# Is climbing with a lower seat more efficient?



## SWriverstone (Sep 3, 2009)

So I went out for a local ride the other day-the ride is basically straight up for a couple miles, with around 1,000' of elevation gain.

I must have done a quick-n-sloppy job of resetting my seat after removing a trail-a-bike adapter I use with the kids, so it was considerably lower than the "high roadie" position I'm used to riding. Not wanting to take the time to stop and raise it, I just said "Whatever" and kept riding.

Here's my question: it might have been my imagination (maybe it was just a good day and I was feeling strong?) but I swear pedaling up steep climbs seemed a bit easier/more efficient with my seat lower.

My reasoning was that the lower seat enabled me to get more _behind_ the pedals instead of _over_ them...and push more forward than down...which all seemed to increase my efficiency.

I even made an insanely tight, steep switchback for the first time ever without stopping or dabbing.

Anyone else (who likes a high roadie seat position) notice this?

If it's true that the lower seat = more efficient climbing, then I definitely need a dropper post...because in spite of perceived climbing efficiency, it still felt crappy not to be able to get max leg extension when riding along level parts of the trail (it felt a bit like being in the back seat of a car without enough leg/knee room).

Scott

PS - I hear people exclaim the virtues of a low seat for steep downhill sections...but I don't think I've ever heard anyone talk about a low seat and climbing...hence my post.


----------



## WaywardTraveller (Oct 2, 2011)

Hey, if it works for you, go for it. But that is not normal. It's a lot harder to sustain optimal output sitting back when going up, you're now fighting gravity not only to climb, but to apply power to the pedals as well. You'll be using more of your core this way, and you'll end up pulling a lot more as well. You will also have a lot more trouble keeping traction on your front tire.

You really want to keep your center of gravity over your pedals...well, always, but especially when climbing. Higher seat helps with this, sitting more forward on the nose of your seat is pretty typical. Standing even can be best...but it does require more finesse to keep your traction balanced between both wheels, and is a quite a bit more work on long climbs. I ride SS a lot though so I spend a lot of time out of the seat while climbing, and I find it translates very well to my FS bike when I pull it out for a rip.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Typically, a lower seat is less efficient for climbing. You're only using a portion of your leg rotation for power.


----------



## Timon (May 11, 2008)

nope, definitely not more efficient.

i will say though, that since having a dropper.....i will occasionally drop the seat for technical uphill sections. makes throwing the bike around easier. but this is on a SS, and i'm standing regardless....not sitting on lowered seat.


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

More efficient when properly adjusted, but I think there is something about feeling fresher when using different muscle groups and lessening knee pain when the seat is slightly lower. I noticed it watching some road races, especially bigger riders, where they don't use normal full leg extension.


----------



## Slash5 (Nov 27, 2011)

I can see where a slightly lower seat could make a very hard climb easier. You can get your heels down and really work the calves. Specially if you are running a real high roadie seat. For a seated spin type climb the higher seat would work better.
Typically my MTBs are setup with a slightly lower seat. The road bikes always feel too high for the first few minutes until the joints get warmed up and stretched.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Generally lower is not more efficient but maybe your saddle was too high in the first place? Or maybe your overall bike position is weird? Or if the trail was very technical then you were more maneuverable and climbing was easier? Odd.


----------



## Guest (Jun 1, 2016)

Definitely a diff between my roadie & mtb seat heights with the roadie higher but not drastic. It's worthy of note when these odd scenarios present themselves that make us ponder the 'what if'


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

So I notice a ton of people riding with their saddle too high. Both roadies and mountain bikers. I think mountain bikers with dropper posts are actually worse because they buy into this "high saddle for climbing" idea.

Here's a little thought experiment. You could even do it if you want.

Put your saddle so high you can just barely get your pedal through the bottom of its stroke. You probably have to point your toe down a lot and rock your hips to reach it. Ride for a bit.

Now lower your saddle, say, half an inch. (A lot, but you started super high.) How do you think your efficiency is going to be affected?

I think everyone knows that too low a saddle blows for efficiency.

The point of this is that there's some optimal height and it's not "as high as I can put it and still pedal."

So my thought is that if you lowered your saddle and climbed better, it's that your saddle was too high before.

I'd suggest some caution about a setup that feels like it requires pushing forward. My knees don't like that. My fore-aft position seems best when I'm pretty much where I'd go when I hover over the saddle.


----------



## Psycho1 (Aug 26, 2014)

I notice that maybe not more efficient but the lower seat you can balance easier and move slightly for the tech sections. When climbing tech I use my dropper and lower my seat about half an inch. Then when is just long grind it goes all the way up and I sit on the nose. Nice to be able to use different positions without stopping. Up and Down


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Lower seat isn't good for climbs. That's why dropper posts exist, to keep the seat up high so your legs can fully extend to provide max torque when going uphill. Lower is better for downhill to keep your COG down which means better control.

But if low seat works for you, then keep it like that.

I keep mine really low, I stand up when going uphill, I never liked staying on the seat when going uphill.









^^^ Look at how low I have my seat compared to my handlebar... plus I'm a very short guy :lol:


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Nat said:


> Generally lower is not more efficient but maybe your saddle was too high in the first place? Or maybe your overall bike position is weird?


That's what I'm thinking, maybe your "high roadie" position is just too high. The optimal seat height for climbing is the same on a mtb. as it is a road bike IME, and it isn't low.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Crankout said:


> Typically, a lower seat is less efficient for climbing. You're only using a portion of your leg rotation for power.


Bingo!


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's what I'm thinking, maybe your "high roadie" position is just too high. The optimal seat height for climbing is the same on a mtb. as it is a road bike IME, and it isn't low.


