Posted in a different thread but I’ll ask here too.
Question for Mirror owners. I rode the Power Mirror basically since the day they came out. Just picked up the Romin Mirror for my other bike because I wanted to try it out. I’m having issues getting it set up. Coming from a Power Arc on this bike. The wide part of the saddle (where I would put my sit bones) is farther back on the Romin. So my initial location I felt like the saddle was setback way too far, and my reach to the bars felt stretched and I felt like I was reaching at my downstroke. I measured the distance from BB to top of saddle and it was over 1cm taller. I tried slamming it all the way forward but it was still a good cm behind where the Power would be. I marked the rails on the Arc to compare where it would be.
The Romin can’t go any farter forward in the clamp. I also lowered the saddle a full cm. Anybody have this issue? How did you setup the Romin? Or do I need a 0-setback post?
Its a pretty common practice to(and there are tools made for) measuring the point at which the saddle is 80mm wide, and using this as a reference point when setting setback between different makes/models of saddles. You’ve done a rough version of that, and from the looks of it, you need a straight post to get the clamp to work with the Romin Mirror. I tried a Romin Mirror, coming from several Power Mirrors and Powers and found the point just forward of the sit bone point to be a bit too wide for me, as it doesn’t taper as quickly as the Power line.
Just to state it for confirmation (and because some people get it backwards), pay close attention to how and where you measure saddle height in particular.
Standard practice is to use the center of the cranks / bottom bracket to the top of the saddle. But when you have two bikes with different crank lengths, you need to have the one with the shorter cranks HIGHER for this measurement by the same length as the single arm difference.
Ex: Bikes with 170mm vs 175mm cranks means the one with the 170mm cranks needs 5mm longer saddle height measurement (assuming the same saddle in use on both bikes).
This side effect of this that also gets missed sometimes is that this effectively increases the saddle to bar drop on the bike with the shorter cranks, unless you also raise the stem & handlebars to match that longer saddle height.
Plenty of people miss this and end up feeling worse since the bars are further down (and longer reach) from a “simple crank arm change”.
Moral of the story is that just about any single dimensional change on a bike will impact at least one other dimension of interest. Balancing that as needed is the ‘weeds’ side of fitting and one reason it takes some experience to catch these unintended consequences.
I am 6’3’'/190 cm with inseam around 90 cm. I’ve been fitted by one of the best fitters available in my country. I came because I was sitting sideways on my saddle and no position was comfortable. Also, I was starting to get hip pain that would linger for a day. He spent more than 3 hours trying to figure out what the problem is but he couldn’t. But he recommended shorter cranks (175->170mm) to reduce movement on the saddle. It took me a while to sort it out (spider pm, new crank arm standars) and I went with 165 mm ones.
Well, I am not sitting sideways anymore but the problems still remain. I don’t have serious upper back pain and wrist pain like I did with longer cranks. But I still have to stop a couple of times every ride and adjust the position. Basically, going in circles - a 1 mm up or down, fore or aft, tilt more or less. Higher saddle instantly leads to lower back pain, traps pain, knee pain and instability. Lower saddle gives me persistent right hip pain. And so on. The best position seems saddle tilted around 3 deg down, forward and up but I get skin abrasions on my bottom and have too much weighted on my hands.
Forgot to mention that the primary cause seems to be the right hip - probably restricted range of motion. However, I can’t see it when examining laying on the ground. What to do next? I’ve tried physio a couple of years back and he noticed asymmetrical internal/external rotation between left and right leg but tha range on both legs looks sufficient. Is ortho visit in order? Or should I go with even shorter cranks?
Hey ! I’ve dealt with this issue extensively my entire time on a bike. Moving to shorter cranks is always a good idea if you are dealing with hip pain/impingement etc.
If you are sitting crooked or with one hips forward one back you will have one leg over extending and possibly the other under extending. Hence the problem finding the correct height. Most people have a right side bias twisting forward on that side and dropping their hip to protect their right leg. I’m actually the opposite and twist my hip forward on the left and also drop my left hip.
Video yourself from behind to see if you are dropping your hip on the right side. Steve Hogg has recommended for a tiny fix to twist the nose of the saddle (if you can) towards the side of the hip drop. It’ll hopefully bring the right hip back and offer support if the sit bone isn’t being supported.
Or if you are a mess like me I needed a shim under the foot with the hip drop. My hip drop is functional not structural. But In motion and with how crooked I’ve sat on the saddle it was impossible to have my legs extend equally. This is likely where you might find some success since you seem to struggle with saddle height.
It would be best time find a fitter with experience in asymmetrical interaction with the saddle. A twisted pelvis and if you are a poor compensator on the bike you’ll never be comfortable.
Do not cater to the twist. Don’t twist one foot in and one out. This got me into hot water. Work on your glute med strength. Smash our your psoas. Make sure you are on a wide enough saddle but not too wide. And read up on left aic pattern in Google. None of my fitters realized I needed a shim and I was miserable for years . Saddle issues to the max. And power connection through my feet.
Last but not least, is your bike the correct size?? Too large and we will compensate in some manner. Too long a reach same thing.
List the precise start & end locations where you place your tape for measurement.
