Saddle height vs PBH

[Christopher Cote]

I'm curious how many here find that Grant's "rule" about saddle height being 10-11cm lower than PBH to be true for them. My PBH is 86cm and for the longest time, ran my saddle at 75cm from the center of the cranks. Lately, I switched from clipless pedals to flats, and now that the weather is warm, I have been riding in Bedrock Sandals. Because the soles are so thin, I had to lower my saddle a bit. I've also been dealing with some knee pain and came across these articles: https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/blog/2011/02/seat-height-how-hard-can-it-be/ and https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/bikefit/2011/05/addendum-to-seat-height-how-hard-can-it-be-2/. I think a lot of what he says is going on for me: knee and back pain, tilted hips, pedaling toes-down, etc. I went for a ride this morning and stopped to lower my saddle a few times. No new knee pain (same as before), and now I feel like I can pedal with a more level foot. My legs are still pretty far extended at the bottom of the stroke, and I can't reach them at the bottom with my heels (another possibly flawed guide for setting saddle height). When I got home I measured the saddle height at 73cm. I know the Bedrock sandals are thin, but I doubt they're 2cm thinner than my clipless pedals and shoe combo. Maybe the additional sole flex makes them effectively even thinner? 

Chris

[Christopher Cote]

Oh, and this article mentions the tilted hip thing: https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/bikefit/2011/11/knee-pain/

Chris

[Dave Small]

My PBH is 88 cm and I put my saddle heights at 78 or 77 cm.  That works well with thicker-soled shoes like Keen sandals, but if I take a ride with thin-soled shoes like Vibram Five Fingers, that saddle height is too tall.  It's easier to change my shoes than it is to lower (and then raise) the saddle, so I do that instead.  But it was a learning experience to try a few rides with the Five Fingers.  

So, a 10-cm difference typically works well for me with most shoes, but not all shoes.  

BTW, when I started paying attention to Grant's recommendations on this subject, it was 10 cm, not 10 or 11.  That's why I put the saddle height and 78 and just went with it.  I don't know when the "or 11" crept in.  

Dave

[Deacon Patrick]

I ride in sandals as well, and with a midfoot pedal placement, which has my saddle lower by some amount. I also like a bit lower saddle because I floor live and so am very used to squatting and bending my knees, preferring a lower stance, for example, for running.

With abandon,

Patrick

[Garth]

As you know, what GP summizes as a starting point for saddle height is based on his experience and assumptions. Of course, we all have our own. I don't think he means it as the one and only way, just his experience and he's passing it along.

Like all fit questions, the variables are infinite, and trying to "figure it out and pin it down for yourself", is utter futility.

[Steven Sweedler]

Chris, it works  for me, a pbh of 91 and a saddle height of 81, most of my riding is in Shimano or Chaco sandals, all on platform  pedals. Steve

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 7:20 PM Christopher Cote <christophe...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm curious how many here find that Grant's "rule" about saddle height being 10-11cm lower than PBH to be true for them. My PBH is 86cm and for the longest time, ran my saddle at 75cm from the center of the cranks. Lately, I switched from clipless pedals to flats, and now that the weather is warm, I have been riding in Bedrock Sandals. Because the soles are so thin, I had to lower my saddle a bit. I've also been dealing with some knee pain and came across these articles: https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/blog/2011/02/seat-height-how-hard-can-it-be/ and https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/bikefit/2011/05/addendum-to-seat-height-how-hard-can-it-be-2/. I think a lot of what he says is going on for me: knee and back pain, tilted hips, pedaling toes-down, etc. I went for a ride this morning and stopped to lower my saddle a few times. No new knee pain (same as before), and now I feel like I can pedal with a more level foot. My legs are still pretty far extended at the bottom of the stroke, and I can't reach them at the bottom with my heels (another possibly flawed guide for setting saddle height). When I got home I measured the saddle height at 73cm. I know the Bedrock sandals are thin, but I doubt they're 2cm thinner than my clipless pedals and shoe combo. Maybe the additional sole flex makes them effectively even thinner? 

