ryan, I'm sure he's acquainted with triathlete physiology after
dissecting a few of them.

[Davey Crockett[_5_]]

thirty-six a écrit profondement:

| I don't really know what to make of this.
>
| http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6QvK1NXINY&feature=player_detailpage#t=93s
>
| My concerns over crank length (too long) are possibly partly addressed
| with this varying technique. As I have said in the crank length
| thread, my saddle position is currently restricted due to the crank
| length, but it appears that my physiological limitations may not be so
| restricted as I thought.
>
| So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from the
| quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings. So with high
| power levels I want to bring myself forward on the saddle to avoid
| overuse of the hamstrings. Yep, this sounds like normal practice, but
| it unbalances the pedal stroke. That can't really be helped with high
| outputs though, can it?
>

Rule of thumb:

Saddle as far back as the rails/clamping-mechanism will permit.

Not that Davey's a very technically oriented rider, but that old saw
always seemed to work for him. ("Saw" as in "saying").

Some points to watch which also might affect saddle positioning:
(a) Length (distance) of Ride or Race to be ridden.
Shorter a bit more forward, longer a bit more back.
(b) Are we Club Riding, Training or Racing road/track.
(c) Seat tube angle - Smaller sets you back and VV.
(d) Ratio of femur:tibia bones.
(e) "Q" (Bottom Bracket Axle length)
(f) Crank length - Davey saw a pretty techie article one time that
concluded - within reason - that this didn't make a measurable
difference to power output although at the extremes this will
naturally limit the extent of forward/rearward saddle positioning.
(g) Handlebar "Reach" (from"tops" to "drops").
(h) Stem/Extension length.
(i) Comfort level required
(j) Overall "bike fit" - hopefully you have a reasonable fit but
otherwise you're going to have to compensate for deleterious effects
of a mismatched top tube by juggling stem/extension length and
saddle position.

Hoping you can find your optimum position.

Regards,

Davey

--
Will someone please tell M'Bongo ::
The notion that governments derive their only just authority from
the consent of the governed is a foundational principle of the
American experiment.

[William R. Mattil]

On 8/11/2011 2:50 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:

>
> I don't know if that's true, as I will run (ugh) but am not a
> triathlete - my ancestors evolved to walk on solid ground
> and I wish to respect their traditions. Water is evil and
> may kill you.
>

Hmmmmm you might be onto something here. Imagine the improved TV ratings
if televised triathalons had the swim leg last ?!?!?!?

That'd be entertainment.


Bill



--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

[Mark J.]

On 8/12/2011 4:49 AM, William R. Mattil wrote:
> On 8/11/2011 2:50 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't know if that's true, as I will run (ugh) but am not a
>> triathlete - my ancestors evolved to walk on solid ground
>> and I wish to respect their traditions. Water is evil and
>> may kill you.
>>
>
> Hmmmmm you might be onto something here. Imagine the improved TV ratings
> if televised triathalons had the swim leg last ?!?!?!?
>
> That'd be entertainment.

"DNF" means "Did Not Float".

Mark J.

[thirty-six]

On Aug 12, 11:50*am, Davey Crockett > wrote:
> thirty-six a crit profondement:
>
> | I don't really know what to make of this.
>
> |http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6QvK1NXINY&feature=player_detailpage#...
>
> | My concerns over crank length (too long) are possibly partly addressed
> | with this varying technique. *As I have said in the crank length
> | thread, my saddle position is currently restricted *due to the crank
> | length, but it appears that my physiological limitations may not be so
> | restricted as I thought.
>
> | So let's get this straight, it's move forward to bias output from the
> | quad's and backward to bias output from the hamstrings. *So with high
> | power levels I want to bring myself forward on the saddle to avoid
> | overuse of the hamstrings. *Yep, this sounds like normal practice, but
> | it unbalances the pedal stroke. *That can't really be helped with high
> | outputs though, can it?
>
>
>
> Rule of thumb:
>
> Saddle as far back as the rails/clamping-mechanism will permit.
>
> Not that Davey's a very technically oriented rider, but that old saw
> always seemed to work for him. ("Saw" as in "saying").
>
> Some points to watch which also might affect saddle positioning:
> (a) Length (distance) of Ride or Race to be ridden.
> * * Shorter a bit more forward, longer a bit more back.