Bingo!


----------



## Klurejr (Oct 13, 2006)

I noticed the same thing on my ride yesterday. My seat was not as low as I put it for descending, but it was not as high as I normally run it. I think it was just too high before. I felt really good on the climbs.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Your seat height for climbing in both disaplines, mtb or road: When one crank is at its lowest and you are in the saddle your knee should be just "slightly bent"...bingo.


Unless it's a VERY steep short incline climb. Then the seat lowered is more efficient to power up it standing up.


----------



## Deerhill (Dec 21, 2009)

^^bingo


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Deerhill again.


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

J.B. Weld said:


> That's what I'm thinking, maybe your "high roadie" position is just too high. The optimal seat height for climbing is the same on a mtb. as it is a road bike IME, and it isn't low.


My "roadie" and "MTB" and "cyclocross" height, setback, and angles are all the same. For good reason.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

What's weird about the OP is that he states he was more "behind" the pedals instead of more "over" them. This seems backwards.

Unless your seatpost angle is greater than 90°, the lower the seat, the more forward it is in relation to the cranks.

That said, I run an on-the-fly adjustable post. Have been since 2008. I occasionally will raise the seat up, like for a climb or something. I'm reluctant to call it a "dropper" post. More like a rizer post for me.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Engineer90 said:


> Lower seat isn't good for climbs. That's why dropper posts exist, to keep the seat up high so your legs can fully extend to provide max torque when going uphill. Lower is better for downhill to keep your COG down which means better control.
> 
> But if low seat works for you, then keep it like that.
> 
> ...


Your climbs must be pretty short if you're always standing.


----------



## WaywardTraveller (Oct 2, 2011)

ryguy79 said:


> Your climbs must be pretty short if you're always standing.


Or, you know, he does it a lot and has built up to being able to climb out of the saddle for extended periods. Standing does not have to mean charging up every climb, in fact you can settle into a long climb while standing quite nicely. When done correctly, it's more like walking up a steep set of stairs. I ride SS a lot and I simply do not have the luxury of sitting and spinning up long climbs...I have no problem settling into long sustained climbs out of the saddle. Note that this basically requires a higher gear than you would use to spin up a hill...low spinning gear and sustained out of the seat climbing do not mix.


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

If lowering your seat makes climbing easier, your initial seat height was way too high. 

A lot of bike fit is personal, but not this. Theres tons of research performed by professionals. Our bodies just arent built to pedal a bike efficiently with a low seat. Not only do you lose power, you risk real injury. 

Gear selection and max cadence can be a lot more personal, but no one pedals efficiently with a low seat. Raise the seat until your leg is straight with your heel on the pedal, and then go down a tiny bit (mm's) and thats about perfect. The tiny bit down prevents hip rocking, but that window is narrow. 

I think having the seat too low for very casual cruising is more comfortable, but if you have to climb or apply any real power, it'll ruin your knees.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

One Pivot said:


> If lowering your seat makes climbing easier, your initial seat height was way too high.
> 
> A lot of bike fit is personal, but not this. Theres tons of research performed by professionals. Our bodies just arent built to pedal a bike efficiently with a low seat. Not only do you lose power, you risk real injury.
> 
> ...


I think we could all learn a few lessons by riding a SS. I don't ride one but I've watched plenty who do. It takes a whole different body English and train of thought to master it. It doesn't hurt to be in shape either.  Of course riding one will force you into shape in a hurry.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

Have you given any thought to saddle position fore and aft, as well as foot or cleat position, if you felt better 'behind the pedals'?


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

ryguy79 said:


> Your climbs must be pretty short if you're always standing.


Like WaywardTraveller said, I have built up the endurance to climb standing up. The last trail I went to in NH has an long uphill fire road, I pedaled most of the way up for about a mile to reach the downhill trails with my fattie. My fattie has made my legs put out more torque when going uphills.


----------



## One Pivot (Nov 20, 2009)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> I think we could all learn a few lessons by riding a SS. I don't ride one but I've watched plenty who do. It takes a whole different body English and train of thought to master it. It doesn't hurt to be in shape either.  Of course riding one will force you into shape in a hurry.


Ive seen tons of people on SS bikes over the years. Seriously, 9/10 times they're pushing the bike because SS is ridiculously difficult around here. If you want to push a SS bike, you need monster lungs and tons of power. I dont think theres much to learn from SS at all, except how out of shape you are :lol:

I used my SS bike for short rides only. Sure, the seat height kinda doesnt matter because you'll be out of the saddle suffering the whole time anyway! It was fun, but I was over it pretty quick. It really is like 90% of people pushing those things around here, its just hard for the sake of being hard.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

Engineer90 said:


> Like WaywardTraveller said, I have built up the endurance to climb standing up. The last trail I went to in NH has an long uphill fire road, I pedaled most of the way up for about a mile to reach the downhill trails with my fattie. My fattie has made my legs put out more torque when going uphills.


A mile of climbing, you must have been worn out.


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> A mile of climbing, you must have been worn out.


Oh I was dead lol, but did cheat too and walked some of the way too... but the worse part were the mosquitos!


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

One Pivot said:


> Ive seen tons of people on SS bikes over the years. Seriously, 9/10 times they're pushing the bike because SS is ridiculously difficult around here. If you want to push a SS bike, you need monster lungs and tons of power. I dont think theres much to learn from SS at all, except how out of shape you are :lol:.


The out of shape part was in my post. I've watched many a SS over the years as well. Some pushing but others conquering miles of climbing that I stop midway. Yes you have to be in serious shape to do it. But there is a different riding style because of only having one gear ratio. It forces you to stand way more often than a geared bike. I guess my comment on us all learning from riding a SS was more towards learning a lesson to get in shape.


