# What is the drawback to a forward seat position?



## Greg Smalter

This is aimed to start a discussion on saddle fore/aft, in general, for a conventional road bike with no aero bars. This is not intended to be a "fix my comfort"/"what crank length should I use" post (not to disparage those posts).

I'm a seat forward junkie. I get a bike (I'm on my second where I've done this), it fits fine and is comfy and the saddle is setup as KOPS. I make little adjustments, moving the seat forward little by little until it's slammed all the way forward. Then I buy a Thomson Elite no setback to get even more forward.

Obviously time trialists put the seat way forward (via steep STA). Actually, they put it as far forward as the UCI allows and then perch on the tip of it. So, forward = fast in that case.

But when it comes time to mount a conventional road bike, what is the incentive for the slack seat tube angle and the posts with setback? Less weight on arms, more aerodynamic, what? Are the set of tradeoffs (speed vs comfort, I guess) different on a time trial bike than a road bike or are they the same but people are just willing to suffer on a TT bike to a greater degree than on a road bike (because the rides are usually shorter)?

I find with the seat forward I get much higher cadence, and I don't feel like I lose anything in power or comfort. Obviously everyone is different. Maybe it is because most of my leg length is below my knee.

When the seat is back I feel like I pedal slow, but worse, I feel like the only reason I can't pedal faster is because I just can't.... there is no muscle burn, nothing, my legs just feel locked up and slow. At least when my seat is forward if I can't go faster it's because my calves burn and I need to get stronger. That I can deal with.

I appreciate your thoughts.


----------



## Hank Stamper

I'm a rookie and don't really know what I'm taking about but will take a stab at it.

I think the real thing that makes you feel good forward is the position of your knees in relation to the center of the pedals not necessarily the position of the seat. And it takes different body types on different bikes different seat positions to achieve the same position relative to the pedals.
Take two different people on two different bike.....just because one has his seat forward and one has it back doesn't mean the knees are over the pedals any differnetly. Take you for example, with most of your leg length being below the knee it only goes to figure that you'd need your seat more forward than someone with all the length being above the knee to achieve the same positioning of the knees above the pedals. So people with their seat way back compared to you.....don't necessarily achieve the same leverage points you would in that position.
Just a guess.


----------



## jorgy

Even though you might not feel like you're losing power, you may very well be.

Obviously the length of your femur vs. total leg length is important here, as is your crank length.


----------



## Mr. Bill

In my experience, seat forward equals better spinning; faster on the flats, and works the glutes and hams more. Seat to the rear favors the quads, and since I'm genetically disposed toward large quads, I climb a bit better. In the end, though, I make better averages with the seat tending forward.


----------



## Wookiebiker

Body composition plays a large role in where your saddle ends up....and KOP is just a starting point...some are in front, some are in back of the center.

The more forward your saddle is the more you tend to use your quads and less glute in your pedal stroke. Also, those with shorter femurs tend to have their saddles more forward than somebody with long femurs.

The drawback to a far forward saddle position is you can't get as much torque on the pedals as you can with it back, which will hurt seated climbing. This is where a bit of a compromise comes into play and you have to find a happy medium that fits you best.

Myself...I'm like you in that I have my saddles far forward and I like bikes with steep seat tube angles. I've never had much of a butt, even when squatting very heavy weights in college...but I've always had huge quads, hamstrings and calves. I also have short legs and femurs....so this position suites me well.

Add to that I'm super flexible and can get very low and aerodynamic and on the flats, I can move along a good clip. However, up hills I suffer a little from not being as far back on the saddle as I could be...but I play to my strengths, not weaknesses


----------



## Ventruck

I used to take up a very forward position, but lately I've been trying to find a sweet spot to have as much of the leg working as possible. Not for competitive purposes, but just recreational.


----------



## Jesse D Smith

Greg Smalter said:


