# Shorter stem or seat forward



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

My position is close to perfect except my reach. I have my seat forward all the way and I just feel a little stretched out. I think another centimeter would do it. I had my lbs fitter change the stem to a 100mm, but it still feels like the reach isnt right. He disagrees and says my position looks perfect. I went back in and he rotated my bars a bit which helped but it still feels like the reach is a bit long.

What should I do?

The bike is a new CAAD10 purchased at the lbs for racing and fast group rides. It is a 56 and I am 6' with a 32" inseam.


----------



## locustfist (Feb 21, 2009)

Seat fore/aft should be determined more by your orientation to the BB than you reach. Yes, you can get some nominal reach adjustment at the saddle but I would look there as a last resort. Most fitters will get your cleats and saddle dialed and then start adjusting reach.

If you're feeling stretched out, you can go shorter on the stem or put bars on there with a shorter reach.


----------



## tihsepa (Nov 27, 2008)

Moving your saddle to adjust reach is plain wrong. Moving your saddle puts you correctly over the crank. Stem and bars will adjust reach.


----------



## Peter P. (Dec 30, 2006)

According to your overall height, I'd expect you to ride a taller frame (read: longer top tube than a 56cm frame provides.). According to your inseam, you should be on an even smaller frame-54cm.

I can't believe your seat is full forward-it implies you have very short thighs for someone your height.

Since all these red flags/contradictions are being raised and I can't fit you myself, I'd say either you're not suited to road bikes and should be either riding a custom frame or a hybrid, or you are extremely lacking in flexibility. You could also be very new to road riding and did not expect a road bike to fit and feel as you're discovering.

If it's really bugging you then ignore your fitter's advice and just install a shorter stem. But a 9cm stem on a 56cm frame with a 6ft. rider is a queer setup to say the least. There's a lot more going on than the information you provided, I suspect.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

As others have said keep your saddle/BB relationship the same (if good). Adjust reach with:

1. Shorter stem or 
2. Perhaps a shorter reach bar. Do some research here. Many assume a bar is a bar is a bar. Not only do they vary with respect to reach but also drop...


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

What every one else said. But I'll add. If your saddle is all the way forward then I question that your posistion is as you say "close to perfect.
32" inseam at 6', I would say you have shorter legs for your height wich means you must have a longer torso. So if you indeed had reach issues you must then have short arms. 
Also, what is your bar height. Raising the bars also brings them closer to you. Are your bars too low for you making the reach even more?
I suspect like someone else said you are just not used to the posistion. At 6' (if indeed you really are) I cannot see you having to push your saddle all the way forward and run a 90 or even a 100 stem on a 56.
A pic would help. 
Note; getting a bike fit on the internet is not best but maybe it can help get you close or help you understand what is going on.


----------



## dcb (Jul 21, 2008)

Which seatpost are you using?

I'm about a 1/2" shorter than you and ride the same bike, same size. The stock seatpost is setback so you could just replace it with a zero setback model. 

I wonder about the stock stem that came with your bike as mine was 90mm stock. I had a Wobble Naught fit done for my bike and that's when I switched to a zero setback post and I also switched to a 110mm which kept my reach about the same.


----------



## scottma (May 18, 2012)

If you are feeling too stretched you could try bringing the bars up by flipping the stem or changing the shims. You could also put the brake levers farther up on the bars which obviously won't help in the drops.


----------



## perpetuum_mobile (Nov 30, 2012)

CAAD10 is a racing bike, it should not feel super comfortable. If the fitter said that you look good then you probably are good. Don't change the setup for a couple of weeks give it a chance. You will probably adopt to the aggressive geometry. You can also try some exercises off the bike to work on your core strength and flexibility!


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Something completely whack going on is all I will say until I see pics of you on the bike.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Thanks for all the replies.

I am indeed 6' even, and my Levis Im wearing have a 32" inseam. I havent measured my arm length but I can.

When test riding I tried a 54 frame and it felt pretty good reach wise but the seat was way back. I went with fitters advice for the 56 and it does feel much better.

I started with a 110 stem and couldnt reach the round part of the bars but I could ride the hoods. He switched me to 100mm stem and I can reach in all positions but my arms are completely straight, not the slight bend I see advertised as a good fit.

I will say I have my stem slammed and Im comfortable with the seat/bar drop. I am 46 years old and have been riding since I was 18. I agree im not as flexible as I once was, but my old steel Bianchi fit like a glove. On the CAAD I find myself sliding forward on the saddle often. I have leveled it and even tried tilting it up a couple degrees. I have reported this to my fitter and he moved the saddle forward all the way. Im still sliding forward. I tried flipping my stem which helped more, but im still sliding forward. Maybe i am a freak of nature but i cant seem to stop sliding forward. Im having little trouble keeping a 20+ mph pace for my normal hour ride, and Im climbing well. It is just that I find myself adjusting my seating position during my rides.

My fitter seems deadset against me trying a 90 stem and I dont want to buy one just to find out that wasnt the right thing to do. Maybe I just need to go with what I have as one poster said its a race bike and I want speed so deal with it.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I just measured and my reach is 25" from arm pit to folded fist, 32" exactly on the inseam. I will have my wife photograph me today.


----------



## JackDaniels (Oct 4, 2011)

Pretty rare that your pants inseam is your actual inseam. You should run through this to make sure you get proper measurements:

Fit Calculator - Competitive Cyclist


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Based on the link provided...here are my measurements:
Your Measurements
Gender	M
Inseam	33 in
Trunk	47 in
Forearm	14 in
Arm	28 in
Thigh 28 in
Lower Leg	25 in
Sternal Notch	61.5 in
Total Body Height 71.5 in


----------



## velodog (Sep 26, 2007)

rs_herhuth said:


> Thanks for all the replies.
> 
> I am indeed 6' even, and my Levis Im wearing have a 32" inseam. I havent measured my arm length but I can.
> 
> ...