It's about surviving the day in comfort and without exhaustion or
strains.

> (b) Are we Club Riding, Training or Racing road/track.

Nah, I'm dropping below fast tour. No more wannabe racer.

> (c) Seat tube angle - Smaller sets you back and VV.

What's VV ?

> (d) Ratio of femur:tibia bones.
> (e) "Q" (Bottom Bracket Axle length)
> (f) Crank length - Davey saw a pretty techie article one time that
> * * concluded - within reason - that this didn't make a measurable
> * * difference to power output although at the extremes this will
> * * naturally limit the extent of forward/rearward saddle positioning..

I'm not interested in my power output over 4 seconds or 4 minutes
(which is all the power studies in modern times cover, unless you know
different). My short term power levels are more than adequate. My
difficulties lie in fatigue and strain for 2 to 12 hours. I'd like to
be able to cover any terrain for 10 hours without having to bother
with stretching or worrying about my condition at the end of the day.

> (g) Handlebar "Reach" (from"tops" to "drops").
> (h) Stem/Extension length.
> (i) Comfort level required

Pocket sprung with all the trimmings please.

> (j) Overall "bike fit" - hopefully you have a reasonable fit but
> * * otherwise you're going to have to compensate for deleterious effects
> * * of a mismatched top tube by juggling stem/extension length and
> * * saddle position.

I was fitted around 170mm cranks, I took 18 months to find the exact
position around which variation of 1/8" produced a deterioration in
performance. Use of a turbo trainer and constant chain gang
participation helped in finding the most efficient position as regards
1 hour output (within the constraints of 170mm cranks). I remained
consistently below the cat 2 riders despite vaying training loads. I
didn't get the breaks I needed in racing and at the time became
convinced of the argument about failing to choose the right genetics.


I'm already 12mm back on my #2 bike with 165mm cranks, this is further
than the differential in crank lengths (to 170mm on #1) suggest yet I
still feel there is restriction to varying of seated position. The
stem is 20mm shorter than on #1 and the bars similar so that is not
upsetting the natural saddle postion. #1 did use a slightly shorter
stem for power but my back position was more relaxed and benefitted
from the slight difference as it is in as little as 1/2 hour.

I feel there is nothing to be done to position on my #1 bike while it
still wears 170mm cranks. I use the tops a lot and have cross brake
levers fitted. Oh hold on, I could fit straight bars (not bloody
likely) (just yet).

The relatively large difference in saddle position on #2 wrt crank
differential suggests to me that there is further to go to attain the
most natural and unstrained position which should result in a better
economy of effort over a long day in the saddle.

[Fredmaster of Brainerd]

On Aug 12, 10:46*am, "Mark J." > wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 4:49 AM, William R. Mattil wrote:
>
> > On 8/11/2011 2:50 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
>
> >> I don't know if that's true, as I will run (ugh) but am not a
> >> triathlete - my ancestors evolved to walk on solid ground
> >> and I wish to respect their traditions. Water is evil and
> >> may kill you.
>
> > Hmmmmm you might be onto something here. Imagine the improved TV ratings
> > if televised triathalons had the swim leg last ?!?!?!?
>
> > That'd be entertainment.
>
> "DNF" means "Did Not Float".

IIRC, Ryan has suggested the bike-run-swim triathlon
here before.

Water killing you is a real problem:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/sports/rise-in-first-time-triathletes-raises-safety-concern.html

But look, if they did a bike-run-swim triathlon, the swim would
not be a mass start and so you wouldn't get kicked in the head,
so we should sell it as a safety measure.

On the other hand, triathletes do love those photo-ops
for staggering over the finish line, and I'm not sure the
swim last would allow that. I guess if you have the finish
100 yards out of the water and the finishers are
crawling over the line, it would make good TV. Plus it
would recapitulate the evolutionary development of
crawling onto land, that I spoke of earlier.

