# Need a Good Seatpost With At Least 40mm of Setback...



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Hi all, ima goin' a seatpost shoppin'... a'gin... and it won't be easy. 

My prob? I have very long thighs for my leg length (which is short... go figure). 

On my old Bridgestone road bike with a 74 degree seat tube angle, I had to use a freaky-weird special seatpost with super setback, the venerable (and quite heavy) SR MTE-100:













On my new bike, a LeMond Nev City I'm fixing up a bit, I figured the 73 degree STA would offer a little relief, but, noooo.... standard setback seatposts are a definite no-go. 

Part of the prob is my Selle San Marco Rolls saddle, which doesn't have a lot of fore-aft travel in the rails, but even with a more 'mod-ren' saddle, it'd still be a prob.

Upshot, I'm needing the following in my new seatpost:

1) At least 35-40mm of setback

2) The ability to deal with a Clydesdale like moi (~ 240 lbs)

3) A sleek seat-rail clamp that won't interfere with me getting every iota of fore-aft travel (the stock seatpost actually has a blocky clamp that prevents full slide-back– how stoooopid)

4) Preferably, a non-outrageous price (will go up to $150 if there's no other option, but something cheaper is preferred)

5) Preferably, alloy (but I'll try carbon if the post/company has a good track record)

6) Preferably, non-hideous. 

7) 27.2 mm size.


Any and all advice is much appreciated. :thumbsup: 


...


----------



## HammerTime-TheOriginal (Mar 29, 2006)

Look Ergopost 4
http://cgi.ebay.com/LOOK-Carbon-Erg...yZ106952QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem is a reputable ebay dealer: $158.00 with shipping. Or about $250 if you buy from a regular dealer in U.S. The weight is really more than the Look advertised 180g. Setback is adjustable to a little more than 40 mm.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*thoughts...*

Long femurs do not necessarily require an extreme setback. The idea that KOP must be maintained or in someway guarantees better power output is unproven.

If you move the saddle too far back, you can foul up the handling of the bike, but won't notice it unless you do some critical high speed cornering, where a proper amount of weight on the front wheel is needed.

If you get a post like the FSA K-force with largest setback and move the saddle nearly all the way back, that should be more setback than anybody needs.

I keep my saddle far enough back to produce a good weight balance relative to the saddle, so I have little weight on my hands. That allows me to tolerate a large 12cm drop from the saddle to the bars. More setback would not serve any purpose. I get enough setback with a long railed saddle nearly all the way back with a 25mm setback post, even on a frame with a 74.5 degree STA.


----------



## barry1021 (Nov 27, 2005)

Nitto Wayback is an alternative. They are backordered at Rivendell, you can order one there. Not sure it meets all you requirements but it is abetter looking alternative to what you have.....


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

C-40 said:


> Long femurs do not necessarily require an extreme setback. The idea that KOP must be maintained or in someway guarantees better power output is unproven.


Oh, I'm even further back than KOPS.  

I did a _lotttt_ of experimentation with saddle setback prior to my long layoff, and trust me, having the saddle nose around 8 to 8.5cm behind the BB spindle is what works best for me, both power-wise and pedaling-wise. It was something arrived at 'out in the field', not because it was what someone told me to do.

Thanks for the rec of the FSA K-Force. 

...


----------



## Stogaguy (Feb 11, 2006)

*Oval Concepts*

I have the same set of fit issues and used the same old school post as you for a while. What diameter post do you need? If you need 27.2mm, this might be an option for you:
R910 Aergo Carbon Road Post
http://www.ovalconcepts.com/productsGenereDett.php?idGenere=12&idCat=2
If you need a different size, I am sorry but I do not have a recommendation. If you find something in 26.8 mm, let me know as I would definitely be interested.

The real fix for your fit issues is a custom frame with a slack seat angle. C-40 raises a valid point regarding weight distribution and handling. Going custom with an experienced builder would address this concern as well.

Happy Hunting...


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*only 80mm??*

With a saddle height of 74cm, a STA of 74.5 degrees and only a 25mm setback post, my saddle is about 70mm behind the BB.

Do you have a really short saddle height? A 73 degree STA would make my setup about 90mm.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

C-40 said:


> With a saddle height of 74cm, a STA of 74.5 degrees and only a 25mm setback post, my saddle is about 70mm behind the BB.
> 
> Do you have a really short saddle height? A 73 degree STA would make my setup about 90mm.


Not too short... my saddle height is 72.5cm.