Do you still have that Bianchi? If you do all you've got to do is measure the contact points and apply them to the CAAD. You know, seat height and setback to bottom bracket and handlebar drop and reach to saddle. 
What kind of experience does the fitter have? Has he worked with many 50yr olds or just kids half your age and less. Did he take any measurements from the Bianci as a starting point and ask what you liked or didn't about the way it fit?

If you can't bend your elbows you may need to raise your bars or use a shorter stem. Have you tried to flip the stem, or has that been done? Raising the bars will not only bring them up but closer also. If the reach was good on the 54 why did he suggest a 56 with 1.5cm longer TT? 
According to Cannondale the seat tube angle on both bikes is the same at 73.5 so both bikes put the saddle at the same place when adjusted to the same height.


----------



## Bill2 (Oct 14, 2007)

If you have spacers above the stem you can try unslamming it and see if that helps.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

No unfortunately the Bianchi is long gone. I did flip the stem, that helped a bit. I have one tiny spacer above the stem per Cannondale. Only he knows why he suggested the 56 over the 54...probally based on my height alone. I like the saddle bar drop, my back seems to have the flexibility for that, the bars feel a bit high with the stem flipped.


----------



## horvatht (Feb 27, 2012)

I too am 6 foot w 32 inseam. 
Over the last year of serious riding. My body has gone through a Medimorphosis. One of the issues I had was in fit to my bars like you I have gone to a 100 mm stem. 
But what really helped me go faster w higher cadence was stretching and planking excersices


----------



## dnice (Jul 12, 2012)

rs_herhuth said:


> Based on the link provided...here are my measurements:
> Your Measurements
> Gender	M
> Inseam	33 in
> ...


I think you have a typo on the trunk measurement. It can't possibly be 4 ft. long. Anyway, I am of similar size and they recommended a 58CM CAAD 10 when I test rode one. Each fitting I have ever had took 2 or three little adjustments with the bike fitter, usually after a week of riding I'd return and we'd make minute adjustments--stem height, stem length and even seat position were adjusted until we got it right. I would hope the bike shop would be reasonable enough to swap out the stems for you after you paid for a fitting. Mine did/does.


----------



## bigbill (Feb 15, 2005)

I don't understand your fit. I'm 73.5" tall and I ride a 58cm toptube with a 130mm stem with standard (non-ergo) bars. I'll be 48 in a few months so my flexibility isn't what it was in my 20's but it's ok. 

If you shorten your stem, you're shifting more weight on to your back wheel and affecting the balance of your bike. You can have aggresive geometry with a steep head tube angle, but a short stem negates much of that. You might consider a fitter not associated with your LBS, something is wrong.


----------



## InfiniteLoop (Mar 20, 2010)

If you have a good fitter, trust them and put in a bunch of miles (200 + ?) to get use to the proper fit and only then make some minor adjustments. This is assuming that efficiency and performance are somewhat important to you which I assume they are given your bike choice. A proper fit can feel very strange at first if you've not had one before, but you'll get use to it and like it. Also consider that stem length plays a role in handling, you don't want to go too short.

In your case though, based on what you've said, I would question if you have a good fitter. I'd find another who you can trust.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

JackDaniels said:


> Pretty rare that your pants inseam is your actual inseam. You should run through this to make sure you get proper measurements:


Almost impossible unless you either have no feet or like to wear your pants so that they cover your feet and drag on the floor.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Still waiting to see a pic of you on the bike, but something is completely whack with your fitting.
No way I would think you need a 54cm or a 90mm stem.
You are borderline between a 56 and 58cm in my mind but without seeing at least a pic of you and your setup it is hard to understand what is going on.


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

You have short legs for your height.
I have the same issue 5'8" with 30" legs.
I have always had to put my seat forward.
On my Tarmac 52cm I am using a zero setback seatpost, you may find that will help.
Did your fitter check your to see if your knees line up with your pedal spindle at 90 degrees?
This is something you can check your self with a plumb line dropped from the front of your knee.
I have used both 100 and 110mm stems. When I am seated the 110 feels better, but when I stand I feel too far forward and not balanced so I went back to the 100mm.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

jnbrown said:


> Did your fitter check your to see if your knees line up with your pedal spindle at 90 degrees?
> This is something you can check your self with a plumb line dropped from the front of your knee.


If he did, go and find a fitter who knows what he is doing.
Absolutely the most pointless "fit" measurement outside of being able to hide your hub with your handlebars.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Can the OP confirm whcih of these frames he has:
There is a 56cm ETT (which is what I thought he meant and a 56 measured (which has a 57.5cm ETT).
I would think that the 57.5cm ETT would be too long for you and you would maybe be better on the 56cm ETT.

View attachment 272726


----------



## DJT21 (May 22, 2011)

jnbrown said:


> You have short legs for your height.
> I have the same issue 5'8" with 30" legs.
> I have always had to put my seat forward.
> On my Tarmac 52cm I am using a zero setback seatpost, you may find that will help.
> ...


pointless advice


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I didnt know anything about an ett frame. All i know is that I have a 2012 Cannondale CAAD10 with the Ultegra build.

I thought I had the seat all the way forward on the setback post. I found I could move it forward another 6 mm. I went on a 40 mile ride today following that adjustment and it felt better. I could reach the bars in all positions even in the curve. I could still change positions on my saddle for climbs etc. i didnt have the problem sliding forward on the saddle, it was a pretty solid ride.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> I didnt know anything about an ett frame. All i know is that I have a 2012 Cannondale CAAD10 with the Ultegra build.
> 
> I thought I had the seat all the way forward on the setback post. I found I could move it forward another 6 mm. I went on a 40 mile ride today following that adjustment and it felt better. I could reach the bars in all positions even in the curve. I could still change positions on my saddle for climbs etc. i didnt have the problem sliding forward on the saddle, it was a pretty solid ride.


Measure your seat tube from the centre of your BB to the top of the top tube (as per the diagram above).
Post what that measurement is.
I am wondering whether you have been sold the 57.5cm ETT.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

I wonder why the sales people and / or fitter didn't recommend measuring the fit on your old bike before starting the selection and fit of the new frame? That's kind of a basic starting point.

