# Long or Short seatpost?



## HAMP (Apr 3, 2012)

For the Clyde riders, do you use a long seatpost or short? and why?

I'm not a weight weenie, and the weight was never a consideration for me at first. I was thinking that the shorter the post the less stress where the pole inserts into the bike.

Reason I am asking this is because when I look up bikes on the net or see some riders with what seems to be extremely long seatpost, and I wonder if I had gotten a smaller frame wound my rides be easier.

I'm just wondering if they just didn't size their bikes correctly or was it to have less weight?

It sounds like I might be leaning towards becoming or a bit of a weight nazi.


----------



## Joules (Oct 12, 2005)

Are you asking if people get a larger frame size or run the saddle at a lower-than-optimal position for the sake of weight or stress on the frame?


For the former, I think you'll find many if not most of us that think of ourselves as clydes are on the largest frames we can find. I've never been between sizes, I've frequently been between XL fits and XL is too small. 
Second question: post is as long as it needs to be to get the saddle the right distance from the pedals. Even if I had the option to size up, running a shorter post is, IMO, a stupid reason to do so.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

I ride what fits. If that requires a longer seat post, so be it. Longer will allow some flex so you get more compliance. As long as the minimum amount is in the seat tube...you should be g2g. 

As far as sizing down...yeah, some do that. Don't know why. Weight and/or handling I'd guess. If it was a race day only bike...yeah...I could see doing it. But for everyday riding where comfort is key...I'll stick with a properly fitted bike. Riding a light bike is nice but it isn't the most important thing IMO. Far as I'm concerned...if you are posting in the clyde section...unless you are very tall and 200 pounds making you lean but still technically a clyde...you probably have some weight to lose and you're better off shedding a couple pounds of fat off your ass rather then spending a load of money or compromising you ride to shed less weight off your bike.


----------



## mechsc1 (Dec 28, 2013)

Seat tube lengths have shortened over the years. I have owned a few XL's that had 22-23" tubes. My XL Trek Remedy had a 20.5" seat tube which I thought was short. My current Kona Process 111 has an 18.5" tube!!! As long as I can move my post low enough I am Ok w/ my 410mm post.


----------



## watts888 (Oct 2, 2012)

I don't mind having a lot of seatpost exposed as long as it's a decent quality seatpost, and there's plenty left in the frame so it doesn't stress the top-top/seat-tube/chainstay joint. Weight weenies can cut their seatpost, but I don't bother.


----------



## HAMP (Apr 3, 2012)

watts888 said:


> I don't mind having a lot of seatpost exposed as long as it's a decent quality seatpost, and there's plenty left in the frame so it doesn't stress the top-top/seat-tube/chainstay joint. Weight weenies can cut their seatpost, but I don't bother.


WoW Watts888, that never crossed my mind that someone would cut the seatpost. Reading the replies, I realized I failed to check the length.

When I bought my Marlin(21in), I felt it was a perfect fit, and I weighed 310lbs. When I bought it, I had no intentions of taking it on a trail. I knew nothing of trails in my area. I bought it for exercise and getting my lower joints better.

Found this website, and learned I had a low priced entry level moutain trail bike, found a trail and love the hobby.

Knowing what I believe I needed to enjoy the trail more then I already did, I went to carbon.

I didn't care what anyone said, but with my weight and plastic trying to support it, I felt I would help the frame and not put too much stress on that joint.

I ended up buying a 23in Trek Superfly. Sitting the bikes next to each other, the handlebar and seats are even to one another, but the bar across the middle(or whatever its called) of course is higher on the 23in.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Not sure what you consider a lot of post showing...but here's some pictures of bikes I own(ed) and how the posts compare...all frames are properly fitted...none are sized up or down. All posts are well above the minimum insertion line.



























So you can see...there's a range. A couple look short, a couple look longish. But all are properly inserted and proper fitting frames. So it's just a matter often times of how the frame is designed as to whether a little or a lot of post is showing.


----------



## HAMP (Apr 3, 2012)

Nice bikes!

I'm not sure which one I like the most, scrolled thru the pics several trying to decide. 

The last pic of the Kona seems like it has the longest post, but what made me question/create this thread, is that I seen someone with a much more longer post.

Although that persons seat had a serious forward downward lean, he claimed how light weight his bike is for the size. It was heavier then mine, but he said it did that for weight reasons.

I bought my larger frame for weight stress reasons, and now that I have lost weight, and plan to continue down to the 200lbs mark(or lower) I now wonder was that a stupid reason like mention in the second reply from Joules.

I do love that darn bike on the trails, so I shouldn't worry about it. I just wanted a little survey of the situation.


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

If you're a skinnyass and getting competitive, then you might want to look at weight weenying. If you're a big guy, the sort of guy they don't really design bikes for, then you want strength. There's always a trade off, but you want stuff to last. There's not very much weight difference between single frame sizes and making a bike fit with more seatpost for weight loss is odd.
As a percentage of YOUR body weight, your bike is probably less than a skinny weight weenies' bike. Ride it, enjoy it.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

A larger bike isn't really going to be a stronger bike. If anything...it might be weaker as the tubing is longer so it might actually support less weight. However...no doubt that the designers take this into account and it's either not an issue or they do things to mitigate those issues. So in short...yeah...you probably should have gotten the bike that fit rather than one that's too big. There's no advantage with the larger bike. But what's done is done. As long as the bike fits and you enjoy it keep riding it. 