----------



## ryguy79 (Apr 12, 2007)

I rode SS for a while, so I get it. But I prefer to sit and spin and take in the scenery when my average weekend rides are 2000-3000 ft of climbing, mostly over 1 to 2 climbs.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

One Pivot said:


> Ive seen tons of people on SS bikes over the years. Seriously, 9/10 times they're pushing the bike because SS is ridiculously difficult around here.


Maybe the in-shape singlespeeders were already way ahead of you? Ohhhh!!!


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

Engineer90 said:


> Like WaywardTraveller said, I have built up the endurance to climb standing up. The last trail I went to in NH has an long uphill fire road, I pedaled most of the way up for about a mile to reach the downhill trails with my fattie. My fattie has made my legs put out more torque when going uphills.


I'll keep that in mind on the way from Fort Collins to Trail Ridge Road this weekend...

Being serious now, perhaps you wouldn't have to get off and walk if you set your bike up in a manner that allowed for a more powerful, efficient seated position.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Engineer90 (Apr 10, 2015)

Le Duke said:


> Being serious now, perhaps you wouldn't have to get off and walk if you set your bike up in a manner that allowed for a more powerful, efficient seated position.


I agree. But I like my seat low when going downhill and I'm a very short guy. What I need is a dropper post.


----------



## Fleas (Jan 19, 2006)

Yeah, this is a MTB forum, but this rule is universal:


Velominati Rule #20 said:


> Rule #20
> 
> There are only three remedies for pain.
> 
> ...


Rule #20 only works if your saddle is at the appropriate height.
Sliding back on your saddle gives you that "pushing forward" feeling, while sliding up on the saddle gives you that "pushing down" feeling. The difference is less than the length of your saddle.

I pedal with my heels low or, more likely, flat. It allows me to pedal over technical features while the bike bounces around, gives me good clearance around the saddle when needed, and provides an ample fore/aft pedaling comfort zone. YMMV

-F


----------



## JNKER (Feb 19, 2016)

One Pivot said:


> If lowering your seat makes climbing easier, your initial seat height was way too high.
> 
> A lot of bike fit is personal, but not this. Theres tons of research performed by professionals. Our bodies just arent built to pedal a bike efficiently with a low seat. Not only do you lose power, you risk real injury.
> 
> ...


^^ The injury part is true. There is an proven height your saddle should be for the least amount of stress on your knees and optimum use of the correct leg muscles. Figuring out what "slightly bent" knees can be confusing when adjusting height. What is "slightly"?

Try measuring your inseam on a wall. Stand on a wall with no shoes and take a level and shove it up into your crotch. You want the level to not only be level but firm enough up in there that it mimics you sitting on your bike. (hopefully that makes sense) Mark the level on a wall and now you have your appropriate inseam measurement. Take that measurement and multiply by .889. This number is the number you want from the center of your cranks to the top middle of your saddle. Start there and you'll probably not need much adjustment for height. You can then play with saddle for and aft and nose raised or lowered.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

It's more efficient for technical climbs as your tipping point will be lower.... but, I'm talking half mast here ^^

For long grinder climbs full seat extension is best for mind

-----------------------------------------------------------
#1 resolution... Ride it like I stole it!!


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

SWriverstone said:


> ..
> My reasoning was that the lower seat enabled me to get more _behind_ the pedals instead of _over_ them...and push more forward than down...which all seemed to increase my efficiency.
> 
> I even made an insanely tight, steep switchback for the first time ever without stopping or dabbing.


If your "standard position" is too high maybe. As for the tight switch back (climbing I am assuming) that may be that it puts you in a different position for balance.

I have a dropper post on one bike and when the seat is low I can't pedal worth crap. It is very nice however when standing as it clears the seat and makes it much easier to shift my balance around and let the bike move under me.

My HT has fixed seat post and my 5" bike has dropper.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> I think we could all learn a few lessons by riding a SS. I don't ride one but I've watched plenty who do. It takes a whole different body English and train of thought to master it. It doesn't hurt to be in shape either.  Of course riding one will force you into shape in a hurry.


There have been many ride where I will leave my geared HT in a single speed ratio and ride it like a SS bike. It does teach you all kinds of new techniques and brings in different muscles. It is in fact amazing what you can climb in a big gear. I personally think that being able crank over a lower gear standing like on a SS gives you as geared rider another tool to use to attack certain bits of trail. Standing and climbing is less efficient on a FS bike as compared to sit and spin, but I think that being able to handle the bike and be fit enough to do it for 5 min hard is very handy.


----------



## JoePAz (May 7, 2012)

One Pivot said:


> Ive seen tons of people on SS bikes over the years. Seriously, 9/10 times they're pushing the bike because SS is ridiculously difficult around here. If you want to push a SS bike, you need monster lungs and tons of power. I dont think theres much to learn from SS at all, except how out of shape you are :lol:...


I don't know where you live and the trails you ride, but generally speaking I disagree. SS will be hard at first, but it time will prove to be a benefit. I am in fact faster on some climbs SS than geared. Others are too steep or techy and I am slower. Others I may need to walk feature or two, but overall can still be a wash. Part of this is that when riding SS momentum is key. You need to first generate it and second keep it going and that forces you attack more. Slow down too much and you are done for. That said track standing on 12% pitch up is great way to learn balance and when you really push on a SS you will find yourself doing that. Plus when standing and climbing the front end becomes very controllable due to weight transfer.


----------



## SWriverstone (Sep 3, 2009)

Wow...(original poster here)...lots to think about.