I can't remember if I've read that you're using a set back or non set back seat post? Reiterating what the others have said about setting your fore-aft according to position over the pedals, you might be able to better achieve that with a non-setback post if you have short femurs.

I have kind of the opposite problem - I have long-ish legs for my height (5'8", 32.5+ inch inseam). A lot of that leg length is in the femur so I have to really get my saddle back to feel comfortable over the pedals, plus I tend to like a position a cm or so behind "KOPS"). So I have to find seat posts with maximum set back.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

jnbrown said:


> You have short legs for your height.
> I have the same issue 5'8" with 30" legs.
> I have always had to put my seat forward.
> On my Tarmac 52cm I am using a zero setback seatpost, you may find that will help.
> ...


as others have said, this is completely useless advice and anyone that knows how to fit bicycles properly doesn't use KOPS. 


rs_herhuth said:


> I didnt know anything about an ett frame. All i know is that I have a 2012 Cannondale CAAD10 with the Ultegra build.
> 
> I thought I had the seat all the way forward on the setback post. I found I could move it forward another 6 mm. I went on a 40 mile ride today following that adjustment and it felt better. I could reach the bars in all positions even in the curve. I could still change positions on my saddle for climbs etc. i didnt have the problem sliding forward on the saddle, it was a pretty solid ride.


ETT is 'effective top tube'...on frames with sloping top tubes (not horizontal...pretty much all frames these days are 'sloping' to some degree) the measurement that matters more for determining fit is the 'effective' top tube, not the actual. your frame will have an ETT measurement that will be somewhat greater than the ATT (actual top tube) which is measured along the center line of the top tube from the center of the head tube to the center of the seat tube. 
ETT is measured from the intersection of the head tube & top tube horizontally. usually that line will intersect w/ the seat post, not the seat tube, because most frames have sloping top tubes. look at a frame geometry chart and you'll understand. 
and get your bike fit properly...stop sliding the seat forward to make the reach better.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I come up with 55.88 based on measuring on the chart lines.


----------



## RoadBoy1 (Oct 1, 2011)

FTR said:


> If he did, go and find a fitter who knows what he is doing.
> Absolutely the most pointless "fit" measurement outside of being able to hide your hub with your handlebars.


You may want to check your information about "hide your hub with your handlebars". I think in many cases this is no longer relevant especially considering that conventional geometry is not as prevalent as it used to me.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

RoadBoy1 said:


> You may want to check your information about "hide your hub with your handlebars". I think in many cases this is no longer relevant especially considering that conventional geometry is not as prevalent as it used to me.


Yep.
Read my post again.
I said that KOPS is about as pointless as hiding your hub with your handlebar.
But thanks for posting.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> I come up with 55.88 based on measuring on the chart lines.


I am even more certain you have been sold the 57.5cm ETT and would suggest that this is why you are struggling to fit it.


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

cxwrench said:


> as others have said, this is completely useless advice and anyone that knows how to fit bicycles properly doesn't use KOPS.


To all - I am sorry for giving useless advice. I am just an old guy who has been riding bikes for 40 years and have never been to a professional fitter. Just made adjustments using some guidelines until it felt right. After reading online for other fit methods it seems people who write about this are selling a product and go into very complicated explanations that I am not sure I would ever understand or if it really works. I am not sure any if any of them agree with each other as well. So if there are some basic principles that are generally agreed on I would be interested in hearing them.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I appreciate your time. Im becoming more certain that I dont know what a proper position should feel like. 55 is pretty close to 56, closer than 57.5. The sticker on the bottom said it is a 56. I will try to get pics tommorrow...is there any in paticular I should get you? Should it be on the road or trainer?

Thanks again.


----------



## BamaBulldawg (Dec 16, 2012)

rs_herhuth said:


> I appreciate your time. Im becoming more certain that I dont know what a proper position should feel like. 55 is pretty close to 56, closer than 57.5. The sticker on the bottom said it is a 56. I will try to get pics tommorrow...is there any in paticular I should get you? Should it be on the road or trainer?
> 
> Thanks again.


Did you measure "A" or "B" on the chart at 55.88?


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I measured B position


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

jnbrown said:


> To all - I am sorry for giving useless advice. I am just an old guy who has been riding bikes for 40 years and have never been to a professional fitter. Just made adjustments using some guidelines until it felt right. After reading online for other fit methods it seems people who write about this are selling a product and go into very complicated explanations that I am not sure I would ever understand or if it really works. I am not sure any if any of them agree with each other as well. So if there are some basic principles that are generally agreed on I would be interested in hearing them.


BIKE FITTING PHILOSOPHY – BASIC PREMISE » Bike Fit » Featured » Steve Hogg's Bike Fitting Website
check out steve's site, he has a ton(literally...a metric sh*t ton) of good info about fitting...all of the whys and hows are covered in a series of articles including properly supporting the feet.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

cxwrench said:


> BIKE FITTING PHILOSOPHY – BASIC PREMISE » Bike Fit » Featured » Steve Hogg's Bike Fitting Website
> check out steve's site, he has a ton(literally...a metric sh*t ton) of good info about fitting...all of the whys and hows are covered in a series of articles including properly supporting the feet.


Exactly what I would recommend.


----------



## aureliajulia (May 25, 2009)

rs_herhuth said:


> My position is close to perfect except my reach. I have my seat forward all the way and I just feel a little stretched out. I think another centimeter would do it. I had my lbs fitter change the stem to a 100mm, but it still feels like the reach isnt right. He disagrees and says my position looks perfect. I went back in and he rotated my bars a bit which helped but it still feels like the reach is a bit long.
> 
> What should I do?
> 
> The bike is a new CAAD10 purchased at the lbs for racing and fast group rides. It is a 56 and I am 6' with a 32" inseam.