Fredmaster Ben

[Frederick the Great]

In article
>,
Fredmaster of Brainerd > wrote:

> On Aug 12, 10:46Â*am, "Mark J." > wrote:
> > On 8/12/2011 4:49 AM, William R. Mattil wrote:
> >
> > > On 8/11/2011 2:50 PM, Fredmaster of Brainerd wrote:
> >
> > >> I don't know if that's true, as I will run (ugh) but am not a
> > >> triathlete - my ancestors evolved to walk on solid ground
> > >> and I wish to respect their traditions. Water is evil and
> > >> may kill you.
> >
> > > Hmmmmm you might be onto something here. Imagine the improved TV ratings
> > > if televised triathalons had the swim leg last ?!?!?!?
> >
> > > That'd be entertainment.
> >
> > "DNF" means "Did Not Float".
>
> IIRC, Ryan has suggested the bike-run-swim triathlon
> here before.
>
> Water killing you is a real problem:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/sports/rise-in-first-time-triathletes-raises-safety-concern.html
>
> But look, if they did a bike-run-swim triathlon, the swim would
> not be a mass start and so you wouldn't get kicked in the head,
> so we should sell it as a safety measure.
>
> On the other hand, triathletes do love those photo-ops
> for staggering over the finish line, and I'm not sure the
> swim last would allow that. I guess if you have the finish
> 100 yards out of the water and the finishers are
> crawling over the line, it would make good TV. Plus it
> would recapitulate the evolutionary development of
> crawling onto land, that I spoke of earlier.

True. I would put the bike after the run
so as to fully exploit triathletes' bike
handling abilities. Then the swim will be
at twilight when sharks wake up from siesta
talking about where they will go for dinner.
Road rash will chum the waters.

--
Old Fritz

[RicodJour[_2_]]

On Aug 15, 11:14*pm, Frederick the Great > wrote:
>
> Road rash will chum the waters.

Chum The Waters is a good name for a band.

R

[Frederick the Great]

In article
>,
RicodJour > wrote:

> On Aug 15, 11:14Â*pm, Frederick the Great > wrote:
> >
> > Road rash will chum the waters.
>
> Chum The Waters is a good name for a band.

When punk rock started to hit the big time
I offered a name that nobody took up: Bad Pork.

--
Old Fritz

[Davey Crockett[_5_]]

thirty-six a écrit profondement:

>
| > (c) Seat tube angle - Smaller sets you back and VV.
>
| What's VV ?

V.V. == Vice Versa
Literally : The other way around.

So a lower seat tube angle would set you back, and a higher set tube
angle would set you forward.

Apologiess for not replying on a more timely basis.

Davey
--
http://youtu.be/RCgBkNzhgq4
US getting their Ass Kicked in Libya
3 NATO ships sunk
http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=628070?rss

[thirty-six]

On Aug 18, 1:47*am, Davey Crockett > wrote:
> thirty-six a écrit profondement:
>
> | > (c) Seat tube angle - Smaller sets you back and VV.
>
> | What's VV ?
>
> V.V. *== Vice Versa
> Literally : The other way around.
>
> So a lower seat tube angle would set you back, and a higher set tube
> angle would set you forward.
>

That's understood. BTW 'vice versa' is always lower case and rarely
abreviated (sometimes when handwritten).

It could well be that I could benefit from a heel down position, as
the draw back phase has always been weakest, but this seems to require
a more rearward position than I can attain using the current seatpost
on my #2 (73deg with 165s). I cannot retain leg comfort just by
lowering the saddle (oh yeah, that takes it forward as well). So to
attain the desired heel down position to improve torque through the
bottom I need a different seat post with more offset.

Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
please.

Not so sure about the absolute requirement 150mm cranks now, but not
off the agenda yet. The identification of any UK or EEC suppliers for
short crank adult twin ring chainsets will be gratefully received.

[Mike Causer[_3_]]

On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
thirty-six > wrote:

> Not so sure about the absolute requirement 150mm cranks now, but not
> off the agenda yet. The identification of any UK or EEC suppliers for
> short crank adult twin ring chainsets will be gratefully received.

Highpath Engineering make an adaptor for existing cranks:
http://www.highpath.net/index.html

The Bandits of Bridgewater used to do a range, but it's not on their
current website.