First comment: many years ago, when riding my first road bike century, there was a long, steep climb. A veteran road biker, noticing my huffing and puffing, gave me a suggestion: slide back on your saddle, slide your hands in (to either side of the handlebar stem), and push more forward on the pedals rather than pushing down. I tried this and was amazed at what a difference it made! (Keep in mind I'm no top-athlete-superstud; just a "slightly above-average recreational rider.")

Flash forward to my original post in this thread...

I don't think my "high roadie" seat position was too high; I've ridden road bike for decades at this height without issue, and ridden with my MTB seat that high for 5-6 years—again, never had a problem with it—even on steep downhills, as I've gotten pretty good at getting behind the saddle.

I do know that on steep climbs you need to keep your weight over the pedals to prevent loss of traction. And here's an important point about me "getting behind the pedals" when my MTB seat was lower: I typically lower my torso on climbs too (so I'm almost touching the bars with my chin); I've found this makes a HUGE difference in my climbing (and I'm still not sure why?)

So (I think) what was happening is that I was countering a rearward weight shift (by sliding back and getting behind the pedals) by also "laying down" with my upper body—so the net result was that most of my weight was still over the pedals.

Then I was able to drop my heels, get serious extension of my calf muscles, and apply more power over the top of each stroke. (At least that's how it felt.) I should also add I ride full-suspension, which some credit with better traction on climbs—but that's a different discussion!

Regarding maneuverability (making a crazy-tight switchback I'd never made before), I was seated 100% of the time—so gained no advantage from a lower seat in terms of leaning the bike. But I did feel like my CG was lower—which made me feel better balanced, less precarious in almost-dead-stopped tight turns, and generally more "planted."

To the folks who've suggested my normal seat height might be too high, I'm willing to admit it might be. But the lower position (where I felt better climbing in the saddle) was definitely too low for more level XC pedaling. So I obviously need to do more experimenting (which is why I just bought a quick-release seatpost clamp).

Scott


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

SWriverstone said:


> Wow...(original poster here)...lots to think about.
> 
> First comment: many years ago, when riding my first road bike century, there was a long, steep climb. A veteran road biker, noticing my huffing and puffing, gave me a suggestion: slide back on your saddle, slide your hands in (to either side of the handlebar stem), and push more forward on the pedals rather than pushing down. I tried this and was amazed at what a difference it made! (Keep in mind I'm no top-athlete-superstud; just a "slightly above-average recreational rider.")
> 
> ...


I see it as you were more aware of your weight distribution on the switchback and you were more on your game on that ride. Some that run dropper posts lower their seat for tight switchback and find it helps them. I run mine at full ride height and have no problem negotiating switchbacks descending. However climbing switchbacks it's a bit harder, but I still run at full height. I think you may be over thinking this ride, perhaps you had a good night sleep and were well hydrated and fed prior. Could be.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Bar on chin!? On a mtb that will get you visiting the Orthodontist!!

Maybe you could find some single track ;-P 

-----------------------------------------------------------
#1 resolution... Ride it like I stole it!!


----------



## SWriverstone (Sep 3, 2009)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> I see it as you were more aware of your weight distribution on the switchback and you were more on your game on that ride. Some that run dropper posts lower their seat for tight switchback and find it helps them. I run mine at full ride height and have no problem negotiating switchbacks descending. However climbing switchbacks it's a bit harder, but I still run at full height. I think you may be over thinking this ride, perhaps you had a good night sleep and were well hydrated and fed prior. Could be.


You might be right! In any case, I'm going to spring for a dropper post soon (with infinite adjustment) just so I can play around more.



targnik said:


> Bar on chin!? On a mtb that will get you visiting the Orthodontist!!


Ha, well I don't literally lean that low, but you get my drift. and I'd still love to know what the explanation is for more power (or efficiency) when you're leaned over like that-because I *know* that's not my imagination.

There have been climbs I've *never* made sitting more or less upright (or leaning slightly forward)...and then when leaned way forward, I'd clean the climb. It was like night and day. (And it was never traction-related, because I wasn't slipping either way.)

Scott


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Two things about getting in a lower position to kick out more Watts.

If you're developing more torque, the instant center of where you're supporting yourself on your pedals moves forward. So to be in equilibrium, you need to move your CG forward. Bending more at the hips does that. Unloading your arms does that too.

If you can unload your arms, it also means you're not wasting that effort holding your torso up.

So that low, elbows-dropped riding position is both easier when developing more power and facilitates it.


----------



## SWriverstone (Sep 3, 2009)

Interesting AndrwSwitch—that makes sense. My impression is also that bending forward (and unloading weight from my arms) allows me to pull *straight back* on the bars (like rowing) while pedaling (parallel to the ground) instead of pulling at more of an upward angle, which seems to help with overall power? (It seems like if you're pedaling in a more upright position, you can't help but be pulling upward at least to some extent on the bars...which maybe is okay if you're pushing down on the pedals?)

Scott


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

SWriverstone said:


> You might be right! In any case, I'm going to spring for a dropper post soon (with infinite adjustment) just so I can play around more.


They are definitely nice to have. And you are on the right mindset in getting one with infinite adjustment. Once you push that lever you just adjust your ass to the height you want and then then release the lever. Any of the droppers with increment adjustments makes no sense to me. It limits your use of height.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

Interesting stuff ^^ I find pulling on the bars (one hand at a time + counter balancing so I don't turn down a Bluff) helps getting up real steep climbs (smooth in nature)...

-----------------------------------------------------------
#1 resolution... Ride it like I stole it!!


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Seated climbing: lower your torso, drop your elbows, pull the bars back towards your hips.

