View Full Version : Old Days and Saddle Height.
johnnymossville
10-10-2008, 12:39 PM
Did Merckx and his contemporaries ride with their saddles lower? I was watching La Course en Tete last night it looked like they had quite a bit of bend in their legs compared to what I see today?
Has there been a change in thinking on this or is it about the same now as then?
avalonracing
10-10-2008, 01:14 PM
It has always looked that way to me. Personally, I don't know how anyone can ride with a low saddle.
Joellogicman
10-10-2008, 01:24 PM
Did Merckx and his contemporaries ride with their saddles lower? I was watching La Course en Tete last night it looked like they had quite a bit of bend in their legs compared to what I see today?
Has there been a change in thinking on this or is it about the same now as then?
The long seat post came around the same time as the sloping top tube and head tube extension. I do not think the distance between rider's torso and foot have changed all that much.
You can tell by the bend in their knee though... visually people look higher if you look at the bike with sloping top tubes, but the actual leg extension at a given seat -> BB distance & crank length is the same regardless of where the TT is.
I feel like I ride pretty high compared to the "formulas". E.x. Lemonds Inseam x 0.883 formula. Mine is more like 0.92 or something, but that is what the Serotta method stuck me at, and I do think it works.
0.883 I'm 99% sure I would be quite a bit slower, not going to try it though because it results in knee tendonitis.
johnnymossville
10-10-2008, 01:37 PM
You can tell by the bend in their knee though... visually people look higher if you look at the bike with sloping top tubes, but the actual leg extension at a given seat -> BB distance & crank length is the same regardless of where the TT is.
I feel like I ride pretty high compared to the "formulas". E.x. Lemonds Inseam x 0.883 formula. Mine is more like 0.92 or something, but that is what the Serotta method stuck me at, and I do think it works.
0.883 I'm 99% sure I would be quite a bit slower, not going to try it though because it results in knee tendonitis.
Yeah, exactly. I was talking knee bend. more bend in leg = lower saddle.
Viper
10-10-2008, 02:09 PM
Not certain, but maybe it's an illusion in that years ago, they had a different saddle-to-bar-drop. I prefer the Belgian fit, little seatpost is needed and the drop was generated from the bars themselves. Eddy's leg looks great at 6 o'clock, below.
I know Sean Kelly rode around in what surfers would call a stink-bug stance, deeply squated. Sean Kelly will be seated at the right hand of the Father, or Cylon, someday.
So maybe more an illusion of the frame fit from yesteryear? I've always been in tune with the knees on a bike.
giordana93
10-10-2008, 09:20 PM
I am all over this thread, because I'm trying to decide whether I like my old school fit of a lower seat or the new school higher position. they both have their merits, and the goofiest of details seem to affect what works. for example, I love the old style whale tail type of seat, a la turbo, concor, etc. but they just don't work as well at the higher seat levels, where the new-style flat and level saddle is the key. I do know that it is much easier to get into the mega crouch, super low position with a lower seat and a good amount of set back, and there is the secret: at given height A and a forward position, the leg extension is the same when you lower the seat and push your butt back in position B. and note where the hands are: in the old days, it was best to be in the drops, not just for aero, but to reach the down tube shifters. I am convinced that a higher seat makes the drop position much harder to get to, but it is less necessary when you can do all your cruising stretched out and shifting from the hoods. I'm still probably gonna do a post on this eventually, but short answer for the long prologue:
yes, I think the seats were lower, but the overall position, when hammering in the drops, is not so different; by pushing back and bending over, the leg extension gets to be about the same as a more on the hoods, superman-aero (rotated forward, time-trialish) position.
johnnymossville
10-10-2008, 10:48 PM
I am all over this thread,....
Me too!
I've been playing around with saddle height on my new bike and found I like the slightly lower saddle. I seem to be getting more power to the pedals than before, with less little aches and pains after long rides. It's also smoothed out my pedal stroke. It may be more of a case of being too high before, I set the bike up to competitive cyclist's competitive fit to start. Wife measured me 3x/averaged/did the math etc,...
Watching Merckx going in the drops really leaned over just looks so fast to me in those old videos. He looks to have more leg extension (looks perfect by the way) in that photo viper showed above than during actual race footage I'm watching. I wonder if that isn't just for the photo op. hehe
alancw3
10-11-2008, 07:30 AM
from the looks of this pic i would say not. also i once read that em was known to use very long cranks.
There is higher seat heights, and there is "bike doesn't fit".
If someone can't ride in the drops with a new school higher seat height then their bike probably just doesn't fit...
Joellogicman
10-11-2008, 08:03 AM
from the looks of this pic i would say not. also i once read that em was known to use very long cranks.
From the picture at least it appears the expanse of the seat stays between the top of the tire and top tube is longer than most modern road bikes.
There must be a link somewhere comparing classic geometry with modern.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.