Mike

[thirty-six]

On Aug 18, 6:49*pm, Mike Causer > wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2011 05:58:04 -0700 (PDT)
>
> thirty-six > wrote:
> > Not so sure about the absolute requirement 150mm cranks now, but not
> > off the agenda yet. *The identification of any UK or EEC suppliers for
> > short crank adult twin ring chainsets will be gratefully received.
>
> Highpath Engineering make an adaptor for existing cranks:http://www.highpath.net/index.html

No, I have not won the lottery, in case that was your enquiry. Those
monstrosities would make the crank tread undesirably wide. A widened
tread is out of the question as I am attempting to refine my position
not balls it up completely.

>
> The Bandits of Bridgewater used to do a range, but it's not on their
> current website.
>
> Mike

[Victor Kan]

On Aug 18, 8:58*am, thirty-six > wrote:
....
> Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> please.

Velo Orange:

http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/vo-grand-cru-seat-post-long-setback.html

I have one of these on a road bike that's a little too small for me
and has a 74.5 degree seat tube.

I still need to have my saddle slammed all the way back and the bike
fits me just right now.

This seat post's clamp is on the short/narrow side though.

The setback as measured from the front of the post to the front of the
clamp (the only measure that really matters, rather than a center-to-
center measurement, when one is looking for long setback), is, IIRC,
about 30mm. This is a much longer effective setback than an Oval
Concepts seat post I have that has a nominal, center-to-center setback
of 28mm, but has a long/wide clamp that gobbles up a lot of that.

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per thirty-six:
>Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
>please.

Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
stressing the post more. Might not be as much of an issue for
people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.

Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)

viz: http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
--
PeteCresswell

[RicodJour[_2_]]

On Aug 19, 9:24 am, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
> Per thirty-six:
>
> >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> >please.
>
> Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> stressing the post more. Might not be as much of an issue for
> people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx

Custom fabricated...? Nah, you can get those over at
PerinealCoreSampling.com

I saw the cracked stem photos. Looks like the tweaking needs some
tweaking. Yikes.

R

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per RicodJour:
>I saw the cracked stem photos. Looks like the tweaking needs some
>tweaking. Yikes.

That was release 1.0.

Release 2.0 has greater wall thickness.

A low 'folding' failure isn't so bad. The sudden "BANG" ones
are *really* bad.

The worst failure I've had was with Cane Creek's ThudBuster.
It was pure luck that I got out of it intact. Corresponded with
another user who was not so lucky - lost his job, multiple back
operations... and on-and-on. He won his lawsuit against Cane
Creek, but that probably didn't put his life back together for
him.
--
PeteCresswell

[thirty-six]

On Aug 19, 11:48*am, Victor Kan > wrote:
> On Aug 18, 8:58*am, thirty-six > wrote:
> ...
>
> > Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> > please.
>
> Velo Orange:
>
> http://store.velo-orange.com/index.php/vo-grand-cru-seat-post-long-se...
>
> I have one of these on a road bike that's a little too small for me
> and has a 74.5 degree seat tube.
>
> I still need to have my saddle slammed all the way back and the bike
> fits me just right now.
>
> This seat post's clamp is on the short/narrow side though.

I was wondering about that, they make some point about Brooks
saddles. I do use an old Brooks Competition which does not in my eyes
be particularly restricted by the rails. Unfortunately it's out of
stock anyway and I'd prefer a UK supplier.

>
> The setback as measured from the front of the post to the front of the
> clamp (the only measure that really matters, rather than a center-to-
> center measurement, when one is looking for long setback), is, IIRC,
> about 30mm. *This is a much longer effective setback than an Oval
> Concepts seat post I have that has a nominal, center-to-center setback
> of 28mm, but has a long/wide clamp that gobbles up a lot of that.

Thaks for the info on the measuring system, I was a bit confused on
what to measure to make comparisons. As you say, it's the front of
the clamp that matters when requiring a more rearward position and
it's good to be able to find the correct position with the clamp
centred on the saddle's rails. I'll see where the current posts lie
when I get my hands on a couple of measuring sticks.

[thirty-six]

On Aug 19, 2:24*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
> Per thirty-six:
>
> >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> >please.
>
> Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.

Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
components. If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
also need longer chainstays. May as well go the whole hog and get a
more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
> Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> --
> PeteCresswell

[Plano Dude]

On Aug 19, 8:13*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
> On Aug 19, 2:24*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
>
> > Per thirty-six:
>
> > >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> > >please.
>
> > Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> > stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> > people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> > I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
> position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
> components. *If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
> also need longer chainstays. *May as well go the whole hog and get a
> more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> > is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> > viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> > --
> > PeteCresswell

Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993

[Plano Dude]

On Aug 19, 11:36*pm, Plano Dude > wrote:
> On Aug 19, 8:13*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 19, 2:24*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
>
> > > Per thirty-six:
>
> > > >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> > > >please.
>
> > > Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> > > stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> > > people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> > > I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> > Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
> > position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
> > components. *If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
> > also need longer chainstays. *May as well go the whole hog and get a
> > more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
> > > Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> > > is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> > > viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> > > --
> > > PeteCresswell
>
> Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993

http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478

[T°m Sherm@n]

On 8/19/2011 11:40 PM, Plano Dude wrote:
> On Aug 19, 11:36 pm, Plano > wrote:
>> On Aug 19, 8:13 pm, > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 19, 2:24 pm, > wrote:
>>
>>>> Per thirty-six:
>>
>>>>> Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
>>>>> please.
>>
>>>> Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
>>>> stressing the post more. Might not be as much of an issue for
>>>> people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
>>>> I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>>
>>> Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
>>> position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
>>> components. If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
>>> also need longer chainstays. May as well go the whole hog and get a
>>> more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>>
>>>> Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
>>>> is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>>
>>>> viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
>>>> --
>>>> PeteCresswell
>>
>> Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993
>
> http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478

Or 66°:
<http://www.gazelle.us.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage_gazelle.tpl&product_id=174&category_id=38&vmcchk=1&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=54>.

--
Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
I am a vehicular cyclist.

[thirty-six]

On Aug 20, 5:40*am, Plano Dude > wrote:
> On Aug 19, 11:36*pm, Plano Dude > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 19, 8:13*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 19, 2:24*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
>
> > > > Per thirty-six:
>
> > > > >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> > > > >please.
>
> > > > Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> > > > stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> > > > people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> > > > I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> > > Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
> > > position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
> > > components. *If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
> > > also need longer chainstays. *May as well go the whole hog and get a
> > > more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
> > > > Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> > > > is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> > > > viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> > > > --
> > > > PeteCresswell
>
> > Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993
>
> http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478

Ah yes, I remember the banana saddle, I don't think this was the only
low seat angle used by professionals but this really goes beyond the
mark. Note that his knees are behind his heels so that saddle becomes
necessary to resist the backwards force simply by pressing down at the
pedals most forward position. This is certainly not an optimum design
for any type of riding. I've been missing a simple trick here, moving
the cleats on my racing shoes all the way back. I don't usually think
of cleat position because I have no problems as regards to my legs and
feet (longer leg already had cleat partially adjjusted forward). It's
a lot cheaper than shortening my feet anyway. I'll give this a go and
stay on the tops and see how I feel in the hills.

[Plano Dude]

On Aug 20, 12:04*am, "T°m Sherm@n" <""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net"> wrote:
> On 8/19/2011 11:40 PM, Plano Dude wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 19, 11:36 pm, Plano > *wrote:
> >> On Aug 19, 8:13 pm, > *wrote:
>
> >>> On Aug 19, 2:24 pm, > *wrote:
>
> >>>> Per thirty-six:
>
> >>>>> Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> >>>>> please.
>
> >>>> Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> >>>> stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> >>>> people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> >>>> I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> >>> Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
> >>> position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
> >>> components. *If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
> >>> also need longer chainstays. *May as well go the whole hog and get a
> >>> more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
> >>>> Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> >>>> is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> >>>> viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> >>>> --
> >>>> PeteCresswell
>
> >> Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993
>
> >http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478
>
> Or 66°:
> <http://www.gazelle.us.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage....>.
>
> --
> Tºm Shermªn - 42.435731°N, 83.985007°W
> I am a vehicular cyclist.

What do the Dutch know about "Route 66 detailing"?

