Thanks for taking the time to respond. I started low with one fit and that was bad (as in entire foot numb in 30 minutes). Did another ReTul fit that raised me up a bit that helped out quite a bit. Some rides are worse than others - there are times when nothing goes numb and others where 60 minutes into the the front half of my foot is numb.
None of this is really diagnosable over an internet forum – I’ll try a couple of things here or there (maybe lower or raise saddle by a couple of mm, move cleats around, etc…) but if I really want to fix it I just need to go and get refit - it’s not like my body is the same as it was 2 years ago.
ISM is probably best for numbness if you like an aggressive, tilted-over position. They aren’t especially comfortable in a more relaxed, upright position.
For indoor training, the best thing might be to just throw gel cover over anything with a decent cutout…
I am looking to try out an SMP at some point.
I briefly sat on a Dynamic, and it felt pretty good for being as thinly padded as it is, and the fact that I wasn’t wearing a chamois.
My bike fitter has to always tell me that most saddles do start to break down after some time. 10k is for sure too long. Going back to a fresh Phenom, and changing it out more frequently might be something to consider.
Great plan. Neither you nor your bike are a static object. Some people are more sensitive to fit. Two years is a long time. My LBS is one of the top fitters in the country and they say that the only time that saddle issues aren’t solved by fit is when people have long-term injuries in the area.
@mcneese.chad yes - I really don’t see why you’d need different saddles unless the angle that you sit on the saddle massively changes. An example of this would be on a time trial bike, where you are opting to minimise CdA perhaps by riding the nose. The idea, however, of a separate ‘gravel’ saddle from a road saddle is as much marketing as shimanos new ‘Gravel Lenses’.
I did not read all responses, so if this has been recommended please disregard.
I have had the absolute worse time with feet pain/numbness for a very long time, my retul fitter worked with me recently and we did something a little different to my fit.
We located as close as possible to the center of the ball of my foot based on the 1st and 5th metatarsal joints (yes, I sharpie the crap out of my shoes). We then moved my cleats back 7-9mm behind the ball of my foot and adjusted my saddle height and fore/aft accordingly. It alleviated maybe 85-90% of my issues and I would push the cleats back even further if I could.
I may try this plate for testing purposes but in my experience as someone who has tried tons of shoes, insoles, shims, wedges… I needed the cleat behind the ball to alleviate the issue I was having in my feet.
Now that being said, see this caveat!!!
When I moved from +0-2mm in front to -7-9mm behind the ball of my foot, I am using muscles that I don’t think I have every truly used and my instant snap power went down but my power durability and cadence went up. Its a weird phenomenon, 250watts is just as difficult as 450watts but it all feels similar. I am only 3-weeks into this move so it might get better, but I must have always relied on calf strength and not used my thighs this much.
Hair splitting between road/gravel/mtb and such is fine to question. Marketing is a real thing and has good and bad aspects that we have all seen.
That said, there are real differences in design and function of saddles when you look at the spectrum available. My main point is that it’s a mistake to assume that any saddle can work for any rider in any situation. People are not identical in their physiology and that alone necessitates things like different widths, shapes and padding levels even if the basic use case (ex: road) happens to be the same.
As a fitter and within my own saddle search journey, I have seen more than a few examples when the only variable changed was a saddle (all other fit setup was identical) and it made all the difference in the world for the rider. Back when our saddle mapper worked, I could see evidence that paralleled the feedback from the rider as well. It’s the one piece of “fit tech” that I value and wish I had vs all the focus on motion capture and such.
Anyway, I just think that saddle selection is a key step in the fitting process as it forms the literal foundation of the rider placement on the bike. Overall fit and setup of the saddle itself is essential, but it can all still fail if you have the wrong saddle to start.
When there is an instance of a bike & fit working well outside and that same setup leads to problems inside, I start by trying to identify all the differences between the setups.
Lack of motion in most indoor setups is my primary concern. Locking a bike into a vertical position is not ideal from a comfort standpoint. No idea if it can manifest in your issue, but I suggest reviewing it at the very least.
Axle height is my second concern. The conventional wisdom of having equal axle height inside like we do outside is flawed IMO. We lose not only dynamic motion but wind resistance when riding inside. That likely alters the weight distribution we have on the saddle and bars, that can manifest in the feet as well. I recommend that people experiment with a higher front axle to create a weight shift that is a proxy for the wind resistance outside. 1" [25mm] is a decent starting point and people can adjust up or down from there as they see fit.
I’m now strongly of the opinion that bikefit for most people should start with slamming the cleats back as far as possible, then work from there. Many benefits, very little downside for anyone unless maybe you’re a competitive sprinter.
Probably the shoe industry should be lobbied to add extra cleat mounting holes at the mid-foot point also.
Frequency may be in question, but I can assure you that saddles can and do wear out.
The plastic shells that are more common will flex in use and the material ages over time. Function will change over time in some cases, particularly for ones on the light end of the spectrum.
Foam, gels and other support materials are also subject to compression set and aging just like most materials.
I won’t say there is some particular mileage or age that someone should use as a milestone, but the reality is that these may well change in performance over time. If an otherwise comfortable setup becomes uncomfortable over time, saddle wear & replacement is at least something that should be considered.
Outside of that, we are strange machines and not stable in structure either. Injuries and changes in body composition can all contribute to new ways we sit and support ourselves. This alone can be the trigger to having a good setup turn bad. I experienced issues with my saddle preference over a couple of years as my body composition shifted in response to changes in my riding and training habits.
Last year I noticed the material on my bike seat had changed to be extremely smooth. One area had started to dissolve so I ordered a new seat. The new seat felt a lot more comfortable. It just reminded me everything does breakdown at some point
Most saddles work outside if your position is reasonably good.
Indoors is another matter entirely.
I took a saddle that I hated indoors and threw a gel cover on it, and it’s the most comfortable I’ve been riding indoors in years, thought the gel cover introduces its own issues.