Had a different answer, but looks like you've corrected, now that I went back and reread.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

jnbrown said:


> To all - I am sorry for giving useless advice. I am just an old guy who has been riding bikes for 40 years and have never been to a professional fitter. Just made adjustments using some guidelines until it felt right. After reading online for other fit methods it seems people who write about this are selling a product and go into very complicated explanations that I am not sure I would ever understand or if it really works. I am not sure any if any of them agree with each other as well. So if there are some basic principles that are generally agreed on I would be interested in hearing them.


What I think is fairly agreed on is that the "KOPS" measurement is as good a starting point for setting saddle position as anything. It's easy to measure fairly objectively, and for a lot of people is a good enough saddle position. But it shouldn't be seen as a iron clad "rule" - just an objective measuring point, a starting point from which to change fit in a measurable way. I rode for a long time at KOPS and I didn't really have any problem. But I noticed I liked to sit way back in my saddle, especially when going uphill. So I experimented with moving my saddle back on the rails - using the KOPS as the baseline so I knew exactly where I was going and could go back if necessary.

I don't agree when people say KOPS is "wortless" etc. Just that people need to understand it's a good starting point, maybe perfect for some, but just a good way to measure saddle position.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

rs_herhuth said:


> I appreciate your time. Im becoming more certain that I dont know what a proper position should feel like. 55 is pretty close to 56, closer than 57.5. The sticker on the bottom said it is a 56. I will try to get pics tommorrow...is there any in paticular I should get you? Should it be on the road or trainer?
> 
> Thanks again.




I just don't know what the uncertainty is. Your sticker says it's a Cannondale CAAD10 56 frame. Look at the geometry chart on the Cannnondale website and it will clearly state what the Horizontal Top Tube (HTT) or Effecctive Top tube (ETT) - they are the same thing - is for that size CAAD10. No need to measure anything for yourself, unless for some reason you don't believe the Cannondale chart. I can't read the chart posted above and am too lazy to look on the Cannondale website.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

Camilo said:


> What I think is fairly agreed on is that the "KOPS" measurement is as good a starting point for setting saddle position as anything. It's easy to measure fairly objectively, and for a lot of people is a good enough saddle position. But it shouldn't be seen as a iron clad "rule" - just an objective measuring point, a starting point from which to change fit in a measurable way. I rode for a long time at KOPS and I didn't really have any problem. But I noticed I liked to sit way back in my saddle, especially when going uphill. So I experimented with moving my saddle back on the rails - using the KOPS as the baseline so I knew exactly where I was going and could go back if necessary.
> 
> I don't agree when people say KOPS is "wortless" etc. Just that people need to understand it's a good starting point, maybe perfect for some, but just a good way to measure saddle position.


you should read this as well, great info.
BIKE FITTING PHILOSOPHY – BASIC PREMISE » Bike Fit » Featured » Steve Hogg's Bike Fitting Website


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

I'm about 1" shorter than you with a .5" longer inseam and ride a CAAD 10.

If you like a race oriented position and have longer arms ... here is what my position looks like. 


I have a zero degree post ... Specialized Romin saddle that's about 1 cm from all the way forward on the rails
A slam that stem spacer (basically 1.5mm stack height)
A -20 degree Deda Pista 12 cm stem.
Cranks are 170 mm


It's pretty stretched out and low and is very race oriented ... but for me it's quite comfortable for 4+ hour rides and races. 

Position will vary for every rider and because one person says it looks good, doesn't mean it will feel good. Use the fitter as a starting point, communicate how it feels to them and if they can't make adjustments that give you a comfortable fit ... find a new fitter.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

cxwrench said:


> you should read this as well, great info.
> BIKE FITTING PHILOSOPHY – BASIC PREMISE » Bike Fit » Featured » Steve Hogg's Bike Fitting Website


Yea I have quite a while ago (haven't gone back to re-read it), but unless I'm mistaken I don't think it has anything to do with what I wrote. I actually had my greatest "aha" moment when I read Peter White's essay on fit.

But I think the bottom line is that the rails are there for a reason - adjust to preference.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Okay so you all have me thinking...KOPS is trash...so how do I get the right fore-aft position of my saddle? Im obviously probally too far forward since I have my seat all the way forward on the rails. I dont have any unusual pain anywhere, if I am to far forward what are the repurcussions of doing so?

BTW I read as many articles on the supplied site above before he wanted my money...Im more confused now than before.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

IMO the order to read the articles is:
Basic premise
Cleat position 
Seat height
Seat setback (will answer your question)

If you want to get fancy after that start reading the threads about arch support, wedges and shims.

However none of this is useful if your bike is way too big.


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

You have a Caad 10 size 56. The chart clearly states a 56 has a "horizontal top tube" measurement of 56 cm. For a guy 6' I can't see that your bike is too big unless you have T rex arms or a stumpy torso. But if your inseam is 33 then that couldn't be the case. You have to be getting your height from somewhere.


----------



## carlislegeorge (Mar 28, 2004)

I am almost exactly the same proportions as the OP. I ride bikes with effective top tube as close to 56 as i can, use a 110 stem, and use a setback seatpost. Works for me.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

carlislegeorge said:


> I am almost exactly the same proportions as the OP. I ride bikes with effective top tube as close to 56 as i can, use a 110 stem, and use a setback seatpost. *Works for me.*


And yet the reason it works for you and not another is beyond cyber analysis. Just too many unknown variables. Too much info left out. The OP really needs to find a fitter with a proven track record and seek help in person. For all we know his/her seat post is on backwards.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

No the seatpost is facing the right direction...I checked that. But thank you for that valuable input. I thought the guy that fit me was reputable.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> No the seatpost is facing the right direction...I checked that. But thank you for that valuable input. I thought the guy that fit me was reputable.


Have you taken that picture yet?
Side on.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

What pictures do you want? Road or trainer? Any particular pedal orientation? How do I get them to you?


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

You on the trainer would be good, foot closest to the camera down.
Load them onto the forum using the attachment option from Advanced Reply.


----------



## woodys737 (Dec 31, 2005)

rs_herhuth said:


> No the seatpost is facing the right direction...I checked that. But thank you for that valuable input. I thought the guy that fit me was reputable.