[Plano Dude]

On Aug 20, 7:14*am, thirty-six > wrote:
> On Aug 20, 5:40*am, Plano Dude > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 19, 11:36*pm, Plano Dude > wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 19, 8:13*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 19, 2:24*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
>
> > > > > Per thirty-six:
>
> > > > > >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> > > > > >please.
>
> > > > > Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> > > > > stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> > > > > people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> > > > > I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> > > > Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
> > > > position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
> > > > components. *If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
> > > > also need longer chainstays. *May as well go the whole hog and get a
> > > > more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
> > > > > Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> > > > > is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> > > > > viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> > > > > --
> > > > > PeteCresswell
>
> > > Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993
>
> >http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478
>
> Ah yes, I remember the banana saddle, I don't think this was the only
> low seat angle used by professionals but this really goes beyond the
> mark. *Note that his knees are behind his heels so that saddle becomes
> necessary to resist the backwards force simply by pressing down at the
> pedals most forward position. *This is certainly not an optimum design
> for any type of riding.

Recumbent riders would disagree with you. :-)

> *I've been missing a simple trick here, moving
> the cleats on my racing shoes all the way back. *I don't usually think
> of cleat position because I have no problems as regards to my legs and
> feet (longer leg already had cleat partially adjjusted forward). *It's
> a lot cheaper than shortening my feet anyway. *I'll give this a go and
> stay on the tops and see how I feel in the hills.

What about shoe overlap with the front wheel?

[thirty-six]

On Aug 20, 2:42*pm, Plano Dude > wrote:
> On Aug 20, 7:14*am, thirty-six > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 20, 5:40*am, Plano Dude > wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 19, 11:36*pm, Plano Dude > wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 19, 8:13*pm, thirty-six > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 19, 2:24*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" > wrote:
>
> > > > > > Per thirty-six:
>
> > > > > > >Someone point me in the direction of a cheap long layback seatpin,
> > > > > > >please.
>
> > > > > > Keep in mind that as the saddle moves back, your body weight is
> > > > > > stressing the post more. * Might not be as much of an issue for
> > > > > > people of average weight, but I've broken several seat posts and
> > > > > > I suspect my use of excessive layback was the cause.
>
> > > > > Thank's for the reminder, but although I think of the proposed
> > > > > position as radical, I'm hoping to accomplish it with typical
> > > > > components. *If it looks off I'll possibly get another frame as I'll
> > > > > also need longer chainstays. *May as well go the whole hog and get a
> > > > > more touring orientated frame with a lower crank bracket.
>
> > > > > > Now I use a custom-fabricated interface whose additional benefit
> > > > > > is that decreases the steal-appeal of the bike -)
>
> > > > > > viz:http://tinyurl.com/3nowflx
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > PeteCresswell
>
> > > > Look at Steve Bauer's bike circa 1993
>
> > >http://www.retrobike.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=137478
>
> > Ah yes, I remember the banana saddle, I don't think this was the only
> > low seat angle used by professionals but this really goes beyond the
> > mark. *Note that his knees are behind his heels so that saddle becomes
> > necessary to resist the backwards force simply by pressing down at the
> > pedals most forward position. *This is certainly not an optimum design
> > for any type of riding.
>
> Recumbent riders would disagree with you. :-)

Yes.
>
> > *I've been missing a simple trick here, moving
> > the cleats on my racing shoes all the way back. *I don't usually think
> > of cleat position because I have no problems as regards to my legs and
> > feet (longer leg already had cleat partially adjjusted forward). *It's
Oh, should have written that the cleat was adjusted back for the
longer leg, nothing like having the object in your hands to describe.
> > a lot cheaper than shortening my feet anyway. *I'll give this a go and
> > stay on the tops and see how I feel in the hills.
>
> What about shoe overlap with the front wheel?

That occurs on the unloaded bike, but has not been an issue when
riding today (2 hours flat and rolling, no wind or hills). Felt a
bit odd, certainly different but not exactly uncomfortable. I'll drop
the saddle a touch for the next time out, there is also likely to be a
period of acclimatisation so I'll re-appraise the toe forward position
in a month. I didn't get down on the drops and I doubt it would make
any difference after adjusting my seat height down a little.