Speaking of chin-on-bars, if nuts on your chest are called chestnuts what do you call nuts on your chin?


----------



## BumpityBump (Mar 9, 2008)

SWriverstone said:


> My reasoning was that the lower seat enabled me to get more _behind_ the pedals instead of _over_ them...and push more forward than down...which all seemed to increase my efficiency.


You should be in front of your pedals and doing what Nat says.



SWriverstone said:


> I even made an insanely tight, steep switchback for the first time ever without stopping or dabbing.


Sometimes lowering your body gravity can help in this situation, aka, lowering your shoulder into the climb and accelerating hard, but you have to pop your body up fast after and spin up quick.



SWriverstone said:


> I definitely need a dropper post


Yes



SWriverstone said:


> PS - I hear people exclaim the virtues of a low seat for steep downhill sections...but I don't think I've ever heard anyone talk about a low seat and climbing...hence my post.


I very occasionally lower my seat post and stand in order to raise/lower my body through technical, rocky sections of trail when climbing. Generally, however, extend those legs, sit, and grind is what gets it done for me. But as far as downhill, it is a major game changer.


----------



## Glide the Clyde (Nov 12, 2009)

I think it's because you bulked up dragging your kids around Peterson Ridge.


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

What's" considerably lower"? Imo, most people ride with a too high saddle position. All the guidelines on where you should set your saddle height are just starting points. Everyone should experiment with different saddle heights to find the one that works best, even a couple of millimeters can make a difference.
Way back when I first started taking cycling seriously, I use to scratch a line in my seatpost of different heights( of course one at a time) and found out what worked best for me. Most of my bikes are set up with the same height, although some bikes require a different height that others.


----------



## SWriverstone (Sep 3, 2009)

Hurricane Jeff said:


> What's" considerably lower"?


In my case, it was probably an inch lower than normal. And you (and others) may be right that my original seat height was too high. I just set where my road bike seat is and forgot about it-and it's worked fine over the years. But could it be better? Maybe.

I know part of it (for me) is just a comfort thing. I find my legs get uncomfortable if I can't stretch them out (same when driving, or riding my motorcycle, or even sitting at a desk-which is why I got a standing desk!). So I've found that a high seat (giving me just a *very* slight bend at the knee at the bottom of the stroke) gives me the most comfort on a multi-hour ride.

It would be really interesting to ride a trainer that accurately measured watts and experiment around for a while. But in the meantime, the whole thing definitely has shaken up my idea of where my seat ought to be!

And yeah, dragging my kids around in a Weehoo may have helped. 

Scott


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Saddle height should be similar across road and mtb disciplines if one wants to get the most out of his or her pedaling efficiency. Things change up when one gets into trials and BMX riding.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Doing some climbing out of the saddle comes naturally to me when I'm riding somewhere with hills. But I've seen recommendations to get out of the saddle for a while from time to time just for the variation on a ride that doesn't give an external reason.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Le Duke said:


> My "roadie" and "MTB" and "cyclocross" height, setback, and angles are all the same. For good reason.





Crankout said:


> Saddle height should be similar across road and mtb disciplines if one wants to get the most out of his or her pedaling efficiency. Things change up when one gets into trials and BMX riding.


I've always had a hard time understanding how it's possible to keep the same saddle position between bikes of different disciplines when the frame geometry varies so much. For example, Trek's mid-size Domane road frame has a 73.3 degree seat angle, their mid-sized enduro Slash is 65.5 degrees, and their mid-sized Session DH bike is 57 degrees. If one participated in all three disciplines, wouldn't the saddle positions be totally different? Would keeping saddle position similar even be desirable, considering the different demands? What are your guys' thoughts?


----------



## Le Duke (Mar 23, 2009)

If you are concerned about seated pedaling performance, I'd argue yes.

And, I'm guessing the designers of most DH bikes don't consider seated pedaling performance a primary quality when designing them.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

Le Duke said:


> If you are concerned about seated pedaling performance, I'd argue yes.


I suppose on an enduro or trail bike the expectation is to be standing up with some frequency.

Are you able notice a difference in your road and xc mtb seat angle? Do you have the mtb saddle pushed forward to mimic the road position (or vice versa)?



Le Duke said:


> And, I'm guessing the designers of most DH bikes don't consider seated pedaling performance a primary quality when designing them.


Probably not.


----------



## idividebyzero (Sep 25, 2014)

Having my seat half an inch too low can mean the difference between tired legs that recover fast or cramped legs that take 10min to recover at the top of a steep fire road I have to climb. I always know if my seat has slipped down a little because my legs are in ruin by the time I get to the top.


----------



## RS VR6 (Mar 29, 2007)

Nat said:


> I've always had a hard time understanding how it's possible to keep the same saddle position between bikes of different disciplines when the frame geometry varies so much. For example, Trek's mid-size Domane road frame has a 73.3 degree seat angle, their mid-sized enduro Slash is 65.5 degrees, and their mid-sized Session DH bike is 57 degrees. If one participated in all three disciplines, wouldn't the saddle positions be totally different? Would keeping saddle position similar even be desirable, considering the different demands? What are your guys' thoughts?


My road and XC bikes have the same "pedaling" position. I have a third trail bike that I pretty much use only for shuttle/lift rides. On the trail bike...I pretty much eyeball the saddle position since I don't pedal it much (and have no dropper)...but even with the slack seat tube...I can still get the saddle somewhere pretty close to the bikes where I do spend most of my time pedaling. I guess that's why you see more mountain bikes with zero offset posts than road bikes. I run zero offset posts on all my bikes.


----------



## Ryder1 (Oct 12, 2006)

Hurricane Jeff said:


> What's" considerably lower"?