There are seat post that can be reversed and still remain level which would affect the fore/aft position by cm's. If your fitter is reputable why are you trying to figure it out here?


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

T K said:


> But if your inseam is 33 then that couldn't be the case. You have to be getting your height from somewhere.


Really long neck?


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

your saddle position should be set without you ever touching the handlebars. Saddle position is determined by the knee over the pedal exle with a plumb bob. Once that is set adjust reach with the stem length


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

atpjunkie said:


> Saddle position is determined by the knee over the pedal exle with a plumb bob.


Sad that a member with as many posts as you would provide such terrible advice.


----------



## Camilo (Jun 23, 2007)

atpjunkie said:


> your saddle position should be set without you ever touching the handlebars. Saddle position is determined by the knee over the pedal exle with a plumb bob. Once that is set adjust reach with the stem length


I don't always read entire threads before posting, but you probably should have. This point has been debated (and debunked) already.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I promise pics today...but After I viewed the first round of pics I realized quite a bit.

First off I repositioned my cleats to position 1 in the article link posted. This moved my cleats back about 10mm. That felt more natural. Then I did the no arm test and failed miserably...my seat was too far forward, which explained why I was in such an upright position hence the reach issue. After several adjustments I got that right...it felt much better, now my seat is back 20mm and my sit bones are right where they should be on the seat. The next issue was too much pressure on my sensitive area. After several minor adjustments to the seat angle I was able to allieviate that problem...leveling that seat is hard because it curves alot from back to front. That felt so good after 10 minutes on the trainer I decided to flip the stem back to the aggressive position. It just felt right.

I need to do some rides to get used of the setup, but gone is the discomfort I felt just feeling like something wasnt right.

I will get some pics up in a bit to see what you have to say.

Thanks for all the helpful advice!


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

*OrigInal setup*

This is my initial position


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

This is my position following the chAnges listed above.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

As others have said ... KOP is a general starting point. 

What seems to be fairly normal is this:

*Short Femurs* - When people have shorter femurs they tend to be a bit forward of KOP. It's easier to spin and put out power with your quads ... which also uses your glutes and hamstrings less.

*Long Femurs* - When people have longer femurs they tend to be a bit behind KOP. This uses your hamstrings and glutes more than your quads.

If you are somewhere in-between ... you will be closer to KOP.

It's a matter of figuring out what works for you and adjusting to make it work. It can take time if you do it on your own ... and even with the use of a fitter, can take time. Everybody is different and our asymmetrical bodies don't help things much.


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

FTR said:


> Sad that a member with as many posts as you would provide such terrible advice.


sorry I'm a pretty old school in such matters. Still. if one resolves reach issues by moving forward in regards to crank position, one typically puts too much weight forward (screwing up bike balance) and messing with their pedaling action by putting themselves too far forward in regards to the BB.

Camilo, yes I skipped ahead, should have read the whole thread and I should have added it is only a good starting point. But I have seen too many people resolving poorly fitting bicycles with terrible saddle adjustments


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

atpjunkie said:


> sorry I'm a pretty old school in such matters. Still. if one resolves reach issues by moving forward in regards to crank position, one typically puts too much weight forward (screwing up bike balance) and messing with their pedaling action by putting themselves too far forward in regards to the BB.
> 
> Camilo, yes I skipped ahead, should have read the whole thread and I should have added it is only a good starting point. But I have seen too many people resolving poorly fitting bicycles with terrible saddle adjustments


no one said that the OP should move his saddle forward to make the bars closer, in fact the proper advice was given multiple times. we're just saying that KOPS is considered pretty much useless at this point.


----------



## perpetuum_mobile (Nov 30, 2012)

This thread is going nowhere. I will try to put it mildly: we have a slightly unfit person on a racing bike with aggressive geometry. Of course it is going to feel very uncomfortable. It is not the fault of fitter and it is not an issue of wrong frame size.

I would suggest riding a lot for the next year and getting into a good shape. Then you can start thinking about the best position and proper fit. Don't waste time and money on it right now. Probably it would even be a good idea to log some serious miles on a more relaxed bike and setup and then come back to CAAD10.

I am not trying to put rs_herhuth down. Don't hate me for what I wrote. You are just approaching the problem from the wrong side.


----------



## forge55b (Jan 30, 2011)

I completely agree with perpetuum. The bike seems to be fit well enough to get into cycling and the more you ride, the more your fit will likely evolve as you gain flexibility, core strength, etc.

I would just ride on the hoods for now. Not riding on the drops isn't some kind of taboo for the cycling world.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

A little harsh, but okay. i posted pics of me on the trainer...Im trying to get feedback on that so I can *learn* to ride in the correct position. I am fine with agressive positioning but I want to know what that feels like and then I will put in the miles correctly.


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

I'm certainly no expert but the trainer pictures look like the set up is pretty good for your height to me - not too stretched and appropriately low. You could get a little lower with some more bend in the arms perhaps if you could do that comfortably. What's it feel like on the hoods?


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Wookiebiker said:


> As others have said ... KOP is a general starting point.
> 
> What seems to be fairly normal is this:
> 
> ...


Or as Hogg says, if you are average. And in his opinion nobody is average.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Srode said:


> I'm certainly no expert but the trainer pictures look like the set up is pretty good for your height to me - not too stretched and appropriately low. You could get a little lower with some more bend in the arms perhaps if you could do that comfortably. What's it feel like on the hoods?


Feels good in the hoods too, i noticed a more pronounced ben in my elbows. My biggest problems was pressure in my crotch area, that was keeping me too upright. I think I fixed that now though...will know for sure after a 40 mi ride.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> This is my position following the chAnges listed above.


Looks much better.
Your first pics sho you were too far forward which is evidenced to me by the position of your arms where they are braced holding you up versus slightly bent in the updated pictures.
Did you adjust your set height first using Hogg's method?


----------



## Srode (Aug 19, 2012)

rs_herhuth said:


> My biggest problems was pressure in my crotch area, that was keeping me too upright. I think I fixed that now though...will know for sure after a 40 mi ride.