Chris

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bun...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owne...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Steven Sweedler
Plymouth, New Hampshire

[Chris Lampe 2]

I think it works well for me and I actually worked backwards and got my PBH from my saddle height.  I have a hard time measuring PBH due to obesity and my wife and I measured it at 83cm (5'11").  I can straddle an 84cm S.O. bike and still bend my knees a bit so I know 83cm isn't accurate.  From my SH of 75cm, I assume my PBH is 86'ish cm.  With slightly thicker soled shoes, I would go with a S.H. of 76 cm.  Luckily, the 86'ish estimate gives me clear size recommendations on the Rivs I would want to own.  54 Hunq (53 is probably an option now),  55 Appaloosa and 52 Bombadil.   

[Ray Varella]

Don't forget to factor in your crank length.
5mm difference in cranks equals 10mm in the full revolution.
5mm shorter means 5mm less at the top and bottom of the stroke.
Go from 165mm to 175mm cranks and you may find your hip flexor, knees and foot muscles as well as calf and Achilles' tendons all affected.

Ray
Vallejo CA

[Kai Vierstra]

Not true for me, I'm losing about 13 from my pbh, with 178 cranks.
-Kai
BK NY

[Jay Connolly]

My PBH is 95 and I run my saddles (180/178 cranks) at 85. On my Joe, I use Pedaling Innovations long pedals and push my foot further forward. The saddle on that one is at 84. (Jury still out on the overall value of the pedals, but I no longer suffer excruciating hot foot on long rides, so that aspect of the experiment has been a success.)

Jay

[Mojo]

I have a couple of formulas in my garage, using cm:

PBH x 0.69  =  Frame Size

PBH x 0.833 = Saddle Height

I believe I got these from one of Grant's writings. My Riv custom follows these formulas. My PBH is 89.2 and Grant built me a 61.5cm frame and my saddle height is 74cm using 175mm cranks and spd pedals.

Anyway they are a place to start.

Joe in GJT

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 9:03:47 PM UTC-6, Jay Connolly wrote:

[Mojo]

Oops!

PBH x 0.883 = Saddle height.

I ride just a bit lower than that.

[Kiley DeMond]

Hmmm, I have read most if not all GP wrote, and while message is received, numbers rarely stick. So, I got out my tape measure: with a PBH of 91, and Keen bike sandals with a sole of 1.9, my saddle height is 67 cm to center of crank. I don't think it is the numbers (36", .75", 26.5"), so, I am not sure why my numbers seem out of whack. My bike is 60cm Cheviot, saddle is a Rivet Loveland, and pedals are Grand Cru Sabots. Perhaps it is because I have a 175cm crank instead of the usual 172 (an idea I got from GP for a leg length/arm length ratio issue). 

[Christopher Cote]

Thanks for the input everyone. Seems like the 10cm delta holds for a lot of folks, but they're riding with "normal" shoes and pedals. For those of you in that camp, are you also able to reach the pedals in the down position with your heels? Just curious.

Chris "just a number"

[John]

Hi, 

   I haven't seen anyone else mention this, but when I set my saddle back, like way back on the Nitto lugged seat post, I have to measure my saddle height from BB to where my sit bones go, not parallel to the seat post tube, thus lowering the saddle more in relation to the ground. 

    Also, I have to adjust my saddle further if I make changes in shoe & pedal thicknesses.

The (PBH x 0.883 = saddle height) & (PBH - 10-11cm = saddle height) equations have always worked for me as a good place to start. My wife has a 73cm PBH and starting with these formulas as a place to work from has worked out for her too.

John

 
On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 4:20:50 PM UTC-7, Christopher Cote wrote:

[Patrick Moore]

Christopher: any saddle height rule is only a "rule of thumb." It's a starting point, like KOPS. Measure per Grant or whomever; ride; adjust.

Patrick Moore, who has recently very slightly reduced his saddle setback over the center of the bb spindle.