SWriverstone said:


> In my case, it was probably an inch lower than normal.


I find if my saddle is just a weeeee bit too high (.5"), I can climb OK, but my pedaling power is a bit compromised compared to .5" lower. I think it's because I lose some power near the 6 o'clock position, and I think it's because, with my saddle a hair too high, I have to relax some muscle(s) in my posterior chain (or round the back?) in order to "reach down" to 6 o'clock, and that relaxing of muscles decreases my power at 6 o'clock. With the saddle down .5", I have consistent torque around the clock, turning circles is more natural, and can accelerate at any moment, as needed.

I'm guessing I could, by improving my flexibility (hams/lower back), run my saddle higher and still have consistent torque around the clock.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Climbing with a low saddle is a more efficient way to wreck your knees.


----------



## SWriverstone (Sep 3, 2009)

I dunno, some of you ought to try it. 

As I've mentioned earlier, when I climb with a "low saddle," I'm only talking *slightly* lower than usual (no more than an inch, maybe just 0.5")...and I'm still getting good leg extension by sliding back in the saddle, getting low (leaning over in the torso), pulling straight back on the bars (toward my hips), dropping my heels (literally try to touch the ground with your heels to get the kind of heel drop I'm talking about).

It still seems to make a difference for the better for me. 

I *do* think that if you sat bolt upright with a lower seat (in other words, if all other things were the same except less leg extension) it might be harder...but that's not what I've been doing.

I should try to get some profile photos...but they wouldn't be pretty, LOL.

Scott


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

SWriverstone said:


> As I've mentioned earlier, when I climb with a "low saddle," I'm only talking *slightly* lower than usual (no more than an inch, maybe just 0.5")...


but 1/2 inch is the beginnings of fine tuning, and you've admitted that you're "roadie" saddle height could possibly be a bit off.

I run my mtb saddle slightly lower than on a road bike but I don't consider it low by any means.


----------



## Guest (Jun 2, 2016)

.5" or 12.2mm is what amounts to in this discussion as, huge. That's the diff between hip rock or not. In my feeble mind 2mm= slightly, but then someone elses interpretation of slightly differs.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

I lower my seat a bit more, an inch or so, on climbs that are more technical (steep, bumpy, or anything else that causes traction/balance issues), since it gives more freedom to adjust my position in order to find traction and maintain composure. Without such traction and composure worries, I more freely put down the power. I would call it more effective, in my case, rather than more efficient. Have to trade efficiency sometimes, for better results.

Before I ran a dropper, I used to run the seat height at such all the time. It's more like adding a dropper unlocked a higher setting, in my case, for extra smooth sections without much change in pitch.


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

nvphatty said:


> .5" or 12.2mm is what amounts to in this discussion as, huge. That's the diff between hip rock or not. In my feeble mind 2mm= slightly, but then someone elses interpretation of slightly differs.


I have a 37.5" inseam and wear size 14 shoes so yeah, I guess my scale is a bit different.

My point was that I've seen people who've been riding for years with a seat that is about an inch too high or too low. Many people are surprised after a proper fit.


----------



## Hurricane Jeff (Jan 1, 2006)

If you can go to a qualified bike fitter with the latest bike fitting equipment, they can tell( and show you the data) of which position can produce the best results, but still, just because you are shown what is" scientifically" your best position, that doesn't always jive which works the best for you.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

J.B. Weld said:


> My point was that I've seen people who've been riding for years with a seat that is about an inch too high or too low. Many people are surprised after a proper fit.


I resemble that. I'd always heard higher was better and didn't think too critically about it. When I got knee pain, I moved it higher because Too Low a Saddle Causes Knee Pain. I finally went to see a fitter and he lowered my saddle on the order of an inch and a half. It felt weird and I fought it, but it didn't take that long to get used to it and I've regained my tolerance for putting in some decent mileage and riding at a variety of intensities.

I suspect an open-minded person could figure it out. But there's a lot of dogma in cycling.

I do have almost the same saddle to pedals relationship across all my bikes. However my newest one, a 140 mm bike, I've left set up with a more upright riding position than the others. I find I use less setback too, though the straight seat post is still a little annoying. I don't think the seat tube is crazy slack, though it's not straight and the axis of the seat post doesn't intersect the bottom bracket. So I'm not sure where to measure it anyway.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

AndrwSwitch said:


> But there's a lot of dogma in cycling.


That's true. One example is the oft-quoted formula of multiplying inseam length by .883 to arrive at your ideal saddle height. Who the hell can measure his inseam to the thousandths place? Your chamois thickness or taint fattiness would affect a measurement to the thousandths. Bahhh.


----------



## AndrwSwitch (Nov 8, 2007)

Although measuring inseam length to the third significant figure isn't so far out - that's like a tenth of an inch.

But I hate these formulas that cloak themselves in an aura of being correct or scientific by using overly specific math. What if I change to pedals with a different stack height or have long feet or use a different crank arm length?


----------



## J.B. Weld (Aug 13, 2012)

Proper roadie height isn't as high as many think it is.









One thing I've noticed over the years is that cycling enthusiasts tend to have their seats a little high while casual riders tend to set them low.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2016)

J.B. Weld said:


> I have a 37.5" inseam and wear size 14 shoes so yeah, I guess my scale is a bit different.
> 
> My point was that I've seen people who've been riding for years with a seat that is about an inch too high or too low. Many people are surprised after a proper fit.


My previous comment was in general with respect to .5" and how it effects ones pedal stroke. I apologize if you meant it aimed @ you as that was not my intention.
I had the fortune of a proper fit on my roadie, 2hrs long but oh so worth the $300.