I had the same problem, and ended up moving to an anatomically correct saddle which helped a bunch removing pressure from the taint etc. Hopefully you won't need one, but if you do there's plenty available. Specialized Romin Evo Comp Gel is what I ended up getting. Selle SMP looks to be a good choice too but there weren't any for me to demo and they were more $


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

FTR said:


> Looks much better.
> Your first pics sho you were too far forward which is evidenced to me by the position of your arms where they are braced holding you up versus slightly bent in the updated pictures.
> Did you adjust your set height first using Hogg's method?


Yes I followed them in the order you suggested...why does the seat height look wrong?


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

perpetuum_mobile said:


> I would suggest riding a lot for the next year and getting into a good shape. Then you can start thinking about the best position and proper fit. Don't waste time and money on it right now. Probably it would even be a good idea to log some serious miles on a more relaxed bike and setup and then come back to CAAD10.
> 
> I am not trying to put rs_herhuth down. Don't hate me for what I wrote. You are just approaching the problem from the wrong side.


And just how do you think he is going to "ride lots" in a completely funked up position?


----------



## T K (Feb 11, 2009)

Ok, your bike does not look too big. Your fit looks pretty good. I think what is going on here is that you have a bit too much weight in the waist not allowing you to get low enough. I've been there too so I know what it feels like. As you lose some weight you will notice yourself getting lower with ease. I personally think you should raise your bars a bit to get more comfortable. Lower them as you get more fit. If you are more comfortable on your bike you will do more miles and get fitter faster.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> Yes I followed them in the order you suggested...why does the seat height look wrong?


Nope, just checking is all.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

That jersey is actully an xl i bought before I lost 60lbs. I assure you its baggyness you are seeing, my stomach is almost flat now...the pictures really helped, I will focus on getting a little lower.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> That jersey is actully an xl i bought before I lost 60lbs. I assure you its baggyness you are seeing, my stomach is almost flat now...the pictures really helped, I will focus on getting a little lower.


You still have the 100mm stem on?
Swap it out for a 110mm which will stretch you out a little further.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I had the fitter swap the 110 for the 100 so I dont have it any more. Should I set back the seat a bit more?


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

rs_herhuth said:


> I had the fitter swap the 110 for the 100 so I dont have it any more. Should I set back the seat a bit more?


Nope.
Borrow a 110mm and try it.
Do not adjust for reach via setback. They are 2 different things.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

rs_herhuth said:


> I had the fitter swap the 110 for the 100 so I dont have it any more. Should I set back the seat a bit more?


you still are missing the point people have been making all along...do not adjust the saddle position to make up for an issue w/ the reach. 
you need to make those adjustments w/ the stem length. 
do
not 
move 
saddle
to 
increase/decrease
reach. 
saddle position is independent of reach.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

I thought I remembered reading that somewhere!


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Anyone have a 110mm stem I can borrow?


----------



## MGS9500 (Aug 19, 2004)

*Take it for a ride*

I love this thread and have been following it without feeling the need to make any comments. But this thread has progressed to the point that I feel like putting in my two cents.

I've been riding for over 40 years... and yes, I started amateur racing on a Bianchi steel framed cottered crank and bought my first decent bike as a Frejus Legnano with Reynolds 531 frame and a Regina rear cluster that was five speed and 11-23. And unbelievably, the front was a 52/49. 

So, for all you old timers, I now ride a Custom Serotta Ottrott, a Colnago and a Pinarello. And, at the age of 59 i have determined the following.

Bike set up is nice with someone who can fit the frame, but no one can tell you how it feels. You have to ride the bike. 

I recall Lemond set his seat WAY back, well behind the standard COPS and said it improved his comfort. His book notes that the COPS is a start, but everyone is different.

Also, all the TRI riders set the seat forward to improve power. They use a post with no set back and reverse the post to allow my power. 

And, as one gets older and less flexible, a higher headtube height is nice, so a bigger frame gets rid of the problem of 5 cm of spacers.

That being said, both pictures look ok. No one is going to be able to tell you what fits. When I set up a new frame, I get it set to my basic set up and go riding with an allen wrench. I mark the seat position and slowly adjust fore and aft till I like who my knees feel. 

I have three stems, a cheap investment. I have a 100mm, 110mm and 120mm and try changing stem heights and length till they match my flexibility.

So, what I have learned and would recommend is to ride the bike. A trainer will never duplicate the on the road feel. 

I agree with almost everything that has been said.. however, every body is different with two many variables to consider including flexibility, leg length, foot pronation and upper torso/abdominal strength. 

I also run/jog and found that picking a running shoe cannot be done by reading other opinions. You just have to put the shoe on and run. 

The same with bikes...you can dial in some of the numbers. Seat height to crank is standard. The total top tube length should not change with respect to seat to stem. However, no one can or should tell you if the seat should be forward or the stem shorter. Handlebar height, drop and bar reach does change from bike to bike and with age. Trial and error is the key. What feels good is what is good.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

MGS9500 said:


> The total top tube length should not change with respect to seat to stem.


Not true unless you use an identical saddles on every bike.
I would also think that seat tube and head tube angles will impact on this.


----------



## MGS9500 (Aug 19, 2004)

FTR said:


> Not true unless you use an identical saddles on every bike.
> I would also think that seat tube and head tube angles will impact on this.


Ok, you're right to an extent. It was a generalization and one should never be dogmatic.

And changing seat tube angle and raising the stem may effectively shorten or lengthen the seat to stem reach....as will different seat effect how you settle in on the bike. However, it is, as I said a good starting point if one has a bike that has been dialed in and is comfortable.

And once I find a comfortable saddle I stick with it. I use the same saddle on all of my bikes.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Not only that but the human body is very adaptable and you can pretty much change every setting on the bike and it might feel good one day but not the next. There are too many factors to consider and with all of the scientific data collected on what works and what doesn't can help ensure you are putting the power to the ground without injury.

Some things that initially feel akward, with a little adaption become second nature and feel better in the long run.