On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Christopher Cote <christophe...@gmail.com> wrote:

I'm curious how many here find that Grant's "rule" about saddle height being 10-11cm lower than PBH to be true for them. My PBH is 86cm and for the longest time, ran my saddle at 75cm from the center of the cranks. Lately, I switched from clipless pedals to flats, and now that the weather is warm, I have been riding in Bedrock Sandals. Because the soles are so thin, I had to lower my saddle a bit. I've also been dealing with some knee pain and came across these articles: https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/blog/2011/02/seat-height-how-hard-can-it-be/ and https://www.stevehoggbikefitting.com/bikefit/2011/05/addendum-to-seat-height-how-hard-can-it-be-2/. I think a lot of what he says is going on for me: knee and back pain, tilted hips, pedaling toes-down, etc. I went for a ride this morning and stopped to lower my saddle a few times. No new knee pain (same as before), and now I feel like I can pedal with a more level foot. My legs are still pretty far extended at the bottom of the stroke, and I can't reach them at the bottom with my heels (another possibly flawed guide for setting saddle height). When I got home I measured the saddle height at 73cm. I know the Bedrock sandals are thin, but I doubt they're 2cm thinner than my clipless pedals and shoe combo. Maybe the additional sole flex makes them effectively even thinner? 

Chris

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RBW Owners Bunch" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rbw-owners-bunch+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to rbw-owners-bunch@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/rbw-owners-bunch.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Resumes, LinkedIn profiles, bios, and letters that get interviews.

By-the-hour resume and LinkedIn coaching.

Other professional writing services.

http://www.resumespecialties.com/

www.linkedin.com/in/patrickmooreresumespec/

Patrick Moore

Alburquerque, Nouvelle Mexique,  Vereinigte Staaten

****************************************************************************************

Interested in trading resume, LinkedIn, and other writing work for professional (professional) help with marketing and growing my resumes, etc. business. Respondents should have considerable experience in helping small, online businesses grow. Please contact me at patric...@resumespecialties.com. Thanks.

[Christopher Cote]

Good point, I do shove the saddle back as far as it goes on an offset seat post. I've been measuring along the seat tube. That would make a difference.

Chris "trigonometry" Cote

[Jeff Lesperance]

I've never measured saddle height, well, I suppose I tried once and I observed that there appeared to be enough room for error and variability in measuring based on the type and position of my saddle that I wasn't sure I could use a tape measure measurement as a baseline to set saddle height across my array of bikes. How do you all measure consistently, and is it necessary to take into account varying setback across different bikes?

I've mostly standardized to two different saddle models that have no padding but do squish/deflect some (Brooks C-17 and B17 models) so saddle make up does cause variance, but seat tube angles, seatpost setback, saddle rail length and desired seating position (close to or further from KOPS) pending riding style/bike style create enough perceived variability for me that I just put the saddle where I think I want it to be fore/aft (usually as aft as possible), put on my most common riding shoes (Keen Newports) and put the saddle in position whereas my leg is as straight as can be when my heel is on the pedal and the crank is straight down. From bike to bike, across the variables I've mentioned, I've found that I've had to make up to +/- 2 cm adjustments, but that's pretty rare, and really only tends to rear its head as a necessity for longer-than-average mileage days. I think I used to be more sensitive to saddle height over shorter distances when I used foot retention, but since going to flat pedals and sandals I know that I move my foot around on the pedal over the course of a day, not unlike the way I move my hands around my handlebars.

-Jeff

Silver Spring, MD

On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 7:45 PM, Christopher Cote <christophe...@gmail.com> wrote:

Good point, I do shove the saddle back as far as it goes on an offset seat post. I've been measuring along the seat tube. That would make a difference.

Chris "trigonometry" Cote

[Richard Rios]

I prefer the heel on pedal method plus a few hairs up. I found Riv's recomendation of pbh -10 or 11 put me a tad high. Always felt like I was reaching for the pedals and my toes were pointed down to much for my taste. I prefer a flatter foot while pedaling. I end up around 72.5-73 with a 85 cm pbh measured by the old book jammed up crotch method.