> This is aimed to start a discussion on saddle fore/aft, in general, for a conventional road bike with no aero bars. This is not intended to be a "fix my comfort"/"what crank length should I use" post (not to disparage those posts).
> 
> I'm a seat forward junkie. I get a bike (I'm on my second where I've done this), it fits fine and is comfy and the saddle is setup as KOPS. I make little adjustments, moving the seat forward little by little until it's slammed all the way forward. Then I buy a Thomson Elite no setback to get even more forward.
> 
> Obviously time trialists put the seat way forward (via steep STA). Actually, they put it as far forward as the UCI allows and then perch on the tip of it. So, forward = fast in that case.
> 
> But when it comes time to mount a conventional road bike, what is the incentive for the slack seat tube angle and the posts with setback? Less weight on arms, more aerodynamic, what? Are the set of tradeoffs (speed vs comfort, I guess) different on a time trial bike than a road bike or are they the same but people are just willing to suffer on a TT bike to a greater degree than on a road bike (because the rides are usually shorter)?
> 
> I find with the seat forward I get much higher cadence, and I don't feel like I lose anything in power or comfort. Obviously everyone is different. Maybe it is because most of my leg length is below my knee.
> 
> When the seat is back I feel like I pedal slow, but worse, I feel like the only reason I can't pedal faster is because I just can't.... there is no muscle burn, nothing, my legs just feel locked up and slow. At least when my seat is forward if I can't go faster it's because my calves burn and I need to get stronger. That I can deal with.
> 
> I appreciate your thoughts.


Your body's center of gravity is now more forward, so you have twitchier steering.


----------



## danl1

Jesse D Smith said:


> Your body's center of gravity is now more forward, so you have twitchier steering.


And generally more weight being supported by the arms, shoulders, and torso, meaning wasted energy. And less force available to go to the cranks. 

As for power, consider that sliding a saddle back also effectively increases the saddle height. Lower it to compensate, and that dead, powerless feeling you describe will disappear.

Not to say that rearward doesn't have it's challenges, too. But bottom line, what's right for you is right.


----------



## Hooben

Descents can be more dangerous when in the forward seat position.


----------



## Wookiebiker

Hooben said:


> Descents can be more dangerous when in the forward seat position.


That depends on your skills


----------



## Hendley

For a long time, I've preferred further back than forward... It felt better for the arms and upper body, and more stable on descents.

However, because of hip/back problems, I've been moving the saddle more and more forward. Some personal observations:

1. Though long-legged, proportionately more of my height is in the lower legs.
2. Saddle forward definitely improves my acceleration, the bike seems to jump forward more quickly
3. Cadence is generally higher, open hip angle is more comfortable.
4. Climbing is actually about the same forward or back. Forward, I tend to spin better and get on top of the pedals better. It feels like the comparison of climbing styles between Ivan Basso (forward) and Cadel Evans (back).
5. Possibly, the knees prefer saddle back, but not sure of this.
6. Still don't know if I like the increased weight on the hands or the balance, but for the legs, I think forward is better.


----------



## Fredrico

*Forward rocks.*



Hendley said:


> For a long time, I've preferred further back than forward... It felt better for the arms and upper body, and more stable on descents.
> 
> However, because of hip/back problems, I've been moving the saddle more and more forward. Some personal observations:
> 
> 1. Though long-legged, proportionately more of my height is in the lower legs.
> 2. Saddle forward definitely improves my acceleration, the bike seems to jump forward more quickly
> 3. Cadence is generally higher, open hip angle is more comfortable.
> 4. Climbing is actually about the same forward or back. Forward, I tend to spin better and get on top of the pedals better. It feels like the comparison of climbing styles between Ivan Basso (forward) and Cadel Evans (back).
> 5. Possibly, the knees prefer saddle back, but not sure of this.
> 6. Still don't know if I like the increased weight on the hands or the balance, but for the legs, I think forward is better.


My experiences are similar to yours.

I have two bikes, one with saddle setback about 7 cm, the other about 5 cm. I'm a spinner and always find the shorter saddle setback really nice. I can get up lots of power at high cadences. Also, climbing, seems like I can use my upper body weight on the downstrokes when I have to.

I've had knee stress if pushing too hard for too long, but generally, saddle forward is easier on the knees than futhur back. That's because I'm spinning tho. Furthur back works the quads better perhaps, and can deliver power, but it's not as satisfying, probably because as others have said, the hamstrings and buttocks don't come into play as easily.

Saddle forward makes the legs more vertical, so the angle with the back is not so tight, I can make the back flatter, stretch more easily, and ride in the drops more comfortably. The saddle is not so far forward as to throw excessive weight on the hands, so that isn't a problem. It helps of course to have a roomy cockpit with the bars only 2 inches below saddle height.

Also the bike geometry keeps rider weight balanced between the two wheels, so handling isn't squirrely on descents. For that reason, the furthur setback bike won't handle well with the saddle more forward than it is.


----------



## danl1

Fredrico said:


> Saddle forward makes the legs more vertical, so the angle with the back is not so tight, I can make the back flatter, stretch more easily, and ride in the drops more comfortably. The saddle is not so far forward as to throw excessive weight on the hands, so that isn't a problem. It helps of course to have a roomy cockpit with the bars only 2 inches below saddle height.