I want to go fast on group rides and local races. I had a simple problem really, I couldn't get comfortable on my bike. Some generous readers offered up a website that took some of the black magic out of dialing in the correct setup, what it should feel like, and how they came to that line of thinking. Once I read that, and studied the photos my wife took of me I could see the problem I was trying to solve wasn't the real issue.

I appreciate that you have gained a wealth of experience in what you believe works for you. I on the other hand want to ride and not spend countless hours tweaking. Many of the changes you make affect which muscle groups are called into action at different levels. So simply making one change might feel better initially, wont feel so great at 25 miles...or at least until the new muscle groups develop.

I believe in eliminating variables. Get the bike setup correctly so I can focus on my intervals, fast rides, climbs...all the things that we all enjoy.


----------



## cxwrench (Nov 9, 2004)

MGS9500 said:


> I recall Lemond set his seat WAY back, well behind the standard COPS and said it improved his comfort. His book notes that the COPS is a start, but everyone is different.
> 
> Also, all the TRI riders set the seat forward to improve power. They use a post with no set back and reverse the post to allow my power.
> 
> ...


i agree w/ some of the things you've posted, but some are a little off.
firstly, it's KOPS...KNEE over pedal spindle. the way bike fit is approached has changed a bit since Lemonds days. 


TT/Tri fits are 'forward' to improve power, yes. but also to improve aerodynamics, most importantly. no one really 'reverses' seat posts, TT/Tri bikes are designed w/ this position in mind so that isn't necessary. nor would it be possible as most posts are aero section and can't physically be 'reversed'. 

and not a 'bigger' frame as that would increase reach, but a taller head tube.


----------



## MGS9500 (Aug 19, 2004)

cxwrench said:


> i agree w/ some of the things you've posted, but some are a little off.
> firstly, it's KOPS...KNEE over pedal spindle. the way bike fit is approached has changed a bit since Lemonds days.
> 
> 
> ...


Two quick notes,
1.) yes, I know it KOPS. A mind cloud or mental flop sometimes get in the way.
2.) I was looking at the pictures and appreciated that you are much more comfortable on the bike with the changes. My only concern/question is that it appears your front wheel is lower than the rear. The top tube appears parallel to the back door. And the top tube usually has a slope meaning the front wheel may be sitting lower than the rear. I know this is a trainer, but if the front wheel is lower, this changes how you sit on the bike and will change your perceived comfort.

so, essentially, is it an illusion or is the front wheel slightly lower?

And, good riding. A new bike and new set up is always a pleasure.


----------



## rs_herhuth (Aug 17, 2009)

Its an illusion from the camera angle...I measured it to double check.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

Steve Hogg says that the KOPS fit depends on the orientation of the rider and pedal system with respect to gravity, and that the geometry of recumbents shows that this principle is worthless. What he neglect to point out is that the performance benefits of a recumbent are principally the result of lower wind resistance, similar to comparing a conventional road bike to a TT machine. If you put an upright road bike up against a recumbent in any situation where wind resistance is a minimal factor, such as on a long climb, the recumbent is at a serious disadvantage. To no small degree this is because the recumbent rider can't use gravity to his advantage in pedaling the way the upright pedaler can. So KOPS may not be the best answer in many cases, but it's not trash and for most riders it's a good starting point, within tweaking distance of what's optimal. 

You need to listen to your body and get all of the aspects of your posture and mechanics working together to make a good fit. I just improvised a plumb bob and checked my own fit on my road bike that fits me very comfortably and that I've got around 14K miles on, and which has never seen a pro fitter or been measured for seat position or evaluated in any way other than by my own experience and tweaking to the optimal position and comfort, and it's very close to KOPS. My posture is a little longer and lower than the norm, or what a bike shop would probably set me up with, but I put in 250 miles a week every week and I'd be the first to know if my fit was wrong.


----------



## Bizman (Apr 27, 2011)

Can someone's explain the plumb bob method for setting your seat position or a website that does, thanks!


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

How would you know if it is wrong compared to something better if you dont change it and try?
And are you sure you even used your plumb bob correctly off the correct point on your knee?
And what if you moved your cleats back or forward?
Your position in relation to KOPS would change.
You would also likely need to move your saddle down.
Does this mean you would change something just to achieve KOPS again?
I can tell you from experience that lots of things you change will have an impact on other parts of your position and none of these are dependant upon you achieving KOPS.

And Recumbants aren't bikes.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Bizman said:


> Can someone's explain the plumb bob method for setting your seat position or a website that does, thanks!


Basically sit on your bike with your pedals at the 9 and 3 o'clock position.
Drop plumb bob from your forward knee.
If the string passes through your pedal axle then apparently your saddle is somehow magically at the correct height and setback.
Why do you want it?
It is a nonsense.


----------



## Bizman (Apr 27, 2011)

FTR said:


> Basically sit on your bike with your pedals at the 9 and 3 o'clock position.
> Drop plumb bob from your forward knee.
> If the string passes through your pedal axle then apparently your saddle is somehow magically at the correct height and setback.
> Why do you want it?
> It is a nonsense.


Hey thanks FTR I just wanted to understand it a little better. When I was fit for my bikes (both mountain and road) this method was used but it was over a year ago for one and 2 years for the other and at the time didn't really know what was going on. I actually stand up while riding my bikes most of the time so I am not sure how critical it is for me. When I do sit on the rare occasions I feel comfortable. I have moved my seats and post height some after the fittings focusing more on a comfortable standing position.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Bizman said:


> Hey thanks FTR I just wanted to understand it a little better. When I was fit for my bikes (both mountain and road) this method was used but it was over a year ago for one and 2 years for the other and at the time didn't really know what was going on. I actually stand up while riding my bikes most of the time so I am not sure how critical it is for me. When I do sit on the rare occasions I feel comfortable. I have moved my seats and post height some after the fittings focusing more on a comfortable standing position.


Go back and find the Steve Hogg link that CXwrench posted and then read the threads I recommended from it.
I am not understanding.
You ride around standing up all the time?