Richard "it's close either way though" rios

[Bill in Roswell GA]

Steve Hogg is the master wizard of real world fit, IMHO. His use of a goniometer to measure leg angle and thus determine saddle height has worked for me. My local shop has one, so they set the height on the two bikes I ride the most. I then measured from crank center, in parallel to the seat tube, to top of saddle. With each bike setup that way, all is good. 

Using The Fit KIt at a shop, I had my PBH measured. The Fit KIt uses foot length to determine a saddle height range. The range given was spot on with what the goniometer showed. All has been good for years on a variety of bikes with my saddle set to the proper height using cycles shoes with cleats, both SPD and SL systems. 

Ever since developing knee issues last fall, I started getting pain at the left sit bone, the insertion point of the hamstring. I stretched a lot and iced after rides, which helped. But, the more climbing I did (pretty hilly area, can't avoid), the worse the symptom became. Then just a few weeks ago, I stopped by another town to see a friend and he said lets go ride. He setup his spare bike just eye-balling the saddle height to my hip. Amazingly, the ride was pain free. I wondered if it was the Brooks saddle or saddle height. After the ride, I measured the crank center to top of saddle height - easily a half inch lower than my "ideal" saddle height. 

Next ride at home I lowered the saddle on my CX bike, did a 24 mile 2,400' climbing route and voila, no sit bone pain!  I later talked with a friend's daughter that is a sports med practitioner. She said what I had is much like tendonitis - the sheath around the muscle and attaching ligaments become inflamed. Stretch, ice and rest will alleviate the problem in a few weeks. Not to mention lowering the saddle!

The lesson shows there is an ideal saddle height that works when things are ideal. Then there is real world saddle height when your body says change is needed by shouting at you via pain point. Adjust as needed. 

Cheers,

Bill in Roswell, GA sitting comfortably on the bike

[Dave Johnston]

15 yrs ago I measured my PBH at 83.5 and my saddles were at 72.5 with  B17 and up to 73cm with a Flite using 170mm cranks and clipless MTB pedals.

I am currently measuring my PBH at about 83.0  and my saddles are 72.0 +/- 5mm. I notice with thin flat pedals and thinner shoes I can be comfortable at 71.5mm, but usually go 72.0. With all these heights my heel barely scrapes or is above the pedal at full leg extension. I usually start at 72.5 now and work my way down. I know for a fact my saddle is about 5mm lower now on my Atlantis than it was 10+ yrs ago because I had to stop using the Aero post, as the aero part was getting to be below the lug edge.

I am also not that good at getting consistent measurements. I can measure the same saddle 3 different times and get 71.8, 72, 72.3 depending how I eyeball where the top of the Brooks is.

-Dave J

[REC]

I have PBH of 83.  My B17 is set at 71.25.  I have the pedals that came with the bike and wear sneakers, marketed as "walking shoes." 

Roberta 

On Saturday, July 29, 2017 at 7:20:50 PM UTC-4, Christopher Cote wrote:

[Patrick Moore]

A tangential but related question to that about saddle height: Do you others who use cycling specific shoes favor different shoes for different pedals and cranks? I find that even a slight difference in sole thickness can make a saddle feel awkward; add to this the "flare" of the crank arms and Q, and the attempt to avoid the inside of the shoe rubbing the arms, and it's much easier to set up 1 shoe for each pedal/crank combo. 

For example, the gofast with DA 7410 SPDs and converted Sidi road shoes has a slightly lower saddle than the '03 with M 540s and ancient Shimano spd shoes (both have the same crank). 

Is this peculiar? Are others as sensitive to this sort of thing as I?

Patrick "Dear Abby: Does it make me look fat?" Moore

[Garth]

   Well sure Patrick, I get what you mean.  It also depends on the pedals and their width too. Back when I rode all straight arms and racing pedals of any kind I needed a narrow shoe not so much for the cranks but the pedals were so narrow. On the Stumpie with wider flat cage Suntour pedals w/o retention I could wear any shoes, even my light hiking shoes. Though by todays standards of flat bmx style pedals they were still narrow in width and cage size.