----------



## BumpityBump (Mar 9, 2008)

Just to add to the conversation, I think a lot of riders would be surprised how different 1" can feel (no jokes please). I didn't realize this until installing a gravity dropper post with incremental drops. Personally, I like my leg slightly bent on full extension, maybe some are shooting for full straight legging it. Common sense and experience tells me that would be a problem and cause knee issues. Dogma, perception, setback, different terrain between riders, this is a nebulous topic at best.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2016)

BumpityBump said:


> Just to add to the conversation, I think a lot of riders would be surprised how different 1" can feel (no jokes please). I didn't realize this until installing a gravity dropper post with incremental drops. Personally, I like my leg slightly bent on full extension, maybe some are shooting for full straight legging it. Common sense and experience tells me that would be a problem and cause knee issues. Dogma, perception, setback, different terrain between riders, this is a nebulous topic at best.


the slight bend @ bottom stroke is the preferred technique, straight leg will find ones self @ the ortho clinic.


----------



## BumpityBump (Mar 9, 2008)

nvphatty said:


> the slight bend @ bottom stroke is the preferred technique, straight leg will find ones self @ the ortho clinic.


Yep, and that's where dogma can be a bad thing.


----------



## DIRTJUNKIE (Oct 18, 2000)

nvphatty said:


> the slight bend @ bottom stroke is the preferred technique, straight leg will find ones self @ the ortho clinic.


I said this some 4 pages back, post 16. 



DIRTJUNKIE said:


> Your seat height for climbing in both disaplines, mtb or road: When one crank is at its lowest and you are in the saddle your knee should be just "slightly bent"...bingo.
> 
> Unless it's a VERY steep short incline climb. Then the seat lowered is more efficient to power up it standing up.


----------



## Varaxis (Mar 16, 2010)

Popped my seat up on my ride today to its "max" height for my body, and noticed that I struggled to spin high RPMs, but it was great for mashing a taller gear to accelerate.


----------



## Guest (Jun 3, 2016)

DIRTJUNKIE said:


> I said this some 4 pages back, post 16.


yes well i said it again so pffttt!  and i might add in support of your astute observation kind sir.


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Nat said:


> I've always had a hard time understanding how it's possible to keep the same saddle position between bikes of different disciplines when the frame geometry varies so much. For example, Trek's mid-size Domane road frame has a 73.3 degree seat angle, their mid-sized enduro Slash is 65.5 degrees, and their mid-sized Session DH bike is 57 degrees. If one participated in all three disciplines, wouldn't the saddle positions be totally different? Would keeping saddle position similar even be desirable, considering the different demands? What are your guys' thoughts?


To be more specific, I was referring to saddle height over the pedals. I guess it may differ on a DH bike though?


----------



## Crankout (Jun 16, 2010)

Varaxis said:


> Popped my seat up on my ride today to its "max" height for my body, and noticed that I struggled to spin high RPMs, but it was great for mashing a taller gear to accelerate.


Clipless? Are you using your hammies as well as your quads? Pull up on your pedal strokes; hopefully you still have a slight bend at the knees.


----------



## cjsb (Mar 4, 2009)

JoePAz said:


> I don't know where you live and the trails you ride, but generally speaking I disagree. SS will be hard at first, but it time will prove to be a benefit. I am in fact faster on some climbs SS than geared. Others are too steep or techy and I am slower. Others I may need to walk feature or two, but overall can still be a wash. Part of this is that when riding SS momentum is key. You need to first generate it and second keep it going and that forces you attack more. Slow down too much and you are done for. That said track standing on 12% pitch up is great way to learn balance and when you really push on a SS you will find yourself doing that. Plus when standing and climbing the front end becomes very controllable due to weight transfer.


Agree with you completely on momentum and balance. rode SS exclusively 2012-2013, and found that I had to attack more to keep that momentum. It was a much more active way of riding and encouraged me to keep looking ahead down the trail. The traits have carried over to that same bike which is now geared, but not to my full suspension bike. I am still a pretty lazy rider on the full suspension because there is less a penalty for it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

net wurker said:


> What's weird about the OP is that he states he was more "behind" the pedals instead of more "over" them. This seems backwards.
> 
> Unless your seatpost angle is greater than 90°, the lower the seat, the more forward it is in relation to the cranks.
> .


My experience is similar to the OP in terms of a lower saddle putting me more behind the pedals. I end up sliding further back in the saddle to maintain leg extension.


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

kapusta said:


> My experience is similar to the OP in terms of a lower saddle putting me more behind the pedals. I end up sliding further back in the saddle to maintain leg extension.


So, the closer to the stem you manage to move your body, the farther behind the pedals you go? I just don't get it.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

How is sliding back on your saddle moving closer to the stem?

Just try it. Lower your saddle an inch, then start climbing in the saddle, you likely to adjust yourself so that you have good leg extension when you pedal. That is going to require you sliding back on your saddle (which puts you farther from the pedals).

This same concept is why when you slide the saddle back, you often need to lower the seatpost, and when you slide it forward you need to raise it a tad.


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

Before you slid back on the saddle, you lowered it. That put it (and you) closer to the stem.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

net wurker said:


> Before you slid back on the saddle, you lowered it. That put it (and you) closer to the stem.


..... and then he (and I, when I have done this) slid back once we start pedaling. Thus he is farther back.