As I said earlier, part of the problem is the San Marco Rolls saddle... shortish rails/not as much fore-aft adjustment, and the rails are _inside_ the fold of the saddle shell... which means that a blocky seatpost clamp (which the stock post has) will prevent one from sliding the seat all the way back. :sad:

Hence one of my requirements: "Seatpost with a sleek rail clamp that won't interfere..." :yesnod:

...


----------



## capt_phun (Jun 14, 2004)

FSA K-Force 37mm setback post should be more than plenty, plus it offers the benefit of a two bolt post for infinite adjustment, ala Thomson. DONE.


----------



## C-40 (Feb 4, 2004)

*saddle choice....*

You might want to give the Fizik Gobi a try. It's got a rounded shape that's a lot different than most road saddles and it's got long rails. The clamp on my FSA post causes no problem, even with the saddle nearly all the way back. 

You can often find the Gobi with steel rails cheap on E-bay.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

capt_phun said:


> FSA K-Force 37mm setback post should be more than plenty, plus it offers the benefit of a two bolt post for infinite adjustment, ala Thomson. DONE.


On FSA's site, regarding the K-Force, it says, "We offer three setback options, from zero to 32mm."

And yet one of the model numbers is 'SB37'. Odd.  

...


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

FSA SL220 (aluminium) post, assuming 27.2mm diameter works with you. This post actually provides a touch more seat-back that K-Force Lite 32mm version even though they are both listed as having same set-back. I have both of those posts btw.
If you want to go further back, mount Selle SMP saddle on that FSA post, this saddle has very long rails (~10cm, 100mm) and due to its shape allows you to sit further back (effectively further back). But I agree with C-40, are you sure you need that much setback? The FSA post will get you to ~70-71 STA on 74STA frame already and with Selle SMP back on rails you have ~69STA. Any further back and you might as well ride recumbent!!! 8^)


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

acid_rider said:


> FSA SL220 (aluminium) post, assuming 27.2mm diameter works with you. This post actually provides a touch more seat-back than K-Force Lite 32mm version even though they are both listed as having same set-back. I have both of those posts btw.
> 
> If you want to go further back, mount Selle SMP saddle on that FSA post, this saddle has very long rails (~10cm, 100mm) and due to its shape allows you to sit further back (effectively further back). But I agree with C-40, are you sure you need that much setback? The FSA post will get you to ~70-71 STA on 74STA frame already and with Selle SMP back on rails you have ~69STA. Any further back and you might as well ride recumbent!!! 8^)


Acid, yes, 27.2 is what I'm looking for. Should've mentioned that in the OP, will edit it.

Looking at FSA's site, doesn't seem like they make the SL 220 anymore, though I'm sure I can still find it somewhere. 

Not sure about going to a Selle SMP saddle... I really like my Rolls. But, we'll see.

Far as an FSA post getting me to the equiv of a 70-71 degree STA, well, that's only if you're comparing to a zero offset post. From what I can tell, 20mm offset is still considered medium setback. So, it's more like going to a 72 STA equivalent. 

And yeah, I really do need to sit about that far back.  

...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Well, looks like these are the contenders:

*FSA K-Force
Oval Concepts Aergo
Look Ergopost
Nitto Wayback
FSA SL-220* (if I can find one)


The list is shorter, more expensive, and more carbon than I expected. But hey, that's the industry these days, I guess.

One thing that raised an alarm bell is that I noticed from pics that the Oval Concepts post seems to _taper_ along its shaft for a significant part of its length, limiting the range of saddle height adjustment you can get with it.

I wonder if any of the other posts listed do that. It's really hard to find an online photo of a K-Force head-on, for some reason... hmm.

Ah well. Off to the LBSes soon! :thumbsup:

...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Aaaaand, the winnah is...

*FSA SL-220!!!*

Ran into a shop that actually had one left, in stock. The LBS guy who sold it to me was a bit rueful, saying that he had looked at it 'just last week' and had thought about getting it for himself, since the post replacing it didn't have near as much setback.

Alloy, $70, shaft doesn't taper (so you have full height adjustability)... wot's not to like? :yesnod:

Many thanks to AcidRider and everyone else... now let's see how it works.

...


----------



## Stogaguy (Feb 11, 2006)

*Congratulations!*

Congratulations on that find, I have two SL-220s. They are two of my three bikes. If it was made in 26.8 it would be three of three. I was a bit PO'd when FSA stopped making them. The post is a great option if you need the set back on a frame that takes a 27.2 mm post. IMHO, from an ease and percision of adjustment perspective, the FSA 2-bolt clamp is the absolute best I have ever ridden


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Stogaguy said:


> I was a bit PO'd when FSA stopped making them.