That's one approach to flattening the back, but the limiter there is ham/glute flexibility. In the rearward position, a slightly lowered saddle can allow the back to flatten right out. Consider as an analogy reaching down to touch toes with the knees locked. As you start to bend the knees, the back can suddenly go much flatter. Not everyone likes the more closed angle, but it can be a very powerful position. 

And again, this discussion isn't controlling for body types. What looks 'forward' on your body/bike and 'rearward' on mine could easily end up as being the same thing, physiologically.


----------



## percy

I just bought one of the new "Max" saddles from Cobb Cycling and it came with a setup video and some pretty good written directions and sugggestions. They invite you to call if questions and I had one so I called and John Cobb himself answered. I just wanted to share that, based on his extensive experience and expertise, he doesn't give a hoot about KOPS but is very focused on reach. He likes nose of saddle to center of bar to roughly equal your forearm length (back of elbow to outstretched middle finger). He also likes a slightly higher saddle (.889 times inseam) rather than the typical Lemond seat height formula of .883. (Obviously these are not set in stone.) His saddle design accomodates a lot of fore and aft movement and he recommends a slight nose up saddle position (for his saddles, anyway) to take weight off the arms, combined with a forward-rotated pelvis for comfort and power.


----------



## J24

danl1 said:


> And again, this discussion isn't controlling for body types. What looks 'forward' on your body/bike and 'rearward' on mine could easily end up as being the same thing, physiologically.


Because of knee problems this year I started experimenting with my postion and now I have my seat slammed as far back as it will go on both of my bikes; one has a 25mm setback post and the other has 30mm setback post that I recently bought, and I also shortened the stems by 10mm on both, and just for information the ST angles are 74 and 74.5 degrees.

I wish I had done this several years ago. My knee is ok so far, and I have more power seated, can spin at a higher cadance longer, and my center of gravity changed making both bikes go from twitchy to easy no hands riding.


----------



## bwhite_4

It's a matter of being balanced on the bike. You should pretty much throw KOPS out the window because it won't work for everyone. 

I once read an explanation to determine a decent measurement starting point for fore/aft by David Kirk:
I'll summarize here ... hoping I don't leave out anything important

Ride a very slight incline with a smooth cadence and your hands on the tops of your bars. Raise your hands one inch off the bars leaving your body in the same position. Does you have to work extra hard to keep leverage from not falling forward? If so, you need to move your saddle back.

Try in a chair at home (it's the same concept). Put your feet 6 inches in front of you while you sit in a chair and lean over - no issues, right? Put your feet underneath of you and try to lean over and you'll see how much more strength you need to hold yourself up.

Also, a good builder will explain that reach adjustments shouldn't be made through setback, but by top tube and stem length. Setback and seat tube angle are meant to properly position the rider over the pedals.


----------



## J24

bwhite_4 said:


> It's a matter of being balanced on the bike. You should pretty much through KOPS out the window because it won't work for everyone..............


Agree.....I haven't thought about checking KOPS in my new position and don't much care to know what it is.


----------



## muscleendurance

Jesse D Smith said:


> Your body's center of gravity is now more forward, so you have twitchier steering.


a good way to show this is to ride no handed before and after the change (more forward more back) and I would be willing to bet that its harder to do/less easy with the saddle far forward.


----------



## Fredrico

*Saddle still has to set back.*



bwhite_4 said:


> It's a matter of being balanced on the bike. You should pretty much throw KOPS out the window because it won't work for everyone.
> 
> I once read an explanation to determine a decent measurement starting point for fore/aft by David Kirk:
> I'll summarize here ... hoping I don't leave out anything important
> 
> Ride a very slight incline with a smooth cadence and your hands on the tops of your bars. Raise your hands one inch off the bars leaving your body in the same position. Does you have to work extra hard to keep leverage from not falling forward? If so, you need to move your saddle back.
> 
> Try in a chair at home (it's the same concept). Put your feet 6 inches in front of you while you sit in a chair and lean over - no issues, right? Put your feet underneath of you and try to lean over and you'll see how much more strength you need to hold yourself up.
> 
> Also, a good builder will explain that reach adjustments shouldn't be made through setback, but by top tube and stem length. Setback and seat tube angle are meant to properly position the rider over the pedals.