What exact seat post do you have?
There are many different ways that seat posts hold and set saddle angle. When altering angle, some will have a tendency to raise or lower portions of the saddle, even if you leave the actual seat post height unchanged in the frame.
Additionally, some will also impact fore-aft location a bit as well through angle changes. These combined aspects can lead to different leg extension on the bike.
Per your pelvic rotation idea, you may be sitting on the saddle differently in pelvis angle, but also fore-aft locations due to angle. This can quickly alter your functional leg extension and lead to needing to be higher or lower than a prior height/angle combo.
Saddle height is measured from center of BB to “center” of the saddle, i.e. where its width is 8 cm. The center of the saddle is placed roughly just above the seat clamp, so its height relative to the BB hasn’t been affected by the tilt down.
I have a Selle Italia Boost Superflow. My initial set-up was already set nose-down, so that the flat part in the middle was level.
I have paid attention to where I am sitting on the saddle in both configurations and it seems like I haven’t moved (there is not much room to fiddle on this saddle anyway).
With that in mind, I am basically stumped. 2cm [20mm] is no minor difference in saddle height.
The fact That you arrive at that delta as a result of a small 3* saddle tilt change really seems odd to me. It is what it is, but without seeing a before and after, I can’t say I have a decent guess on the root cause. It could be a combo that starts with pelvic rotation, and associated joint angles / range of motion, but it’s really hard to say.
What are your thoughts on having different fits for my two road bikes? I have an SL7 that’s my nice bike. I used to race it and managed to avoid crashes, but I wanted to build up a cheap crit bike that I wouldn’t mind so much if I crashed. So I initially set them up as identical as I could get them. I’ve since made the crit bike a little more aggressive by lowering the cockpit and removing spacers. I also have a 1cm longer stem on there. I had the longer stem on my SL7, but my thought is that for my long endurance rides and as an everyday bike, I want to go for a little more comfort. So I shortened it by 1cm. Is this a silly idea? The longest ride I’ve done on the racing bike is just over 2 hours and my lower back was a little tight. But for 60 minute crits it’s fine and I like the lower aggressive position. But I do 4-5+ rides on the SL7 fairly often and my lower back is always tight after the third hour or so.
TL;DR - Had an aggressive fit on my SL7 for racing, built a cheaper bike to race with same geo, now have relaxed the SL7 by shortening the stem and adding a spacer. Dumb? Smart? Indifferent?
Left/Right imbalance: Adjust the bike fit or fix my body?
Short of it:
I have near perfect left right skeletal symmetry from the waist down, but I have slight scoliosis and significant left right functional/muscular imbalances. How do you decide, what factors do you consider, what are some signs that it’s appropriate to fix those imbalances via bicycle fit adjustments vs doing physio work on the body?
Longer version:
I’ve had left right functional imbalances since I was a teenager. It became an issue on the bicycle during my college years when I incurred a small knee injury during a race. I was able to alleviate the issue with a small shim (~2mm) under my cleat. The left right imbalance progressed in my twenties and the shim stack increased over time to 7mm. By my 30’s I was using 11mm of shimming and my functional imbalance got so severe, I could no longer ride nor walk down stairs due to knee pain. It wasn’t until my late 30’s that I finally found a physio that was able to properly diagnose my issue, and work towards restoring balance and function. It’s coming up on 3 years of restoration, and I am now back on a bike with 0 shims, but I am still slightly imbalanced. The center line of my bibs does not line up with the mid line of the saddle. I still get some knee pain if I forget to activate certain muscles, or pedal a certain way. I feel I need to “reach” for the pedal and that a shim would help despite the saddle being almost too low. My physio says shimming will push me towards more imbalance and that I should continue to work on my body, but I feel that the gains are starting to plateau, and a shim would help. I don’t think I will ever be able to reach perfect balance due to my habits and work. I realized the specifics are going to be different from person to person, so how do you go about thinking about this issue? What are some considerations?
Ditto to the reply above… nothing wrong with a “comfortable fit”, no matter what bike it’s on. If it allows you to hit your goals and enjoy the bike as you wish, that is a WIN in my book.
Sounds like quite a challenging issue and fit problem. I will be honest and say I don’t have much to offer with a remote perspective. This is the type of issue that needs direct access & contact to handle, and can still be difficult to address. I wish I had more to offer, but this is out of my league.
That’s why this standard practice is a bit daft IMO. Measuring from the pedal spindle center (with crank near bottom, aligned with seat tube) will give a more consistent value.
It will still be affected by pedal, clear and shoe stackup, but so will the standard measurement. And presumably you’re using the same shoes and pedal system for similar bikes.
As an OCD Engineer-type, I am well aware of the issues which is why my fit sheets also include crank and pedal specs, to account for the issues you raised.
Additionally, I happened to work with the mid-life owner of Fit Kit Systems way back in 1997. He got me started on my bike fit journey, which included a deep dive into the Fit Kit Tools. One piece of which is the Seat Height Tool, that registers off the pedal spindle as you mention and up to the top of the saddle. A one-stop tool that is handy for repeat use, but can be replicated with a tape just about as easily.