Yeah, you are so right. Seems like many posts are going towards zero offset for some silly reason... it's 'whats in' at the moment.

A very retarded development for those of us with long thighs. 




> IMHO, from an ease and percision of adjustment perspective, the FSA 2-bolt clamp is the absolute best I have ever ridden


Really? 'Cuz the one downer I'm finding with the post is the 2-bolt system makes adjustment a bit of a pain in the ass (for me). 

Is there some secret I'm missing? :idea: 

And, ok, there's another minus, but it's minor and easily correctable– the flashy graphics and bright red seatpost cap are kinda tacky. But electrical tape covers the graphics, and I'm gonna rattle-can the seatpost cap either black or navy tomorrow. 

On the plus side, yep, it looks like I can now set up my proper pedaling position. Which is 98% of what's important in a seatpost anyway.

...


----------



## Stogaguy (Feb 11, 2006)

*FSA clamp setup tips*

It is easiest to:

Mount the post on the saddle with the saddle on the work bench, rails facing up. Dial-in your approximate adjustment by eyeball. Then mount the whole saddle and post assembly on the bike and fine tune the position.
Adjust the saddle rake with the bolts at almost final torque. Work a quarter trun at a time, loosen one bolt and tighten the other until you get to your desired saddle rake.
For fore-aft adjustments, loosen both bolts the same number of turns; just enough to be able to slide the rails. Then re-tighten both bolts the same number of turns. This preserves the original rake adjustment.
Once everything is where you want it,bring the bolts up to final torque. (8.8Nm or 78in.lbs)
Use a torque wrench for final adjustment as the factory spec is tighter than you might think you can go.


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

Sound advice. Many thanks, stogaguy. 

...


----------



## AlexCad5 (Jan 2, 2005)

SystemShock said:


> Yeah, you are so right. Seems like many posts are going towards zero offset for some silly reason... it's 'whats in' at the moment.
> 
> A very retarded development for those of us with long thighs.
> 
> ...


Because Zero set back posts weigh less, and that is what people look at when they plonk down their $175. Fit is only a kind of car to most riders


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

AlexCad5 said:


> Because Zero set back posts weigh less, and that is what people look at when they plonk down their $175. Fit is only a kind of car to most riders


Sad, but no doubt largely true. 

I mean, who really needs a good position and maximum power and/or pedaling fluidity, when you can save an ounce? 

...


----------



## acid_rider (Nov 23, 2004)

*re those large set-backs*

I think there is a (growing) demand for large set-back posts like FSA SL220 and K-Force Carbon Lite (32mm setback) because the frame makers make the seat tube angles too steep for majority of the riders. If we were all riding "Look 481sl geometry" frames with 72.5STA then either a zero offset or at most 25mm standard setback post would work for 99% of all riders. For some bizarre reason the average STA of a frame in medium/small size (i.e. most popular sizes) is 73.5-74.0 STA. Have a look at pro peloton bikes, a lot of them have their seats all the way back on their rails to get slacker STA. Clearly the frame angles are not even close to good enough. My bike fitter has positioned ~10,000 riders in 25+ years and he reckons vast majority of the riders need STA of 73.0 and below that. How many off the shelf frames in 51-55cm size can you name with 73 STA? I can come up with 3 only - Time, Cervelo R3/RS and BH. There are hundreds of other frame makers, all steeper. Go figure.

Off my soapbox. 8^)


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

*^ +1 zillion*. :thumbsup:

It's funny. I've been out of the sport for about a decade (am coming back), and I kinda assumed that 74 degree STAs would've died out by now, or at least would be far less popular, due to simple bicycle Darwinism.

Nope. Everyone's still pretending to be a crit rider, 'parently. :frown2:



_ps–_ pls spare me the, "Well, _I'm_ a crit rider, and..." blah buh blah buh blah. There's nuthin' wrong with that, but the point is, most ppl aren't. 

...


----------



## SystemShock (Jun 14, 2008)

I'd also add that geometry is obviously a contributing factor– i.e. the interaction between smallish frames and big-ish 700C wheels. 

Can't make the front-center too short, or you get a lot of TCO (toeclip overlap). Can't lean the seat tube back too far with those sub-41cm chainstays, or there's not enough room for the rear wheel (without using some kind of odd, expensive bent seat tube). Etc. etc. 

But some of it is still fashion. 74+ degree STAs are just 'cooler' than 73 and 72, doncha know. :lol:

...


----------