----------



## Bizman (Apr 27, 2011)

FTR said:


> Go back and find the Steve Hogg link that CXwrench posted and then read the threads I recommended from it.
> I am not understanding.
> You ride around standing up all the time?


I did read the article and it was way over my head, I was more confused and it seemed so complex with big words and things that I had no idea what he was talking about? Maybe just me but I couldn't keep interested in it? I am not trying to be ignorant about it and there may be a lot of good info there, I just couldn't see it?

Yes I stand up most all the time both mountain and road. With all due respect please don't try and tell this is wrong and I won't try to tell you or anyone it is right, it is what I do and I won't be changing anytime soon or possibly ever, regardless of what anyone has to say about it. I have been doing it on mountain bikes for years and carried it over to my road bike with great success for me and my riding style. I like to stand, it is normal for me, sitting isn't.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Bizman said:


> I did read the article and it was way over my head, I was more confused and it seemed so complex with big words and things that I had no idea what he was talking about? Maybe just me but I couldn't keep interested in it? I am not trying to be ignorant about it and there may be a lot of good info there, I just couldn't see it?
> 
> Yes I stand up most all the time both mountain and road. With all due respect please don't try and tell this is wrong and I won't try to tell you or anyone it is right, it is what I do and I won't be changing anytime soon or possibly ever, regardless of what anyone has to say about it. I have been doing it on mountain bikes for years and carried it over to my road bike with great success for me and my riding style. I like to stand, it is normal for me, sitting isn't.


OK.
No sense you reading anything then, as if you dont plan to change there is no point.


----------



## camping biker (Dec 22, 2011)

I think it has something to do with the phenomenon of bikes not being exact matches for others in their size (like blue jeans and shoes), and a strong factor in the bike fit is the position/rotation of the hips that is comfortable to the rider. 

I'm 5'11, tall and lean, and I can't stand being in the superman position to ride a bike. I like 52 and 54cm frames with drop bars. I don't like long stems (over 90mm) either. To me, they make steering sluggish and unnatural. 






bigbill said:


> I don't understand your fit. I'm 73.5" tall and I ride a 58cm toptube with a 130mm stem with standard (non-ergo) bars. I'll be 48 in a few months so my flexibility isn't what it was in my 20's but it's ok.
> 
> If you shorten your stem, you're shifting more weight on to your back wheel and affecting the balance of your bike. You can have aggresive geometry with a steep head tube angle, but a short stem negates much of that. You might consider a fitter not associated with your LBS, something is wrong.


----------



## camping biker (Dec 22, 2011)

If you can find a shop that has a stationary test bike, that might help you a lot. It's not a real bike, but it adjusts a dozen different ways, and should give you a benchmark for what real bike to start with. 








https://highergearchicago.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Calfee-sizer1-300x237.jpg


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

FTR said:


> How would you know if it is wrong compared to something better if you dont change it and try?
> And are you sure you even used your plumb bob correctly off the correct point on your knee?
> And what if you moved your cleats back or forward?
> Your position in relation to KOPS would change.
> ...


I've been cycling for 35 years. I've tried every variation of position on the bike you can imagine, and I have indeed thought of moving my cleats around. I still tinker with my fit as conditions change or the mood strikes. At the moment my saddle is a few mm low, and I may get around to changing it today. 

FWIW moving your cleats doesn't in itself change the relationship of knee to pedal. It changes other things.


----------



## FTR (Sep 20, 2006)

Fireform said:


> I've been cycling for 35 years. I've tried every variation of position on the bike you can imagine, and I have indeed thought of moving my cleats around. I still tinker with my fit as conditions change or the mood strikes. At the moment my saddle is a few mm low, and I may get around to changing it today.
> 
> FWIW moving your cleats doesn't in itself change the relationship of knee to pedal. It changes other things.


You and I will have to agree to disagree then but IMO if you are going to move one of your fixed contact points (cleats) forward or back then the pivot points (ankles and to a greater extent knees) are going to have to move in relation to that. Given that the cleat is attached over the pedal spindle, this means that the knee position is going to move in relation to this point and will not necessarily be over the pedal spindle.

This is only true if you only move the cleat position and nothing else. However this will also cause you to have to reach further on your pedal stroke and will probably see you need to lower your saddle.


----------



## jnbrown (Dec 9, 2009)

I have been doing some reading on Steve Hogg's site and I think I have been there before. I think the part on saddle height makes sense. Yesterday I tried raising my saddle 3mm and it did feel awkward riding uphill, so I put it back. I think that tells me I pretty much had it right to begin with. He seems to put a lot of importance into arch support and wedging. I have low arches and my feet have never been able to tolerate much of any kind of arch support. I am just using the insoles that came with my S-Works shoes. They seem decent but probably not optimal. I am hesitant to spend much money on trying anything else because it hasn't worked for me. I do not have any leg injuries or biomechanical issues causing a problem so I am thinking I should leave it alone. I have had the same problem with running shoes, I can't use anything with too high or narrow arch. Right now I am using Adidas Boston 2.


----------



## Fireform (Dec 15, 2005)

FTR said:


> You and I will have to agree to disagree then but IMO if you are going to move one of your fixed contact points (cleats) forward or back then the pivot points (ankles and to a greater extent knees) are going to have to move in relation to that. Given that the cleat is attached over the pedal spindle, this means that the knee position is going to move in relation to this point and will not necessarily be over the pedal spindle.
> 
> This is only true if you only move the cleat position and nothing else. However this will also cause you to have to reach further on your pedal stroke and will probably see you need to lower your saddle.


We dont disagree--we're talking about slightly different things. Unless moving your cleat changes the length of your femur or the shape of your pelvis to the extent that you belong further forward or back on the saddle, moving the cleat alone (and i did specify that condition) has no effect on the relationship of knee to pedal spindle. It does change the effective saddle height by moving your foot relative to the pedal, and you may well change your saddle height to compensate which will affect the position of your saddle slightly wrt the pedal. But moving your cleat alone doesn't move your hip joint.


----------