I read that too, and it goes with what danl1 said above, and also with my observation that I can take my hands off the handlebars when leaning forward on the hoods, and still be able to hold the upper body in position without undue strain. That must have something to do with center of gravity. The furthur your butt hangs back, the heavier the counterweight for the head and upper body. There's a certain point where that center of gravity is right, and its different for everybody.

So to qualify my previous post, "Seat forward" to me, isn't right up on top of the crank, but set back 5 cm. Didn't mean to contradict danl! or David Kirk, only to say slightly forward for my probably short femurs is more efficient for me, than having the saddle way back. Tried that many years ago; that's how I know. :biggrin5:


----------



## trobriand

I'm a tall rider (6'4" 36 IN inseam) and have ridden 2400 miles since starting in April. I measured with a plumb drop and noticed my knee in the 3 O' Clock position is several centimeters in front of the spindle.

When you guys talk about being too far forward, are you talking about the knee over the spindle, or a case like where I'm in front of the spindle? Should I move back til I'm over the spindle?


----------



## MerlinAma

You know the term "on the rivet".

That's where a rider slides forward so he can go really fast, for a relatively short period of time.

I think most riders don't move their saddle up because:

1) on long rides - too much weight is on arms

2) you probably ride longer climbs better with the saddle back

In other words you get different bike setup optimization depending on the riding you do. Centuries in the mountains VS sprint triathlons, for example.


----------



## Dinosaur

*Yes..*



trobriand said:


> I'm a tall rider (6'4" 36 IN inseam) and have ridden 2400 miles since starting in April. I measured with a plumb drop and noticed my knee in the 3 O' Clock position is several centimeters in front of the spindle.
> 
> When you guys talk about being too far forward, are you talking about the knee over the spindle, or a case like where I'm in front of the spindle? Should I move back til I'm over the spindle?



If your knee is several cm in front of the pedal spindle you have a forward position. Of course the KOPS method is argumentative and is just used as a general setting for a place to start. I set both of my bikes measuring the tip of the saddle from the center of the BB. Both are 8cm back. I broke my hip a few years back and had to move my seat back further (about 10cm) as my thigh would ache where I have a ti rod implanted in my femur. I just moved it forward a couple of cm's (which is a lot) and I can feel a difference. I can spin easier and use larger gears when climbing. I would think you want your saddle positioned so you can move forward or scoot back, depending on what you are doing. If you make a drastic chance you can end up with an injury. One thing that helped me was going to a shorter stem. Saddle and stem length/rise are connected. You have to dial in your saddle first, then deal with the stem length. 

And if it ain't' broke, don't fix it. Everyone has a different way to set their saddles...I kinda let my body me my guide..sometimes you have to leave well enough alone..I guess you could try and start with a neutral KOPS position and see how it feels.


----------



## PJ352

trobriand said:


> I'm a tall rider (6'4" 36 IN inseam) and have ridden 2400 miles since starting in April. *I measured with a plumb drop and noticed my knee in the 3 O' Clock position is several centimeters in front of the spindle.*
> When you guys talk about being too far forward, are you talking about the knee over the spindle, or a case like where I'm in front of the spindle? Should I move back til I'm over the spindle?


And just to make sure you're measuring correctly...
View attachment 179822


----------



## David Kirk

IMO there are a number of things to consider with fore/aft saddle position. One thing that I don't think has been addressed in this thread is how fore/aft saddle position determines which muscle groups are engaged. 

Generally speaking you use more quad with a forward position and you use more butt and hamstring with a reward position. Triathletes were some of the first riders to adopt the forward position because it was an easier transition from riding to running as they were using more similar muscle groups. The side added benefit was that they had a smaller frontal area that made them more aerodynamic in this forward position and therefore faster in a time trail. The downside of the forward position is that it is harder to generate power while climbing in the saddle due to fewer and smaller muscle groups being used and the handling of the bike can suffer with so much weight on the front wheel.

On the other end of the spectrum are long distance stage-race guys who favor a rearward position (picture Greg LeMond) because it uses more and larger muscle groups so there is less chance of fatiguing those muscles. One can generate huge power in the saddle when it is more rearward. The downside is that it takes more flexibility and core strength to use the rearward position and it most cases it's less aerodynamic.

Power-wise it all boils down to the angle the hip makes with the lower back. A forward position opens the hip angle and lessens the use of the butt and hamstrings so power drops. A rearward positions tightens the hip angle and uses more butt/hamstring which are larger muscle groups. This often means a lower heart and respiratory rate for a given wattage output. 