----------



## scottg (Mar 30, 2004)

I use a dropper post and for me it's not just a way to get the seat out of the way on the descents. I fine tune the seat height during the ride depending on the grade - essentially when the dropper is fully extended it is a little too high for pedaling on flatter terrain. I also move it a half inch up or down during long rides to use different parts of the muscles - I find it helps reduce fatigue. Moving it lower does allow me to be a little further behind the pedals because when I move the saddle lower I also move further back on it (my saddle is quite narrow so moving fore and aft is still comfortable). Between all these tiny adjustments while seated and also pedaling out of the saddle, I find that I can "rest" while pedaling. 

On a shorter ride this may not matter but if you're looking at a big 3 hour effort it can all add up to feeling a lot stronger at the end - for me anyway. I also have a creaky back that acts up if I'm in a static position for too long and changing positions helps with that a ton.


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

kapusta said:


> Thus he is farther back.


Or, back where you started out...or maybe, almost back as far as where you started out. I guess the angle of the seat post plays a lot into this aspect.

Which position is closer to the stem? A or B?


----------



## coke (Jun 7, 2008)

Varaxis said:


> Popped my seat up on my ride today to its "max" height for my body, and noticed that I struggled to spin high RPMs, but it was great for mashing a taller gear to accelerate.


Lately I've been working on increasing my max cadence. I race a SS in a geared class and most of the races have a road start before entering the singletrack, so I'm working on maintaining a very high cadence for the starts. I've found that if my seat is too high, I can't spin near as fast. I start to bounce much sooner than I do when my seat is slightly lower.


----------



## kapusta (Jan 17, 2004)

net wurker said:


> Before you slid back on the saddle, you lowered it. That put it (and you) closer to the stem.


Your observation about the saddle moving forwards as is is lowered indicates a good grasp of geometry.

Now apply that to considering what happens if you want to lower your butt, but maintain a fixed distance from your butt to the BB: you pivot rearward.

Consider this in you diagram above if it were only lowered less than an inch, which is probably what the OP was dealing with. With it dropped as low as in that diagram, you could not slide back far enough on the saddle the get full extension.


----------



## Nat (Dec 30, 2003)

BumpityBump said:


> You should be in front of your pedals and doing what Nat says.


Hey yeah, all of you should do what Nat says -- I like that. Do this! Do that! I command you!


----------



## net wurker (Sep 13, 2007)

kapusta said:


> Your observation about the saddle moving forwards as is is lowered indicates a good grasp of geometry.
> 
> Now apply that to considering what happens if you want to lower your butt, but maintain a fixed distance from your butt to the BB: you pivot rearward.
> 
> Consider this in you diagram above if it were only lowered less than an inch, which is probably what the OP was dealing with. With it dropped as low as in that diagram, you could not slide back far enough on the saddle the get full extension.


OK. I think I get it now.


----------



## Arphia (May 8, 2014)

I used to ride with my seat way low, a habit I picked up from riding BMX as a youngster. Then my knees started to hurt so bad I couldnt ride anymore until I figured out that I really needed to raise my seat. Now if I even pedal a mile uphill with my seat an inch or so too low my knees remind me real quick to fix it. 
I still keep my seat slammed on the DH though.


----------



## guitarjohn21 (Jan 16, 2012)

The fox doss cTd has a 40 millimeter drop in the trail position which makes it great for technical climbing


----------



## Davidfs (Feb 18, 2016)

guitarjohn21 said:


> The fox doss cTd has a 40 millimeter drop in the trail position which makes it great for technical climbing


Actually I think many people feel that is too much drop, which is why infinitely adjustable posts are popular, but if it's comfortable for you then great!!


----------



## BumpityBump (Mar 9, 2008)

Nat said:


> Hey yeah, all of you should do what Nat says -- I like that. Do this! Do that! I command you!


Well Simon thought it sounded like a great idea! initially.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_de_Montfort,_6th_Earl_of_Leicester

"Montfort's body was mutilated in an unparalleled frenzy by the royalists."


----------



## slohr (May 22, 2008)

Sounds to me too that the saddle was still too high. Steve Hogg has a great article on saddle height. His describes a functional adjustment; you do a climb several times and monitor the quality of your pedal stroke. Generally he feels most peoples' saddles are too high, and has some tragic stories about damaged SI joint from the rocking to compensate. One guideline that I think is important is that after a tough climb, you shouldn't feel isolated fatigue. Like "burning quads." Plus I don't think a lot of people realize that a big proportion of the power comes from the gluteals, and if the saddle is too high, you effectively remove them from their optimal range of power. Try lowering your saddle 4mm, ignore pushing the pedals down at your knees, and try to push forward from your butt. If you get it right, you will feel like you are going into warp and that your quads are just there to stabilize your knees against the force of your hamstrings. Plus you may find your knees feel better afterwards.


----------



## mizzaboom (Jun 2, 2010)

I don't have a dropper and keep my saddle probably slightly lower than it "should" be as a compromise between ups and downs. And I have to agree with OP, I fair much better on tech climbs with tight switchbacks (which is pretty much all of them on my local singletrack) with my seat in this position. It's a touch more than the "slightly bent" traditional guideline at full extension. On fire roads or non-tech singletrack climbs I stand anyway, it just feels better to me. 

And on the downhills I've adopted what I feel is a better technique of getting my COG forward with by bending at the torso and with my elbows bent and chin over the stem as opposed to sliding my butt back over the rear wheel. Better traction on the front end under braking. It takes some time to get used to as you feel like you're going OTB until you get comfortable. It started as a compromise for not wanting to deal with lowering and fiddling with my saddle height before descents and not ponying up the dough for a dropper. Then I read an interesting article on PB that advocates this technique...coupled with watching the DH WC circuit and studying those guys' technique, noticing that's mostly how those guys do it outside of brief moments where they get behind the saddle in certain spots (which I still do on occasion as well).


----------