And I can't imagine your Superfly weighs that much. What, like 24-ish pounds? I'd ride it until you were at your goal weight and maybe reward yourself with something new and lighter if you feel the need. Of all the bikes I posted...none are weight weenie. The first three are 20 pounders and I'd guess the Kona being aluminum is 21-22 pounds maybe. Never weighed it. But being single speed and having a carbon fork helps shed some weight. But that was the last thing on my mind when I built it.


----------



## TooTallUK (Jul 5, 2005)

> A larger bike isn't really going to be a stronger bike. If anything...it might be weaker as the tubing is longer so it might actually support less weight.


On potential strength issues, I'll take a frame over a too-long seatpost and stem any day.


----------



## HAMP (Apr 3, 2012)

As I was riding yesterday, I noticed a older gentleman with a very long seat pole. As he was going up the hill he was fully seated, and every pedal I could see the pole flexing. He was bouncing back and forth, and the entire time I was thinking that if I was using a pole like that, I wouldn't get that much bounce. I pretty sure it would break the bike frame.

On another subject, I was trying to improve my ride time thru the trail, and was a little tired, but I wasn't going to let that slow me down.

I wiped out 3 different times, and the last one, I just laid there and cussed up a storm. I'm really glad I was wearing my helmet as my head laid on the tree I hit. lol 

I'm also glad I continue to wear my knee pads my wife make me wear when I go riding. I don't wear the elbow pads, which I should. My first wipeout from yesterday, I was thinking that Im glad my wife loves me and make me wear these. It was pretty amazing how a fat guy can fly up and over the bar without touching it, and land about 5 feet in front of the bike. 

Funny thing is I didn't hurt myself, mainly because at the moment I knew I F'ed up(as I was flying over the bars), I was too mad to feel anything and was cussing then as well.


----------



## csgaraglino (May 20, 2012)

Ok, I don't see anyone commenting on the "real" issue with the original posters question about the length of seatposts. The real concern is the positioning of your body in the cockpit making sue you FIT the FRAME!

Fit is everything! When purchasing a bike you NEED to make sure that your body position is correct and then use the seatpost and stem to make the fine tuned adjustments. This is no different for a Clyde (as I am) but arguably more important.

I have 7 bikes, mostly all different - Small vs Med / Large vs XL is not as important as the base geometry of the bike. A slacker ride frame will likely stretch you out more causing you to feel more comfortable on a frame one size smaller.

Now don't get me wrong, there is a limit to how much a seatpost can be exposed and if your a larger rider, I'd at least double that! The quality of the seatpost and frame can even effect that decision.

So don't be too concerned on how much seatpost is exposed (unless your close to the limit) but more concerned about fit. If you you buy a bike form your local dealer, most likely it comes with a free fitting. If your looking online, try to test ride one locally (I'd never buy a bike without test riding it first) - most bike shops have basic fitting services for a small fee even if you don't buy form them.

Regards,
Chris Sgaraglino

My Life on Two Wheels


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

csgaraglino said:


> Ok, I don't see anyone commenting on the "real" issue with the original posters question about the length of seatposts. The real concern is the positioning of your body in the cockpit making sue you FIT the FRAME!


You didn't read the posts above you then...proper fit has been talked about.


----------



## csgaraglino (May 20, 2012)

Nubster said:


> You didn't read the posts above you then...proper fit has been talked about.


I saw that, but it really didn't address the issue.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

Yes...it was. He was told to ride a frame that fits and let the seat post length be what it needs to be. As long as there's enough in the frame. How is that not addressing the issue?


----------



## csgaraglino (May 20, 2012)

Ok, sorry - didn't mean to get under your skirt. I didn't it address it "clearly" as the original poster seems to be a little new to the sport, I felt a more focus response was necessary. 

Next time, instead of "it was not address" I'll start "It was not address clearly" - geeze!


----------



## HAMP (Apr 3, 2012)

Its cool csgaraglino, I understood your concern.  

It did make me think into it a little more, and I almost asked/stated a silly remark as into it. If the bar across the top is more acquainted with your Johnson more then your hand, is that bad? lol

I do like the frame height of the 21in Marlin when standing, but when riding/hitting the trails, the 23in superfly does make me feel better/safer.

Now I could be wrong for making that statement, because there is no comparing the 2 different bikes. The components alone is a world of difference(i'm pretty sure that's an obvious statement).

Honestly it was really dumb of me to create this thread, because the 2in's between the 2 bikes wouldn't have made abit of a difference. Although at the time of buying it was seriously on my mind, because of the material and my weight.


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

HAMP said:


> I do like the frame height of the 21in Marlin when standing, but when riding/hitting the trails, the 23in superfly does make me feel better/safer.


Since you should be spending more time riding on than standing over the bike...get the one that feels best when riding. Standover is just a very basic and general guide to fitting a rider to a bike and not a very good one at that.

And just FYI...the bar across the top is called the top tube.


----------



## solarplex (Apr 11, 2014)

400mm 27.2mm post at 45mm insertion above the max height.

Just a cheap rocky mountain brand. It use to slip down then i tightened the crap out of the clamp... Then this.


----------



## schnee (Oct 15, 2005)

There's only one answer for a clyde seatpost.

Thomson Elite.

Get a nice long one that sticks really far down into the bike and call it a day.

/end thread


----------



## HAMP (Apr 3, 2012)

I was picking my bike up from LBS, and I noticed a recall list from trek concerning seatpost on the superfly. It was for the 2015, and not the 2013


----------



## Nubster (May 15, 2009)

schnee said:


> There's only one answer for a clyde seatpost.
> 
> Thomson Elite.
> 
> ...


2 out of 3 bikes I currently own have Thomson. That said, I've never had an issue with stock posts either. But when I have to buy one for whatever reason...Thomson is what I go to as my default.


----------