There are lots of other considerations with this such as weight placement and handling and frame design and there are few hard and fast rules. I can think of a few absolutes that I believe in - 

* KOPS is as best voodoo. If you happen to be the most comfortable with your knee directly over the pedal spindle that's cool but it's not because your knee is over the spindle. It's pure coincidence. There is no biomechanical reason for KOPS at all. It's not like our knees are really heavy so we put them right over the spindle to that our heavy knee can fall and push the pedal down. KOPS really came into being with the first generation of the FitKit. They measured lots of fast pro riders and found that a majority of them had their knee somewhere above the spindle. The problem with this was that most pro riders are a similar size and proportion to each other and what worked for them didn't really work for a 6'5" guy or a 5'0" female. Many people are riding around in less than optimum positions because they or their fitter used the hard and fast rule of KOPS.

* fore/aft saddle position should never be used to adjust saddle to handlebar reach. Ideally fore aft saddle position is set for best power/comfort/bike use and then the saddle to handlebar reach adjusted with top tube/stem length. Moving the saddle way forward or back to make the reach right often results in a poor handling bike that the rider has trouble generating power on.



As usual what I thought would be a quick post ended up being rather long. Thanks for sticking with me through it all. Thanks for reading.

Dave


----------



## Dinosaur

*That's it..*



David Kirk said:


> IMO there are a number of things to consider with fore/aft saddle position. One thing that I don't think has been addressed in this thread is how fore/aft saddle position determines which muscle groups are engaged.
> 
> Generally speaking you use more quad with a forward position and you use more butt and hamstring with a reward position. Triathletes were some of the first riders to adopt the forward position because it was an easier transition from riding to running as they were using more similar muscle groups. The side added benefit was that they had a smaller frontal area that made them more aerodynamic in this forward position and therefore faster in a time trail. The downside of the forward position is that it is harder to generate power while climbing in the saddle due to fewer and smaller muscle groups being used and the handling of the bike can suffer with so much weight on the front wheel.
> 
> On the other end of the spectrum are long distance stage-race guys who favor a rearward position (picture Greg LeMond) because it uses more and larger muscle groups so there is less chance of fatiguing those muscles. One can generate huge power in the saddle when it is more rearward. The downside is that it takes more flexibility and core strength to use the rearward position and it most cases it's less aerodynamic.
> 
> Power-wise it all boils down to the angle the hip makes with the lower back. A forward position opens the hip angle and lessens the use of the butt and hamstrings so power drops. A rearward positions tightens the hip angle and uses more butt/hamstring which are larger muscle groups. This often means a lower heart and respiratory rate for a given wattage output.
> 
> 
> 
> There are lots of other considerations with this such as weight placement and handling and frame design and there are few hard and fast rules. I can think of a few absolutes that I believe in -
> 
> * KOPS is as best voodoo. If you happen to be the most comfortable with your knee directly over the pedal spindle that's cool but it's not because your knee is over the spindle. It's pure coincidence. There is no biomechanical reason for KOPS at all. It's not like our knees are really heavy so we put them right over the spindle to that our heavy knee can fall and push the pedal down. KOPS really came into being with the first generation of the FitKit. They measured lots of fast pro riders and found that a majority of them had their knee somewhere above the spindle. The problem with this was that most pro riders are a similar size and proportion to each other and what worked for them didn't really work for a 6'5" guy or a 5'0" female. Many people are riding around in less than optimum positions because they or their fitter used the hard and fast rule of KOPS.
> 
> * fore/aft saddle position should never be used to adjust saddle to handlebar reach. Ideally fore aft saddle position is set for best power/comfort/bike use and then the saddle to handlebar reach adjusted with top tube/stem length. Moving the saddle way forward or back to make the reach right often results in a poor handling bike that the rider has trouble generating power on.
> 
> 
> 
> As usual what I thought would be a quick post ended up being rather long. Thanks for sticking with me through it all. Thanks for reading.
> 
> Dave


Saddle position effects which muscle groups you are using, so I think you would want a position that allows you to move forward or scoot back, depending on what you are doing. I broke my right hip at the end of '05 and the only way I could get comfortable is by moving my saddle way back, otherwise my right thigh would ache because of the ti rod I have implanted. This went on for about 3 3/2 years. Recently I moved my saddle forward and I noticed a dramatic difference. I notice it when I am climbing. With hills I was using a 23 gear I am now using a 19 or 21. I think getting your weight over your bottom bracket and balance is a major point. Stem length and angle is also important as you do a lot of pulling on your bars when you are climbing.


----------