  As far as you needing different heights of seat for the same crank and shoes, were the frames exactly the same STA and saddle and position of the saddle fore/aft/tilt ?  And differences would be noticed.

[Christopher Cote]

Yes, back when I rode with clipless pedals that had limited float (SPD on the MTB, Look on the road), I had to set the cleats up carefully taking into account the width of the cranks. I later switched to Speedplay frogs with 30 degrees of float. I just needed to ensure that I could rotate my heels in on the most flared cranks I had, and they worked on narrower cranks just fine. Now I'm free of those encumbrances, and life is much simpler. As a side note, I found that I could not ride clipless pedals and cranks with straight arms like the old TA Cyclotouriste. I need a bit more heel clearance.

Chris

On Tuesday, August 1, 2017 at 4:51:17 PM UTC-4, Patrick Moore wrote:

[Mitch Harris]

At the time, I thought Grant's recommendation of PBH minus 10 or 11cm seemed like a nice simplification of the mainstream performance saddle height method that became a widespread standard in the 80s. Even though Grant's advice on frame height and bar height were/are way out of industry standard and invite people to re-think the way a bike fits, I think his "rule" for saddle height was more a descriptive observation of what most avid cyclists were using. 

According to that 70s standard my own ~87cm PBH multiplied by .889 is 77cm and that's the saddle height I rode for 30 years. The standard advice for saddle height in the 80s in the US was based on Greg Lemond's book and Bernard Hinault's book before that. It was assumed back then top racers would have the best advice on saddle height. Hinault's book recommended measuring PBH the way we do now and then multiplying by .889 (IIRC/exactly) to get bb center to saddle top distance, assuming a 170 crank. Lemond's book used a different multiplier for a pedal spindle center to saddle top height which was a way of taking into account crank length and foot length better. Hinault's and Lemond's numbers tended to result in the same saddle height for most riders. Grant's subtraction method matches closely this multiplier method in the mid-size bike sizes but would result in proportionately lower saddle heights for smaller riders and proportionally higher saddle heights for taller riders. That's one reason I assumed his "rule" was more descriptive. I think it was not so much a method of arriving at saddle height but more a way to estimate frame size--a way to prevent getting too small a frame.

The 80s .889 saddle height method represented a significant rise in standard saddle height from the previous generations of racers/riders (continent, Britain, N.America) mid-70s and earlier, who used lower saddles at least 2cm lower. You seen this in older photos of racers and riders with much more knee bend at bottom than this new standard allowed. 

This would have been or become the dominant saddle height theory during the period Grant P was racing and was pretty standard for N.Americans by mid-80s even before Lemond's book came out. Eddy B. (Polish emigre) was a top US coach/guru in the mid 80s and recommended even higher seat heights if you could manage them without too much hip rocking. He based this on VOmax studies, which I won't go into, but suffice it to say the Hinault/Lemond method was considered by comparison a fairly conservative method in the 80s. 

To my surprise, this mainstream N.American method wasn't the accepted wisdom among racers/riders in Britain when I lived and raced there beginning in the late 80s. To my team mates my saddle was a little high. But I persisted because continental riders were using the same method N.Americans were using, including the French, Swiss, and Flemish clubs we partnered with for Velodrome events. Also all the Six Day pros used this same saddle height. I assumed British club racers were just more traditional and would eventually adopt the new method. 

In the last 10 years though, out of boredom and wanting to tinker, and because various experiences had made me wonder whether all those previous generations knew better than we did in the 80s, I decided to experiment with lowering my saddle to the heights they were using in the 60s. Lowering a few mm at a time over a month, my saddle height has now been 2cm lower for years now. I've found no drawback whatsoever that I can tell and have enjoyed several advantages of a lower saddle height. My 80s/90s London club-mates were right. So I my own rule now is saddle height 12cm less than PBH.

--Mitch